• There Is Only One Winner In The Ukrainian War: The US
  There Is Only One Winner In The Ukrainian War: The US

  Authored by Gerardo Femina via Pressenza.com,

  Many are surprised by Russia’s sudden and violent reaction, which is to be expected if one pays attention to the processes and not just the details. Already in 2007, in the Europe for Peace declaration, it was said that Europe would be plunged into a serious conflict if it continued to support Washington’s policy.

  

  And today, at this point in the Ukrainian crisis, we see only one winner, the United States, which has achieved several goals:

  1. New sanctions against Russia

  2. Blocking the Nord stream2 gas pipeline and above all stopping one of the things they fear the most, the collaboration between Europe (Germany) and Russia.

  3. To propose itself to Europe as an alternative gas supplier.

  4. Validate the narrative that Putin has expansionist aims.

  5. Increasing control over Europe.

  6. Waging war in Europe by sending only arms and not soldiers. The war against Russia is being waged by Europeans, especially the Ukrainians and Eastern European countries in general.

  What we are witnessing is the consequence of 30 years of US aggression against Russia with the support of Europe.

  The breach of agreements with Gorbachev in 1990, based on the commitment not to extend NATO to Eastern European countries, was a turning point. The aggression then continued with the so-called star shield and the installation of military bases in Poland and Romania. The US advance continued with the Western-led coup in Ukraine, which brought the country to a government of oligarchs close to Washington. Then, in 2015, the Ride of the Dragons took US troops across Eastern Europe to Russia’s borders; the military manoeuvres were accompanied by a campaign of hate speech against Russians and Putin in particular and, more importantly, numerous economic and financial sanctions designed to weaken an already struggling economy.

  For its part, Russia has made the “misstep” that the US provoked and hoped for in order to justify further sanctions. Since the beginning of the crisis, Moscow has tried to reach an agreement by clearly spelling out its demands: that Ukraine not join NATO, as it could not accept US military installations with nuclear missiles within 500 kilometres of Moscow. These demands were described as unacceptable, as if hypothetical Russian missiles in Mexico or Canada on the US border were acceptable.

  This, of course, does not justify the use of violence or war, but we understand the overall context in which this decision was taken.

  Europe will pay the highest price for this crisis. Not only will bills go up and many companies will be forced to close, but also the price of all products will go up and they will no longer be competitive on the world market. This will also slow down exports. In this situation, European governments, in a kind of hara-kiri, accept Washington’s diktat, inexplicably sacrificing their own interests, when they should be talking to all actors on the ground and finding a peaceful and reasonable solution for all.

  Neither Russia, nor Europe, let alone the Ukrainian population will benefit from this war.

  That is why the Europe for Peace declaration of 2007 said:

  Europe must not support any policy that drags the planet towards catastrophe: the lives of millions of people are at stake, the very future of humanity is at stake.

  People want to live in peace, they aspire to cooperation between peoples and are beginning to realise that we are all part of one big human family. The development of science and technology can guarantee a dignified life for all, but the greed of a few is holding back the path of human evolution.

  At that point, only strong pressure from citizens on their governments could help turn the tide.

  If you don’t want war, stop making it. European leaders are incapable of stopping the avalanche, whereas they would do well to listen to the demands of the people. Instead of fueling this war, they need to resume dialogue now.

  However, whatever one’s point of view, interpretations and analyses, this war must stop immediately. War belongs to prehistory. Let us build peace!

  Europe for Peace
  www.europeforpeace.eu

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/03/2023 – 02:00

• The Death Of Patriotism
  The Death Of Patriotism

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

  Wall Street Journal has conducted a poll with the most interesting results.

  From 1998 to the present, the percentage of Americans who say that patriotism is an important value has crashed from 70% to 38%. The bulk of the fall has happened since 2019.

  More results will be discussed in a bit but let’s first focus on this issue of patriotism.

  The poll doesn’t define for the respondents what patriotism is but reflect on the word. It can mean love of country and homeland. It’s perhaps true that this has fallen. That’s believable since the U.S. in three years ceased to place freedom as a first principle.

  Indeed, there is a growing cultural movement, extending from academia to the mainstream, that encourages loathing of American history and its achievements. No “Founding Father” is safe from being called the worst-possible names. Hatred of this country has risen to be an expected norm.

