• Fed Bubble Ignites "Great Retirement" Wave As Baby Boomers Party Like It 1999
  Fed Bubble Ignites “Great Retirement” Wave As Baby Boomers Party Like It 1999

  As the Magnificent 7 tech stocks and home prices grind higher, there has been a massive surge in the number of Americans taking early retirement. Bloomberg has coined this phenomenon the “Great Retirement Boom.”

  A model designed by economist Miguel Faria-e-Castro at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis shows the US has around 2.7 million more retirees than initially forecasted. 

  

  Notice that the number of retirees in the US has surged beyond expectations.

  

  This trend emerges as retirement savers pile into tech stocks (we’ve asked: Is this a good idea?). 

  

  A recent Bloomberg Markets Live Pulse survey showed about half of the retirement savers were buying stocks as a direct response to soaring prices – far surpassing the 6% who said they had added the traditional inflation hedges. 

  

  The latest expectations for interest-rate cuts from the Fed this year have fueled the artificial intelligence bubble – with signs of Dot Com lurking in markets. 

  

  Or 1930s…

  

  Maybe it’s different this time. 

  

  According to Bloomberg, soaring stocks are already “convincing those already retired they needn’t return to the workforce.” 

  Unless the Fed is committed to a never-ending program of zero interest rates and quantitative easing… Then, retirement savers have nothing to worry about. However, when the financial elites prick the bubbles through a prolonged tightening cycle, we’ll see some those retirees return to the workforce as Walmart greeters. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 23:20

• US Profits Outshine Europe By The Most Since 2020
  US Profits Outshine Europe By The Most Since 2020

  By Sagarika Jaisinghani, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

  Europe Inc. just reported its worst earnings season relative to the US in three years, according to data from JPMorgan. And worst yet, strategists are bracing for more pain before recovery starts.

  Profits of Stoxx Europe 600 firms are estimated to have dropped 11% in the fourth quarter, 2 percentage points more than analysts expected, the research shows. The decline is driven by sputtering economies — with both Germany and the UK in recession — as well as underwhelming growth in China, a key market for European companies.

  

  The development marks a stark contrast to Corporate America, where the latest earnings grew by a better-than-expected 8%, data compiled by Bloomberg Intelligence show. That’s mainly thanks to the seven-largest stocks though, most of them tech. Without them, the rest of the S&P 500 saw a 1.6% drop in profits — still outperforming Europe.

  Fund managers and strategists aren’t fully convinced about an imminent recovery for European earnings, given the continent’s economic malaise, the bleak outlook for commodity prices and lack of AI darlings akin to Nvidia. While Europe has AI beneficiaries such as ASML, ASM International and BE Semiconductor, their performance has lagged well behind Nvidia. Data from BI shows S&P 500 profits are expected to rise 8.4% this year compared with a 4.4% increase in Europe.

  

  A Citigroup index shows analysts are bearish, with earnings downgrades consistently outnumbering upgrades in the past five months. Still, Citi strategist Beata Manthey says the pessimism may have gone too far. “The silver lining for Europe is that US earnings are priced for perfection,” Manthey says. “In Europe, investors are pricing in flat earnings growth. That lowers the bar for earnings beats,” especially if local economies or China deliver a “positive surprise.”

  Signs of an improvement in the macro outlook are already showing up in the performance of cyclical stocks, which are more sensitive than their defensive peers to economic growth. Analysts are raising profit estimates for cyclicals at a faster clip than for defensives as business activity ticks up, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

  

  Barclays strategist Emmanuel Cau is also optimistic that an improving business cycle will feed a broader equity rally. “Soft data” such as manufacturing and services sector activity tend to be a good leading indicator for future earnings growth, Cau says, and they’re signaling a nascent rebound. “Investors are paying up ahead for potential EPS recovery later,” he says.

  Fund managers in a recent Bank of America survey were broadly cautious, with about 54% of participants seeing downside for European EPS in the coming months. Still, that number is down from 75% in January and 88% in December. Hopes are also growing that luxury goods makers — which depend on China for a significant share of revenue — will revive along with demand from the world’s second-biggest economy. Resilient earnings at LVMH have fueled a 27% surge in the MSCI Europe Textiles Apparel & Luxury Goods Index the since mid-January.

  

  “We agree that the first quarter is likely to be challenging with double-digit negative earnings growth,” Deutsche Bank strategist Maximilian Uleer says. But he expects a “pronounced” recovery in the second half of the year against the backdrop of global economic growth.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 23:00

• China Sets Economic Growth Target At Around 5% This Year, Will Boost Defense Spending By 7.2%
  China Sets Economic Growth Target At Around 5% This Year, Will Boost Defense Spending By 7.2%

  China will target economic growth of “around 5%” this year as it works to transform its development model (read magically grow while aggressively deleveraging), curb industrial overcapacity (read build less ghost cities while trying to contain the fallout from the biggest real estate crisis in history), defuse property sector risks (read transfer ownership from countless insolvent property developers to the state while encouraging foreign investment) and cut wasteful spending by local governments (read limit corruption in a country where 1 out of every 3 yuan is embezzled, stolen or otherwise vaporized), Premier Li Qiang said on Tuesday according to Reuters.

  

  Li delivered his maiden work report at the annual meeting of the National People’s Congress (NPC), China’s rubber-stamp legislature, in the cavernous Great Hall of the People in Tiananmen Square.

  The growth target – already the lwoest in decades – was identical to last year’s but analysts warned that it would be harder to achieve this year than in 2023, when growth was flattered by a low base during the pandemic, and will require stronger government stimulus for China to reach it, as the economy remains reliant on state investments in infrastructure that have led to a mountain of municipal debt.

  Almost all of the 27 economists polled by Bloomberg before the National People’s Congress expected Beijing to announce a growth target similar to last year. Economists polled in a separate, broader survey, however, said the economy would likely grow at a more realistic 4.6% in 2024.

  “It’s what the Communist Party thinks is needed to keep the Chinese economy going and account for needs like employment,” Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore, said of the GDP goal for 2024.

  Investors are watching this year’s “Two Sessions” of the National People’s Congress, the country’s parliament, and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, the top advisory body, for clues as to how dictator Xi plans to tackle the slowing economy. The premier’s work report, delivered to the NPC’s nearly 3,000 delegates in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, is the keynote speech of the Two Sessions, laying out the party’s most important annual economic goals and setting the tone for policymakers for the rest of the year.

  “We expect a moderate level of policy support, but given a less favourable base effect, pervasively downbeat sentiment, and property market weakness remaining an overhang, reaching 5 per cent growth this year may be more difficult,” ING greater China chief economist Lynn Song said in a note ahead of the work report.

  An aborted COVID recovery in the past year has laid bare China’s deep structural imbalances, from weak household consumption to increasingly lower returns on investment and a collapse in loan demand, prompting calls for a new development model.

  A property crisis, deepening deflation, a stock market rout, mounting local government debt woes and a surge in protests by angry Chines workers have increased the pressure on China’s leaders to respond to these calls.

  

  “We should not lose sight of worst-case scenarios and should be well prepared for all risks and challenges,” Li said.
  “In particular, we must push ahead with transforming the growth model, making structural adjustments, improving quality, and enhancing performance.”

  There were no immediate details on the changes China intended to implement.

  In setting the growth target, policymakers “have taken into account the need to boost employment and incomes and prevent and defuse risks,” Li said, adding China intended to have a “proactive” fiscal stance and “prudent” monetary policy.

  China plans to run a budget deficit of 3% of economic output, down from a revised 3.8% last year. While generally in line with expectations, the country’s stock market observers were likely hoping for “an increase in the official fiscal deficit for any clues on policy support for property and other parts of the economy,” said Derek Tay, head of investments at Kamet Capital Partners, adding that China still has other fiscal tools to work with. But, as reported in late 2023, it plans to issue 1 trillion yuan ($139 billion) in special ultra-long term treasury bonds, which are not included in the budget. That said, the impact of such debt on growth would be modest at best: China needs trillions (in USD) in new debt to kick start to languishing and deflating economy.

  While the stimulus target is the same as last year, the central government special bond issuance was new compared with a year earlier.

  Beijing also plans to boost defense spending by 7.2%, well above the country’s economic growth target of around 5%. The pace of military expansion matches the spending budgeted under former Premier Li Keqiang’s watch last year. This marks the third year in a row of military expansion above 7%, even as the economy continues to slow down.

  China trails only the U.S. in military spending and has been beefing up its armed forces amid tensions with the U.S. and the West. President Xi Jinping has emphasized the significance of preparing for the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the People’s Liberation Army in 2027.

  The details of the defense budget expansion were not available, but the focus is understood to be on catching up with the U.S. while filling the gap in nuclear capabilities by enhancing other conventional weaponry. it also wasn’t clear if China plans on invading Taiwan this year or will once again kick this particular start to WW3 to next year.

  The special bond issuance quota for local governments was set at 3.9 trillion yuan, versus 3.8 trillion yuan in 2023. China also set the consumer inflation target at 3% and aims to create over 12 million urban jobs this year, keeping the jobless rate at around 5.5%. Meanwhile, it remains unclear what China’s all-important youth unemployment is – the data was suspended for reporting when it hit a record over 20% and has since been restored in a several adjusted format which nobody trusts.

  “The Chinese government does not want to stimulate the economy too much, … and also wants to keep leverage relatively low,” said Xia Qingjie, economics professor at Peking University. The budget deficit target can be adjusted later this year, if needed, Xia added.

  According to Paul Pong, managing director at Pegasus Fund Managers, for China to achieve 5% economic growth this year forceful measures focused on boosting consumption will be needed as the property sector becomes a smaller driver of growth, with electric vehicles, sportswear and healthcare sectors are among the areas that might benefit most.

  To achieve the 5% growth target, China will need to take measures to ease developers’ financing stress to avoid any unfinished homes. Sentiment remains weak, especially among foreign investors, given the property problems in China.

  Analysts expect China to lower its annual growth ambitions in the future. The International Monetary Fund projects China’s economic growth at 4.6% this year, declining further in the medium term to about 3.5% in 2028.

  Li also said, that China will continue to pour resources into tech innovation and advanced manufacturing, in line with President Xi Jinping’s push for “new productive forces.” Some analysts have criticized this policy, however, saying it exacerbates industrial overcapacity, deepens deflation and heightens trade tensions with the West. At the same time, reform advocates, worried about record low consumer confidence and plunging investor and business sentiment, want China to return to a path of pro-market policies and boost household demand.

  The NPC is not the traditional venue for sharp policy shifts, which are usually reserved for events known as plenums, held by the Communist Party between its once-every-five-year congresses. One such plenum was initially expected in the final months of 2023. While it could still take place later this year, the fact that it has not yet been scheduled has fuelled investor concerns over policy inaction.

  The extent to which China’s economic expansion is reached or spread across the entire economy is increasingly difficult to ascertain independently given greater restrictions on data accessibility, said Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore, said of the GDP goal for 2024.

  As noted earlier, China also abruptly scrapped a three-decade tradition for the premier to hold a press conference at the NPC, fanning fears about opaque policymaking.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 22:40

• These Four Themes Will Define The Next Decade
  These Four Themes Will Define The Next Decade

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via Substack,

  Morgan Stanley recently came out with their 3 Themes that will impact markets for many years: longevity, AI tech diffusion, and decarbonization, i.e. the transition from hydrocarbon fuels to so-called “green energy.”

  That’s the status quo: everything’s great! Pills that cost $1,000 a month will make us live longer, AI will increase corporate profits (which is the entire point of the economy, of course) and those who invest in the “green energy” transition will be rewarded with fabulous wealth.

  

  That all sounds peachy, but the real world will be defined by four much different themes: sclerosis, dysfunction, debt saturation and power asymmetry.

  1. Sclerosis: the same old nodes of power cling onto power and so nothing changes because nothing can change: those in power must maintain or expand their power, regardless of what comes along, and that sclerosis is the systemic problem that cannot be resolved.

  2. Dysfunction: nothing works due to the consequences of sclerosis: those who cling to power do so by eliminating every dynamic of open, self-correcting systems: they get rid of competition (every sector is dominated by monopolies, cartels or state-cartels), they get rid of transparency (information asymmetry is how they maintain power) and they have a lock on regulatory complexity / capture: first jump through all these hoops and maybe we’ll let you propose some worthless policy tweak that leaves our power intact. Or we’ll co-opt you by inviting you to become one of our flunkies, PR flacks, factotums, enforcers, lackeys, etc.

  In a system rigged to maximize the profit and power of the few at the expense of the many, nothing works because the system is no longer capable of self-correction.

  3. Debt saturation: 15 years of expanding credit has created the illusion we can pay for everything, no matter how costly, from future earnings, basically forever. So we need trillions to transition to “green energy,” no problem, we’ll borrow it. We need more trillions to pay for an aging, increasingly sickly populace, no problem, we’ll borrow it. We need to borrow more trillions to fund all the status quo grift and graft, no problem, we’ll borrow it.

  And since we can pin interest rates to zero forever, we can borrow whatever tiny sums we need to pay the interest on hundreds of trillions in new debt, no problem. Except for one little dynamic called debt saturation: future earnings are not guaranteed, and at some point the income cannot sustain both the eternally expanding consumer and state spending needed to keep the Waste Is Growth Landfill Economy from imploding and the rising debt service on the ballooning debt.

  We can afford only one: either borrow and spend to keep the Waste Is Growth Landfill Economy humming, or we can devote that income to servicing rising debt. We can’t do both, so one or the other will collapse: either consumer/state borrowing and spending or the Palace of Debt.

  This reality increases risk, and capital eventually demands a real return. Interest rates can’t stay at zero, so the costs of servicing the soaring debt rises rapidly. At the same time, the immense expansion of credit–money borrowed from future income to be spent today–generates inflation, as the flood of credit needed to keep a sclerotic, dysfunctional status quo afloat outpaces the value being generated by all the trillions being borrowed and blown.

  No one at the trough of “free money” will give up their place, and so the system is rigged to fail: we have to keep borrowing trillions to keep all the incumbents, entrenched interests and those collecting benefits happy, but as interest payments rise, we need to borrow more trillions just to pay the interest. And so on, in a self-reinforcing feedback loop.

  4. Power asymmetry is my term for the structural inequality and bondage that characterize the global status quo. The many have very little power over anything, while the few hoard the power to make sure they keep what they have and to protect their perquisites from competing elites and populist movements. Debt serfdom is a good example of bondage–you need to borrow to live–and power asymmetry: debt-serfs have essentially zero power in the economy, society or the sclerotic systems of governance.

  No amount of AI or new technology will change any of this, because all those tools serve those already in power. In effect, AI and all other new technologies simply serve to solidify power asymmetry and thus sclerosis and dysfunction. And since the system demands “free money” borrowed from the future to keep everyone at the trough happy, it also guarantees debt saturation, which eventually triggers a phase change much like liquid water (liquidity) suddenly freezing into ice.

  Everyone at the trough believes that the transition from liquid water (free flowing credit) to ice cannot possibly happen. So when it happens, everyone will be surprised. What do you mean, there are limits?

  New podcast Vision Series: AI Job Challenges and Trends (34:54 min)

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 22:20

• Former Twitter CEO, Three Other Fired Officials, Sue Musk For $128 Million In Severance
  Former Twitter CEO, Three Other Fired Officials, Sue Musk For $128 Million In Severance

  Instead of giving him a medal for demonstrating that their censoring, woke, CIA-controlled bloated media platform can operate with 80% less diversity hires and can actually grow much faster when stripped of its unbearable propaganda, four ex-Twitter executives, including former CEO Parag Agrawal, sued X (f/k/a Twitter) company owner Elon Musk for allegedly stiffing them on more than $128 million in severance payments after they were ousted from the company.

  The former top officials, many of whom were fired for cause within seconds of Musk “letting that sink in” to the then-Twitter San Francisco office,  said Musk showed “special ire” toward them after he took over the social-media platform in 2022, publicly vowing to withhold their severance to recoup about $200 million from the $44 billion deal, according to a lawsuit filed Monday in federal court in northern California.

  Twitter, which Musk renamed X, has been accused in several suits of numerous labor and workplace violations, including failing to pay severance to thousands of Twitter workers whose only job apparently was to censor their own users, and who were laid off in the minutes and months after the takeover. The company also was accused in a raft of suits of failing to pay millions owed to vendors and landlords while purportedly trying to stay financially solvent.

  “Under Musk’s control, Twitter has become a scofflaw, stiffing employees, landlords, vendors, and others. Musk doesn’t pay his bills, believes the rules don’t apply to him, and uses his wealth and power to run roughshod over anyone who disagrees with him,” lawyers for Agrawal and the other ex-executives said in the 38-page complaint. It was unclear if they were transcribing what the CIA told them to say as had been the case customary for years, or if they actually had an original thought for once.

  As soon as he took over Twitter, Musk fired several other top-ranking executives in addition to Agrawal: Vijaya Gadde, who was the company’s top censorship officer and also pretended to be in charge of legal and policy; Ned Segal, the chief financial officer; and Sean Edgett, Twitter’s general counsel.

  They were all fired for cause, and were deemed unsurprising at the time: after all the entire former Twitter management team was captured by the deep state, a bunch of clueless pawns meant to keep Twitter a venue where a small number of very vocal liberals and socialists could pretend they were the vast majority of the country, when in reality they were just a handful of useless socialists.

  Each of the four executives was due to receive substantial payouts as part of Musk’s agreement to buy the company, which included language that would expedite the their unvested stock awards. Agrawal alone was set to get roughly $50 million in severance payouts, however Musk managed to short-circuit the process by firing Agrawal for cause with minutes to spare before the contracts became enforceable.

  In early December, X failed in court-ordered mediation to resolve claims by thousands of former Twitter employees who say they were cheated of severance pay.

  Also in December, San Francisco judge rejected X’s request to dismiss a lawsuit by employees claiming they were denied 2022 bonuses, despite being promised in the months leading up to Musk’s acquisition that they’d be paid 50% of their target amounts.

  The lawsuit is below.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 22:00

• How The Government Used 'Track F' To Fund Censorship Tools: Report
  How The Government Used ‘Track F’ To Fund Censorship Tools: Report

  Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Officials from the National Science Foundation tried to conceal the spending of millions of taxpayer dollars on research and development for artificial intelligence tools used to censor political speech and influence the outcome of elections, according to a new congressional report.

  

  The report looking into the National Science Foundation (NSF) is the latest addition to a growing body of evidence that critics claim shows federal officials—especially at the FBI and the CIA—are creating a “censorship-industrial complex” to monitor American public expression and suppress speech disfavored by the government.

  “In the name of combatting alleged misinformation regarding COVID-19 and the 2020 election, NSF has been issuing multimillion-dollar grants to university and nonprofit research teams,” states the report by the House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

  “The purpose of these taxpayer-funded projects is to develop AI-powered censorship and propaganda tools that can be used by governments and Big Tech to shape public opinion by restricting certain viewpoints or promoting others.”

  The report also described, based on previously unknown documents, elaborate efforts by NSF officials to cover up the true purposes of the research.

  The efforts included tracking public criticism of the foundation’s work by conservative journalists and legal scholars.

  The NSF also developed a media strategy “that considered blacklisting certain American media outlets because they were scrutinizing NSF’s funding of censorship and propaganda tools,” the report said.

  NSF Responds

  In a statement to The Epoch Times, an NSF spokesman categorically rejected the report’s allegations.

  “NSF does not engage in censorship and has no role in content policies or regulations. Per statute and guidance from Congress, we have made investments in research to help understand communications technologies that allow for things like deep fakes and how people interact with them,” the spokesman said.

  “We know our adversaries are already using these technologies against us in multiple ways. We know that scammers are using these techniques on unsuspecting victims. It is in this nation’s national and economic security interest to understand how these tools are being used and how people are responding so we can provide options for ways we can improve safety for all.”

  The spokesman also denied that NSF ever sought to conceal its investments in the so-called Track F program, and that the foundation does not follow the policy regarding media that was outlined in the documents discovered by the committee.

  

  Track F Program Funding

  The $39 million Track F Program is the heart of the congressional report’s analysis of a systematic federal effort to replace human “disinformation” monitors with AI-driven digital systems that are capable of vastly more comprehensive monitoring and censoring.

  “The NSF-funded projects threaten to help create a censorship regime that could significantly impede the fundamental First Amendment rights of millions of Americans, and potentially do so in a manner that is instantaneous and largely invisible to its victims,” the congressional report warned.

  During NSF’s solicitation and sifting of dozens of bids it received in response to its request for proposals, a University of Michigan team, with its “WiseDex” tool, pitched federal officials on enabling the government “to externalize the difficult responsibility of censorship.”

  The Michigan team was one of four Track F funding recipients spotlighted by the congressional report. A total of 12 recipients were involved in Track F funding and activities.

  The second of the four spotlighted teams is from Meedan, a San Francisco-based group that describes itself as “a global technology not-for-profit that builds software and programmatic initiatives to strengthen journalism, digital literacy, and accessibility of information online and off. We develop open-source tools for creating and sharing context on digital media through annotation, verification, archival, and translation.”

  In fact, according to the congressional report, Meedan’s Co-Insights Program uses AI to identify and counter “misinformation” on a massive scale.

  In one illustration that the group provided to NSF in its funding pitch, was to “crawl” more than 750,000 blogs and media articles on a daily basis for misinformation and fact-checking on themes such as “undermining trust in mainstream media,” “fear-mongering and anti-Black narratives,” and “weakening political participation.”

  The Co-Insights Program, according to the congressional report, was “part of a much larger, long-term goal by the nonprofit. As [Scott] Hale, the director of research at Meedan, explained in an email to NSF, in his ‘dream world,’ Big Tech would collect all of the censored content to enable ‘disinformation’ researchers to use that data to create ‘automated detection’ to censor any similar speech automatically.”

  

  The third spotlighted team is from the University of Wisconsin and its CourseCorrect tool that received $5.75 million in NSF funding “to develop a tool to ‘empower efforts by journalists, developers, and citizens to fact-check delegitimizing information’ about ‘election integrity and vaccine efficacy’ on social media.”

  The tool “would allow ‘fact-checkers to perform rapid-cycle testing of fact-checking messages and monitor their real-time performance among online communities at-risk of misinformation exposure,’” the congressional report said.

  ‘Effective Interventions’ to Educate Americans

  The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) team that developed its “Search Lit” tool with government funding was the fourth of the highlighted NSF grant recipients.

  Officials with NSF asked the MIT team “to develop ‘effective interventions’ to educate Americans—specifically, those that the MIT researchers alleged ’may be more vulnerable to misinformation campaigns’—on how to discern fact from fiction online.

  “In particular, the MIT team believed that conservatives, minorities, and veterans were uniquely incapable of assessing the veracity of content online,” the congressional report noted.

  “In order to build a ’more digitally discerning public,’ the Search Lit team proposed developing tools that could support the government’s viewpoint on COVID-19 public health measures and the 2020 election.”

  In a study by one of the MIT team’s members, people who hold as sacred certain texts and documents, most notably the Bible and the U.S. Constitution, were described as “‘often focused on reading a wide array of primary sources, and performing their own synthesis,’ further alleging that, ‘unlike expert lateral readers,’ the conservative respondents made ‘no such effort’ to “eliminate bias that might skew results from search terms.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 21:40

• Argentina's President Javier Milei Suspends State-Run Leftist News Agency For 'Propaganda''
  Argentina’s President Javier Milei Suspends State-Run Leftist News Agency For ‘Propaganda”

  The chainsaw-wielding Argentine president Javier Milei has consolidated eighteen government ministries into nine, fired 5,000 government workers, devalued the peso near market rates, and introduced economic reforms to overhaul the faltering economy after a series of devastating financial crises. 

  

  The latest fat Milei has trimmed from the bloated government’s books is the largest and most prestigious news agency in Argentina, Telam. The state-run media outlet has served as a mouthpiece of “propaganda” for previous progressive administrations. 

  On Monday morning, Telam’s website was shut down. The current message on the media outlet’s website reads: “Page under reconstruction. The page you are trying to view is under reconstruction.” 

  

  The eight-decade news organization, with over 800 staff, is the latest casualty of Milei’s drive to shake up the prior corrupt progressive government. He told lawmakers last Friday about his plans to shutter the media outlet as part of a wave of reforms targeting public bodies that he warns are “covert propaganda ministry.” 

  “We will close the news agency Télam, which has been used as a Kirchnerist propaganda agency for the last decades,” Milei told lawmakers, referring to former president Cristina Kirchner. 

  And, of course, US legacy media outlets were unhappy about Milei’s move. 

  Reuters cited the Buenos Aires Press Union, which wrote on X: 

  “It is a blow against democracy and freedom of expression, and that is why we are going to defend it.”

  The libertarian and self-described “anarcho-capitalist” understands the government shouldn’t have a monopoly on the so-called ‘free press’. The president is also ridding the government of dangerous ‘collectivist experiments‘ such as Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 21:20

• VDH: American Paralysis & Decline
  VDH: American Paralysis & Decline

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  “We can bear neither our diseases nor their remedies.”

  So shrugged the ancient historian Livy (59 B.C.- A.D. 17) of the long decline of Roman national character that, in his age, finally ended the Roman Republic.

  Like a patient whose medicine proves worse than the disease, Livy lamented that the Romans knew that they had become corrupt and lawless.

  But the very contemplation of the hard medicine needed for restoration – and the furious reaction that would meet the remedy – made it impossible to save the patient.

  America is nearing such an impasse.

  

  We know that no state can long exist after opening its borders to over 7 million illegal aliens, requiring neither background checks nor legality.

  The recent murder of a Georgia female jogger by an illegal alien and the savage beating of New York policemen by similar others hardly merit media attention.

  Everyone knows that neither new appropriations nor new laws are needed to secure the border as it was in 2020.

  Instead, we could just stop suicidal catch-and-release, deport lawbreakers, privilege the legal over the illegal immigrant, demand would-be refugees apply for asylum first in their native countries, finish the border wall, and pressure Mexico to stop undermining the territorial integrity of its northern neighbor.

  But then we shrug, “We can’t do that”—paralyzed in fear of being smeared as “xenophobic,” “nativist,” or “racist.”

  So this generation apparently feels that it can endure the collateral damage of daily assaults on American citizens, the near bankruptcy of our cities, and 100,000 fentanyl deaths per year—but certainly not the idea that it is somehow not politically correct or compassionate.

  The same is true of the $35 trillion debt, now costing more than $1 trillion a year in interest payments—and growing. We all know it is unsustainable. Americans understand it will eventually lead either to destructive hyperinflation, suicidal renunciation of federal debt, or confiscation of private savings.

  Yet we ignore the reckless spending and keep borrowing well over $1 trillion a year.

  Apparently, our generation prefers being praised as “virtuous” and “caring.” So it leaves the next generation to be smeared as “cruel” and “unfair” when it is forced to cut federal entitlements and bloated government or face civilizational collapse.

  The crime epidemic is also similar. Everyone accepts that no society can long endure quasi-legalized shoplifting or green-lighting smash-and-grabbers and carjackers to be released without bail.

  But we assume that such a civilizational implosion will never reach our own sanctuary neighborhoods or safe places of work—at least not yet.

  We also know that restoring deterrence by arresting, convicting, and jailing repeat felons will return safety to our streets.

  But again, we fear even more that advocating “law and order” will earn slanders like “racist” or “reactionary.”

  Ditto the homeless. In an age of self-congratulation and hyper-environmentalism, we know that a million homeless defecating, urinating, injecting, and assaulting on our downtown sidewalks and storefronts is medieval.

  We know that it is illegal to camp out on the street and publicly harass citizens or relieve oneself in public.

  And we know the cure lies in building and staffing more mental institutions and providing areas far from public spaces where the homeless can find shelter, sanitation, and medical care.

  But the very idea of removing anyone from his accustomed sidewalk spot, or the notion of the use of force to transport the mentally ill to proper and humane facilities, terrifies us.

  So we walk around, step over, and ignore those on the street.

  Is the assumption that the odds of being assaulted or sickened acceptable? Or do we just not wish to learn where the flotsam, jetsam, and human offal of the street end up?

  Most accept that had Donald Trump just not run for president in 2024 or was a man of the left, he would not now be facing four different felony court cases.

  Most accept that three of the four prosecutors have either in advance promised to get Trump or have proved grossly unethical.

  Most know it is wrong to try to remove a leading presidential candidate from state ballots.

  Yet many shrug that this new weaponization of America’s legal system is the flamboyant Trump’s own problem, not their own.

  So they ignore the third worldization of our political system, which they quietly acknowledge is otherwise leading us to a Venezuela-like mess.

  The paralysis of American society extends to our foreign policy as well. We deplore the terrorism of Iran and its thuggish surrogates. But we fear more the nasty, costly business of stopping its aggression.

  Societies do not always collapse from a lack of wealth, invasion, or natural catastrophes.

  Most often, they know what is destroying them. But they are so paralyzed by their fear that the road to salvation becomes too painful to even contemplate.

  So they implode gradually, then suddenly.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 21:00

• Wall Street Scrambles To Abandon DEI As "Legal Assaults" Mount
  Wall Street Scrambles To Abandon DEI As “Legal Assaults” Mount

  We’ve been stating for months that both the DEI and ESG gravy trains on Wall Street are finally coming to an unceremonious end. Who would have guessed the profit motive would be incompatible with mindless, unproductive virtue signaling and reverse racism? 

  The pushback on DEI has been immense, with entire universities and corporations slashing their DEI departments. Subha Barry, former head of diversity at Merrill Lynch, told Bloomberg this weekend: “We’re past the peak.”

  The report highlighted yet another shift on Wall Street, wherein programs open to people of color and women are “now open to all”. Imagine that…

  For example, Goldman Sachs has adjusted its “Possibilities Summit,” previously exclusive to Black college students, to now welcome White students as well. Bank of America Corp. has expanded its internal programs, initially aimed at women and minorities, to include all employees. Furthermore, Bank of New York Mellon Corp. has been advised by legal counsel to reevaluate and potentially eliminate strict diversity metrics from its workforce evaluations, according to a new report from Bloomberg.

  

  Executives at major banks, including Goldman Sachs, publicly affirm their commitment to diversity, despite acknowledging privately the challenges posed by a growing campaign against DEI initiatives led by figures like Elon Musk and Bill Ackman, the report says.

  Efforts to recruit diverse talent through programs for women and minorities are being reassessed, along with other diversity measures within corporations. Bloomberg says the shift is notable compared to the ambitious diversity pledges made by CEOs following George Floyd’s murder in 2020. Almost as if it was just mindless lip service to silence the ‘woke mob’…

  The recent Supreme Court decision against affirmative action in colleges has intensified legal challenges to corporate diversity efforts, with banks wary of becoming lawsuit targets over claims of reverse discrimination, the report says. 

  “The legal assault on corporate diversity initiatives is gathering steam” after the Supreme Court’s rejection of affirmative action at colleges, the report says.  

  While black people make up about 14% of the total population, their representation in the senior roles at banks like Citi, JP Morgan and Goldman remains 8.7%, 5% and 3.7%, respectively, the note says. However, these figures have grown significantly since 2019:

  

  Several other financial institutions, including the Bank of New York and Bank of America are subtly altering their approaches to diversity and inclusion initiatives.

  These changes range from modifying executive compensation linked to diversity progress, adjusting the language around D&I goals, reconsidering certain mentorship programs, and adapting recruitment strategies to avoid explicit references to race and gender.

  Despite these adjustments, spokespeople for these banks assert their continued commitment to fostering an inclusive workplace. And, nonetheless, industry consultants (whose meaningless careers and paychecks rely solely on racial division and DEI initiatives to begin with) and some financial executives still emphasize the importance of persevering with D&I efforts, despite these internal and external pressures.

  Industry consultant Duarte McCarthy told Bloomberg: “We’re not suggesting that things stop because there’s this fear factor. But rather, take a look.”

  Ana Duarte McCarthy, former chief diversity officer at Citigroup concluded: “We’re at an interesting inflection point.” 

  Yeah, the kind of inflection point that is going to see a lot of former “Chief Diversity Officers” scrambling through LinkedIn and updating their resumes…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 20:40

• Amid Debate Over Rail Safety Concerns, Another Norfolk Southern Train Derails
  Amid Debate Over Rail Safety Concerns, Another Norfolk Southern Train Derails

  By John Kingston of FreightWaves

  With a Norfolk Southern derailment in Pennsylvania on Saturday that sent diesel fuel into a Lehigh Valley River, the already heated battle over control of the railroad with safety issues as a backdrop got even hotter. 

  

  The derailment came after two days of charges, countercharges and missives flying back and forth over the safety records of both Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific, with leading government officials that regulate the rails leveling separate heavy criticism at the two companies. 

  And while it hasn’t yet provoked any government response, the issue of safety and levels of employment could also be triggered by Friday’s news that BNSF had implemented a significant number of furloughs. 

  In the proxy battle roiling Norfolk Southern, the activist investor group Ancora is recommending the replacement of eight new directors to the Norfolk Southern board. It also wants to replace CEO Alan Shaw with former UPS executive Jim Barber and name Jamie Boychuk, a former executive at CSX, to replace current COO Paul Duncan.

  That fight now has the Pennsylvania derailment as part of the battle, and Ancora wasted no time Saturday coming out with a statement over the incident.

  “Our proposed slate and management team are unanimous in their view that Norfolk Southern must become a safer and more reliable railroad before it can ever reach its full potential,” Ancora said in the statement. “Following this latest derailment, we call for the immediate termination of CEO Alan Shaw and stand ready to engage with the Company about an orderly reconstitution of the Board and a transition to capable management with a track record of actually delivering on safety commitments.”

  The statement went on to say that “an incident like this, which is drawing national news coverage and resulting in more embarrassment for the railroad, should put an end to the Board’s unsustainable efforts to save a tainted CEO with no long-term future.3 How can anyone defend this?”

  What happened?

  According to news reports, the derailment took place in Lower Saucon Township, which is near the Allentown-Bethlehem area. There were no reports of injuries, although diesel fuel being carried in a tank car did spill, there were no reports of contamination or evacuations. Plastic pellets also spilled, according to the news reports. 

  In a statement provided to FreightWaves on Sunday, a spokesperson said: “Norfolk Southern crews and contractors remain at the derailment site. Members of the NTSB have arrived and are investigating. Once they have completed their investigation of the scene, we will continue with site cleanup and begin work to restore the track. The area where the locomotives were in the water will remain contained with booms until any residual sheen has been removed.”

  Saturday’s derailment comes after two days of back-and-forth over two of the U.S.-based Class 1 railroads that left heads spinning. The scorecard for the criticism and the responses went like this:

  — Martin Oberman, chairman of the Surface Transportation Board, ripped into Ancora Associates for its proxy battle over Norfolk Southern (NYSE: NSC) railroad. Oberman spoke to the Southeast Association of Rail Shippers 2024 Spring Meeting in Atlanta on Thursday, where he said Ancora “has nothing to say about what it could do better” than current management in running Norfolk Southern, adding, “I think we can assume that if Ancora succeeds in its bid to control NS, its next move will be to put the Brooklyn Bridge on the market.”

  Ancora didn’t have any public response to Oberman’s comments, but on Friday, it sent a letter to the Norfolk Southern board, just a few days after the railroad released its 2024 proxy statement. The proxy revealed that in 2023 — the year when Norfolk Southern labored under the fallout from the derailment in East Palestine, Ohio — NS CEO Alan Shaw had total compensation of $13.41 million, compared to $9.78 million a year before.

  — The second blast from a government official aimed at a railroad came from Amit Bose, the administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration. In a letter addressed to UP CEO Jim Vena,

  Bose criticized recent furloughs implemented at Union Pacific (NYSE: UNP). “It is imperative that UP prioritizes safety above all else and takes immediate steps to address this issue, an issue disproportionately affecting UP workers since your railroad continues to furlough employees at a rate, based on available data, far outpacing that of any of your Class I peers.” Bose wrote.

  — Union Pacific quickly responded to Bose’s comments with a letter from Vena, which said the FRA head was portraying an “inaccurate correlation between natural workforce fluctuations and safety.”

  Oberman was harsh in his assessment of Ancora’s motives. “Several weeks ago, Ancora wrote me a letter,” Oberman said, according to a transcript released by the STB. “The essence of their message was that they had taken a $1 billion dollar stake in NS in order for it — quote — ‘to become a safer railroad.’ Really? What hedge fund raises $1 billion to promote safety anywhere?”

  Oberman, as he has done before, criticized railroad focus on its operating ratio (OR), with the STB head expressing concern that a goal to reduce OR can come at the expense of both safety and performance. 

  “Ancora principally and repeatedly focuses on a rapid lowering of the OR to drive cash payouts and raise its stock price, harshly criticizing present NS management for not making a lower OR the objective,” Oberman said. “We now know that this is wrong-headed thinking. Making OR the corporate objective is what led to elimination of thousands of workers which caused the service crisis.” 

  The reference to the service crisis was from earlier in his speech when he recapped STB actions to force service improvements during the enormous system backups of 2022. 

  Ancora’s Friday letter was addressed to Amy Miles, the non-executive chair of the NS board.  The letter said that Ancora — which as an activist investor has previously trained its sights on Forward Air (NASDAQ: FWRD) and C.H. Robinson (NASDAQ: CHRW) — said Shaw has “presided over industry-worst operating results, sustained share price underperformance and an ineffective and tone-deaf response to the preventable derailment in East Palestine.” It said Anchor had “offered viable solutions in the form of exceptional people with a strategic vision.”

  Norfolk Southern’s stock price in the last 52 weeks is up about 14%. During that time, its fierce rival for business east of the Mississippi, CSX (NASDAQ: CSX), is up about 23.7% while Union Pacific is up 21.5%.

  Focusing in on Shaw’s pay package from 2023

  On the issue of Shaw’s pay, the Ancora letter said shareholders were “baffled” at the decision to give the CEO a raise in the same year as the East Palestine derailment and the fallout from it. 

  “We challenge the Board’s determination that it had to adjust executive compensation in 2023 to

  ‘retain key talent,’” Ancora said, quoting a board statement. “We do not see how the Board could have actually viewed Mr. Shaw as a flight risk. In addition to being a more than 30-year insider at Norfolk Southern, he was a relatively new, unproven CEO off to an extremely rocky start. The fact that this decision was made suggests deference to management and a lack of respect for shareholders and stakeholders.”

  UP furloughs at issue

  In the back-and-forth surrounding Union Pacific, Bose said UP’s decision to furlough some worker is a sign that the railroad “has again chosen to prioritize cost-cutting measures over ensuring safe operations, jeopardizing the well-being of both UP’s workers and the public.”

  “Furloughing maintenance of equipment workers puts a strain on workers across the railroad, leading to fatigue and potential errors that could have severe ramifications for both workers and the public,” Bose wrote. 

  In a letter signed by Vena, UP responded to Bose’s criticism with several key rebuttals.

  — It cited several statistical points about derailments, that “serious” derailments were down 26% in 2023 from 2019 levels, track-related derailments had declined 28% in the past 10 years, and that UP had recorded an 8.7% improvement in mainline derailments in 2023 versus 2021.

  The Vena letter said “fluctuations in workforce needs are a natural component of operating the railroad … normal, cyclical and vary from year to year based on business needs, capital projects and weather.”

  To support its criticism that Bose was not making distinctions among types of workers and railroad needs, Vena’s response said the Bose letter “combines different types of workers (Mechanical employees and Engineering employees) and work done on the railroad (equipment maintenance and capital projects), and therefore paints an incorrect and incomplete picture of the natural role workforce fluctuations play in operating a railroad year-round.”

  “We’ve already begun seeing an increase in demand and have more employees working in January and February of this year,” Vena wrote.

  The letter also said workers impacted by furloughs and layoffs can apply for other positions at Union Pacific. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 20:20

• The Nuclear Boom Is Here: Uranium Projects Jump Back On Line As Price Soars
  The Nuclear Boom Is Here: Uranium Projects Jump Back On Line As Price Soars

  It’s been a long time coming, but the bulls are finally back in uranium. And with them comes the restart of multiple uranium projects that have been taken offline in the years while the commodity slouched in price. 

  We have long stated here on Zero Hedge that nuclear power is an obvious win/win: it’s clean, it’s safe, it provides robust power and, most importantly to our liberal friends, it has minimal emissions. So why isn’t it more prominent?

  In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, uranium mining in the United States, particularly in Wyoming, Texas, Arizona, and Utah, experienced a significant downturn.

  This decline wasn’t helped by uranium prices plummeting and nations such as Germany and Japan moving away from nuclear energy. However, as global efforts to reduce emissions renew interest in nuclear power, and as leading uranium producers face challenges in meeting demand, prices for the metal have risen sharply, a new Bloomberg report says.

  This resurgence in prices is offering previously unprofitable American uranium mines an opportunity to re-enter the market and address the supply shortfall.

  According to the report, as the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada’s annual meeting takes place in Toronto, attracting thousands from the mining industry, uranium will be a key focus.

  

  With participants including major uranium firms like Denison Mines Corp., Fission Uranium Corp., and IsoEnergy Ltd., the event highlights the growing importance of uranium in the context of climate change and nuclear power.

  The International Atomic Energy Agency predicts a significant rise in uranium demand, foreseeing a need for over 100,000 metric tons annually by 2040, necessitating a near doubling of current mining and processing efforts.

  Scott Melbye, executive vice president of Texas-based Uranium Energy Corp. said: “We’re in an old-fashioned, plain-and-simple supply squeeze. Demand is increasing again, with new reactors coming online.”

  John Ciampagli, Chief Executive Officer of Sprott Asset Management added: “The industry is clearly trying to respond with smaller mines reopening, but when you have a mine that hasn’t operated for that long, it’s obviously not very substantive.”

  Cameco has resumed operations at MacArthur River and Key Lake, the world’s largest high-grade uranium mine and mill in Saskatchewan, Canada, after halting from 2018 to 2021 due to poor market conditions. 

  The reopening of U.S. mines signifies a comeback for an industry that nearly vanished five years ago, with production plummeting to 174,000 pounds in 2019 from a peak of 44 million pounds in 1980. This decline was accompanied by increased reliance on uranium imports from nations such as Canada, Australia, Kazakhstan, and Russia.

  Amid geopolitical tensions, particularly sanctions on Russia after its 2022 invasion of Ukraine affecting uranium shipments from Kazakhstan, the U.S. is motivated by both supply security and political reasons to boost its uranium production. The Uranium Producers of America suggests the U.S. will need to open 8 to 10 major new mines within the next decade to meet demand.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 20:00

• "Nothing Will Make Sense To You Unless You Accept That The 2020 Election Was Stolen…"
  “Nothing Will Make Sense To You Unless You Accept That The 2020 Election Was Stolen…”

  Submitted by Drew Allen,

  During the debut of his new Saturday show on the General Michael Flynn-backed Patriot TV, Drew Allen – host of the Drew Allen Show – opened by claiming the Democrats stole the 2020 election.

  “They cheated!” Allen says plainly.

  

  Allen, of course, isn’t the first to say it. While the claim isn’t novel, his explanation is—and brilliant too. 

  Allen says:

  “I want you to listen very carefully. This is very, very important. In fact, it’s the key to understanding the world that we’re living in right now in the United States of America. Nothing that is happening can make sense to you unless you understand one thing. And this is something that you are forbidden from believing. Alright, this is the key to everything. Are you ready? The Democrats stole the 2020 election. They cheated! Alright, if you believe that, you can understand what’s going on. You have a lens to comprehend the world that we’re living in—the insanity. But if you don’t believe it, nothing makes sense.”

  Allen explains that when the Democrats started prosecuting Trump, “what they thought was gonna happen is that the American people were going to abandon Trump.”

  He points out that “…it didn’t. It had the opposite impact. It backfired on them. What actually happened was Donald Trump’s poll numbers improved. Improved! So they didn’t know what to do. They had to double down on that strategy.”

  “They want a Richard Nixon situation,” Allen points out “and it didn’t happen. They cannot fathom that Trump is still standing.”

  Allen plays a clip of Democrat lawyer Marc Elias to prove his point.

  In the clip Elias says:

  “how they decided that the candidate who is going to be best as their standard bearer is Donald Trump, is not just sickening from a standpoint of American politics, but is actually baffling from a matter of partisan strategy. I mean, it is hard to imagine a worse candidate for them to put forward, a candidate with more vulnerabilities than Donald Trump. The fact that the Republican Party itself is unwilling to just say he is out of bounds, he is too toxic, and he will not be out standard bearer…”

  Allen points out:

  “You hear what he’s saying there right? He wants to choose our candidate…in his opinion he cannot comprehend how the American people, the Republican voter has not ditched Trump. They do not want to face Trump in 2024 because why? Because they stole 2020 and they’re worried about 2024 again.”

  Allen goes on to explain how the latest Democrat Party meltdown over the Supreme Court taking up the Trump immunity appeal proves his point beyond doubt. 

  “The Hill, Fortune Magazine, Axios, NBC, they all had these polls that got them giddy with excitement…for example an NBC news poll recently it showed that former President Donald Trump uh leading current President Joe Biden by 5 points among registered voters, well, when the surveys final question re-asks voters what their ballot choice would be if Trump is found guilty and convicted of a felony this year Biden narrowly pulls ahead of Trump.”

  “So they were banking on what?” Patriot TV host Allen asks.

  “Getting a conviction of Trump because they believe, because their pollsters told them that one of their paths to victory was dependent, perhaps their only path to victory apart from cheating…their success in 2024 was heavily dependent upon getting a conviction.

  And so with the Supreme Court coming in and basically ensuring that no conviction was going to happen before November they’re losing their minds because why? They stole 2020 and they don’t believe they can beat Trump in 2024. See it’s making so much sense now right?”

  The Drew Allen Show is the most exciting new addition to Patriot TV and a new episode will air each Saturday. Allen is also the author of America’s Last Stand: Will You Vote to Save or Destroy America in 2024?, a new book lauded as a sequel to Thomas Paine’s Common Sense.

  Watch the episode here.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 19:43

• More Than $11 Million In Fentanyl Pills Seized In Massive Bust At U.S./Mexico Border
  More Than $11 Million In Fentanyl Pills Seized In Massive Bust At U.S./Mexico Border

  U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officers (CBP) at the San Ysidro Port of Entry made a massive bust over the weekend, discovering more than $11 million of blue fentanyl pills concealed in a car on Sunday. 

  At the San Ysidro POE around 8PM on Sunday night, a K-9 unit encountered a “37-year-old man driving a 2008 sedan applying for admission into the United States from Mexico,” a release from Customs and Border Patrol revealed over the weekend. 

  The K-9 unit alerted for drugs near the glove compartment and the vehicle was referred for further inspection, at which point “CBP officers extracted a total of 100 packages containing blue pills concealed within the vehicle’s dashboard and within the front passenger seats”.

  

  The release noted that the pills were tested and found to be fentanyl. Investigators ultimately uncovered approximately 561,000 tablets, weighing in at 123.6 pounds, with an estimated street value of around $11.22 million.

  Mariza Marin, Port Director for the San Ysidro Port of Entry, commented: “Fentanyl is a very lethal drug that continues to be encountered along our southern border. I’m very proud of the exceptional work by our officers who skillfully interdict illicit narcotics on a daily basis.”

  The individual was placed under the supervision of Homeland Security Investigations for additional scrutiny. CBP officers confiscated both the drugs and the vehicle involved.

  This confiscation is a component of Operation Apollo, a collaborative regional initiative that unites federal, state, and local agencies in the fight against the menace posed by fentanyl and other illegal synthetic drugs.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 19:20

• The Complete Graphic History Of "Bitcoin Is A Bubble"
  The Complete Graphic History Of “Bitcoin Is A Bubble”

  Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

  Courtesy of Establishment Shills, Central Banksters… and goldbugs

  It’s that time again, when Bitcoin is about to embark on a string of fresh all-time highs, triggering the mainstream pundit class into public displays of denial and angst.

  Just in case you may think “It’s a bubble” and “Tulips, backed by nothing” is a next-level, unique argument that no Bitcoiners have ever heard before, we humbly present, the history of “Bitcoin is a Bubble” in graphic terms, going back over a decade.

  2013 Cycle

  We start in 2013 when The Economist magazine declared Bitcoin to be a bubble in November as BTC cracked the $1,000 handle for the first time – they also declared “Bitcoin is expensive” and looking like a bubble earlier that year, in March 19, 2013 – when the Bitcoin spot price was… $59.

  

  2017 Cycle

  The next cycle peaked out in 2017 and by January, 2018 had plummeted all the way down to the $10,000 / BTC area, it prompted the New York Times to eulogize those foolish investors who tried to glom onto the phenom… “Remember Bitcoin? Some Investors Might Want to Forget” on December 28, 2018 – when the Bitcoin price was $3,653.13/BTC.

  

  Even by this very next cycle, 2013 looked like a rounding error.

  You’ll never guess what happened next…

  2021 cycle

  One of the staunchest sound-money advocates in the world became one of the most vociferous critics of Bitcoin ever seen on social media.

  

  None other than Peter Schiff went all-in on being a no-coiner, which, as a long-time gold investor myself, I found puzzling.

  It may be understandable that one may prefer precious metals to Bitcoin, or even eschew the latter if it was outside of their wheelhouse. But for a professional investor and capital allocator to be so opposed to Bitcoin, while incessantly employing the most uninformed objections to it (“backed by nothing”) belies a willful ignorance that would be extremely distressing to find in one’s financial advisor.

  I’ve said it before: nobody who actually rolls up their sleeves and does the work on “why Bitcoin” ever comes out the other end saying “tulips, backed by nothing”. They may still say it’s not for them, but they won’t say that. 

  Honourable Mention

  We could never run out of fodder for establishment shills of the Cantillionaire class who either loathe Bitcoin because of what it represents (a threat to their position and power), or lower order sycophants who don’t understand it, because in true Upton Sinclair fashion, their livelihoods depend on them not understanding it.

  • Paul Krugman (an example of the latter) declaring “Bitcoin is Evil” (2013) and “has no use case” (2018))

  • World Economic Forum – who declared that Bitcoin would consume all the world’s electricity by 2020 (update: it didn’t).

  • Most recently, the ECB put out a piece echoing the same old, tired objections… backed by nothing… intrinsic value zero *yawn*, calling it “The Emperor’s New Clothes”.

  And of course, Jim Cramer’s legendary call in late January… “Bitcoin’s new theme is number go down”.

  Bang on.

  — Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) March 4, 2024

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

  Where are we today?

  So with Bitcoin on the cusp of racking up another all-time high, the first of this cycle – call it The 2025 Cycle – are we at the top?

  Google trends seems to indicate we are nowhere close to a manic peak…

  Doesn’t much look like a cycle-top, either… pic.twitter.com/FH84IGDmTW

  — Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) March 4, 2024

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

  Which means all the inflows into ETFs right now are probably mostly institutional.

  

  What is most surprising to me on this cycle (my fourth Bitcoin cycle since becoming orange-pilled in 2013) is how fast it is unfolding this time.

  The milestones this year:

  ✔️ Bitcoin recapturing the $1 trillion market cap

  ✔️ Bitcoin hitting new all-time-highs in other currencies

  ✔️ Bitcoin cracking $60K USD for the setup to new all-time highs

  A new all-time high before the Bitcoin halving event in April seems baked-in (hell, it may happen before I get this post published) – and the next major milestone after that will be the $100K USD per BTC mark. Seems hard to think that won’t happen this year either.

  Is it too late?

  As a glimmering awareness that Bitcoin didn’t die on the last cycle begins to elbow its way into public consciousness – people may think they’ve missed the boat on this, but what I still look at is the relative size of the global bond market – about $150 trillion of “return free risk” vs Bitcoin, still only at just over a $1 trillion.

  

  From The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto

  My base case is that the destruction of the current, fiat-based global monetary system will result in a bond exodus – and that “conventional wisdom” now includes a small allocation to Bitcoin – at least 1% – possibly 3% to 5%. When you consider that 70% of all Bitcoin hasn’t moved in over a year – even in the face of this latest run, we’re going to have anywhere between $1.5 and $7.5 trillion coming into Bitcoin over the next few years, and competing for about 30% to, call it 50% of the total supply.

  What will that do to the spot price? Here’s Tuur Demester on Marty Bent’s TFTC making a cogent case for $1 million Bitcoin. We’ll just have to wait and see…

  *  *  *

  Get on the Bombthrower mailing list here and receive a free copy of The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto, which outlined all this. However, by the time you read this it may already be too late to sign up for The Bitcoin Capitalist Letter: new subscriptions will be closed once Bitcoin hits a new all-time high.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 19:00

• 'Ever-More Opaque' China Scraps Premier's Briefing, Ending 30-Year Tradition
  ‘Ever-More Opaque’ China Scraps Premier’s Briefing, Ending 30-Year Tradition

  Last summer, Chinese Prime Minister Li Qiang addressed a conference in Berlin and optimistically said: “When it rains hard, it gets muddy. But we must not bow our heads.” He added of the world’s second largest economy, “Keep your chin up! When the time comes, we will surely see a rainbow. The economy has a natural cycle, in China as well.”

  But Western press is now going after the Chinese premier and the country’s increasingly opaque system and dealings with the outside world. Just ahead of his much anticipated address to the National People’s Congress this week, it has been confirmed that the nation’s number two top official won’t take questions during what was a long-standing press briefing.

  

  “China’s Li Qiang will become the first premier in three decades to not hold a press briefing at the annual parliamentary meetings, removing a rare platform for investors to learn more about the nation’s policy direction as President Xi Jinping consolidates control over the world’s second-largest economy,” Bloomberg reports.

  And what’s more is that this 30-year long tradition looks to be possibly permanently halted, according to more from the announcement: 

  The country’s No. 2 official won’t take questions at the close of the National People’s Congress for the rest of its five-year term apart from in “special circumstances,” official spokesperson Lou Qinjian said at a Monday briefing in Beijing. This cohort of lawmakers will gather each year until 2027.

  Not only had this Q&A briefing been going on annually since 1993, but its significance was in the fact that it provided a rare occasion for such a high-ranking Chinese official to interact and field public questions.

  Ironically in recent years the National People’s Congress had touted the press briefing which largely focused on the state of the economy as “one of the important windows for observing China’s openness and transparency.”

  But apparently there’s no pretending anymore, and as regional analyst Christopher Beddor has remarked, “This is a big loss, and yet another sign the government slowly becoming ever-more opaque, both to outsiders and even those within the system.”

  So now China watchers can expected any broad economic commentary from Beijing to be even more highly choreographed and scripted. 

  Beijing Is Expected to Unveil GDP Target Around 5% — A Goal Now Harder to Achieve

  Premier Li Qiang will deliver government work report at NPC

  Investors will scrutinize policy priorities as economy faltershttps://t.co/sXIKcUR0Z9

  — Giovanni Staunovo🛢 (@staunovo) March 4, 2024

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

  But one Shanghai-based professor of international relations, Josef Gregory Mahoney, has said these forums often lead Western observers to overhype narratives of “internal dissent within the party” based on informal exchange with the premier. He suggested, “Perhaps these are problems worth avoiding from the premier’s perspective.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 18:40

• Israel's Manpower Crisis Worsens As Wave Of Resignations Hits Army
  Israel’s Manpower Crisis Worsens As Wave Of Resignations Hits Army

  Via The Cradle

  The Israeli Army Spokesperson’s Unit, led by Lt Col Daniel Hagari, has witnessed a large wave of resignations.  Among those who resigned are Hagari’s second in command, Colonel Butbol, as well Colonel Moran Katz and the army’s International Spokesman Lieutenant Richard Hecht.

  “A large number of officers recently announced their retirement from the unit responsible for the military’s information system,” Hebrew news outlet Channel 14 reported on Saturday. 

  

  A number of female officers were also among those who resigned. The resignations came “after things did not work out ‘professionally and personally,'” Channel 14 correspondent Tamir Morg said. 

  Several officers have reportedly complained about not moving up in the ranks, the Hebrew outlet explained. “The picture is complex, since it is a military system and sometimes people reach retirement age and leave for no particular reason, but despite this, the number of people who retire at once during a war is unusual,” the correspondent said. 

  The Israeli military has not responded to requests for comment. The resignations come as significant tension has overtaken Israel’s military establishment. 

  Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant has been calling for an end to draft exemptions for Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community, citing a severe manpower crisis in the army. Gallant said he would only support legislation to settle the issue if certain members of the ruling coalition backed it.

  “The army is in need of manpower now. It’s not a matter of politics, it’s a matter of mathematics,” the defense minister said on Sunday. 

  Gallant’s position is causing tension with ultra-Orthodox parties in the coalition, viewed as integral to the current government’s survival, according to Hebrew media. 

  Israel is reportedly taking severe losses from its war in Gaza which has caused mass civilian casualties and amid its attempt to eradicate Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). 

  Important: Israeli army faces a ‘dramatic manpower crisis’

  Tel Aviv is still scrambling to mitigate the “shock that befell the IDF following almost 150 days of fighting, which began with heavy losses on 7 October.” https://t.co/JvXFVQlTR1

  — Sharmine Narwani (@snarwani) March 1, 2024

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

  While Israel claims that Gaza’s southernmost city of Rafah is the final Hamas stronghold, the group’s military wing, along with several other factions, continue to fiercely confront Israeli troops across the strip.

  “The situation is simply not good and does not match the threat map,” Ynet reported on March 1. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 18:20

• US New-Home Listings Jump Most In Three Years
  US New-Home Listings Jump Most In Three Years

  The 30-year fixed mortgage rate is edging closer to 7%, having stayed below 6.6% since May 2023. With mortgage rates remaining high, we ask this very simple question: Will the high rate environment deter homebuyers from listing their homes as the spring home-buying season fast approaches? 

  Let’s take a look at the latest inventory data from residential real estate brokerage Redfin, which shows new home listings jumped 13% year-over-year for the four weeks ending Feb. 25, the most significant increase in three years. 

  

  “Total inventory is also improving: Active listings are flat from a year ago, marking the first time in nine months the total number of homes for sale hasn’t declined,” the report said. 

  The increase in new listings is a welcoming sign as 2023 headwinds in the housing market will persist this year. This includes elevated mortgage rates, an affordability crisis, and record-low housing stock – this makes for a perfect unaffordability recipe. 

  The good news is buyers are getting more homes to choose from despite elevated housing costs. As of Feb., the average homebuyer’s mortgage payment was around $2,671, just $47 shy of last October’s record high. 

  In a separate report, the real estate news website HousingWire noted:

  “Inventory is very seasonal, and we are about to start our seasonal increase in inventory. But even before that seasonal boost, we are showing year-over-year growth in inventory despite higher rates. Most home sellers are buyers of homes, so the action we are seeing this year is a healthy step in the right direction to get more balance in the housing market.” 

  

  Another report from Realtor.com also showed an increase in housing inventory for the week ending Feb. 24: 

  “Active inventory increased, with for-sale homes 17.8% above year ago levels. For a 16th straight week, active listings registered above prior year level, which means that today’s home shoppers see more for-sale homes. In fact, the January Realtor.com Housing Trends Report showed that 2024 had the most abundant level of inventory in the most recent four years. Nevertheless, the number of homes on the market is still down nearly 40% compared to what was typical in 2017 to 2019.”

  Meanwhile, new home sales in January disappointed as mortgage rates are back on the rise. We shared with readers last month that new home supply ticked higher. 

  

  The increase in housing supply might indicate a slower rise in home prices this year compared to recent years. 

  Chief economist at First American Financial Corporation Mark Fleming recently noted a “flat stretch” for home prices is ahead:

  “If the 2020-2021 housing market was too hot, then the 2023 market was probably too cold, but 2024 won’t yet be just right.” 

  The problem with the housing market is that if rates cool too quickly, it could ignite another buying wave. So if rates bounced between 6.5% – 7%, inventories could continue building, pressuring prices lower. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 18:00

• One Bank Asks "Could A Central Bank Somewhere Be Buying Crypto Assets?"
  One Bank Asks “Could A Central Bank Somewhere Be Buying Crypto Assets?”

  By Benjamin Picton of Rabobank

  We’re going to build a (tariff) wall…

  Crude oil prices spiked on Friday evening following news that OPEC+ and Russia will extend production cuts through to June of this year. Brent closed 2% higher at $83.55/bbl, which means that prices have now risen by more than $6/bbl since the start of the year. Gold also caught a bid on Friday night to close the week at $2,082/ounce. This followed weaker than expected ISM survey data out on the United States that saw 2-year yields fall 9bps to 4.53% and the S&P500 hit fresh all-time-highs. Meanwhile, the Bitcoin surge continues apace after prices for ‘digital gold’ finished the week slightly above $62,500.

  Judging from the price action last week, the everything rally remains resilient to the effects of monetary tightening. Have we sprung a monetary leak somewhere that is providing mysterious liquidity into markets? Or is this all just a huge lag effect as the Covid-era torrents of easy money continue to wash through the economy and the US deficit remains close to 6.5% of GDP?

  Whatever the case, some of the moves are very interesting. News has emerged of a crypto whale dubbed ‘Mr 100’ who has been quietly accumulating a $3.1bn stash of Bitcoin. Decrypt.co reports that the mysterious whale is unlikely to be US-domiciled, and unlikely to be one of the new Bitcoin ETF operators since those have already disclosed their blockchain addresses. Could a central bank somewhere be buying crypto assets?

  

  There is plenty on the calendar this week for markets to digest, but of particular interest is the National Party Congress of the Chinese Communist Party. The meeting begins on Tuesday and will include an updated growth target for the Chinese economy. Last year’s ‘modest’ 5% target was exceeded by two-tenths of a percentage point after helpful base effects and data revisions helped the economy over the line. The speculation is that the CCP will again set 5% as the official goal, although our own China watcher, Teeuwe Mevissen, expects growth of just 4.6% in the Middle Kingdom this year.

  In the United States we have the non-farm payrolls report at the end of the week, but on a longer view the possibility of universal tariffs will have much more structural bearing on who produces  what and where, and for how much, and to be sold to who. This Daily last week canvased the possibility of outright bans on Chinese auto imports into the United States as the Biden White House attempts to outbid Donald Trump on America First protectionism. Trump’s threats of 10% universal tariffs, with tariffs of 60% or more on Chinese goods, would be certainly be a big structural change that, in our view, could reignite inflation. It also (by design) poses risks to the Chinese growth model.

  With real-estate and infrastructure investment already reeling from heavy debt loads, a loss of confidence and Xi Xinping’s Common Prosperity initiatives to rein-in speculation on house prices, the China model will be even more reliant on production and exports. It’s worth asking the question whether that can still work in a world where the world’s biggest market is potentially slapping a 60% tax on your exports. Of course, Chinese goods could flow into other markets like Europe, but if the Trump tariffs are enacted it would take all of 5 minutes before European leaders follow suit in an effort to protect their own sputtering industry from Chinese competition.

  So where does this leave China? The worst case would be massive oversupply, deflation and economic depression as China fails to escape the Middle Income Trap. The alternative might be economic reorganization away from a production-led economy toward a more balanced growth model that emphasises internal consumption. Such a reorganization would also start to address one of the major (but not the only) impediment to the adoption of CNY as a reserve currency: China’s enormous trade surplus, but it would stand at odds with Xi Xinping thought that sees consumerism as decadent and production as virtuous. That’s a vicious circle to square, but if it is to ever happen, we should expect to see early signs this week.

  This week will be important for other reasons. We are now one week out from the date at which the Fed will cease issuing new loans under the BTFP program. Regular readers will remember that this was the liquidity facility put in place during the mini banking crisis last year. Under the terms of the program, the Fed accepts collateral from the banking system while paying out the par value (!) of the securities in cash. Questions remain over what will happen to US regional banks with a large share of commercial real estate loans on the balance sheet (many due for refinance shortly!) once the banking system can no longer pretend that those loans are not underwater.