  But the problem goes even deeper.

  

  When you are locked in your home, your business is closed, your church is shut, your neighbors are screaming at you to mask up, then the doctors come at you with shots you don’t want, and you are further prevented from leaving the country to anywhere but Mexico, and the president calls the unvaccinated enemies of the people, sure, one can imagine that affections for the homeland decline.

  Americans Have Lost Faith in Their Institutions

  But there is another important pillar of patriotism. It is about trust in the civic institutions of the country. These include schools, courts, politics and all the institutions of government at all levels.

  Civic trust in these are surely at rock bottom. The courts did not protect us. The schools shut, particularly the public ones, which are supposed to be the crowning achievement of Progressive ideology. Our doctors turned on us.

  And let’s say that we consider the media to be part of civic culture. It has been that way since at least FDR’s Fireside Chats. It’s always been the mouthpiece for what we are supposed to be thinking about as a people.

  The media too turned on regular people for three years, calling our parties super-spreader events, jeering pastors who held worship services, demonizing live concerts and screaming at everyone to stay home and stay glued to the tube.

  Yet at the same time, they encouraged mass protests in the wake of the death of George Floyd. Think about the logic, or lack thereof.

  Yes, such evil antics tend to lessen public respect for all the institutions involved, especially when objections to these policies were censored by all the institutions we were supposed to trust with our data and friend networks. They turned out to be wholly owned too.

  The New Patriotism

  All the while, public support for patriotism was abused to deny fundamental rights and liberties. Patriotism was supposed to mean staying home and staying safe, masking up, social distancing, complying with every random edict no matter how ridiculous and finally getting jabbed once, twice, three times and more forever, despite the lack of medical vulnerability for vast swaths of the public.

  The Constitution became a dead letter for a time. It still is, as visitors from other countries cannot even enter our borders lest they too submit to the shots made and distributed by companies that provide half the budget of the agencies requiring everyone to comply.

  And this was all supposed to be necessary because of what was obviously a seasonal respiratory infection, a fact we knew at least a month before the lockdowns began. We could read about it in all mainstream venues.

  Don’t panic, they said, just trust your doctor. But with lockdowns, they also took away from the doctor the liberty of treating patients with therapeutics known to be effective against exactly this sort of virus.

  Instead, we were expected to put all of normal life on hold and wait for the magic antidote that was supposedly on the way. When it didn’t arrive until after the hated president was unseated, it turned out not to be an antidote at all.

  At best it was a temporary palliative against severe outcomes. It certainly did not stop infection or spread. All that happened anyway, which makes the point that the huge sacrifices made in the name of patriotism were all for naught.

  Lost Faith

  We should in no way be surprised that the public these days is not feeling very patriotic. And yes, this is very sad in many ways. But it is also what happens when patriotism is hijacked by the state and industry to shatter our hopes and dreams.

  We tend to learn from our errors. So when the pollsters come around and ask if we are feeling patriotic, it’s hardly unusual that people would respond: Not really.

  And we could say the same about the other poll result: The importance of religion has fallen from 62% in 1998 to 39% in 2022. Again the bulk of the crash happened after 2019. No question that the nation was already trending secular.

  But what are we to think when two successive seasons of Easter and Christmas (or whatever holiday you celebrate) were canceled by the civic elites with full cooperation from the mainstream of religious leaders?

  The whole point of religion is to reach outside the mundane world of civic culture into the realm of the transcendent in order to see and live by truth. But when transcendent concerns are replaced by fear and secular compliance, then religion loses credibility.

  If you want to find people who still believe, you can in groups that are truly serious about faith: the Hasidim, Amish, traditionalist Catholics and Mormons. But in mainline denominations, not so much. Like media, tech, and government, they turned out to be captured too.

  Young People Don’t Even Want Kids Anymore

  In the final results of the poll, the importance of having children went from 59% to 39% and the importance of community involvement peaked at 62 at the height of lockdowns to fall to an astounding 27%.

  Again, the culprit here seems pretty obvious: it was the pandemic response. All the policies were structured to shatter human relationships. People are nothing but disease vectors. Stay away from everyone. Don’t become a super-spreader by daring to hang around others. Be alone. Be lonely. That’s the only proper way.