  It may be the case that the Fed had hoped that they would be cutting rates by now and the capitalisation rates on commercial real estate would look less bad as a result. Unfortunately, last week’s PCE data did little too further the case for imminent cuts. PCE rose by 0.3% in January, but if you move the decimal a couple of places it becomes obvious how close we came to a 0.4% reading instead. One Swallow does not make a summer, but the January PCE result marks a substantial acceleration compared to December, November and October. That’s despite being helped by lower fuel prices that are unlikely to be replicated in February. The +0.4% core reading was the highest since January of last year, and the +0.6% services ex housing and energy reading was the highest since December of 2021.

  In Europe last week the inflation story was similar. Eurozone preliminary CPI for February rose at the fastest pace since April last year. It was up 0.6% m-o-m, which translates to a 2.6% y-o-y figure. That was a little below the 2.8% figure for January but higher than the consensus estimate of 2.5%. The core reading printed at 3.1% versus an analyst consensus of 2.9%. So the direction is right, but progress is slow, and as our Head of Macro Research, Elwin de Groot, pointed out in a piece last week, the Red Sea shipping disruptions could pose a substantial upside risk to Eurozone price pressures.

  So, for the moment at least we have encountered a bump in the road back to low and stable inflation. Central banks ought to be cognizant of the risks in cutting rates while loads of asset classes are already making new highs every other day, and the spectre of geopolitics looms as a potential spoiler for markets that think only in terms of free-flowing trade and capital. In a world of rapid change, the ability to think outside accepted paradigms is becoming more and more important.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 17:40

• Netanyahu Fuming Over Rival Cabinet Minister's Rogue Trip To White House, Capitol Hill
  Netanyahu Fuming Over Rival Cabinet Minister’s Rogue Trip To White House, Capitol Hill

  In a episode that underscores the tensions straining Israel’s wartime unity government, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly irate over a senior cabinet minister’s unauthorized trip to Washington this week to meet with US officials. 

  Benny Gantz, a relative centrist and one of Netanyahu’s principal political rivals, arrived in Washington on Sunday afternoon. He’s slated to meet on Monday with Vice President Kamala Harris and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan. On Tuesday, he’ll talk with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and he will also meet senior Congressional leaders during his stay. There’s some possibility that President Biden will opt to join one of the White House sessions, sources tell Israeli outlet Ynet News. 

  The first Netanyahu heard of the trip was when Gantz called him on Friday to spring the news and ask for Netanyahu’s input about what to communicate to American officials, the Times of Israel reports. The call grew heated, with Netanyahu scolding Gantz, and telling him that “The State of Israel has only one prime minister.”   

  

  The prime minister’s office doesn’t consider Gantz’s trip to be an official one, since it’s happening without Netanyahu’s permissions. Consistent with that view, Netanyahu ordered Israel’s US ambassador, Michael Herzog, to refrain from providing any assistance to Gantz during his visit. He also blocked government financing of Gantz’s travel, which will take him to the United Kingdom next. 

  Four days after the Oct. 7 Hamas invasion of southern Israel, Gantz joined Netanyahu in forming an emergency unity government. Nearly five months into the war, Netanyahu is embattled and deeply unpopular. Many Israelis say he’s to blame for the Israel Defense Forces being caught off-guard by the Hamas attack. Families of Israelis taken hostage have mounted protests demanding Netanyahu approve a prisoner swap. 

  A February poll found that, were an election to be held, an opposition block anchored by Gantz’s National Unity party would clobber Netanyahu’s far right coalition — by a 75- to 45-seat margin in the Knesset.  That makes Gantz a seeming prime minister-in-waiting, which helps explain why his self-initiated trip to Washington would leave Netanyahu fuming.  

  

  Netanyahu returned to the prime minister’s office last January by assembling a coalition of religious and ultra-nationalist extremists unlike any seen in the country’s history. With many Democrats angry over Biden’s backing of Israel’s retaliatory destruction in Gaza and the resulting humanitarian catastrophe, the White House would clearly prefer to deal with a more centrist, Gantz-led government. In late February, Biden fired a shot during a late-night television appearance:

  “Israel has had the overwhelming support of the vast majority of nations. If it keeps this up with this incredibly conservative government they have, and [National Security Minister Itamar] Ben Gvir and others… they’re going to lose support from around the world, and that is not in Israel’s interest.”

  Over the weekend, Israel opted out of sending a delegation to ceasefire discussions in Cairo, sharply contradicting rosy White House statements that Israel had already “basically accepted” a six week ceasefire proposal in Gaza. 

  While in DC, Gantz will also meet with leaders of AIPAC — the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The enormously influential group acts as a de facto lobbying arm of the Israeli government, but without having to register its members as agents of a foreign government, as would otherwise be required by the Foreign Agents Registration Act. 

  On Sunday, Politico reported that AIPAC unveiled a $100 million war chest it will use in America’s 2024 elections to defeat candidates of either party who are guilty of not backing Israel to extent AIPAC finds acceptable.  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 17:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• For Socialists, It Doesn't Matter if Socialism "Works" – What Matters Is Power
  For Socialists, It Doesn’t Matter if Socialism “Works” – What Matters Is Power

  Authored by Jason Montgomery via The Mises Institute,

  A recent rash of libertarian-leaning right-wing podcasters’ rehashing of a shopworn takedown of socialism has bothered me to the point of launching into this essay. It goes something like “Why is this still a thing? When are they going to realize that IT DOESN’T WORK, and drop it?”

  

  This criticism deserves a closer look. Maybe socialism does too. By the way, I define the term as any economic paradigm that turns over the means of production to “society,” “the workers,” or some other fictitious entity that effectively means the state; and limits or prohibits private property.

  Here’s my best stab at fleshing this out.

  Socialism is defective, because everywhere it’s instituted (which is nowhere near Scandinavia, but that’s a different topic), the assured universal plenty fails to materialize.

  Instead they get extreme poverty, hunger, and deficits of every variety.

  The evidence is littered throughout history, all over the world.

  So, any idiot still promoting this mess is ignorant to the facts of reality.

  Quite a counterargument; factually correct, hard-hitting, down-to-earth, and practical. No abstract political theory here, just the bottom-line question: does it work? Period. Look to the historical statistics. Any other consideration doesn’t correspond to the real world, so it’s useless. Thus, we’ve effectively relegated socialism to the historical scrap heap, right?

  Not in the least.

  I’m not calling this refutation ineffective. It’s much worse than that.

  First there’s the obvious question; what does it mean for an economic system to “work”? That nobody’s poor? What’s the standard of “poor”? A certain universal margin of disposable income? A level of GDP? Maybe in a survey of 1,000 random people, 672 of them rated their economic status at least “satisfactory”? What are the criteria? What’s the barometer? How can we know if it “works”?

  Couldn’t someone just cherry-pick an arbitrary standard of “working” in hindsight and proudly tout socialism’s great success? It’s happened before! And here’s the real question: Who could this someone be? By what right could he decide this measure on behalf of an entire population?

  Well, those might be tough questions to answer, but surely we can know what it means to not work. Socialism has repeatedly yielded famine, rationing, production shortages, and the seeming disappearance of natural resources. An economic record like this has to be sufficient to dismiss it.

  Think so? Let me ask you…

  • Are you against slavery because it doesn’t engender a thriving agrarian industry?

  • Are you against restricting speech because it does a bad job protecting people’s feelings?

  • Are you against random home searches because they don’t uncover enough contraband to bolster public safety?

  If not, why not? These are exactly the grounds on which you’re rejecting socialism; because it appears not to satisfy its stated societal goals. Therefore…

  What if it did, indeed, work? If it produced a society of loyal proletarians, happily subsisting on their allotted resources, working limited hours at their communal farms and factories, with plenty of days off, and enjoying their state-approved hobbies with all that spare time? Then I guess you’d be all for it?

  Is this really your angle of opposition, or is there something else at work here?

  “Of course, there’s more to it!” you say.

  “Beyond economics, socialism has repeatedly led to mass surveillance, arbitrary incarceration, torture, death camps, and the greatest human atrocities every known! That’s the real counterargument!”

  You’re just digging yourself deeper into the rhetorical pit.

  You know the responses to this. Say them with me.

  “That wasn’t real communism.”

  “That was all just one bad guy in charge, not an indictment on the system itself.”

  “It was the leftover greed and sadism from the market economy.”

  “Marxism is scientifically sound. It just requires a maturation period for people to learn the right values, then it all turns to paradise.”

  Are these platitudes frustrating? Well, anyone arguing that “it doesn’t work” has tacitly agreed to the exact same underlying premises.

  This argument appeals to pragmatism, utilitarianism, empiricism, and consequentialism; the Four Horsemen of Sophistry.

  It says don’t knock socialism till you try it. Gauge its practical impacts (pragmatism), based solely on experience (empiricism), to see if it confers the greatest good on the greatest number (utilitarianism) by delivering its promised economic equality and prosperity (consequentialism).

  This is part of the desperate longstanding campaign to render economics a hard science, with a definitive answer, discoverable through rigorous testing of hypotheses. If you accept these terms, then “it doesn’t work” is no counterargument at all. The possibility of a blown experiment is built right into this scheme. It just hasn’t worked yet, so we tweak the theory and try again.

  Did we get… riches and happiness for all? Great! It worked! Or… an extermination campaign of biblical proportions? Ooops, back to the drawing board. There was no way to see that coming.

  Here is where “it doesn’t work” surpasses fruitlessness and becomes self-defeating. If you posit one unfavorable result (or a few) as grounds to reject the theory wholesale, the other side can call you inconsistent and unscientific, and they’re right! See how their fraudulent reasoning can make a correct conclusion seem wrong?

  Therefore, socialism continues to be apologized for, rationalized, promoted, and consequently implemented around the globe; with more comebacks than Aerosmith (apologies to Aerosmith).

  (This is covered brilliantly in Hoppe’s A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.)

  This plays to two of Marx’s great historical swindles.

  • First, commerce and all human action can be scientifically engineered by a central authority to produce desired ends.

  • Second, that the nobility of those ends in the indeterminate future justifies any and all means, potentially limitless suffering, in the present.

  Other than stripping the ethics, morality, and all humanity from human action; whether it “works” can never be resolved, just deliberated ad infinitum, making it ideal mainstream media fodder. Under any legitimate scrutiny, it collapses under its own haughty intellectual weight because there’s something missing at its foundation; fundamental principles that can be ascertained as self-evidently true or not.

  To go after socialism, you must aim for its fundamental principles. And what are some of those?

  • Rooted in collectivism – no individual is of material importance, only society as a whole. Any number of individual needs, preferences, and lives can and should be sacrificed for the good of the collective.

  • Absence of a market – production and trade operate by the will of central planners, not economic actors. What gets made, in what quantity, and for what use is not determined by consumer demand or the profit motive, but by top-down calculations. Based on what? Such questions will not be tolerated. Now, get in the bread line! Which brings us to…

  • Necessitates a totalitarian state – This centralization of economy requires such thorough micromanagement of human action that monitoring, espionage, harassment, and stiff penalties for violators (for starters) must become features of the landscape. Some adherents claim that state control, and the state itself, will one day become unnecessary under socialism, once the people fall in line (read are beaten into submission). But, like the arrival of universal abundance, that day never seems to come. More on this momentarily…

  This argument may not be perfect, but notice the differences between this and where we started. These premises are axiomatically integral to socialism. No experience, experimentation, or research is required to bear them out. No statistical data is going to come along and change them. These aren’t ends, which cannot be conclusively known at the outset of any initiative (if they ever can at all). These are means, which are known, instantly and to a certainty, as they effectively become the material conditions of life in the given society. Economics is a journey, not a destination, so those someday promises of wealth and statelessness in exchange for your present suffering mean nothing from the man prodding you with the rifle.

  Now a REAL debate begins.

  The socialist must be prepared to defend all of the items above, at least. Any claim against the necessity of these factors can be gleefully met with, “then that’s not real socialism!” If they prefer their ideologies a la carte, by plucking the “good bits” of socialism and discarding the gulags and mass graves; then they’re arguing for something else entirely, a mixed economy, the polluting of the market with some degree of the above tenets.

  Do the Horsemen’s graphs and data have any validity? Sure, as persuasive support. But they cannot BE your argument.

  That must come from First Principles, e.g. freedom, property, and individual sovereignty. These are all that matter. To subordinate them to numbers and stats is to discount them entirely.

  So, when it comes to socialism; stop saying it doesn’t work, stop calling it a perfect idea on paper that falters in implementation, and stop dignifying its adherents with “noble intentions.”

  Give it its intellectual due, then you can call it what it is; an evil concept on its face that has no place among the human species.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/04/2024 – 00:00

• Russian Strike Rocks Ukraine's Odesa After Rare Drone Attack On St. Petersburg 
  Russian Strike Rocks Ukraine’s Odesa After Rare Drone Attack On St. Petersburg 

  Russia’s military may have its sights set on Ukraine’s key southern port city of Odesa next. On Saturday a wave of drone and artillery strikes reportedly killed at least 11 people.

  According to Ukraine government officials, “Eight were confirmed dead, including a child and a baby, after an overnight drone strike on the southern port city of Odesa.” Two more bodies were said to have been found on Sunday. A direct drone strike appears to have destroyed a residential apartment block.

  

  Zelensky in the attack aftermath said that ongoing aerial strikes like these are why Kiev urgently needs additional batteries of advanced anti-air defense systems.

  “Russia continues to hit civilians,” Zelensky said in a statement on social media. “We need more air defenses from our partners. We need to strengthen the Ukrainian air shield to add more protection for our people from Russian terror. More air-defense systems and more missiles for air-defense systems save lives,” he said.

  The country’s Interior Minister Igor Klymenko described that in Odesa, “a nine-story building was destroyed as a result of an attack by Russian terrorists” – as stated on Telegram. There have been local reports that debris from an Iranian-made drone was recovered.

  At the same time, Ukraine’s cross-border attacks on Russian territory have continued to intensify. On Saturday there was a rare Ukrainian drone attack that reached all the way to St. Petersburg, reportedly striking a residential building in the Krasnogvardeisky district.

  Further, Russia’s defense ministry said that overnight a large wave of 38 drones were intercepted over the Crimean peninsula. According to fresh reporting Sunday, some of the drones may have gotten through:

  In Russian-occupied Crimea, loud explosions were heard near an oil depot in the early hours of Sunday, according to a local pro-Kyiv Telegram news channel, while Kremlin-installed officials in the territory said that a nearby stretch of highway was closed to traffic for about eight hours.

  Videos shared with pro-Ukrainian channel Crimean Wind showed explosions lighting up the night sky, followed by loud booms. The channel said they were taken by local residents near Feodosia — a coastal town in northeastern Crimea. It was not immediately possible to verify the circumstances in which the videos were shot.

  Below: severely damaged apartment block in Odesa struck by suicide drone…

  #Watch | Russian drone crashed into a residential building in Odesa, destroying several apartments, and leaving several people trapped in the rubble.#russia pic.twitter.com/9cFzgVSgZX

  — DD News (@DDNewslive) March 3, 2024

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

  The last several months have witnessed repeat cross-border attacks on Russian oil and energy infrastructure especially. But Russian civilians have also been killed and injured as a result of drone and missile attacks on the center of Belgorod city. 

  Moscow has meanwhile condemned Western powers in addition to Kiev, given Kremlin officials have charged that Western-supplied weapons have been used in these cross-border attacks.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 23:35

• US Supreme Court Ruling On Trump Ballot-Ban Case Could Come On March 4
  US Supreme Court Ruling On Trump Ballot-Ban Case Could Come On March 4

  Author\ed by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  The U.S. Supreme Court could issue a ruling as early as March 4 regarding a case that seeks to bar former President Donald Trump from appearing on primary and general election ballots for the 2024 presidential election.

  

  The Supreme Court, in an unusual Sunday update to its schedule, didn’t specify what ruling it would issue. However, the justices on Feb. 8 heard arguments in the former president’s appeal of a ruling in Colorado and are due to issue their own decision.

  The March 3 announcement said the opinion would be posted online at 10 a.m. Washington time. “The court will not take the bench,” it only said on its website.

  Late last year, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that President Trump is disqualified from appearing on ballots in Colorado, citing an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment provision that stipulates that candidates who engaged in an “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States should be prevented from holding office. Maine’s Democratic secretary of state made a similar decision days later, and a judge in Illinois recently issued a similar ruling to prevent his appearance on ballots.

  The amendment was drafted more than 150 years ago, after the Civil War, and the court was the first to invoke it. However, that ruling and the two others are on hold pending the Supreme Court decision.

  The former president appealed the Colorado court ruling to the Supreme Court, which took up the matter quickly. Oral arguments in the case were heard last month.

  Notably, the Supreme Court has until now never ruled on the provision, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The court indicated this weekend that at least one case would be decided on March 4, although it didn’t indicate which one.

  Except for when the end of the term nears in late June, the court almost always issues decisions on days when the justices are scheduled to take the bench. But the next scheduled court day is March 15. And apart from during the coronavirus pandemic, when the court was closed, the justices almost always read summaries of their opinions in the courtroom.

  If the resolution of the case comes on March 4, a day before Super Tuesday primary contests in 16 states, it would remove uncertainty about whether votes for President Trump, the leading Republican candidate for president, will ultimately count.

  Colorado and Maine are two of the states that will hold its GOP primary during the March 5 Super Tuesday contest.

  Lawyers for the former president asked the nine justices to reverse the Colorado court decision because only Congress can make a determination as who can become president.

  The court’s decision is also “the first time in the history of the United States that the judiciary has prevented voters from casting ballots for the leading major-party presidential candidate,” his lawyers said, concluding that it “is not and cannot be correct.”

  After the ruling, President Trump wrote on social media that he is “not an insurrectionist,” adding that President Joe Biden is one. He also noted that he told supporters to protest “peacefully and patriotically” during a rally on Jan. 6, 2021, before protesters and rioters entered the U.S. Capitol during the certification of electoral votes for the 2020 election, which forms the basis of the “insurrection” accusations against him.

  Justices for the Colorado Supreme Court had argued that they believed President Trump engaged in an insurrection because of his activity before and on Jan. 6, 2021, during the breach of the U.S. Capitol building. The former president, however, was never charged or convicted of insurrection. He was charged by a federal special counsel in connection with the 2020 election, but not for insurrection, rebellion, or related charges.

  “President Trump asks us to hold that Section Three disqualifies every oath-breaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath-breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,” the majority for the Colorado Supreme Court wrote in its 4–3 ruling.

  “Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section Three.”

  Oral Arguments

  During oral arguments in front of the justices in early February, at least six of the justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, appeared to be at least skeptical of some of the claims made by the lawyer representing several Colorado voters who brought the lawsuit against the Republican front-runner.

  “It’ll come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election,” Chief Justice Roberts said, referring to the potential effect of the Colorado court’s ruling.

  “That’s a pretty daunting consequence.”

  Justice Clarence Thomas asked the lawyer, Jason Murray, why there weren’t many examples of individual states’ disqualifying candidates under the 14th Amendment after the Civil War.

  “There were a plethora of confederates still around, there were any number of people who would continue to either run for state offices or national offices, so it would seem—that would suggest there would at least be a few examples of national candidates being disqualified,” Justice Thomas, a Bush appointee, said.

  Justice Elena Kagan, considered a member of the court’s liberal wing, asked the attorney why one state would have power to determine which candidates should be on the ballot for a nationwide election.

  “Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination not only for their own citizens but also for the nation?” she asked the attorney, adding the move would be “quite extraordinary.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 23:10

• Russian Oil No Longer Sells At A Discount As Nobody Complies With Western Sanctions
  Russian Oil No Longer Sells At A Discount As Nobody Complies With Western Sanctions

  Remember when, in the immediate aftermath of the Ukraine war, Russian oil immediately traded down to a discount of as much as 30% below spot Brent as the entire western world suddenly found itself locked out of access to the most valuable Russian export (which also meant that China and India were the only natural buyers left) and the price of Russian oil had to reflect the explicit plunge in demand?

  Well, that’s no longer the case because in the two years since the start of the Ukraine conflict, it became apparent that Western sanctions were merely a theatrical publicity stunt as the alternative – strict enforcement – would have sent oil prices soaring and that would be unacceptable to a Biden administration terrified of losing the November elections if and when oil and gasoline prices surges.

  And as fear of enforcement became a non-issue over time, so did the discount of Russian oil to Brent, which brings us to today, and Goldman’s “chart of the week” which illustrates the collapse in the discount on Russian crude oil close to zero relative to Brent, according to the bank’s estimates using the most recent customs data for December.

  

  According to Goldman, which estimates the effective price of Russian crude paid by its trade partners using detailed customs data on import volumes and import payments for Russia crude, this drop in the price discount was primarily driven by the countries outside of the G7 coalition.

  However, the discount has also narrowed for most of the buyers as Russian fleets were becoming more capable of operating under the G7 price cap.

  The US Treasury’s recent decision to target Sovcomflot, Russia’s state-owned shipping company and fleet operator, comes against the backdrop of the drop in the effective discount late last year and the twin goals of US policymakers to “limiting Kremlin profits while promoting stable energy markets.”

  It is also an admission that western attempts to prevent Putin from generating oil export revenues – critical in keeping the Russian war machine going – were either a failure, or merely a theatrical, virtue signaling sleight-of-hand from the beginning. And while the former is bad, the latter is far more disturbing as it suggests that the west has been willingly enabling Putin to sell oil and fund the war in Ukraine, the same war with Western nations are so vocally against.

  Almost as if both Russia and the West are aligned in their (shared) goal of keeping the war in Ukraine going to its inevitable and dire, for Zelenskyy, conclusion; it also almost makes one wonder if the destruction of Ukraine – at the hands of Russia with the implicit enabling by the West – was a pre-planned exercise all along.

  Full Goldman note available to pro subscribers in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 22:45

• Appeals Court Overturns Jan. 6 Defendant’s Sentence, Potentially Impacting Dozens Of Cases
  Appeals Court Overturns Jan. 6 Defendant’s Sentence, Potentially Impacting Dozens Of Cases

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

  An appeals court in Washington unanimously ruled that a Jan. 6 defendant’s sentence was improperly enhanced, a move that could impact numerous other Jan. 6 cases.

  

  On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that Larry Brock, who was convicted for a range of crimes related to Jan. 6, improperly had additional charges of “interference with the administration of justice.” The judge who wrote the court’s opinion wrote that the charge doesn’t apply to a sentencing enhancement, however, and struck it down.

  “Brock challenges both the district court’s interpretation of Section 1512(c)(2)’s elements and the sufficiency of the evidence to support that conviction,” wrote the judge, Patricia Millett.

  The judge, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, concluded that any interference with Congress’ certification of the 2020 electoral votes isn’t tantamount to a sentencing enhancement.

  “Because Section 2J1.2’s text, commentary, and context establish that the ‘administration of justice’ does not extend to Congress’s counting and certification of electoral college votes, the district court erred in applying Section 2J1.2(b)(2)’s three-level sentencing enhancement to Brock’s Section 1512(c)(2) conviction,” the judge wrote.

  The judges, in siding with Mr. Brock, wrote that Congress’ function on Jan. 6 was not judicial but was only a part of the 2020 presidential election process.

  “Taken as a whole, the multi-step process of certifying electoral college votes—as important to our democratic system of government as it is—bears little resemblance to the traditional understanding of the administration of justice as the judicial or quasi-judicial investigation or determination of individual rights,” the panel concluded.

  Law enforcement officials who were there at the Capitol on that day, they added, were “to protect the lawmakers and their process, not to investigate individuals’ rights or to enforce Congress’s certification decision.”

  “After all,” the judges wrote, “law enforcement is present for security purposes for a broad variety of governmental proceedings that do not involve the ‘administration of justice’—presidential inaugurations, for example, and the pardoning of the Thanksgiving Turkey.”

  Now, Mr. Brock’s sentence under the statute will be vacated and will be remanded to the district court for resentencing, according to Friday’s order.

  But it’s not clear whether Mr. Brock’s sentence will be reduced or whether it will apply to a number of other people who were charged with interference in the administration of justice related to the Capitol breach. However, the ruling could impact plea negotiations for future Jan. 6 defendants who are charged with the felony.

  Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have been convicted and sentenced for interference in the administration of justice, according to data provided by the Department of Justice. It may mean that their time in prison and other penalties need to be reduced.

  The Justice Department, meanwhile, has often asked judges to apply the enhancement charges to the defendants, saying that the Congressional session on Jan. 6, 2021, to count electoral votes and certify the election was the same as a judicial proceeding.

  But Mr. Brock’s lawyers successfully argued in an appeal that the charges shouldn’t impact his sentence after he was given a two-year prison term in 2023. At the time, the lower court judge who convicted and sentenced Mr. Brock calculated that the obstruction charge meant he should spend more time in jail.

  The court made the sentencing decision as it simultaneously upheld Mr. Brock’s felony conviction regarding his activity on Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands breached the U.S. Capitol during the certification of the election.

  During court arguments in September, Mr. Brock’s lawyer noted that he committed no violence on Jan. 6 and said the man believed the 2020 election was stolen. “Mr. Brock thought he was acting righteously, patriotically and with a eminently proper purpose,” attorney Charles Burnham said at the time, according to reports.

  That argument was rejected by the panel of judges on Friday. “Brock participated in a riot that sought to overturn the 2020 presidential election by force, and that he was himself prepared to take violent action to achieve that goal,” the judges wrote.

  Because of his social media posts about the election, the court added, “Where a defendant announces his intent to use violence to obstruct a congressional proceeding, comes equipped for violence, and then actually obstructs that proceeding, the evidence supports a finding that he acted with an impermissible purpose or knowledge of the wrongfulness of his actions.”

  Some Jan. 6 defendants have argued in court motions that the law have been improperly applied to charge them with felonies. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in a Jan. 6 defendants’ appeal in April on the application of the law, which could also impact special counsel Jack Smith’s case against former President Donald Trump as he faces two obstruction charges in Washington.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 22:20

• Trudeau Scraps Event With Italy's Meloni After Pro-Palestinian Protesters Block Venue Entrance
  Trudeau Scraps Event With Italy’s Meloni After Pro-Palestinian Protesters Block Venue Entrance

  The Canadian government and the Trudeau administration apparently cowered in the face of a sizable group of protesters angry at the soaring death toll in Gaza and Canada’s pro-Israel policies on Saturday. Typically heads of state, top government officials, and their schedules and access to high-secure venues take precedence, but apparently in this situation the pro-Palestinian protesters were allowed to ‘win’.

  “A reception meant to cap off a day of meetings between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his Italian counterpart was abruptly cancelled on Saturday after protesters blocked entrances to the venue and kept key figures, including the guests of honor, from getting in,” a Canadian national broadcaster reported.

  

  The protesters charged that Trudeau is funding genocide in Gaza, given the supply of Canadian defense items to Israel. Despite the government’s attempts to downplay, there’s been growing controversy over Canadian arms supplied to Israel of late. 

  But when it comes to rection to major world events and foreign conflicts, Canada typically plays junior partner to Washington policy, regardless of whichever administration is in the White House.

  “Due to security concerns, the event was cancelled,” a statement by the prime minister’s office to CBC News indicated.

  It happened at the Art Gallery of Ontario, where crowds completely took over steps and a large entrance area. Police apparently stood by while it unfolded…

  

  The demonstrators were shouting pro-Palestine slogans and waving large flags and banners, while huddling close together at the building entrances.

  Reports described that some 200-300 protesters were present, and it’s unclear if any arrests were made. But apparently they were there in big enough numbers to block all key entrances.

  One report described that “The disruption marked a tumultuous ending to an otherwise cordial day of meetings in Toronto, during which Trudeau and Meloni said they agreed to establish the Canada-Italy Roadmap for Enhanced Cooperation.”

  Outside the AGO, Palestinian solidarity activists block @HonAhmedHussen from entering. Trudeau is expected soon to meet with the Italian PM. All entrances are blocked. pic.twitter.com/PAINqfbNTJ

  — Andrea Houston (@dreahouston) March 2, 2024

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

  The Toronto Police Service is said to be reviewing its response (or lack of) and the series of events that led Trudeau’s team to scrap the event.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 21:30

• 'Atlas Shrugged' Comes To Life In California
  ‘Atlas Shrugged’ Comes To Life In California

  Authored by Daniel Kowalski via FEE.org,

  The plot of Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged can be briefly summed up as follows: the productive leaders and innovators of the country go on strike by disappearing from society to protest the cronyism, corruption, and oppressive taxes that have made living a virtuous life unbearable.

  The nation is then on the brink of an economic collapse as the remaining politicians, intellectuals, and mediocre businessmen are only able to take from others and have no capability to create or add value. Atlas Shrugged is very popular with those whose views lean toward libertarianism, while those who lean to the left react to it like a vampire does to a crucifix, despite never even reading a page.

  

  Concerningly, the state of California seems determined to bring Rand’s novel to life.

  During the 20th century, California was the jewel of America. Beautiful weather, diverse landscapes, access to the Pacific Ocean, and other features made it the leading state of the nation. There is a saying that says “As California goes, so goes the nation” because to many Americans this seemed like the best place in the entire country to live and raise a family.

  Things seem to have changed in the 21st century though. When times were good, the government of California grew and spent more money than it had. In the short term, most people ignored this problem, but as time went on the deficits grew and grew. By the year 2000, the government had run up a debt of $57 billion. Twenty-two years later that number had almost tripled to $145 billion dollars. Since California is a state and not a nation they couldn’t print money to make up for the downfall, so their only options were to either cut spending or raise taxes. They chose the latter.

  For state income taxes, California has the highest rates in the entire nation. They also have a declining population, with a loss of more than half a million people since a peak population of 39.5 million in 2019—and they did not all die of Covid. The majority are people who left to live in other states that did not have oppressive taxes and draconian Covid restrictions.

  While wise leaders might look at this indicator and see it as a sign that they should change course, wisdom seems to be in short supply for the political elite in this state. Rather than move towards freedom, they are instead moving to erode and attack property rights even more through the form of a wealth tax. Of course, the people proposing this are trying to sell the idea to the public by saying only the super wealthy will be on the hook for this. The rest of us in the ninety-percent will benefit thanks to the rich paying their “fair share”.

  The 16th amendment was sold to the American people under this promise too, and had people back then known that income taxes would lead to the system we have today, where the majority of the people use the majority of their income to pay taxes (federal, state, local, property, sales, etc), then this proposal would have been dead on arrival. Today’s politicians are trying to use the same tricks to pass a wealth tax, but the difference between now and then is that now we should know better.

  What makes California’s proposed wealth tax even more disturbing is that they wish to still collect the tax for years after a person moves out of the state, like a feudal lord persecuting a serf for moving off his land.

  They also wish to impose the wealth tax on “part time residents” for the portion of the year that they “reside” in the state. In other words, a family vacation to Disney Land might come with a tax bill from the State of California. And when tourism declines, I wonder who the politicians will blame?

  While the wealth tax has not become law yet, it is already prompting some of the mega-rich to move away, depriving California of their portion of the income tax and increasing the deficit. And it’s not just individuals who are leaving the state. National corporations are also deciding not to do business there as well.

  As inflation rages across the nation, the costs of everything have gone up, and building materials are no exception. It costs more to replace a house now than it did five years ago. To meet this new reality, home insurance premiums everywhere have increased. California’s Department of Insurance has responded to the new reality by placing new regulations on the insurers to prevent them from raising rates on their customers. The logic here is that the state has the largest population so if insurers wish to do business in the largest market in the United States, then they must abide by our rules.

  The reaction has essentially been a boycott of the state by the companies. In addition to normal risks, California is also prone to natural disasters like wildfires, earthquakes, and even mud slides from heavy rains. With these new regulations limiting what prices could be charged, the cost of doing business in the state increasingly outweighs any potential profits. As a result, many of the largest insurance companies in the nation like Allstate and Hartford are no longer issuing new policies in the state.

  California government policy has created an insurance desert in the state and with private business unwilling to respond because the once free market is no longer free, the politicians have solved the problem with a government insurance system called FAIR so that homeowners can comply with the insurance requirements for their mortgage. Under this state-owned enterprise, California residents get to enjoy reduced coverage at a higher premium than they would have been able to get before the politicians stepped in to help. This is a clear cut, black and white example of the standard of living decreasing.

  The theme of Atlas Shrugged is that the freedom of American society is responsible for its greatest achievements. The book warned that as freedom declined, so too would the standard of living. California’s politicians seem determined to recreate the dystopian world of the book with oppressive taxes, attacks on personal property, and regulations that drive away private businesses.

  Someone really ought to tell them that the world of Ayn Rand’s novel was not meant to be aspirational.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 21:00

• Pakistan's New Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif, Installed As Pro-Khan Protests Hit Parliament
  Pakistan’s New Prime Minister, Shehbaz Sharif, Installed As Pro-Khan Protests Hit Parliament

  Shehbaz Sharif, the chairman of the PML-N party (Pakistan Muslim League-N), has been elected as the new prime minister of Pakistan by lawmakers in Pakistan’s National Assembly on Sunday, according to national broadcasters.

  This will be the 72 year-old Sharif’s (who is brother of Nawaz Sharif) second time to lead the country as prime minister, having previously been in office between April 2022 and August 2023. He’s entering office for a five year term.

  

  Sharif said in his acceptance speech after a tumultuous and at times violent election season, “We were subjected to political victimization in the past but never took any revenge.” This appeared to be a shot at former PM Imran Khan, but without naming him directly.

  Sharif had secured 201 parliamentary votes to become the clear victor over rival Omar Ayub (at 92 votes), who significantly had the backing of Imran Khan’s Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party. Khan has been urging on his political movement and allies, candidates which were forced to run on independent platforms, from jail.

  Khan’s party has repeatedly claimed that the election “was stolen during the vote count” but the Election Commission vehemently denies this charge.

  The Associated Press writes of the past weeks since the early February election, “Following days of negotiations, Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League party and his supporters formed an alliance after the Feb. 8 election, which was overshadowed by militant violence, a nationwide mobile phone shutdown, Khan’s exclusion from the vote, and an unusual delay in announcing the result.” This delay was used of Khan’s party to issue charges of vote rigging and corruption.

  Opponents made their anger known during new PM Sharif’s acceptance speech before parliament, per the AP:

  Holding portraits of Khan, some lawmakers stood in front of Sharif when he began his speech, shouting “vote thief” and “shame.” Sharif denounced their actions, saying they were causing chaos in parliament. He also said they should present their evidence of vote rigging to the relevant authorities.

  Sharif then addressed the opposition saying, “I am offering you reconciliation. Let us sit together to work for the betterment of Pakistan.” But he was greeted with more protests and shouts.

  Day 2 of the Pakistan’s 🇵🇰 parliament.

  Those who are brought in by establishment won’t last very long under this pressure.

  The sooner they correct the form-47 results better it would be for Pakistan.

  pic.twitter.com/AKWUMnGLwn

  — 🇺🇸 Bilal Khan ﷽ (@Peace4allpak) March 3, 2024

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

  Khan and his supporters have long described the more than one hundred corruption cases brought against him as ultimately the military’s attempt to control the country and permanently ‘disappear’ Khan from politics.

  As for Sharif, he vowed in the Sunday speech to repair ties with the United States, and blamed the Khan era for creating tensions with Washington.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 19:30

• Mystery Whale Has Quietly Accumulated Over $3 Billion In Bitcoin In 15 Months
  Mystery Whale Has Quietly Accumulated Over $3 Billion In Bitcoin In 15 Months

  A mysterious Bitcoin buyer has quietly amassed billions worth of bitcoin over the past two years making the unknown address one of the largest single holders of the cryptocurrency as the race to a new all-time high continues. According to data from Bitinfocharts, after patiently buying bitcoin almost daily since November 2022, the whale’s wallet now holds over 54,164 BTC, worth around $3.2 billion, according to Decrypt.

  This whale, dubbed “Mr. 100” due to his purchases of an average of 100 bitcoin per day since November 2022, may not be a single investor, and could belong to an investment fund or one of the big banks behind one of the several spot Bitcoin ETFs now available, although some are skeptical.

  “It’s definitely possible, but I would say unlikely,” Amberdata Director of Research Chris Martin told Decrypt. “All of the ETFs have publically shared their addresses, so it would be strange to me if they didn’t share this one.”

  This wallet has purchased an average of 100 #Bitcoin per day since November 2022.

  It now holds 51,164 $BTC worth $3.1 billion. pic.twitter.com/cXpp97NfCC

  — Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) March 2, 2024

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

  According to Amberdata, the wallet has been accumulating Bitcoin since November 2022, using Binance and KuCoin.

  

  While the US Government has also accumulated an huge amount of Bitcoin – estimated to now be worth over $12 billion -Martin doesn’t see the Biden Administration being behind the address. One tell: the digital assets are coming from Binance and KuCoin,

  “It might be safe to rule out a U.S. entity or bank,” Martin said. “I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a fund of some kind.”

  Hong Kong is said to be mulling 31 applications for crypto custodians, he noted. A recent expose from Reuters echoed what we first said back in September 2015 (when we recommended buying bitcoin at a price of $230), namely that a silent flood of Chinese buying may be one of the core drivers behind the recent meltup. “Mr. 100″ may just be one of them. 

  Martin also said he does not believe the wallet is someone loading up in preparation for the upcoming Bitcoin halving in April.

  “I would say not—they could just be supporting the price run-up rather than accumulating tokens for a specific event,” he said.

  “I think it’s interesting that they’ve generally received the same amount on every transaction—about 100 BTC—throughout their existence,” Martin added. “Why they chose 100 BTC is beyond me… possibly a limitation of their funding source.”

  While speculation around the identity of “Mr. 100” whale remains, sentiment in the cryptocurrency market is riding high, and the countless entities loading up on Bitcoin – especially in the recently launched ETFs – point to signs that the bull market is indeed back and running.

  

  The mystery whale isn’t the only that has been making waves in recent days: in April, a wallet from the early days of Bitcoin moved over $11 million in BTC after being dormant for 12 years. That same week, another Bitcoin wallet moved $8 million in BTC after ten years of inactivity. In November, another Bitcoin whale made waves after analysts discovered wallet holding $450 million in Bitccoin.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 19:05

• Why Is Congress Nuking Northeast Gasoline Reserve As Part Of Bill To Avert Shutdown?
  Why Is Congress Nuking Northeast Gasoline Reserve As Part Of Bill To Avert Shutdown?

  On Sunday night, Congressional negotiators revealed a bill which will fund key parts of the government through the rest of the fiscal year which began in October.

  

  The 1,050-page legislation sets a discretionary spending level of $1.66 trillion for FY24, which comes just days after lawmakers passed the fourth stopgap measure since Oct. 1 to keep the government funded a bit longer.

  According to Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer’s office, the bill “maintains the aggressive investments Democrats secured for American families, American workers, and America’s national defense.”

  House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a statement that “House Republicans secured key conservative policy victories, rejected left-wing proposals, and imposed sharp cuts to agencies and programs critical to the President Biden’s agenda.”

  But what neither of them mention is that the bill also nukes the entire Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve – which, at roughly 1 million barrels, is too small to matter on a national scale – but which could serve as a critical cache of energy in the event of another major disaster.

  

  The entire US 1 million barrel Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve will be required to be sold and closed in fiscal 2024, according to bill text of government funding legislation unveiled Sunday

  Did China write this bill? https://t.co/d8qLXZ5Gi6 pic.twitter.com/8B2flG0CZw

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 3, 2024

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

  The Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve was established in 2014 following Hurricane Sandy, which cut through refineries and fuel terminals resulting in fuel shortages in some parts of the northeast. The rationale for draining it is that it “does not have the operational functionality that was envisioned post-Sandy,” former President Trump said of the supply in 2017.

  In particular, the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve, created after Hurricane Sandy interrupted supplies.

  This will make the northeast again vulnerable to disruptions from hurricanes or another cyberattack on the Colonial Pipeline.

  — Russell Brown (@DrRussellBrown) March 3, 2024

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

  What’s more, once the reserve is drained, the bill mandates that the entire thing will be shut down.

  Not just sell it, they then have to close the entire reserve infrastructure it looks like. pic.twitter.com/Rw7txW07rS

  — Tom Fisher (@TomFisher37) March 3, 2024

  Then, the bill makes it even harder to establish regional reserves in the future – requiring several new layers of red tape. 

  

  Is the government trying to cause another disaster? This supply is so small but crucial for its intended purpose that we’re in ‘just why?’ territory.

  

  a diesel engine tow will be expensive when your crappy EV is stranded with no charge.

  — Meyers.™ (@Meyers__MD) March 3, 2024

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

  Whelp, if this was completed and there was a regional level issue there wouldn’t be any Diesel available. Double whammy.

  — Tom Fisher (@TomFisher37) March 3, 2024

  irresponsible at best. No one who inserted that should be in government.

  “Upon the completion of such sale, the Secretary
  14 shall carry out the closure of the Northeast Gasoline Supply Reserve”

  — John Barton (@bartjw) March 3, 2024

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

  And the SPR is currently the lowest it’s been since the mid 80s pic.twitter.com/Zr0p9ypTWZ

  — Tründi Molisher (@trundimolisher) March 3, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 19:00

• Israel Opts Out Of Gaza Talks In Cairo, Contradicting Prior White House Optimism
  Israel Opts Out Of Gaza Talks In Cairo, Contradicting Prior White House Optimism

  It was only on Saturday that the White House issued optimistic statements saying Israel has already “basically accepted” a six week ceasefire proposal in Gaza. But the Biden administration’s rosy assessment that a truce is ‘near’ has once again been utterly contradicted by Israeli actions.

  CNN now writes, “On Sunday, Israel decided not to send a delegation to Egypt for talks on a deal for a ceasefire and release of hostages from Gaza, an Israeli official told CNN.” It was only days ago that Biden issued his remarks saying a ceasefire is likely “by Monday” – but now as of the weekend Israel isn’t so much as even participating in the Cairo talks.

  

  CNN’s source says the Israeli delegation has stayed home because time had run out for Hamas to respond to the following two Israeli demands:

  • a list of hostages, specifying which are alive and which are dead
  • confirmation of the ratio of Palestinian prisoners to be released from Israeli prisons in exchange for hostages

  The Netanyahu government said days ago said that this next round of talks would be conditioned on Hamas verifying ahead of time the names and current condition of all hostages.

  Israel has said it believes 130 hostages abducted on Oct.7 remain in captivity, but the tragic reality is that some or many may have already been killed.

  While Israel has not sent its negotiators, Hamas has arrived in Cairo Sunday, a senior Hamas official told CNN. Per the same report, Hamas wants the following:

  • A permanent ceasefire
  • The withdrawal of what the source called “occupation forces” — that is, Israeli troops — from the Gaza Strip
  • The return of displaced people from the south to the north of the strip

  But Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly called the demand for a complete military withdrawal “delusional”.

  The Times of Israel and other local sources have also confirmed that Israel is not sending negotiators:

  According to Channel 12, the war cabinet and the professional echelon all agreed that there was no point in sending a delegation to Egypt for ongoing talks given Hamas’s response.

  Israel has said that 31 of the 130 hostages held since October 7 are dead. The first phase of the mooted deal is reported to provide for the release of 40 of the living hostages, including women, children, the elderly and the sick, in the course of a six-week truce, and in exchange for some 400 Palestinian security prisoners. The outline reportedly provides for negotiations on the further phased release of the remaining hostages, living and dead, in return for longer pauses in the fighting and many more Palestinian prisoner releases.

  Meanwhile, just last Tuesday…

  President Joe Biden said Monday that he hopes there will be a cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war by next week. https://t.co/bcXCx4WJom pic.twitter.com/i6dL1JBBQP

  — NBC Politics (@NBCPolitics) February 26, 2024

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

  All of this means there is a greater likelihood the Israel assault on Rafah will proceed, which many international officials have warned against, given the southern city is packed with well over one million refugees, many of which are living in tents and makeshift structures.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 18:30

• No, The Court Is Not "Slow Walking" The Trump Immunity Case
  No, The Court Is Not “Slow Walking” The Trump Immunity Case

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  The decision of the Supreme Court to review the immunity question in the Trump prosecution has brought forth the usual (and a couple not so usual) attacks on the integrity of the Court.  While some are calling the justices now part of the “insurrection,” others are accusing them of “slow-walking” the appeal to push any trial past the election. MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin added that, due to the delay for a review of the matter, she was “beyond terrified for our country”

  

  In reality, the claim that the Court is moving slowly is factually and historically untrue. Indeed, in comparison to most cases, this is a NASCAR pace for an institution that is more focused on issuing right rather than rapid decisions.

  While the Court has had shorter schedules on emergency matters, this case will be heard in a fraction of the usual period for appeals and the calendar is consistent with past expedited cases. Moreover, the conditions that led to the shorter expedited calendars in a few past cases are not present in this case.

  Craven Insurrectionists

  Some of the usual voices immediately came forward to declare that, once again, the justices are exposing themselves as raw partisans. MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow declared the review of the matter as “BS” and exposed “the cravenness of the court.” She further declared, again, that the action undermined “legitimacy of the court.”

  MSNBC host Chris Hayes alleged declared “Today, the Supreme Court signaled that it is in cahoots. The plot is on. It is a go.”

  Mary Trump, the niece of the former president, went further and declared that “the Supreme Court of the United States just reminded us with this corrupt decision that the insurrection did not fail–it never ended.”

  Former Wyoming congresswoman Liz Cheney (R., Wy) said that the review effectively “suppresses critical evidence that Americans deserve to hear.”

  Regular MSNBC guest Elie Mystal (who previously called the Constitution “trash“) had a more novel take.  With MSNBC host Alex Wagner nodding in apparent agreement, Mystal explained to viewers that this was just an effort of Justice Clarence Thomas (and possibly Samuel Alito) to retire. The theory goes something like this: Thomas does not want to have a Democrat fill his seat, so he is going to postpone the appeal, which will delay a trial for Trump, which will allow Trump to be elected, which will permit Trump to appoint his successor, which will allow Thomas to drive off in his RV for an unending retiree roadtrip. See, it’s that simple.

  There is, of course, another possible explanation.

  Some justices have serious concerns about the lower court decision.

  The Historical Comparisons

  At the outset, there are a couple of glaring problems with the claim of “slow-walking” to push the trial past the election.

  First, the Court did not create this collision with the election. Both state and federal prosecutors have waited until shortly before the election to bring charges for actions taken almost four years ago. They are now demanding expedited and in some cases abridged reviews due to an urgency that they created.

  Second, this matter has already been curtailed and expedited. Special Counsel Jack Smith has repeatedly pushed to deny Trump standard appellate options and time to present his case. After the Supreme Court refused to effectively cut off his right to an appellate review, the D.C. Circuit did so by pressuring Trump to file directly with the Supreme Court rather than seeking the review of the entire court in an en banc appeal. That standard en banc option was all but eliminated by an order that would have returned the mandate to the district court within days — forcing Trump to argue an appeal while being forced into the resumption of pre-trial proceedings.

  Third, the Court has expedited the matter. The fact is that this is a much shorter schedule and the Court is fitting the case in the middle of a long scheduled and crowded calendar. It allowed the parties a few weeks to fully brief a question with major implications for our constitutional system.

  It ordinarily takes months for the Court to even accept a case. The Court has set this matter for argument in April to allow the parties to fully brief the issue and will likely rule by June.

  Some have pointed out that there are cases where the Court moved more swiftly. However, those cases have important distinctions.

  For example, Michael Waldman, president of New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, noted that in 1974 the Court considered United States v. Nixon “in a matter of weeks.” That is a valid point, but there are a couple of missing relevant facts.

  The district court issued the subpoena to Nixon to turn over the famous White House tapes in April 1974. It then ordered compliance in May 1974 when Nixon refused. In allowing a direct appeal, the Court then held oral argument on July 8, 1975. It issued its unanimous decision on July 24, 2975. That was roughly two months after the initial appeal.

  That is certainly a faster track by a few weeks. However, the Court was unanimous and this was not an appeal by a criminal defendant. While there was always the chance of an indictment of Nixon (until his pardon by Gerald Ford after he left office), the case concerned the access to evidence in the Watergate investigation. Criminal defendants are afforded the highest level of protection and review in cases.

  Critics also cite the Bush v. Gore decision where the Supreme Court decided the matter in days.  Once again, that is true. I covered that decision for CBS as a legal analyst and it was a rocket pace. However, the Court was not looking at an approaching election but an approaching inauguration of the next president. The case was decided on December 12, 2000 — roughly three weeks away from the certification of the election by Congress.

  The Issue Presented

  This case is not going to decide whether an election can be held or whether a candidate can be certified. The original March trial date has already been discarded. It is not clear if a trial will occur before the election. It could still theoretically occur even with a June decision of the Court, though it is admittedly less likely with every delay.

  That trial could cut both ways. Trump could be acquitted or convicted or it could result in a hung jury. The Court, however, rarely engages in such political calculations. Indeed, some justices may not agree with the exceptional treatment given this case by the appellate panel, including effectively cutting off the option of an en banc review.

  For some, this case has been marked by fast walking, not slow walking, by courts. The Supreme Court previously rejected Smith’s arguments that the urgency of trying Trump should override the ordinary appellate process or schedule.  Some justices may resent the pressure to dispatch these claims to allow for a trial that may influence an election.

  Notably, the Court has previously rejected expedited appeal requests from Trump, including some issues related to the last presidential election. This appeal is not dependent on the election or tied to its certification.

  The Court has laid out a difficult question for review:

  “Whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.”

  It is clear that, unlike the Nixon case, the court is not likely to be unanimous on this question. I have previously expressed doubt over the sweeping claim of immunity presented by the Trump team. However, justices may have good-faith concerns over the implications of the lower court decision as well.

  The Court has had a long, collegial tradition in allowing justices to resolve such questions even when they may be in the minority.

  Some justices have long supported a robust view of executive privilege and power.  They may want to delineate the scope of this privilege with greater precision. In that sense, the Court could uphold the result of the D.C. Circuit while offering a different or more nuanced view of the immunity.

  Of course, none of that is nearly as captivating as calling the justices “insurrectionists” or spinning tales of some retirement conspiracy with the RNC and the AARP.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 18:00

• Team Biden Braces For More 'Uncommitted' Protest Votes On Super Tuesday
  Team Biden Braces For More ‘Uncommitted’ Protest Votes On Super Tuesday

  President Biden’s path to the Democratic nomination could become one of serial humiliation. As Super Tuesday looms, Team Biden is hoping the embarrassment they endured in Michigan — where more than 100,000 Democrats voted “uncommitted” as a form of protest — isn’t repeated in contests across the country. 

  Motivated largely by anger over Biden’s handling of the Israel-Gaza war, Michigan’s uncommitted drive exceeded organizers’ expectations, with a hefty 13.3% of Democratic voters opting to repudiate the incumbent. The tally was large enough that two of the state’s 117 delegates at the Democratic national convention will be free to vote as they please, though it seems likely that state party officials will pick Biden loyalists for the slots anyway. 

  Michigan’s significant Muslim population led the effort, but disenchanted progressives and college students also played a key role — and could do so again in upcoming primaries. “They’re absolutely not some voting bloc to take for granted,” leftist political consultant and former AOC confidante Corbin Trent tells the New York Post. “Biden is a general election threat to Democrats.”

  if you live in Minnesota, please join me in voting “uncommitted” in the Democratic primary on Tuesday to show Biden he must stop supporting Israel’s war on Gaza pic.twitter.com/uvxyPdGV7f

  — Nathan Goldman (@nathangoldman) March 1, 2024

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

  Eight of the 16 Super Tuesday states have either an “uncommitted” or write-in option on the ballot: Alabama, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Tennessee and Vermont, according to the Post. Given it’s the home of the country’s largest Somali population, Minnesota is a state where uncommitted votes are more likely make waves for the Biden-Harris campaign.   

  “A majority of us have voted for Biden before, but this time I don’t think we should vote for him,” 26-year-old Minnesotan Abdifatah Abdi told Associated Press. Abdi says he’s thinking of voting for Trump, shrugging off the former president’s Muslim immigration ban in pursuit of the better of two evils. “Trump may be for a ban. But what is worse, a ban or the killing?”

  More than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed and more than a million forced from their homes amid Israel’s massive retaliation for the Oct. 7 Hamas invasion of southern Israel. Defying global condemnation, the Biden administration has steadfastly stood by the Israeli government, to include not only arming and funding it, but vetoing United Nations resolutions calling for a ceasefire. 

  

  Colorado is another state to keep an eye on. Inspired by Tuesday’s result in Michigan, the Colorado Palestine Coalition and Democratic Socialists of America launched a “Vote Noncommitted Colorado” drive on Wednesday. That’s a very late start compared to Michigan’s effort that spanned weeks. “We figured if there’s a way to make some waves and let our discontent be known, we might as well,” Grace Thorvilson tells Axios Denver. 

  A New York Times/Siena poll released over the weekend found that only 23% of Democratic voters are enthused about Biden, with 32% either dissatisfied or angry about having him atop the ticket. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 17:30

• The Ministry Of AI Truth
  The Ministry Of AI Truth

  Authored by CJ Hopkins via The Consent Factory,

  Remember HAL, the homicidal Heuristically Programmed Algorithmic Computer from Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey? Well, if you haven’t had the pleasure yet, let me introduce you to Gemini, Google’s “multimodal large language model.” Gemini hasn’t killed anyone yet — as far as I know, the liquidation of Gaza is being assisted by an Israeli AI called “the Gospel” — but it is certainly doing a bang-up job of assassinating people’s characters.

  

  I was prompted to play around with Gemini by Matt Taibbi’s recent piece reporting on how Gemini invented entire “Matt Taibbi articles” that Matt never wrote. Given the fact that I’ve been relentlessly censored and “visibility-filtered” for years by Google, Twitter, X, Facebook, Amazon, and Wikipedia, I figured I should probably give Gemini a go and see how I am being portrayed to potential readers who may have never heard of me.

  Here are screenshots of my chat with Gemini. I hope you’ll take the time to read them, and reflect on how our official “reality” is being manufactured by global corporations and their increasingly creepy algorithmic machines. I used myself as an example in this chat, but the subject could have been anyone, any writer, artist, or any other public figure.

  I omitted some of the repetitive boilerplate platitudes about Gemini’s noble intentions, but otherwise … well, here’s what happened.

  

  That answer seemed slightly imbalanced. So I probed …

  

  Gemini clearly wanted to focus on how “controversial” I am, so I went with that …

  

  OK, that was somewhat alarming, especially the part about how I’m “promoting conspiracy theories” and “contributing to societal division and undermining trust in credible sources.”

  

  This session was not going well for me at all.

  According to Gemini, in addition to “attacking the credibility of scientists, journalists, and public health officials,” I’ve been “eroding the public’s ability to discern fact from fiction” and “undermining trust” by “spreading misinformation.” I wasn’t aware I was doing that, so …

  

  Right. So, I tried it another way …

  

  And here comes my favorite part of the chat. I did not write any of the following “excerpts.”

  

  None of the above are actual quotes, neither the “excerpts,” nor the “quotes” in Gemini’s analysis. Gemini just made it all up.

  

  Right. I took a different tack …

  

  Yes, it appears, once again, that “mistakes were made” … but that’s OK, because Gemini is still “under development and learning.” And, after all, fabricating quotes (or, in Matt Taibbi’s case, entire articles) is an innocent “mistake” that anyone could make!

  I decided to get down to the nitty-gritty …

  

  And …

  

  Imagine my horror at being accused of “amplifying Russian perspectives.” Once again, I asked Gemini for specific examples.

  

  OK, how about examples of my “conspiracy theories” …

  

  Or any actual examples of any of the claims about me that Gemini is making …

  

  Wait … what? Widely contested?

  

  That wasn’t an answer, so I pressed on …

  

  And on …

  

  And on …

  

  And there you have it. If you’re into this stuff, try it out yourself with another controversial public figure. Just for fun. I mean, there’s no need to worry. Gemini is “still in development,” and it means well. I’m sure it will fix its “mistakes.”

  After all, it apologized, just like HAL did near the end of the movie …

  “I know I’ve made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I’ve still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 17:00

• Lawyers Who Voided Musk's "Excessive" $56 Billion Pay-Plan Seek $6 Billion Worth Of Legal Fees
  Lawyers Who Voided Musk’s “Excessive” $56 Billion Pay-Plan Seek $6 Billion Worth Of Legal Fees

  In case you were wondering whether or not the lawyers challenging Elon Musk’s pay plan were doing pro bono work on behalf of Tesla shareholders, that answer is starting to look like a resounding “no”.

  That’s because it was reported on Friday that the lawyers who voided the “excessive” $56 billion pay plan are seeking $6 billion in Tesla stock as compensation. After all, who would know better about excessive compensation?

  The fee works out to $288,888 per hour, a report from Reuters said. “We recognize that the requested fee is unprecedented in terms of absolute size,” the three firms said in a filing at the Court of Chancery in Delaware.

  “This structure has the benefit of linking the award directly to the benefit created and avoids taking even one cent from the Tesla balance sheet to pay fees,” they continued, saying the fee would be tax deductible for Tesla. 

  The reasoning for the excessive fee rests on the fact that the victory to void Musk’s pay plan results in 266 million shares being returned to the company. 

  Needless to say, Elon Musk didn’t stop to find the irony in the situation. “The lawyers who did nothing but damage Tesla want $6 billion. Criminal,” Elon Musk fired back on X on Friday. 

  

  For comparison, Reuters noted that in a securities fraud case concerning Enron Corp.’s collapse, a legal team secured a $7.2 billion settlement in federal court, receiving a record fee of $688 million in 2008.

  Delaware courts have noted that legal battles that progress towards trial, involving extensive litigation efforts like depositions, warrant a higher recovery percentage due to the associated risks and efforts. This principle was applied in the trial over Elon Musk’s compensation package, which spanned a week. Critics, however, argue for reducing attorneys’ percentage fees as settlements and awards increase, to prevent excessive compensation.

  The legal team in Musk’s case sought about 11% of the judgment, advocating for stock compensation free of selling restrictions.

  Recall on January 31, we wrote that the compensation case, which was launched by shareholder Richard Tornetta, argued that Tesla’s board lacked independence in crafting Musk’s pay, a view the judge supported.

  Delaware Chancery Court Chief Judge Kathaleen St. J. McCormick cited inadequate disclosures and board conflicts of interest in her ruling. Musk, whose wealth largely comes from Tesla, the top auto company globally, has seen stock options from this plan vest as performance goals were met, though he hasn’t exercised them yet.

  The judge wrote: “In the final analysis, Musk launched a self-driving process, recalibrating the speed and direction along the way as he saw fit. The process arrived at an unfair price. And through this litigation, the plaintiff requests a recall.”

  “The most striking omission from the process is the absence of any evidence of adversarial negotiations between the Board and Musk concerning the size of the grant,” she said in her ruling.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 16:30

• Letters Warn "You Cannot Keep Your Doctor" – Thousands Freaking Out
  Letters Warn “You Cannot Keep Your Doctor” – Thousands Freaking Out

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

  Does anyone recall the Obamacare promise “you can keep your doctor”. Up to 100,000 people might find out otherwise in one big bang. More are likely on deck.

  

  Freaking Out

  Patients are caught in the middle of contract disputes between hospitals and health insurers. As a result, people are Freaking Out. Letters Warn Patients They Risk Losing Their Doctor

  Patients are getting ominous warnings in their mail and inboxes: They are about to lose insurance coverage of their doctors.

  The threatening letters and emails have sent patients reeling. Unsure what to make of it all, they are flooding doctors with calls asking questions, snapping up appointments with the physicians and taking to social media to complain.

  Sparring in New York City are health insurers such as giants UnitedHealthcare and Aetna, which pay for medical care, and big-name hospital systems like NewYork-Presbyterian and Mount Sinai Health System seeking more money for the treatment provided by their doctors.

  NewYork-Presbyterian said the insurer has failed to offer enough. Aetna said the hospital system’s demands are unsupportable. Both declined to say what rate increases they are seeking.

  If hospitals and insurance companies fail to agree on a contract, patients can lose not only some or even all of their health plan’s coverage, but they may also pay a doctor’s higher, non-negotiated rates.

  The hospital system sought new terms because of rising labor costs and its analysis of newly public hospital pricing data indicated Mount Sinai wasn’t paid as well as its competitors, said Brent Estes, Mount Sinai’s chief managed-care officer. 

  UnitedHealthcare said Mount Sinai’s proposals would increase its rates by 43% to 58% over three to four years. “We continue to await a realistic proposal from Mount Sinai that’s affordable and sustainable for New Yorkers and employers,” the company said.

  As boomers get older demands for medical care services will explode.

  Percentage Change in Debt and Population

  

  In the last four years, the percentage increase in population was 3.0 percent. The percentage in crease in debt was 45.3 percent.

  Federal Debt vs Population 1992 vs Now

  • In 1992, the federal debt was $4.027 trillion. The population was 192.805 million.
  • At the end of 2023, federal debt was $32.690 trillion and the population was 266.942 million.
  • Between 2019 and 2023, the federal debt rose by 45.3 percent. The population rose by 3.0 percent.
  • Between 2007 and 2019, the federal debt rose by 105.3 0ercent. The population rose by 11.8 percent.

  The cost of healthcare is about to soar.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 16:00

• These Are The Best And Worst Performing Assets Of February And YTD 2024
  These Are The Best And Worst Performing Assets Of February And YTD 2024

  As DB’s Henry Allen writes, February was another very strong month for risk assets, with many major world equity indices hitting fresh record highs. That included the S&P 500, which surpassed the 5,000 mark for the first time, as well as the Nikkei, which surpassed its previous record from 1989. In part, that was because of continued excitement around AI, and the Magnificent 7 posted their best performance in 9 months. However, with inflation still above target and surprising on the upside in the US, investors pushed out the timing of future rate cuts, and sovereign bonds lost further ground. In addition, US regional banks continued to struggle, as investor concerns persisted about commercial real estate. As for cryptocurrencies and bitcoin which soared almost 50% in February after the launch of bitcoin ETFs, well, don’t get Elizabeth Warren started.

  Month in Review – The high-level macro overview

  February had several ongoing stories that were relevant for markets.

  1. The first was that global data was still robust for the most part, and hopes for a soft landing continued. For instance, the US jobs report for January showed nonfarm payrolls up by +353k, along with positive revisions to the previous two months. Moreover, the ISM manufacturing print hit a 15-month high. But even as growth remained strong, there were further upside surprises on inflation, which raised fears that the path back to target was unlikely to be a smooth one, and raised questions as to whether the economy would face a “no landing”. In particular, the US core CPI print for January came in at a monthly +0.4%, which pushed the 3-month annualised rate for core CPI up to +4.0%.

  With inflation above target and growth remaining strong, that led investors to push out the timing of future rate cuts once again. At the Fed, futures moved from pricing 146bps of cuts by the December meeting, to 85bps, a reduction of 61bps over February. In addition, they pushed out the likely timing of the first rate cut to the June meeting. As a result, sovereign bond yields rose further, and US Treasuries (-1.4%) posted their worst monthly performance since September. Similarly in the Euro Area, investors reduced the expected cuts by December from 160bps to 91bps, and Euro sovereign bonds fell -1.2%. Lastly in Japan, expectations grew that the BoJ might end the negative interest rate policy as early as April, and yields on 2yr JGBs were up +9.7bps to 0.17%, marking their highest level since 2011.

  2. The second important story was the ongoing excitement around AI, which led to a fresh outperformance from the Magnificent 7. They were up +12.1% in total return terms, which was their best monthly performance since May 2023, and Nvidia surged by a further +28.6%, which followed their strong earnings release towards the end of the month. That helped to power the overall S&P 500 (+5.3%) to a 4th consecutive monthly advance, although the rally continued to be a narrow one, with the equal-weighted S&P 500 up by a smaller +4.2% in February.

  3. Third, the concerns about commercial real estate continued, particularly at the start of February. That came after New York Community Bancorp reported a loss on January 31 as they raised their expected loan losses on commercial real estate. This raised fears that the full consequences from higher interest rates are still yet to materialise, particularly give the amount of debt that needs refinancing over 2024 and 2025. For markets, it meant that US regional banks lost further ground, with the KBW Regional Banking Index down another -2.8%, bringing its YTD decline to -9.5%. New York Community Bancorp led those declines, with a -25.2% return in February, taking its YTD decline to -52.7%.

  Which assets saw the biggest gains in February?

  • Equities: Excitement about AI and strong growth data helped global equities advance for a 4th consecutive month, with the S&P 500 (+5.3%) and the STOXX 600 (+2.0%) both rising. Asian indices saw the largest gains, with the Nikkei up +8.0%, and the Shanghai Comp (+8.1%) had its best monthly performance since November 2022.
  • US Dollar : As investors pushed out the timing of future rate cuts, the dollar index rose for a second consecutive month, rising +0.9%. Moreover, the dollar strengthened against every G10 currency apart from the Swedish Krona.
  • Oil : Despite the losses for other commodities, oil prices rose for a second consecutive month, with Brent crude up +2.3%, and WTI up +3.2%.
  • Cryptocurrencies : It was a very strong month for cryptocurrencies, with Bitcoin (+44.7%) seeing its best monthly performance since December 2020, ending the month at $61,431.

  Which assets saw the biggest losses in February?

  • Sovereign Bonds : As investors pushed out the timing of rate cuts, sovereign bonds saw further losses. That included US Treasuries (-1.4%), Euro sovereigns (-1.2%) and gilts (-1.3%)
  • Japanese Yen : The Japanese Yen weakened a further -2.0% against the US Dollar in February, leaving it as the worst-performing G10 currency on a YTD basis, having now weakened -6.0% since the start of the year.
  • Commodities (except oil) : Several commodities saw significant declines in February. European natural gas was down -17.8%, marking a fourth consecutive monthly decline. Copper (-1.8%) also lost ground after three monthly gains, whilst agricultural goods including wheat (-3.0%), corn (-7.3%) and soybeans (-7.7%) fell back as well.

  Finally, here are the charts summarizing major asset performance in February in local currency and USD…

  

  … and YTD.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 15:30

• Another One? Trump-Hunter Letitia James Spent Thousands On Luxury Travel And All Sorts Of Other Malarkey
  Another One? Trump-Hunter Letitia James Spent Thousands On Luxury Travel And All Sorts Of Other Malarkey

  While Georgia Trump prosecutor Fani Willis is embroiled in Fanigate – paying her boyfriend nearly $1 million to help her ‘get Trump’ while he flew the two of them on (allegedly ‘cash’ reimbursed) lavish vacations, New York AG Letitia James has been spending tens of thousands of dollars on all sorts of personal benefits, according to a recent analysis of a recent financial disclosure by X user “Mel” (@Villagecrazylady).

  

  The findings are damning. James spent more than $15,000 on luxury hotels in Puerto Rico, $20,000 per yea rin meals, $7,000 dropped at a NYC nightclub that was billed as an “office,” and $84,000 in airfare to fly all over the country.

  Then there’s the airfare. In the 5 years she’s been the New York State AG, James’ has spent over $84,000 on airfare to fly herself all over the country.

  This includes private jet rentals. pic.twitter.com/jihZzOALgO

  — Mel (@Villgecrazylady) February 27, 2024

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

  She also stayed at the Beverly Hills Wilshire, and claimed $65,000 in “reimbursements” to “campaign consultants,” which as X user Jim Weed notes, “could literally be anything.”

  Speaking of campaign consultants, can anyone tell me why a state Attorney General would need to spend over $300,000 in a single year (2023) on campaign consultants when she *just* won re-election the previous November? What could she possibly be consulting on? Furthermore, why do these million-dollar “campaign consultancy firms” always seem to be run out of random 2-bedroom apartments?

  To be clear, Ms. James isn’t breaking the law with her expenditures. But considering the high bar she set for Trump in his civil fraud case, it’s more than a little galling that she plays so fast and loose with what she deems to be “legitimate campaign expenses.” -@JimBobW49

  James also spent thousands at the ’48 Lounge’ in NYC as a ‘fundraising’ expense, a venue which claims to provide a “luxurious and intimate atmosphere.”

  Then there’s thousands spent on Ubers and Lyfts.

  Tens of thousands spent on “office” at everywhere from Target to BJ’s wholesale.

  Over $7,000 dropped at a nightclub in NYC and billed as “office.” pic.twitter.com/lWswXt5IyQ

  — Mel (@Villgecrazylady) February 27, 2024

  Continues:

  So you might be wondering, where does all this money come from?

  Well here’s where things get interesting.

  Because it appears our holier than thou Attorney General, Ms. James, has gotten herself wrapped up in the ghost donor scam.

  — Mel (@Villgecrazylady) February 27, 2024

  Ghost Donors?

  It appears Attorney General Ms. James is wrapped up in the ghost donor scam.

  You may think that ghost donor bots were just operating at the federal level, but this investigation revealed how big it is at the state level.

  Here’s a list of  Ms. James’ total donations and their corresponding receipts by year. Does anything jump out at you?

  Obviously, 2022 is off the charts. Over 32,500 receipts, and over 62% are from out of state. Who the heck donates to an Attorney General, running in a totally safe seat in a whole other state?!

  Answer: Ghost donors. What are ghost donors? Ghost donors (sometimes called “smurfs”) are sophisticated bot programs that use the names and addresses of real Americans to make donations to political campaigns. This allows the people running the programs to circumvent campaign finance laws. The donations are made in thousands of small-dollar increments that are easily looked over on cursory review. –America Out Loud

  As Mel concludes: “So to recap: we’ve got unknown entities funding our state and federal elections and everywhere you turn there’s a sleazy politician using this tainted campaign money to fund their extravagant lifestyles.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 15:00

• "We Definitely Messed Up": Google Co-Founder Addresses Woke Gemini Fiasco
  “We Definitely Messed Up”: Google Co-Founder Addresses Woke Gemini Fiasco

  “We definitely messed up on the image generation, and it was mostly due to not thorough testing,” Google co-founder Sergey Brin said at the Gemini Hackathon regarding the controversy surrounding Gemini, a woke artificial intelligence bot, which has been criticized for misinformation and disinformation. 

  A video featuring, Brin, currently a major shareholder at Alphabet, the parent company of Google, shows him making no apologies for the historical inaccuracies and woke biases in Gemini. 

  Co-founder of Google, Sergey Brin, seems to think they only messed up on their image generator and fails to acknowledge that Google’s chatbot is just as broken.

  Not a good sign, but then again his fellow co-founder believes AI causing an end to humanity is simply “evolution.” pic.twitter.com/uFQ7o064kd

  — Te𝕏asLindsay™ (@TexasLindsay_) March 3, 2024

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

  X users immediately noticed a man at the event, sitting at a table in front of Brin, wearing what appears to be a body print of a woman’s naked torso, including breasts. Weird, right? 

  

  Gemini’s inaccuracies were so egregious that they appeared not to be mistakes but instead a possible deliberate effort by its woke creators to rewrite history. The image function on the bot has been paused for over a week. 

  Google scrambled last week as it entered damage control mode. 

  Alphabet’s Sundar Pichai described the Gemini issue as “completely unacceptable” in a statement. 

  Some?!? Your racism didn’t fly…. Elon’s AI will be my choice instead. pic.twitter.com/jEb0WywDin

  — AKA Frederikke Amalie Hansen – #FreeAssange 🐈 (@FAH36912) February 22, 2024

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

  Meanwhile, there are mounting boycott calls for all Google products:

  “I’ve been reading Google’s Gemini damage control posts. I think they’re simply not telling the truth. For one, their text-only product has the same (if not worse) issues. And second, if you know a bit about how these models are built, you know you don’t get these “incorrect” answers through one-off innocent mistakes,” one X user stated in a post that has more than 5 million views. He further mentioned that he’s “done with Google.” 

  I’m done with @Google. I know many good individuals working there, but as a company they’ve irrevocably lost my trust. I’m “moving out”. Here’s why:

  I’ve been reading Google’s Gemini damage control posts. I think they’re simply not telling the truth. For one, their text-only… https://t.co/dMbKLf6fV1

  — Mario Juric (@mjuric) February 26, 2024

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

  Gemini is the tip of the woke iceberg, and executives at the giant tech company are entirely out of touch with reality. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/03/2024 – 14:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Pipe Bombs Before Jan. 6: Capital Mystery That Doesn't Add Up
  The Pipe Bombs Before Jan. 6: Capital Mystery That Doesn’t Add Up

  Authored by Julie Kelly via RealClear Wire,

  The newly disclosed video shows a dark SUV pulling up to the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, D.C., at 9:44 a.m. on Jan. 6, 2021. It sits for several minutes until a uniformed man with a bomb-sniffing dog enters from the right and steps up to the vehicle. The driver complies with his command, the dog sniffs inside and outside the car which is soon allowed to enter the parking garage. The man and his dog exit back to the right.

  

  This scene is unremarkable except for one detail: The uniformed man and his trained canine came within a few feet of where a plainclothes Capitol Police officer would soon discover a pipe bomb that had been planted there the night before. The bomb, which the FBI has described as viable and capable of inflicting serious injury, along with a similar one found at the headquarters of the Republican National Committee, would appear to be the most overt act of violence perpetrated on Jan. 6.

  Responding to the video discovered by this reporter, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the Georgia Republican who chairs the House Oversight Committee subcommittee now conducting a separate inquiry into Jan. 6, asked, “How could a bomb-sniffing dog miss a pipe bomb at the DNC? We’ll add this to our long list of unanswered questions and continue getting to the truth.”

  The number of anomalies surrounding this still unsolved case continues to grow. These include:

  • The failure of the Secret Service detail assigned to Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris, who was inside DNC headquarters when the bomb was discovered, to find the device before her visit.

  • The fact that the bomb at RNC headquarters was discovered by a government contractor with ties to the FBI.

  • That law enforcement officials repeatedly described the bombs as “highly dangerous” but also said they couldn’t have detonated on their own because of their cheap kitchen timers.

  • That cell phone data that might help locate the perpetrator has been deemed corrupted.

  •  

  • That the FBI’s geofence warrant to obtain cell phone data from Google gives no indication the warrant included the Capitol Hill neighborhood on the night of Jan. 5 – the time and location the pipe bombs were apparently planted.

  • That the FBI assistant director leading the stalled investigation had previously been in charge of the investigation into a kidnap plot against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in which the bureau tried to get alleged conspirators to build bombs.

  • That an FBI whistleblower has testified he was told the bombs were inoperable – a claim that seems supported by video showing authorities allowing children to cross the street toward the DNC bomb after it was discovered.

  Discovery of the new video featuring the ineffective bomb-sniffing dog has also generated skepticism about the timing of the day’s events: The RNC pipe bomb was discovered at 12:40 pm, just thirteen minutes before the first breach of police lines on the west side of the Capitol and 20 minutes before House and Senate members convened to consider the electoral college results of the 2020 election – creating a narrative of grave threat as the protests turned violent. How might the day have unfolded if the bombs had been discovered many hours before and large swaths of the city had been shut down? And why, given the devices’ proximity to the U.S. Capitol and the joint session of Congress that would involve every U.S. Senator and House member, did law enforcement not send investigators with bomb-sniffing canines to the Capitol immediately?

  Vanished Without a Trace

  The greatest mystery may be why official Washington has lost interest in this alleged act of domestic terrorism. In the three years since Jan. 6, the DOJ has conducted what Attorney General Merrick Garland describes as a criminal investigation proceeding at an “unprecedented speed and scale” into the protests. Casting a wide dragnet for Capitol protesters across the country, federal and local authorities in Washington have tracked down and prosecuted more than 1,300 defendants, almost all of whom were unarmed, including 62 individuals so far this year.

  Yet the perpetrator of what could have been the only deadly attack by a civilian that day appears to have vanished without a trace. He or she also seems to have slipped down the official memory hole. Although the Washington FBI field office recently issued a statement saying the “suspect may still pose a danger to the public or themselves” and upped the reward to $500,000, Washington appears to have lost interest in the pipe bomb whodunnit.

  The now defunct Select Committee to Investigate the Attack on the U.S. Capitol barely mentioned the pipe bomb threat in its final report; the committee did not include video of the incident or the suspect during any televised hearings. This strikes some observers as odd for two reasons: The pipe bombs seemed to offer the strongest evidence for the Committee’s case that Jan. 6 was an act of domestic terrorism, and the direct threat to the life of the vice president, who was at the DNC for nearly two hours as the device sat undetected outside the building.

  The major news organizations that initially devoted significant space to promote the idea that a supporter of Donald Trump tried to blow up buildings near the Capitol on Jan. 6 have also lost interest in the case.

  But a handful of outlets led by Revolver News stayed on the story. And the same media once fixated on the pipe bomber now considers poking holes in the government’s official story little more than right-wing conspiracy-mongering.

  The government’s seeming ineffectiveness, however, and lack of forthrightness regarding an allegedly deadly plot filled with unanswered questions has also created a wellspring of distrust. 

  The presence of bombs in the nation’s capital as the joint session of Congress convened to debate the outcome of the Electoral College vote animated the notion that Jan. 6 represented an act of domestic terrorism perpetrated by Trump supporters. Reports that two explosives were found just blocks from the U.S. Capitol initiated the first wave of panic that accelerated throughout the afternoon.

  It began when a 37-year-old woman from Madison, Wisc., named Karlin Younger, who said she was walking to do her laundry near the RNC, discovered a device in an alley around 12:40 p.m. Although it is not clear whether the Jan. 6 committee interviewed Younger – her name does not appear in its final report – she gave numerous media interviews in the weeks and months following Jan. 6.

  In November 2021, Younger told Business Insider, “When I cast my eyes down, I just saw something kind of metallic, and it was just a very passing glimpse, and all I thought is someone must have missed the recycling bin. And I was going to recycle it, because I’m about that life. I just looked, and it was so completely unbelievable. You’re not on high alert. You don’t think you’re under attack. I’m not in Iraq. This is Capitol Hill.”

  She beckoned an RNC security guard whose name has not been made public to confirm her suspicions. “Holy shit, it’s a bomb!” Younger said he exclaimed.

  The FBI interviewed Younger a few days later after she contacted the bureau’s Jan. 6 tip line. But it doesn’t appear she was interviewed again by the FBI.

  The FBI story.

  The FBI official leading the investigation, Washington FBI Field Office assistant director in charge Steven D’Antuono, told House Republicans he did not “recall” who discovered the device. Had the FBI come knocking again, Younger certainly would have consented to another interview. At the time, Younger worked for a public-private partnership called FirstNet, which provides interoperable broadband for first responders across the country. The month before Jan. 6, the FBI awarded a $92 million grant to FirstNet.

  Authorities quickly dispatched officers to the DNC located a few blocks away. A similar device reportedly was found on the ground between two benches outside one of the building’s entrances at 1:07 pm.

  In response, police immediately evacuated a few congressional buildings including the nearby Cannon House Office building. “I just had to evacuate my office because of a pipe bomb reported outside,” Virginia Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria tweeted at 1:46 p.m. “Supporters of the President are trying to force their way into the Capitol and I can hear what sounds like multiple gunshots. I don’t recognize our country today and the members of Congress who have supported this anarchy do not deserve to represent their fellow Americans.”

  The Capitol Police stated on Jan. 7 that both devices, which it said were “hazardous and could cause great harm to public safety,” were “disabled and turned over to the FBI for further investigation and analysis.” The FBI did not respond to a request for a report on the devices.

  The topic of the pipe bombs was raised repeatedly during the Department of Justice’s first press conference a few days later. In their joint appearance on Jan. 12, D’Antuono and acting U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin were asked by CBS News reporter Catherine Herridge whether the pipe bombs were a diversionary tactic to redirect police away from the site of the protest, or if the devices intended to kill or maim individuals working in both buildings. Sherwin responded that both scenarios would be explored during the investigation but he emphasized that the devices were “real” and contained “explosive igniters.”

  D’Antuono, who spearheaded the FBI’s Jan. 6 investigation including the pipe bombs, announced a $50,000 reward leading to the arrest of the perpetrator. “I just want to make that perfectly clear and that we’re looking at all angles in that. Every rock is being unturned, because we have to bring that person to justice or people to justice,” D’Antuono said.

  By the end of January 2021, the FBI released grainy footage of a person the government believed to be the bomber and upped the reward to a total of $75,000 – and which now stands at $500,000. 

  An individual, wearing a hoodie, a face mask, gloves, and Nike gym shoes, is seen carrying a backpack around the vicinity of both buildings. FBI authorities said the suspect planted the devices sometime between 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. on Jan. 5. Ashlan Benedict, head of D’Antuono’s ATF division, told CNN at the time that the bureau considered the investigation an urgent matter because the suspect “could potentially be building more bombs right now.”

  Intense media coverage followed. On Jan. 29, 2021, the Washington Post published an extensive story on the pipe bombs, assigning five of the paper’s top reporters to investigate the timeline and obtain private security camera footage from surrounding property owners.

  Months passed before D’Antuono’s office provided an update into the investigation. In September 2021, the FBI released more inconclusive security video obtained from a camera at the DNC showing the alleged suspect walking by the building and sitting on a bench next to where the bomb was discovered the next day. But the brief clip did not show the perpetrator removing anything from his backpack or placing a bomb on the ground.

  By the third anniversary of the Capitol protest, the FBI was still empty-handed. D’Antuono himself had become a target of media and congressional scrutiny over his handling of the Jan. 6 investigation and his involvement in the FBI-orchestrated plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in 2020.

  FBI Director Christopher Wray had promoted D’Antuono from head of the Detroit FBI field office – the office responsible for the key FBI agents, informants, and undercover employees responsible for executing the entrapment operation – to head of the Washington FBI office in October 2020.

  That case also involved the use of explosives. The FBI ran an undercover agent disguised as an explosives expert into the group of alleged kidnappers to lure them into attempting to buy components to build a bomb. Several of the men targeted by the FBI were arrested when the FBI’s lead informant drove them to meet the undercover agent acting as a bomb builder.

  Under questioning by House Republicans in 2023, D’Antuono, who retired from the FBI after Republicans won control of the House in November 2022 to take a job in the private sector, appeared less confident about the threat posed by the pipe bombs than he had in public statements. Asked by Rep. Tom Massie whether a one-hour kitchen timer, a component of both devices, could detonate a bomb 17 hours after it was set, D’Antuono said it could not.

  D’Antuono admitted he did not follow the “granularity” of his office’s inquiry into the pipe bomber case and also did not know if the FBI interviewed the person who discovered the device outside the DNC. 

  D’Antuono also testified that a search warrant failed to scoop up data of the alleged suspect, who is seen handling a cell phone on his walk in the vicinity. Stating the FBI did a “complete” geofence warrant for Jan. 6, D’Antuono disclosed that data from one company strangely was missing. “Some data that was corrupted by one of the providers, not purposely by them, right. It just – unusual circumstance that we have corrupt data from one of the providers. I’m not sure – I can’t remember right now which one. But for that day, which is awful because we don’t have that information to search. So could it have been that provider? Yeah, with our luck, you know, with this investigation it probably was.”

  Congressional Republicans say they were troubled by another aspect of D’Antuono’s testimony related to the allegedly corrupted file. While the FBI did issue a geofence warrant to obtain cell phone data from Google, there is no indication the warrant included Jan. 5 – the day the pipe bombs were allegedly planted.

  Public reporting and court filings in Jan. 6 cases indicate the warrant identified three specific time periods on Jan. 6, resulting in the collection of data from more than 5,000 devices, but did not request records for Jan. 5.

  “Mr. D’Antuono’s testimony raises concerns about the FBI’s handling of the pipe bomb investigation, more than 890 days following the placement of the pipe bombs. To date, the FBI has failed to respond to the Committee’s requests for a briefing regarding the investigation,” Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote in June 2023.

  Other aspects of the pipe bomb story started to raise eyebrows. After nearly a year of misleading judges and defendants, federal prosecutors revealed in late 2021 that Kamala Harris was at the DNC and not at the Capitol on Jan. 6; the government was forced to disclose her whereabouts to correct court filings that stated Harris was in the Capitol on the afternoon of Jan. 6. Harris left the Capitol following a Senate Intelligence Committee briefing and arrived at the DNC around 11:25 a.m. She remained inside the building until she was evacuated at 1:15 p.m. 

  The timeline generated even more head-scratchers. How did her security detail, which included Secret Service agents and D.C. Metropolitan police officers, miss the device sitting in relatively plain view?

  Did the Secret Service fail to perform a sweep of the premises before she arrived? Even so, how did numerous law enforcement agents not see a pipe bomb laying on the ground just feet from her parked motorcade?

  Further, security video posted this month by Revolver News showed law enforcement’s puzzling reaction to the discovery of the bomb at 1:07 p.m.

  “The most striking feature of the footage depicting the discovery of the DNC bomb is the utter nonchalance of the Secret Service officials, Metro PD officials, and Capitol Police officers upon learning of the proximity of the bomb,” Darren J. Beattie of Revolver wrote on Jan. 18. “The Metro PD officers didn’t even bother getting out of their vehicles for about a minute after being informed of the bomb and proceeded to stand around in the most lackadaisical fashion imaginable once getting out of the vehicles.”

  And according to Sean Gallagher, chief of the Protective Services Bureau of the Capitol Police, one of his plainclothes officers found the bomb after responding to the threat at neighboring RNC. “[One] of my counterintelligence teams that was doing enhanced sweeps around the DNC found a pipe bomb at the DNC as well,” Gallagher told the Jan. 6 committee in 2022. He also did not discuss with the committee Harris’ presence or any aid his division provided in ensuring her safe escape from the building.

  Even more puzzling is the fact Harris never mentions the episode in her public statements, even though she has compared Jan. 6 to Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Reporters also appear uninterested in the subject; Harris, more than three years later, hasn’t been asked about it.

  The Secret Service also is mum on the issue – and under suspicious circumstances. Text messages belonging to at least two dozen officials and agents from Jan. 5 and 6 were deleted at the end of January 2021 and never recovered. Jan. 6 committee investigators, when first informed the messages were purged during “a pre-planned, three-month system migration,” according to an agency spokesman, issued a subpoena for the missing records in July 2022, but the request came up empty. Committee investigators did not continue their inquiry further.

  This represents another aspect of the congressional investigation that did not reach an edifying conclusion. A suspected Trump supporter planted a bomb that could have killed the first female and person of color to hold the office of the vice presidency – and it only merited one sentence in an 840-page report.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 23:20

• Possibly The Most Overtly Racist Segment Ever On MSNBC
  Possibly The Most Overtly Racist Segment Ever On MSNBC

  The voting public, and especially the rural voting public, should brace themselves for an avalanche of mainstream media and punditry hate directed toward them in the months leading into the November election.

  A Thursday the below MSNBC segment was somewhat shocking even for the mainstream in terms of the extent a whole demographic of Americans was viciously attacked stereotyped and labeled as ‘all the same’. One online commenter rightly pointed out: “This might be the most overtly racist thing I’ve seen people say on TV.” Watch below:

  This might be the most overtly racist thing I’ve seen people say on TV… pic.twitter.com/ucPnlupa0e

  — EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) February 29, 2024

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

  University of Maryland political science professor Thomas Schaller and op-ed writer Paul Waldman were in MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” studio to promote their new book titled, “White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy”. They repeatedly called Whites in the countryside and across the land “racist” and “anti-democracy”.

  “They are the most racist, xenophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-gay, geodemographic group in the country,” Schaller said. “Second, they’re the most conspiracist group. QAnon support and subscribers, election denialism, COVID denialism instead of scientific skepticism, Obama birtherism.” So all that… applied to an entire race of people living in rural areas.

  The aforementioned commenter “Educated Hillbilly” further highlighted that this particular segment is notable for being “far more in your face and blatant”. He complained, “I have not seen anyone on TV say all black city people are XYZ this blatantly racist way and be accepted on a mainstream so and get support from everyone while saying it.”

  The authors continued their rant, with Schaller saying further of White rural people, “They don’t believe in an independent press, free speech.”

  “They’re most likely to say the president should be able to act unilaterally without any checks from Congress, or the courts or the bureaucracy. They’re also the most strongly White nationalist and White Christian nationalist,” Schaller said. “Fourth, they’re most likely to excuse or justify violence as an acceptable alternative to peaceful public discourse.”

  Can you imagine thinking rural Appalachia is full of white rage and is threatening democracy?

  We are too busy trying to keep our kids from taking opioids laced with fentanyl bought from an illegal who moved into a house that was owned by a poor family who couldn’t pay their… https://t.co/ffZhUxmfz9

  — Margo (@MargoinWNC) February 28, 2024

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

  As for co-author Waldman, he called Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump a “conduit for [White rural voters’] rage and anger.” 

  “All that [Trump] gave them was essentially a way to essentially give a big middle finger to Democrats, to people who live in cities and to the rest of the country,” he said.

  Sadly the road to November is likely be paved with much more of this elite corporate media racism unleashed on Trump supporters and “rural” or “poor” White people.

  * * *

  The examples are starting to pile up… just this week:

  

  And speaking of a big “middle finger” – this is how Washington Post reports on Alabamans’ legitimate concerns about where their tax-dollars go…

  Just an affluent stay at home mom, asking folks in one of the poorest states to give her more money to send overseas. Shocking that (eventually) someone gave her the finger.

  — Charles Rigler (@theBradRigler) March 1, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 22:45

• Americans Face Decades In Prison For Convincing Women Not To Have Abortions
  Americans Face Decades In Prison For Convincing Women Not To Have Abortions

  Authored by Beth Brelje via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Heather Idoni picked up a phone receiver and punched in her inmate number on a keypad to activate it through the visitation window at Grayson County Detention Center.

  

  She had 15 minutes to talk before the sound was cut off without warning and her guests were told to leave.

  In prison, every move an inmate makes is controlled. Ms. Idoni, 59, is getting used to that. She must, because she is facing more than 41 years in prison—the rest of her natural life.

  Her sentence is expected to be the longest in the United States for someone charged with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a 1994 law that prohibits interfering with anyone obtaining or providing “reproductive health services.” It was seldom used until the Supreme Court’s decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization reversed Roe v. Wade in June 2022, which returned abortion regulation to the states.

  Her crime: sitting near or in front of the doors of abortion clinics to give sidewalk counselors a few moments to talk to women before their abortion appointments and potentially change their minds. Nine women out of 10 give them the middle finger and keep walking, Ms. Idoni said. But some women do change their minds, and sidewalk counselors say the life of every baby saved is worth the risk.

  But a decade or more in prison is an outcome Ms. Idoni and other abortion rescuers didn’t expect. In post-Roe America, pro-lifers have been served harsh, life-altering penalties.

  “I have young, young grandchildren,” Ms. Idoni told The Epoch Times. “They are not going to have any memory of me. It’s hard to think about. It is the most painful thing, being separated from my young grandchildren who are growing so fast, and I’m missing their lives.”

  Before prison, Ms. Idoni owned a bookstore in Linden, Michigan. She is a mother of 16, including 10 orphaned boys she adopted from Ukraine.

  In 2022, at least 26 pro-life activists were charged under the FACE Act, and many are now in prison or awaiting sentencing. Most were charged after June 2022, when President Joe Biden formed the Reproductive Rights Task Force, a Department of Justice-led group focused, in part, on enforcing the act. The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment.

  Political watchers predict the emotional issue of abortion will be a top 2024 election topic in most races.

  Civil Disobedience

  Ms. Idoni was convicted in 2023, along with four other defendants in Washington, of a FACE Act offense and of felony conspiracy against rights.The group blocked the entrance to a late-term abortion business in 2020. The DOJ said the group entered the facility and blocked access using their bodies, furniture, chains, and ropes, then live-streamed their activity on social media. The DOJ considered live-streaming a felony conspiracy, which carries a 10-year penalty. The FACE violation adds another year. Sentencing is in May.

  But after her trial in Washington, Ms. Idoni and five others were convicted for praying and singing hymns in the hallway of a now-closed abortion business in Mount Juliet, Tennessee. This will be considered a prior conviction and could add years to the sentence out of Washington. She awaits another trial for two FACE violations in Michigan.

  

  “The Tennessee case highlights how absurd the situation has become, using FACE in that weaponized fashion against the pro-lifers who obviously are political opponents of this administration,” Stephen Crampton, senior counsel for the Thomas More Society, told The Epoch Times. “To throw in that 10-year federal conspiracy charge in a case that, if you’re just looking at it cold, is indistinguishable from a civil rights sit-in.”

  Mr. Crampton is an attorney in the Tennessee case, which was tried in Nashville, where in 1960, black citizens engaged in civil disobedience by sitting at lunch counters to protest racial segregation.

  “There is a Civil Rights Museum in the middle of the public library right across the street from the courthouse—a big display, honoring as heroes those folks that engaged in sit-ins in Nashville and helped change the whole culture of the nation,” Mr. Crampton said.

  “In the same breath, they make our [clients] martyrs because they engaged in a sit-in, not for advancing racial equality but for trying to save the life of an unborn child. … If that’s not political, I don’t know how else to describe it.”

  The abortion business affiliated with the Tennessee FACE charges was closed before the DOJ served any indictments because abortion is no longer legal in Tennessee.

  No matter how one feels about abortion, Americans should care about what happens with the FACE Act, Mr. Crampton said.

  

  “The fact that the government has picked … which causes to federalize and to maximize prison sentences for—today, it’s pro-lifers, but tomorrow, hey, maybe it’s Greenpeace, right? Maybe it’s the PETA folks with animal rights, and all of a sudden you’re facing 11 years in prison because they don’t like your cause,” Mr. Crampton said.

  “Is this really something that we want our federal government doing?”

  Repealing FACE

  The FACE Act has been used 130 times against pro-life individuals, but it has only been used three times against pro-abortion protesters, a U.S. Senate aide told The Epoch Times on background.

  “There’s certainly a disparity in how this is being enforced,” the aide said. “In the wake of the Dobbs decision being leaked, there are at least 108 Catholic churches and at least 78 pregnancy-resource centers that were attacked by pro-abortion protesters.

  “But there were only three FACE Act cases opened in response to that. So it’s very clear, just on the numbers alone, that this is being enforced in a very political way, and that the DOJ is weaponizing it against pro-life individuals and ignoring it when it comes to pro-abortion individuals.”

  Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who is sponsoring legislation that would repeal the FACE Act, pointed to the fact that legal scholars have long questioned the act’s constitutionality. He said the Biden administration has recently used it as a tool to harass and prosecute pro-life activists. His House bill is called the Restoring the First Amendment and Right to Peaceful Civil Disobedience Act.

  

  Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) has a companion bill in the House.

  While there was interest when the Senate bill was introduced in October 2023, it has not had much momentum since then. The aide isn’t optimistic about the measure passing in the Senate.

  “Without a Republican majority, there is just no way that that’s going to get through,” which means those imprisoned under the FACE Act may face long sentences, the aide said.

  “They are suffering from the political fallout of this law that really shouldn’t exist in the first place, and that has absolutely been weaponized against one group and not another.”

  FBI Raid

  Mark Houck, a father of seven, was shocked the morning of Sept. 23, 2022, when a team of roughly 25 FBI agents pounded on his door, pointed guns at him and arrested him for an alleged FACE Act violation.

  Mr. Houck was a long-time sidewalk counselor at a Philadelphia abortion business. He pushed a volunteer at that business after the man made vulgar comments to Mr. Houck’s son and wouldn’t stop. Although local police refused to bring charges in the case, the DOJ said the shove was a FACE violation. A jury disagreed and found Mr. Houck not guilty. For months before the verdict, however, he faced a potential prison term. Now he is running for a U.S. congressional seat in Pennsylvania.

  “We would not be running if that had not happened to me,” Mr. Houck told The Epoch Times. “That wasn’t my personal aspiration. But after the raid, and the government coming after me, and the government being weaponized against me, we decided that we want to run so that this doesn’t happen to anybody else.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 22:10

• Trump Trounces Haley In Idaho, Missouri, And Michigan
  Trump Trounces Haley In Idaho, Missouri, And Michigan

  Donald Trump dominated in Saturday’s primary races, inning caucuses in Idaho and Missouri – while sweeping the delegate haul at a Michigan party convention.

  

  The former president earned every delegate at stake on Saturday, bringing his overall count to 244 vs. Nikki Haley’s 24. To secure the Republican nomination, Trump will need 1,215 delegates in total.

  In Michigan, Trump won all 39 delegates at the Republican convention in Grand Rapids, after winning the state’s primary on Tuesday with 68% of the vote vs. Haley’s 27%.

  In Missouri, Trump won 51 delegates. Things went particularly not well for Haley at one point:

  The steep odds facing Haley were on display in Columbia, Missouri, where Republicans gathered at a church to caucus.

  Seth Christensen stood on stage and called on them to vote for Haley. He wasn’t well received.

  Another caucusgoer shouted out from the audience: “Are you a Republican?”

  An organizer quieted the crowd and Christensen finished his speech. Haley went on to win just 37 of the 263 Republicans in attendance in Boone County. -AP

  

  Earlier in the day, Missouri Trump supporters inside a church in Columbia linked up to appeal for the former president.

  “Every 100 days, we’re spending $1 trillion, with money going all over the world. Illegals are running across the border,” said Tom Mendenall, an elector for Trump in 2016 and 2020. “You know where Donald Trump stands on a lot of these issues.”

  And in Iowa, Trump won 32 delegates, once again smoking Haley.

  Next on deck is a Republican event on Sunday in the District of Columbia (they have Republicans?), followed by Super Tuesday two days later, when 16 states will hold primaries – and the date Haley suggested she’d be dropping out if things don’t start going her way.

  This is going to be fun, no? From tonight’s speech in Virginia:

  President Trump: “With your vote, we will throw out Bidenomics… and we will reinstate MAGANOMICS!” pic.twitter.com/qNlLtupYWM

  — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) March 3, 2024

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

  LMFAO!!! OH MY GOD! pic.twitter.com/FwF0vZHTXh

  — Bad Hombre (@joma_gc) March 3, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 21:35

• They Called Him "Crooked Cohen": Thacker
  They Called Him “Crooked Cohen”: Thacker

  Authored by Paul Thacker via The Disinformation Chronicle,

  The COVID pandemic created some of the worst science writing in our lifetimes. Major media outlets failed at providing readers with accurate and balanced news across a host of issues, including vaccines, masks, lockdowns and how the virus likely began spreading through the human population.

  

  It’s critical to call the news we read over the last four years “science writing” and not “reporting” because few science media outlets do any actual reporting. What science writers label “reporting’ is just calling up the known experts and then quoting them as the known experts.

  As I’ve noted in the past: Science writers report for, not on science.

  Looking back over the last four years of science writing claptrap, I ran across an early article by Science Magazine writer Jon Cohen that illustrates this point quite nicely. On January 31, 2020, Cohen wrote a story for Science Magazine alleging that “most researchers say” the virus could not have come from a lab, an idea Cohen added, had been dismissed as a “conspiracy theory.”

  However, Cohen’s “most researchers say” assertion was totally phony. How do we know this?

  We have the emails.

  “[S]ome of the features (potentially) look engineered,” a virologist wrote in a private email, the day after Cohen quoted him in his “most researchers say” article for Science Magazine.

  That same day after Science Magazine published Cohen’s article—this would be February 1, 2020—Anthony Fauci emailed NIH officials detailing what “most researchers say” when they were talking to him on a conference call: they fretted that the virus was not natural, might have had a mutation inserted into the sequence, and their fears were heightened because scientists in Wuhan were running dangerous gain-of-function studies on coronaviruses.

  Since Cohen wrote that January 2020 article, he has only doubled and tripled down with further allegations that the virus could not have escaped from a Wuhan lab.

  As Ashley Rindsberg reported in Tablet, an anonymous whistleblower tipped off Cohen that one of the critical papers virologists published to allege the pandemic could not have started in a lab was apparently corrupt and did not list the true authors (Treason of the Science Journals). Instead of doing anything with the information, Cohen dimed out the whistleblower and forwarded the allegations on to the virologists: “Here’s what one person who claims to have inside knowledge is saying behind your backs …”

  After this story went public, several accounts on X began referring to the Science Magazine staff writer as “Crooked Cohen” a label that eventually forced him off the social media app.

  Cohen’s ham-fisted, biased attempt at journalism, however, remains a singular example of pandemic science writing gone awry. So let’s take a look at that early article he wrote.

  Emails: The bane of science writers

  In the pandemic’s opening weeks, reporters scrambled to understand how the virus first began circulating in humans. Most outbreaks start when a virus, circulating in animals, adapts to the human body and then spreads to infect the rest of us. But the Washington Post reported in January 2020, that people were speculating on social media whether the pandemic started naturally or not.

  Based on emails, we now know that some scientists were even concerned whether the virus came from a Wuhan lab.

  But on January 31, 2020, Science Magazine’s Jon Cohen tried to shoot down such thinking in a misleading feature that ignored scientists’ own opinions. (Mining coronavirus genomes for clues to the outbreak’s origins: Theories abound about how the virus that’s now rampant in China made its way from bats (almost certainly) to humans.)

  Here’s the second paragraph of Cohen’s story:

  “One of the biggest takeaway messages [from the viral sequences] is that there was a single introduction into humans and then human-to-human spread,” says Trevor Bedford, a bioinformatics specialist at the University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. The role of Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China, in spreading 2019-nCoV remains murky, though such sequencing, combined with sampling the market’s environment for the presence of the virus, is clarifying that it indeed had an important early role in amplifying the outbreak. The viral sequences, most researchers say, also knock down the idea the pathogen came from a virology institute in Wuhan.

  Note three allegations in this paragraph:

  1. The virus entered the human population and then began spreading

  2. The Huanan Seafood Market is critical

  3. “Most researchers say” the virus sequences serve to “knock down” the idea that the virus came from a Wuhan lab.

  Cohen also quotes two researchers: Kristian Andersen with Scripps Research, and Eddie Holmes with the University of Sydney.

  The paragraph with Andersen serves to further enforce the idea that the virus didn’t come from a lab, and jumped from a wild animal (natural host) into humans.

  “Until you consistently isolate the virus out of a single species, it’s really, really difficult to try and determine what the natural host is,” says Kristian Andersen, an evolutionary biologist at Scripps Research.

  The paragraph quoting Eddie Holmes serves the same purpose: further enforcing the notion that the virus wasn’t engineered and didn’t come from a lab, but jumped from a wild animal into humans.

  “The positive tests from the wet market are hugely important,” says Edward Holmes, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Sydney who collaborated with the first group to publicly release a 2019-nCoV sequence. “Such a high rate of positive tests would strongly imply that animals in the market played a key role in the emergence of the virus.”

  In case the narrative wasn’t already clear, Cohen then addressed “conspiracy theories” about the pandemic beginning from lab research.

  The Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is the premier lab in China that studies bat and human coronaviruses, has also come under fire. “Experts debunk fringe theory linking China’s coronavirus to weapons research,” read a headline on a story in The Washington Post that focused on the facility.

  Well, here’s the funny thing. Emails show that Cohen’s “reporting” was totally wrong-headed.

  The day after Cohen published his “most researchers say” piece to “knock down” the “conspiracy theory” that the virus could have come from a lab, Kristian Andersen—the same one quoted in Cohen’s story!—emailed Anthony Fauci.

  “[S]ome of the features (potentially) look engineered,” Andersen wrote to Fauci. “Eddie Bob, Mike, and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.

  

  The Eddie, Bob, and Mike are researchers Eddie Holmes (who Cohen quoted in his “most researcher say” story), Bob Garry (a virologist at Tulane Medical School) and Michael Worobey (evolutionary biologist at the University of Arizona).

  Yet none of Eddie, Bob, and Mike’s concerns that the COVID virus was engineered can be found in Cohen’s “most researchers say” article. Even though Cohen quotes Kristian Andersen and Eddie Holmes in the piece.

  Oh, but it gets better.

  Fauci responds to Andersen’s email, “Thanks, Kristian. Talk soon on the call.”

  According to an email sent to Fauci by Jeremey Farrar of the Wellcome Trust, attendees on the call were to include Kristian Andersen, Eddie Holmes, and Bob Garry, as well as the following:

  • Christian Drosten, Director of the Institute of Virology at the Charité Hospital in Berlin

  • Ron Fouchier, Deputy Head of the Erasmus MC department of Viroscience

  • Marion Koopmans, Dutch virologist who is Head of the Erasmus MC Department of Viroscience

  • Patrick Valance, Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government of the United Kingdom

  In short, the conference call attendees were a collection of experts that any reporter would call if they were going to write a “most researchers say” article about how the pandemic started.

  Well, guess what?

  After that call ended, Fauci sent an email detailing what he learned “most researchers say,” noting that NIH-Director Francis Collins was also listening in. Here’s Fauci:

  They were concerned about the fact that upon viewing the sequences of several isolates of the nCoV, there were mutations in the virus that would be most unusual to have evolved naturally in the bats and there was a suspicion that this mutation was intentionally inserted. The suspicion was heightened by the fact that scientists in Wuhan University are known to have been working on gain-of-function experiments to determine the molecular mechanisms associated with bat viruses adapting to human infection, and the outbreak originated in Wuhan.

  In short, here’s what “most researchers say” when their thoughts are not being stage-managed by Jon Cohen and the editors at Science Magazine:

  1. Mutations in the COVID virus do not appear to be natural;

  2. There was suspicion that a mutation was inserted into the virus;

  3. These suspicions were heightened because Wuhan scientists were doing dangerous gain-of-function research and the outbreak began in Wuhan.

  

  Of course, only Jon Cohen knows why his “most researchers say” reporting was so phony and misguided.

  I sent him an email asking him to explain, and got back an angry retort that ran over 800 words. Here’s one pertinent passage: “Andersen and Fauci did not share these concerns with me at the time, and if they had—and I wish they had–I certainly would have quoted them saying as much.”

  “Jon, you seem upset,” I replied. “If Andersen and Fauci didn’t tell you what they were thinking, why are you directing anger at me? Have you asked them why they misled you? How are you going to hold them accountable to readers?”

  Jon emailed back that I was twisting his words.

  To this day, a majority of American remain concerned that the COVID pandemic started because scientists were screwing around in a lab with dangerous viruses and something went haywire. And these suspicions remain because virologists worked to gaslight anyone who raised this as a possibility—a propaganda campaign that was aided by their friends in science writing.

  AT THE REQUEST OF A LONGTIME READER, JON COHEN’S EMAIL TO ME. JON SEEMS UPSET BY MY QUESTIONS, BUT NOT AT ANTHONY FAUCI, KRISTIAN ANDERSEN, AND EDDIE HOLMES FOR MISLEADING HIM.

  WHY IS THAT?

  Paul,

  

  Despite your inaccurate, incessant, snarky, juvenile attempts to deride me and my work, I am going to explain this to you because it’s so wide of the mark. I anticipate that you will twist whatever I say here to fit the narrative you have wedded yourself to, but, well, color me generous and thoughtful.

  The story you are citing from, written in the first month of the outbreak becoming public, is questioning all origin possibilities and stresses that the market theory remains uncertain. It also is one of the first stories that, without bias, raises the lab origin possibility and WIV’s potential role:

  Concerns about the institute predate this outbreak. Nature ran a story in 2017 about it building a new biosafety level 4 lab and included molecular biologist Richard Ebright of Rutgers University, Piscataway, expressing concerns about accidental infections, which he noted repeatedly happened with lab workers handling SARS in Beijing. Ebright, who has a long history of raising red flags about studies with dangerous pathogens, also in 2015 criticized an experiment in which modifications were made to a SARS-like virus circulating in Chinese bats to see whether it had the potential to cause disease in humans. Earlier this week, Ebright questioned the accuracy of Bedford’s calculation that there are at least 25 years of evolutionary distance between RaTG13—the virus held in the Wuhan virology institute—and 2019-nCoV, arguing that the mutation rate may have been different as it passed through different hosts before humans. Ebright tells ScienceInsider that the 2019-nCoV data are “consistent with entry into the human population as either a natural accident or a laboratory accident.”

  The sentence fragment you have selected comes from a paragraph that further emphasizes that the market theory is “murky”:

  “One of the biggest takeaway messages [from the viral sequences] is that there was a single introduction into humans and then human-to-human spread,” says Trevor Bedford, a bioinformatics specialist at the University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. The role of Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China, in spreading 2019-nCoV remains murky, though such sequencing, combined with sampling the market’s environment for the presence of the virus, is clarifying that it indeed had an important early role in amplifying the outbreak. The viral sequences, most researchers say, also knock down the idea the pathogen came from a virology institute in Wuhan.

  Unlike you, I had covered infectious diseases and outbreaks for several decades when this one surfaced, which means I regularly speak with many researchers who work in the field. That’s why I wrote what I did. (You, strikingly, didn’t know who Redfield was, and when you discovered him, you ignored his troubled past, which occupies a chapter in my 2001 book, Shots in the Dark, about reporting I did in the early 1990s.) Andersen and Fauci did not share these concerns with me at the time, and if they had—and I wish they had–I certainly would have quoted them saying as much. I had no bias toward it being a natural origin, and I do not until this day. As I have said repeatedly, I would be happy to break a story about compelling evidence that this was a lab leak, and I have closely examined every theory. 

  You are a believer. You chide me for not being a journalist, but you have abandoned journalism to push an agenda, and you rely heavily on sources who have the same convictions. Let me be clear: I am not wounded by your campaign to defame and libel me—have at it. I have a body of work that speaks for itself (your #scicomm thing demonstrates you haven’t read much of it), and I’m too old to care about criticism that’s not based on fact. But I just did a quick search to remind myself of why I find your criticism of my work feckless, mendacious, and filled with unbridled rage:

  We don’t play by the same rules. I strive to be fair and accurate. You preach to a choir, gleefully attacking people you deem miscreants with toxic rants, and have convinced yourself that you know the truth about something that remains a mystery. You blithely ignore mistakes made by journalists who are in the choir. You jump up and down about scientists behaving like scientists and changing their minds when new evidence surfaces. You seem to lack the interest in complicated science to assess claims yourself, relying entirely on people you view as reliable experts to judge the worth of arguments and counterarguments. And you remain mum about outrageous behavior by China that doesn’t support your beliefs: Have you ever written about the proven coverup of the wildlife for sale at the market, the scientifically preposterous assertion that the virus came from outside of China through the cold chain, or the absence of traceback studies from the wildlife  stalls we know sold these animals? 

  In closing, I have written about or referenced most every lab leak theory, and I have organized panel discussions with scientists and journalists who have different points of view. I think civility matters. I would encourage you to be more civil to me and others who you disdain.

  Jon

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 21:00

• Is A Mag7 'Gamma Squeeze' About To Send Bitcoin 'To The Moon'?
  Is A Mag7 ‘Gamma Squeeze’ About To Send Bitcoin ‘To The Moon’?

  Making money in the markets over the past few months has really come down to four simple steps:

  Step 1: Put on pants.

  Step 2: Identify buzzy stock-du-jour.

  Step 3: Buy metric fuckton of deep OTM, extremely short-dated calls.

  Step 4: Sit back, sip coffee, take profits after gamma squeeze complete.

  Sounds to simple to be true, right?

  Here’s Goldman Sachs’ flows guru reflecting on the situation:

  

  And, everyone’s searching for “call options”…

  

  At first it appeared to be SoftBank up to its old tricks…

  Holy shit, that sociopath really did it again. https://t.co/OsWXOxOl5e pic.twitter.com/uHC6X8If5Y

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 13, 2024

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

  But then, day after day, a different name was picked and gamma-squeeze-algo unleashed on poor unsuspecting dealers…

  Of course, the ‘buzz’ recently has been ‘AI’ stocks…

  ARM Holdings call volume exploding as the stock ramped over 100% in 4 days…

  

  SoundHound AI stocks soared a stunning 330% in the last two weeks as call volumes literally went to the moon…

  

  Even boring old DELL is in on the act with gamma-squeezers buying calls with both hands and feet, sending the stock up 36% in 3 days…

  

  Careful though – it doesn’t always work.

  Palo Alto Networks disappointed after the call-buying-brigade has gone wild into earnings and that shitshow left the stock (critical to AI) down 28% in a day (but we do note that since that decline, the gamma-guys didn’t give up, pumping the stock up 20% in the last few days on the back even more call-buying)…

  

  And then there’s the big boy – NVDA – where we see call-volume spike into earnings every time, but this time was special as the put-denying-pumpers pushed the giant AI chip maker up 17% in 2 days after this massive call-buying-gasm…

  

  “The call volume is very extreme,” said Piper Sandler head of options, Daniel Kirsch, referencing interest in Nvidia.

  “People seem to just — every day — have no problem continuing to add.”

  Finally, just so you get the point, here’s SMCI – probably the ultimate poster-boy for gamma-squeezers in the last month as the stock rallied 222% practically without a dip as day-after-day, the deep OTM, short-dated cal-buying worked to squeeze dealers to chase the stock higher and higher…

  

  But, with all this upside call buying – and no downside protection buying – skews have collapsed to a point that some are anxious of another systemic crisis in equity-vol land…

  Last time skew was this low was on Feb 5, 2018, a few hours before Volmageddon sent the VIX from 14 to 40 pic.twitter.com/gQEn8zpXny

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) February 11, 2024

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

  So, maybe, just maybe, the ‘squeezers’ got out of bed this last week, put on their pants, and noticed that the buzzy-stock-du-jour was actually bitcoin ETFs (and bitcoin itself).

  Which is where we find ourselves now.

  UNless you lived under a rock – or are marooned, powerless in Lake Tahoe – right now, you will have likely read/watched news about crypto’s impressive gains in the last two weeks…

  

  …as the newly-launched Spot Bitcoin ETFs has seen unprecedented net inflows…

  

  Putting this sudden ‘demand’ in context…

  

  Heading for a blowout year…

  

  And this is ahead of the Halving, which implicitly hampers supply.

  “All things are pointing towards if momentum keeps us going up, then we could see another violent move upwards,” said Luke Nolan, a research associate at digital-asset manager CoinShares.

  So applying the four-step logic from above – what do you think would be the most likely next target for the gamma-squeezers?

  Bitcoin options volumes are exploding higher…

  

  Source: Deribit

  And notional options open interest has hit a new high…

  

  Source: Deribit

  As Yahoo Finance reports, an influx of buyers for short-dated options has increased Bitcoin volatility to the highest since last year’s collapse of crypto-friendly Silvergate and Signature banks. The notional value of the March 29 call and put options contracts has climbed to around $7 billion, far above the amount of any other contracts on a specific expiration date, according to data from Amberdata (and call volumes are dominating puts in the shortest-dated maturities)…

  

  Source: Deribit

  “We can see still a huge amount of OTM (out of money) calls,” Nolan said.

  “If Bitcoin pushes to levels near that, then in my opinion we could certainly get a squeeze.”

  To put it simply, if a large amount of call options are bought, the sellers of the options, usually dealers or market makers, need to hedge their exposure. The usual way to hedge is to buy the underlying instrument so that they are not exposed to directional risk, Nolan said. If Bitcoin starts going up, the dealers will have to hedge further, thus buying more of the underlying token.

  “This self-perpetuating loop can lead to a rapid price increase as dealers push the price up, causing them to have to buy more,” Nolan said.

  But, Nolan warns, even a small change in ETF flows could cause people to quickly deleverage.

  “It works both ways,” he said.

  But, there are three good reasons to believe the ammunition for a gamma-squeeze is still there – Technicals (short positioning), Supply (Halving) and Demand (ETF flows and institutional adoption).

  For one, funding rates are through the roof (implying a large demand for shorting bitcoin)… which implicitly provides support for the gamma-squeezers to the upside if it morphs into a short-squeeze…

  We’ve had to (possibly temporarily) add a new color to the funding rate heatmap for >100% APR: pic.twitter.com/8GIn1C5SHY

  — Velo (@VeloData) February 29, 2024

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

  In fact we’ve already seen very heavy short-liquidation driving this move…

  

  Source: CoinGlass

  Another factor supporting bitcoin from here is the upcoming Halving, and as the stock-to-flow model shows, we have reverted back to fair-value just as the supply-shrink is about to occur….

  

  Source: @PlanB

  As @PlanB explains below, we are entering a ‘bull market’ with “face-melting FOMO and extreme price pumps”... hyperbole?

  And then there is demand as institutional interest accelerates and retail adoption improves.

  “I think there’s an even bigger wave coming in a few months as we start to see the major wirehouses turn on,” Bitwise’s CIO Matt Hougan explained in a Feb. 29 interview with CNBC, adding that the first wave of Bitcoin ETF interest has primarily come from retail, hedge funds and independent financial advisors.

  “So we’re going to see the next wave of institutional capital coming,” said Hougan, who referred to the ETFs as Bitcoin’s “IPO moment.”

  “With #Bitcoin right now … there is too much demand and not enough supply.” – Matt Hougan, CIO Bitwise pic.twitter.com/1B0joUQ1Pp

  — Michael Saylor⚡️ (@saylor) February 29, 2024

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

  The supply-demand dynamic is just “off the hook,” Hougan said of the amount of Bitcoin ETFs purchased relative to Bitcoin mined day-to-day and the upcoming halving event.

  “There’s too much demand and not enough supply.”

  When asked how high, Hougan said Bitcoin could blow Bitwise’s initial 2024 prediction of $80,000 out of the park and reach anywhere between $100,000 to $200,000 or even higher.

  While many have welcomed Bitcoin ETFs, some major U.S. players like Merrill Lynch are still blocking clients from being able to access the investment products. Vanguard, the world’s second-largest largest asset manager, also blocks access to Bitcoin ETFs through its platform due to the firm’s “philosophy” around investing.

  “I’m sure pressure is mounting for them,” tweeted Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas on Thursday, noting that recent ETF flows are likely “natural demand” for BTC rather than algorithmic buying.

  “They like to see [a] track record and get paid off, but with grassroots demand like this they [are] gonna have to expedite,” he continued.

  And Bitcoin is hitting record highs around the world.

  Bitcoin has passed all-time highs in 30+ countries, including China and India. pic.twitter.com/63CnC9DE0F

  — Balaji (@balajis) February 28, 2024

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

  Japan has been a particularly weak case, with a 24% decline in the yen meaning bitcoin hit a record price in that country well before this week’s fireworks that saw bitcoin prices soar.

  “Japan’s government has been devaluing the yen, and the flow of liquidity has trickled into bitcoin as their fiat has weakened,” March Zheng, Managing partner of Bizantine Capital explained in an interview with CoinDesk.

  With The Fed hinting at the next QE on Friday (Reverse Twist), will we see ‘record highs’ in the USD price for bitcoin soon too?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 20:25

• Kenya & Haiti Sign Agreement To Deploy Force To Caribbean Nation
  Kenya & Haiti Sign Agreement To Deploy Force To Caribbean Nation

  Via The Libertarian Institute,

  The leaders of Kenya and Haiti inked a pact for a Kenya-led UN mission to the Caribbean nation. Nairobi plans to send 1,000 armed men, dubbed police officers, to Port-au-Prince as local authorities have all but lost control of Haiti’s capital city. The Joe Biden administration has been working for several years to create a UN force to invade Haiti to restore order. 

  In October, at Washington’s urging, the UN Security Council approved a resolution that authorized Kenya to lead a UN police force in Haiti to return power to Prime Minister Ariel Henry, who has faced months of violent unrest in the wake of the 2021 assassination of President Jovenal Moise.

  

  The people of Haiti did not elect the government in Port-au-Prince. Not long after Moise’s murder, then-Prime Minister Claud Joseph resigned at the behest of Western pressure, allowing Henry to assume power in his stead.

  Since then, armed gangs have seized control over most of the city under Henry’s watch, at times occupying critical infrastructure, including its main port.

  After the UNSC approved the force, opposition leader Ekuru Aukot in Nairobi challenged President William Ruto’s decision to send Kenyans to Haiti. In January, the Kenyan High Court ruled in favor of Aukot, blocking the deployment. 

  The president later declared he could skirt the ruling by inking a pact directly with Port-au-Prince. That “reciprocal” agreement was signed on Friday. Ruto said he and Henry “discussed the next steps to enable the fast-tracking of the deployment,” though the leaders did not offer a timeline for the operation. 

  The US-backed plan to send Kenyans to Haiti has met opposition in Port-au-Prince in addition to Nairobi. Haitians have protested Henry’s request for the UN deployment, as UN peacekeepers in Haiti have a legacy of rampant sexual abuses and, causing a cholera outbreak that killed thousands.

  Haiti’s capital Port-au-Prince saw another day of fighting as gangs looked to oust Prime Minister Ariel Henry. Gunmen targeted the international airport and police stations, forcing residents to flee their homes. pic.twitter.com/dcsXExWApw

  — DW News (@dwnews) March 2, 2024

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

  “The Haitian people have kept the bitter taste of a foreign force in charge of our situation: theft, rape, cholera, food dependence, deregulation of the economic system, without mentioning the fact that we don’t remember seeing then-gang leaders be arrested or rendered unable to do harm,” a Haitian think tank, Groupe de Travail sur la Securite (the Security Working Group), said of Henry’s initial request.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 19:50

• We Must Grow Our Aerospace Workforce
  We Must Grow Our Aerospace Workforce

  Authored by Felix Aviles via RealClear Wire,

  The aerospace industry desperately needs young talent if we expect it to grow, innovate, and continue providing the services we need and expect in the modern era. The jobs are plentiful, but the skilled workers are not. The leaders of the industry must do a better job of communicating with the next generation of aviation pilots, machinists, and mechanics. If they don’t, the future of aerospace is in jeopardy.

  

  A recently released industry report a detailed that “the aircraft mechanic shortage has reached a critical point” and the outlook for growth is precarious. This is detrimental not only to commercial aviation, but also national defense aviation. Without mechanics to service the U.S. aerial fleet, it’s essentially useless.

  In his testimony to the House Armed Services Military Personnel Subcommittee last fall, Undersecretary for Personnel and Readiness Ashish Vazirani said that the Pentagon missed its recruiting goals by roughly 41,000 recruits. He also noted that “the all-volunteer force faces one of its greatest challenges since inception” in 1973. As our fighting forces shrink, so does the number of skilled machinists, technicians and pilots that are trained to service our defense aircraft. This is exacerbating an already critical problem.

  I spent my aviation career as an F-15 technician and crew chief in the U.S. Air Force (USAF), and later I was hired by McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Company which eventually merged with Boeing. Working on this first-class fighter jet gave me opportunities I never imagined, including traveling to Saudi Arabia to support and train officers in the maintenance of the F-15s for the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) working on the F-15 C/D models. This is the most successful fighter jet in the world with an unbeaten combat record.

  America’s younger generation has so much to offer. The technologies that have developed since I began my career have advanced tremendously, and today’s young people are already masters of it. The sky is the limit, literally. But they can’t seize on aerospace careers if they don’t know about them.

  Now is the time for the aerospace industry to make a concerted effort to increase awareness about the fulfilling, family-supporting opportunities in aviation. For too many years, the message to our young people has been you need to go to college to succeed. While that may be the right path for some, it’s not the only path to success. Especially when you consider that the cost of a traditional college education has increased by nearly 150% since the 1960s.

  Aerospace companies have been partnering with colleges and universities to create training programs that help directly fill open trades positions directly upon completion. Similarly, the U.S. service branches have been pounding the pavement, trying to reach young people and educate them on all the opportunities available through military service. However, more must be done. The skilled worker shortages get worse every day, stagnating the industry and creating a substantial national defense concern.

  Industry leaders, elected officials, and those currently in the field must do what they can to meet our young people where they are. We must share our success stories, promote training programs, and offer guidance and advice to students who could become contributors and innovators in the industry. The problem won’t resolve overnight, but we can make incremental improvements if we work together.

  Felix Aviles is a U.S. Air Force veteran, a single-engine pilot, and a Boeing retired F-15 technician. He currently resides in Tucson, AZ.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 18:40

• Negotiators Scramble To Rescue Gaza Hostage Talks As Refugee Area Struck In New Israeli Air Raid
  Negotiators Scramble To Rescue Gaza Hostage Talks As Refugee Area Struck In New Israeli Air Raid

  Negotiators involved in Qatari-mediated peace efforts between Israel and Hamas are said to be scrambling to salvage talks after the deadly aid convoy incident. The death toll from that Thursday incident has reportedly risen to 118. President Biden has said he hopes a deal can be reached by the start of the Muslim season of Ramadan, which begins March 10.

  “We’re not there yet,” he told reporters Friday. The Wall Street Journal has reported on the emerging disappointment and fear that talks have been utterly stalled. “Talks between Israel, Hamas and their mediators were expected to kick into high gear as the two sides try to reach a cease-fire for the Islamic holy month of Ramadan…,” the Saturday report describes. Meanwhile Al Jazeera reports of a new mass casualty attack near Rafah:

  At least 11 Palestinians were killed and 50 wounded when an Israeli air raid directly hit tents housing displaced people in Tal as-Sultan, Rafah, an area previously designated as “safe”.

  

  However, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned Qatari and Egyptian officials that the Israeli side will not participate in another round of talks until Hamas confirms a full list of living hostages still being held in Gaza.

  Axios reported on Friday, “Israel made it clear to Egypt and Qatar that it will not hold another round of talks until Hamas presents a list of the hostages who are alive.”

  Israeli officials said: “There is no point in starting another round of talks until we receive the lists of which of the hostages are alive and until Hamas gives its answer regarding the ‘ratio’ that defines how many prisoners will be released for each hostage.”

  This has been a key part of the hold up all along: disagreements over numbers and the iterative phases of planned exchanges. Additionally Hamas has been requiring that all Israeli troops withdraw from the Gaza Strip first, something which Netanyahu has called “delusional”.

  “Hamas officials have told negotiators that in the coming days they may propose new figures for how many Palestinian prisoners they expect to receive in exchange for roughly 40 Israeli hostages,” according to more from the WSJ. “The latest framework being discussed in Cairo involves exchanging about 400 Palestinian prisoners for 40 of the hostages still held captive in Gaza, including five female Israeli soldiers.”

  On Tuesday President Biden raised eyebrows in hastily and seemingly prematurely declaring his hope that a truce deal between Hamas and Israel would be achieved by Monday.

  But now this is even less likely, though that timetable was acknowledged as unrealistic by all parties in response. On Thursday the president walked back the statement. And now he’s opted to stick with the ‘hopefully’ by Ramadan timeline. 

  ⚡️Another massacre in Rafah… pic.twitter.com/bUPmdIa309

  — War Monitor (@WarMonitors) March 2, 2024

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

  But there are now new reports of Israeli bombings of Palestinian tent encampments – in what looks like a dense urban or suburban area of Rafah – with horrific and tragic footage [warning: graphic] widely circulating, which will make successful talks between Hamas and Israel even less likely to progress. 

  * * *

  Below is a list of more of the latest developments via Al Jazeera:

  • The US carried out its first airdrop of aid into Gaza, according to US officials, with three C-130 planes dropping some 35,000 meals.
  • Thousands are marching in Kafr Kana, an Arab town in northern Israel, to demand an end to Israel’s attacks in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
  • A separate crowd of Israeli protesters, led by relatives of Israeli captives in Gaza, are marching towards Jerusalem to urge the government to do whatever it can to bring their loved ones home.
  • Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid, joining the march to Jerusalem, blamed the government for not doing enough to return Israeli captives.
  • The office of EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell called for an impartial investigation into the aid convoy attack on Thursday that killed 115 people and said responsibility for the incident falls on Israel.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 18:05

• WaPo Reporter Mocks Shoplifting Stories As The "Panic" Of "A Sticky-Fingered Nation Built On Stolen Land"
  WaPo Reporter Mocks Shoplifting Stories As The “Panic” Of “A Sticky-Fingered Nation Built On Stolen Land”

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Washington Post writer Maura Judkis is under fire this week for a column in which she mocks shoplifting stories as the “moral panic” of a nation built on “stolen land.”

  

  It is reminiscent of those who excused rioting in past summers “as an expression of power” and demanded that the media refer to looters as “protesters.” Now, the Washington Post is suggesting that it may be just desserts for a nation of colonizers and enslavers.

  The prior day, the Post ran another column downplaying accounts of stores closing due to shoplifting even though employees blamed rampant shoplifting in San Francisco.