  Finally, among the only things that are rising concern the importance of money. That’s probably because real income has been declining for the better part of two years and inflation is gutting our standards of living.

  Once again, pandemic policies are the culprit. They spent trillions and the money printers matched that spending nearly dollar for dollar, watering down the value of a previously reliable currency.

  

  We Need an Honest Accounting

  The trouble with the survey is not the numbers but the interpretation. This is being seen as some weird fog of nihilism and greed that has mysteriously slipped over the population, as if it were an entirely organic trend over which no one has any control. That’s wrong. There is a definite cause and it all traces to the same egregious policies without precedent.

  We still do not have honesty about what happened. And until we get it, we cannot repair the grave damage to the culture or the national soul.

  We are living in crisis times but that crisis has an identifiable cause and hence solution.

  Until we can speak frankly about it, the situation can only get worse.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/03/2023 – 00:00

• These Are The Best-Selling Video Games Of All Time
  These Are The Best-Selling Video Games Of All Time

  It’s a good time to be a video game fan. Not only is the gaming industry booming and projected to grow to $320 billion by 2026, but every year is bringing new evolutions in the medium.

  2022 saw massive launches in both games (Elden Ring and God of War Ragnarök) and media based on games (the films Uncharted and Sonic the Hedgehog 2). 2023 has already seen the release of major flagship TV series based on a game, HBO’s The Last of Us, and the much-anticipated The Super Mario Bros. Movie is slated to release in April.

  But which game is the best, or most successful? That debate may never end, but as Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao reports, from company reports and sales data aggregated by Wikipedia, Samuel Parker’s chart of the most-sold video games as of March 3, 2023 can at least tell us which ones have been the most popular.

  

  Top Ten Video Games Sold in History

  The best selling video game didn’t need multimillion dollar budgets, sixty-hour narratives, or celebrity voice actors and ad spots. The independently-developed (indie) Minecraft, with its pixelated blocks, takes the top spot on this list.

  

  Minecraft sold more units than the combined forces of Grand Theft Auto 5 (#2) and Red Dead Redemption 2 (#8), both made by industry giant Rockstar. Its immense popularity has been credited to its simple gameplay (no goals), creative structure (build anything), and engaged community with player-run servers and additional feature creations (known as mods).

  Another simple favorite, Tetris, comes in at third place with 100 million units sold of its 2006 re-release. Millennials continue to make up a large chunk of the video game playing demographic which might explain Tetris’ sales.

  But newer games are making up the majority of sales records. PUBG: Battlegrounds, a battle-royale shooter game which helped popularize the genre (and eventually its competitor Fortnite) asserts its popularity at #5. That puts it well ahead of the better-known shooter Call of Duty, even despite PUBG being banned in a number of countries for the alleged impact on the mental health of gamers.

  The oldest game to make the list is Super Mario Bros. (#7), apt considering it is credited with reviving the video game industry after it crashed in 1983. The original staple side-scroller has sold 58 million copies worldwide.

  Developer Dominance

  Though the top selling games span various series of games, a few developers managed to repeatedly find success.

  

  Japanese video game titan Nintendo developed three games (Super Mario Bros., Mario Kart, Wii Sport/Fitness) in the top 10 and another eight in the top 20. That’s not including its co-ownership of Pokémon, the world’s highest-grossing media franchise.

  American publisher Rockstar Games also managed to score multiple hits, though its longer development cycle necessary to create cinematic games gives it fewer potential candidates. That might change with the much-anticipated GTA 6 reportedly in production.

  Best Selling Genres

  The most popular genres in the top 10 give players the freedom to impose their will upon the world and pursue objectives at their leisure:

  

  Two games (Minecraft, Terraria) are classic sandbox games, where worlds are procedurally generated and there are no gameplay goals. Another two (GTA 5, Red Dead Redemption 2) are in the adjacent open-world genre, with a combination of sandbox elements and a narrative structure.

  However, with new games launching and selling millions of units every year, new entrants to the top 10 list of best selling video games of all-time seems likely. How will these developers, genres, and games fare over time?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 23:30

• Comey's "Good Day": How Political Prosecutions Became "Ethical Leadership" In The Pursuit Of Trump
  Comey’s “Good Day”: How Political Prosecutions Became “Ethical Leadership” In The Pursuit Of Trump

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in the New York Post on the level of joy being expressed by many over the indictment of former president Donald Trump, including former FBI Director James Comey.