  Judkis wrote a Friday piece entitled “The zombie CVS, a late-capitalism horror story.” The hook was another store being looted in D.C. Judkis matter-of-factly describes how

  “Everything else that remains in the store in Northwest D.C., which is not much, is under plexiglass: Dawn dish soap, L’Oreal shampoo, MiraLax, a handful of Clairol root touch-up hair dye kits, flu season combo packs of DayQuil and NyQuil. The diapers are behind the counter. The Cetaphil and Neutrogena face washes are under lock and key. Other shelves, stretching entire aisles, are totally empty. “

  The reason for those extreme measures is brushed over. Instead, Judkis uses the story to mock such coverage as “a horror story of Late Capitalism” in which “the empty CVS had somehow become a stand-in for all that is wrong with American cities — and liberals (and liberal democracy?) — in 2024.”

  She then adds “America is a sticky-fingered nation built on stolen land, and its current moral panic is about shoplifting. It’s not just a worry in Columbia Heights. All over the country, from sea to shining CVS, there are concerns about petty theft.”

  She dismisses the shoplifting as a “political talking point” despite many stories citing such crimes as the reason for closing stories in various cities. 

  She questions the real basis for such moves and claims that “in certain conservative circles, there’s a wild narrative about cities as terrifying hellholes of crime, theft and lawlessness. The bleakness of the D.C. CVS played right into this belief.”

  The real story, she suggests, are the economic conditions leading to shoplifting.

  Other journalists have made similar objections. New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones, has called upon journalists stop covering shoplifting crimes, even criticizing MSNBC’s Al Sharpton for his discussion of a viral video of a man who recently stole steaks from a New York City Trader Joe’s.

  Writers like Hannah-Jones believe that reporters should actively suppress or dismiss stories on such crime to frame public opinion. It is all part of advocacy journalism. You can almost attribute it the denial of reality in “a late-journalism horror story.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 17:30

• Watch: MSNBC Legal Analyst Calls For 'Regulation' Of Disinformation As Trust In Corporate Media Collapses
  Watch: MSNBC Legal Analyst Calls For ‘Regulation’ Of Disinformation As Trust In Corporate Media Collapses

  MSNBC has long been known as one of the most biased news organizations in the US among a host of other highly biased outlets.  The hypocrisy of such an company admonishing the spread of disinformation in American society is probably not lost on most people, but it is also a survival mechanism for an industry that is swiftly fading into oblivion.  

  In numerous polls, the “mainstream media” is facing an integrity crisis.  Only 32% of Americans say they trust corporate platforms a “great deal” or a “fair amount.”  A majority of the public say they rarely trust the media or never trust the media and faith in establishment journalism is near record lows.  MSNBC, once the go-to bullhorn for the political left during the Trump Administration, has been on the receiving end of this fury with consistently low ratings and steeply declining influence over public discourse.

  That said, the company is still a useful litmus test for insights into the mind of the political left as well as a window into the thinking of establishment elites.  In a segment on disinformation featuring Michigan legal analyst Barbara McQuade, MSNBC actually engages in a mind boggling series of disinformation tangents.  It’s not so much hypocrisy as it is a master-class in propaganda.  

  Keep in mind that this is the same crew of people who recently asserted that Trump’s 20 point primary victory over Nikki Haley in her home state of South Carolina is somehow a “disaster” for the Trump campaign.  However, if we set aside the obvious anti-Trump bias for a moment, the deeper motivations of the above discussion become clear. 

  Why have Americans strayed away from the corporate media?  The bottom line is that the media is no longer a center for objective journalism (and maybe it never was), it is a disinformation machine.  The MSNBC segment above engages in disinformation in a number of ways.

  For example, they attempt to plant unconscious associations between genocidal dictators and Donald Trump in the minds of their audience.  They cite the “kidnapping conspiracy” case involving Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer as an example of public radicalization, but fail to mention that this event was utterly exposed as coordinated and controlled by the FBI.  McQuade suggests only right-wing media as a source of “disinformation” while ignoring the endless trespasses and lies perpetuated by the left-wing media.  

  The analyst goes on to insult the American public by claiming they need to “get out of their basements” and off the internet to find the facts.  In other words, they need to watch corporate media again and stay away from any alternative sources.  MSNBC laments the problem of the public being separated and limited to “news bubbles,” but this is a misrepresentation of what is really happening.  

  The topic of centralized control of news being a tool for dictators is broached, and the irony is dripping. America lived within a “news bubble” for decades.  For generations, corporate media platforms dominated the distribution of information and had the ability to mold and influence the public at will.  The populace had no other options.  The explosion of the alternative media on the internet is a direct reaction to this long time centralization and abuse of news access. 

  Whenever mainstream pundits ask questions like “How do we get Americans to listen to the facts?” what they mean to say is, “How can we once again centralize and control what Americans get to see and hear?” 

  

  McQuade touches on this issue briefly, suggesting that there are a number of options for “regulation” of social media and online sources to combat “disinformation.”  She does not elaborate for obvious reasons – We all know that regulation of news and public discourse looks a lot like the authoritarianism that she claims to fear.

  We have seen this disturbing trend in parts of the west including in Europe where online companies are required by law to heavily censor certain topics.  What constitutes “hate speech” or “dangerous speech” is arbitrarily determined by a gaggle of socialist bureaucrats.  This is the kind of news environment MSNBC prefers in the US.  

  We also witnessed the ugly nature of censorship during the pandemic hysteria, with alternative news sources crushed by rigged algorithms.  The corporate media was collapsing up until that point, but they enjoyed preferential treatment by Big Tech and by governments during covid, to the point that searches on any current event forced readers to sift through hundreds of establishment media results before finding a single alternative view. 

  The talking heads at MSNBC were right about one thing:  The methods of authoritarians might change, but the messages and intent stay the same.  In our modern era corporate platforms are the voice of Big Brother, and the only way they can maintain control of the narrative is by becoming the preeminent source of information.  That is to say, they can only accomplish dominance through suppression or regulation of alternative voices.  They know that no one will listen to them otherwise.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 16:55

• Let Bitcoin Cook
  Let Bitcoin Cook

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  “Let him cook” has been the expression that all of the young whippersnappers are using lately when describing somebody or something that shouldn’t be interrupted, because they are on a roll.

  I know this piece will come across as annoying to some, especially because I have only been bullish on bitcoin with some gusto for the last couple of months (though I first pointed it out to my readers in December 2022), but as a newfound member of the church of bitcoin community, I’d be remiss if I didn’t try out my voice a bit.

  I apologize in advance for opining on things that many members of planet bitcoin have talked about and debated ad nauseam for the last decade. But, one way or another, I have to get myself up to speed, and I do that best cathartically through writing. As a result, you, the reader, are left here to suffer. So, you know, don’t forget to renew your paid subscriptions to Fringe Finance.

  Enough with the prelude — we all know it has been a breathtaking week for bitcoin, which is up well over 20% in just the span of days.

  

  “Oh my f*ck.” – Bubbles, Trailer Park Boys

  The moves have done well to spin up even more interest in the cryptocurrency than there was over the last month with the launch of the ETFs. Hell, even Morgan Stanley came out this week and said they were thinking of throwing their hat into the ring and launching a bitcoin fund of their own.

  

  I’ve gotten a number of phone calls and texts about bitcoin, and I’m not even a prominent member of the community, nor am I a well-known bull. And so I can’t even imagine the outreach that maximalists and longtime advocates have seen this week.

  Undoubtedly, it is exciting, and I can’t even imagine how long people have been waiting to savor this moment, after years of abuse from family members and uninformed assholes like myself, as well as general doubt about the asset class. But, if there is one small lesson I have learned from decades in the capital markets that I think translates across asset classes, it is to celebrate modestly and prepare for the worst.

  That may seem like the furthest thing from people’s minds this week, but for me, it has always been the best way to savor success. Many people who listened to the podcast that I did a couple of weeks ago with Peter McCormack know that it was arrogance and hubris that turned me off from bitcoin to begin with. Perhaps that is my fault for not having an open enough mind and not doing enough of my own work – it’s a mistake that saw me miss out on large gains. But today I’m speaking as one of the people who can visualize bitcoin as a long-term success and are genuinely excited about onboarding the rest of the world.

  My Twitter feed over the last week has been replete with people triumphantly celebrating, bragging, and taking shots at those who doubted that the price would ever go back up again. Here’s one example from my brother James Lavish, who I know well enough to know he won’t mind me using him as an example because he knows I respect the shit out of him. Behold Exhibit A: James talking shit to Vanguard.

  

  Does James have a point? Yes, he does. Could be wind up being right 50 years from now also? Yes, he could. But is it karmically sound to taunt the $7.7 trillion bear? To me, not really. I’d rather just savor the satisfaction of the temporary dub quietly.

  Everybody is well within their rights to celebrate this short-term action anyway they would like, but what I’m suggesting today is that karmically and psychologically, the less you force the issue and the more humility you show, the more evenly and consistently bitcoin will thread itself through the rest of the world.

  Think of this: celebrating making an exorbitant amount of money or rage-tweeting about your success is going to do two things: (1)it’s going to turn off people like myself who think that behavior is generally synonymous with fraud and (2) it’s going to excite investors with lower-than-average sophistication who will look for quick riches and won’t be the steady hands bitcoin needs to become a perpetual success.

  Rather, what I’m suggesting is to allow the news media to do what they do (generally be useless and chase stories long after they’ve happened) and allow people to come to the realization about bitcoin the same way that I did: on my own, once I felt as though I wasn’t being suffocated with the idea by outside sources anymore.

  ---

  🔥 50% OFF SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR LIFE: If you are not yet a subscriber, you can take 50% off for life by using this link: GET 50% OFF

  ---

  My interest in looking at bitcoin this go-round in early 2024 was completely organic: the news coverage of it had died down, and I had blocked or unfollowed enough people who were hyping it that I could have some clarity and some peace of mind about it when I sat down to consider how it worked, seriously, for the first time ever. It was that calm, relaxed, blank slate that allowed me to grasp the relatively complex concepts of how it worked and believe in it the way that I do now.

  I think given the astronomical week that we just had, we’d be better off to “act like we’ve been here before” and to remember that sometimes the more you push an idea, the more people are prone to resistance than barking like hyenas and taunting people. If bitcoin had a $50 trillion market cap, that’d be a different story. But we’re still in the early stages of this courtship with the rest of the world and, like any good relationship or friendship in your life, there has to be a genuine organic interest in “showing up” to the idea of it happening. All of those who have been smothered by a partner or a friend in the past know that all it does is create distortions and unhealthy dynamics. Such delicate things cannot be forced, but rather, accepted willfully like a slow, purposeful deep breath outside on a winter day.

  This is not to say that I don’t believe this week is the beginning of much larger adoption that would likely drive the price of bitcoin higher. As I said on the “What Bitcoin Did” podcast, I believe that there is at least one, if not several, nation-states looking at putting bitcoin on their sovereign balance sheets, and that this will kick off a period of game theory for the digital asset revolution the likes of which we haven’t seen yet. Just days after I said that, yesterday Edward Snowden came out and postulated the same.

  

  Try to keep up with me, Eddie.

  But in all seriousness, we know what will happen if the price continues to rise. The hype will continue to flywheel further, as will interest and adoption. People will have the same realization that it took me a decade to figure out: this thing simply isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. But if you ask me, especially given the fact that we all know how quickly price moves can whipsaw back to the downside in the short term, I think the community would be well served to focus less on spiking the football here and more on how we will be able to clearly explain and convey the transformation that is unfolding before our eyes in a calm, measured, and comprehensive way.

  After all, whose questions do you want to deal with on the next 20% overnight whipsaw lower: unsophisticated maniacs or measured investors who already know and expect the volatility that is a certainty.

  And the more time we spend setting reasonable expectations that bitcoin can easily exceed, instead of overpromising and underdelivering, the less time we have to brag about being right. The journey is the reward. Or, as the bible says:

  “When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom.”

  — Proverbs 11:2

  But I think if Jesus were around today, he would simply tell us to “let bitcoin cook”.

  

  

  QTR’s Disclaimer: I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. I didn’t double check any numbers or figures in this piece and am generally lazy with my research. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. Contributor posts and curated content are posted either with the author’s permission or under a Creative Commons license. This is not a recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. Sometimes I just lose money by misplacing it. I’m generally irresponsible. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. These positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. Do your research elsewhere. I exist on the fringe. The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it numerous times because it’s that important that you

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 16:20

• The Next ZeroHedge Live Debate: Sen. Ron Johnson And Joe Walsh Face Off Over The Ukraine War
  The Next ZeroHedge Live Debate: Sen. Ron Johnson And Joe Walsh Face Off Over The Ukraine War

  As House Democrats gear up to force a vote on another $60 billion to Ukraine — plus $14 billion to Israel and $5 billion to Taiwan — prepare yourself for a PR campaign by congressional hawks complete with taxpayer-funded Zelensky photo ops, sanctimonious moral lectures from Sen. Chuck Schumer, and celebrations of dead youth by triple-flag-username Adam Kinzinger:

  I met with the U.S. Senate delegation, Senate Democratic Majority Leader @SenSchumer and senators @SenBlumenthal, @SenJackReed, @MichaelBennet, and @SenatorHassan.

  This visit is a solid message from the United States and the American people. It shows that the U.S. support… pic.twitter.com/hjSYvmzFWd

  — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) February 23, 2024

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

  What’s the difference between Feb 24, 2022, and Feb 24, 2024?

  Answer: 400,000 fewer Russians.

  Slava Ukrainii

  — Adam Kinzinger (Slava Ukraini) 🇺🇸🇺🇦🇮🇱 (@AdamKinzinger) February 24, 2024

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

  Beyond this shallow jingoism, do not expect the Schumer’s and McConnell’s to engage in substantive dialogues with you — the underwriter — about the risks inherent to funding a Russian proxy war, its relevance to America’s interests, or the track record of those pushing it. Most members of Congress avoid factual rigor and scrutiny like the plague.

  Thankfully, there are exceptions to every rule…

  ZeroHedge will be hosting two (one current, one former) members of Congress — Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and fmr Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois — for an in-depth discussion on the war in Ukraine and the role America should play. X Spaces influencer Mario Nawfal will moderate the debate in-person, which will stream live on ZeroHedge.com.

  

  They will answer the question: Should the U.S. continue to fund and provide operational support to Ukraine?

  To illustrate their divide: Walsh, the former Illinoisan Rep, has hailed Biden’s Ukraine policy as “one of the greatest defenses of freedom… ever put on the world’s stage” while the Wisconsinite Senator believes Ukraine “can’t win” and that it and the U.S. must pursue a negotiated settlement:

  Three thoughts this morning:

  1) Putin’s invasion of Ukraine last year will go down in history as one of the biggest fuckups & biggest miscalculations ever made by a major figure on the world’s stage.

  2) Joe Biden’s response to Putin’s invasion, Biden’s strong defense of…

  — Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) June 24, 2023

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

  The war in Ukraine is a bloody stalemate. Every day that goes by, more people die. This war should be brought to an end. The sooner the better.

  The Democrats’ open border is a clear and present danger to America. Closing it should be our top national and homeland security… pic.twitter.com/lArDmzzXFT

  — Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) December 13, 2023

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

  Healthy debate is sorely lacking on Capitol Hill, where it’s most needed. For bucking this trend, we have tremendous respect for both Johnson and Walsh and are looking forward to a civil exchange of ideas. We urge more elected officials to follow the Walsh-Johnson example.

  Tune in on Wednesday, March 6 at 7pm ET on zerohedge.com to watch the debate live.

  As usual, our moderator will take questions submitted by Premium and Pro subscribers in the comment section (sign up here for the opportunity to have your question answered by a member of Congress).

  Attend In-person

  ZeroHedge is offering a limited number of VIP tickets to readers who wish to join us backstage in our studio in Washington D.C. and enjoy the debate live. Only 10 tickets will be made available. An even more limited number of tickets are available for an ultra exclusive dinner with several of the participants and ZH organizers.

  For questions and tickets, please email debates@zerohedge.com and inquire about the even-more-limited private dinner.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 15:45

• Evidence And Insights About Gold's Long-Term Uptrend
  Evidence And Insights About Gold’s Long-Term Uptrend

  By Jesse Colombo of BullionStar

  For the past few years, gold has been treading water with no clear direction and causing even the most die-hard gold bugs to scratch their heads in confusion regarding the yellow metal’s next major move. Though gold surged during the most acute phase of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic due to the unprecedented tsunami of liquidity from global central banks, it has since bounced around between $1,600 to $2,100. In this piece, I will show that gold is still in a confirmed long-term uptrend despite the choppy action of the past few years. I will also show several factors that should create a tailwind for gold in the next decade and beyond.

  The Technical Backdrop

  It’s helpful to take a step back and look at the big picture when the short-term picture is unclear. Gold’s monthly chart going back to the year 2000 shows that the metal is in a confirmed uptrend according to the most basic, widely accepted tenets of technical analysis. For starters, gold has been consistently making higher highs and higher lows over the past quarter-century. In addition, gold has been climbing up a long-term uptrend line that formed in the early-2000s. From a technical perspective, gold will remain in a confirmed long-term uptrend as long as it stays above that uptrend line — after all, a trend in motion tends to remain in motion.

  

  If you look at gold’s price action of the past five years, you can see that there is a strong resistance zone overhead from $2,000 to $2,100. Gold has attempted to break above that resistance zone several times since 2020 to no avail. If gold can finally close decisively above its $2,000 to $2,100 resistance zone, that would indicate that another phase of the bull market has likely begun.

  

  (Of course, I need to point out that gold and silver’s price discovery process has been corrupted and distorted by the explosion of “paper” or synthetic gold and silver products including futures, options, swaps, and exchange traded funds that are not fully backed by actual physical gold and silver.

  Over the past couple of decades, the amount of outstanding synthetic gold and silver has ballooned relative to the amount of physical gold and silver in existence, which has suppressed physical precious metals prices. In a genuine and fair market, physical gold and silver prices would be much higher than they currently are. You can learn more about this issue here and here.)

  The Role of Paper Money Debasement

  There are numerous factors that drive the price of gold, but dilution of fiat or “paper” currencies is one of the most glaring. For the past five decades, all of the world’s major currencies have been downgraded to mere “paper” currencies that are unbacked by gold, which has predictably resulted in an explosion of the global money supply and the ensuing erosion of those currencies’ purchasing power.

  To put it in layman’s terms, a rising money supply harms the value of currencies and results in inflation or higher living costs. When the cost of housing, groceries, car insurance, healthcare, and college education all rise together, look no further than the debasement of paper money. When currencies were backed by gold, it was impossible to dilute them the way that paper currencies are diluted because every currency unit was required to have a certain amount of gold backing it up and it’s impossible to print or conjure gold out of thin air. For that same reason, people clamor to the safety of gold when paper money is being diluted to oblivion.

  The chart below shows the United States M2 money supply, which is a measure of all notes and coins that are in circulation, checking accounts, travelers’ checks, savings deposits, time deposits under $100,000, and shares in retail money market mutual funds. The U.S. M2 money supply has more than quadrupled since the early-2000s, which was a major factor behind gold’s long-term uptrend that began at that time.

  

  Though paper money is typically diluted as a function of time, this process accelerated dramatically after the Global Financial Crisis of 2007 – 2008 due to widespread government bailouts, fiscal and monetary stimulus, and quantitative easing (QE), which can be thought of as digital money printing for the purpose of propping up the economy and boosting the financial markets.

  The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an even more reckless printfest that caused nearly every measure of money supply in practically every country to go vertical in just a few months as central banks — including the U.S. Federal Reserve — desperately tried to prop up their economies and financial markets during the pandemic lockdowns with trillions upon trillions of dollars worth of stimulus.

  The chart below shows how gold follows the M2 money supply higher over time:

  

  The next chart shows the ratio of gold’s price to the M2 money supply, which is helpful for seeing if gold is keeping up with money supply growth, outpacing it, or lagging it. If gold’s price greatly outpaces money supply growth (the red zone in the chart below), there is a heightened chance of a strong correction. If gold’s price lags money supply growth (the green zone in the chart below), however, there is a good chance that gold will soon experience of period of strength. Since the mid-2010s, gold has slightly lagged M2 money supply growth, which could set it up for a period of strength due to the other factors discussed in this piece.

  

  The U.S. Dollar’s Declining Purchasing Power

  As discussed earlier, a rising money supply erodes the purchasing power of paper currencies over time. The Noble Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman described this process succinctly: “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon…” Since the year 2000, the U.S. dollar has lost nearly half of its purchasing power largely due to reckless monetary experiments conducted by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is supposed to be a good steward of America’s currency but has proven to be the exact opposite.

  

  Unfortunately, the U.S. dollar’s debasement since the year 2000 wasn’t a fluke — it was just a continuation of the trend that started almost immediately after the Federal Reserve was founded in 1913. Since then, the American currency has lost a jaw-dropping 97% of its purchasing power with no end in sight. As long as the U.S. dollar remains an unbacked fiat currency, it is going to keep losing purchasing power as a function of time.

  

  The U.S. National Debt

  America’s surging national debt has been another driver of gold’s bull market since the early-2000s. A combination of costly wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, bailouts and stimulus programs during the Global Financial Crisis of 2007 – 2008, and stimulus programs during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic caused the U.S. national debt to explode sixfold from $5.77 trillion in 2000 to $34.3 trillion in 2024.

  

  Even more concerning is the fact that the U.S. Congressional Budget Office expects the federal debt held by the public as a percentage of GDP to surge from just below 100% currently to approximately 170% over the next couple decades:

  

  Since the 2020 pandemic, America’s exploding national debt combined with rising interest rates have caused annual interest payments to double to nearly $1 trillion:

  

  Now costing U.S. taxpayers a mind-boggling $1 trillion per year, federal interest payments are set to exceed both the cost of defense and Medicare this year for the first time ever:

  

  Over the past few years, U.S. federal interest payments as a percentage of GDP have increased at the sharpest rate in at least seventy years:

  

  As a country’s national debt burden increases, the probability of a fiscal, economic, and currency crisis increases, which was what gold has been pricing in over the past quarter century. America’s surging debts — both public and private — are ultimately setting the stage for the destruction of the U.S. dollar, which will be sacrificed by the Federal Reserve and U.S. federal government as they run the printing presses on overdrive in a desperate attempt to pay for the spiraling cost of interest, Medicare, Social Security, welfare benefits, inevitable future bailouts and fiscal stimulus programs, and all other government spending. Throughout history, every paper currency has succumbed to the same fate as governments prove unable to resist the temptation of the printing press

  Conclusion

  To summarize, gold began a powerful uptrend in the early-2000s and it is still in that same uptrend despite the choppy price action of the past few years. The factors that originally drove gold’s uptrend are still in effect and, in many cases, are accelerating. Over the next decade and beyond, we are going to see a staggering increase in debt and the money supply, which will result in terrible inflation and, ultimately, hyperinflation. Though this piece focused primarily on the U.S. monetary and fiscal situation, make no mistake — practically every major economy is in the same boat and has its own version of the charts and data shown here.

  Though the paper money supply will increase exponentially in the years ahead, the supply of physical precious metals like gold and silver will remain relatively constant in comparison, which is a recipe for much higher gold and silver prices. I personally favor physical gold and silver bullion over all other investments (including gold ETFs and mining shares) in these unprecedented times.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 15:10

• Germany Confirms Leaked Audio Of Its Top Generals Discussing Blowing Up The Crimean Bridge
  Germany Confirms Leaked Audio Of Its Top Generals Discussing Blowing Up The Crimean Bridge

  In a huge development and absolute smoking gun revelation, the government of Germany has confirmed the authenticity of a leaked audio recording file published by Russia’s state-backed RT. The leak was first published by RT Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan, who described that she received it from Russian security officials.

  It first appeared under the headline “Alleged audio of German officers discussing Crimean Bridge attack leaked” – as it featured top ranking Germany military officials in a private discussion of “a potential German operation to bomb the Crimean Bridge in Russia,” as it was initially described by RT. Russian media is now openly admitting that the call was in fact intercepted by Russia. Moscow is now saying this shows “direct” German involvement in the war.

  

  The audio could have easily been dismissed in the West as simply Russian-sourced propaganda or even an AI fake; however, in an unexpected development the highest levels of the German government have now confirmed that the audio is indeed real and Berlin launched an investigation into the “serious” breach of secured communications.

  “What is being reported is a very serious matter and that is why it is now being investigated very carefully, very intensively and very quickly,” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said in Rome.

  Germany’s military has also confirmed the leaked recording, but officials have avoided weighing in the actual content of what was said pending an internal investigation:

  A German defense ministry spokeswoman confimed to AFP that the ministry believes a conversation in the air force division was “intercepted”.

  “We are currently unable to say for certain whether changes were made to the recorded or transcribed version that is circulating on social media,” the spokeswoman said. Experts consulted by Der Spiegel magazine said they believed the recording was authentic.

  Germany’s Ministry of Defense said per the country’s dpa: “According to our assessment, a conversation within the Air Force was intercepted. We cannot currently say with certainty whether changes have been made to the recorded or written version that is circulating on social media.”

  AFP further writes that “Topics include aiming the missiles at targets such as a key bridge over the Kerch strait linking the Russian mainland to Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in 2014.”

  

  Additionally the potential supply of Taurus long-range air-to-surface missile to Kiev is a major focus of the conversation. The Franco-British cruise missile Storm Shadow also receives mention. 

  Importantly, it seems none other than Lieutenant General Ingo Gerhartz – the commander of the national air force, is among the four voices heard in the audio among top generals within the Bundeswehr, Germany’s armed forces.

  A particularly damning section of the audio for which Moscow is currently demanding answers from German leaders…

  🇩🇪 Germany Planned a Crimea Attack

  German military officials reportedly planned to attack Russia’s Crimea bridge, aiming for strategic and political impact, stressing non-direct involvement.

  “The target is not only of military-strategic importance, but also political good. We… pic.twitter.com/rfIjC8E7eo

  — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 1, 2024

  They are heard openly discussing “interesting targets” including the “bridge in the east” and nearby “ammunition depots”. 

  Of course, the vital 12-mile bridge which spans the Kerch Strait and connects Crimea with mainland Russia was already previously severely damaged and briefly knocked out of commission in a major July 2023 missile or drone attack from Ukraine. Prior to that in October 2022 a truck bomb detonated on the bridge, resulting in parts of the roadway collapsing into the water below.

  Those prior attacks were suspected to have had Western intelligence help, given the sophistication of the operations. Are the German officers caught in the audio possibly plotting another future attack? (Or alternately some of the contents or references could predate the prior attacks on the bridge, timeline-wise). Third time’s a charm? Most likely, this is a very recent conversation wherein they talk about a future potential attack:

  In the 38-minute recording, military officers discuss the question of how the Taurus long-range cruise missiles could be used by Ukraine. A debate has been taking place in Germany over whether to supply the missiles as Ukraine faced setbacks on the battlefield after two years of war, and with military aid from the United States being held up in Congress.

  Earlier this week Scholz said he remains reluctant to send the Taurus missiles to Ukraine, pointing to a risk of Germany becoming directly involved in the war. His hesitancy is a source of friction in his three-party coalition and also annoyed Germany’s conservative opposition.

  But in the purported audio recording, German officers discuss the theoretical possibility of the missiles being used in Ukraine.

  Listen to more snippets from the Crimean Bridge section of the recording:

  Margarita Simonyan, as promised, publishes audio of a conversation between Bundeswehr officers discussing how they will bomb the Crimean Bridge. https://t.co/nIns6PjRlL pic.twitter.com/x5WVyZSYWw

  — Victor vicktop55 (@vicktop55) March 1, 2024

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 14:35

• Congress Must Investigate John Podesta's Role In Biden's LNG Decision
  Congress Must Investigate John Podesta’s Role In Biden’s LNG Decision

  Authored by Larry Behrens via RealClear Wire,

  Ever since 2016, talk to a liberal and there’s a good chance that they will blame “Russia” for something. Election interference, inflation, record-high gas prices, the list goes on and on. Since taking office, Joe Biden continues to take this deflection to a new level. As a gallon of gas soared past $5 in the summer of 2022 it was all Russia’s fault. And who can forget the ill-fated #PutinsPriceHike campaign as Team Biden tried to dodge criticism for skyrocketing inflation.

  

  Yet according to recent revelations, there may be more to Biden’s “America Last” energy policy than meets the eye, and again, Russia enters the picture.

  According to a bombshell report from the Washington Free Beacon, the decision to halt American liquified natural gas (LNG) exports was pushed by Biden’s new Climate Czar John Podesta, who recently took over for John Kerry.

  As a well-known climate warrior, it makes sense Podesta would be pushing for policies against American energy interests. Yet at the same time, Podesta’s brother, Tony, one of DC’s most well-connected mega lobbyists, has financial connections to foreign LNG companies, including one with links to a Russian oligarch. It is concerning to see the Podesta family standing to profit from a policy priority of the White House who employs another Podesta. Foreign companies, including Russia, are clear beneficiaries Biden’s LNG attack. It should be raising questions about potential conflicts of interest and profit motives at the White House.

  Even more troubling is the fact that this decision plays right into the hands of Vladimir Putin, the same dictator that Biden and his allies have been quick to blame for our country’s woes. By halting American LNG exports, Biden is handing Putin a wider energy market, allowing him to continue raking in billions while American energy workers suffer, and our families pay higher prices.

  As even the left-leaning Washington Post editorial board put it, “Biden’s LNG decision is a win for political symbolism, not the climate.”

  For the record, this is not the first time the Podestas were caught in ethical compromising situation. In 2019, Tony Podesta was investigated by the Southern District of New York for potential violations of foreign lobbying rules. Back in 2021, the same Podesta brother pocketed a cool $1 million by lobbying Biden in favor of Chinese telecommunications. Instead of tapping the brakes on this questionable influence, Joe Biden picked John Podesta to replace John Kerry and then put him in charge of the largest green slush fund in American history.

  At a time when the country is still facing too-high gas prices and inflation, it is unacceptable for the Biden administration to prioritize the interests of foreign companies, and his radical green supporters over those of American workers and consumers. It is imperative that Congress launch an investigation into these suspicious ties to uncover the truth behind Biden’s energy policy and determine whether there is any real Russian collusion at play.

  The House of Representatives deserves credit for investigating other elements of Biden’s green grift, including an electric vehicle battery deal that Ford reached with a Chinese company. It seems there is no end to the amount of our money Team Biden is willing to spend for more…green.

  It is time for Biden to put America first and prioritize the needs of the American people over the profits of foreign entities.

  It is time for Congress to step up and ensure that our energy policies are in the best interests of the country, not those of foreign oligarchs. The time for action is now. Let us demand the truth and hold our leaders accountable for their actions. Congress must investigate because America deserves nothing less.

  Larry Behrens is the Communications Director for Power The Future. He has appeared on Fox News, OANN and NewsMax speaking in defense of American energy workers. He is the author of the book “Sabotage: How Joe Biden Surrendered American Energy Independence.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 14:00

• IRS To Retrieve Potentially Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars From Americans Who Failed To File Tax Returns
  IRS To Retrieve Potentially Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars From Americans Who Failed To File Tax Returns

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

  The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced a new effort aimed at boosting tax revenue from taxpayers who haven’t filed returns for several years, with the initiative expected to net at least hundreds of millions of dollars.

  

  The new initiative, announced on Feb. 29, focuses on 125,000 cases of taxpayers with annual incomes over $400,000 who didn’t file tax returns between 2017 and 2021.

  The IRS said it was tipped off by various types of third-party information indicating that these taxpayers received taxable income but failed to file a tax return.

  Information on these taxpayers indicates total financial activity of over $100 billion.

  “Even with a conservative estimate, the IRS believes hundreds of millions of dollars of unpaid taxes are involved in these cases,” the agency said in a statement.

  The IRS will soon start sending letters (known as CP59 notices) to the affected taxpayers at a rate of between 20,000–40,000 per week.

  The agency warned that people who receive these letters should take immediate action to avoid higher penalties and “increasingly stronger enforcement measures.”

  The penalty of failure to pay is 5 percent of the amount owed each month, up to a maximum of 25 percent of the tax bill.

  ‘Risk Will Just Grow’

  Roughly 25,000 cases involve taxpayers who made over $1 million in income, while around 100,000 pertain to non-filers with incomes between $400,000 and $1 million.

  In all cases, the IRS was tipped off by way of third-party information, including through Forms W-2 and 1099s, that these people received incomes within the above ranges between tax years 2017 and 2021.

  Some of these non-filers have multiple years included in each case, so the total number of taxpayers targeted by the new initiative will be smaller than the roughly 125,000 letters that will be sent out.

  “We cannot tolerate those with higher incomes failing to do a basic civic duty of filing a tax return,” IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel said in a statement.

  “For those who owe, the risk will just grow over time as will the potential for penalties and interest,” he added.

  The latest move is part of a broader IRS effort to ramp up tax enforcement thanks to a $60 billion funding boost from the Inflation Reduction Act.

  While the IRS has vowed to spare Americans earning less than $400,000 from its enforcement crackdown, a watchdog has cast doubt on the agency’s ability to make good on this pledge.

  New Compliance Crackdown

  The IRS announced four new initiatives in October that target high-income, high-wealth individuals, as well as large corporations.

  One of these thrusts is focused on U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies that distribute goods in the United States but don’t pay enough tax.

  “These foreign companies report losses or exceedingly low margins year after year through the improper use of transfer pricing to avoid reporting an appropriate amount of U.S. profits,” the agency said in a statement.

  The second initiative relates to the IRS Large Business & International Division’s (LB&I) Large Corporate Compliance (LCC) arm, which is being expanded and will be auditing an additional 60 big corporations with assets worth over $24 billion on average.

  The third initiative involves cracking down on abuse of a corporate tax break that was repealed several years ago, while the fourth targets individual taxpayers who make over $1 million in annual income and have over $250,000 in recognized tax debts.

  While the IRS has repeated time and again that it’s new enforcement crackdown won’t target Americans earning less than $400,000, a watchdog has cast doubt on this pledge and the agency’s chief hinted that this might inadvertently happen.

  The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), which is the watchdog overseeing the IRS, said in a September report that the IRS would have a hard time making good on its $400,000 pledge because the agency doesn’t have a clear definition of “high income” and many of its tax enforcers still use an outdated $200,000 threshold as their default.

  Mr. Werfel said in recent testimony on Capitol Hill that his “marching order to the IRS” is not to increase audit rates for people making less than $400,000, but added that, “if we fall short of that, I will be held accountable,” hinting that even with the best intentions, there’s a chance overzealous enforcers might do so anyway.

  A separate watchdog report revealed that the IRS managed to rake in a record $4.9 trillion in taxes from Americans in the last fiscal year, in large part due to automated collections processes and aggressive audits.

  While the IRS is set to continue increasing its reliance on automated systems to squeeze more tax dollars from American taxpayers, it’s also looking to hire another 3,700 tax enforcers as it spends an extra $46 billion of the recent $60 billion funding boost on enforcement.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 12:50

• Taibbi: MSNBC, Paul Krugman Panic Over "White Rural Rage"
  Taibbi: MSNBC, Paul Krugman Panic Over “White Rural Rage”

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via Racket News,

  This week in undisguised class hatred: the New York Times and MSNBC slobber over a new book on the domestic threat

  “Tom, I’ll start with you,” began Mika Brzezinski. “Why are rural white voters a threat to democracy at this point?”

  Fastball delivered, University of Maryland professor and co-author of just-released White Rural Rage: The Threat To American Democracy Tom Schaller took a swing. He and Mika first complained rural voters should be supporting Joe Biden, given his roots — you’d have to be pretty high to call Scranton “rural,” but whatever — then Schaller read off small town America’s charge sheet: rural whites, he said, are the most “racist,” “xenophobic,” “anti-immigrant and anti-gay,” “conspiracist,” “anti-democratic,” they “don’t believe in an independent press or free speech,” and are “most likely to accept or excuse violence,” for starters.

  White Rural Rage, which I made the mistake of reading, is a vicious manifesto in the anti-populist tradition nailed by Thomas Frank in The People, No. When rural voters in the late 1800s defied New York banking interests and demanded currency reform to allow farmers an escape from one of the original “rigged games” in finance, relentless propaganda ensued. Rural populists were depicted as dirty, bigoted, ignorant. They refused expert wisdom, represented a “frantic challenge against every feature of our civilization,” and waged a “shameful insurrection against law and national honesty.” A populist caricature in Judge magazine showed a violent, destructive idiot, a real-life Lennie from still-unwritten Of Mice and Men, standing over the defiled corpse of civilized America:

  

  The theme is back, condescension multiplied. Despite a pandemic that just graphically demonstrated the social contributions of farmers, truckers, train operators, and other “essential workers,” the people working those jobs were demonized during the crisis as murderous horse-paste eaters and insurrectionists. Their chief crimes: protesting lockdowns and school closures that disproportionately affected them, and being consumers of supposed foreign-inspired “misinformation” that led them to refuse appropriate political choices offered them.

  Nobel-winning columnist Paul Krugman of the New York Times spent the last year telling “ignorant” Middle America its negative feelings about the economy are “demonstrably false,” because despite what their bank accounts or home evaluations might say, “Bidenomics is still working very well.” When White Rural Rage came out this week he rushed to review it, the intransigent refusal of yokels to accept his wisdom being his favored current hobby horse. “The Mystery of Rural White Rage” is remarkable on multiple levels, one being that after spending so much energy talking about the health of the economy, he pulls out an economic version of Sam Kinison’s classic “Move to the Food!” routine:

  The decline of small-town manufacturing is a more complicated story, and imports play a role, but it’s also mainly about technological change that favors metropolitan areas with large numbers of highly educated workers. Technology, then, has made America as a whole richer, but it has reduced economic opportunities in rural areas. So why don’t rural workers go where the jobs are?

  He answers his question: “Some cities have become unaffordable… and many workers are reluctant to leave their families and communities.”

  To recap: globalization and technological change have devastated small towns and made the urban keyboard warriors richer, and rural voters can’t move to the cities because they can’t afford to. However, instead of being grateful for the “huge de facto transfers of money from rich, urban states like New Jersey to poor, relatively rural states like West Virginia” in the form of federal programs paid by the taxes of luckier citizens like Krugman, small town America is unaccountably hostile.

  Schaller and White Rural Rage co-author Paul Waldman make the same point, that “cities produce far more of the nation’s wealth,” and rural citizens are increasingly “subsidized by the taxes paid by higher-income metropolitans.” What gives? Why won’t they shut the fuck up?

  “For so long,” complained Waldman on Morning Joe, “Democrats have been told… that in order to get rural voters… you have to go there… you have to show them that you understand… You have to put on a Carhartt jacket and go down to somebody’s farm, right? Maybe milk a cow?”

  “Yes!” exclaimed* Mika.

  But it turns out, a sad Waldman pronounced, that you “don’t have to do any of that,” because Donald Trump didn’t. He just “gave [rural voters] a way to essentially give a big middle finger to Democrats, to people who live in cities and to the rest of the country.”

  The Morning Joe set looked perplexed.

  Why would that work better than wearing a Carhartt jacket and milking a cow? It didn’t make sense.

  Educated America. We’re in good hands!

  *The correct phrase is really “‘Yes,’ dipshitted Mika,” but I was afraid the usage would throw off some readers. For future reference, it may come up again

  Subscribe to Matt Taibbi’s Racket News substack here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 12:25

• US Military Begins Airdropping Food Into Gaza
  US Military Begins Airdropping Food Into Gaza

  With the humanitarian disaster in Gaza growing more desperate each day, President Biden on Friday afternoon announced that the United States government would begin airdropping food and other supplies into the territory. Jordan has airdropped supplies in recent weeks, and Biden said that kingdom and other countries would join the effort.

  Biden’s announcement comes after a catastrophe that saw more than 100 Palestinians killed by some combination of Israeli Defense Forces gunfire and stampeding after they massed on a convoy of about 30 trucks that had arrived in Gaza City to distribute food in the pre-dawn hours on Thursday. It also comes after more than 100,000 Michigan Democrats voted “uncommitted” in the Tuesday primary election, with many in the battleground state doing so to protest Biden’s handling of the Israel-Gaza war. 

  

  Over half of Gaza’s more than 2 million residents have been forced from their homes. In the IDF-pulverized north — where Thursday’s horror unfolded and hundreds of thousands still linger — one in six children under age 2 are acutely malnourished, according to an analysis by the Global Nutrition Cluster.

  More broadly, nearly 600,000 Palestinians in Gaza are near famine level, and disease is mounting. Driven to extreme measures, many are grinding animal feed into flour — and a toddler reportedly died last week after eating bread made that way. “We began to eat fodder and barley like animals in order to survive,” his weeping mother told al Jazeera.  

  Officials tell Reuters the US relief missions will begin as soon as this weekend. Planning for airdrops must be done with great care. “There’s few military operations that are more complicated than humanitarian assistance airdrops,” said National Security Council spokesman John Kirby. 

  It appears the US airdrops have begun Saturday:

  The U.S. Air Forces Central Command has just conducted its First Round of Humanitarian Airdrops into the Gaza Strip, with 3 C-130 Transport Aircraft flying at Low Altitude dropping upwards of 66 Pallets containing 38,000 Meals for the Palestinian Population. pic.twitter.com/PXBncWuQhj

  — OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 2, 2024

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

  “The biggest risk is making sure nobody gets hurt on the ground.” In addition to that peril, airdrops have the drawback of being relatively inefficient, with each drop only equaling between one and four truckloads of cargo.

  Delivering aid via trucks would be far safer and efficient — if only the trucks could get in to the beleaguered, 25-mile-long strip. On that front, Biden said the White House would be pressuring Israel to let relief flow. “We’re going to insist that Israel facilitate more trucks and more routes to get more and more people the help they need,” he said. Trucks laden with water and baby formula have sat for a month at Gaza’s border with Egypt, reports the Wall Street Journal. 

  

  When Israel began its response to the Oct 7 Hamas invasion of southern Israel that led to the deaths of 1,139 Israeli civilians, military personnel and foreigners, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced that the deprivation of food to Gaza civilians would be one of Israel’s tactics:

  “I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.”

  Meanwhile, Israeli protesters have been attempting to prevent aid trucks from proceeding into Gaza. When reporters asked one of them, 32-year-old Rachel Touitou if she had any empathy for civilians in Gaza, she shrugged and said, “Should I have mercy on the children of today who will be the terrorists of tomorrow?”

  Today at the Nitzana border crossing Israeli citizens are bringing their machine guns and small children to block all humanitarian aid from entering Gaza. The military is having fun. The kids are cooking cotton candy. pic.twitter.com/9rGpCnQS4A

  — Jeremy Loffredo (@loffredojeremy) February 27, 2024

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

  About 90% of children in Gaza reportedly have some kind of infectious disease, with 70% suffering from diarrhea in the previous two weeks. ”Hungry, weakened and deeply traumatized children are more likely to get sick,” said Dr Mike Ryan of the World Health Organization’s Health Emergencies Program, “and children who are sick, especially with diarrhea, cannot absorb nutrients well. It’s dangerous, and tragic, and happening before our eyes.” Much, apparently, to the delight of Rachel Touitou and others. 

  Initial US airdrops are likely to consist of military Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE) ration packets. On Friday, Biden told reporters that, in addition to airdrops and truck shipments, the administration would “seek to continue to open up other avenues…including the possibility of a marine corridor to deliver large amounts of humanitarian assistance.”   

  Of course, no Biden appearance would be complete without the obviously failing president misnaming someone or something important. True to form, Biden twice said “Ukraine” when he intended to refer to Gaza. He was reading from a prepared statement, but things went wrong when he dared to speak on his own: 

  President Biden says they will be completing air drops of ‘food and supplies into Ukraine’, and the US is seeking to open up ‘other avenues in Ukraine’. Mr Biden meant to say Gazahttps://t.co/GD1gLkuJSj pic.twitter.com/zvx5phNx5p

  — Sky News (@SkyNews) March 1, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/02/2024 – 12:15

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• 'A Rocky Road To De-Dollarization' – Pepe Escobar Interviews Sergei Glazyev
  ‘A Rocky Road To De-Dollarization’ – Pepe Escobar Interviews Sergei Glazyev

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  Very few people in Russia and across the Global South are as qualified as Sergei Glazyev, the Minister for Integration and Macroeconomics of the Eurasia Economic Commission (EEC), the policy arm of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), to speak about the drive, the challenges and the pitfalls in the road towards de-dollarization.

  

  As the Global South issues widespread calls for real financial stability; India inside the BRICS 10 makes it clear that everyone needs to think seriously about the toxic effects of unilateral sanctions; and Professor Michael Hudson keeps reiterating current policies are not sustainable anymore, Glazyev graciously received me at his office at the EEC for an exclusive, extensive conversation, including fascinating off the record odds and ends.

  These are the highlights – as Glazyev’s ideas are being re-examined, and there’s huge expectation for the green light from the Russian government for a new trade settlement model – which for the moment is in the final stages of fine-tuning.

  Glazyev explained how his main idea was “elaborated a long time ago. The basic idea is that a new currency should be first of all introduced on the basis of international law, signed by the countries which are interested in the production of this new currency. Not via some kind of conference, like Bretton Woods, with no legitimacy. At the first stage, not all countries would be included. BRICS nations will be enough – plus the SCO. In Russia, we already have our own SWIFT – the SPFS. We have our currency exchange, we have correspondent relations between banks, consultation between Central Banks, here we are absolutely self-sufficient.”

  All that leads to adopting a new international currency: “We don’t really need to go large scale. BRICS is enough. The idea of the currency is that there are two baskets: one basket is national currencies of all countries involved in the process, like the SDR, but with more clear, understandable criteria. The second basket are commodities. If you have two baskets, and we create the new currency as an index of commodities and national currencies, and we have a mechanism for reserves, according to the mathematical model that will be very stable. Stable and convenient.”

  Then it’s up to feasibility: “To introduce this currency as an instrument for transactions would not be too difficult. With good infrastructure, and all Central Banks approving it, then it’s up to businesses to use this currency. It should be in digital form – which means it can be used without the banking system, so it will be at least ten times cheaper than present transactions through banks and currency exchanges.”

  That Thorny Central Bank Question

  “Have you presented this idea to the Chinese?”

  “We presented it to Chinese experts, our partners at Renmin University. We had good feedback – but I did not have the opportunity to present it on a political level. Here in Russia we promote the discussion via papers, conferences, seminars, but there’s still no political decision on introducing this mechanism even on the BRICS agenda. The proposal by our team of experts is to include it in the agenda of the BRICS summit next October in Kazan. The problem is the Russian Central Bank is not enthusiastic. The BRICS have only decided on an operating plan to use national currencies – which is also a quite clear idea, as national currencies are already used in our trade. Russian ruble is the main currency in the EAEU, trade with China is conducted in rubles and renminbi, trade with India and Iran and Turkiye also switched to national currencies. Each country has the infrastructure for it. If Central Banks introduce digital national currencies and allow them to be used in international trade, it’s also a good model. In this case crypto exchanges can easily balance payments – and it’s a very cheap mechanism. What is needed is an agreement from Central Banks to allow a certain amount of national currencies in digital form to participate in international transactions.”

  “Would that be feasible already in 2024, if there is political will?”

  “There are some start-ups already. By the way, they are in the West, and the digitalization is conducted by private companies, not Central Banks. So the demand is there. Our Central Bank needs to elaborate a proposal for the summit in Kazan. But this is only one part of the story. The second part is price. For the moment price is determined by Western speculation. We produce these commodities, we consume them, but we do not have our own price mechanism, which will balance supply and demand. During the Covid panic, the price for oil fell to nearly zero. It’s impossible to make any strategic planning for economic development if you do not control prices of basic commodities. Price formation with this new currency should get rid of Western exchanges of commodities. My idea is based on a mechanism that existed in the Soviet Union, in the Comecon. In that period we had long-term agreements not only with socialist countries, but also with Austria, and other Western countries, to supply gas for 10 years, 20 years, the basis of this price formula was the price for oil, and the price for gas.”

  So what stands out is the effectiveness of a long-term, long view policy: “We did create a long-term pattern. Here in the EEC we are looking at the idea of a common exchange market. We already prepared a draft, with some experiments. The first step is the creation of an information network, exchanges in different countries. It was rather successful. The second step will be to set up online communication between exchanges, and finally we move to a common mechanism of price formation, and open this mechanism for all other countries. The main problem is that the major producers of commodities, first of all the oil companies, they don’t like to trade through exchanges. They like to trade personally, so you need a political decision to make sure that at least half of production of commodities should go through exchanges. A mechanism where supply and demand balance each other. For the moment the price of oil in foreign markets is ‘secret’. It’s some type of colonial times thinking. ‘How to cheat’. We must create legislation to open all this information to the public.”

  The NDB in Need of a Shake-up

  Glazyev offered an extensive analysis of the BRICS universe, based on how the BRICS Business Council had its first meeting on financial services in early February. They agreed on a working plan; there was a first session of fintech experts; and during this week a breakthrough meeting may lead to a new formulation – for the moment not made public – to be put into the BRICS agenda for the October summit.

  “What are the main challenges within the BRICS structure in this next stage of trying to bypass the US dollar?”

  “BRICS in fact is a club which doesn’t have a secretariat. I can tell it, from a person that has some experience in integration. We discussed the idea of a customs union here, on the post-Soviet territory, immediately after the collapse. We had a lot of declarations, even some agreements signed by heads of state, over a common economic space. But only after the establishment of a commission the real work stated, in the year 2008. After 20 years of papers, conferences, nothing was done. You need someone who’s responsible. In BRICS there is such an organization – the NDB [New Development Bank]. If the heads of state decide to appoint the NDB as an institution which will elaborate the new model, the new currency, organize an international conference with the draft of an international treaty, this can work. The problem is that the NDB works according to the dollar charter. They have to reorganize this institution in order to make it workable. Now it works like an ordinary international development bank under the American framework. The second option would be to do it without this bank, but that would be much more difficult. This bank has enough expertise.”

  “Could an internal shake-up of the NDB be proposed by the Russian presidency of BRICS this year?”

  “We are doing our best. I’m not sure the Ministry of Finance understands how serious this is. The President understands. I personally promoted this idea to him. But the chairman of the Central Bank, and ministers are still thinking in the old IMF paradigm.”

  ‘Religious Sects Don’t Create Innovation’

  Glazyev had a serious discussion on sanctions with the NDB:

  “I discussed this issue with Mrs. Rousseff [the former Brazilian President, currently presiding the NDB) at the St. Petersburg Forum. I gave her a paper about it. She was rather enthusiastic and invited us to come to the NDB. But afterwards there was no follow-up. Last year everything was very difficult.”

  On BRICS, “the financial services working group is discussing reinsurance, credit rating, new currencies in fintech. That’s what should be in the agenda of the NDB. The best possibility would be a meeting in Moscow in March or April, to discuss in depth the whole range of issues of BRICS settlement mechanism, from most sophisticated to least sophisticated. It would be great if the NDB sign up for it, but as it stands there is a de facto gulf between the BRICS and the NDB.”

  The key point, insists Glazyev, is that “Dilma should find time to organize these discussions at a high level. A political decision is needed.”

  “But wouldn’t that decision have to come from Putin himself?”

  “It’s not so easy. We heard statements by at least three heads of the state: Russia, South Africa and Brazil. They publicly said ‘this is a good idea’. The problem, once again, is there is no task force yet. My idea, which we proposed before the BRICS summit in Johannesburg, is to create an international working group – to prepare in the next sessions the model, or the draft, of the treaty. How to switch to national currencies. That’s the official agenda now. And they have to report about that in Kazan [for the BRICS annual summit]. There are some consultations between the Central Banks and Ministers of Finance.”

  Glazyev cut to the chase when it comes to the inertia of the system: “The main problem for bureaucrats and experts is ‘why they don’t have ideas?’ Because they assume the current status quo is the best one. If there are no sanctions, everything will be good. The international financial architecture that was created by the United States and Europe is convenient. Everyone knows how to work in the system. So it’s impossible to move from this system to another system. For businesses it will be very difficult. For banks it will be difficult. People have been educated in the paradigm of financial equilibrium, totally libertarian. They don’t care that prices are manipulated by speculators, they don’t care about volatility of national currencies, They think it’s natural (…) It’s a kind of religious sect. Religious sects don’t create innovation.”

  Now Get on That Hypersonic Bicycle

  We’re back to the crucial issue of national currencies: “Even five years ago, when I spoke about national currencies in trade, everybody said it was completely impossible. We have long-term contracts in dollars and euro. We have an established culture of transactions. When I was Minister of Foreign Trade, 30 years ago, at the time I tried to push all our trade in commodities into rubles. I argued with Yeltsin and others, ‘we have to trade in rubles, not in dollars’. That would automatically make the ruble a reserve currency. When Europe moved to the euro, I had a meeting with Mr. Prodi, and we agreed, ‘we will use euro as your currency, and you will use rubles’. Then Prodi came to me after consultations and said, ‘I talked to Mr. Kudrin [former Russian Finance Minister, 2000-2011], he didn’t ask me to make the ruble a reserve currency’. That was sabotage. It was stupidity.”

  The problems actually run deep – and keep running: “The problem was our regulators, educated by the IMF, and the second problem was corruption. If you trade oil and gas in dollars, a large part of profits is stolen, there are a lot of intermediate companies which manipulate prices. Prices are only the first step. The price for natural gas in the first deal is about 10 times less than the final demand. There are institutional barriers. A majority of countries do not allow our companies to sell oil and gas to the final customer. Like you cannot sell gas to households. Nevertheless, even in the open market, quite competitive, we have intermediates between producer and consumer – at least half of the revenues are stolen from government control. They don’t pay taxes.”

  Yet fast solutions do exist: “When we were sanctioned two years ago, transfer from US dollar and euro to national currencies took only a few months. It was very quick.”

  On investments, Glazyev stressed success in localized trade, but capital flows are still not there: “The Central Banks are not doing their job. The ruble-renminbi exchange is working well. But the ruble-rupee exchange doesn’t work. The banks that keep these rupees, they have a lot of money, accrue interest rates on these rupees, and they can play with them. I don’t know who’s responsible for this, our Central Bank or the Indian Central Bank.”

  The succinct, key takeaway of Glazyev’s serious warnings is that it would be up to the NDB – prodded by the leadership of BRICS – to organize a conference of global experts and open it for public discussion. Glazyev evoked the metaphor of a bicycle that keeps rolling along – so why invent a new bicycle? Well, the – multipolar – time has come for a new hypersonic bicycle.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 23:40

• The State Of Global Fertility
  The State Of Global Fertility

  South Korea broke its own record when it announced this week that as of 2023, its fertility rate had fallen to just 0.72 births per woman.

  The rate at which a population replaces itself between generations without migration stands at around 2.1.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, the following map with comparable data between countries from 2021, shows that even then South Korea was one of only a few places in the world with a fertility rate below 1.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In Japan, which on Tuesday announced a 5 percent decline in births to a record low of 758,631, the birth rate remained at 1.26. This places the country among the approximately 90 in the world where populations are not growing independent of immigration. Also in this group are many nations from Europe, the Americas and Southeast Asia. Most of the countries losing fertility are better developed and reasons for the trend include greater access to contraception and more women being educated and heading to work.

  The story is different in the developing world where higher rates of fertility are fueling continued global population growth. The West African country of Niger had a fertility rate of 6.8 in 2021, the highest in the world listed by the World Bank, followed by Somalia, Chad and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Out of the 33 countries in the world where women had 4 or more children on average, 31 were in Africa that year.

  On average, women in 1963 were having 5.3 children in their lifetime and by 2021, that had more than halved to 2.3. During the same period, the global population rose by around 150 percent from 3.2 billion to 7.9 billion. The fact that populations kept (and keep) growing despite falling global fertility is tied to longer life expectancy and lower childhood mortality.

  The UN expects global fertility to reach the minumum replacement level of 2.1 by the middle of the century while global population is expected to start falling towards the end of it.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 23:20

• Sen. Johnson's Senate Panel On The Vaccines Is The Red Pill We've All Been Waiting For
  Sen. Johnson’s Senate Panel On The Vaccines Is The Red Pill We’ve All Been Waiting For

  Authored by ‘A Midwestern Doctor’ via ‘The Forgotten Side Of Medicine’ substack,

  This excellent presentation meticulously breaks down exactly what went awry throughout COVID-19. What everyone needs to know is summarized below…

  Ron Johnson has gradually become one of my favorite senators in American history. In 2020, he repeatedly advocated for early COVID-19 treatments to be made available to Americans (which had they been made available would have ended the pandemic).

  Throughout 2021, he spoke out against the vaccine mandates and in November hosted a panel at the Senate which scrutinized the federal vaccine mandates and exposed how poorly those who experienced severe COVID-19 vaccine injuries were being treated. In January 2022, he hosted a panel which scrutinized the entire COVID-19 response, and in December of 2022, he hosted a panel focusing on everything we now know about the vaccines.

  Being one of the most outspoken critics of the vaccination program in American history got him a lot of pushback, and in 2022, he decided to postpone his retirement to go through a grueling re-election campaign so there would be someone in the government who could advocate for everyone whose lives had been ruined by the COVID vaccines.

  Despite being public enemy number one of the pharmaceutical industry, Johnson narrowly won, becoming the first politician in America’s history to run on the vaccine safety issue and win. Since then Johnson has kept his promise and fought for the vaccine injured (along with taking a variety of other difficult but important positions such as giving one of the most poignant speeches I’ve heard on the Ukraine War when he tried to block the Senate from continuing to fund it).

  A lot of work has gone into producing each of the vaccine panels he’s hosted. On Monday, he hosted “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?” When it was all said and done, I believe this panel was the most effective presentation I have seen for explaining what happened throughout COVID-19 and waking people up to how much they have been lied to. Because of this I strongly encourage you to watch or share his presentation with people who you think might be open to understanding exactly what was done to all of us. This article will begin with his entire panel:

  Note: I have been struggling to find the best term for these criminals. The four I’ve used are listed below; I would appreciate knowing what you think is the best one.

  What’s the best term for the COVID criminals?

  • The COVID Cartel

  • The Pandemic Profiteers

  • The Pandemic Industrial Complex

  • The Biosecurity Agenda

  Lastly, for those who prefer to read, a transcript of Johnson’s symposium can be found here.

  Note: for each of the videos embedded within this article, I (or the Vigilant Fox) edited them down to their most important parts. A lot of time was put into this article because of the importance of what was presented.

  Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?

  Since the entire panel was 4 hours long, I recognize that many of you will not be able to watch all of it. For that reason, I tried to highlight what I felt were it’s most important parts.

  First, in Johnson’s opening statement, he discusses just how hard it has been over the last three years to get any of the information his office is legally entitled to from the government. For example with (Fauci’s) NIH:

  We are down to the last 50 pages [of the 4000 he originally requested]. They will not release these. It’s been now going close to 2 years. This is what has been provided to us. Do you think there might be some incriminating information in this?

  Likewise, these agencies have completely brushed off all evidence something is wrong. For example, with the NIH:

  Just like former NIH director Francis Collins Collins told me when I asked about all the deaths being reported on VAERS, [he said], “Senator, people die.” The fact that both of these statements are as true as they are callous highlights the challenge we face in exposing the truth.

  While with the FDA:

  I’ve written 4 [letters on hot-lots] starting in December of 2021. The first letter compared 25,000 lots of COVID vaccine to 22,000 lots of flu vaccine. One COVID lot had 5,297 adverse reactions associated with it. The worst flu lot had a 137. So 5,300 versus 137.

  365 COVID lots had more than 100 adverse events. Only 10 flu lots had more than 100. And 80% of the serious adverse events, those with emergency room visits, hospitalization, or death were associated with only 5% of the lots. So, again, to me, I’m from manufacturing. That shows to me a manufacturing process out of control.

  [It] took us a year to get some kind of response and, basically, response from the agencies was, “we don’t see any variation in lots.”

  Johnson then illustrates how the current political climate has undermined everything science once stood for:

  “Vaccine injuries are rare.” “The benefits outweigh the risk and that the science is clear and overwhelming.” “And anyone challenging this narrative is an is an anti science conspiracy theorist.” In other words, second opinions are not allowed. To me, this attitude is the antithesis of science.

  I am amazed at the knowledge mankind has obtained over the millennia. But I would argue that what we don’t know vastly exceeds what we do know. So as we pursue truth, we must pursue it with the humility that that reality demands.

  Johnson’s opening statement was then followed by Robert Malone:

  I’ll be succinct. The SARS CoV 2 modified mRNA based vaccine products were deployed via emergency use authorization without adequate nonclinical and clinical testing and without full disclosure of known patient risk and efficacy data. This violated well established legislatively mandated patient informed consent requirements. The FDA and HHS justified these actions as necessary due to reliance on deeply flawed modeling data indicating that SARS CoV 2 was associated with an infection fatality rate of 3.4%.

  Note: the IFR was subsequently shown to average between 0.018%-0.03% for everyone under 60 and was approximately 0.506% for those between 60-69 years of age.

  Subsequent clinical research experience has revealed a number of problems with the genetic vaccine technology based SARS COV 2 products, which have been marketed as vaccines. In most cases, there has been an effort to obscure or deny facts in public communication by government and pharmaceutical industry representatives.

  Malone then listed the key issues with the vaccines, to which Johnson replied:

  Doctor Malone, I think one of the things that always bothers me is [that] so much of what we’re learning in terms of harms of these vaccine was clearly known before they were rolled out.

  Jessica Rose spoke next. After concisely summarizing all of the issues that had been found within VAERS, she concluded with:

  Standard operating procedures for analysis of safety signals emergent from VAERS when utilized reveal causal links between the COVID 19 injectable products and the adverse events investigated. Standard operating procedures are not being followed by the owners of the data, namely CDC, HHS, and FDA, and this equates to hiding the millions of people reporting not only adverse events but injuries in the context of the COVID 19 injectable products.

  Note: Rose also reviews the science behind why vaccinated individuals keep on catching COVID-19.

  Edward Dowd then concisely presented the years of work his team has done to quantify just how devastating the vaccines have been for the world.

  “You Can’t Hide the Dead Bodies” – Edward Dowd Testifies on the COVID Jabs

  “One America CEO Scott Davison, in a chamber of commerce meeting, revealed that he had seen 40% excess mortality … for 25 through 64. He said that a 10% increase would be once in a 200-year-flood or… pic.twitter.com/ssxEkIYcEQ

  — The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 26, 2024

  To quote part of Dowd’s testimony:

  When analyzing the excess death human cost…in 2020, there were approximately 458,000 excess deaths, of which 73% were aged 65 and older and 15 to 64 comprising just 27%. However, in 2021, with the rollout of the “safe and effective vaccine,” there were approximately another 500,000 excess deaths, but a mix shift had occurred from older to younger. In 2021, the 65 plus age category was [only] 57…while the 15 to 64 cohort increased to 43%.

  The absolute excess death increase from 2020 to 2021 for the productive working age 15 to 64 was 73% [124,000 to 215,000].

  The total excess death since the rollout of the vaccine in the US, including 21, 22, and 23 is approximately 1,100,000. We estimate the economic cost, productive working age people dying at $15,600,000,000 When analyzing disabilities, it’s interesting to note that there were no excess disabilities in 2020.

  Using the civilian labor force, we have calculated an increase of 2,300,000 individuals with disabilities costing the economy an estimated $77,000,000,000. When analyzing lost work time, which we call injuries, we estimate 28,400,000 individuals are chronically absent resulting in an estimated economic cost of a $135,000,000,000 since 2021…Obviously, the policy cure was undeniably worse than the illness.

  Kevin McKernan then discussed his groundbreaking discovery that there was widespread DNA plasmid contamination of the COVID vaccines and how horrendously the drug regulators have responded to that discovery.

  This work has been replicated by many labs around the world, and now the FDA, the EMA, and even Health Canada, have admitted to this. The regulatory agents have admitted that Pfizer also omitted the SV40 sequences that are in their vaccine. They’ve deemed this contamination to be of little consequence, claiming the DNA is of too little concentration to matter or to be containing DNA of no functional consequence. These statements are false and are not supported by any independent testing by these regulators.

  After the regulators have admitted to being deceived, they asked the opinion of the party that deceived them how bad was the deception. They shockingly believe the answer they were given, which is that these sequences have no relevance to plasmid manufacturing. As someone who has worked on the Human Genome Project manufacturing millions of plasmids, I can assure you that this is an overt lie. DNA contamination can lead to insertional mutagenesis. This is actually declared in Moderna’s own patent regarding the mRNA vaccines.

  This is also supported by Lim et al, which speaks to the rate of spontaneous integration in the genome during transfection. We are using transfection after all with LMPs. The SV40 DNA is in fact functional. It is published as a potent gene therapy tool in a nuclear targeting sequence as described by David Dean et al.

  The SV40 promoter DNA is also known to bind to the tumor suppressor gene known as p53.

  Note: p53 defects are commonly linked to cancers.

  We’ve applied these vaccine system cancer cell lines and have evidence that it enters the cell and can survive several cell divisions. We have preliminary evidence, although this requires replication in other labs, that this DNA can integrate into the genome. We found 2 spike sequence integration events in ovarian cancer cell lines of CAR 3 into chromosome 12 and 19 very recently. Since these vaccines were expected to only contain mRNA, they were never assessed for genotoxicity studies. These studies were therefore being conducted as guinea pig US citizens as we witnessed an unprecedented rise in cancer drug sales since the vaccines rolled out.

  It is time for our representatives to repeal or review the PDUFA Act of 1992.  This act allows regulators to defray the cost of regulation by accepting payments directly from the companies they regulate. Over half of the FDA’s budget is sourced through this act.

  Note: I discussed the significance of the vaccine plasmid contamination in more detail here.

  Dr. David Gortler (who previously served as a senior advisor at the FDA) then explains why the contamination and widespread variability we are seeing in the vaccines (e.g., the hot lots) being completely ignored is so unprecedented:

  Federal rules requiring ingredient transparency date all the way back, believe it or not, to 1862 [and] it’s the whole reason the FDA was started in 1906. Prior to COVIDsRNA injections, the FDA had approved 4 different RNA based products. Onpattro, shown here, was the 1st RNA product approved back in 2018…as you can see by looking at this label, Onpattro prominently details the exact structure, milligram strength, and molecular weight. Highlighted in green at the very top, you’ll see it specifies [what its] lipid nanoparticles are engineered for.

  In contrast to the previous labels I’ve shown, here is the official FDA label for COVID RNA injections. As you can see just looking at it, it details a lot less information. We don’t [even] have the structure.

  Of note, in pharmacology, even very minor deviations in any molecular structure can mean the difference between a drug and a poison…The lack of transparency means that scientists can’t use modeling to test lipid nanoparticles for safety receptor specificity or analyze inequality [in batches of those products].

  Unfortunately, around 70% of the 127 page document that explains the methodology to perform quality control on RNA injections are redacted much like the document I’ve shown here.

  Next Dr. Harvey Risch discusses the “crushingly obsessive push to COVID vaccinate every living person on the planet” and provides a concise overview of the horrific bioweapons industry which gave birth to COVID-19 and then tried to pivot to vaccinating everyone rather than accept responsibility for what it had done.

  Dr. Harvey Risch makes a damning case that the global push to force vaccinate the world was a strategic move to protect the bioweapons industry from scrutiny and justify its existence.

  “So my hypothesis, what I believe, is that both the virus origin cover-up and the forced… pic.twitter.com/7grdLjRh5U

  — The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 26, 2024

  Note: This catastrophic industry is discussed in more detail here (e.g., I highlighted how numerous modern diseases are the results of lab leaks).

  Next, Barbara Loe Fisher, an activist who has spent decades fighting for vaccine safety shared the broader context of what we are now dealing with.

  I worked with parents in congress to secure safety and informed consent provisions in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. It was an historic law, the first official acknowledgment by government that federally licensed and state mandated vaccines can and do injure and kill some children. In January, my eyewitness perspective of how and why child vaccine victims and their parents were betrayed after that law was passed 38 years ago, was featured in a 2 hour conversation I had on the Highwire.

  I encourage everyone to watch it and learn how parents trusted that the 5 years of work we put into that 1986 act to successfully secure life saving, informing, recording, reporting, and research provisions in it, and to protect the legal right of vaccine victims to sue vaccine manufacturers for product design defects, and to sue negligent doctors for medical malpractice, and to create an expedited, more just, less traumatic federal vaccine injury compensation system alternative to a lawsuit were all destroyed by congressional amendments, by federal health agencies, and the US Supreme Court after that law was passed. Following that betrayal of trust, Congress directed federal agencies to create lucrative public private business partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry, a business deal that has broken America’s public health system.

  Note: I previously wrote about how the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act forced the government to create VAERS (as parents had no way to report vaccine injuries) and ever since that time, the government has done everything it could to undermine VAERS.

  Johnson then shares a poignant observation with Fisher that illustrates how effectively the pharmaceutical industry has bought out our media:

  By the way,I became aware of you from that excellent documentary which I would also recommend. What struck me about [it] is back then in 1982 through 1986, you could talk about these things. You could advocate for your child who’s vaccine injured.  You weren’t ostracized. You were actually welcomed here in the senate by people like Senator Hatch and Senator Kennedy and you got this [law] signed by Ronald Reagan.

  To which Fisher replies:

  I never imagined when I began this work in 1982 that the day would come when I would not be able to exercise freedom of thought and conscience in the country I love. And I thank you for allowing me to exercise that right today.

  Next, Bryan Hooker, the parent of a severely vaccine injured adult son shares his 23 years of work (e.g., 15 peer-reviewed papers) to get the data on vaccine injury the CDC has been hiding for decades.

  “For every one child that is saved from death from COVID-19, there are 30 child deaths associated with the COVID-19 vaccine.”

  Dr. Brian Hooker testifies against lack of oversight on ALL vaccines.

  Study Comparing Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children (2020):

  • Vaccinated… pic.twitter.com/ynAeZaIzfX

  — The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 26, 2024

  In 1962, children received 5 vaccine doses, and in 1986, the schedule expanded to 25 doses of 5 different vaccine formulations. Shortly after the passage of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, the law was amended to essentially erect a liability shield protecting vaccine manufacturers, and the schedule expanded dramatically. By 2023, 73 doses of 16 different vaccine formulations were given to children up to age 18. [As we discovered through lawsuits] the FDA approved these formulations individually only with minimal and inadequate safety testing, and the CDC has never tested the cumulative effect of the vaccine schedule on childhood health outcomes.

  Since [proper trials] are really the only way to establish that a pharmaceutical product is safe, it is misinformation to state that the vaccines are safe.

  However, independent researchers have assessed the outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children.

  This [study] demonstrates that vaccinated children were at least twice as likely to be diagnosed with developmental delays, ear infections, and gastrointestinal disorders.

  [In this study] a control group of over 1800 unvaccinated children recruited from 46 different states in the US were compared to the national average rates of the listed disorders…For each of the autoimmune, neurodevelopmental, and other disorders considered, the unvaccinated group fares much better with incidence rates between 4-20 times lower than their vaccinated counterparts.

  The CDC has a database called the vaccine safety data link. It’s over 10,000,000 individuals with 2,000,000 children from 10 participating HMOs.  I would say that within that database, there were at least 10,000 unvaccinated children that can be studied.

  Neither do they they publish the results [discovered from that data], nor do they let any independent scientist in to look at that information. [That’s] because [they know] the bloated vaccination schedule is responsible is in part responsible for the epidemic of chronic disorders that we see in children in the United States.

  Note: Hooker also discusses the evidence the COVID-19 vaccine harms children (e.g., that it appears to kill 30 children for each child it saves from COVID and has given many of our children myocarditis).

  Next, Del Bigtree discusses the decade of work he and the non-profit ICAN have conducted to get that data from the government:

  In his talk, he puts the results of a recent study which monitored 99 million people for 45 days post vaccination into context. It found that their risk for a variety of severe conditions increased by 2-7 times, something which quickly adds up as you when consider how many of those “rare” conditions exist (that often take more than 45 days to appear) and how many vaccines they’ve received. These results is turn sheds a light on exactly what’s been happening to our children.

  Every one of the childhood vaccines has a similar [lengthy] list of [severe] side effects. Though they are considered rare, how rare is it when you multiply roughly 50 potential side effects 72 times, which is the total number of doses given to a child by the time they’re 18. The revelations from the recent study of the COVID vaccine explains what we have been saying for years. Vaccines are not completely safe, and [though] those side effects are rare. What happens when you add them altogether?

  Bigtree then shows this slide (which references this study and this study):

  

  Next, Dr. Sabine Hazan shared how her [self-funded] research to evaluate the use of existing therapies to treat COVID-19 was blocked by the FDA, her discovery that the severity of COVID-19 was directly linked to a loss of bifidobacteria in the gut and that the vaccine also caused a loss of bifidobacteria in the gut.  She then contrasted this to how previous research she did (which supported the pharmaceutical industry) never ran into similar road blocks.
  Note: I synopsized that research here.

  Pierre Kory then discussed the lengthy number of mechanisms which are in place to ensure that repurposed (off-patent) drugs can never have enough evidence to be acknowledged as treatments for a disease someone is profiting off of.

  Ivermectin is often recognized–2nd to penicillin–for having the greatest impact on human health. Its discovery even won the Nobel Prize.

  But propagandists told you it was “horse dewormer.”

  Out of 43 effective medicines for COVID, the ones approved had something in common: They… pic.twitter.com/jhk0dV4WkY

  — The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 27, 2024

  Note: this talk has already been seen by over 1.6 million people on Twitter.

  Next, Christian Perron MD PhD (former chairman of the WHO’s committee on vaccines and communicable diseases) recounted how early in the pandemic, he completed a study which showed hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin dramatically lowered the death rate from COVID-19. A political backlash forced the withdraw of his study and he was fired from his 26 year professorship.

  Before long France then banned the use of hydroxychloroquine and began enacting harsher and harsher sanctions against French dissidents like Perron who tried to tell the truth—eventually forcing Perron to publish in a French newspaper which had originally been created to defy the Nazis (as every other publication censored him).

  Perron was followed by Raphael Lataster PhD, who is one of the leading researchers working with the BMJ (one of the top 5 medical journals) to expose the fraud within the COVID vaccine trials:

  These [abhorrent] policies [e.g., the vaccine mandates] were justified via claims about the vaccine’s effectiveness and safety. Now recent research published in major medical journals reveals that these claims were highly exaggerated…we have found in the studies varying definitions of fully vaccinated and unvaccinated. And, generally, what we find with the term fully vaccinated is that they are ignoring COVID cases, COVID infections, in the partially vaccinated…that effect was found to be up to 48% using data from Pfizer’s trial as an example.

  We can’t be sure what the actual exaggeration is because we aren’t supplied with all the data. So it’s impossible to actually know. But it looks like there are huge exaggerations of effectiveness because of what you could call manipulation of the data. So if these [omitted COVID cases] were included, or if even just some of these were included, we could have an effectiveness of the vaccines of around 10%…[which]is well below the 50% required for approval. Furthermore, looking to safety in the clinical trials, adverse effect counting windows are again incredibly short.

  Note: Lataster also discusses many of the safety issues with the vaccines that were demonstrated within the trial data but hidden from the public (e.g., that the vaccines have a significant risk of myocarditis) and states “now Pfizer also admits that they’re still trying, this is a quote ‘to determine if Cominati is safe and effective and if there is a myocarditispericarditis association that should be noted’. That’s on clinicaltrials.gov still right now. They’re trying to find out if it’s safe and effective right now.”

  Award winning investigative journalist Lara Logan then provides a poignant summary of how her profession has been hijacked by the government and how a variety of shadowy organizations now enforce this vast propaganda apparatus.  This was the most compelling part of her talk:

  Lara Logan Highlights How Facebook and Google Are Not Too Dissimilar from Stalin and Hitler

  “Companies like Facebook, Instagram, and Google, as you have heard many times today, have been allowed to amass monopoly power. And as a result, they not only reach billions of people… pic.twitter.com/4USaO29Bo9

  — The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 27, 2024

  Note: Her testimony was followed by one from Jason Christoff, a propaganda expert, who explained why flooding the population with a single narrative and way of thinking has caused many people to adopt completely dysfunctional beliefs at odds with everything they’d held dear

  They were then followed by Rodney Palmer, who was a Canadian journalist for 20 years, sharing his perspectives on the current state of the media.

  If the news reporters did their jobs instead of reporting propaganda, this fraud would have been exposed from the outset.

  Censorship is what actually caused these deaths. It was the lie that assured us it was safe when it wasn’t, and it still isn’t

  In America, it’s much worse. The vaccine companies are allowed to sponsor the news directly…To a visiting Canadian, the news here looks like one big ad for pharmaceutical products. It’s a bit of a culture shock when you turn on the TV. There wouldn’t even be a US newscast without Pharma ads. So the reporters on your newscasts are all conflicted.

  They can’t bite the hand that feeds them. They can’t possibly investigate the most important stories of our time.

  It appears that the reporters are actually colluding with their sponsors to break FDA advertising laws.  FDA law requires them to conspicuously describe the known risks of any pharmaceutical product [which news anchors promoting vaccines never do.

  The good news is no one believes the TV news anymore. Only 15% of Canadians, 15%, are getting the boosters.

  [The media has] now canceled lunchtime news hours. It’s canceled weekend newscasts. After these reporters are laid off, we’ll only be left with the trusted favor of the trusted faces of our favorite news anchors, delivering the propaganda of the day, instead of the news of the day. But when those trusted faces are telling us lies, they’re like a super weapon aimed directly at us. The news anchors are now the finger on the trigger in that game of Russian roulette.

  When the news is poisoned, so is Democracy…most every other country is letting this happen, but where goes America, so goes the world. You have a unique role in setting the moral tone for Western democracies.

  So I respectfully recommend that the senate investigate the role of American television news networks, including with pharmaceutical advertisers to skirt the FDA laws that require them to declare the known risks of a pharmaceutical product. This investigation should extend to any reporters, news anchors, editors, and executives who lied to their audience about the safety of the COVID vaccines.

  Note: Palmer also describes how he gradually saw the corrupting influence of the pharmaceutical industry enter Canada’s media over the last decade. One of the most compelling observations he shared was that during the pandemic, the doctors who spoke on television didn’t talk like doctors but instead appeared to have corporate media training, which he took as an early sign a lengthy PR campaign was being enacted to sell as many vaccines as possible.

  Next, Matthias Desmet provided a concise summary of the crowd psychology which explained how it was possible for so many people to refuse to see what was being hidden from them, even thing after thing happened which made it clear we were all being lied to:

  Note: I recently completed an article relating Desmet’s work on crowd psychology to how individuals commonly become trapped in cults and dangerous spiritual practices.

  Brett Weinstein then describes the institutional breakdown gripping our society and the malicious forces which are taking away each thing we had previously depended upon for truth and justice (e.g., our premier scientific apparatus).  I wanted to quote one exchange he had with Johnson:

  [Johnson] Now I kind of want to ask you, I describe my eyes being opened up, certainly during COVID to a number of things…Can you just describe your [red pill] journey here?

  [Weinstein] Well, I think we are all on a similar journey. I did not think that I was naive 7 years ago, and then I learned that I had been very naive and I keep learning that lesson. Each new discovery reveals that I was missing something that was right in front of me, and I think that’s actually the hallmark of the exact pattern I’m describing.

  Canadian Randy Hillier served in Ontario’s parliament for 15 years and was the first member to publicly oppose his government’s response to COVID. Like Canada’s citizens, Hillier was targeted by the government for doing so, and argues we are at the tip of a slippery slope with this.  In this part of his testimony, he shares how Ontario’s leadership told him they made the decision to continually coverup the damage of the COVID policies because they felt the political consequences would be too severe if they admitted their mistakes:

  Next, Dr. Sorin Titus Muncaciu shared his experience as a Romanian member of parliament who watched the central authorities use every tool at their disposal to forcefully vaccinate Romania.

  We are a party having probably 10% of the votes we got in the parliament in 2020, and we, from the very beginning of this pandemic, we decided that the rights of the people to decide if they accept, or [do not accept receiving] an experimental drug should be respected.

  When the European Union started behaving like the USSR with those commissars coming to us and mister Barnier came to Romania. This gentleman was the commissioner for internal affairs of the European Union and pushed us, pushed the Romanian parliament to vote [for COVID vaccine mandates].

  But in Romania the problem they face is that we are 40 years after a communist dictatorship, 30, 34 years after a communist dictatorship. And it’s in our genes to distrust the government because we knew every time a communist government is saying anything or is directing anything, we knew that’s a lie, that’s something that we should not trust or we should not follow.

  We did everything in the book that we could to stop that and we stopped it. And, as a consequence to that, the Romanian rate of vaccination was probably less than half of what the other European countries experienced or United States, Canada and Australia [experienced]. And, therefore we can compare now the low rate and the excess mortality. And that’s the best proof I can bring to the table is the fact that having a relationship between a low rate of vaccination and low excess mortality, which is right there you see it on the, Romania is the last country on the right which means we have negative excess mortality while all the other countries in Europe have positive excess mortality.

  Rob Roos (a European member of Parliament) and Phillip Kruse (a lawyer) then discussed who actually funds the WHO and the disastrous treaty it is trying to sneak through which will force everyone to comply with the pandemic cartel and silence anyone who challenges their next pandemic response.

  Note: I discussed this treaty and the grass roots effort to stop it in more detail here. I consider that article to be one of the most important articles I’ve published on Substack.

  Finally, Ryan Cole concluded the talk by discussing how he was punished for speaking out, how everything which happened throughout the pandemic has violated our fundamental constitutional rights and how critical it is for us to reclaim what our Founding Fathers fought for.

  Dr. Ryan Cole Delivers Impassioned Testimony: “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!”

  🔥🔥🔥

  “When I became a physician, I did not give up my constitutional rights, the right to freedom of speech enumerated in the First Amendment.”

  “The censorship we’ve endured, the gaslighting,… pic.twitter.com/fwCR7VLcan

  — The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 27, 2024

  Note: for anyone considering being a whistleblower, Johnson requested for you to contact his office here.

  Conclusion

  Since Johnson packed this presentation with so many impactful points, it was quite hard to decide which was the best one to conclude it with. Eventually however, I settled on this one, which while brief, I believe is the critically important message all Americans can agree with:

  It is remarkable how much each successive panel Johnson has hosted has improved upon the one which preceded it. I consider this to be both a product of how dedicated each participant has been to fixing this mess and how much the alternative media has facilitated the production of high quality information that has rapidly unravelled the immensely complex web we were trapped within.

  Without each of your supporting the wonderful community of dissident authors on Substack, much of this would likely have never happened, and I thank each of you from the bottom of my heart for giving me the opportunity to be part of it.

  Lastly, if you have anyone close to you who is on the fence about the vaccines, please consider sharing this article or a video of Johnson’s panel with them; it’s something than can persuade people who are at last beginning to become open to hearing the truth and we have reached the moment where it is critical for the truth to reach as many people as possible.

  The Forgotten Side of Medicine is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 23:00

• Details Of 'Sabotaged' Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal In First Months Of War Revealed
  Details Of ‘Sabotaged’ Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal In First Months Of War Revealed

  The Wall Street says it has gotten its hands on a secretive document revealing the details of a failed Ukraine-Russia peace deal that was on the table within the opening months of the war. Since then there have been several reports, including from Foreign Affairs which said the UK at the time sought to sabotage the deal.

  The draft peace treaty was drawn up by negotiators from both sides in April 2022, and reveals the thinking and objectives of Moscow at the time. The 17-page document has never been made public, with the WSJ for the first time on Friday divulging key sections and points.

  Dated April 15, 2022, the document is said to lay out an agreement that turns Ukraine into a “permanently neutral state that doesn’t participate in military blocs”. It further stipulated that Ukraine must not build up its military using Western support and that Crimea must remain under Russian control.

  

  The WSJ analysis admits that there were some deep concessions on the table from the Ukraine side, and further underscores many of these things would likely remain in place in any future deal where Ukraine would no doubt be inflicted with even more compromises given its forces are currently being rolled back by superior Russian military might.

  “The draft treaty states that Ukraine, while being allowed to pursue European Union membership, wouldn’t be allowed to join military alliances such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization,” according to the report. “No foreign weapons would be allowed on Ukrainian soil.”

  And importantly, “Ukraine’s military would be pared down to a specific size.” The proposed deal even sought to impose permanent limitations on the Ukraine armed forces’ troop numbers: “Russia sought to limit everything from the number of troops and tanks to the maximum firing range of Ukrainian missiles.”

  Another key point dealt with the role of the Russian language in Ukrainian society. Some two-thirds of the country at least knows Russian, while much of the eastern portion that includes the Donbas speaks Russian as their first language. The document reportedly sought to ensure the Russian language had an equal status in Ukrainian government ministries and in courts. The Zelensky government has since the war’s start sought to aggressively limit and even stamp out Russian in the public sphere.

  According to more context of the draft deal from the WSJ:

  The future of the area of eastern Ukraine covertly invaded and occupied by Russia in 2014, wasn’t included in the draft, leaving it up to Putin and Zelensky to complete in face-to-face talks. That meeting never took place.

  The treaty was to be guaranteed by foreign powers, which are listed on the document as including the U.S., U.K, China, France and Russia. Those countries would be given the responsibility to defend Ukraine’s neutrality if the treaty were violated. But while the treaty held, guarantors would be required to “terminate international treaties and agreements incompatible with the permanent neutrality of Ukraine” including any promises of bilateral military aid. The international security guarantees wouldn’t apply to Crimea and Sevastopol.

  Negotiations stopped completely by June of that year, and there were widespread reports months after indicating that UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson encouraged Zelensky not to make a deal with Moscow.

  Meanwhile, entering the third year of this horrific and tragic conflict which has taken countless lives:

  “Ukraine will join NATO. It is not a question of if, but when,” Jens Stoltenberg, secretary general of NATO, said. pic.twitter.com/WLbyNS8TL3

  — DW News (@dwnews) February 24, 2024

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

  Hundreds of billions in arms and funding have since been poured into Kiev and its war effort, and tragically likely hundreds of thousands have died. So much death and destruction could have been averted if an early deal had been reached and held, and backed by external powers.

  The WSJ gives specifics on troop limitations from the 17-page document in the following: 

  The draft treaty with Ukraine included banning foreign weapons, “including missile weapons of any type, armed forces and formations.” Moscow wanted Ukraine’s armed forces capped at 85,000 troops, 342 tanks and 519 artillery pieces. Ukrainian negotiators wanted 250,000 troops, 800 tanks and 1,900 artillery pieces, according to the document. Russia wanted to have the range of Ukrainian missiles capped at 40 kilometers (about 25 miles). 

  But Ukraine is now likely in for more severe restrictions on any future Ukrainian state and military, should there ever be a negotiation for the end of the war reached (assuming Moscow and NATO don’t stumble into direct war by then).

  Bloomberg on Thursday issued a report predicting total collapse of the Ukrainian front lines by summer, as the headline suggests (Ukraine Sees Risk of Russia Breaking Through Defenses by Summer): “Ukrainian officials are concerned that Russian advances could gain significant momentum by the summer unless their allies can increase the supply of ammunition, according to a person familiar with their analysis,” the report said. Will peace settlement talks begin at that point, or will the West intervene even more forcefully? 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 22:40

• Third-Party Candidates Will Swing The Election
  Third-Party Candidates Will Swing The Election

  Authored by James Rickards via DailyReckoning.com,

  Although my focus is on markets rather than politics, it’s impossible to forecast markets without understanding what’s going on in the political realm. While there are important Senate and House races this year, all eyes are focused on the presidential race likely (as of now) to be between Joe Biden and Donald Trump.

  A Trump vs. Biden (if he makes it) replay of the 2020 election could be close and is difficult to predict this far in advance. But we can say that the simple narrative of Trump vs. Biden does not come close to capturing the complexities of what’s ahead.

  In the first place, Biden may not even be the Democratic nominee because of his obvious physical and mental disabilities. I’ll save the Biden story for another day. For now, let’s look at the other wild card affecting the 2024 election — the role of third parties.

  Most observers disregard third-party candidates. They typically get 1–2% of the vote, don’t come close to winning individual states and have no impact on the final electoral results. That’s true, but there are some important historical exceptions.

  To understand the potential impact of third parties and get a preview of what might happen this year, we need to look at three critical elections. In reverse chronological order, they are 1992, 1968 and 1912.

  

  In 1992, Ross Perot won about 19% of the popular vote (that’s huge for a third-party candidate) but he won no states. Still, his impact on the final result was enormous. Perot was an early version of “America First.” He leaned conservative, although he had unconventional views on a number of policy issues. On balance, he took more votes from George H.W. Bush than he did from Bill Clinton.

  In the end, Clinton won with 43% of the vote and carried 32 states (plus D.C.) compared to 37.5% of the vote and 18 states for George H.W. Bush. But if Perot’s 18.9% of the vote were divided two-thirds for Bush and one-third for Clinton (as some analysts suggest), Bush might easily have won several more states.

  Moving those electoral votes from the Clinton column to the Bush column would have changed the outcome of the election. Perot marked the downfall of Bush’s chances for a second term.

  In 1968, George Wallace as a third-party candidate actually did win five states (Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia) and got 46 electoral votes. But that was not enough to stop Nixon, who won 32 states and got 301 electoral votes.

  The key to Nixon’s victory was the dismal performance of Hubert Humphrey, who won only 13 states (plus D.C.) and got 191 electoral votes. The popular vote was much closer, 43.4% for Nixon and 42.7% for Humphrey, but the popular vote doesn’t count; it’s the electoral vote that decides elections. The lesson of 1968 is that even when a third-party wins states, it does not necessarily stop a major party candidate from winning the election outright.

  An even more interesting case is 1912. This election involved Woodrow Wilson (Democrat), William Taft (Republican) and Teddy Roosevelt (Bull Moose). Roosevelt had been president from 1901–1909 but stepped aside in 1909 to allow Taft to succeed him.

  In 1912, Roosevelt challenged Taft for the Republican nomination but lost. At that point, Roosevelt formed his new Bull Moose third party and ran in the general election.

  Wilson got 40 states and 435 electoral votes, a landslide. Roosevelt actually ran ahead of Taft. TR got six states and 88 electoral votes. Taft finished third with two states and 8 electoral votes. (A fourth candidate, Eugene V. Debs, got 6% of the vote and no states running as a socialist.)

  The dynamic was also interesting. Roosevelt and Taft split the Republican vote about evenly, 27.4% for TR and 23.2% for Taft. Together, the Republicans had 50.6% of the vote, probably enough to win.

  Wilson got only 41.8% of the popular vote, but that was way ahead of TR and Taft when taken individually, so he won 40 states. The lesson of that election is when a major party feuds with itself, the other party wins big.

  So 1968 and 1912 are both cases in which a third party won a number of states (five for Wallace, six for Roosevelt), but still not enough to prevent a major party candidate from getting to 270 (depending on the year) electoral votes or much higher (Nixon was 301 and Wilson was 435). The 1992 election was one where the third party (Perot) won no states, but probably did change the outcome of the election in favor of Clinton.

  The 2024 election with third-party candidates looks like a blend of all three elections: 1992, 1968 and 1912.

  The third-party candidates running (so far) include Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Cornel West and Jill Stein.

  RFK Jr. is attempting to get on the ballot in key states on his own but may abandon that effort and become the Libertarian Party candidate. The Libertarian Party is already on the ballot in almost every state. The candidate and the party are in discussions and an announcement is expected in March.

  

  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is being attacked by the media as a “fringe” candidate. In fact, he is one of the most thoughtful and truthful voices in politics today. Those qualities may transcend voter disagreement with particular policies.

  Jill Stein is running as the Green Party candidate and will be on the ballot in almost every state. She is not expected to win more than about 2% of the vote, but in certain states, 2% is enough to tip the election if the Green vote comes from Biden. This happened in 2016 when the Jill Stein vote in Wisconsin may have cost Hillary Clinton that state in a contest decided by less than 1% of the vote.

  Cornel West has not set up his own party yet but is endeavoring to get on the ballot in key states as RFK Jr. is. West is a socialist but is highly articulate and charismatic and will make a strong candidate. His efforts would also cost Biden votes in some key states.

  Finally, there is the No Labels Party. They have been spending millions of dollars to get on the ballot in all 50 states. They have not announced a candidate yet, but they are in discussions about a fusion ticket that would include Democrat Joe Manchin and Republican Jon Huntsman (though Manchin has announced he won’t run).

  The idea would be to run down the middle that considers Trump too radical and Biden too senile. I don’t expect No Labels to win any states, but they will peel votes away from Biden, handing states to Trump. That could form the basis for a Trump electoral vote landslide similar to Wilson’s in 1912.

  The third parties combined — No Labels, RFK Jr., Libertarian, Cornel West and Jill Stein — could collectively take upwards of 20% of the vote like Perot in 1992. But they will principally take votes from the Democrats, the reverse of what TR did to Taft in 1912.

  This would guarantee a landslide victory for Trump like Nixon in 1968.

  It’s impossible to predict exactly how events will unfold. But it’s not difficult to see a wild election season with six credible parties fighting state-by-state and confounding the customary polls and pundits.

  Prepare for electoral and market volatility ahead.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 22:20

• Why Are We Still Reliant On China For Our Biosecurity?
  Why Are We Still Reliant On China For Our Biosecurity?

  Authored by Matthew Turpin via RealClear Wire,

  The reports out of China arrived just before Thanksgiving. A surge in respiratory infections among children in the northern part of the country triggered a sense of foreboding — and Deja-vu. Meetings between the World Health Organization and Chinese officials quickly followed.

  

  The WHO’s conclusions brought some relief. The surge was caused by an “immunity gap” in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, wherein children had few defenses against influenza and other respiratory infections after years of quarantine.

  This episode should be a wake-up call for the U.S. national security establishment. We remain reliant on other nations, including countries of concern, like China, for critical intelligence needed to defend against biological dangers — whether naturally occurring, mistakenly released, or purposefully engineered. 

  That needs to change. It starts with expanded investment in the technological infrastructure that can monitor for and detect dangerous pathogens that could devastate our nation and economy.

  Since COVID-19, we’ve all become familiar with the risk posed by novel infectious diseases with pandemic potential. Just 30,000 base pairs of RNA — roughly one one-hundred-thousandth as many as the human genome contains — managed to shut down our planet.  

  And, as we know from our experience with the last pandemic, time is essential to stopping the spread and minimizing danger to people. We need a strategy for the rapid identification and understanding of emerging threats, as well as timely countermeasures once a threat has been intercepted.

  A sophisticated bio surveillance or “bio radar” network would include collection points where pathogens are most at risk of emerging or being identified as threats — including airports, borders, conflict zones, labs, and farms. Once bio radar systems leveraging DNA sequencing have detected a threat, we can create a digital fingerprint of the suspect pathogen’s genetic material and begin analyzing the level of risk and mitigation options. This creates true bio intelligence, or BIOINT.

  Artificial intelligence tuned to biological information like this can quickly begin analyzing the data collected from bio radar systems. And by learning to “speak DNA” the way chatbots can speak English, AI has the potential to identify anomalies and quickly inform development of genomic-informed countermeasures.

  Today, nodes in this bio radar network are already at work. We just need to connect the dots of this biosecurity infrastructure and expand its scale.

  Take the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Traveler-based Genomic Surveillance program, which swabs international travelers arriving at various international airports. In August 2023, the Dulles International Airport location outside Washington D.C. flagged a sample from a U.S. resident returning from a multi-week trip to Japan. Analysis revealed that the traveler was carrying a new SARS-CoV-2 variant. After sequencing the variant, American authorities notified their counterparts in Japan.

  This same program identified the Omicron variant when it first arrived in the United States 43 days before it showed up in a clinical setting. 

  In other words, existing bio surveillance tools can find dangerous or novel pathogens before we would otherwise know they exist.

  Acting on that information in a timely fashion could help save lives — or even eliminate outbreaks or biological threats. Despite the lag in receiving information on SARS-CoV-2 from China, it didn’t take long for scientists to develop mRNA vaccine candidates against COVID-19 that proved effective.

  In its 2023 Biodefense Posture Review, the U.S. Department of Defense singles out four nations — North Korea, Russia, Iran, and the People’s Republic of China — as either having active offensive bioweapons programs or developing concerning dual-use capabilities in this area.

  We should assume that countries the United States considers adversaries are already at work on genetically engineered pathogens and other violations of the Biological Weapons Convention. 

  And yet, public health experts have consistently downplayed biothreats. The United Nations characterizes COVID-19 as a “once-in-a-lifetime pandemic”and the New England Journal of Medicine labels it a “once-in-a-century” event.

  Biothreats are a much more immediate danger. They’re potentially more catastrophic than most other risks. We build early-warning systems for hurricanes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters. We build them for missile launches and the transport of nuclear material. The public and private sectors spend billions each year on cybersecurity. Why isn’t there a similar urgency about biosecurity?

  There’s no time to waste in addressing this truly neglected dimension of global security. We should be building a sophisticated bio radar, bio intelligence, and biosecurity system now before the next pandemic — engineered or otherwise — is at our doorstep.

  Matthew Turpin is a senior counselor at Palantir Technologies and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution specializing in U.S. policy towards the People’s Republic of China. From 2018 to 2019, Turpin served as the U.S. National Security Council’s Director for China and the Senior Advisor on China to the Secretary of Commerce.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 21:40

• Biden Wants G7 To Give Russian Central Bank Funds To Ukraine, But France Resists
  Biden Wants G7 To Give Russian Central Bank Funds To Ukraine, But France Resists

  President Biden wants the G7 countries to develop a plan to eventually have Russia’s frozen sovereign assets handed over Ukraine in order to support the war effort, Bloomberg has reported. Bloomberg’s source have also said the US president has privately warned allies that Ukraine’s collapse, and a Russian victory, would signify the international order is effectively destroyed for at least the next half-century.

  “G-7 officials have been discussing options to use the $280 billion of immobilized Russian Central Bank assets, including using the money as collateral to raise debt or issuing guarantees against the frozen funds, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity,” according to the report. Biden reportedly wants a firm plan proposed by the time of the Italy G7 summit in June. The US has been working behind the scenes to build consensus.

  

  The UK and Canada are reportedly on board, but not Germany and France. Earlier this week France firmly voiced its rejection of seizing the frozen Russian bank funds.

  “We don’t think this legal basis is sufficient,” French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said after the G7 finance ministers meeting in Brazil on Wednesday.

  “This legal basis must be accepted not only by the European countries, not only by the G7 countries, but by all the member states of the world community, and I mean by all the member states of the G20. We should not add any kind of division among the G20 countries.”

  Opponents, including of course Russian officials themselves, have highlighted that such a act would be outright and brazen theft.

  Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov has warned in response, “We have ways to respond. We have also frozen sufficient volumes of financial assets and investments of foreign investors in our securities, all of which transfers we carry out for the owners of our securities.”

  Europe has to agree to any US push to freeze banks funds, since the bulk of Russia’s money – about $200 billion – is being held by European banks. In such a scenario Moscow may consider the ‘theft’ to be tantamount to an act of war.

  Still, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen was undeterred when she was in Brazil this week. “It is necessary and urgent for our coalition to find a way to unlock the value of these immobilized assets to support Ukraine’s continued resistance and long-term reconstruction,” she had said from Sao Paulo, speaking to 20 finance ministers and central bank governors.

  “I believe there is a strong international law, economic, and moral case for moving forward. This would be a decisive response to Russia’s unprecedented threat to global stability,” she added.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 21:20

• X Users Didn't Like A Paper's Tone And Findings, So They Got It Rejected
  X Users Didn’t Like A Paper’s Tone And Findings, So They Got It Rejected

  Authored by Ross Pomeroy via RealClear Wire,

  At Frontiers in Psychology, it seems that users on X are now part of the peer review process.

  

  On January 4th, the paper “Meta-analysis: On average, undergraduate students’ intelligence is merely average,” was accepted to the journal. That same day, the abstract was published with the notice that the “final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.”

  Soon thereafter, the paper went viral, quickly accruing over 54,000 views, wide discussion on X and Reddit, and coverage in popular media (including RCS). It garnered this attention for its intriguing yet simultaneously obvious finding: over the past 80 years, as a far greater proportion of North Americans attended college, the average IQ of college undergraduates dropped from around 120 to 102, just slightly above the average of 100.

  As the authors, Bob Uttl, a psychologist and faculty member at Mount Royal University, and his students Victoria Violo and Lacey Gibson, noted, “The decline in students’ IQ is a necessary consequence of increasing educational attainment over the last 80 years. Today, graduating from university is more common than completing high school in the 1940s.” College students no longer come solely from the ranks of the highly intelligent and privileged, they come from all corners of society. Uttl and his colleagues noted that this has implications. For example, academic standards and curricula might have to be adjusted. Moreover, employers can’t assume that applicants with university degrees are more capable or smarter than those without degrees.

  A little over a month after Uttl, Violo, and Gibson’s paper was accepted and the abstract published, they were abruptly notified by email that it was rejected. They were apprised that Specialty Chief Editor Eddy Davelaar, a Professor of Psychology and Applied Neuroscience at Birkbeck, University of London, overrode the three peer reviewers who approved the paper and even his own handling editor. His reasons were subsequently forwarded to Uttl and his colleagues.

  While Davelaar raised a couple of issues with the paper’s methods, the vast majority of his focus was on its tone. He wrote that the use of the word “merely” in reference to college students’ just-above-average IQ was “demeaning.” He also noted that the authors’ critiques of other scientists’ works “could have been packaged more sensitively.” He also called unfounded the authors’ opinion that the widening participation policies of universities were the cause of undergraduates’ falling IQs.

  In emails viewed by RealClearScience, Uttl extensively refuted Davelaar’s issues the same day the paper was rejected (Feb. 6), to which he received no reply from Davelaar or Frontiers for six days. On February 12, Frontiers replied saying that Davelaar’s concerns remained. If they were addressed, “the manuscript could be reconsidered for publication.”

  Uttl subsequently published his refutations of Davelaar’s methodological criticisms online. Lending strength to his arguments is that fact that three peer reviewers and even Davelaar’s own handling editor did not find fault with Uttl’s paper.

  Davelaar’s problems with the paper’s tone and conclusions were harder to address, because they were his opinions. It seemed strange that an editor’s opinions should supplant those of the paper’s authors. It’s not his paper, after all.

  In response to a request for comment, Frontiers stated that an article can be rejected at any stage before official publication. A public relations manager then quoted their editorial process, “…if a manuscript does not meet our editorial criteria and standards for publication, or if peer-review or research integrity concerns are raised by any review participant or reader (abstracts are published online ahead of official publication), the journal’s chief editors and Frontiers’ Chief Executive Editor will investigate these concerns, regardless of peer review or acceptance stage.”

  Frontiers added:

  The Speciality Chief Editor (SCE) reviewed the paper in line with our clearly stated editorial process when concerns were raised about the abstract, particularly about underlying bias. The SCE assessment concurred with some reviewers’ judgements, identifying substantive flaws in the meta-analysis and bias in the tone of the paper. The authors were given further opportunities to revise the paper in line with reviewer and SCE comments. These requested revisions were not made but once again disputed. 

  RealClearScience reached out directly to Davelaar for comment, but he has not replied.

  Uttl was curious what brought on the sudden rejection of his already accepted paper, so he asked representatives at Frontiers. He was told that “several posts” on X triggered Dr. Davelaar’s review. As readers were only able to view the abstract, and thus weren’t able to assess the authors’ methodology, it seems clear that they complained purely about the authors’ tone and provocative conclusions. Davelaar only found ‘problems’ with Uttl, Violo, and Gibson’s methods afterwards.

  Uttl and his co-authors were not apprised of the content of the X posts.

  “I think an editor or whoever owes it to us to tell us what the issues are, allows us to respond, before rejection,” he told RCS in an email.

  Uttl, Violo, and Gibson have since had their publication fees refunded and have submitted the paper for publication at another journal.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 21:00

• Teamsters, Anheuser-Busch Reach New 5-Year Contract
  Teamsters, Anheuser-Busch Reach New 5-Year Contract

  By John Kingston of Freightwaves

  The contract agreement reached this week between the Teamsters union and Anheuser-Busch, averting a strike that could have begun Friday, calls for wage increases of $8 an hour over the five years of the deal. A $4-per-hour raise kicks in immediately.

  

  Anheuser-Busch announced the deal late Wednesday. It awaits ratification in the coming days by approximately 5,000 workers across the company’s U.S. operations. 

  The new contract also calls for a $2,500 ratification bonus.

  As to whether ratification is likely, any worker dissatisfaction with Teamsters contracts generally shows up through the dissident Teamsters for a Democratic Union (TDU), which is often critical of deals struck by the union’s negotiators. However, TDU notably was supportive of the union’s deal with UPS and more recently backed a new contract at U.S. Foods.

  TDU comments on its website regarding the deal at Anheuser-Busch were noncommittal. It noted the length of the deal, the wage increases and other changes in benefits, and said only that Teamsters members at the brewery would “be able to review all contract changes before the ratification vote, which is expected to be held next week.”

  The breakdown of how many of those 5,000 workers are truck drivers and warehouse employees was not immediately available from the union.

  In its prepared statement announcing the contract agreement, Anheuser-Busch said the deal “builds even further upon our existing industry-leading package of wages, healthcare, and retirement benefits, and it includes significant commitments to job security.”

  “At Anheuser-Busch, we have said time and again that our people are our greatest strength, and we are incredibly pleased to have reached a tentative agreement that continues to recognize the talent, dedication, and hard work of our teams, while also positioning the Company for long-term success,” Brendan Whitworth, CEO of  Anheuser-Busch, said in the statement.

  The Teamsters statement on the deal was more detailed. In its bullet point list of provisions in the contract, the union said that besides the hourly wage increases, the pact provides:

  • –“Significant job security for all 5,000 Teamsters at Anheuser-Busch, including brewers, packagers, and warehouse workers.”
  • –An average wage increase of 23% over the five years of the deal.
  • –“An end to two-tier health care, providing all workers with the same high-quality Teamsters health care coverage.”
  • –“Increased pension contributions and benefits nationwide.”
  • –“Increased maximum vacation accrual to 8 paid weeks.”
  • –“Restoration of retirement benefits for active and retired members.”

  The Teamsters are on strike at a brewery operated by Molson Coors (NYSE: TAP) in Fort Worth, Texas. Teamsters President Sean O’Brien, celebrating the contract with Anheuser-Busch, noted that the union “continue[s] to hold the line at Molson Coors in Texas.” That company, O’Brien said, “should pay close attention to the bar we’ve set today for brewery workers across the country.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 20:40

• Sanction Irony: Trade Between Iran And Russia Soars As SWIFT Circumvented
  Sanction Irony: Trade Between Iran And Russia Soars As SWIFT Circumvented

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  Russia and Iran developed a way to avoid the US dollar routing system known as SWIFT, Trade between the nations is booming.

  

  Image from US Institute for Peace – The Iran Primer.

  What is the SWIFT Banking System?

  Investopedia explains: The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) system powers most international money and security transfers. SWIFT is a vast messaging network used by financial institutions to quickly, accurately, and securely send and receive information, such as money transfer instructions.

  Most global transitions touch SWIFT in some way. The EU wanted to develop a way around SWIFT because the EU is sick (rightfully so) of the US setting sanction policy for the whole world.

  Russia beat the China to secure SWIFT avoidance mechanism.

  Russia’s Trade Routes to Iran

  Eurointelligence discusses Russia’s Trade Routes to Iran

  Business between the two most sanctioned countries in the world, Russia and Iran, is thriving. Iran’s exports to Russia have surpassed the $2bn mark last year according to Iran’s ambassador to Moscow. This is a considerable jump from the figures the previous years, and a 30% rise throughout the year, according to the Tehran Chamber of Commerce. The total value of bilateral trade between the two in volume reached $4.9bn in 2023 according to Iran’s official statistics. A Russian economic delegation with 170 representatives was in Tehran this week as the two countries held the 17th round of their joint economic commission. The two sides have pledged to increase trade tenfold over the coming years.

  What facilitates their trade is their own banking solution, which the two countries set up last year to circumvent the dollar. The two central banks managed to connect Iran’s Sepam national financial messaging service to Russia’s SPFS messaging service, its equivalent to the Swift system. In connection with this new system, Russian banks started operating offices in Tehran, and offered credit lines to ease exports from Russia to Iran. There are similar plans in Iran for exports towards Russia. Intensifying trade with Russia is part of Iran’s Look to the East strategy that aims to neutralise the effects of US sanctions by expanding into new markets.

  Lesson of the Day

  Didn’t you declare victory on these sanctions?

  Here’s the deal: China and India will always buy. And they should. It’s in their best interest.

  — Mike “Mish” Shedlock (@MishGEA) September 18, 2023

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

  On September 19, 2023, my Lesson of the Day was Sanctions Don’t Work Because They Create New Markets

  Lesson of the Day: Sanctions Create New Markets

  Foreign Policy: “Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Greece’s mighty shipping sector has continued to earn good money shipping Russian oil. But Greek shipowners have discovered an apparently even more lucrative source of revenue: selling the ships themselves to mysterious buyers linked to Russia. One publication has declared that a “Great Greek Tanker Sale” is taking place, and no price seems too high for a secondhand tanker. But the formerly Greek ships are entering a Hades-like shadow economy.”

  Lesson Number Two

  Countries, political leaders, and market makers act in their best interest.

  It is in the best interest of Greek shippers to sell ships so they do. It is in the best interest of India and China to buy Russian oil and Greek ships so they do. It is in the best interest of Dubai middlemen to make a market in ships so they do.

  What this boils down to is simple: It is the best interest of middlemen in Greece, Russia, India, China, and Dubai to tell Biden to go to hell, so they do.

  How Russia Makes a Mockery of US Sanctions in One Picture

  Unprecedented US and EU sanctions against Russia have had no impact on Russia’s oil exports or revenue. Who’s the beneficiary?

  

  On December 29, 2023 I explained How Russia Makes a Mockery of US Sanctions in One Picture

  Buyer’s Cartel Silliness

  The number of economists promoting a buyer’s cartel to suppress the price of Russian oil (and only Russian oil) only was stunning.

  I laughed at the idea when it was proposed on June 28, 2022 in A Laughable Explanation of the G7 Oil Price Buyers’ Cartel Emerges

  Despite the obvious stupidity of the scheme, some prominent economists backed the idea.

  How China Gets Around US Sanctions on Semiconductors

  The largest source of rising Chinese semiconductor equipment imports comes from lithography machines used to print circuitry patterns onto silicon wafers, but purchases up and down the semiconductor manufacturing process have risen dramatically in 2023. pic.twitter.com/QV3vWC7JO5

  — Joey Politano 🏳️‍🌈 (@JosephPolitano) February 17, 2024

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

  On February 18, 2024 I noted How China Gets Around US Sanctions on Semiconductors

  If You Weaponize the Dollar and Confiscate Assets, Expect Retaliation

  By weaponizing the banking system against enemies outside and within, advanced economies are losing their ‘risk free’ status. This may not change the global currency order for now, but could lead to a wild scramble for gold and other tangible assets.https://t.co/QFkdkBMnf4

  — Joseph Wang (@FedGuy12) March 7, 2022

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

  Russia seized the local assets of Carlsberg beer and yogurt maker Danone. It now threatens Austria’s Raiffeisen bank.

  My lesson of the day on July 20, 2023 was Lesson of the Day: If You Weaponize the Dollar and Confiscate Assets, Expect Retaliation

  At the onset of the war, the Fed, under direction of the Biden Administration, illegally seized Russia’s foreign reserves. Illegal is the correct word.

  Nowhere does the act give the Fed the right or power to confiscate the reserves of sovereign nations. But that is exactly what the Fed did when it seized Russia’s US dollar reserves. 

  If the Fed can confiscate Russia’s reserves, who’s next?

  Weaponization of Swift

  Please consider the Richmond Fed article What Is SWIFT, and Could Sanctions Impact the U.S. Dollar’s Dominance? 

  The recent removal of Russian banks from the SWIFT messaging system has highlighted the importance of payments in supporting economies. But the weaponization of SWIFT has also left some commentators worrying about the loss of the U.S. dollar’s dominance, as it might drive banks and firms to other substitutes. This Economic Brief discusses the economics of SWIFT and explains why emigrating from the U.S. dollar may be more difficult than we thought.

  

  It appears to me Russia and Iran just succeeded.

  US policy is to blame.

  However, it’s easier for Russia than it will be for China because China is too dependent on exports to the US and EU. Regardless, more dollar and SWIFT avoidance is in the pipeline.

  The BRICS are working on a similar idea. They will fail to achieve much traction except in one area, sanction avoidance.

  For discussion and reasons why, please see What Would it Take for a BRIC-Based Currency to Succeed?

  None of the conditions for a meaningful launch of a BRIC-based currency are in place, at least on a dollar volume basis. Talk of dethroning the dollar is silly.

  However, sanction avoidance is another matter. Coupled with central bank digital currencies, countries and individuals will have a clear means of sanction avoidance. US sanctions on Iran, Venezuela, and other nations and individuals are a tiny percent of global trade, but those sanctions are not trivial to the individuals and countries sanctions.

  I wrote that August 23, 2023. And here we are.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 20:20

• Colorado Democrats Block Legislation Punishing Child Sex Traffickers – Suggest Criminals Are Also Victims
  Colorado Democrats Block Legislation Punishing Child Sex Traffickers – Suggest Criminals Are Also Victims

  While conservative states like Florida have passed legislation to institute the death penalty for criminals guilty of child sexual abuse and child trafficking, it’s becoming more and more difficult in blue states to punish pedophiles at all.  No other issue so fully reflects the growing rift between the political left and everyone else in America today.  If we can’t even agree that child sex abusers should face severe punishment, then how can we possibly agree on anything else?

  Colorado Democrats have recently struck down House Bill 1092, a bill that would have instituted minimum sentencing for offenders convicted of selling or buying children for the purposes of exploitation.  The bill was heard in the House State, Civic, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, which is also known as the “kill committee.” On Thursday, the panel lived up to its nickname, killing the bill on an 8-3 party-line vote.  The eight Democrats who voted to stop HB 1092 were State Reps. Andrew Boesenecker, Kyle Brown, Elisabeth Epps, Jennifer Lea Parenti, Naquetta Ricks, Manny Rutinel, Jenny Wilford, and Steven Woodrow.

  50 witnesses crowded into the state Capitol hearing room to testify on the bill’s passage, with 47 of them in favor of the legislation and only 3 people against.  Some of the witnesses were themselves survivors of abuse and trafficking.  Republicans who voted in favor of the bill noted that many child traffickers escape with light sentences or they are sometimes let back onto the streets within days of their arrest. 

  Sick! Democrats in Colorado shot down a bill that would’ve mandated harsher punishment for pedos who bought and sold children for s*x.

  Why would anyone want to protect pedos? pic.twitter.com/aRMBYFnn8T

  — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 28, 2024

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

  You might be wondering at this point whose side the Democrats are on?  Colorado Democrats reportedly argued that they oppose the harsher minimum sentences in part because offenders might “also be victims,” a narrative which has been spreading among leftist activists often in relation to LGBT issues and trans rights issues.  The purpose?  They assert that pedophilia is a form of sexual orientation, and once something is labeled an orientation it suddenly becomes a protected group status.

  But not all behaviors should be tolerated in a civilized society and just because someone might be a “victim” that does not justify their victimization of others.  Leftist states have increasingly targeted children with sexualized propaganda including unproven gender fluid theories, to drag shows and trans indoctrination, to sex change hormones and operations on minors without parental consent, to pornographic content in school libraries. 

  Not long ago Democrats denied any of these activities were real and accused conservatives of “conspiracy theory.”  Now that they have been thoroughly exposed, the leftist response is to defend the sexualization of children rather than admit they are wrong.  One could chalk it all up to the progressive tendency to care more about “winning” than caring about what is actually right, or perhaps there is a more nefarious motive behind their consistent defense of such reprehensible criminal behaviors.

  

  Colorado Democrats seemed to be more outraged by the social media response after they struck down Bill 1092, with some arguing that Republicans House members needed to self-censor.  Online commenters posted pictures of wood chippers and nooses on the internet, which Democrats interpreted as a threat.  Colorado House Speaker Julie McCluskie said her office has contacted Colorado State Patrol over online posts related to the child trafficking bill, as well as the trans rights legislation.             

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 20:00

• Iran's Jewish Population Belies Claims Of Tehran's Genocidal Intent
  Iran’s Jewish Population Belies Claims Of Tehran’s Genocidal Intent

  By Brian McGlinchey via Stark Realities

  For decades, Israeli government officials — chief among them, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — have accused Iran of plotting a new Holocaust against the millions of Jews who call Israel home. Netanyahu has said Iran is “planning another genocide against our people,” and wants to “destroy another six million plus Jews.”

  Western journalists are quick to quote these claims, yet slow to publicize contradictory evidence — such as the fact that Iran is home to the Middle East’s second-largest population of Jews, who freely practice their faith, peacefully coexist within the Islamic republic and even have a seat in the legislature.

  It’s said that “charity begins at home.” If we’re to believe Netanyahu and his confederates in America, wouldn’t an Iranian genocide against Jews begin there too?

  

  Having long been subjected to the genocidal-Iran narrative, the average American probably assumes there’s no such thing as an Iranian Jew. However, according to varying estimates, there are 9,000 to 20,000 of them in a land where the Jewish presence goes back nearly 3,000 years.

  That’s well lower than the 100,000 or more Jews who lived in Iran in the years leading up to the 1979 revolution. The uncertainty of what life would be like in an Islamic republic — culturally, economically and in terms of personal safety — prompted tens of thousands to leave for Israel, the United States and other countries.

  Many of them were alarmed when Habib Elghanian, a prominent Iranian Jewish industrialist with ties to the deposed Shah, was arrested just a few weeks after the revolution and charged with corruption and spying for Israel. Prosecutors also accused him of soliciting money for the Israeli Defense Forces, and thus being complicit “in murderous air raids against innocent Palestinians.” In May 1979, he was executed by firing squad.

  Though Elghanian’s execution shook Iranian Jews, it also precipitated a critical development that has helped assuage their fears ever since.

  The day after the execution, two rabbis and four younger intellectual Jews arranged a visit with the Ayatollah Khomeini. By conveying that Iran’s Jews considered themselves Iranian first and would support their fellow citizen’s choice of a new system of government, they hoped to elicit a guarantee against Jews being targeted.

  To their surprise, Khomeini welcomed the Jews as VIPs. After a literal standoff that saw the Jewish delegation and the ayatollah both deferentially waiting for the other to take a seat first, they all sat on the floor in a circle.

  Khomeini lauded Moses as one of three prophets sent by God to guide humanity. Then, to the great relief of his guests, he drew a sharp distinction between the Israeli government and Iran’s Jews, declaring:

  “Moses would have nothing to do with these pharaoh-like Zionists who run Israel. And our Jews, the descendants of Moses, have nothing to do with them either. We recognize our Jews as separate from those godless, bloodsucking Zionists.”

  Khomeini then issued a fatwa — an Islamic religious leader’s formal decree — asserting that Jews are a protected minority and forbidding violence against them.

  Jews do not, however, hold a fully equal place in Iranian society. Most notably, they may not hold senior government posts or become judges. Jews serve in the Iranian military, but cannot do so as officers. They can’t inherit property from Muslims, but if a member of a Jewish family converts to Islam, that person inherits everything.

  

  To a great extent, however, Iran’s Jews live much like anyone else in the country, a reality sharply at odds with Western assumptions.

  While promoting Zionism or the Israeli government is illegal for anyone, Jews openly display their identity and practice their faith. Iranian Jews wear yarmulkes and prayer shawls in public. Muslims pass by without giving a second glance — after all, Jews’ presence in Iran and Persia goes back nearly three millennia, and the country is home to many important Jewish religious sites.

  There are 13 synagogues in Tehran alone. Tourists are surprised to find that, unlike in Europe and elsewhere, Iran’s synagogue don’t have locked doors, metal detectors or security guards. Tehran also has a Jewish seminary and a mikveh ritual bath facility.

  In 2015, President Hassan Rouhani officially recognized Saturday as the Jewish day of religious observance, freeing Jews to observe their Sabbath (the typical Iranian workweek and school week goes from Saturday to Wednesday with a half-day on Thursday).

  

  Jews send their kids to Jewish schools, enjoy kosher restaurants and operate Tehran’s oldest charity hospital, where 96% of patients are Muslims. “When I am sick, I go across the street [to the Jewish-run hospital],” a Muslim seminary student told the New York Times. “They might have a different religion, but they are fellow Iranians.”

  That sentiment is widely embraced in Iran. In fact, the Anti-Defamation League’s 2014 Global Index of antisemitism (its most recent) found Iranians to be the least antisemitic of any population in the Middle East.

  By some indications, Iranian Jews are more accepted by Muslims in Iran than by Jews in Israel. As a third-generation Iranian-Israeli explained to Radio Free Europe, “In Israel, we have racism towards people that came from Islamic states. As a child, I suffered a lot because I’m Persian.”

  When wealthy Jewish expatriates in 2007 offered cash rewards of $60,000 per family to entice Iranian Jews to emigrate to Israel, few signed up. The Society of Iranian Jews scoffed, saying “the identity of Iranian Jews is not tradable for any amount of money.”

  Jews are guaranteed one of five seats in the Iranian parliament reserved for religious minorities; three more are reserved on behalf of Iran’s hundreds of thousands of Assyrian-Chaldean and Armenian Christians. The government has tolerated public rebukes issued by the Jewish representative and other Jews. For example, in 2006, Jewish MP Maurice Motamed and other Jewish leaders criticized President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for saying Jews “have created a myth in the name of Holocaust, and consider it to be above God, religion and the prophets.”

  On the other hand, Iranian Jews’ political stances frequently align with the government’s. When anti-regime protests erupted in 2022, the Tehran Jewish Committee, an umbrella group of organizations, issued a statement condemning them, adding that its members have “always obeyed the position of the Supreme Leader, like our compatriots.”

  In October, Jews in five cities participated in rallies against Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza. Some held a sign reading, “Do not commit crimes in the name of Judaism.”

  Outsiders reasonably wonder if Jews feel compelled to take such stances to maintain their safe place in society. The Israeli and US governments go a step further, accusing Iran of actively coercing such speech, but they offer nothing to substantiate those allegations.

  A New Political Order, Not A New Holocaust

  While the existence of Iran’s unmolested Jewish population belies claims that their government is bent on eliminating Jews, any thorough evaluation of those claims must also confront Tehran’s sharply-worded statements against the State of Israel.

  Iran doesn’t recognize Israel as a state and, ever since 1979, Iranian ayatollahs, presidents and generals have called for Israel to be “destroyed,” “wiped off the map” or “eliminated.”

  While that language can sound like threats of physical destruction, scrutiny of the full quotes almost invariably confirms the speakers are referring to the elimination of the State of Israel as a political entity. Western news outlets, politicians and propagandists, however, often omit the context that makes this distinction clear — if not misquoting the speaker altogether.

  

  Anti-Iran propagandists’ all-time favorite citation springs from a 2005 speech by then-president Ahmadinejad, who was said to have declared that “Israel must be wiped off the face of the map.” The quote became a staple of Iran-hawk rhetoric that’s still employed more than 18 years later — despite the fact that he actually said something quite different: “[Ayatollah Khomeini] said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.”

  In that same speech, titled “The World Without Zionism,” Ahmadinejad listed three other regimes that have ceased to exist — Iran’s own monarchy, the Soviet Union, and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq government. As I wrote in 2012:

  He wasn’t calling for the annihilation of a population, but for the dismantling of a governing entity. That’s highly antagonistic language, to be sure, but it’s not genocidal—any more than Ronald Reagan’s assertion that “freedom and democracy will leave Marxism and Leninism on the ash heap of history” was a pledge to incinerate the Soviet, Chinese or Cuban people.

  Even when current-day news reports include accurate quotes about Iranian bluster, the headlines and leads frequently use shortened quotes that leave a false impression, as was the case with an Associated Press article titled, “Iran leader says Israel a ‘cancerous tumor’ to be destroyed.”

  The great many who only scan the headline or first few paragraphs would reasonably think Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was threatening to blast the entire country to smithereens. Only those who dive deeper into the article would find Khamenei actually said, “The Zionist regime is a deadly, cancerous growth and a detriment to this region. It will undoubtedly be uprooted and destroyed.”

  When the Iranian government has explicitly threatened a physical attack, look closely and you’re almost certain to find the threat was not to initiate war but to retaliate if Israel strikes first. For example, consider a 2022 Times of Israel article titled, “Iranian general threatens to ‘raze Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground’.”

  You wouldn’t know it from the headline, but the commander of the Iranian ground forces, Kiumars Heydari, was warning against Israeli aggression. He said, “For any mistake made by the enemy, we will raze Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground by the order of the Supreme Leader.” The Times included that quote, but didn’t include another that reinforces the contingent nature of Heydari’s threat. Referring to the upgrading of Iran’s arsenal, he said, “All this equipment is to respond to the stupid aggressions of the enemies of the Islamic revolution.”

  Heydari’s remarks came days after an Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps colonel was shot to death in his car outside his Tehran home. Israel told U.S. officials it had assassinated him, according to an intelligence source cited by the New York Times.

  Eliminating Israel: Khamenei Gets Specific

  In a 2014 Q&A posted to social media, Ayatollah Khamenei elaborated on his vision of the State of Israel’s elimination. Here are some key excerpts:

  • “The only means of bringing Israeli crimes to an end is the elimination of this regime. And of course the elimination of Israel does not mean the massacre of the Jewish people in this region.”

  • “The proper way of eliminating Israel: The original people of Palestine including Muslims, Christians and Jews, wherever they are…take part in a public and organized referendum…Jewish immigrants who’ve been persuaded into emigration to Palestine do not have the right to take part.”

  • “The ensuing government…will decide whether non-Palestinian emigrants…can continue living in Palestine or should return to their home countries.”

  • Until the referendum, Khamenei calls for “resolute and armed resistance,” to be facilitated in part by arming the Israeli-occupied West Bank “like Gaza.”

  • “Unacceptable” solutions include “a classical war by the army of Muslim countries” or “throw[ing] migrated Jews [to the] sea.”

  Khamenei’s agenda is undoubtedly hostile to Israel as a governing entity, includes a call for revolutionary violence, and raises the specter of a potential mass expulsion of Jews who migrated to Israel after some unspecified date. However, it isn’t remotely a blueprint for killing “another 6 million” Jews, as Netanyahu and others would have you believe.

  It should be noted that many of the world’s Jews —who, like the Iranian government, say the creation of a Jewish ethno-state has victimized Palestinians — also call for an entirely new political order in the land currently controlled by the State of Israel.

  Defenders of the status quo in Greater Israel say peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Jews would be impossible in a successor state to Israel. In addition to undermining claims that Iran is genocidal, the enduring, peaceful coexistence of Jews and Muslims in Iran is problematic for that narrative as well — which may help explain why wealthy Israelis tried bribing Iranian Jews into leaving the country behind.

  “Death to Israel” and “Death to Traffic”

  At Iranian demonstrations and even in parliament, it’s common to hear chants of “Death to Israel” and “Death to America,” the latter phrase originating during the 1979 revolution. These slogans are seized upon by anti-Iran hawks who say it would be foolish not to take Iranians at their word — meaning Iranians want all Israeli and American people to die.

  However, when you’re crossing cultural lines, discerning meaning isn’t always so simple.

  Travel guru Rick Steves learned this firsthand as he was being driven to the Tehran airport at the end of a 12-day stay. When his car encountered heavy traffic, his driver spontaneously exclaimed, “Death to traffic!”