  The thrill kill atmosphere ignores the blatantly political history behind this indictment.

  In the Sixteenth Century, the poet John Lyly wrote “The rules of fair play do not apply in love and war.” It also appears equally true “in love and War Trump.”

  

  Here is the column:

  James Comey could not contain himself at the news of an indictment of former President Donald Trump.

  Comey hopped on Twitter to declare, “It’s been a good day.”

  The former FBI director, who has been teaching and speaking on government ethics, joined others in celebrating the upcoming arrest of Trump because nothing says “ethical leadership” like a patently political prosecution.

  Comey declined to prosecute Hillary Clinton on her email scandal despite finding that she violated federal rules and handled classified material “carelessly.”

  He declared, “Ethical leaders lead by seeing above the short term, above the urgent or the partisan, and with a higher loyalty to lasting values, most importantly the truth.”

  Yet now Comey is heralding the effort of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who campaigned on a pledge of bagging Trump for some unspecified crime.

  While the actual charges will not be disclosed until the release of the indictment, the underlying theory discussed for months is an effort to revive a dead misdemeanor offense of falsifying business records — years after the statute of limitations expired.

  Bragg may try to accomplish this Frankensteinian feat by converting this into a felony.

  The long-debated theory in Bragg’s office was whether they could effectively allege a violation of federal election laws even though the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission declined such charges.

  Notably, Bragg’s predecessor declined to bring these charges.

  Bragg himself declined to do so, and that led to two of his prosecutors resigning in protest.

  Mark F. Pomerantz then proceeded to do what some of us view as breathtakingly unprofessional.

  He wrote a book on what he learned in the investigation, which was still ongoing.

  He made the case for indicting an individual who had not been charged, let alone convicted.

  He continued to engage in this public campaign despite requests from his former office that he was undermining its ongoing investigation.

  The public pressure worked.

  Bragg caved.

  Despite the widespread criticism of Bragg for reducing charges for an array of felonies by Manhattan criminals, he spent months working to convert a misdemeanor into a felony.

  Trump would apparently have been better off robbing Stormy Daniels at gunpoint rather than paying her off for a nondisclosure agreement.

  And yet Comey is not alone in his praise.

  Various professors and pundits have declared that this unprecedented use of New York law would be perfectly legal and commendable.

  They largely ignore that the misdemeanor is expired.

  Instead, Georgetown Law professor and MSNBC legal analyst Paul Butler declared, “Nobody is above the law, including Donald Trump.

  “It doesn’t matter that this is kind of a minor crime compared to some of the other allegations.”

  However, the law also protects people from selective prosecution and affords them protection through the statute of limitations.

  One can debate whether Trump may have committed this misdemeanor.

  That is a good-faith debate.

  What is not debatable is that the window for such a prosecution closed years ago.

  Unless this indictment reveals a previously undisclosed crime, the use of the long-debated bootstrapped offense would defy the rule of law. Nobody is above the law, but nobody is below its protections … including Donald Trump.

  Dozens of criminal counts — it’s been reported there are as many as 34 — will make no difference if they merely replicate the same flaws.

  There are reports, for example, that Bragg may bring charges based not only on the Daniels payment but money given to former Playboy model Karen McDougal to kill a story on another alleged affair.

  However, that payment (from Trump’s friend at the National Enquirer) was also paid in 2016 and raises the same statute of limitations and other issues.

  Bragg is operating directly out of Comey’s handbook on “ethical leadership.”

  After all, it was Comey who joked about how he violated department rules to nail Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn.

  He delighted audiences with how he told underlings “let’s just send a couple guys over” to trap Flynn.

  It was Comey who was fired after former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein cited him for “serious mistakes” and violating “his obligation to ‘preserve, protect and defend’ the traditions of the Department and the FBI.”

  It was Comey who violated federal laws and removed FBI material (including reported classified material) after being fired and then leaked information to the media.

  Despite those violations, Comey was heralded by the media and made wealthy on book and speaking tours.

  Bragg knows that 62% of people view his case as “mainly motivated by politics,” but (like Comey) he is playing to an eager and generous audience.