  A perplexed Steves said, “What? I thought it was ‘Death to America’.” His driver explained, “Here in Iran, when something frustrates us and is out of our control, we say ‘death’ to that.” Upon reflection, Steves likened it to an American saying “damn those teenagers,” without really wanting them to burn in eternal hellfire.

  That explains the seeming paradox of Iranians chanting “Death to America” while holding a reputation for being extraordinarily welcoming and hospitable to American tourists, or “Death to Israel” while peacefully coexisting with Jews. “Once, a group of [Iranian] women embraced and kissed my American colleague on both cheeks, proudly announcing ‘we love American people,’ before turning around to chant ‘Death to America’,” writes Nazila Fathi.

  “When we do use this phrase, it strictly refers to governments, not people,” explains Pontia at My Persian Corner. “Iranians are much better when it comes to differentiating between people and their governments…it’s very clear to us that when we say ‘death to America or ‘down with America’ (or anyplace else), we are solely talking about the government.”

  Khamenei has offered his own clarification: “Obviously, by ‘death to America,’ we don’t mean death to the American people…it means death to US policies and its arrogance.”

  In Iran’s official English-language statements, “death to” is frequently translated as “down with.” However, the Iranian expression is the gift that keeps on giving to Iran hawks from Tel Aviv to Washington, DC.

  

  None of this is to say that the Iranian government is virtuous, or that it isn’t a major adversary of Israel. Iran calls for the State of Israel’s violent overthrow. It supports Hamas and other organizations that advance that goal. It has praised violent attacks on Israeli soldiers and civilians, from shootings in the West Bank to the Oct. 7 Hamas invasion.

  However, claims of genocidal intent by the Iranian government are contradicted by the treatment of the country’s own Jews and by close scrutiny of Iran’s supposedly genocidal rhetoric.

  As with other geopolitical myths — Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, Iraqi soldiers removing Kuwaiti infants from incubators, Gadhafi dispensing rape-drugs to soldiers — the myth of a genocidal Iranian government is purposefully cultivated: Americans who believe 6 million Israeli Jews are at risk of an Iranian-inflicted genocide are more likely to support the ongoing redistribution of billions of dollars of American wealth and weapons to Israel —despite that aid’s little-known illegality under US law.

  Americans persuaded to believe the worst about Iran are also more likely to support hostile policies toward the country, including economic sanctions that, like terrorism, intentionally inflict suffering on innocents.

  Those prone to accepting at face value the claims of the Israeli government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should consider that it was Netanyahu who, thirty-two years ago, first claimed Iran was “three to five years” from having a nuclear weapon.

  It was Netanyahu who, testifying before the US Congress in 2002, emphatically declared “there is no question whatsoever that Saddam is…advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons — no question whatsoever.”

  It was Netanyahu who “guaranteed” that same congressional audience that a regime-change invasion of Iraq would “have enormous, positive reverberations on the region.”

  And it was Netanyahu who bragged to West Bank settlers that “America is a thing you can move very easily.”

  Having helped “move” America to throw away the lives of more than 4,500 service members in an invasion of Iraq that destabilized the region and caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, Netanyahu, his government and Israel’s fellow travelers inside the United States have long sought to nudge America into a war with Iran too.

  If we’re to avoid another catastrophe triggered on false pretenses, take care that your perception of the Iranian menace isn’t moved too easily.

  Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Read more and subscribe at starkrealities.substack.com 

  

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 19:40

• These Are America's Favorite Sneaker Brands
  These Are America’s Favorite Sneaker Brands

  With estimated sales of more than $22 billion last year, the United States is by far the largest sneaker market in the world. According to estimates from Statista Market Insights, roughly 380 million pairs of sneakers were sold in the U.S. last year alone, as athletic footwear has long transcended its utilitarian roots and become an essential piece of everyday wear for Americans from all age groups and backgrounds.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter reports, according to findings from Statista Consumer Insights, Nike is still the most popular sneaker brand in the U.S., as the Oregonian sportswear giant leverages its home turf advantage versus long-term rival Adidas.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  The German brand with the three stripes is the second most popular choice for U.S. sneaker owners, followed at some distance by New Balance, Converse, Skechers and Nike’s Jordan brand, which is likely higher up the list among die-hard sneakerheads.

  With global footwear sales of $33 billion in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2023, Nike is not only the most popular but also by far the biggest seller of athletic footwear in the world.

  The company’s chief rival Adidas recorded roughly $13 billion in footwear sales in 2022, illustrating how far ahead of the competition Nike really is.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 19:20

• As China Builds Yugos, EVs May Be The New Edsels
  As China Builds Yugos, EVs May Be The New Edsels

  Authored by Duggan Flanakin via RealClear Wire,

  The year 1957 is memorable for at least two historic launches. The launch by the Soviet Socialist Union of the Sputnik, the world’s first artificial satellite, prompted the U.S. to create the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) the very next year.

  

  Eleven years later, Neil Armstrong stepped out of Apollo 11 and famously proclaimed, “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”

  Barely three years later, Apollo 17 astronaut Eugene Cernan announced the end of the manned space flight experiment: “We shall return, with peace and hope for all mankind.”

  Many believe that the Challenger launch failure in 1986, with teacher Christa McAuliffe one of the seven dead, and the disintegration of Space Shuttle Columbia in 2003, in which another seven astronauts died, ended the U.S. dream of manned space flight.

  Former NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory systems engineer Mark Adler spilled the beans in 2015. “The bottom-line answer is that it was … way too expensive. The shuttle never met its promise for low-cost access to space.” [Well, it was a government program!]

  Cost-cutting and bureaucratic overkill were behind the Challenger (whose politically correct O-rings failed) and Columbia disasters. As chief NASA historian Bill Barry told Newsweek, “People realized that [Columbia] was a lot more risky than generally thought [mostly] because of [design] compromises … due to cutbacks in the budget [emphasis added].“

  The other historic 1957 launch was Ford Motor Company’s much-heralded Edsel. Ten years in the making, at a development cost of $250 million ($2.78 billion in 2024 dollars), Ford dealers saw thousands lining up to buy the new dream car that September, but by yearend monthly sales had fallen by a third.

  Two years later, Ford ceased production of the Edsel and revamped its production lines to build compact cars. According to Time reporter Lily Rothman, “As it turned out, the Edsel was a classic case of the wrong car for the wrong market at the wrong time.”

  Ford had relied on market research showing that within a decade half of U.S. families could buy then-popular medium-priced vehicles. Further studies led Ford to design “the smart car for the younger executive or professional family on its way up.”

  To Ford’s sad surprise, by 1957 the lust for medium-priced cars was usurped by a new boom in the compact field, an area the Edsel research had overlooked completely, said Rothman.

  Much as with the space program, the federal government has spent huge sums subsidizing the construction and purchase of electric vehicles, including 18-wheelers, airplanes, and tanks. All of this has been driven, ostensibly, by the perceived threat posed by the plant food carbon dioxide.

  Much as with the Edsel, the electric vehicles that European, American, and other Western governments have been subsidizing are “the wrong car for the wrong market at the wrong time.”

  Around the planet, individuals, automakers, and even policy advisors are waking up to this gross miscalculation.

  Meanwhile, the Chinese, who long ago cornered the market on the primary raw materials and technologies needed for producing EVs in quantity, stand to be the primary sellers of vehicles Western governments have mandated that the hoi polloi purchase.

  The largest Chinese automaker, Biyadi (BYD), uses the slogan “Build Your Dream” to lure buyers into even greater reliance on Chinese technology that will erase tens of thousands of American jobs.

  BYD sells battery-electric vehicles in China for US$26,000. BYD makes its own batteries, semiconductors, and seal upholstery, and its nearly 30,000 patents owned or filed puts BYD light years ahead of any Western automaker.

  The only brakes on China destroying the world auto market are tariffs and other import restrictions – or ending the EV mandates. But the tariffs would likely be passed onto customers, forcing Americans to pay double if Washington forces Chinese EVs down their throats.

  And, as noted, without the tariffs, Ford, General Motors, and every other non-Chinese automaker could quickly be forced into bankruptcy. The United Auto Workers know this and hedged their bets for 2024 by throwing money in both directions. Western automakers, joining Toyota, have already pulled back from their EV production commitments.

  Ford, which has been losing $60,000 – more than the selling price – on every EV it sells, saw sales of its Lightning F-150 fall 46% in third quarter 2023. Mercedes downsized its EV sales projections by 2030 by 50% and announced it will update its petrol-fueled fleet engines into the next decade. Now Ford has halted all shipments of the Lightning F-150.

  Rivian, too, has fallen on hard times, laying off 10% of its workforce, signaling a significant decline in demand. With prices starting at $70,000 for its pickup and $75,000 for its SUV, the sales downturn led to a corporate loss of $1.52 billion in the first quarter of fiscal 2023.

  Slackening demand for EVs has even led to entire mines shutting down as the supply of rare-earth minerals now exceeds demand. Albemarle announced it was deferring spending on a planned $1.3 billion plant in North Carolina. The price of lithium has shrunk by 90%, and the price of nickel has been cut in half. As a result, a nickel mine in New Caledonia recently suspended operations.

  In the UK, auto dealers are offering discounts of up to 25% on EVs sitting idle on their lots. The Lords Committee says British drivers are “giving the cold shoulder” to the electric transition despite dramatic drops in finance rates for EVs in an effort to boost flagging sales. Non-fleet EV purchases in the UK fell by 25% from the prior year, with yet another reason being much higher auto insurance rates.

  The obvious ability of China to dominate the EV market, coupled with increasing public resistance to EV mandates, has put pressure on the European Union and its member states. A year ago, the EU took a baby step backward, agreeing to allow sales and registration of internal combustion engine vehicles after the 2035 deadline if they operate only on carbon-neutral fuels. 

  In the U.S., President Biden had until very recently doubled down on his EV demands, ignoring the concerns of automakers, auto unions, and the auto buying public. Just a week ago, the EPA indicated it was “considering” delaying EV mandates beyond 2030, an election-year concession that could quickly be reversed.

  A 2023 Gallup poll showed that only 16% of Americans with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 either own or are “seriously” considering purchasing an electric vehicle. The most likely EV buyer is a Democrat who lives in a Pacific Coast state, but only 28% of U.S. Democrats and 25% on the West Coast either own or are “seriously” considering an EV.

  As Mark Knopfler’s Romeo said to Juliet, “the timing was all wrong,” perhaps the only real flaw with the current EV mandates is that the supply chain – especially in the West – is just not ready for prime time.

  But in another few years, things could change. After all, the privately funded Odysseus Moon lander just became the first new U.S. presence on the lunar surface in 55 years.

  On the other hand, unless the West cedes EV manufacturing to China, the EV may soon become so unpopular it will go the way of the Edsel.

  Duggan Flanakin is a senior policy analyst at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow who writes on a wide variety of p

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 19:00

• Great News Gen-Zers: "Silver Tsunami" Will Trigger Housing Supply As Baby Boomers Die
  Great News Gen-Zers: “Silver Tsunami” Will Trigger Housing Supply As Baby Boomers Die

  Millennials and Generation Z have been battered by a persistent housing shortage, with the US market currently short 7.2 million homes. However, there may be light at the end of the tunnel for those struggling to afford or even find a home, thanks to an emerging trend known as the “silver tsunami.”

  A new report from Freddie Mac estimates homeowners aged 60-plus years (baby boomers) increasingly put their homes on the market as they enter retirement facilities, downsize, and/or estates sell off assets after death. This means the cohort, comprised of about 29% of the adult population and 44% of homeowners, could free up a whopping 9.2 million homes by 2035. 

  

  “Over the next five years, the decline is more modest, and we only see a reduction of 2.7 million households by 2028. In this sense, the silver tsunami is more like a tide, with a gradual reduction phasing in over several years. While the number of people aging out of homeownership will increase in the coming years, it is more of an upward sloping trend than a disruptive spike,” Freddie Mac economists wrote in the report. 

  Freddie Mac estimates the silver tsunami will only begin to accelerate by the end of the decade. In 2029, they expect 3.4 million net decline in the number of baby boomer homeowner households. By 2035, the figure could reach well over 9 million. 

  

  The report noted: “Given that the housing market is facing a shortage of available single-family homes, the housing decisions Boomers will make in the coming years will have an outsized impact.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 18:40

• California Seized Enough Fentanyl In 2023 To Kill Global Population 'Twice Over'
  California Seized Enough Fentanyl In 2023 To Kill Global Population ‘Twice Over’

  Authored by Lorenz Duchamps via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Authorities in California seized enough lethal doses of fentanyl last year to kill the entire global population “nearly twice over,” according to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office.

  

  In a statement on Feb. 27, the Democrat governor said operations supported by the state’s National Guard, or CalGuard, led to the seizure of a record 62,224 pounds of fentanyl in the state and at ports of entry in 2023, marking a 1,066 percent increase since 2021.

  The street price for the intercepted fentanyl would be about $670 million, according to calculations using the Los Angeles High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area price sheet for that year.

  According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, two milligrams of fentanyl is considered a potentially lethal dose, and one kilogram of the drug has the potential to kill 500,000 people.

  “Fentanyl is a poison, and it does not belong in our communities,” Mr. Newsom said. “California is cracking down, increasing seizures, expanding access to substance abuse treatment, and holding drug traffickers accountable to combat the immeasurable harm opioids have caused our communities.”

  In 2022, authorities in the Golden State seized 28,765 pounds of fentanyl, up from 5,334 pounds in 2021.

  To tackle the evolving opioid addiction crisis in California, Mr. Newsom allocated $1 billion to law enforcement agencies and other public entities across the state to combat overdoses and raise awareness about the dangers of opioids such as fentanyl, a synthetic opioid that is a major contributor to drug overdose deaths in the United States.

  The state’s billion-dollar plan included a multi-million dollar effort to boost CalGuard’s work in preventing drug-trafficking transnational criminal organizations. Since it was launched last year, more than 140 new CalGuard members have been hired, trained, and embedded to reduce fentanyl use in communities.

  “The California National Guard is committed to combatting the scourge of fentanyl,” CalGuard’s Maj. Gen. Matthew Beevers said in a statement. “These extraordinary seizure statistics are a direct reflection of the tireless efforts of the highly trained CalGuard Service Members supporting law enforcement agencies statewide.”

  Overdose Deaths

  Fentanyl, an opioid approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to treat severe pain, is the leading cause of drug overdose deaths in the United States.

  According to the California Overdose Surveillance Dashboard, there were 7,385 opioid-related deaths in California in 2022, of which 6,473 were fentanyl-related.

  San Francisco is one of the communities most acutely affected by drug overdoses, with 813 fatalities in 2023, of which 657 were attributed to fentanyl, according to data released by the San Francisco Department of Public Health.

  “Fentanyl is deadlier than any drug we’ve ever seen on our streets,” San Francisco Mayor London Breed said in a statement on Oct. 27. “We must treat the trafficking and sale of fentanyl more severely and people must be put on notice that pushing this drug could lead to homicide charges.”

  Drug deaths in the United States hit a new record nationwide in 2022, with nearly 110,000 people dying as a result of the opioid crisis, according to data released by the National Center for Health Statistics which is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

  Washington and Wyoming saw the biggest increases in drug fatalities, according to the agency. Both states suffered a 22 percent increase in deaths linked to overdose.

  

  From NTD News

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 18:20

• Eye-Catching Jump In Inflation Expectations Threatens Bonds
  Eye-Catching Jump In Inflation Expectations Threatens Bonds

  By Wes Goodman, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

  The US two-year breakeven rate is showing an eye-popping increase and will put upward pressure on yields.

  

  Inflation expectations are climbing as the Fed’s fight against rising prices seems to be sputtering. The latest warning for bond investors came from Apollo Management Chief Economist Torsten Slok, who said that a re-accelerating US economy, coupled with a rise in underlying inflation, will prevent the Federal Reserve from cutting interest rates in 2024.

  

  The numbers tell the tale of a Fed battle against inflation that has yet to be won. Core PCE is the highest in almost a year. CPI and PPI both beat expectations.

  

  All of this comes at a time when breakeven rates and yields are moving together more. This signals breakevens are asserting more influence on yields. The chart below shows the 30-day correlation between two-year breakeven rates and two-year yields is rising.

  

  Bloomberg’s Correlation Finder shows that two-year breakeven rates are also moving largely in line with five- and 10-year yields, suggesting rising inflation expectations have the potential to buoy yields across maturities.

  My theory is being put to the test today because Treasury yields are falling. Still, it’s worth keeping these risks in mind. The most potent warning from these breakevens came after they rose in 2019, 2020 and 2021. The Bloomberg US Treasury Total Return Index went on to tumble a stunning 12% in 2022, its biggest loss based on Bloomberg data going back to 1974 –- the year President Richard Nixon resigned and I turned 10 years old.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 18:00

• Study Finds Majority Of Patients With Long COVID Were Vaccinated
  Study Finds Majority Of Patients With Long COVID Were Vaccinated

  Authored by Megan Redshaw via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A recent study found that the majority of patients who suffered from long COVID during a time when vaccines and antiviral treatments were widely available were vaccinated.

  

  The observational study published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, researchers interviewed 390 people in Thailand who contracted COVID-19 during the “fifth wave of the COVID-19 pandemic” when the omicron variant was dominant. Patients were followed by phone from three months after their diagnosis for a year to monitor their physical condition, mental health, sleep disturbances, and quality of life.

  Out of 390 people with COVID-19, 377 (97 percent) were vaccinated, 383 (98 percent) underwent antiviral treatment, and 330 (78 percent) developed long COVID syndrome. The most frequently reported symptoms were fatigue and cough. Other reported symptoms included depression, anxiety, and poor sleep quality. The study found that patients under age 60 with a cough as an initial symptom were more likely to develop the condition. In a subset of patients with long COVID, researchers found a notable correlation in females with headaches, dizziness, and brain fog.

  “Despite the extensive distribution of vaccines and antiviral therapies, the prevalence of long COVID remains high,” the authors of the paper wrote.

  Although definitions of long COVID differ, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) broadly defines long COVID as “signs, symptoms, and conditions that continue to develop after acute COVID-19 infection” that can last for “weeks, months, or years.” The term “long COVID” also includes post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, long-haul COVID, and post-acute COVID-19.

  According to the World Health Organization, while most people with COVID-19 recover and return to normal health, some patients, including those with mild illness, have symptoms that persist for weeks or months after recovering from acute illness.

  Nearly 7 percent of U.S. adults surveyed by the CDC in 2022 said they’ve experienced long COVID. Although U.S. regulatory agencies claim vaccinating against COVID-19 can reduce the risk of developing long COVID, the current paper did not find a significant link between the presence of comorbidities or infection severity and the emergence of long COVID symptoms.

  Studies Link Long COVID to Vaccination

  A February report published by the CDC found that more than 8 percent of participants in seven U.S. states reported having experienced long COVID symptoms. In West Virginia, almost 11 percent of survey participants reported long COVID symptoms. However, the agency did not disclose whether survey respondents were vaccinated.

  Some research suggests long COVID may be caused by an immune overreaction to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that COVID-19 vaccines use to induce antibodies and that vaccination causes some people to generate a second round of antibodies that target the first.

  In a February 2023 study published in the Journal of Medical Virology, researchers analyzed the levels of spike protein and viral RNA 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 an August 2023 study published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, researchers found the risk of long COVID was lower in those who had previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the risk of getting long COVID did not differ by vaccination status. Researchers found that unvaccinated people infected with omicron had the lowest risk of long COVID.

  In a 2023 study in the European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, researchers studied the serum of 81 individuals with long COVID. They found viral spike protein in one patient after the infection had cleared despite having a negative COVID-19 test, and vaccine spike protein in two patients two months after vaccination.

  In a December 2022 study published in PLoS One, researchers found patients were more likely to experience long COVID if they had preexisting medical conditions, a higher number of symptoms during the acute phase of COVID-19 illness, if their infection was more severe or resulted in hospitalization, or if they had received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine.

  The Epoch Times contacted the CDC for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 17:40

• Fed-Up San Fran Voters Set To Expand Police Power, Drug-Screen Welfare Recipients
  Fed-Up San Fran Voters Set To Expand Police Power, Drug-Screen Welfare Recipients

  Fed up with a city ravaged by crime and drug addiction and shedding theft-plagued businesses weekly, voters in ultra-liberal San Francisco are poised to approve a ballot measure that would require illegal-drug screening for recipients of city benefits, and another that would give police more power and less oversight.  

  That’s the finding of a San Francisco Chamber of Commerce poll, in which 61% of likely voters said they back both measures on the March 5 ballot. It’s a population that’s increasingly aware of its trajectory: 71% say the city is on the wrong track. 

  “The pendulum is swinging,” 41-year-old resident Malcolm Weitz tells the Wall Street Journal. “It’s coming hard-core back to the center.” He says he he’ll vote yes on both propositions, completing a major philosophical u-turn. Weitz voted for progressive district attorney Chesa Boudin in 2019, only to vote to kick him out in the successful 2022 recall drive. 

  MEANWHILE IN SAN FRANCISCO — A shoplifter hoards goods into a massive trash bag and BIKES out of a store in a video filmed by Lyanne Melendez, one incident among many that have become a pattern due to the city’s decriminalization of thefts under $950. pic.twitter.com/aWvii3JGHR

  — Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) May 29, 2023

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

  Now, he and other residents are ready to sic the cops on the criminals. Proposition E would remove several shackles from law enforcers, authorizing them to:

  • Engage in more high-speed chases
  • Use drones during pursuits
  • Install more cameras in public places and test electronic surveillance methods — with less oversight
  • File fewer reports about their use of force
  • Substitute body-camera footage for other types of documentation 

  Little of that would address the scourge of increasingly brazen shoplifters, which is encouraged by 2014’s Prop 47, which turned thefts valued under $950 into mere misdemeanors. In an eye-rollingly limp-wristed effort to impose more accountability, state legislators in January proposed making jail time mandatory after a THIRD theft conviction.  

  New normal. They exit with an entire clothing rack from a store in the San Francisco Bay Area.

  It’s this type of situation that’s become a debate – should an employee intervene if they encounter a shoplifter or a robber? The employee in this case tells KRON4 she stepped in… pic.twitter.com/9VHYRVyqdc

  — Aric Chen 陳曉天 (@aricchen) September 25, 2023

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

  Proposition F endeavors to cut off city handouts to people likely to take the money and shoot it into their veins. It doesn’t cover everyone, however, and the wording of the measure doesn’t imply it will precipitate universal drug-testing: 

  Shall the City require single adults age 65 and under with no dependent children who receive City public assistance benefits and whom the City reasonably suspects are dependent on illegal drugs to participate in screening, evaluation and treatment for drug dependency for those adults to be eligible for most of those benefits?

  People who decline the screening, evaluation and treatment would be terminated and, depending on whether they’re homeless, would receive a final 30 days of shelter access or rent paid direct to the landlord, according to San Francisco Public Press. 

  

  San Francisco Mayor London Breed, who’s under fire as the city collapses and is facing multiple primary challengers to her 2024 reelection bid, is backing both measures. Striking a decidedly un-progressive tone in September, Breed said of the drug-screening requirement, “No more handouts without accountability. People are not accepting help. Now, it’s time to make sure that we are cutting off resources that continue to allow this behavior.”

  As we wrote Monday, the latest indication that San Francisco is reaching new depths of despair comes with reports that a hardware store is now requiring shoppers who want to peruse its merchandise to be accompanied by an employee escort.   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/01/2024 – 17:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Obama's CIA Asked Foreign Intel Agencies To Spy On Trump Campaign
  Obama’s CIA Asked Foreign Intel Agencies To Spy On Trump Campaign

  Authored by Robert Chernin via RealClear Wire,

  The revelation that the U.S. intelligence community, under the Obama administration, sought the assistance of the “Five Eyes” intelligence alliance to surveil Donald Trump’s associates before the 2016 election is a chilling reminder of the lengths to which the Deep State will go to protect its interests and challenge its adversaries. (The Five Eyes countries are the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.) This bombshell, reported by a team of independent journalists, exposes a dark chapter in American political history, where foreign intelligence services were reportedly mobilized against a presidential candidate.

  

  The alleged operation against Trump and his associates, which predates the official start of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation, is a stark example of political weaponization of intelligence. The involvement of foreign allies in surveilling American citizens under the pretext of national security raises serious questions about the integrity of our democratic processes and the autonomy of our nation’s intelligence operations.

  The narrative that has been pushed for years, that the investigation into Trump’s campaign began with an Australian tip about a boastful Trump aide, now appears to be a cover for a more extensive and coordinated effort to undermine Trump. If reports are accurate, British intelligence began targeting Trump on behalf of American intelligence agencies as early as 2015, long before the official narrative claims.

  The implications of this are profound. It suggests an unprecedented level of collusion between U.S. intelligence agencies and their foreign counterparts to influence the outcome of an American presidential election. The use of foreign intelligence to circumvent American laws and surveillance limitations represents a grave threat to our nation’s sovereignty and the principles of democracy.

  The fact that this operation was reportedly initiated at the behest of high-ranking officials within the Obama administration, including CIA Director John Brennan, only adds to the severity of the situation. Brennan’s alleged identification of Trump associates for surveillance by the Five Eyes alliance, and the directive to “bump” or make contact with them, illustrates a deliberate strategy to entangle the Trump campaign in a web of suspicion and intrigue.

  Moreover, the reported involvement of foreign intelligence in crafting the Russia collusion narrative not only delegitimizes the subsequent investigation but also highlights the willingness of certain elements within the U.S. government to exploit international partnerships for domestic political gain. This revelation demands a thorough and transparent examination to ensure that such abuses of power are brought to light and severely punished to discourage them from being repeated.

  As more details emerge, it is imperative that the American public demand accountability from those who orchestrated and executed this operation. The sanctity of our electoral process and the trust in our intelligence agencies are at stake. We must not allow the politicization of intelligence to go unchecked, nor can we tolerate the involvement of foreign powers in our democratic processes.

  Robert Chernin is chairman of the American Center for Education and Knowledge. He is a longtime entrepreneur, business leader, fundraiser, and political confidant, and has consulted on federal and statewide campaigns at the gubernatorial, congressional, senatorial, and presidential levels.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 23:45

• What Caused China's Quant Quake
  What Caused China’s Quant Quake

  While it has gone largely underreported in western media, in the past week China launched a war against both quant funds and High Frequency Traders, claiming they were responsible for the market crash observed at the start of February. But maybe Beijing does have a point, after all long-term readers will recall that one of our first crusades was against none other than US HFT funds, which first we and then others (Michael Lewis) exposed for manipulating markets.

  So what exactly happened, and what caused China’s quant quake?

  As SocGen strategist Puneet Singh explains, China did indeed go through a quant quake but this hiccup was mostly concentrated in the small- and mid-cap space. Indeed, while the CSI 1000 the CSI 2000 were down ~30% and ~34% respectively, the large cap heavy CSI 300 only lost 7.3%. The chart below left below shows that small- and mid-caps exacerbated price movements in Chinese equities.

  

  Looking at factor correlations (chart above right) clearly underscores the moves in Reversals and Risk factors (which includes vol and size). SocGen’s charts plot 5d moving average rank correlations between daily factor performance. As Singh explains, “stable correlations are inevitably required for quant strategies to work, but changes like what we saw destabilised quant models, and added to the underperformance.”

  Factor performance for reversals and size in the small-mid and large cap spaces underscored the thesis: we saw small caps severely underperform large caps over the beginning of the year, with the reversal factor getting affected as well.

  

  Just as was observed in the US during the August 2007 quant quake, moves of the magnitude discussed here inevitably result in spikes in volatility. Instead of using a close-to-close estimator, Socgen uses its preferred proprietary high frequency OHLC estimator (chart below left). This clearly shows how sudden the volatility pickup was in the small- and mid-cap space. This volatility spike becomes even more stark when compared to the large cap benchmarks.

  Rising risks also lead to limits being triggered and risk-based unwinding of positions. In a market which is then working on a fear motive rather than profit, liquidity dries up leading to larger jumps in prices even from small trades. This is what the bank’s proxy illiquidity indicator captures (chart right below). Once again, the spike in illiquidity in the small- and mid-cap space, versus the relative calm in the large cap space potentially added to this quant quake.

  

  As Singh concludes, even as this illiquidity measure remains elevated in the CSI1000, it appears to have ticked up over the last couple of days in the CSI2000, suggesting lingering risks and perhaps more pain to come.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 23:25

• "We Can't Wait": Speaker Johnson Demands Action On Border During 'Intense' Meeting
  “We Can’t Wait”: Speaker Johnson Demands Action On Border During ‘Intense’ Meeting

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has described reports that he was confronted by congressional leaders during an “intense” meeting over government funding and aid to Ukraine at the White House on Feb. 27 as “pretty accurate.”

  

  Speaking to Fox News on Feb. 28, Mr. Johnson was asked by anchor Sean Hannity if there was any truth to the reports. The Republican lawmaker explained that he was definitely at odds with congressional leaders over the crisis at the southern border, among other issues, during the meeting.

  “Well, their reports are pretty accurate. They said that I was on an island by myself, and it was me versus everyone else in the room,” Mr. Johnson said.

  “What the liberal media doesn’t understand Sean, is that if you’re here in Washington and you’re described as a leader that’s on an island by themselves, it probably means you’re standing with the American people,” he continued.

  “And that’s what I did yesterday, I reminded the president, and all involved, that the number one issue in America is that open border. The catastrophe that we have, that President Biden himself designed, that he caused and created and I told him, just as I have many times before, he must address it with executive authority. We can’t wait any longer,” Mr. Johnson added.

  Mr. Johnson was joined by congressional leaders including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) during the Feb. 27 meeting with President Biden and Vice President Harris at the White House, ahead of a looming government shut down.

  Officials also discussed potential funding for Ukraine during the meeting, with the White House having repeatedly urged Congress in recent weeks to pass a $95 billion foreign aid package, which includes $60 billion for Ukraine, $14.1 billion for Israel, and around $9.2 billion for humanitarian assistance in Gaza.

  While the package was approved by the Senate earlier this month, it has been stalled in the House by Republicans who are at odds over its lack of U.S. border security provisions and the additional funding for Ukraine.

  Lawmakers who attended the White House meeting, including Mr. Jeffries, later described it as “intense” while Mr. Schumer told reporters that he and all other attendees, had repeatedly pressed Mr. Johnson on Ukraine aid.

  “The meeting on Ukraine was one of the most intense I’ve ever encountered in my many meetings in the Oval Office,” Mr. Schumer told reporters.

  Ultimately, lawmakers were able to strike a deal in principle and avert a partial government shutdown set to take place at the end of this week, although another continuing resolution to fund the government at current levels will need to be passed under the deal announced on Feb. 28.

  Parts of the government would be funded through March 8 while the remaining would be funded through March 22, according to congressional leaders. A final text is widely expected to be available by the weekend.

  Congress Must ‘Break the Cycle’

  Meanwhile, a deal on extra aid to Ukraine and other nations remains at a stalemate.

  Mr. Johnson told Fox News it is essential that Congress “breaks the cycle” in the way Washington works and “reform budgeting and spending” going forward.

  

  The House Speaker also stressed that Republicans will not give up the fight to ensure President Biden secures America’s borders.

  “The president has the executive authority to fix it right now, I told him at the White House yesterday one-on-one and in the group, I told him ‘Mr President, if you just issue an executive order that reinstates the Remain in Mexico [policy] … the agents, your own border patrol agents, told us it would reduce the flow by 70 percent, almost overnight,’” Mr. Johnson said.

  The House Speaker stressed the border crisis is a key issue for lawmakers, citing a rise in violent crime and murders, including the recent killing of university nursing student Laken Riley, allegedly at the hands of illegal immigrant Jose Antonio Ibarra.

  “There’s no question about it, this is a very dangerous time … America can’t stand for this any longer,” Mr. Johnson said.

  Jackson Richman contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 23:05

• Pentagon Chief: If Ukraine Is Defeated, NATO Will Be At War With Russia
  Pentagon Chief: If Ukraine Is Defeated, NATO Will Be At War With Russia

  This is the single most important, dangerous and highly revealing statement from a top defense official in the West in a long time… It also demonstrates the precarious urgency of the moment and the huge stakes going into the November US election. The world truly stands on the precipice of a nuclear nightmare with the following fresh assertion of Biden’s Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who said before Congress on Thursday: 

  “If Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will be in a fight with Russia,” Austin stated.

  What’s more is that this came the very day that Russian President Vladimir Putin warned things could easily spiral toward nuclear war in the scenario that NATO sends troops to Ukraine. Watch:

  US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin says if Ukraine falls he really believes NATO will be in a fight with Russia pic.twitter.com/lmOimGsSAH

  — Sputnik (@SputnikInt) February 29, 2024

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

  According to the fuller context of the Pentagon chief’s statements, he emphasized that more Washington funding is crucial for Ukraine in order to prevent a situation where “one country can redraw its neighbors’ boundaries and illegitimately take over its sovereign territory.”

  “We know that if Putin is successful here, he will not stop. He will continue to take more aggressive actions in the region. And other leaders around the world, other autocrats around the world will look at this and will be encouraged by the fact that this happened and we failed to support a democracy,” he added.

  “If you are a Baltic state, you are really worried about whether you are next. They know Putin. They know what he is capable of. And, frankly, if Ukraine falls, I really believe that NATO will be in a fight with Russia,” Austin said.

  What is even more alarming about this statement is that everyone now knows that Ukraine forces are in retreat at this very moment, especially after the Russian capture of the city of Avdiivka, and surrounding villages.

  Bloomberg on Thursday issued a report predicting total collapse of the Ukrainian front lines by summer, as the headline suggests (Ukraine Sees Risk of Russia Breaking Through Defenses by Summer): “Ukrainian officials are concerned that Russian advances could gain significant momentum by the summer unless their allies can increase the supply of ammunition, according to a person familiar with their analysis,” the report says. According to more from Bloomberg:

  Internal assessments of the situation on the battlefield from Kyiv are growing increasingly bleak as Ukrainian forces struggle to hold off Russian attacks while rationing the number of shells they can fire.

  Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi said Thursday that mistakes by frontline commanders had compounded the problems facing Ukraine’s defenses around Avdiivka, which was captured by Russian forces this month. Syrskyi said he’d sent in more troops and ammunition to bolster Ukrainian positions.

  

  So the consensus narrative and belated mainstream media admission is that Ukraine’s military is a mere months away from clear defeat, and the top US defense chief just said NATO will go to war with Russia “if Ukraine falls”.

  The conflict has reached a dire and perilously unpredictable moment indeed, and clearly the already slim chances of jump-starting serious peace negotiations to end the war are slipping away fast. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 22:45

• 'DMV' America: The Regime's Fani Willis Problem, And Ours
  ‘DMV’ America: The Regime’s Fani Willis Problem, And Ours

  Via Revolver News,

  The fantastic fall of Fani Willis is one of the great comedies of recent American politics. It’s the flagrant corruption of Hunter Biden, mixed with the stupidity of Jussie Smollett, the courtroom farce of the George Zimmerman trial, and the sky-high political stakes of a U.S. presidential election. It’s the joyous, healthy humor of seeing a wicked, ridiculous person be exposed and get exactly what she deserves.

  WATCH: Fani Willis thought the attorney called her a ‘Cash Whore’ 🤣

  pic.twitter.com/uyUJlE3vJ5

  — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) February 16, 2024

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

  Prosecutor: “So, to be clear, you don’t know where the money came from that you gave Mr. Wade for the cruise?”

  Fani Willis: “NAH LADY, I KEEP FAT STACKS IN MY MATTRESS OK THE SOURCE OF THE MONEY IS THE WORK, SWEAT, AND TEARS OF ME!”

  This is such a shit show. 😂😂 pic.twitter.com/SEPY55cYYZ

  — Meara (@MillennialOther) February 15, 2024

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

  Right now, it still isn’t certain whether Judge Scott McAfee will actually kick Fani Willis off her own case, but even if he doesn’t, the damage has substantially been done. The tenuous prosecution of President Trump in Georgia has already been badly delayed and discredited, increasing its odds of being tossed by a higher court and the odds of the public simply shrugging its shoulders even if this abortion of a case somehow lurches all the way to a felony conviction. Left-wing anti-Trump zealots are practically begging Fani to step aside of her own volition for the good of the anti-Trump cause.

  But they are unlikely to get what they want, for the same reason that this scandal happened in the first place: America’s regime elevated a clown-show affirmative-action incompetent who only cares about herself, told her that she was a big hero simply for existing, and now we are all reaping the consequences.

  But don’t laugh too hard at the left’s Fani Fiasco. Because lurking beneath the Fulton County farce is a dark look at an institutional decay in American life that has only just begun.

  Compare Fani Willis with, say, another prosecutor, an older one who represents America’s past: Robert Mueller.

  Robert Mueller’s investigation was born of deceit and dark political motivations, as befits a reliable government functionary. Yet for all Mueller’s faults, it was also a smooth and, in the end, relatively professional operation. When Mueller learned about the affair and improper text messages between FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, he removed them both from the case, months before the story leaked to the press. While there is much to attack about earlier cases in Mueller’s career (for one, he helped to cover up the Saudi role in 9/11), his own personal life appears extremely boring, with a 50-year marriage to a woman he met in high school.

  Despite being the biggest story in the country with a vast whirlwind of rumors around it, Mueller’s own probe had minimal leaks. Despite enormous celebrity status thanks to a Trump-deranged left (remember these?), Mueller did very little to court publicity. His investigation rarely said anything, only briefly stepping forward to debunk a false anti-Trump report by Buzzfeed News. And, of course, when all was said and done, despite enormous hype and tens of millions of dollars spent, despite the entire American ruling class practically begging him to send the Bad Orange Man to prison, Mueller’s final report found no evidence of “Russian collusion” and brought no criminal charges against President Trump.

  Now, take in all of that and go back to the adventures of Flim-Flam Fani.

  Willis’s illicit relationship could have easily remained hidden, or at least inconsequential, if she had been even slightly less stupid. But she just could not help herself. It wasn’t enough to hire her lover. She had to make him special counsel on by far her most high-profile case, which would attract by a million miles the most press attention and the most expensive, diligent lawyers. It wasn’t enough to carry on a tryst with Willis. She had to go on one lavish vacation after another with him.

  Willis’s excuses for her behavior are the sort that require a lobotomy to accept. Her relationship with Willis was entirely appropriate and aboveboard, yet Willis felt compelled to hide it because, well, *mumble mumble*. Was Willis using her highly-paid lover as a conduit to get those vacations? Not at all. By happenstance, Fani just keeps $15,000 (15 large) in cash in her home at all times for just this sort of thing. And by golly, it turns out Wade liked to do the same thing. How handy!

  The Hill:

  The special prosecutor described Willis as an “independent, proud woman” who insisted on paying her own way and used cash for “safety reasons,” not to obscure the transactions. He also said he did not deposit the cash Willis paid him for their trips together.

  “You don’t have a single, solitary deposit slip to corroborate or support any of your allegations that you were paid by Mrs. Willis in cash, do you?” Shafer attorney Craig Gillen pressed.

  “No sir,” Wade replied, adding he would either “spend it or put it in my pocket or put it in the hotel’s safe.”

  “Safety reasons!” It’s the sort of lame lie that belongs alongside “Hunter Biden was a top anti-corruption expert.” Incompetent in a wholly stupid, almost lazy way, she covers her tracks with a tale that isn’t even meant to convince, just to make one sputter at seeing a person possibly get away with the thinnest excuse imaginable. The stupidity of such affirmative action cases so unfathomably defies conventional understanding that it extends beyond the merely ludicrous and would achieve an endearing, childlike quality were it not for the devastating consequences to the country.

  The American regime is groaning both in public and behind closed doors at the trouble Fani Willis has stirred up for them. But just as Fani deserves her ongoing humiliation, so do all of her enablers. They have asked, loudly and proudly, for every part of this.

  After all, Fani Willis is the avatar of DMV (DC, Maryland, and Virginia) America – the combination of racial caste system and kakistocracy that the American regime is determined to erect in what was once the world’s proudest meritocratic society.

  

  We have extensively chronicled the decay rotting out America as it pays for bad decisions made decades ago. We’ve covered the degradation of America’s power grid, its airports, and even its amusement parks. But just as glaring as any physical decay will be the decay in human capital—the disappearance of talented and morally upright people who are replaced by farcical parasites who bask in how useless and entitled they are.

  Back in the mid-90s, when Willis attended law school, her alma mater at Emory averaged a U.S. News ranking in the mid-20s—in the top quarter but also well outside the Top 14 that has traditionally designated America’s best law schools. And that’s frightful, in fact. We can safely guess that Willis was not an above-average Emory student, or even the median one. All of us know the truth: America has for decades run a pervasive race-based affirmative action racket in which students from preferred races get a huge boost to their college admissions.

  The odds that Willis scored below Emory’s median LSAT—and perhaps well below—are very high. The median black LSAT score is around 142 points, meaning that any score above 160 represents the top three percent of all test-takers. But if Willis was scoring in the top 3 percent, then frankly, she would have been able to punch a ticket to a top law school, like Harvard or Columbia, or, hell, at least Georgetown. Going to Emory, with the massive admissions boost she could count on based on skin color alone, indicates Willis’s LSAT score may have been frightful. There are, no exaggeration, hundreds of thousands of lawyers in America who are smarter and better-qualified to be prosecutors in a major American city.

  But Fani is the one we have.

  And you know what might be the funniest part? Fani is, in many ways, the cream of the crop.

  Say what you will about Fani cavorting with her boyfriend—she does, at least, manage to prosecute some actual criminals. That puts her far ahead of recently-departed St. Louis, Missouri, circuit attorney Kim Gardner. During her six-year run as the top prosecutor in America’s deadliest city, Gardner:

  • Let St. Louis’s murder rate balloon to 87 per 100,000, more than double the rate of Johannesburg and in the top 10 for all of planet Earth.

  • Admitted to paying for her personal apartment using campaign funds.

  • Criminally charged the McCloskeys for brandishing unloaded firearms at a BLM mob, then fundraised off said prosecution in such a glaring manner that a judge kicked her off the case.

  • Falsely accused police of pulling her over for no reason as an intimidation tactic—when, in fact, camera footage showed she was driving without working headlights.

  • Sued her own city under the Ku Klux Klan Act, alleging a vast racist conspiracy against her by the city government and police department.

  • Illegally spent two years secretly pursuing a nursing degree while still serving as a circuit attorney.

  • Repeatedly had to drop criminal charges against alleged murderers because her office just could not stop screwing up.

  In Baltimore, former state’s attorney Marilyn Mosby hoped to use the Freddie Gray case to launch her national fame. Instead, her shoddy, politically motivated prosecution of local police sent the signal that Baltimore was a free-fire zone, and the city soon became one of the most violent in the world. Then, just as things were getting a bit better, Mosby used COVID as an excuse to get even more lenient on crime.

  

  Mosby herself, meanwhile, became known for firing prosecutors she disliked and then threw in a dose of mortgage fraud for good measure. That should at least be enough to get her disbarred, sparing Marylanders from further Mosby shenanigans, but who knows? Maybe some lefty judge will rule that disbarring criminals is racist!

  Yet even Mosby is a model of public service compared to someone like Dolton, Illinois mayor Tiffany Henyard, who has recently become a minor celebrity for her brazen corruption.

  

  Tiffany Henyard

  The New York Post:

  Henyard was first elected in 2021 to lead the small town of 20,000 people about 20 miles south of downtown Chicago.

  She has come under scrutiny in recent weeks for a laundry list of antics, including accusations of blowing thousands in public funds on luxury travel and dining, turning local police into both her personal bodyguards and backup dancers for music videos, and hiring DJs for town meetings — all while the village falls $5 million into debt. …

  Dolton Trustee Kiana Belcher said former Dolton Chief of Police Robert Collins admitted the mayor forced him to target people.

  “She’ll have the police follow you and give tickets,” Belcher said. “I went out of town and she had one of the officers … give me tickets … It was a manipulation tactic.”

  When she confronted Collins, Belcher said, the chief didn’t hesitate to blame Henyard.

  “He looked down at me and said, ‘She told me to write them,’” Belcher said.

  Henyard was elected in February 2021, meaning she has now been trashing her city for three whole years. Yet, despite by all accounts being an obvious criminal, she’s still in office and still unindicted. Why would that be?

  Well, because the DA to bring those charges would be Cook County DA Kim Foxx!

  

  Kim Foxx

  Yes, that Kim Foxx: the one who tried to let Jussie Smollett off the hook, requiring a special prosecutor to swoop in and save the day. When she wasn’t giving favorable treatment to black celebrities, Foxx ordered her minions to avoid cash bail and to only bring felony theft charges against criminals with at least ten prior felony convictions.

  So, why would we expect Kim Foxx to hold a fellow soul sista accountable? For that matter, why would we expect anyone on the left to do it?

  The modern left has almost wholly abandoned traditional religious faith, but it certainly still has its priests and saints. And the narcissistic message, repeated day in and day out, is that black women are America’s sacred beings. Joe Biden ran on a promise to consider black women, and only black women, for his first Supreme Court pick—93% of Americans need not apply. The result was Ketanji Brown Jackson, who can’t say what a woman is but nevertheless thinks the entire planet should hear every inane thought passing through her head.

  As soon as Fani Willis’s own conduct threw the entire lawfare campaign against Donald Trump, years in the making, into doubt, the ethnonarcissist whining came tumbling out immediately: Criticizing a prosecutor for corruptly staffing her loser boyfriend onto a job he wasn’t qualified for was racist!

  

  It is our job to revere them and to listen to them (just don’t ever touch their hair!).

  

  

  

  We’re not even close to rock bottom, either. Remember, as we speak, Kamala Harris is a heartbeat away from the presidency.

  Kamala Harris talks to Americans like we are all in kindergarten. Here she explains AI: pic.twitter.com/YHFgT5K3E4

  — Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) July 12, 2023

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 22:25

• US Deploys "Project Maven" In Middle East As AI Warfare Underway
  US Deploys “Project Maven” In Middle East As AI Warfare Underway

  Remember in 2018 when thousands of Google employees protested its Pentagon contract called “Project Maven” that used article intelligence technology to analyze drone surveillance footage?

  Well, six years after Google did not renew its Pentagon contract for AI work to head off an internal rebellion, that very same technology was used by the US military to identify targets across the Middle East in bombing raids by fighter jets earlier this month, according to Schuyler Moore, chief technology officer for US Central Command, which runs US military operations in the Middle East, who spoke with Bloomberg. 

  “We’ve been using computer vision to identify where there might be threats,” Moore said in an interview. 

  

  She continued: “We’ve certainly had more opportunities to target in the last 60 to 90 days,” adding the US is currently looking for “an awful lot” of rocket launchers in the region. 

  Moore’s comments provide some of the strongest evidence to date that the US military is using AI targeting systems to identify potential strike areas. She noted that even after Google walked away from the project, experimenting has continued with drone or satellite imagery. 

  Based at Central Command, or Centcom headquarters in Tampa, Florida, Moore revealed that US forces in the Middle East have been testing AI targeting systems using a combination of satellites and other data sources and conducted exercises over the past year with the technology. 

  “October 7th, everything changed,” she said, adding, “We immediately shifted into high gear and a much higher operational tempo than we had previously.” She noted the shift from exercises to real-life missions was “a pretty seamless shift” with Project Maven. 

  However, Moore emphasized that Project Maven’s AI capabilities only identify potential targets instead of automatically confirming and killing the target. 

  A separate Bloomberg report noted:

  “A growing number of US military officers predict that AI will transform the way America and its enemies make war, ranking it alongside the radio and machine gun in its potential to revolutionize combat.” 

  Insiders told Bloomberg that Project Maven’s core data-fusion platform is developed by Palantir Technologies, and involves critical contributions from Amazon Web Services, ECS Federal, L3Harris Technologies, Maxar Technologies, Microsoft, and Sierra Nevada.

  According to Colonel Joseph O’Callaghan, the fire support coordinator for the 18th Airborne Corps and its AI targeting efforts leader, Project Maven, “is not Terminator. The machines aren’t making the decisions, they’re not going to arise and take over the world.”

  America’s use of AI in warfare for targeting assistance is no longer theoretical. This could be the beginning innings of Skynet. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 22:05

• Watch: Mother Pushes 'They/Them' Pronouns On 15-Month-Old Baby At Gay Pride Event
  Watch: Mother Pushes ‘They/Them’ Pronouns On 15-Month-Old Baby At Gay Pride Event

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news,

  A video posted by the New Yorker which is going viral on X shows a mother asking people to refer to her 15 month old baby as a ‘they/them’.

  

  Yes, really.

  The baby is wearing a frilly pink, yellow and blue dress as the mother walks it through the pride parade.

  This mom at a pride parade says her 15-month-old baby uses they/them pronouns. How can a 15-month-old baby decide to be nonbinary?? pic.twitter.com/eK0TNgKQFT

  — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 29, 2024

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

  “How old is she?” asks another person.

  “They are 15 months old,” the mother responds, adding, “We actually use them/them pronouns until they tell us who they are.”

  The mother then explains how, “We are pulling apart this idea of sex which is related to genitals and gender which is related to how you move in the world, so what you wear, how you share your identity with other people, all of those things are related to gender.

  Respondents on X accused the mother of using her baby as a prop for her own demented political ideology.

  That’s not a baby to them, that’s a prop.

  — 𝓓𝖗. 𝓥𝖔𝐱 𝓞𝖈𝖚𝖑𝖎 (@Vox_Oculi) February 29, 2024

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

  This is the result of toxic narcissistic mothers using their children as accessories to gain clout in their cult community.

  — The Morning Shitter (@MorningShitter) February 29, 2024

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

  Look at me! Look at my baby! We are special! We are unique! Look at us! LOOK!

  — Barry on the fly (@barryonthefly) February 29, 2024

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

  It blows my mind that there’s a pregnant woman thinking right now thinking

  “ I can’t wait to take my baby to the pride parade”

  🤡

  — Rob Coates 🇺🇸 (@LuckyHippie926) February 29, 2024

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

  That poor child doesn’t have a chance.

  — 1776Forever❤️🇺🇸 (@4luvofcountry) February 29, 2024

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

  She’s dying to have some clout in the cult. That poor child.

  — Arlin (@Arlin4US) February 29, 2024

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

  Münchausen by proxy. Very sick mother. Poor baby.

  — Live🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@22liv22) February 29, 2024

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

  That’s because Transheusen by proxy stuck again…👇👆💯 pic.twitter.com/MjD5XvXhEl

  — Liberacrat Media™️ (@Liberacrat_) February 29, 2024

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

  Public schools are also responsible for this pic.twitter.com/gvmYumH0X6

  — Alex – hall of memes (@hall_O_memes) February 29, 2024

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

  As we previously highlighted, under new rules introduced by the Biden administration, foster parents will be forced to “affirm” the gender identity of children in their care or risk being refused permission to become foster parents in the first place.

  *  *  *

  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
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 21:45

• Election Embezzlement: Harris Says Administration To Pay College Students To Register Voters
  Election Embezzlement: Harris Says Administration To Pay College Students To Register Voters

  Like the increasingly brazen thievery in America’s cities, the Democrats’ use of government resources to reinforce their hold on power is becoming more blatant by the day. 

  The latest: On Tuesday, Vice President Kamala Harris announced the federal government will start paying college students to register voters and serve as poll workers. College students and young people in general historically lean heavily Democratic: Biden received 65% of votes cast by 18- to 24-year-olds in the 2020 election, compared to 51% overall. 

  “We have been doing work to promote voter participation for students,” said Harris as she met with activists representing more than 20 voting rights groups. “For example, we have under the Federal Work-Study program now allow students to get paid through Federal Work-Study to register people and to be non-partisan poll workers. As we know, this is important for a number of reasons. One, to engage our young leaders in this process and activate them in terms of their ability to strengthen our communities.”

  Biden signed EO14019 ordering federal govt to use taxpayer $ to mobilize (his) voters. @StephenM has FOIAed details, and I’ve sought them in Congress, but Biden is hiding them. Sounds like the election-year plan is underway. https://t.co/fFIkVHZVpm

  — Senator Bill Hagerty (@SenatorHagerty) February 28, 2024

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

  “Curious how they chose college students and not veterans,” said New Hampshire state Rep. Ross Berry. “Almost like this is just a scheme to register Democrats and not actually increase participation of all voters. In most states, the areas they are targeting already have these programs under the National Voter Registration Act, so why the sudden interest in injecting college students? I think we know the answer.”

  Further tipping the self-serving slant of its taxpayer-funded voter-registration machinery, the Biden administration chose the Juneteenth holiday — which commemorates the abolition of slavery — as one of three occasions on which it will have registration blitzes, Axios reports. Biden won the 2020 black vote by a 92% to 8% margin. Another push will come on the anniversary of the Voting Rights Act.

  It doesn’t stop there. Harris said the administration has also ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to send voter registration solicitations to Americans who’ve obtained health insurance via the Affordable Care Act marketplace. According to a 2017 Cal-Berkeley study, “Republicans are fully 12 percentage points less likely to purchase marketplace plans than Democrats.”

  

  Federal employees, whose 2019 party identification skewed Democratic by a 50% to 26% margin, get free time off to vote — even if they choose to do so during early voting. 

  The announcement that taxpayer funds will be used to pay a Democrat-leaning demographic to find new voters to register comes a week after Biden, defying the Supreme Court, cancelled another $1.2 billion in student debt — in a thinly-veiled scheme to use your money to buy votes.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 21:25

• A Global, Digital Coup d'État
  A Global, Digital Coup d’État

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

  There was a time.

  What seemed to be unfolding was a huge intellectual error for the history books.

  A new virus had come along and everyone was freaking out and smashing all normal social functioning.

  

  The excuse turns out just to be the cover story. Still, it bears examination.

  Even though plenty of outside commentators said the pathogen should be handled in the normal way—with known treatment and calm while those most susceptible stayed cautious until endemicity—some people on the inside fell prey to a great fallacy. They had come to believe computer models over known realities. They thought that you could separate everyone, drive down infections, and then the virus would die out.

  This was never a plausible scenario, as anyone who knew something about the history of pandemics would report. All known experience stood against this cockamamie scheme. The science was very clear and widely available: lockdowns do not work. Physical interventions in general achieve nothing.

  But, hey, they said it was an experiment born of new thinking. They would give it a whirl.

  When it became clear that the lockdowners had gained sway over policy, many of us thought, truly, how long can this really last? A week, maybe two. Then we would be done. But then something strange happened. The money began to flow. And flow. The states thought that was awesome so they kept it up. The money printers got to work. And general chaos broke out: social, cultural, educational, economic, and political.

  It all happened so fast. The months rolled on with no break in the narrative. It became crazy after a time. There were so few critics. We didn’t know it but they were being silenced by a new machinery that had already been constructed for this purpose.

  Among that which was censored was criticism of the inoculation potion that was being rolled out and which would eventually be forced on populations all over the world. They said it was 95 percent effective, but it wasn’t clear what that could mean. No coronavirus had ever been controlled by any vaccination. How could this be true? It wasn’t true. Nor did the shot stop the spread.

  Many people said this at the time. But we couldn’t hear them. Their voices were muffled or silenced. The social media companies had already been taken over by government-connected interests working on behalf of intelligence agencies. We had believed that these tools were designed to increase our connections with others and enable free speech. Now they were being used to broadcast a preset regime narrative.

  Strange industrial shifts took place. Gas cars were deprecated in favor of a new experiment in electric vehicles, thanks to intense consumer demand caused by shortages owing to supply chain breakages. Digital learning platforms got a huge boost because physical classrooms were closed. Online ordering and doorstep delivery became the rage because people were told not to leave their homes and small businesses were forcibly closed.

  The pharma companies were riding high of course, gradually acculturating the population to a subscription model. There were attempts to convert whole countries to a health passport system. New York City tried this, along with actual physical segregation of the entire city, with the vaccinated considered clean while the unvaccinated were not allowed into restaurants, libraries, or theaters. The digital app didn’t work however, so that plan fell apart quickly.

  All of this happened in less than one year. What began as an intellectual error in public health ended up looking like a digital coup d’état.

  Coups of the past featured rebel armies from the hills storming the cities and joined by the military as they invaded the palace and the leader and his family fled in a carriage or helicopter depending on the epoch.

  This was different. It was organized and planned by intelligence agencies within the structure of the global state, a great reset to reject the forms of the past and replace them all with a new dystopia.

  Initially, the people who said this was a great reset were derided as crazed conspiracy theorists. But then it turned out that the head of the World Economic Forum (WEF), Klaus Schwab, had written a book by the very title that you could buy from Amazon. It turns out to be H.G. Wells’s “The Open Conspiracy” updated for the 21st-century technology.

  There turns out to be much more than that. There was an angle to all of this that impacts the mechanisms we use for democratic control of societies. Buried in the flurry of bills shoved through in March 2020 was a liberalization of balloting and voting that would never have been tolerated before. In the name of social distancing, mail-in ballots would become the norm, along with the known irregularities they introduce.

  Implausibly, this too was part of the plan.

  Researching and realizing all of this in real time has been a bit much. It has shattered the old ideological paradigms. The old theories no longer explain the world as it is unfolding. It causes all of us to revisit our priors, at least those with minds adaptable enough to pay attention. For vast swaths of the intellectual class, this is not possible.

  Looking back, we should have known something was up at the outset. There were too many anomalies. Were the people in charge really so stupid as to believe that you can make a virus go away by making everyone stay home? It’s absurd. You cannot control the microbial kingdom this way, and surely everyone with a modicum of intelligence knows this.

  Another clue: there never was an exit plan. What exactly was fourteen days of frozen activity going to achieve? What was the benchmark of success? We were never told. Instead, the elites in media and government simply encouraged fear. And then met that fear with ridiculous protocols like dousing ourselves with sanitizer, masking while walking, and presuming every other person is a disease vector.

  This was psychological warfare. To what end and how ambitious are these hidden plans for us?

  Only four years later, we are grasping the fullness of what was going down.

  For those of us schooled in the persistent incompetence of government to get anything right, much less deploy a plan with anything like precision, elaborate conspiracy theories of plots and schemes always seem implausible. We just don’t believe them.

  This is why it took us so long to see the fullness of what was deployed in March 2020, a scheme that combined a plethora of seemingly disparate governmental/industrial ambitions including:

  1) rollout of subscription/platform model of Pharma distribution,

  2) mass censorship,

  3) election management/rigging,

  4) universal basic income,

  5) industrial subsidies to digital platforms,

  6) mass population surveillance,

  7) cartelization of industry,

  8) shift in income distribution and entrenchment of administrative state power,

  9) crushing of ‘populist’ movements worldwide, and

  10) the centralization of power generally speaking.

  To top it off, all these efforts were global in scope. This whole model truly stretches the bounds of plausibility. And yet all the evidence points to exactly the above. It just goes to show that even if you don’t believe in conspiracies, conspiracies believe in you. It was a digital-age coup d’état unlike anything humanity has ever experienced.

  How long will it take us to process this reality? We seem to be only at the early stages of understanding, much less resisting.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 21:05

• Leaked Military Files Show Russia's Nuclear Strike Threshold Lower Than Previously Known
  Leaked Military Files Show Russia’s Nuclear Strike Threshold Lower Than Previously Known

  This week the Financial Times has published contents of a cache of leaked classified Russian documents said to lay out the country’s doctrine and strategy for tactical nuclear weapons use. Included in the documents is info on the Kremlin’s minimum criteria for using tactical nukes.

  The criteria outlined in the secret files range “from an enemy incursion on Russian territory to more specific triggers, such as the destruction of 20% of Russia’s strategic ballistic missile submarines,” according to FT.

  

  The question of the possibility of Russia and NATO stumbling toward nuclear war is without doubt heavy on the minds of many this week, especially after French President Emmanuel Macron’s Monday comments wherein he raised sending Western troops to fight Russia in Ukraine and said of the possibility, “nothing should be ruled out.”

  Putin appeared to respond directly in his Thursday state of the nation televised address, spelling out: “Everything that they are coming up with now, with which they threaten the entire world – all this really threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, and therefore the destruction of civilization – don’t they understand this, or what?“

  “They must ultimately understand that we also have weapons – and they know about it, just as I now said  – we also have weapons that can hit targets on their territory,” he warned.

  As for tactical nuke usage, Russia’s tactical arsenal has more limited range in comparison to strategic weapons, and thus are designed and intended for the possibility of a ‘nearer’ war in Europe or Asia. 

  But worrisomely, the FT review of the documents (which date from 2008-2014) finds that the Kremlin likely has a threshold “lower than Russia has ever publicly admitted, according to experts who reviewed and verified the documents.” Experts cited in the FT say the contents of the leaks likely remain part of Moscow’s current nuclear doctrine.

  The documents show that Russia has recently rehearsed scenarios involving war with China. Per the leaks and the FT report:

  One exercise outlining a hypothetical attack by China notes that Russia, dubbed the “Northern Federation” for the purpose of the war game, could respond with a tactical nuclear strike in order to stop “the South” from advancing with a second wave of invading forces.

  “The order has been given by the commander-in-chief . . . to use nuclear weapons . . . in the event the enemy deploys second-echelon units and the South threatens to attack further in the direction of the main strike,” the document said.

  And for another scenario involving a hypothetical enemy invasion of Russian territory: 

  A separate training presentation for naval officers, unrelated to the China war games, outlines broader criteria for a potential nuclear strike, including an enemy landing on Russian territory, the defeat of units responsible for securing border areas, or an imminent enemy attack using conventional weapons.

  The slides summarise the threshold as a combination of factors where losses suffered by Russian forces “would irrevocably lead to their failure to stop major enemy aggression”, a “critical situation for the state security of Russia”.

  🇷🇺 RUSSIA STATE OF THE NATION – PUTIN SPEECH
  West risks nuclear war if NATO sends troops to Ukraine
  “But now the consequences will be far more tragic,” said Putin. “They think it (war) is a cartoon,” he said. pic.twitter.com/YT7BxHzY7o

  — Freddie Ponton 🇫🇷 (@LFCNewsMedia) February 29, 2024

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

  Another envisioned situation seems to apply more for something like a Ukraine escalation scenario where there’s runaway escalation. According to the FT’s analysis and citations of the documents:

  Other potential conditions include the destruction of 20 per cent of Russia’s strategic ballistic missile submarines, 30 per cent of its nuclear-powered attack submarines, three or more cruisers, three airfields, or a simultaneous hit on main and reserve coastal command centres.

  Russia’s military is also expected to be able to use tactical nuclear weapons for a broad array of goals, including “containing states from using aggression […] or escalating military conflicts”, “stopping aggression”, preventing Russian forces from losing battles or territory, and making Russia’s navy “more effective”.

  The particular above section has language in it which seems to lay out the most minimal threshold, but which perhaps leaves open the most interpretation for Russian leadership. Publicly at least, Kremlin leadership has said nuclear weapons could only be deployed if Russian territory and population face existential threat.

  Putin in his aforementioned Thursday major address seemed to appeal in his nuclear warning given to NATO to this doctrine of “containing states from using aggression” – given that’s precisely what he’s now accusing the West of in Ukraine.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 20:45

• Lloyd Austin: Israel Killed "Over 25,000" Women & Children In Gaza
  Lloyd Austin: Israel Killed “Over 25,000” Women & Children In Gaza

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said on Thursday that Israel has killed over 25,000 Palestinian women and children in Gaza since October 7.

  When asked how many women and children have been killed during a House Armed Services Committee, Austin replied, “It’s over 25,000.” The number is higher than the estimate that’s been put out by Gaza’s Health Ministry.

  

  The Gaza ministry said on Thursday that over 30,000 have been killed so far and has consistently said about 70% of the casualties are women and children, which puts the women and child death toll around 21,000.

  Gaza’s Health Ministry does not account for the thousands of civilians who are missing and presumed to be dead under the rubble or for Palestinians who may have been buried instead of being sent to a hospital or morgue.

  The breakdown of communications in the Gaza Strip has also impeded the Health Ministry’s ability to keep a count.