  The buildup to Trump’s booking has all of the appeals of a thrill kill for Democrats.

  It will be another “good day” for Comey and others who put politics above principle in the use of the criminal justice system.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 23:00

• Oil's Spreads Show The Depth Of OPEC+ Shock
  Oil’s Spreads Show The Depth Of OPEC+ Shock

  By Jake Lloyd-Smith, Bloomberg markets live reporter and analyst

  Well OPEC+ certainly knows how to spring a surprise, especially at the start of the week. The substantial production cut — which totals more than 1 million bpd on paper — will tighten market balances into 2H, reinforcing the impact of an expected increase in demand from China. The combination of lower global supply and higher consumption will put more backbone into prices that just two weeks ago had hit the lowest since 2021.

  To gauge the way the market’s pricing in the move’s expected impact it’s instructive to look at some of the favored timespreads, particularly Brent’s December-December differential. This measure — the gap between the futures for the final month of this year versus the end of 2024 — got crushed last month as the banking turmoil spurred a flight from risk. This morning, it spiked by as much as $1.57 a barrel, dwarfing the usual daily move of a few cents.

  

  It’s worth remembering that the latest salvo from OPEC+ comes after the US has already drawn down the nation’s emergency crude stockpile, with the Biden administration unleashing a torrent of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve last year after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

  Right now, the holdings sit at their lowest since the 1980s, effectively strengthening the hand of OPEC+.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 22:47

• Anti-Russia Alliance Splinters As Japan Buys Russian Oil At Price Above Cap; Others To Follow
  Anti-Russia Alliance Splinters As Japan Buys Russian Oil At Price Above Cap; Others To Follow

  Today OPEC+ woke up and chose scorched-earth war against the Fed.

  That’s because while the US central bank is already trapped, and is desperately looking for any excuse to halt its tightening campaign now that inflation is accelerating to the downside not just because regional banks desperately need a lower Fed Funds rate to short-circuit the relentless deposit drain which won’t stop (and will lead to even more bank failures and resolutions) until their deposit rates can at least match those of the Fed, but also because various liberal rags have already thrown Powell, pardon, the “Trump-era holdover” under the bus for the coming recession…

  The bus now is headed straight for Jay pic.twitter.com/cfa4GYHKFL

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 26, 2023

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

  … OPEC’s shocking shot across the Fed and Biden bow revealed in its intention to keep oil prices high even as central banks push the world into a recession, just made life for the central planners very difficult, as the sordid stench of stagflation is suddenly all over the place.

  pic.twitter.com/Uoi7RHJkGT

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 2, 2023

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

  But while much will be said about the monetary consequences of OPEC’s action, which may be viewed as sealing the fate of countless small banks in an act that any objective person would deem monetary warfare by the anti-Western alliance of China, Russia, and now Saudi Arabia, the complexity of which can be summarized as follows…

  Does bitcoin drop from here because rising oil means more inflation and less cuts, or rise because Fed stuck means more banks fail and bank runs resume.

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 2, 2023

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

  … there is a much simpler, if far more impactful geopolitical consequence of today’s post-OPEC news price surge.

  Readers may recall that one of the reasons why oil first exploded a year ago, then drifted ever lower before hitting a 16 month low just two weeks ago, is because it only gradually became apparent that despite the bluster and posturing, most Western nations – with the exception of a few truly stupid ones – realized that they never intended to truly sanction Russian  oil exports int he aftermath of the Ukraine invasion. Much to the chagrin of Zelensky, this meant that despite their dramatic, Oscar-worthy anti-Putin monologues, western leaders never actually intended to halt Russia’s commodity exporting machine as the consequences for the west would be far more dire.

  That’s why when the Russian $60 export price cap was being debated a few months ago, the US quickly quashed any debate for lowering the cap even more as it would mean truly limiting how much oil Russia could export. You see, $60 was a perfect price: as long as Brent traded around $80, Russian Urals – which has traded with a 25-30% discount to Brent – would be comfortably below the cap and any and all Western countries that needed Russian oil could buy it, in the process explicitly funding the Russian military machine that they so vocally oppose by funneling money to the Kiev regime (knowing very well most of that money will be embezzled and will be never seen again).