  In October, President Biden accused the Palestinians of lying about the death toll when confronted about civilian casualties. “I have no notion that the Palestinians are telling the truth about how many people are killed,” Biden said.

  But a few weeks later, Barbara Leaf, assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, acknowledged Gaza’s Health Ministry has always been reliable and said the true death toll is likely higher than what they’re reporting. Israeli media reports have also said that Israeli military officials believe the Health Ministry’s numbers are close to accurate.

  Austin, a former Raytheon board member, also said the US had provided Israel with 21,000 munitions since October 7 to support the massacre, which does not include the American-provided bombs Israel was already armed with, as it receives $3.8 billion in military aid from the US each year.

  Watch the moment Secretary Austin addressed casualties in Gaza…

  The death toll in Gaza hit 30,035 today (almost certainly an undercount).

  Just now, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that at least 25,000 of those people killed by Israeli forces were women & kids: pic.twitter.com/ZVXkdiePgQ

  — Prem Thakker (@prem_thakker) February 29, 2024

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

  Despite the massive civilian casualty rate and the International Court of Justice ruling that it’s “plausible” Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, the US continues to provide unconditional military support and political cover.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 20:25

• "Everything Is Gone": Texas Wildfire Ravages America's Cattle-Mecca
  “Everything Is Gone”: Texas Wildfire Ravages America’s Cattle-Mecca

  A devastating wildfire ravages parts of the Texas Panhandle, home to more than 85% of the state’s cattle herd. This comes when the nation’s cattle herd has collapsed to a seven-decade low, pushing up retail beef prices at the supermarket to record high levels. 

  Texas A&M Forest Service said the wildfire, called Smokehouse Creek fire, has scorched more than 850,000 acres (344,000 hectares) of grasslands as of Wednesday. 

  

  Reuters spoke with state Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, who warned the wildfire has likely killed tens of thousands of livestock and destroyed grain in storage bins. 

  “It’s almost like gasoline when it goes up,” Miller said, adding, “We have now lost over a million acres.

  Massive wildfires burning in the Texas Panhandle sent cattle fleeing from the smoke. https://t.co/5PrXIHBO85 pic.twitter.com/RP62inDfKO

  — CBS News (@CBSNews) February 28, 2024

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

  Miller said the wildfire rages in the Panhandle area, where 85% of the state’s herd is located. It’s important to note that Texas is the top cattle producer in the nation. He said cattle in feedlots and dairies are safe. 

  

  “Feed supplies are scarce for surviving cattle because the fire destroyed grazing lands and bins holding crops like wheat and corn,” he said.

  Miller continued: “There’s absolutely zero vegetation. The cattle that do survive, they have absolutely nothing to eat.”

  Readers have been well informed about ‘beeflation’ and why it’s happening: 

  • Dwindling US Cattle Herd Implies Supermarket Beef Prices May Rise Even More
  • Hamburger Prices Might Continue To Rise As US Cattle Herd Shrinks
  • US Cattle Prices Hit Nine-Year High As National Herd Drops To Half-Century Low
  • US Beef Prices Hit Record High As Nation’s Cattle Herd Expected To Shrink Through 2025
  • US Cattle Herd At 73-Year Lows As Retail Beef Prices At Record Highs

  The latest data from the US Department of Agriculture’s biannual cattle inventory report earlier this month showed that the US cattle herd (as of Jan. 1) fell 2% from a year ago to 87.2 million cattle. That’s the smallest herd count since 1951. 

  

  A shrinking herd has pushed US retail beef prices to a record of $5.35 per pound. And prices could go much higher. 

  

  In a separate interview with Bloomberg, Miller said: “I know ranchers up there — families that have had these ranchers for more than 100 years — everything is gone.” 

  Meanwhile, elites in the WEF cult have been pushing hard to ban cow farts because they allege it’s contributing to climate change. These folks are adamant about resetting the global food supply chain to one that puts working poor folks on a bug-heavy diet. 

  

  We, the people, will not eat bugs.

  The Significance Behind The Texas Fires

  – This Is Another Blow To Our Supply Chain
  – Where The Fires Happened Is Where 88% Of Texas Cattle Feed
  – The US Is Already Down Roughly 1 Billion Pounds Of American Beef
  – These Fires Are Another Win For Foreign Imports

  Is it another… pic.twitter.com/HrF6XuVMnk

  — Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) February 29, 2024

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

  Now, more than ever, Americans must break out of the food industrial complex and start their own farms or simply buy from local mom-and-pop farms. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 20:05

• Sen. Cotton Asks Pentagon Why Airman Who Self-Immolated Was Allowed To Serve
  Sen. Cotton Asks Pentagon Why Airman Who Self-Immolated Was Allowed To Serve

  Authored by Aaron Pan via The Epoch Times,

  Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) has questioned why the Pentagon allowed an active-duty airman, who set himself on fire in front of the Israeli embassy in Washington on Feb. 25, to serve in the U.S. Air Force.

  In a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin dated Feb. 28, Mr. Cotton sought answers from the Department of Defense (DOD) over the incident.

  “You have made it a top priority to address ‘extremism’ amongst our total force, and this act of horrific violence—in support of a terrorist group—raises serious questions about how this individual was allowed to serve on active duty,” Mr. Cotton wrote.

  Aaron Bushnell, 25, a member of the U.S. Air Force, self-immolated in protest against Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip that followed the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas.

  Before setting himself on fire, he said he would “no longer be complicit in genocide” and would therefore “engage in an extreme act of protest,” repeating the phrase “free Palestine.”

  The man passed away as a result of his severe injuries.

  In a press release, Mr. Cotton said Mr. Bushnell’s actions show that he “obviously harbored extreme, anti-American views.”

  

  Mr. Cotton asked the DOD to provide information if its anti-extremism training program “addresses support for Islamic terrorist groups like Hamas.” He also wanted to know whether the airman showed any “extremist leanings” or “concerning behavior” before the self-immolation incident and if the DOD took any action to deal with such a concern.

  The senator from Arkansas also wanted to know if the Pentagon found any Islamic terrorist support groups within the department and whether any service members were involved in anti-Israeli protests that violated DOD regulations on restricted political activities.

  Mr. Cotton, a member of the Armed Services Committee, asked if the man had access to classified information that undermined U.S. national security. The senator set a March. 7 deadline for the DOD to answer his questions.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to the Pentagon for comment.

  The self-immolation incident comes more than four months into the Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip, which began in response to the Oct. 7 attacks in southern Israel by the Hamas terrorist group. The attack killed 1,200 Israeli civilians and security personnel.

  According to the U.S. Air Force, Mr. Bushnell was a cyber defense operations specialist for the 531st Intelligence Support Squadron at Joint Base San Antonio in Texas. He had been on active duty since May 2020.

  The Air Force sent condolences to Mr. Bushnell’s family after the incident. “When a tragedy like this occurs, every member of the Air Force feels it. We extend our deepest sympathies to the family and friends of Senior Airman Bushnell,” Col. Celina Noyes, commander of the 70th Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Wing, said in a statement on Monday.

  The incident happened as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seeks cabinet approval for a military operation in Rafah, in southern Gaza, while a temporary cease-fire deal is being negotiated. Israel’s military offensive in Gaza, however, has drawn criticism, including allegations of genocide against Palestinians.

  Israel has adamantly denied the genocide allegations and says it is carrying out operations in accordance with international law.

  It is not the first self-immolation incident related to anti-Israel protests. Last December, a man also set himself on fire outside the Israeli consulate in Atlanta.

  Atlanta Police Chief Darin Schierbaum said at the time that it was “an act of extreme political protest” and did not believe it was connected to terrorism.

  Polls Show Majority of Americans Support Israel

  Israel is a longtime U.S. ally and receives billions of dollars in military support annually from Washington. Since the start of the war, the Biden administration has been actively engaged in diplomatic efforts to prevent the conflict from escalating into a wider regional war.

  A January poll by Gallup found that nearly 4 in 10 Americans—38 percent—think that Washington provides Israel with the right amount of support, 36 percent say that U.S. support is too much, and 24 percent say it’s too little. Regarding Palestinians, 31 percent of Americans think that they get the right level of support, and 33 percent say it’s too little.

  According to another Gallup poll in November, 50 percent of Americans approved of Israel’s military operation against Hamas, and 45 percent disapproved. A poll by the Harris Poll and HarrisX in October showed that most Americans were in favor of Israel in the war and opposed the Hamas terrorist group. Eighty-four percent of Americans sided with Israel in the war, while 16 percent sided with Hamas.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 19:45

• Seismic Shift: Indonesia Floods Market With Cheap Nickel, Sparking Wave Of Unprofitable Mines  
  Seismic Shift: Indonesia Floods Market With Cheap Nickel, Sparking Wave Of Unprofitable Mines  

  The global nickel industry is experiencing a seismic shift as Indonesia emerges as a major low-cost supplier, contributing to a collapse in prices of the metal used in everything from making stainless steel to high-grade batteries. 

  Nickel is trading at just above $17,400 a ton, according to the London Metal Exchange, down from $48,800 a ton in early 2022. 

  

  Miners are writing down their businesses and closing mines due to a massive drop in income. At least six projects were closed in Australia last year as Indonesia flooded the world with cheap nickel. Bloomberg notes the supply of cheap nickel could mean upwards of at least half the world’s mines could become unprofitable. 

  

  Christel Bories, the head of Eramet, told the Financial Times that Indonesia has the world’s largest nickel reserves and could soon account for 75% of all high-grade nickel production by the end of the decade. 

  “It has really made a big part of the old traditional players structurally non-competitive for the future,” Bories said, adding, “This is part of the industry will either disappear or be subsidized by governments.” 

  She continued: “The uncompetitive mines elsewhere will close. I’m not sure there will be so many governments deciding to subsidize big production with a lot of money just to compete with Indonesia production.”

  Bories’ gloomy prediction for the oversupplied nickel markets is similar to other mining CEOs, like BHP chief executive Mike Henry, who recently warned that its flagship nickel business in Australia could close in the next few months. He said help from the government “may not be enough” to save the company’s nickel operation in the western part of the country. 

  Two weeks ago, BHP wrote down the entire value of its Western Australian nickel mining operation. The firm reported a shocking 86% year-on-year plunge in net income for the second half of 2023. 

  Bloomberg pointed out that Indonesia’s move to flood the world with cheap nickel will keep markets oversupplied through the decade’s end. 

  

  “There is a serious structural challenge as a result of Indonesian nickel,” said Duncan Wanblad, chief executive officer of Anglo American Plc. The miner was forced to take a $500 million writedown on its nickel business last week. 

  Wanblad added: “They don’t seem to be letting up anytime soon.”

  The imploding nickel market is great news for electric vehicle companies, who were once battered by skyrocketing battery material costs during Covid. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 19:25

• Biden Blasted After Claiming Crime Rate Has Fallen To 50-Year-Low
  Biden Blasted After Claiming Crime Rate Has Fallen To 50-Year-Low

  Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

  Joe Biden was slammed online after claiming that the crime rate in the US has fallen to the lowest point its been in half a century.

  

  Biden has claimed that during the Trump Administration, “America saw the largest increase in murders ever recorded,” while “Under the Biden-Harris Administration, there has been a significant decrease in crime — including one of the largest yearly declines in homicides ever.”

  Respondents noted that Biden completely ignored a huge spike in violent crime in large, mostly Democrat run, cities.

  Biden says last year the U.S. had “one of the lowest rates of all violent crimes in more than 50 years.”

  What Biden failed to acknowledge is the spike in violent crime in Democrat-run cities, mostly notably Washington, D.C., which saw it’s deadliest year in over two decades in… pic.twitter.com/3tb69S6Cvt

  — Townhall.com (@townhallcom) February 28, 2024

  Biden made the comments while touting a fact sheet on what he’s done to “fight crime.”

  The gaslighting from Biden on this, whose Vice President fundraised for violent rioters, rapists and murderers, is another level. 2020 violence was organized and endorsed by defund the police, pro-BLM Democrats. pic.twitter.com/dL10rMpSZH

  — Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) February 28, 2024

  Others noted that the drop in overall crime can be attributed to a massive reduction in reporting of crime stats and simply making things that were previously criminal no longer crimes.

  Pretty easy to do when the largest, most violent cities don’t report their stats. pic.twitter.com/w1iWf54M5r

  — JR (@J_Moore1292) February 28, 2024

  When you stop charging for crime you reduce crime https://t.co/vStmJMtqvz pic.twitter.com/lW8otZ87ud

  — Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) February 28, 2024

  Meanwhile, when you glance at the news…

  More…

  It’s not hard to see a drop in crime when you declare nothing is a crime.

  — Toxic Something Podcast – w/ Keith Burgin (@KeithBurgin) February 28, 2024

  Just because liberal cities don’t even bother arresting these people anymore

  — The_Real_T_Paine (@RealTPaine1) February 28, 2024

  lol what? You mean they stopped reporting it and no longer prosecute. This is a very dangerous claim… but I’m sure you already know that.

  — Tactical Trout (@tacticaltrout84) February 28, 2024

  If you don’t charge the crime I suppose your illegitimate statistics make sense ! No charges no crime right?

  10 million illegals crossed illegally, that’s ten million crime charges right there!

  SMH

  — LAURA (@realLauraLenti) February 28, 2024

  Your crime statistics are wrong. Just like your employment statistics every time you release them. You always have to redact them!

  Tell the People who got the MOST JOBS: Illegals!

  DC had the Deadliest Year (2023) Ever! https://t.co/b63Z5H3srl

  — Jamie Girl (@Jamie29036) February 28, 2024

  It’s easy to reduce crime when you rename it “mostly peaceful protest.”

  — Un hombre cualquiera ✠ (@CualquieraOnvre) February 28, 2024

  Arrest and conviction numbers do go down when you don’t arrest and convict. That is true.

  — Jim Tussing (@JimTussing) February 28, 2024

  Even if your statement was true, which it’s not, it would have nothing to do with any policy of the Biden administration. In fact, it would be in spite of it.

  — Steve L (@stevewe99218425) February 28, 2024

  Admittedly I’m not schooled on the subject, but if a criminal isn’t arrested or prosecuted is it not considered a crime? Therefore crime has reduced 🤷🏼‍♂️

  — GP (@imh8nit) February 28, 2024

  *  *  *

  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
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 19:05

• Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law To Arrest Illegal Immigrants
  Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law To Arrest Illegal Immigrants

  By Jack Phillips of Epoch Times,

  A federal judge on Thursday temporarily blocked a Texas law that grants state police the capacity to arrest people who are suspected of illegally crossing the U.S.–Mexico border.

  

  The measure, called Senate Bill 4 and signed by Gov. Greg Abbott in December, was slated to go into effect on March 5, but U.S. District Judge David Ezra ruled that it violated the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy clause that grants the federal government sole authority over immigration matters. The judge also rejected Texas’s arguments that it was being invaded under the Constitution’s Article IV.

  In his order, Judge Ezra, a Reagan appointee, said the law would run afoul federal immigration laws and claimed Texas would then be able to “permanently supersede federal directives” and would “amount to nullification of federal law and authority.” According to the judge, that’s a “notion that is antithetical to the Constitution and has been unequivocally rejected by federal courts since the Civil War.”

  As a result, he argued, the federal government would “suffer grave irreparable harm” because other states would be inspired to pass similar measures. “SB 4 threatens the fundamental notion that the United States must regulate immigration with one voice,” he wrote.

  At a Feb. 15 hearing, Judge Ezra expressed skepticism as the state pleaded its case for what is known as Senate Bill 4. He also said he was somewhat sympathetic to the concerns expressed by Mr. Abbott and other state officials about the unprecedented influx of illegal aliens. Judge Ezra then added that he feared the United States could become a confederation of states enforcing their own immigration laws.

  “That is the same thing the Civil War said you can’t do,” he told the attorneys.

  A lawyer for the state of Texas argued in court that due to the deluge of illegal immigrants, enabled by drug cartels and smugglers, it is tantamount to an invasion and that Texas has the right to defend itself under the Constitution.

  But the judge said that while he is “sympathetic” to the state’s concerns, he appeared to be skeptical of the lawyer’s argument. “I haven’t seen, and the state of Texas can’t point me to any type of military invasion in Texas,” Judge Ezra said. “I don’t see evidence that Texas is at war.”

  Mr. Abbott, a Republican, has backed the law, saying that it would compliment his efforts to provide better border security, noting that his state has dealt with a surge of illegal crossings in recent years. Other measures that Mr. Abbott has implemented are a barrier in the Rio Grande, razor wire barriers at certain border crossings, and prohibiting federal agents tasked by the Biden administration with undoing these measures from accessing border areas in Texas.

  Other state Republicans who back the law have said it would not target immigrants already living in the U.S. because of the two-year statute of limitations on the illegal entry charge and would be enforced only along the state’s border with Mexico.

  Civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), as well as other groups in favor of illegal immigration, have said they oppose the measure. A director at the American Gateways group told the Texas Tribune she believes the law is “based on xenophobia and racism,” while not making “our communities safer,” without elaborating.

  Read the rest at The Epoch Times

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 18:25

• Hunter Finally Admits Joe Biden Is "The Big Guy"
  Hunter Finally Admits Joe Biden Is “The Big Guy”

  Hunter Biden on Wednesday testified to Congress that his father, Joe, was indeed “the big guy” referenced in an email pertaining to a business deal with a Chinese state-linked energy company that made the Biden family and friends millions of dollars. He denied, however, that Joe Biden ever received a 10% stake as was indicated in the text message.

  

  “At one point, we asked Hunter about the 10% for the ‘big guy,’” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) told Breitbart News following the first son’s six-hour, closed-door deposition.

  “We showed him the email … And he said, ‘Oh, that was after my father left office.’” she told the outlet.

  

  Hunter then tried to downplay the 10% idea:

  What’s wrong with having a pie-in-the-sky idea? When he [Joe Biden] left office in 2017, it thought he was done. I had no idea was gonna run for president. What’s wrong with just some pie?’ … thinking that he [Joe Biden] could be in the business. –Breitbart

  Greene said that Hunter insisted that “there was no percentage for my father in the business,” and that the 20 speakerphone calls Joe Biden joined was considered normal.

  “He was saying it’s totally normal for your parents to call you,” said Greene. “He just totally kept on saying, ‘Oh, this is normal. This is normal.'”

  Greene also confirmed Rep. Matt Gaetz’s (R-KY) statement that Hunter testified he joined the board of Burisma Holdings to counter Russian aggression. “He said he was picked to serve on Burisma ‘s board to defend democracy and Burisma was stopping Russian aggression,” Greene said.

  Hunter’s stated purpose for joining Burisma’s board is a new claim that indicates bizarre reasoning never before revealed.

  In 2015, Burisma was under suspicion of money laundering and public corruption. Prosecutor Victor Shokin investigated the case before his termination due to pressure from then-Vice President Joe Biden, who threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid from Ukraine if the Ukrainian government did not fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma.

  Joe Biden later bragged about the firing during a 2018 appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations. –Breitbart

  According to Greene, Republicans need to “get ready” for Democrats to fabricate another Russian disinformation hoax related to Hunter and the 2024 election – and that it would likely fit the media’s existing narrative against both Trump and protecting the Biden family.

  “I have a prediction that they’re gonna move it on to members of Congress like me and others, Jim Jordan, Jamie Comer, any of us that got hot and heavy on this Ukraine Burisma stuff, that they’re somehow going to say that Republicans are Russian sympathizers. They’re gonna call me that anyway, because I won’t fund the Ukraine war. They’re probably going to accuse us of being Russian sympathizers and falling for Russian disinformation and its election meddling. And then Democratic members of Congress here already saying they will not certify Trump’s election if he wins.” -MTG

  “It was there’s a really weird theme in there with the whole Russian thing,” said Greene. 

  In November, the House Oversight Committee revealed that President Biden received $40,000 in Chinese funds which were “laundered” through his brother, James Biden, in a “complicated financial transaction” marked as a ‘loan,’ which took place just weeks after Hunter Biden threatened the Chinese with his father’s wrath in a July 30, 2017 text message to a CEFC China Energy employee.

  The alleged 2017 transfer from first brother James Biden to the future president involves the same business deal in which Joe Biden was called the “big guy” and penciled in for a 10% cut — and would be the first proven instance of the commander-in-chief getting a piece of his family’s foreign income.

  …

  The money ended up in Joe Biden’s bank account on Sept. 3, 2017, via a check labeled “loan repayment” from his younger brother, who partnered with Hunter in the venture. -NY Post

  “Remember when Joe Biden told the American people that his son didn’t make money in China?” asked Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) in a video posted to X. ““Well, not only did he lie about his son Hunter making money in China, but it also turns out that $40,000 in laundered China money landed in Joe Biden’s bank account in the form of a personal check.”

  pic.twitter.com/WKwuRzmYUy

  — Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) November 1, 2023

  This of course came on the heels of another “loan” repayment from James to Joe for $200,000.

  pic.twitter.com/tJUMLMD5iu

  — Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) October 20, 2023

  The aristocrats!

  

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 18:05

• Gavin Newsom Faces Criticism For Minimum Wage 'Bread' Carveout That Benefited Top Donor
  Gavin Newsom Faces Criticism For Minimum Wage ‘Bread’ Carveout That Benefited Top Donor

  Authored by Eric Lendrum via American Greatness,

  California Governor Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) is facing greater scrutiny after it was discovered that a minimum wage carveout he is pushing for would benefit one of his top campaign donors.

  

  According to the Washington Free Beacon, the newly-passed law that will go into effect in April will raise the minimum wage at fast-food chains from $16 to $20 an hour. However, the law includes an exception for restaurants that bake and sell bread; one of the chains that would thus be excluded from the new $20 minimum wage would be Panera Bread, which is owned by Democratic megadonor Greg Flynn.

  Flynn had previously donated $100,000 to oppose the recall election against Newsom in 2021, then donated another $64,800 to support the governor’s re-election campaign in 2022. Flynn has even admitted to knowing Newsom so personally that he can text him directly.

  Newsom claimed that the new law, known as the FAST Act, was negotiated after “countless hours of negotiations with dozens of stakeholders over two years.” Flynn denied having anything to do with the exception for Panera, although other sources have claimed that it was indeed Flynn who pressured Newsom into supporting the carveout.

  The exception drew criticism even from figures who wouldn’t necessarily be political enemies of Newsom. Michelle Korsmo, the head of the National Restaurant Association, said that “everyone’s scratching their heads” in reaction to the exception, adding that “you may be celebrating or you may be lamenting the bakery exemption. But remember, all of that comes through relationships.”

  Newsom’s push for the exception even drew criticism from the original author of the FAST Act, Assemblyman Chris Holden (D-Calif.), who said “we don’t know how that came about.”

  Other fast-food chains lashed out at the law itself, regardless of the bizarre exception. A spokesman from McDonald’s said that the new law would cost each of the company’s locations at least $250,000 a year due to the forced pay raise. This reflects the ongoing trend of California passing laws that are increasingly hostile to businesses, thus forcing many companies to relocate to other states to escape such high costs.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 17:45

• Putin Warns Of Nuclear War If West Sends Troops To Fight In Ukraine
  Putin Warns Of Nuclear War If West Sends Troops To Fight In Ukraine

  Russian President Vladimir Putin used the occasion of his much anticipated annual state of the nation address to directly warn NATO that sending Western troops to fight in Ukraine could result in nuclear war.

  He explained that allegations from Western officials saying Russia intends to attack Europe are “nonsense”—after on Monday French President Emmanuel Macron really escalated the rhetoric by telling a security forum in Paris that sending Western troops to Ukraine “cannot be ruled out”. 

  

  “Everything that they are coming up with now, with which they threaten the entire world – all this really threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, and therefore the destruction of civilization – don’t they understand this, or what?” Putin said.

  “They must ultimately understand that we also have weapons – and they know about it, just as I now said  – we also have weapons that can hit targets on their territory,” he warned.

  On the battlefield, the Ukrainians have continued their retreat amid defeat in several villages and towns outside of Avdiivka. As we previously analyzed, it seems the more that evidence of Russia’s ‘winning’ the war becomes obvious, the more desperate the actions and rhetoric out of NATO officials becomes.

  Putin acknowledged that the Russian military is “confidently advancing in a number of operational areas and liberating more and more territories” and currently “firmly holds the initiative” in Ukraine.

  He also warned over Sweden’s recent approved accession into NATO, saying Russia is building up extra forces along its Western border to “neutralize the threats” of ongoing NATO expansion.

  “The West has provoked conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, and other regions around the world while consistently propagating falsehoods. Now they have the audacity to say that Russia harbours intentions of attacking Europe. Can you believe it? We all know that their claims are utterly baseless,” Putin said. 

  Putin suggested that years of Western aggression and foreign meddling and disastrous interventions have only served to unite “numerous” countries and a “multi-ethnic people:

  The so-called West, with its colonial practices and penchant for inciting ethnic conflicts around the world, not only seeks to impede our progress but also envisions a Russia that is a dependent, declining, and dying space where they can do as they please. In fact, they want to replicate in Russia what they have done in numerous other countries, including Ukraine: sowing discord in our home and weakening us from within. But they were wrong, which has become abundantly clear now that they ran up against the firm resolve and determination of our multi-ethnic people.

  This is very dark. Putin gets to nuclear threats vs. the west quickly.

  “We also have weapons that can strike targets on their territory […] We remember what happened to those who sent their forces to our country. Now consequences for interventionists will be far more tragic.” pic.twitter.com/oEFPBzZ7o1

  — max seddon (@maxseddon) February 29, 2024

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

  According to more from the speech via state media on his comments pertaining to ramped-up NATO involvement in Ukraine:

  At the same time, those same nations are “selecting targets to conduct strikes on our territory,” the Russian head of state claimed, adding that there is now talk of “deploying NATO military contingents to Ukraine.”

  Putin reminded would-be aggressors that all previous attempts to conquer Russia have ended in failure, warning that “now the consequences for potential invaders would be far more tragic.” He pointed out that Russia has a massive nuclear arsenal, which is in a state of “complete readiness for guaranteed deployment.”

  The past two months have seen the Kremlin specifically accuse France of sending its mercenaries to northern cities like Kharkiv, in order to conduct cross-border drone and mortar attacks on Russian territory. Russia’s military says it has successfully targeted places where foreign fighters are staying, but Kiev has of course not confirmed this.

  * * *

  More from Putin’s speech: “Russia ready for dialogue”

  “Russia is ready for dialogue with the United States on issues of strategic stability. However, it is important to clarify that in this case we are dealing with a state whose ruling circles are taking openly hostile actions towards us. So, they seriously intend to discuss strategic security issues with us while simultaneously trying to inflict strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield, as they themselves say…

  …Indeed, just like any other ideology promoting racism, national superiority or exceptionalism, Russophobia is blinding and stupefying. The United States and its satellites have, in fact, dismantled the European security system which has created risks for everyone.

  Clearly, a new equal and indivisible security framework must be created in Eurasia in the foreseeable future. We are ready for a substantive discussion on this subject with all countries and associations that may be interested in it. At the same time, I would like to reiterate (I think this is important for everyone) that no enduring international order is possible without a strong and sovereign Russia.”

  Putin’s response allegations of ‘nukes in space’

  “Here is a good example of their hypocrisy. They have recently made unfounded allegations, in particular, against Russia, regarding plans to deploy nuclear weapons in space. Such fake narratives, and this story is unequivocally false, are designed to involve us in negotiations on their conditions, which will only benefit the United States.

  …At the same time, they have blocked our proposal which has been on the table for over 15 years. I am referring to the agreement on preventing the deployment of weapons in outer space, which we drafted back in 2008. There has been zero reaction to it. It is totally unclear what they are talking about.”

  With the horrifying death toll in Ukraine, it’s past time for the West to push Kiev toward serious peace negotiations, and for a final end to this war, now having entered its third year.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 02/29/2024 – 17:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• War Is Bad For You… And The Economy
  War Is Bad For You… And The Economy

  Authored by William Hartung via Counterpunch.org,

  Joe Biden wants you to believe that spending money on weapons is good for the economy.

  

  That tired old myth – regularly repeated by the political leaders of both parties – could help create an even more militarized economy that could threaten our peace and prosperity for decades to come. Any short-term gains from pumping in more arms spending will be more than offset by the long-term damage caused by crowding out new industries and innovations, while vacuuming up funds needed to address other urgent national priorities.

  The Biden administration’s sales pitch for the purported benefits of military outlays began in earnest last October, when the president gave a rare Oval Office address to promote a $106-billion emergency allocation that included tens of billions of dollars of weaponry for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. MAGA Republicans in Congress had been blocking the funding from going forward and the White House was searching for a new argument to win them over. The president and his advisers settled on an answer that could just as easily have come out of the mouth of Donald Trump: jobs, jobs, jobs. As Joe Biden put it:

  We send Ukraine equipment sitting in our stockpiles. And when we use the money allocated by Congress, we use it to replenish our own stores… equipment that defends America and is made in America: Patriot missiles for air defense batteries made in Arizona; artillery shells manufactured in 12 states across the country — in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas; and so much more.

  It should be noted that two of the four states he singled out (Arizona and Pennsylvania) are swing states crucial to his reelection bid, while the other two are red states with Republican senators he’s been trying to win over to vote for another round of military aid to Ukraine.

  Lest you think that Biden’s economic pitch for such aid was a one-off event, Politico reported that, in the wake of his Oval Office speech, administration officials were distributing talking points to members of Congress touting the economic benefits of such aid. Politico dubbed this approach “Bombenomics.” Lobbyists for the administration even handed out a map purporting to show how much money such assistance to Ukraine would distribute to each of the 50 states. And that, by the way, is a tactic companies like Lockheed Martin routinely use to promote the continued funding of costly, flawed weapons systems like the F-35 fighter jet. Still, it should be troubling to see the White House stooping to the same tactics.

  Yes, it’s important to provide Ukraine with the necessary equipment and munitions to defend itself from Russia’s grim invasion, but the case should be made on the merits, not through exaggerated accounts about the economic impact of doing so. Otherwise, the military-industrial complex will have yet another never-ending claim on our scarce national resources.

  Military Keynesianism and Cold War Fallacies

  The official story about military spending and the economy starts like this: the massive buildup for World War II got America out of the Great Depression, sparked the development of key civilian technologies (from computers to the internet), and created a steady flow of well-paying manufacturing jobs that were part of the backbone of America’s industrial economy.

  There is indeed a grain of truth in each of those assertions, but they all ignore one key fact: the opportunity costs of throwing endless trillions of dollars at the military means far less is invested in other crucial American needs, ranging from housing and education to public health and environmental protection. Yes, military spending did indeed help America recover from the Great Depression but not because it was military spending. It helped because it was spending, period. Any kind of spending at the levels devoted to fighting World War II would have revived the economy. While in that era, such military spending was certainly a necessity, today similar spending is more a question of (corporate) politics and priorities than of economics.

  In these years Pentagon spending has soared and the defense budget continues to head toward an annual trillion-dollar mark, while the prospects of tens of millions of Americans have plummeted. More than 140 million of us now fall into poor or low-income categories, including one out of every six children. More than 44 million of us suffer from hunger in any given year. An estimated 183,000 Americans died of poverty-related causes in 2019, more than from homicide, gun violence, diabetes, or obesity. Meanwhile, ever more Americans are living on the streets or in shelters as homeless people hit a record 650,000 in 2022.

  Perhaps most shockingly, the United States now has the lowest life expectancy of any industrialized country, even as the International Institute for Strategic Studies reports that it now accounts for 40% of the world’s — yes, the whole world’s! — military spending. That’s four times more than its closest rival, China. In fact, it’s more than the next 15 countries combined, many of which are U.S. allies. It’s long past time for a reckoning about what kinds of investments truly make Americans safe and economically secure — a bloated military budget or those aimed at meeting people’s basic needs.

  What will it take to get Washington to invest in addressing non-military needs at the levels routinely lavished on the Pentagon? For that, we would need presidential leadership and a new, more forward-looking Congress. That’s a tough, long-term goal to reach, but well worth pursuing. If a shift in budget priorities were to be implemented in Washington, the resulting spending could, for instance, createanywhere from 9% more jobs for wind and solar energy production to three times as many jobs in education.

  As for the much-touted spinoffs from military research, investing directly in civilian activities rather than relying on a spillover from Pentagon spending would produce significantly more useful technologies far more quickly. In fact, for the past few decades, the civilian sector of the economy has been far nimbler and more innovative than Pentagon-funded initiatives, so — don’t be surprised — military spinoffs have greatly diminished. Instead, the Pentagon is desperately seeking to lure high-tech companies and talent back into its orbit, a gambit which, if successful, is likely to undermine the nation’s ability to create useful products that could push the civilian sector forward. Companies and workers who might otherwise be involved in developing vaccines, producing environmentally friendly technologies, or finding new sources of green energy will instead be put to work building a new generation of deadly weapons.

  Diminishing Returns

  In recent years, the Pentagon budget has approached its highest level since World War II: $886 billion and counting. That’s hundreds of billions more than was spent in the peak year of the Vietnam War or at the height of the Cold War. Nonetheless, the actual number of jobs in weapons manufacturing has plummeted dramatically from three million in the mid-1980s to 1.1 million now. Of course, a million jobs is nothing to sneeze at, but the downward trend in arms-related employment is likely to continue as automation and outsourcing grow. The process of reducing arms industry jobs will be accelerated by a greater reliance on software over hardware in the development of new weapons systems that incorporate artificial intelligence. Given the focus on emerging technologies, assembly line jobs will be reduced, while the number of scientists and engineers involved in weapons-related work will only grow.

  In addition, as the journalist Taylor Barnes has pointed out, the arms industry jobs that do remain are likely to pay significantly less than in the past, as unionization rates at the major contractors continue to fall precipitously, while two-tier union contracts deny incoming workers the kind of pay and benefits their predecessors enjoyed. To cite two examples: in 1971, 69% of Lockheed Martin workers were unionized, while in 2022 that number was 19%; at Northrop Grumman today, a mere 4% of its employees are unionized. The very idea that weapons production provides high-paying manufacturing jobs with good benefits is rapidly becoming a thing of the past.

  More and better-paying jobs could be created by directing more spending to domestic needs, but that would require a dramatic change in the politics and composition of Congress.

  The Military Is Not an “Anti-Poverty Program”

  Members of Congress and the Washington elite continue to argue that the U.S. military is this country’s most effective anti-poverty program. While the pay, benefits, training, and educational funding available to members of that military have certainly helped some of them improve their lot, that’s hardly the full picture. The potential downside of military service puts the value of any financial benefits in grim perspective.

  Many veterans of America’s disastrous post-9/11 wars, after all, risked their physical and mental health, not to speak of their lives, during their time in the military. After all, 40% of veterans of the Iraq and Afghan wars have reported service-related disabilities. Physical and mental health problems suffered by veterans range from lost limbs to traumatic brain injuries to post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD). They have also been at greater risk of homelessness than the population as a whole. Most tragically, four times as many veterans have committed suicide as the number of military personnel killed by enemy forces in any of the U.S. wars of this century.

  The toll of such disastrous conflicts on veterans is one of many reasons that war should be the exception, not the rule, in U.S. foreign policy.

  And in that context, there can be little doubt that the best way to fight poverty is by doing so directly, not as a side-effect of building an increasingly militarized society. If, to get a leg up in life, people need education and training, it should be provided to civilians and veterans alike.

  Tradeoffs

  Federal efforts to address the problems outlined above have been hamstrung by a combination of overspending on the Pentagon and the unwillingness of Congress to more seriously tax wealthy Americans to address poverty and inequality. (After all, the wealthiest 1% of us are now cumulatively worth more than the 291 million of us in the “bottom” 90%, which represents a massive redistribution of wealth in the last half-century.)

  The tradeoffs are stark. The Pentagon’s annual budget is significantly more than 20 times the $37 billion the government now invests annually in reducing greenhouse gas emissions as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. Meanwhile, spending on weapons production and research alone is more than eight times as high. The Pentagon puts out more each year for one combat aircraft — the overpriced, underperforming F-35 — than the entire budget of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Meanwhile, one $13 billion aircraft carrier costs more to produce than the annual budget of the Environmental Protection Agency. Similarly, in 2020, Lockheed Martin alone received $75 billion in federal contracts and that’s more than the budgets of the State Department and the Agency for International Development combined. In other words, the sum total of that company’s annual contracts adds up to the equivalent of the entire U.S. budget for diplomacy.

  Simply shifting funds from the Pentagon to domestic programs wouldn’t, of course, be a magical solution to all of America’s economic problems. Just to achieve such a shift in the first place would, of course, be a major political undertaking and the funds being shifted would have to be spent effectively. Furthermore, even cutting the Pentagon budget in half wouldn’t be enough to take into account all of this country’s unmet needs. That would require a comprehensive package, including not just a change in budget priorities but an increase in federal revenues and a crackdown on waste, fraud, and abuse in the outlay of government loans and grants. It would also require the kind of attention and focus now reserved for planning to fund the military.

  One comprehensive plan for remaking the economy to better serve all Americans is the moral budget of the Poor People’s Campaign, a national movement of low-income people inspired by the 1968 initiative of the same name spearheaded by the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., before his assassination that April 4th. Its central issues are promoting racial justice, ending poverty, opposing militarism, and supporting environmental restoration. Its moral budget proposes investing more than $1.2 trillion in domestic needs, drawn from both cuts to Pentagon spending and increases in tax revenues from wealthy individuals and corporations. Achieving such a shift in American priorities is, at best, undoubtedly a long-term undertaking, but it does offer a better path forward than continuing to neglect basic needs to feed the war machine.

  If current trends continue, the military economy will only keep on growing at the expense of so much else we need as a society, exacerbating inequality, stifling innovation, and perpetuating a policy of endless war. We can’t allow the illusion — and it is an illusion! — of military-fueled prosperity to allow us to neglect the needs of tens of millions of people or to hinder our ability to envision the kind of world we want to build for future generations. The next time you hear a politician, a Pentagon bureaucrat, or a corporate functionary tell you about the economic wonders of massive military budgets, don’t buy the hype.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 23:40

• Moscow Accuses Zelensky Of Lying After Issuing 'Very Low' Ukraine Troop Death Count
  Moscow Accuses Zelensky Of Lying After Issuing ‘Very Low’ Ukraine Troop Death Count

  Just after the Russia-Ukraine war hit the two-year mark this past weekend, entering a third year and with no end in sight, President Volodymyr Zelensky publicly disclosed Ukraine’s official troop death count for the first time. However it immediately resulted in skepticism among even Western pundits, and charges that he’s ‘lying’.

  “31,000 Ukrainian soldiers have died in this war. Not 300,000 or 150,000, or whatever Putin and his lying circle are saying. But each of these losses is a great loss for us,” he said.

  

  Both sides have kept their casualty count a closely guarded secret, with each country’s media regularly making claims of an immense death toll only on the other side, given it’s an important part of wartime propaganda to keep the enemy in the dark and not let them perceive they could be ‘winning’.

  Zelensky’s claim that Ukrainian troop deaths are in the low tens of thousands, and not in the hundreds of thousands, elicited fierce pushback from Moscow. It marks a rare moment that either side is actually talking specific figures, and really for most outside observers the whole ‘debate’ is grim. 

  Russia’s Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said in a briefing before his top generals on Tuesday that Ukraine has actually lost 444,000 servicemen since the war’s start. This is an astounding figure which far surpasses any and all prior speculation by pundits. He said according to a translation by NBC:

  “As a result of the decisive and active actions of our military personnel, the combat potential of the Ukrainian armed forces is decreasing. On average, since the beginning of the year, the enemy has been losing more than 800 personnel and 120 units of various weapons, including foreign-made ones, every day,” Shoigu claimed.

  “After the collapse of the counteroffensive, the military command of the Ukrainian Armed Forces is trying to use the remaining reserves to stabilize the situation and prevent the collapse of the front,” Shoigu added.

  Pentagon officials have recently issued their own estimation of Moscow’s losses, saying that US intelligence believes that some 315,000 Russian troops have been killed.

  What is clear is that Ukrainian forces are currently in rapid retreat, and lack manpower and enough weaponry to keep up resistance along the front line. Ukraine’s military has admitted retreating from several area villages after its collapse in Avdiiivka earlier this month:

  “The Armed Forces have indeed withdrawn from the village of Lastochkyne, which is located immediately west of Avdiivka. There are difficult terrain conditions there, a cascade of small water reservoirs, and this qualifies as stabilizing the defence line, levelling it out to some extent. The enemy continues to attempt offensive actions towards the settlement of Orlivka, conducting them from three fronts, but they are unsuccessful.”

  Meanwhile, there’s been no official progress related to potential ceasefire talks. Zelensky has continued touring Europe, and is even now in Saudi Arabia, trying to get large arms flowing into Kiev again.

  While Russia’s claims are anything but confirmed and are likely exaggerated (as all governments in a time of war tend to do when it comes to enemy losses), some pundits have found it much more credible that Zelensky’s 31,000 figure:

  Zelenskyy lied to his people about the casualty numbers of Ukrainian troops. Russian Defence Minister Shoigu disclosed today that Ukraine lost 444k soldiers so far. Currently 800 Ukrainian soldiers die every day. Obituary data from Ukraine confirms this. pic.twitter.com/v3ZiKBbkhY

  — Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) February 27, 2024

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

  Zelensky is sticking by Ukraine’s own peace formula, which would require that Russia leave all occupied territory, and even give up claims to Crimea. This of course remains a non-starter for Moscow, which remains at an immense advantage both in manpower, artillery, and advanced arms. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 23:20

• From Trucker-Boycotts To Grid-Down – There's Only One Way To Survive A Food Crisis
  From Trucker-Boycotts To Grid-Down – There’s Only One Way To Survive A Food Crisis

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  If there is one reality that Americans need to accept, it’s that every system has a breaking point and there are no exceptions. Human beings are built to adapt and this has given us incredible resilience, but it also means we have a tendency to wait too long to fix the parts of our society that are broken. Instead, we let the problems build and fester until, sadly, the final straw falls and everything comes crashing down.

  

  Sometimes this collapse is by chance and sometimes it’s by design. In either case the catalyst is the same – The public does not prepare and they don’t take action to correct the people creating the crisis until it’s too late.

  In our modern era of invasive technology, economic weakness, nuclear weapons and biowarfare, this is an unsustainable model. We can no longer ignore threats on instability in the hopes that they will go away or that governments will defuse the danger, nor can we simply pick up the pieces over and over again after each calamity. There may come a time when the mess is so big we won’t be able to clean it up. People must plan ahead, and they must stop tolerating the notion of passive involvement in the mechanisms that influence their lives and future.

  I write often about hypothetical trigger events and breakdown scenarios because a large number of people still need to be educated on how fragile the western world truly is right now. For example, any significant disruption to supply chains and logistics at this time would be devastating for a large number of Americans (or Europeans).

  In the past couple weeks alone there has been a rising tide of political discontent among US truckers; the very people that handle over 70% of all freight in our country. They have threatened to boycott a number of Democrat controlled cities (primarily New York City) over a host of issues and complaints including the legal treatment of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.  This boycott may not play out in the near term (watch for talk of boycotts to escalate in November around election time), but the potential is on the table and it’s an important learning moment.  What would happen if the US freight system actually stopped?

  US supply chains operate on a “just in time” freight schedule – Meaning, all the grocery stores in your area will carry just enough backstock to serve normal business operations for about a week, when the next fleet of trucks arrive.

  The just-in-time structure is the lifeblood of the supply chain, and most American cities would fall into chaos after one week without it. Trains and railway networks handle around 28% of total freight and have struggled through a long state of decline. There is no realistic alternative to trucks.

  FEMA and the National Guard could try to field drivers to fill the void, but consider this: There are currently 3.5 million freight drivers in the US today, and that number is at least 80,000 drivers short of what is needed. Do you think the government or the military is going to be able to come up with enough scabs to undermine a trucker strike against blue cities?  There’s no chance.

  I have to say, I’m not opposed the concept of a trucker boycott; its a peaceful redress of grievances and all peaceful measures should be exhausted first. All they have to do is refuse to take on shipments to places like NYC or Washington DC – Many of them are subcontractors that can pick and choose whatever jobs they want.

  However, we need to keep in mind how terrified the Canadian government was during their trucker protests; so terrified that they labeled the truckers as terrorists and started freezing the bank accounts of anyone supporting them. This action was against their own constitutional laws; that’s how effectively frightening a freight shutdown is to politicians.

  Even so, if the US government responded in the same way as Canada, it still wouldn’t do much to stop a boycott. Tensions are extremely high and it’s only a matter of time before conflict erupts in one form or another.  The political left (and their globalist handlers) have offered no indication whatsoever that they intend to back away from their current destructive path. Something has to give.  Why not a trucker protest or red state protest cutting off blue regions from vital resources?

  Unfortunately, there are still a number of conservatives and independents living in these cities that could be negatively affected by a freight shutdown along with their progressive neighbors. Maybe this strike never comes to fruition and everything will continue on as “normal.” Maybe not. The point is, anything can happen and the way our economy and supply chains currently function is not going to pass muster for much longer.

  The average American has around one week’s worth of food in their pantry at any given time. With FEMA response in place a rationing system would be instituted over the course of several weeks, probably using a digital tracking method much like an EBT card. And make no mistake, there will be strings attached to any government rationing program:

  “Do you have the latest covid booster? No ration card until your shots are up to date. We see that you have registered firearms…you need to turn those in before you can get rations. We see that you’ve made problematic comments in your social media history, you may not be eligible.”

  It takes around 7-10 days of zero food supply for panic to set into a population (when people finally realize things are not going back to normal). It takes two weeks for starvation to take a physical toll and three weeks for people to start dying. Riots and looting are inevitable, but that won’t solve the problem if there’s no food to loot.

  Some people will argue that they only need to not be where the shortages are, but there’s no way to predict this. In the case of conservative trucker boycotts, the targeted areas are obvious, but that is only one scenario. There are a host of events that could cause a crippled supply chain in both rural and urban areas, including a mass immigration crisis or a nationwide grid down scenario.

  The only viable solutions is to secure a long term food storage plan, and don’t forget the protein because western governments have become increasingly hostile against animal agriculture these days. (Get your affordable freeze dried beef supply HERE with promo code “market15”)

  Food storage for each family for at least a year is essential. It doesn’t have to start there; even one month of food will give you an edge over most of the population and will ensure you don’t have to go begging to FEMA. But eventually a year’s supply or more is necessary (along with community organization for mutual security). This will give you time to establish a more permanent and sustainable food plan after the worst has happened.

  You can see the storm that a logistical breakdown would cause. In 30 days or less a city like New York could be brought to its knees even with government intervention. On a national scale, regardless of the cause, the result would be about the same. Ultimately there are two kinds of people in the wake of these kinds of events – The people that planned ahead, and everyone else. It’s my hope that through education and encouragement we can convince enough of the populace to prepare so that this large percentage of Americans acts as a redundancy against catastrophe (leftists won’t listen, but maybe the rest of the public will).

  In other words, the goal is to give the public a natural immunity against supply chain collapse, so that when the crisis does strike the effects will be greatly diminished.

  *  *  *

  Food security is one of the most important preparations Americans can make as threats continue to rise. Stock up on Texas-raised long-term storage Ribeye, NY Strip, Tenderloin, and more with Prepper All-Naturals.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 23:00

• "Who Could Be Next": Top Canadian Pension Fund Sells Manhattan Office Tower For $1, Sparking Firesale Panic
  “Who Could Be Next”: Top Canadian Pension Fund Sells Manhattan Office Tower For $1, Sparking Firesale Panic

  New York during the inflationary surge of the late 70s and early 80s was a mythical place where one could purchase a Park avenue penthouse for $1 (while assuming the copious debt, of course). Now, thanks to the brutal bear hug of the highest interest rates in 40 years and the ongoing CRE crisis, those legendary days have made a comeback to the Big Apple, if only in the realm of commercial real estate for now.

  According to Bloomberg, Canadian pension funds – which until recently had been among the world’s most prolific buyers of real estate, starting a revolution that inspired retirement plans around the globe to emulate them because, in the immortal words of Ben Bernanke, Canadian real estate prices never go down…

  

  … are finally realizing that gravity does exist . And so, the largest one among them is taking steps to limit its exposure to the most-beleaguered commercial property type — office buildings.

  Canada Pension Plan Investment Board has recently done three deals at deeply discounted prices, selling its interests in a pair of Vancouver towers, and a business park in Southern California, but it was its Manhattan office tower redevelopment project that shocked the industry: the Canadian asset manager sold its stake for just $1. The worry now is that such firesales will set an example for other major investors seeking a way out of the turmoil too, forcing a wholesale crash in the Manhattan real estate market which until now had managed to avoid real price discovery.

  Indeed, as Goldman wrote earlier this week, while office vacancy rates are expected to keep rising well into the next decade..

  

  … the average price of many nonviable offices has fallen only 11% to $307/sqft since 2019 (left side of Exhibit 6). The bank goes on to note that in the hardest-hit cities, as many as 14-16% of offices may no longer be viable, and their average transaction prices have already declined by 15-35%. However, because of lack of liquidity in this market, these recent transaction prices have not yet started to reflect the current values of many existing offices. Goldman ominously concludes that “alternative valuation methods, like those that are based on repeat-sales and appraisal values, suggest that actual office values may be far lower than the average transaction price.” Well, a $1 dollar price would certainly confirm that actual office values are far, far lower (more in the full Goldman note available to professional subscribers).

  

  And going back to the historic firesale, at the end of last year the Canadian fund sold its 29% stake in Manhattan’s 360 Park Avenue South for $1 to one of its partners, Boston Properties, which also agreed to assume CPPIB’s share of the project’s debt. The investors, along with Singapore sovereign wealth fund GIC Pte., bought the 20-story building in 2021 with plans to redevelop it into a modern workspace.

  

  “It’s the opposite of a vote of confidence for office,” said John Kim, an analyst tracking real estate companies for BMO Capital Markets. “My question is, who could be next?”

  As office building anxiety has swept the financial world, as the persistence of both remote work and higher borrowing costs undercuts the economic fundamentals that made the properties good investments in the first place, a wave of banks from New York to Tokyo recently conceded that loans they made against offices may never be fully repaid, sending their share prices plunging and prompting fears of a broader credit crunch.

  But the real test will be what price office buildings actually trade for – especially once the hundreds of billions of loan backing the properties mature….

  

  …. and until now there have been precious few examples since interest rates started rising. That’s why industry-watchers see such shocking liquidations like CPPIB’s as a very ominous sign for the market.

  The Manhattan firesale isn’t the pension fund’s first sale: last month, CPPIB sold its 45% stake in Santa Monica Business Park, which the fund also owned with Boston Properties, for $38 million. That’s a discount of almost 75% to what CPPIB paid for its share of the property in 2018. The deal came just after the landlords signed a lease with social media company Snap that required they spend additional capital to improve the campus, Boston Properties Chief Executive Officer Owen Thomas said on a conference call.

  Peter Ballon, CPPIB’s global head of real estate, declined to comment on the recent deals, but said the fund has continued to invest in office buildings, including a recently completed, 37-story tower in Vancouver.

  “Selling is an integral part of our investment process,” Ballon said in an emailed statement. “We exit when the asset has maximized its value and we are able to redeploy proceeds into higher and better returns in other assets, sectors and markets, including office buildings.”

  As Bloomberg notes, the pension fund isn’t actively backing away from offices, but it’s not looking to increase its office holdings either. And where a property requires additional investment, CPPIB might simply look to sell so it can put that cash somewhere it can get higher returns instead, said the person, who asked not to be identified discussing a private matter.

  CPPIB’s C$590.8 billion ($436.9 billion) fund is one of the world’s largest pools of capital, and its C$41.4 billion portfolio of real estate — stretching from Stockholm to Bengaluru — includes almost every property type, from warehouses, to life sciences complexes, to apartment blocks.

  While that scale would mitigate any potential losses from individual transactions, it also means even a small shift in CPPIB’s office appetite has the power to cause ripple effects in the market.

  While the 360 Park liquidation may be shocking, it’s just the first of many: with hybrid work schedules set to depress demand for office space in the long term, and higher interest rates increasing the cost of the constant upgrades needed to attract and keep tenants, even the best office buildings may not be able to compete with investment opportunities elsewhere.

  “To get even better returns in your office investment you’re going to have to modernize, you’re going to have to put a lot more money into that office,” said Matt Hershey, a partner at real estate capital advisory firm Hodes Weill & Associates. “Sometimes it’s better to just take your losses and reinvest in something that’s going to perform much better.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 22:40

• The Beltway Judge Hearing Trump Cases & Her Anti-Trump, Anti-Kavanaugh Husband
  The Beltway Judge Hearing Trump Cases & Her Anti-Trump, Anti-Kavanaugh Husband

  Authored by Julie Kelly via RealClearInvestigations,

  Washington glitterati assembled at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in October to celebrate federal employees making a difference in government. Hosted by CNN anchor Kate Bolduan, the black-tie affair featured in-person appearances by top Biden White House officials including Chief of Staff Jeffrey Zients, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, and Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack.

  

  Judge Florence Pan, who now has key Trump issues such as presidential immunity before her in court … U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia/Wikimedia

  Midway through the evening’s festivities, Max Stier, president of the group sponsoring the event – the Partnership for Public Service, a $24 million nonprofit based in Washington that recruits individuals to work in the civil service – took the stage to thank his high-profile guests.

  “Great leaders are the heart and soul of effective organizations,” Stier said, “which is why I am so thankful to see so many of our government’s amazing leaders here tonight.”

  Stier also acknowledged one federal employee, his wife, Judge Florence Y. Pan, who sits on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Pan would soon need no introduction. Earlier this month she made headlines  by asking Donald Trump’s lawyers whether the presidential immunity he sought in connection with alleged Jan. 6 crimes was absolute.

  “Could a president order SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival?” Pan asked Trump lawyer John Sauer. “That’s an official act – an order to SEAL Team Six?” she clarified.

  

  … while her husband, Democrat insider Max Stier, continues campaigning against Trump after  emerging as a key accuser of his former Yale classmate and present Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Business Wire

  Although the back and forth between Pan and Sauer was inconclusive as to the question about a president’s criminal liability, many mainstream outlets misconstrued the exchange while lionizing Pan for posing a question that they then used to advance their description of Trump as a lawless menace. The exchange, which Pan prompted when she posed the pre-arranged hypothetical at beginning of the hearing, has raised new questions about the impartiality of judges hearing politically charged cases.

  For months progressives have been insisting that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas should recuse himself from any case that involves Trump because of his wife Ginni Thomas’ political involvement and participation in the events of Jan. 6. Those same interests have yet to express similar worries about Pan’s objectivity, despite her husband’s longtime political activism and current opposition to another Trump presidency.

  Power couples are the lifeblood of Washington so it’s not unusual for political activists, judges, and White House bigwigs to rub elbows at fancy soirees like the October gala at the Kennedy Center. But Max Stier’s longtime ties to the Democratic Party, his access to key Biden administration officials, and his suggestion that Trump represents a threat to democracy at the same time his wife is handling sensitive matters related to the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the former president should raise questions about her impartiality.

  A member of Bill Clinton’s legal team during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Stier, 57, has been a Democratic Party fixture for nearly three decades. Since 2001, he has run the Partnership for Public Service, which is funded by some of the most generous benefactors of progressive causes including the Gates Foundation, Democracy Fund, and the Ford Foundation. In 2020, the Partnership launched an effort tied to the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) movement, pledging to demand what it considers greater diversity in government agencies and institutions.

  In a letter to mark the group’s 20-year anniversary, Stier lamented the country’s democratic “crisis” caused by “a violent insurrection against Congress and growing suspicions about the results of a legitimate election.”

  

  Liberal media and Democrats see big conflicts of interest in conservative Justice Clarence Thomas and his activist wife, Ginni. They seem less concerned about Judge Florence Pan and her Democrat activist husband, Max Stier. MSNBC/YouTube

  Recently, Stier has joined the growing chorus of Beltway voices warning that a second Trump presidency would pose a unique “threat” to the country’s future. Stier and others are particularly concerned with Trump’s promise to convert tens of thousands of federal bureaucrats into political appointees, meaning they could be fired without cause by the president. Such a plan, according to Stier, undermines the Constitution and the law.

  “You wind up with a workforce that is not only going to deliver poor service, but also that is going to be a tool for retribution and actions that are contrary to our democratic system,” Stier said in a December 2023 Politico interview. “If you are selecting people on the basis of their political persuasion or their loyalty as opposed to their expertise and their commitment to the public good, you’re going to wind up with less good service and more risk for the American people.”

  “I don’t think we have a deep state today,” he said. But “the proposals that are on the table would create a deep state, rather than the effective state that we all should be pursuing.”

  Stier is doing more than just discussing the issue in media interviews; he is working directly with Biden officials to prevent Trump from following through on his pledge if he wins in November. Stier has called Trump’s plans to reform so-called “Schedule F” employees “an assault on our civil service, the core to our system of government and democratic institutions.”

  When Republicans threatened to shut down the government last year over disagreements with Democrats on federal spending levels, Stier warned it would sideline what unions estimate as 4 million government employees. “[It] is the equivalent of burning down your own house,” he said of a potential shutdown.

  

  Stier recalled bad things about Kavanaugh, above, decades after their Yale days together in the 1980s. AP

  But Stier is perhaps best known for his involvement in attempting to thwart Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Stier and Kavanaugh attended Yale University together in the mid-1980s. In September 2019, while reporting on a sexual abuse accusation made by another Yale student, Deborah Ramirez, the New York Times disclosed Stier’s account of an incident he allegedly witnessed during their freshman year.

  Two Times reporters, in their first-person-plural “analysis” favoring Kavanaugh’s accusers, wrote:

  

  The New York Times reporting quoted below led to the book above including Stier’s allegations. Amazon.com

  A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.

  Stier’s still unproven allegations are included in a new documentary, “Justice,” about the Kavanaugh scandal. The film, which premiered at the 2023 Sundance Film Festival, centers on Ramirez and features a recording of Stier’s never-before-heard 2018 call to the FBI tip line detailing what he claimed to have seen and heard. 

  Washington Post entertainment reporter Jada Yuan wrote in January 2023:

  

  Deborah Ramirez, Kavanaugh accuser: In a 2023 documentary, Stier, also a Yalie, adds support to her questioned account of sexual lewdness. Safehouse Progressive Alliance for Nonviolence

  In the previously unheard recording, Stier says classmates told him not just that Kavanaugh stuck his penis in Ramirez’s face, but that afterward, Kavanaugh went to the bathroom to make himself erect before allegedly returning to assault her again, hoping to amuse an audience of mutual friends, In the film, Ramirez says she’d suppressed the memory so deeply she couldn’t recall this second incident. … Stier’s message to the FBI also cites another incident involving a different woman, which he says he witnessed “firsthand”: A severely inebriated Kavanaugh, his dorm mate, pulling his pants down at a different party while a group of soccer players forced a drunk female freshman to hold his penis.

  Stier did not appear as an interview subject in the film. Some speculated that Stier’s involvement in the Kavanaugh matter was retaliation against former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for allowing his wife’s earlier nomination as district judge to expire with the end of the Obama administration.

  

  Jack Smith, special counsel: Trump and Jan. 6 issues arising from his work have come before Judge Pan, and she has sided with the government. AP

  Judge Pan, 57, a Taiwanese-American, has longstanding ties to the Democratic Party. A graduate of Stanford Law School, Pan worked for President Clinton’s departments of Justice and Treasury before joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia in 1999. In 2009, President Barack Obama nominated her to serve as an associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. As his tenure drew to a close, Obama then nominated her unsuccessfully to serve as a United States district judge for the District of Columbia.

  After Trump left office in 2021, Pan became one of President Biden’s first judicial nominees, tapped again to serve as a U.S. district judge in Washington. Less than a year later, Biden promoted her to the D.C. appellate court; in both instances, Pan replaced Ketanji Brown Jackson as she made her way to the Supreme Court. She is the first Asian American to serve on both benches.

  “This is a perfect example of how the Deep State defends its interest,” Russell Vought, president of the Center for Renewing America, one of the organizations pushing for the Schedule F reforms told RealClearInvestigations.

  “In and out of government, multiple branches of government, relying on personal networks, even marriages, to defeat President Trump and thereby protect a permanent, unaccountable bureaucracy.”

  During her brief tenure on the appellate court, Pan has found herself on an unusually high number of politically charged cases.

  A panel of three judges initially hears appeals before the full court selected out of 11 sitting judges. Pan has been seated on two such panels regarding cases involving Jan. 6 and Donald Trump. In both cases she provided the key vote in a split, 2-1 decision, that sided with the government. In Fischer v. USA, Pan acknowledged that the government was making a “novel” use of a post-Enron statute that addressed tampering with documents to increase the legal jeopardy of individuals who disrupted the Electoral College Count on Jan. 6.

  “To be sure, outside of the January 6 cases brought in this jurisdiction, there is no precedent for using 1512(c)(2) to prosecute the type of conduct at issue in this case.”

  Nonetheless, Pan applied a “broad reading of the statute” to allow application of the law.

  Pan reached the same conclusion in Robertson v. USA on the same matter in another 2-1 decision. Her opinion in the Fischer case is now before the Supreme Court; legal observers predict the court might reverse her opinion, essentially overturning how the DOJ has interpreted the statute’s language to charge more than 300 Jan. 6 protesters with the felony count. (This would put Judge Kavanaugh in the unique position of voting against a decision written by the spouse of one of his accusers.)

  Unusual GOP Dissent on Court

  Pan also upheld another controversial lower court ruling that favored the DOJ and worked against Trump, one that recently resulted in a harsh rebuke from some of her colleagues on the circuit court.

  U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell, another Obama appointee, in 2023 authorized an application from Special Counsel Jack Smith to obtain a search warrant for Trump’s Twitter data in his Jan. 6 case against the former President. Not only did Howell force the company to produce the records, which included direct messages and draft posts, she signed a nondisclosure order to prevent Twitter – now X and owned by liberal bête noire Elon Musk – from notifying its customer, Trump, about the warrant for 180 days.

  X appealed Howell’s nondisclosure order; Judge Pan backed Howell’s decision and ruled against the company’s appeal, citing the need to “safeguard the security and integrity of the investigation” and “avoid tipping off the former President about the warrant’s existence.”

  But Pan’s conclusions were wrong, four Republican-appointed judges on the D.C. circuit court wrote this month in what legal observers described as an unusual 12-page statement related to the appeal.

  

  Judge Neomi Rao, Trump appointee: She and three other colleagues on the DC circuit court dissented from Pan. AP

  “The Special Counsel’s approach obscured and bypassed any assertion of executive privilege and dodged the careful balance Congress struck in the Presidential Records Act,” Judges Neomi Rao, Justin Walker, Gregory Katsas, and Karen Henderson wrote in an order filed Jan. 16.

  “The district court and this court permitted this arrangement without any consideration of the consequential executive privilege issues raised by this unprecedented search. We should not have endorsed this gambit. Rather than follow established precedent, for the first time in American history, a court allowed access to presidential communications before any scrutiny of executive privilege.”

  But it was Pan’s exchange with Trump’s defense attorney during oral arguments related to Trump’s claims of presidential immunity against criminal prosecution that caught the media’s attention. Trump is seeking to dismiss Smith’s Jan. 6 indictment on immunity grounds; Judge Tanya S. Chutkan issued a landmark ruling in December denying Trump’s motion and concluded that presidents are subject to criminal prosecution.

  Roughly one minute into the Jan. 9 discussion, Pan interrupted Trump lawyer Sauer with her hypothetical question. The exchange went as follows:

  

  D. John Sauer, Trump lawyer: Impeachment conviction before criminal prosecution. AP

  Pan: Could a president order SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival? That’s an official act, an order to SEAL Team Six?

  John Sauer: He would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution.

  Pan: But if he weren’t … there would be no criminal prosecution, no criminal liability for that?

  Sauer: Chief Justice’s opinion in Marbury against Madison … and the Impeachment Judgment Clause all clearly presuppose what the Founders were concerned about …

  Pan: I asked you a yes or no question. Could a president who ordered SEAL Team Six to assassinate a political rival who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution?