  But where things get problematic is if and when oil prices jump – like they did today – because a spike in Brent also means that Russian Urals will go right up with it. In fact, if Brent rises above $85 or so, Urals hits $60… and if it goes higher, it’s game over for the farce that has passed for Russian oil export sanctions.

  Which brings us to today because as the chart below shows, Urals just hit $60 and any further increases in its price mean that virtually everyone in the anti-Russian west is suddenly cutoff from Putin’s oil.

  

  What happens then? Will western nations follow sanction guidelines and stop buying Russian oil, which means sending the price of all non-Russian oil sharply higher (even as India and China step up and buy whatever western importers no longer desire), or will the anti-Russia alliance splinter?

  While we are confident that many governments will do the former even if it means more hardship for their citizens, if only to signal their virtue and keep the US state department happy, some are already showing that the anti-Russian alliance isn’t worth the paper it is written on in carbon credits.

  Japan is one such nation.

  As the WSJ reports today, one of Washington’s closest allies in Asia is now buying oil at prices above the cap, in effect breaking with the sanctions regime imposed by US allies.

  As the note adds, Japan got the U.S. to agree to the exception, saying it needed it to ensure access to Russian energy. The concession shows Japan’s reliance on Russia for fossil fuels, which analysts said contributed to a hesitancy in Tokyo to back Ukraine more fully in its war with Russia. It also shows why the price cap was imposed at a level where it doesn’t actually adversely impact Russian oil exports. But the current price surge means that unless the price cap is lifted, the U.S. alliance is about to shoot itself in the leg.

  Going back to Japan, it’s the one country which – at a time when most European countries have at least claimed they are reducing their reliance on Russian energy supplies – has stepped up its purchases of Russian natural gas over the past year. Japan is the only Group of Seven nation not to supply lethal weapons to Ukraine, and Prime Minister Fumio Kishida was the last G-7 leader to visit Ukraine after Russia’s invasion.

  In the first two months of this year, Japan bought about 748,000 barrels of Russian oil for a total of ¥6.9 billion, according to official trade statistics. At the current exchange rate, that translates to $52 million, or just under $70 a barrel.

  Of course, Japan will never admit that Russia has leverage over its energy needs, and there has been a diarrhea of hollow rhetoric in recent days seeking to dispell speculation the Japan’s New PM Fumio Kishida is Putin’s bitch:

  Mr. Kishida has said the G-7 summit he is hosting this May in his hometown of Hiroshima will demonstrate solidarity with Ukraine. Tokyo has said it is committed to supporting Kyiv and can’t send weapons because of longstanding export restrictions the cabinet has imposed on itself.

  “We absolutely will not allow Russia’s outrageous act, and we are imposing strict sanctions on Russia in order to stop Russia’s invasion as soon as possible,” said chief government spokesman Hirokazu Matsuno.

  But empty rhetoric aside, the oil purchases which have been authorized by the U.S., represent a break in the unity of U.S.-led efforts to impose a global $60-a-barrel cap on purchases of Russian crude oil.

  The cap works because oil-buying nations, even if they aren’t aligned with the U.S., generally need to use insurance and other services from companies based in the U.S. or one of its allies. The G-7, the European Union and Australia have agreed to rules forbidding those companies from furnishing services if a buyer of Russian oil is paying more than $60 a barrel.

  The nations last year granted an exception to the cap through Sept. 30 for oil purchased by Japan from the Sakhalin-2 project in Russia’s Far East. An official of Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry said Tokyo wanted to ensure access to Sakhalin-2’s main product, natural gas, which is liquefied and shipped to Japan. “We have done this with an eye toward having a stable supply of energy for Japan,” the official said.

  He said a small quantity of crude oil is extracted alongside the natural gas at Sakhalin-2 and needs to be sold to ensure liquefied natural gas, or LNG, production continues. “The price is decided by negotiations between the two parties,” he said. Russia accounts for nearly one-tenth of Japan’s natural-gas imports, most of it from Sakhalin-2, and the quantity bought by Japan last year was 4.6% greater than in the previous year.

  

  That marks a contrast with Germany, which relied on Russia for 55% of its natural-gas imports before the war and survived a complete cutoff through a quick remodeling of its import infrastructure. Germany’s economy grew last year faster than Japan’s, bucking forecasts of a German recession triggered by the cutoff of Russian gas. Of course, instead of being as reliant on Russian gas, Germany is becoming far more reliant on US LNG shipments. How long until the undue reliance on US goodwill for a country that is one of China’s largest trading partners comes back to bite it?

  “It’s not as if Japan can’t manage without this. They can. They simply don’t want to,” said James Brown, a professor at Temple University’s Japan campus. Prof. Brown, who studies Russia-Japan relations, said Japan should move to withdraw from the Sakhalin projects eventually “if they’re really serious about supporting Ukraine.”

  Guess they are not “really serious about supporting Ukraine.”

  But they are not alone: and once Urals rises above $60 for all nations that buy the cheap Russian grade, we are about to find out how many other nations are also not serious about supporting Ukraine, and will promptly exit the anti-Russian alliance if it means access to Russian oil at just over $60 or paying Riyadh $80, $90, or $100 (or more) for the exact same cargo.

  Japan has almost no fossil fuel of its own and relies on imported natural gas and coal for much of its electricity. Officials have said it would be self-defeating to give up access to the Russian liquefied natural gas because Russia could turn around and sell the LNG to China.

  In addition to the price cap, the U.S. and many of its allies have largely banned the import of Russian oil into their own countries.

  While US officials had said for months that the cap has been generally successful in pushing down Russia’s oil revenue while stabilizing global oil markets, that is about to change thanks to the surprise OPEC+ (where Russia is a key member) production cut, one which will inevitably lift Urals price above $60, triggering sanctions for anyone who buys it.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 22:30

• Wagner Raises Russian Flag In Center Of Bakhmut, But Fighting Still Rages
  Wagner Raises Russian Flag In Center Of Bakhmut, But Fighting Still Rages

  Russia’s Wagner paramilitary group in the overnight hours on Monday has claimed victory (or at least a partial victory) over Bakhmut by raising the Russian flag as well as its own PMC Wanger Group flag over central government administration buildings of Bakhmut. 

  Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin described that the key city in Donetsk is “ours” but only in a “legal sense”. He wrote on Telegram: “The commanders of the units that took city hall and the whole center will go and put up this flag,” he said in reference to a Russian flag being raised in the accompanying video. “This is the Wagner private military company, these are the guys who took Bakhmut. In a legal sense, it’s ours.”

  🎥Wagner chief declares ‘#Bakhmut captured’.
  “April 2, 2023, 23:00 (MSK time), the administrative center of the city. Commanders of storming groups of the PMC Wagner will raise the Russian flag and flag of the PMC ‘Wagner’ on the city administration of Bakhmut.” pic.twitter.com/B60yzMhYqi

  — Military Advisor (@miladvisor) April 2, 2023

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

  About two weeks ago Prigozhin claimed that Wagner and Russian forces controlled 70% of the utterly destroyed town, and as the Ukrainians were mounting a stiff defense, pouring more resources into the months-long fight.

  Hours prior to Prigozhin video showing the flag-raising against a dark night sky, the Ukrainian general staff acknowledged that “the enemy has not stopped its assault of Bakhmut… Ukrainian defenders are courageously holding the city as they repel numerous enemy attacks.”

  The announcement was meant to convey that the Ukrainian Army still considers that it “holds” Bakhmut. Russian sources say Ukrainian fighters are still concentrated on the Western outskirts.

  However, going into the weekend it was already clear that Wagner fighters were on the cusp of taking the city center…

  🗺️#Bakhmut situation, March 31 21:00
  – Wagner mercenaries reached the center of the city and raised its flag on one of the high-raise building there.#UkraineRussiaWar pic.twitter.com/JycdoEQCGD

  — MilitaryLand.net (@Militarylandnet) March 31, 2023

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

  On Sunday President Zelensky was still sounding somewhat optimistic regarding the fate of Bakhmut: 

  “I am grateful to our warriors who are fighting near Avdiivka, Maryinka, near Bakhmut… Especially Bakhmut! It’s especially hot there today!” Zelensky said in his own post to Telegram.

  Near Bakhmut, about 27 kilometres (17 miles) away in Kostyantynivka, a “massive attack” of Russian missiles left three men and three women dead and eleven wounded Sunday, Ukrainian authorities said.