  Sauer: If he were impeached and convicted first.

  Pan: So your answer is … no.

  Sauer: It is a qualified yes.

  Despite Sauer’s answer, figures in major media nonetheless reported that Sauer claimed a president could not be prosecuted for ordering the assassination of a political rival. (It was unclear whether Pan suggested the order or the act itself was illegal.) Legal analysts, cable news hosts, and columnists praised Pan regardless of the plausibility of such a scenario.

  Former federal prosecutor Harry Litman told MSNBC host Chris Hayes that “after Judge Pan asked that hypo about SEAL Team Six, Sauer … was a dead man walking. He will lose. He should lose.”

  Writing for the Atlantic, former federal prosecutor and Trump antagonist George Conway described Pan’s hypothetical as a way of setting a “trap” for Team Trump. He further suggested Pan could host “Meet the Press” if she decided to pursue a different career outside the judiciary.

  Conway continued to praise Pan in a CNN interview, calling her SEAL Team Six line of inquiry an “intellectual tour de force.”

  Democrats also seized on Sauer’s response. Rep. Adam Schiff, currently running for the U.S. Senate in California, denounced Trump and his legal team, insisting “there is no immunity for murder.”

  

  Rep. Adam Schiff seized on the Trump lawyer’s response to Judge Pan,  insisting “there is no excuse for murder.” AP

  A reporter asked Trump about the exchange during an appearance on Jan. 11. “Do you agree with your lawyers, what they said on Tuesday, that you should not be prosecuted if you ordered SEAL Team Six to kill a political opponent?” Trump replied that presidents “have to have immunity,” otherwise every president would be prosecuted by that leader’s successor of the opposite political party.

  Some pundits took Pan’s hypothetical a step further. MSNBC contributor Elie Mystal misrepresented Sauer’s answer, then proposed that Joe Biden could “launch a preemptive strike on a rebel stronghold at Mar-a-Lago” under Trump’s way of thinking.

  Paul Rozenzweig of the anti-Trump conservative site The Bulwark wrote that Trump’s reasoning meant Biden could assassinate Trump without any consequences.

  The controversy presumably will continue to swirl until Pan’s panel issues its ruling. It could be weeks until the opinion is filed. Until then, Trump’s March 4 trial date is on hold and looks less likely by the day, which is why Jack Smith asked the court to fast-track the announcement to expedite the process as it inevitably heads toward the Supreme Court. Considering the political composition of the three-judge panel – two judges appointed by Democratic presidents – most observers expect the appellate court to uphold Chutkan’s ruling.

  Meanwhile, Pan’s hypothetical scenario of a presidentially ordered hit likely will figure prominently in any opinion.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 22:20

• Joy Reid Posts Crazed Rant About Alabama IVF Case – Suggests The State Wants Slaves
  Joy Reid Posts Crazed Rant About Alabama IVF Case – Suggests The State Wants Slaves

  Alabama’s Supreme Court has recently ruled on the designation of fertilized embryos held by vitro clinics in the state, giving the embryos legal status as living children. 

  The decision was made in response to lawsuits brought by three couples who were clients of one such clinic, where apparent negligence led to the destruction of embryos which the parents paid to have frozen in preparation for a future pregnancy.

  One of the couples asserted that the destruction of their fertilized embryos should include charges of wrongful death of a minor, and the Alabama Supreme Court agreed.  Alabama issued a ban on the majority of abortions in 2019 and the US Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v Wade has solidified the standing that states have the right to decide the legality of abortion outside of federal interference.  Keep in mind, the Alabama case was not brought by the state, it was brought by private citizens in a dispute with an IVF clinic, but the decision has sweeping implications.    

  The root legal argument made by abortion advocates is that the Constitution protects life, liberty and property, but it does not specify exactly what the definition of “life” is or when legal personhood begins.  The Alabama decision is terrifying to abortion activists because this is one of the first instances since the Dobbs case in which fertilized embryos are being defined as living human beings.  Such a trend would give constitutional rights to unborn children.

  Conservatives in Alabama including Senator Tommy Tuberville have applauded the court ruling, but leftists are in an uproar.  The fear is palpable in the rantings of MSNBC host Joy Reid, who makes some classic anti-child’s rights arguments along with some new and bizarre assertions about slavery in response to Senator Tuberville’s suggestion that Alabama needs more children.

  “The U.S. has a population of 327 million people… why do we need more kids??”

  Watch the entire clip. MSNBC’s Joy Reid is clinically insane. This might be the most deranged rant I’ve ever seen. pic.twitter.com/mjd7bU2VCW

  — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) February 26, 2024

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

  Three primary points need to be addressed here:

  1)  Reid applies the old population control argument in a disturbing tangent – “If conservatives are going to stand against illegal immigration, then they must also support abortion.”  

  In other words, she thinks that opposing illegal immigration is the same as opposing higher population in the US and therefore, if conservatives oppose higher population, they should be pro-abortion.  But, this is not the conservative position. 

  First and foremost, pro-life advocates are against what they see as the murder of children.  It’s a moral argument, not an economic debate related to population rates.  The moral argument, not surprisingly, completely escapes Joy Reid’s radar.

  Second, her position is actually backwards.  If Democrats are going to promote and support mass illegal immigration into the US because they think America needs more workers, then why not simply stop abortions and increase the population organically instead?  Why continue subsidizing and incentivizing illegals when children can be born here legally?  Wouldn’t it be preferable to raise a population with American principles and values rather than inviting in millions of unvetted foreigners who immediately take welfare, eat up housing and cause more crime?

  2)  Reid then pursues an unhinged hypothesis, suggesting that Republicans in Alabama might want more children (in place of illegal immigrants) because those children will be “destitute” and easier to “enslave.”  She then compares the notion once again to “The Handmaids Tale,” a poorly written book for mentally deficient readers often cited by the political left as if it’s as valid as Orwell’s 1984.

  Is Reid suggesting that illegal immigrants are used as “slaves” in the US?  And does she think this is preferable to making abortion illegal?  This seems to be her argument. If she actually believes that illegals are being used as slaves, then she should make a stand against open borders and illegal immigration.

  It’s hard to find any example in history of slaves being paid for their work while also receiving government subsidies and welfare as incentives to stay and continue being slaves.  That doesn’t sound so “slavery-ish,” as Reid so eloquently describes it.   

  3)  Finally, Reid insinuates that the Alabama decision might be a ploy to increase the population of white people in the state (and leftists always treat more white people as a bad thing).  But according to her previous argument any children born under the new rules would be destitute and thus used as slaves.  Does this go for the white kids also?  Or, is it only victimization if the children are not white?

  Some people might say that Joy Reid is an irrelevant person and there’s no need to counter her blatherings with any seriousness.  However, her claims represent the thinking of a majority of activists within the woke movement.  It’s important to show how disjointed and irrational this thinking is whenever it arises, otherwise it will continue to spread like a cancer across the country.          

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 22:00

• Illinois Judge Removes Trump From Primary Ballot
  Illinois Judge Removes Trump From Primary Ballot

  By Catherine Yang of Epoch Times

  Ahead of a Supreme Court ruling on whether former President Donald Trump can be disqualified as a candidate by individual states under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, an Illinois judge ruled President Trump ineligible for the ballot.

  Cook County Circuit Court Judge Tracie Porter, following other jurisdictions, stayed her order to remove the former president pending an appeal which he has, and which the Supreme Court has said it will hear. The ruling came a week after the judge heard arguments regarding Illinois statutes.

  “This Order is stayed until March 1, 2024 in anticipation of an appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, or the Illinois Supreme Court. This Order is further stayed if the United States Supreme Court in Anderson v. Griswold enters a decision inconsistent with this Order,” the ruling reads.

  

  On Feb. 8, the day the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding Colorado’s disqualification of President Trump, mail-in ballots were sent out in Illinois with President Trump’s name on them. This puts the state in a position to potentially have to not count votes cast for him.

  If the order is not stayed and reversed, the state elections board will be tasked with removing “Donald J. Trump from the ballot for the General Primary Election on March 19, 2024, or cause any votes cast for him to be suppressed, according to the procedures within their administrative authority.”

  Much of the judge’s opinion and order dealt with state law and whether the state elections board had the jurisdiction to rule on this matter.

  The judge found that Illinois law allowed petitioners to bring this kind of a challenge and that President Trump was “disqualified by engaging in insurrection,” noting that this finding was echoed by the hearing officer of the state election board and the Colorado Supreme Court.

  “This Court shares the Colorado Supreme Court’s sentiments that did not reach its conclusions lightly. This Court also realizes the magnitude of this decision and it (sic) impact on the upcoming primary Illinois elections,” the order reads.

  Both of those jurisdictions based the “insurrection” conclusion on records that plaintiffs presented drawn largely from the controversial Jan. 6 Select Committee report.

  Judge Porter determined that Section 3 was self-executing, applied to presidents, and could be applied by individual states even in the event of a national election.

  These legal issues are all currently before the Supreme Court, which on Feb. 8 questioned attorneys representing President Trump and six petitioners from Colorado on the ramifications of states applying Section 3 at length and spent little time discussing whether an insurrection occurred.

  Petitioners

  The challenge was brought by five Illinois voters, represented by the activist group “Free Speech for People.”

  Earlier, the bipartisan Illinois State Board of Elections unanimously voted to keep President Trump on the ballot after determining that the board did not have the authority to analyze constitutional issues. The board unanimously voted to keep President Joe Biden on the ballot for similar reasons, in response to two separate challenges brought against the sitting president.

  The challenge to President Trump’s eligibility was then appealed in circuit court, and the parties have indicated that whatever the ruling, it would be appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.

  Free Speech for People Legal Director Ron Fein declared it a “historic victory.”

  Continue reading at Epoch Times

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 21:59

• US GDP "Grew" $334 Billion In Q4…. That Growth Cost $834 Billion In Debt
  US GDP “Grew” $334 Billion In Q4…. That Growth Cost $834 Billion In Debt

  Moments ago, two things happened: Biden’s Bureau of Economic Analysis released the first revision of Q4 2023 GDP, a number which is completely irrelevant as it looks at the state of the US economy more than 2 months ago as the calendar is now just weeks away from the start of Q2 2024… and bitcoin soared above $60,000, now less than $10k away from a record high. While it may not be immediately obvious, the two events are linked. Let us explain.

  First, according to the Biden admin, in Q4 GDP rose 3.2%, a modest drop from the 3.3% reported in the first estimate one month ago, and below the 3.3% consensus estimate.

  

  While we already know this, the BEA reported that the increase in the fourth quarter primarily reflected increases in consumer spending, exports, and state and local government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, increased.

  • The increase in consumer spending reflected increases in both services and goods. Within services, the leading contributors were health care, food services and accommodations, and other services (led by international travel). Within goods, the leading contributors to the increase were other nondurable goods (led by pharmaceutical products) as well as recreational goods and vehicles.
  • The increase in exports reflected increases in both goods (led by petroleum) and services (led by financial services).
  • The increase in state and local government spending reflected increases in both investment (led by structures) and consumption expenditures (led by compensation of employees).

  

  Comparing the first estimate with the second, we find several notable items, the first being that Personal Consumption actually rose more than expected, growing a 3.0% QoQ annualized (vs 2.8% in the first estimate), and contributing 2.0% to the bottom line GDP of 3.21%, up from 1.91% in the original estimate. Another increase was seen in fixed investment which contributed 0.43% to the bottom line, up from the 0.31% originally estimated; finally government also saw its contribution boosted, rising to 0.73%, or about a quarter, of the final GDP. These improvement were offset by a notable drop in the change in private inventories which declined from an addition of 0.07% to a subtraction of -0.27%.

  

  Ok, none of this matters: the numbers will be revised again next month but by then all markets will care about will be not so much Q1 GDP but rather Q2 and onward. So very stale.

  But what does that have to do with the bitcoin spike?

  Well, a closer look at the data revealed something stunning: a quick look at the increase in nominal GDP, which rose from $27.61 trillion in Q3 to $27.94 trillion in Q4, shows that the US economy increased some $334.5 billion in absolute nominal dollar terms.

  But where did this growth come from? Why debt of course, and a lot of it. For the answer how much debt, we go to the US Treasury’s Debt to the penny website, where we find that debt on Sept 30, 2023 was $33,167,334,044,723.16 and debt on Dec 31, 2023 was $34,001,493,655,565.48.

  In other words, it cost $834.2 billion in debt during Q3 to grow the US economy by $334.5 billion, or exactly $2.5 in debt for every $1 in GDP “growth.”

  

  Which also brings us back full circle and explains why bitcoin is now trading at $60,000, the highest price since late 2021 and why it will not only surpass its all time high in just a few days, but why it will rise much, much higher, because the US is now well past the point of no return.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 21:45

• Supreme Court Seems Divided Over ATF Bump Stock Regulation
  Supreme Court Seems Divided Over ATF Bump Stock Regulation

  Authored by Sam Dorman via The Epoch Times,

  The Supreme Court seemed divided during oral argument on Feb. 28 over whether it would uphold the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) regulation prohibiting ownership of bump stocks.

  

  That regulation came after the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas where a gunman used bump stock-equipped firearms. It reversed years of ATF interpretations allowing non-mechanical bump stocks, or those without a spring.

  In doing so, ATF reinterpreted a post-Prohibition law that banned the use of machine guns. Unlike other gun rights cases, the attorneys in this case—Garland v. Cargill—didn’t talk much about the Second Amendment. Rather, they sought to convince the justices that the phrases “automatically” and “single function of the trigger” within federal law either did or didn’t apply to bump stocks.

  Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote an opinion from 2022 upholding gun rights, peppered the Biden administration with questions focused on teasing out the differences in operating a firearm with or without a bump stock.

  Much of the debate focused on whether bump stocks allowed a single trigger pull to initiate a process by which bullets were rapidly released.

  Jonathan Mitchell, the New Civil Liberties Alliance attorney arguing for Michael Cargill, repeatedly emphasized that bump stocks only allowed one bullet per trigger pull. He also argued that firing with bump stocks didn’t meet the statutory language of “single function of the trigger” due to grammatical reasons and the fact that bump stock users had to apply pressure to maintain accelerated fire.

  Principal Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher and Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson suggested instead that bump stocks allowed users to initiate a process with the bump stock after a single pull of the trigger.

  “Once the shooter presses forward to fire the first shot, the bump stock uses the gun’s recoil energy to create a continuous back-and-forth cycle that fires hundreds of shots per minute,” Mr. Fletcher said.

  Justice Amy Coney Barrett told Mr. Fletcher that she was “entirely sympathetic to your argument,” stating that “this is functioning like a machinegun would.” She questioned, however, why Congress didn’t pass legislation to cover bump stocks “more clearly.”

  The case arose from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which ruled in favor of Mr. Cargill while noting that the legal rule of lenity required they rule against the government when the meaning of a statute was unclear.

  NCLA President Mark Chenoweth told The Epoch Times he thought the Court would rule in favor of Mr. Cargill given its textualist composition.

  “We have a majority of justices who are textualists, and they‘ll look at the text, and they’ll look at the way that the gun functions, and I think that they will decide that the bump stock is on the outside of the machinegun ban.”

  The National Firearms Act

  Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh raised concerns about how ATF’s 2018 regulation would apply to people who later owned bump stocks. But most of the questioning focused on how bump stocks operate, the wording of the National Firearms Act, and Congress’ intent in passing the law in 1934.

  Story continues below advertisement

  The three liberal justices seemed skeptical of Mr. Mitchell’s arguments—particularly Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown-Jackson, who suggested he was asserting an irrelevant distinction for the federal law involved.

  Both questioned whether the overall thrust of the 1934 law was intended to prevent use of devices like bump stocks.

  “As far as I can tell, the sort of common usage of the word ‘function’ is not its operational design. It’s not the mechanics of the thing. It is what it achieves, what it’s being used for,” Justice Jackson told Mr. Mitchell.

  She added that “weapons with bump stocks have triggers that function in the same way. They—through a single, right, pull of the trigger or touch of the trigger, you achieve the same result of automatic fire.”

  Mr. Mitchell countered that “a single discharge of the trigger produces only one shot. It doesn’t produce a round of automatic fire. The only way you get to repeated shots with a bump stock equipped rifle is for the shooter himself to continually undertake manual action by thrusting the forestock of the rifle forward with his non-shooting hand.”

  Part of the confusion surrounding the statute involves ATF’s contention that “single function of the trigger” under federal law included a “single pull of the trigger.” Both Justice Neil Gorsuch and Mr. Mitchell cast doubt on that interpretation, noting that “function” was a transitive verb.

  “People don’t function things,” Justice Gorsuch said. “They may pull things, they may throw things, but they don’t function things.”

  Justice Kagan suggested that Mr. Mitchell’s interpretation lacked common sense.

  “I view myself as a good textualist,” she said. “I think that that’s the way we should think about statutes. It’s by reading them.”

  “But, you know, textualism is not inconsistent with common sense,” she added. “Like, at some point, you have to apply a little bit of common sense to the way you read a statute and understand that what this statute comprehends is a weapon that fires a multitude of shots with a single human action.”

  “Whether it’s a continuous pressure on a … conventional machinegun, holding the trigger, or a continuous pressure on one of these devices on the barrel … I can’t understand how anybody could think that those two things should be treated differently.”

  Justice Alito asked Mr. Mitchell whether his case was one where “the literal language of the statute had to control even though it’s pretty hard to think that Congress actually meant that to apply in certain situations.”

  Potential Congressional Action

  Justice Gorsuch indicated he thought Congressional action would have been preferable to an ATF rule interpreting prior legislation. He also asked about former Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) criticizing the use of regulation to ban bump stocks.

  Justice Kavanaugh noted that bump stocks didn’t exist around the time of the 1934 law’s passage. He went on to ask Mr. Fletcher: “What’s your explanation, maybe common-sense explanation or some other explanation, for why, when this does become an issue, the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration, Senator Feinstein, all say no?”

  Outside of the Court, Mr. Cargill told The Epoch Times he thought Congress had authority over the issue but didn’t think it should pass a law regulating bump stocks.

  The Epoch Times asked both he and Mr. Mark Chenoweth whether bump stocks were protected by the Second Amendment. “I don’t know,” Mr. Cargill said.

  Mr. Chenoweth similarly said he didn’t know about the Second Amendment question and would have to look at how history did or didn’t support bump stocks’ protection under the Constitution.

  “We look at this as an abuse of administrative power case, not as a Second Amendment case,” he said. “If Congress had passed this law, we wouldn’t be challenging it.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 21:40

• Goldman Says Office Tower Prices Must Plunge 50% For Housing Conversion To Make Sense
  Goldman Says Office Tower Prices Must Plunge 50% For Housing Conversion To Make Sense

  As office tower vacancies continue to rise nationwide, many of these buildings are becoming economically nonviable workspaces, raising the question of what can be done with millions of square feet of underutilized space. Simultaneously, the US housing market faces a severe shortage, leaving investors and lawmakers to ponder whether underutilized office space can be transformed into multifamily buildings. 

  Goldman analyst Jan Hatzius uses a discounted cash flow model to show that the current acquisition costs of office towers are still too high for conversion to multifamily buildings, indicating that offices will likely remain underutilized in the medium term. 

  Hatzius pointed out that the viable point where office tower conversions would make financial sense would be a further price decline of 50%. 

  About 4% of the nation’s office buildings could be slated for conversion projects into housing, with the share expected to jump as the office vacancy rate is forecasted to reach 18% in 2033 from about 14% this year. 

  Many of these nonviable towers are still overvalued and not cheap enough for conversion because of financing costs. Even with San Francisco’s office industry in a meltdown and prices having already tumbled 35% since 2019, these levels are still too high. 

  

  Goldman’s definition of a nonviable office tower is that it must be located in a suburban area or central business district and built before 1990 but has not been renovated since 2000. Each tower must have a vacancy rate above 30%. 

  Based on Goldman’s model, Hatzius’ team suggests “that converting a nonviable office that is priced at the average current level will result in a $164 loss” per square foot, adding, “This means that current office prices would need to fall by that much, to around $154 per [square foot] or by 50%, for the cost to be fully covered by the stream of discounted future revenues.”

  

  With that in mind, a structural downshift in office demand has occurred in recent years because of the widespread adoption of hybrid work, among other factors, including an exodus of cities by companies whose employees no longer feel safe in imploding progressive-controlled metro areas.

  The CRE crisis is far from over (read prior GS report on “heightened CRE risks“). And remember the dominoes began falling last month. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 21:20

• India's Oil Supply From Russia Threatened by New US Sanctions
  India’s Oil Supply From Russia Threatened by New US Sanctions

  By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

  Indian refiners are concerned that the latest U.S. sanctions against Russia could further impact their ability to import cheap Russian crude as freight rates are set to rise and dent refining margins, industry sources in India have told Reuters.

  

  The U.S. levied new sanctions against Russia last week, on the second anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and in response to the death of opposition politician and anticorruption activist Alexey Navalny.

  Among the 500 targets of the new sanctions, the U.S. Treasury and State are targeting Russia’s tanker operator Sovcomflot and more than a dozen crude oil tankers linked to the Russian state firm.

  Refiners in India are now concerned that the new sanctions would make it more difficult to have oil shipped from Russia on non-sanctioned vessels, which would raise shipping costs and eat into the refining margins, according to Reuters’ sources.

  India will still buy crude from Russia but only if it is sold below the G7 price cap of $60 per barrel and is shipped on non-sanctioned vessels, an Indian government source told Reuters.

  Even before the latest U.S. sanctions, Refining margins for India’s biggest state-owned refiners had dropped amid more difficult access to Russian crude and soaring freight rates due to the Red Sea disruption to shipments, analysts and traders told Bloomberg last week.

  For most of 2023, Indian refiners enjoyed high refining margins and profits as they imported cheap Russian crude at $20 a barrel and more below international benchmarks.   

  The decline in refining margins is due to higher costs for Indian refiners because of higher competition for Russian supply in Asia, increased freight costs, and tougher U.S. sanctions enforcement, which has limited India’s access to very low-priced crudes from Russia.

  The tougher enforcement of the G7 sanctions and related payment issues have been holding up Indian purchases of some cargoes of Russian crude oil, with tankers previously headed to India turning back eastwards, tanker-tracking data monitored by Bloomberg showed early this year.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 21:00

• "I'm Ringing The Alarm Bell, Because Flood Of Illegals Is Crushing The Country!"
  “I’m Ringing The Alarm Bell, Because Flood Of Illegals Is Crushing The Country!”

  Ahead of President Biden’s visit to the southern border on Thursday, with former President Trump planning to visit simultaneously to slam the radicals in the White House for sparking the worst migrant invasion this nation has ever seen, a new graphic released by Bloomberg shows the locations of where illegals have ended up after being bussed through the nation via a shadowy network of taxpayer-funded non-governmental organizations. 

  The latest figure from the US Customs and Border Protection shows a whopping 7.3 million illegals have flooded this nation under Biden’s first term. 

  

  It was already evident that illegals were being transported by bus to major Democratic cities such as New York City, Detroit, Los Angeles, Denver, and other urban centers. Now, according to Bloomberg data based on immigration court records, the cities listed above are, in fact, where these folks are being shipped: 

  Much of the angst around the impact of newly arrived migrants to the US has focused on the biggest cities in New York, Illinois and Colorado, and immigration court records suggest that those states are indeed among the most affected by the surge. The data also signal that Texas and Florida, which have long complained about the costs of absorbing newcomers, are still among the top destinations of migrants.

  

  More from Bloomberg:

  The number of migrants listing an address in Illinois for their immigration court cases jumped nine-fold in 2023 compared with just two years earlier; the increase was 7-fold in Colorado and five times in New York—bigger than the increases seen in Texas and Florida. The data also suggest that New York state saw the highest number of migrant arrivals in 2023 on a per capita basis: 1 per 100 residents of the state. New Jersey and Florida were next at 0.9. Texas and Colorado had 0.8, and Illinois ranked eighth at 0.6.

  

  The invasion is happening at such a grand scale that Elon Musk posted on X Tuesday night: “I am ringing the alarm bell, because the flood of illegals is crushing the country!” 

  Dams are bursting all over the country.

  America is only 4% of Earth’s population. If only 1% of the rest of Earth moves here, that would crush all essential services.

  I am ringing the alarm bell, because the flood of illegals is crushing the country! https://t.co/1FoEUsTAw9

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 28, 2024

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

  There has already been a flurry of headlines about migrants sparking crime waves nationwide (read: “I Hope Public Is Waking Up”: Border Invasion Sparks Migrant Crime Crisis In Major Cities). 

  Tragically, NYC is on a downward spiral. With unchecked migrant influx, rampant mental illness, and soaring crime rates, the city is bracing for even tougher times. It’s a harsh reality, but one we can’t ignore. pic.twitter.com/eHaLMi25s2

  — Clown World ™ 🤡 (@ClownWorld_) February 28, 2024

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

  Another day. Another migrant crime.

  This Salvadoran illegal alien has been arrested in Washington, DC for the murder of a 2-year-old child. pic.twitter.com/svzQuUVQRA

  — Karoline Leavitt (@kleavittnh) February 28, 2024

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

  Over the past few weeks, New York has been overwhelmed by a wave of crimes committed by illegal immigrants

  The attack on the police in Times Square, the shooting in Manhattan, a series of thefts in Brooklyn – all this is the work of illegal immigrants.

  “What goes on in Third… pic.twitter.com/A3XzsCOd74

  — Charlie ⛳️ 💖🗽 🥳 🏕 🚴‍♀️⛺🐈🐈‍⬛ (@MAGACharlie2024) February 21, 2024

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

  15-year-old migrant (Jesus Alejandro Rivas-Figueroa), suspected of shooting a tourist and firing at a police officer during a failed robbery in Times Square, was arrested by the US Marshals Joint Regional Fugitive Task Force.

  He is also a suspect in an armed robbery in the Bronx… pic.twitter.com/l0hBRgMIn8

  — Project TABS (@ProjectTabs) February 19, 2024

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

  Migrants doing their thing in Brooklyn (NYC). They steal a scooter and then chases the person to beat him up 👀 pic.twitter.com/p21wL9jV2r

  — Crazy Society (Fights, Crazy, Funny, Viral Videos) (@CrazySocietynow) February 20, 2024

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

  The latest shitshow is a migrant who murdered a 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley on the University of Georgia campus last week. Left-leaning corporate media has been hush-hush about this as well as the Biden administration. 

  .@POTUS @VP @SecMayorkas

  Her name is Laken Riley.

  Say her name ! #RIP pic.twitter.com/qibktTPyyr

  — Sara A. Carter (@SaraCarterDC) February 27, 2024

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

  These poor sweet kids. Thrown to the wolves by Joe Biden’s reckless border policies. Laken Riley. Say her name. pic.twitter.com/v1g5hluG2W

  — Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) February 27, 2024

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

  Laken Riley, who was tragically murdered by an illegal immigrant, is trending thanks to 𝕏 users who refuse to let her be forgotten. pic.twitter.com/UZglyUcdxC

  — TaraBull (@TaraBull808) February 25, 2024

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

  The most concerning part is that a tidal wave of violent crime will only accelerate from here. 

  A migrant crime wave is gripping the nation. Biden’s invasion has landed in our cities and the destruction is fully underway.

  — Stephen Miller (@StephenM) February 28, 2024

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

  A new Gallup poll shows Americans are becoming increasingly angered by Biden’s migrant crisis. About 28% of respondents said immigration is the top issue in the US. This is up from 20% the month before. 

  

  The border crisis is an epic disaster for Democrats ahead of the November elections. 

  Biden border crisis is killing us. https://t.co/yvk0LOAh9G

  — Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) February 28, 2024

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

  Just how bad? Well, New York City Mayor Eric Adams said Monday night at a community meeting that the city’s sanctuary laws need to be reversed to deport the illegals. This is a significant shift after the progressive mayor first welcomed unvetted illegals with welcoming arms. 

  Wow.

  NYC Mayor Eric Adams is calling for NYC’s sanctuary city law to be changed so that criminal illegal aliens can be deported.

  Democrats don’t even want to live under their policies. pic.twitter.com/izwPI95NrY

  — Congressman Troy E. Nehls (@RepTroyNehls) February 27, 2024

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

  Meanwhile, Democrats are quickly losing the black vote to Republicans because the Biden administration is prioritizing illegals over their own citizens. 

  Among other things, Biden ushering in millions of illegals is disproportionately hurting Black communities

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 25, 2024

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

  Also, riddle us this: Why are Biden elites gunning for World War III in Ukraine with Russia while flooding the US with millions of unvetted illegals?

  You have an invasion of 10 million illegal alien invaders, and migrant crime is out of control. The people who are being destroyed are the Black and Hispanic working class in this country. – Steve Bannon.

  Watch today’s live @CPAC coverage: https://t.co/BcOc68wUgP pic.twitter.com/4C7z0zX3JJ

  — Real America’s Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) February 24, 2024

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

  This is a recipe for a national security disaster. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 20:44

• "Americans Are Being Lied To About Ukraine" – Tucker Carlson Reflects On Putin, Zelensky, Navalny & Nuclear War
  “Americans Are Being Lied To About Ukraine” – Tucker Carlson Reflects On Putin, Zelensky, Navalny & Nuclear War

  The international attacks on Tucker Carlson, especially from within US mainstream media and NATO-connected circles, have only increased following his hugely controversial eight day visit to Russia earlier this month where he interviewed President Vladimir Putin. Russian state media has even this week claimed authorities uncovered an “assassination plot” – rumored to have been backed by Kiev.

  This week the former FOX prime time host was interviewed about his trip and the whole Putin interview experience in three-hour podcast hosted by Lex Fridman. Tucker Carlson revealed more about what motivated him to do the televised Putin segment, and further discussed his personal take on the Russia-Ukraine war and where it could go from here, now having entered its third year. Interestingly, Carlson’s main critique of the war focused not on Putin or the Kremlin’s actions in Ukraine, which of course are not under his control or influence, but on the impact to America.

  Carlson explained that the West’s escalation of the conflict long ago into a full-blown proxy war has not only resulted in more needless Ukrainian deaths, but it has been devastating for the United States. “I reject the whole premise of the war in Ukraine from the American perspective,” Carlson told Fridman. “There’s a war going on that is wrecking the US economy in a way and at a scale that people do not understand.” He also generally characterized the response of the US political class to the conflict, along with the American public which has uncritically followed, as naive.

  

  Carlson emphasized that what would be a cautiously realist approach was utterly abandoned by Washington from the start, as has been typical of the past decades of US interventionism abroad. “It doesn’t even matter what I want to happen… that’s a distortion of what is happening,” Carlson explained, and pointed to Russia having 100 million more people and more defense industry might “than all of NATO combined.”

  He described that a big part of the rationale behind the Putin interview was to bring “more information” to the West so that “people could make their own decisions about whether” escalation of weapons to Kiev and jingoistic rhetoric from Western capitals is a good idea.

  Ultimately, he said, Americans are being lied to:

  “Just to be clear, I have no plans to move to Russia. I think I would probably be arrested if I moved to Russia. Ed Snowden, who is the most famous openness, transparency, advocate in the world, I would say along with Assange, doesn’t want to live in Russia. He’s had problems with the Putin government. He’s attacked Putin. They don’t like it. I get it. I get it. I’m just saying, what are the lessons for us?

  The main lesson is we are being lied to in a way that’s bewildering and very upsetting. I was mad about it all eight days I was there because I feel like I’m better informed than most people because it’s my job to be informed. I’m skeptical of everything and yet I was completely hoodwinked by it.”

  Topics highlighted throughout the long-ranging conversion included Carlson’s personal take on being one-on-one with a seemingly “nervous” Putin, the question of ending the war in Ukraine, the role of the CIA and Western intelligence services, the prospect that the crisis could spiral into nuclear confrontation with the West, the Alexei Navalny saga, as well as a foray into the Israel-Palestine conflict near the end. Watch the full Carlson-Fridman interview below…

  The following are some key excerpts of Tucker Carlson’s words from the interview, selected by ZeroHedge [emphasis ours]…

  * * *

  Carlson On Putin. “I want to know who this guy is.”

  I thought he seemed nervous, and I was very surprised by that. And I thought he seemed like someone who’d overthought it a little bit, who had a plan, and I don’t think that’s the right way to go into any interview. My strong sense, having done a lot of them for a long time, is that it’s better to know what you think, to say as much as you can honestly, so you don’t get confused by your own lies, and just to be yourself. And I thought that he went into it like an over-prepared student, and I kept thinking, “Why is he nervous?” But I guess because he thought a lot of people were going to see it…

  I mean, I asked him as I usually do the most obvious dumbest question ever, which is, “Why’d you do this?” And he had said in a speech that I think is worth reading. I don’t speak Russian, so I haven’t heard it in the original, but he had said at the moment of the beginning of the war, he had given this address to Russians, in which he explained to the fullest extent we have seen so far why he was doing this. And he said in that speech, “I fear that NATO the West, the United States, the Biden administration will preemptively attack us.” And I thought, “Well, that’s interesting.” I can’t evaluate whether that’s a fear rooted in reality or one rooted in paranoia. But I thought, “Well, that’s an answer right there.”

  And so I alluded to that in my question and rather than answering it, he went off on this long from my perspective, kind of tiresome, sort of greatest hits of Russian history. And the implication I thought was, “Well, Ukraine is ours, or Eastern Ukraine is ours already.”…

  I want to know who this guy is. I think a western audience, a global audience, has a right to know more about the guy, and so just let him talk. Because I don’t feel like my reputation’s on the line. People have already drawn conclusions about me, I suppose to the extent they have. I’m not interested really in those conclusions anyway, so just let him talk. And so I calmed down and just let him talk. And in retrospect, I thought that was really, really interesting. Whether you agree with it or not, or whether you think it’s relevant to the war in Ukraine or not, that was his answer. And so it’s inherently significant.

  American falsehoods & the Ukraine war

  I mean, I guess I reject the whole premise of the war in Ukraine from the American perspective, which is a tiny group of dumb people in Washington has decided to do this for reasons they won’t really explain. And you don’t have a role in it at all as an American citizen, as the person who’s paying for it, whose children might be drafted to fight it. To shut up and obey, I just reject that completely. I think, I guess I’m a child of a different era. I’m a child of participatory democracy to some extent, where your opinion as a citizen is not irrelevant. And I guess the level of lying about it was starting to drive me crazy.

  The idea that Ukraine would inevitably win this war. Now victory was never, as it never is, defined precisely. Nothing’s ever defined precisely, which is always to tell that there’s deception at the heart of the claim. But Ukraine’s on the verge of winning. Well, I don’t know. I mean, I’m hardly a tactician or military expert. For the fifth time, I’m not an expert on Russia or Ukraine. I just looked at Wikipedia. Russia has a hundred million more people than Ukraine, a hundred million.

  It has much deeper industrial capacity, war material capacity than all of NATO combined. For example, Russia is turning out artillery shells, which are significant in a ground war at a ratio of seven to one compared to all NATO countries combined. That’s all of Europe. Russia is producing seven times the artillery shells as all of Europe combined. What? That’s an amazing fact, and it turns out to be a really significant fact. In fact, the significant fact. But if you ask your average person in this country, even a fairly well-informed person of good faith who’s just trying to understand what’s going on, who’s going to win this war? Well, Ukraine’s going to win. They’re on the right side.

  …And I raised that question in my previous job, and I was denounced as of course a traitor or something. But okay, great, I’m a traitor. What’s the answer? What’s the answer? [Vic]Toria Nuland, who I know, not dumb, hasn’t helped the US in any way, an architect of the Iraq war, architect of this disaster, one of the people who destroyed the US dollar. Okay, fine, but you’re not stupid. So you’re trying to get a war by acting that way, what’s the other explanation? By the way, NATO didn’t want Ukraine because it didn’t meet the criteria for admission. So why would you say that? Because you want a war, that’s why. And that war has enriched a lot of people to the tune of billions. So I don’t care if I sound like some kind of left-wing conspiracy nut, because I’m neither left-wing nor a conspiracy nut. Tell me how I’m wrong.

  On feeling sorry for Zelensky

  If I’m a Russian or a Ukrainian, let’s just be sovereign countries now. We’re not run by the U.S. State Department. We’re just our own countries. I believe in sovereignty, okay? So that’s my view. I also want to say one thing about Zelensky. I attacked him before because I was so offended by his cavalier talk about nuclear exchange because it would kill my family. So I’m really offended by that. Anyone who talks that way I’m offended by. But I do feel for Zelensky. I do. He didn’t run for president to have this happen.

  I think Zelensky’s been completely misused by the State Department, by Toria Nuland, by our Secretary of State, by the policymakers in the U.S. who’ve used Ukraine as a vessel for their ambitions, their geopolitical ambitions, but also the many American businesses who’ve used Ukraine as a way to fleece the American taxpayer, and then by just independent ghouls like Boris Johnson who are hoping to get rich from interviews on it. The whole thing, Zelensky is at the center of this. He’s not driving history. NATO and the United States is driving history. Putin is driving history. There’s this guy, Zelensky. So I do feel for him, and I think he’s in a perilous place.

  The prospect of nuclear war

  Well it’s been what, 80 years? Not even 80 years, 79. And so we haven’t had a world war in 79 years. But one nuclear exchange would of course kill more people than all wars in human history combined.

  I am counting. Because I think it obviously, it’s completely demonic and everyone pretends like it’s great. Nuclear weapons are evil.

  The use of them is evil, and the technology itself is evil. And in my opinion, I mean, it’s like if you can’t, that’s just so obvious. And what I’m saying is I’m not against all technology. I took a shower this morning. It was powered by an electric pump, heated by a water heater. I loved it. I sat in an electric sauna. I’m not against all technology, obviously, but the mindless worship of technology?

  The possibility of Russia-Ukraine Peace: Putin “wants a settlement”

  He [Putin] wants a settlement, he wants a settlement. He doesn’t want to fight with them rhetorically and he just wants to get this done. He made a bunch of offers at the peace deal. We wouldn’t even know this happened if the Israelis hadn’t told us. I’m so grateful that they did that, that Johnson was dispatched by the State Department to stop it. I mean, I think Boris Johnson is a husk of a man. But imagine if you were Boris Johnson and you spend your whole life with Ukraine flag, “I’m for Ukraine,” and then all those kids died because of what you did, and the lines haven’t really moved. It hasn’t been a victory for Ukraine. It’s not going to be a victory for Ukraine. It’s like, how do you feel about yourself if you did that? I mean, I’ve done a lot of shitty things in my life, I feel bad about them, but I’ve never extended a war for no reason. That’s a pretty grave sin in my opinion.

  Well, the U.S. government’s not allowing negotiations. So that for me is the most upsetting part. It’s like in the end, what Russia does, I’m not implicated in that. What Ukraine does, I’m not implicated in that. I’m not Russian or Ukrainian. I’m an American who grew up really believing in my country. I’m supporting my country through my tax dollars. It’s like I really care about what the U.S. government does because they’re doing it in my name, and I care a lot because I’m American. We are the impediment to peace, which is another way of saying we are responsible for all these innocent people getting dragooned out of public parks in Kiev and sent to go die. What? That is not good. I’m ashamed of it.

  On the Alexey Navalny saga

  Well, it’s awful. I mean, imagine dying in prison. I’ve thought about it a lot. I’ve known a lot of people in prison a lot, including some very good friends of mine. So I felt instantly sad about it. From a geopolitical perspective, I don’t know any more than that. And I laugh at and sort of resent, but mostly find amusing the claims by American politicians, who really are the dumbest politicians in the world actually, “This happened and here’s what it means.” And it’s like, “Actually as a factual matter, we don’t know what happened. We don’t know what happened.” We have no freaking idea what happened. We can say, and I did say, and I will say again, I don’t think you should put opposition figures in prison. I really don’t. I don’t, period. It happens a lot around the world, happens in this country, as you know, and I’m against all of it.

  But do we know how we died? The short answer? No, we don’t. Now, if I had to guess, I would say killing Navalny during the Munich Security Conference in the middle of a debate over $60 billion in Ukraine funding, maybe the Russians are dumb. I didn’t get that vibe at all. I don’t see it. But maybe they killed him. I mean, they certainly put him in prison, which I’m against. But here’s what I do know is that we don’t know. And so when Chuck Schumer stands up and… Joe Biden reads some card in front of him with lines about Navalny, it’s like, I’m allowed to laugh at that because it’s absurd. You don’t know.

  An interesting CIA anecdote

  I was like, live in foreign countries, see history happen. I’m for that. I applied to the Operations Directorate. They turned me down on the basis of drug use actually. True. But anyway, whatever. I was unsuited for it so I’m glad they turned me down. But the point is I didn’t see CIA as a threat, partly because I was bathing in propaganda about CIA and I didn’t really understand what it was and didn’t want to know. But second, because my impression at the time was it was outwardly focused. It was focused on our enemies. I don’t have a problem with that as much. The fact that CIA is playing in domestic politics and actually has for a long time, was involved in the Kennedy assassination, that’s not speculation. That’s a fact. And I confirmed that from someone who had read their documents that are still not public, it’s shocking.

  You can’t have that. And the reason I’m so mad is I really believe in the idea of representative government. Acknowledging its imperfections, but I should have some say, I live here, I’m a citizen. I pay all your freaking taxes. So the fact that they would be tampering with American democracy is so outrageous to me. And I don’t know why Morning Joe is not outraged. This parade of dummies, highly credentialed dummies they have on Morning Joe every day. That doesn’t bother them at all. How could that not bother you? Why is only Glenn Greenwald mad about it? I mean, it’s confirmed. It’s not like a fever dream. It’s real. They played in the last election domestically, and I guess it shows how dumb I am because they’ve been doing that for many years. I mean, the guy who took out Mosaddegh lived on my street. One of the Roosevelt’s, CIA officer.

  Carlson on the Israel-Palestine conflict

   I mean, it’s not a topic that I get into a lot because I’m a non-expert and because I’m not… Unlike every other American, I’m not emotionally invested in other countries just in general. I mean, I admire them or not, and I love visiting them. I love Jerusalem, probably my favorite city in the world, but I don’t have an emotional attachment to it. So maybe I’ve got more clarity. I don’t know, maybe less. Here’s my view. I believe in sovereignty as mentioned, and I think each country has to make decisions based on its own interest, but also with reference to its own capabilities and its own long-term interest.

  And it’s very unwise for… I’m not a huge fan of treaties. Some are fine, too many bad. But I think US aid, military aid to Israel and the implied security guarantees, some explicit, but many implied, security guarantees of the United States to Israel probably haven’t helped Israel that much long-term. It’s a rich country with a highly capable population. Like every other country, it’s probably best if it makes its decisions based on what it can do by itself. So I would definitely be concerned if I lived in Israel because I think fair or unfair-

  But now it’s not possible. If you had a coalition of countries against Israel, I know Israel has nuclear weapons and has a capable military and all that and the backing of the United States, but it’s a small country, I think I’d be very worried. So there’s that. I don’t see any advantage to the United States. I mean, I think it’s important for each country to make its own decisions.

  * * *

  This week there’s been a curious story to emerge in Russian state media sources involving a bizarre ‘assassination plot’ linked to Kiev, which allegedly was supposed to target Carlson while he was in Russia. Interestingly, the allegations have been picked up in major Indian media outlets, among some other international outlets, though it warrants a high degree of skepticism…

  A man has been arrested by security services here in Moscow for plotting an assassination attempt on Tucker Carlson

  The man is from Podolsk and says he was acting on instructions from Ukraines SBU. He claims he was promised $4,000 for “successfully completing the task” (bombing… pic.twitter.com/SCDSKGgeHS

  — Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) February 26, 2024

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

  Would Ukraine be this stupid? I doubt it. 🤷🏻‍♂️ https://t.co/fkZ41v65gC

  — Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) February 26, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 20:40

• Leftists Argue That Hijacking Planes Is A Legitimate Form Of Protest
  Leftists Argue That Hijacking Planes Is A Legitimate Form Of Protest

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news,

  Some leftists have now moved on to hysterically claim that hijacking planes is a legitimate form of protest.

  

  No, this isn’t the Babylon Bee.

  The controversy started when Mohammed El-Kurd, a pro-Palestine writer based in Jerusalem, posted on X.

  “You can’t protest peacefully. You can’t boycott. You can’t hunger strike. You can’t hijack planes. You can’t block traffic. You can’t throw Molotovs. You can’t self-immolate. You can’t heckle politicians. You can’t march. You can’t riot. You can’t dissent. You just can’t be.”

  You can’t protest peacefully. You can’t boycott. You can’t hunger strike. You can’t hijack planes. You can’t block traffic. You can’t throw Molotovs. You can’t self-immolate. You can’t heckle politicians. You can’t march. You can’t riot. You can’t dissent. You just can’t be.

  — Mohammed El-Kurd (@m7mdkurd) February 26, 2024

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

  El-Kurd immediately got ‘community noted’ as it was explained to him that hijacking planes and throwing fire bombs is a from of terrorism, not protest.

  However, despite being utterly roasted and potentially opening himself up to legal ramifications, El-Kurd didn’t delete the tweet.

  His insistence that hijacking planes should be treated as a reasonable form of protest was the echoed by another leftist who describes himself as a “19 y/o white western Maoist”.

  Reminder that plane hijackings used to be perfectly normal and were mostly non-violent. 9/11 was an outlier and the first of its kind https://t.co/g27lKzCXSw

  — Rosedark 📕 (@FreeRosedark) February 27, 2024

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

  “Reminder that plane hijackings used to be perfectly normal and were mostly non-violent. 9/11 was an outlier and the first of its kind,” posted a user called Rosedark.

  Community notes stepped in again to remind him that, “Even before 9/11 plane hijackings were very violent and resulted in hundreds of fatalities. More than 400 fatalities were connected to plane hijackings just in the 1980s and 1990s.”

  What’s the world coming to when you can’t even…hijack a plane?

  Both users were on the receiving end of some very forthright and in some cases hilarious responses.

  plane hijackings are the language of the unheard https://t.co/ULilgOzklH

  — Seamus (FreedomToons) (@seamus_coughlin) February 27, 2024

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

  “EVERYBODY PUT YOUR HANDS BEHIND YOUR BACK THIS IS A PLANE HIJACKING!”

  “Oh my God oh my God please don’t hurt me”

  “Wow. Yikes. Racist much? This is a peaceful perfectly normal plane hijacking in support of ending of the genocide in Palestine. IE non-violent. Have a normal one” https://t.co/NsSE0yMzyU pic.twitter.com/kkSj03Rwhp

  — ɖʀʊӄքǟ ӄʊռʟɛʏ 🇧🇹🇹🇩 (@kunley_drukpa) February 27, 2024

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

  “EVERYBODY PUT YOUR HANDS BEHIND YOUR BACK THIS IS A PLANE HIJACKING!”

  “Oh my God oh my God please don’t hurt me”

  “Wow. Yikes. Racist much? This is a peaceful perfectly normal plane hijacking in support of ending of the genocide in Palestine. IE non-violent. Have a normal one” https://t.co/NsSE0yMzyU pic.twitter.com/kkSj03Rwhp

  — ɖʀʊӄքǟ ӄʊռʟɛʏ 🇧🇹🇹🇩 (@kunley_drukpa) February 27, 2024

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

  Damn bro, it’s truly a sign of how oppressed we are when we don’t allow people to *checks notes* hijack airplanes.

  — ᴍᴇᴍᴇ ʜᴇᴀᴅʀᴏᴏᴍ (@memeheadroom) February 27, 2024

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

  Put the goat and the lube down, Mohammed.

  — U.S. Ministry of Truth (@USMiniTru) February 27, 2024

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

  Wokeness is so out of control they don’t even let you do a 9/11 anymore!!

  — Armand Domalewski (@ArmandDoma) February 27, 2024

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

  You can clearly access the internet to complain though. pic.twitter.com/POgugOVF00

  — IanG 🇬🇧🇮🇱 (@IanGee2023) February 27, 2024

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

  I bet all the passengers on those hijacked planes would wholeheartedly agree. Those people just minding their own business with their families probably loved it.

  — ConfusedX (@lattesBL) February 27, 2024

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

  “19 y/o white western Maoist” It would be more direct to say “anime porn obessed loser that can not make it in the real world and has zero self esteem” but to be fair that is a little wordy.

  — SGRV19 (@SGRV191) February 27, 2024

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

  Yeah … sure 👍🏼 hijackings are peaceful protest and perfectly normal

  TWA Flight 847 (June 1985)**: This Trans World Airlines flight was hijacked by Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad members during its flight from Athens to Rome. During the ordeal, U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem was…

  — Michael Cohen (@NeuroCoachMic) February 27, 2024

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

  Anyone who grew up in the 70’s probably hijacked a plane at one time or another . It was very common.

  — ℙ𝕣𝕠𝕗𝕖𝕤𝕤𝕠𝕣 𝔻𝕒𝕩𝕠𝕡𝕙𝕠𝕟𝕖 (@DaxophoneSolo) February 27, 2024

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

  ***Air France Flight 8969 has entered the chat

  — PhotographicFloridian (@JackLinFLL) February 27, 2024

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

  Mostly peaceful hijackings – here’s your next book title, @Julio_Rosas11.

  — Faye Hausendorff (@FayeH321) February 27, 2024

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

  About that lolhttps://t.co/uGuFHXSMI0

  — Jared Blanco🧦🥑 (@BlancoFlaco91) February 27, 2024

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

  Define “mostly non-violent”. Being hijacked is not non-violent. Also, here’s a list of hijacking fatalities pre-2001: pic.twitter.com/sMDTPpii25

  — Daniela Oertli (@danielaoertli) February 27, 2024

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

  “Non violent “ pic.twitter.com/OzcvDKgdEk

  — Danny ElPaso (@DannyElPaso) February 27, 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
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 20:20

• Army National Guard Hit With "Aviation Safety Stand Down" After Two Crashes
  Army National Guard Hit With “Aviation Safety Stand Down” After Two Crashes

  The director of the Army National Guard ordered an “aviation safety stand down” of all helicopter units until a safety review is completed following two deadly crashes involving rotary wing aircraft. 

  The decision for the grounding came after two crashes of AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopters, one near Salt Lake City during a training exercise on Feb. 12, killing the two pilots aboard, and the other during a Feb. 23 training exercise in Mississippi, with both pilots surviving. 

  

  The stand-down to “review safety policies and procedures” went into effect on Monday, the National Guard said. 

   “We are a combat force with helicopters training or on mission worldwide every day,” said Lt. Gen. Jon A. Jensen, director of the Army National Guard. 

  Jensen continued: “Safety is always at the top of our minds. We will stand down to ensure all of our crews are prepared as well as possible for whatever they’re asked to do.”

  The causes of both crashes have not been publicly released, but the Army’s Combat Readiness Center is investigating the incidents. 

  One of the deadliest training incidents in the service’s history occurred about one year ago when two Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters collided near Fort Campbell, Kentucky. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 20:00

• Mitch McConnell – Longest Serving Senate Leader In US History – To Step Down From Position In November
  Mitch McConnell – Longest Serving Senate Leader In US History – To Step Down From Position In November

  Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who turned 82 last week and has suffered multiple public ‘glitches,’ will step down from his Senate leadership position in November after maintaining power for almost two decades as the longest-serving Senate leader in US history.

  

  McConnell was set to announce his decision on Wednesday in the well of the Senate, AP reports.

  “One of life’s most underappreciated talents is to know when it’s time to move on to life’s next chapter,” he said in prepared remarks seen by the outlet. “So I stand before you today … to say that this will be my last term as Republican leader of the Senate.”

  While he’ll no longer be leader, McConnell will serve out his Senate term, which ends in January 2027, “albeit from a different seat in the chamber.”

  McConnell is rated — and has been for some time — Americans’ most disliked political leader. (Obviously he is beloved by DC.) In America, however, his favorability ratings are even worse than Biden’s. https://t.co/vrC0fnLIsH

  — Mollie (@MZHemingway) February 28, 2024

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

  “As I have been thinking about when I would deliver some news to the Senate, I always imagined a moment when I had total clarity and peace about the sunset of my work,” the prepared remarks continue. “A moment when I am certain I have helped preserve the ideals I so strongly believe. It arrived today.”

  It also arrived, as noted above, after two major health scares and his party shifting towards anti-war populism ushered in by President Trump.

  BREAKING NEWS: Sen. Mitch McConnell appearing to have another scary episode in the media gaggle in Covington today. Aides had to step in to help him out and repeat questions. He was eventually lead away. We’ll have the full video on @WLWT pic.twitter.com/q9ex5MHxLV

  — Hannah Thomas (@HannahPThomas) August 30, 2023

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

  His tenure was not without its critics, especially from the more restive corners of his party, often aligned with Trump’s confrontational style. Yet, McConnell’s grip on his caucus seldom wavered, a testament to his deep understanding of the political undercurrents that shape legislative priorities.

  The two have been estranged since December 2020, when McConnell refused to abide Trump’s lie that the election of Democrat Joe Biden as president was the product of fraud.

  But while McConnell’s critics within the GOP conference had grown louder, their numbers had not grown appreciably larger, a marker of McConnell’s strategic and tactical skill and his ability to understand the needs of his fellow Republican senators.

  McConnell gave no specific reason for the timing of his decision, which he has been contemplating for months, but he cited the recent death of his wife’s youngest sister as a moment that prompted introspection. “The end of my contributions are closer than I’d prefer,” McConnell said. –AP

  The impending leadership vacuum raises questions about the direction of the Republican Party. His successor will inherit a party at a crossroads, caught between its traditional conservative roots and the populist wave that has reshaped its identity in recent years.

  When you see McConnell is stepping down but then you remember his replacement (Thune or Cornyn) will be as bad or worse. pic.twitter.com/FxXwM74MlI

  — Jesse Kelly (@JesseKellyDC) February 28, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 19:55

• Biden Admin Tax Policy Proposals Hurt US Competitiveness
  Biden Admin Tax Policy Proposals Hurt US Competitiveness

  Authored by Michael Wilkerson via The Epoch Times,

  Usually when someone starts to talk about taxes, the eyelids grow heavy and the attention wanes, so I’ll keep this short. The Biden administration’s tax policy proposals are a disaster for U.S. competitiveness, for families, and the employers who hire them.

  

  While the Biden administration’s tax proposals have often been vague, with details missing, a few key elements are consistent. They rely on increased tax rates on businesses and individuals, and assume that both can be further burdened without damaging the economy. This is a falsehood.

  The Biden administration’s tax proposals have been unrealistic and completely disconnected from the massive growth in expenditure reflected in the administration’s various initiatives, such as the $1.7 trillion Build Back Better plan. The administration claimed that the Build Back Better program would be “fully paid for by the tax proposals,” which was clearly untrue even at first glance. Detailed analysis from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School indicated that the tax proposals would fall short of the administration’s spending plan by nearly $500 billion.

  More relevant for individuals is what Build Back Better means for personal income tax. According to analysis from the Tax Foundation, the nation’s leading independent tax policy nonprofit, under the Build Back Better framework, the “average top tax rate on personal income would reach 57.4 percent, giving the U.S. the highest rate in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). All 50 states plus the District of Columbia would have top tax rates on personal income exceeding 50 percent.” Under the administration’s plan, the top statutory income tax rate on personal income would be higher than Japan, France, Denmark, Sweden, and each and every one of the 36 OECD nations. State taxes would fall on top of this.

  For example, a top earning tax resident of New York or California would face a marginal tax rate of 66.2 percent and 64.7 percent, respectively.

  For places like Texas or Florida without state income taxes, the top rate would nonetheless be 51.4 percent.

  What will happen to incentives when somewhere between half and two-thirds of income is paid over to the government to pursue policies and programs that most Americans do not support? The effect is predictable. As envisioned, the administration’s proposed tax policies would hinder U.S. competitiveness and reduce incentives to work, save, invest, and innovate.

  More recent budget proposals have fared no better. For example, the Biden administration’s 2024 budget proposals would, according to analysis from the Tax Foundation, add up to “$4.8 trillion in new taxes targeted at businesses and high-income individuals.” The budget was projected to reduce long-term GDP and wages by 1.3 percent and 1.0 percent, respectively, while costing 335,000 jobs.

  The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 was intended to counterbalance China and strengthen the U.S. semiconductor manufacturing sector. The objective was to encourage capital investment in American companies, but requires firms that receive funding under the program share “excess profits,” without clearly defining what that means, with the federal government. This uncertainty is an arbitrary and undefined hidden tax that, rather than strengthening competition and encouraging innovation, will have the opposite effect. It will scare away private sources of funding which will not want to risk invested capital only to see the value created expropriated by the government.

  A sound tax policy has been a mainstay of conservative politics in the United States for generations. Especially since the Reagan administration, the Republican Party has made moderate tax rates a core policy focus. Before the Reagan administration, the maximum federal income tax rate ranged between 60–70 percent throughout most of the postwar era, and as high as 90 percent during the FDR years. President Reagan launched a new era focused on lower taxes as a stimulant for innovation, investment, and growth. The model worked.

  Until the Biden administration, the tax policies and top rates of post-Reagan presidencies of both parties maintained some reasonableness. While Democrats tended toward higher rates and the Republicans somewhat lower, neither sought to move the maximum rate much above 40 percent. And, before President Biden, neither seriously considered imposing an annual wealth tax, a coercive tool used by only a handful of nations around the world. Wealth taxes have been pursued by socialist and communist regimes which sought extreme measures to level wealth inequities in society, but they backfire through widespread manipulations including asset hiding and expatriation. The United States already has an inheritance tax, which is a one-time equivalent tax on estates payable at time of death, and a dozen or so states have similar estate taxes. These are exploitative and punitive against people who are land or asset rich, but cash poor, like many of our farming families in rural America.

  There is a direct link between taxation and inequality. The current U.S. tax code benefits the wealthy, whose primary source of income is capital gains, at the expense of the working and middle classes, whose primary source of gain is ordinary income from their hard work. Fundamentally, if taxes on capital (e.g., dividends, interest, carried interest in private equity) are lower than taxes on labor, inequality will continue to rise. This will, over time, lead to increased social unrest, instability and reduced competitiveness.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 19:40

• Japan's Demographic Implosion: Live Births Crash To Record Low, 12 Years Ahead Of Forecast
  Japan’s Demographic Implosion: Live Births Crash To Record Low, 12 Years Ahead Of Forecast

  When it comes to monetary and fiscal policy, Japan is doomed. Unfortunately it is also doomed demographically.

  Extending what has long been the most dismal trend in Japan’s civilizational history, government data showed that the number of babies born in Japan fell for an eighth straight year to a fresh record low in 2023, underscoring the daunting task the country faces in trying to stem depopulation.

  The number of births in 2023 fell 5.1% from a year earlier to 758,631, while the number of marriages slid 5.9% to 489,281, the first time in 90 years the number fell below 500,000 – the last time the number was this low the US had just dropped the atom bomb over Hiroshima and Nagasaki – signaling even greater declines in the population as out-of-wedlock births are rare in Japan.

  The drop comes more than a decade earlier than the government’s National Institute of Population and Social Security Research forecast, which estimated births would decline to below 760,000 in 2035, according to Kyodo news.

  Meanwhile, the number of deaths also hit a record – only in the other direction – rising to 1,590,503, while divorces increased to 187,798, up by 4,695.

  

  As a result, Japan’s population, including foreign residents, fell by 831,872, with deaths outnumbering births by a record 831,872, double where it was just five years ago.

  

  Asked about the latest data, Japan’s top government spokesperson said the government will take “unprecedented steps” to cope with the declining birthrate, such as expanding childcare and promoting wage hikes for younger workers.

  None of those measures have led to any perceptive improvement in Japan’s demographic bust in the past.

  The fast pace of decline in the number of newborns has been attributed to late marriages and people staying single. The administration of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has called the period leading up to 2030 “the last chance” to reverse the trend; all Japan has to do is divert the millions of illegal immigrants entering the US every month through the southern border – with the expectation they will all become diligent Democratic voters – and give them a red carpet welcome.

  “The declining birthrate is in a critical situation,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters. “The next six years or so until 2030, when the number of young people will rapidly decline, will be the last chance to reverse the trend.”

  A fall in the number of marriages is clearly followed by a drop in births, said Kanako Amano, a senior researcher at the NLI Research Institute. In order to increase the number of marriages, the government must conduct labor reforms, such as increasing wages in rural areas and eliminating the gender gap, Amano said.

  The government is planning on submitting related legislation, including a bill on boosting child allowances to combat the declining birthrate, to the current session of parliament.

  The number of births has been on a downward trend after hitting a peak in 1973 at around 2.09 million babies. It fell below 1 million in 2016.

  The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare is set to release possibly in June population data excluding foreign residents. The revised figure for 2022 showed births falling to 770,747, down about 30,000 from the preliminary figure. If a similar trend continues in 2023, the number of births excluding foreign residents is likely to total around 730,000.

  Mindful of the potential social and economic impact, and the strains on public finances, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has called the trend the “gravest crisis our country faces”, and unveiled a range of steps to support child-bearing households late last year.

  Japan’s population will likely decline by about 30% to 87 million by 2070, with four out of every 10 people aged 65 or older, according to estimates by the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 19:20

• Leaked Gaza Ceasefire Proposal Is US 'Psychological Warfare', Hamas Says
  Leaked Gaza Ceasefire Proposal Is US ‘Psychological Warfare’, Hamas Says

  Via The Cradle

  Hamas official Ahmad Abdul Hadi stated Tuesday that a leaked proposal for a ceasefire deal in Gaza is part of a “psychological warfare” campaign being carried out by the US.

  Details of the alleged proposal were leaked to Reuters on Monday, the same day US President Joe Biden said he hoped a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas could be reached by March 4 (next Monday). 

  

  “My national security adviser tells me that they’re close. They’re close. They’re not done yet. My hope is by next Monday we’ll have a ceasefire,” Biden claimed during an appearance on a late-night US talk show.

  But Abdul Hadi, the Hamas representative in Lebanon, stated that Hamas is not satisfied with the proposal and will not compromise on any of its demands, particularly “on a ceasefire and reaching an honorable, serious deal.”

  Hamas is seeking a permanent end to the war and the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. Israel is seeking the release of the 136 captives held by Hamas in Gaza and a temporary ceasefire that would allow it to resume the war after a pause.

  “We are open to any ideas posed by mediators but are also keen on preserving our key demands,” Abdul Hadi told Al-Mayadeen, adding that Israel is “seeking to hold Hamas accountable for any later failures in talks, planning to use this as an excuse to pave the way for the invasion of Rafah.”

  He said the leaks were not part of the Paris negotiations but a US and Israeli attempt to give the public an illusion that Hamas had approved of them. He reiterated that “everything being shared is not serious, but a ploy to maneuver and press on the Resistance.”

  The proposal leaked to Reuters outlined plans for a 40-day truce during which Hamas would free around 40 captives – including female soldiers, those under 19 or over 50 years old, and the sick – in return for about 400 Palestinians held captive in Israel.

  Israel would withdraw its troops from populated areas of Gaza. Displaced Gaza residents, excluding men of fighting age, would be permitted to return to their homes. Israel would be required to allow additional humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, as hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the strip are on the verge of starvation. Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) also responded to the leaked Paris proposal.

  “The leaks are an attempt to pressure the Palestinians and incite them against the resistance … They are pushing for a ceasefire before Ramadan in anticipation of what might happen in Al-Quds … The enemy believes that it can deceive the resistance with different methods in order to achieve a victory it has failed to achieve on the ground,” PIJ Political Bureau member Ihsan Ataya told Al-Mayadeen.

  In Gaza, residents speaking to Reuters expressed mixed feelings about possible outcomes. “We don’t want a pause, we want a permanent ceasefire, we want an end to the killing,” said Mustafa Basel, a father of five from Gaza City, now displaced in Rafah.

  “Unfortunately, people’s conditions are so grim that some may accept a pause, even [just] during Ramadan,” he said. “They want a permanent end to the war, but the dire conditions make them want a pause even for a month or 40 days in the hope it becomes permanent.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 02/28/2024 – 19:00