  Zelensky said the affected zones are “just residential areas”, where “ordinary civilians of an ordinary city of Donbas” were targeted.

  A close-up map of the approximate situation around the city of Bakhmut.

  🇷🇺 have advanced deeper into the centre of the city and taken control of what was the city council building. pic.twitter.com/NtiaaCNPGH

  — War Mapper (@War_Mapper) April 3, 2023

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

  Zelensky in an interview last week suggested that he may be forced to negotiate with Russia if his forces are definitively defeated at Bakhmut, while also hinting at huge losses.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 22:00

• Federal Judge Blocks Tennessee Law Banning Drag Shows With Minors Present
  Federal Judge Blocks Tennessee Law Banning Drag Shows With Minors Present

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

  A U.S. judge on March 31 blocked a Tennessee law that forbids drag shows being held while minors are present.

  “At this point, the court finds that the statute is likely both vague and overly-broad,” U.S. District Judge Thomas Parker, a Trump appointee, said in a 15-page ruling.

  

  Parker imposed a temporary restraining order that blocks the law from taking effect.

  The law (pdf), signed by Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, on March 2 after being approved by GOP legislators, had been set to take effect on April 1.

  The law makes it a criminal offense for a person to “perform adult cabaret entertainment” on public property or in a place where it could be viewed by a minor. Adult cabaret entertainment is defined in the law as shows featuring strippers, men dressed as women, and similar entertainers.

  Friends of George’s, a nonprofit that holds drag shows in Memphis, sued state officials, alleging the law violated rights granted by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment and is discriminatory on the basis of viewpoint.

  Tennessee “does not have a compelling interest in preventing minors from watching drag show,” one of the filings from the plaintiffs stated. It also argued that the statute was too vague because “it does not give citizens a reasonable opportunity to know what conduct is prohibited; nor does it give law enforcement explicit standards by which to enforce the law.” Friends of George’s said that it would have to cancel its next production, which is slated to start on April 14, or add an age restriction if the law was not blocked.

  State defendants said that the plaintiff had not shown it would be injured by the law because it had not asserted its production would violate the law.

  “Plaintiff makes no allegation that it intends to engage in conduct that 2023 Pub. Ch. No. 2 prohibits,” they said.

  Parker sided against the state, finding that Friends of George’s “has to try to sell tickets while deciding whether it should add a previously unnecessary age restriction, cancel the show, or risk criminal prosecution or investigation.”

  “These are not trifling issues for a theatre company—certainly not in the free, civil society we hold our country to be. Defendants’ approach would have Plaintiff, and those similarly situated in Tennessee, eat the proverbial mushroom to find out whether it is poisonous. The law does not require that for standing,” the judge added.

  Parker said that the law is unconstitutionally vague and overboard in part because the law “reaches the conduct of performers virtually anywhere.”

  “What exactly is a location on public property or a ‘location where an adult cabaret entertainment could be viewed by a person who is not an adult’?” he wondered. “Does a citizen’s private residence count? How about a camping ground at a national park? What if a minor browsing the worldwide web from a public library views an ‘adult cabaret performance?’ Ultimately, the Statute’s broad language clashes with the First Amendment’s tight constraints.”

  The temporary restraining order is in place for 14 days, unless it is extended. Additional hearings in the case will be scheduled soon.

  Lee’s office did not immediately return a request for comment. The office of Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti did not pick up the phone.

  “We won because this is a bad law,” Mark Campbell, president of the board of directors for Friends of George’s, said in a statement. “We look forward to our day in court where the rights for all Tennesseans will be affirmed.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 21:00

• Manhattan Office Vacancy Hits Record As Marquee LA Office Tower Sells At 50% Loss
  Manhattan Office Vacancy Hits Record As Marquee LA Office Tower Sells At 50% Loss

  It’s not as if the trade we defined as the “Big Short 3.0″ needed help to plumb fresh record lows (as it has been doing virtually every day in the past month, see “New “Big Short” Hits Record Low As Focus Turns To $400 Billion CRE Debt Maturity Wall“), but it’s getting it anyway courtesy of an unexpected source.

  While it is common knowledge by now that lower-tier and suburban office markets as entering the nine circles of hell…

  

  … for reasons most recently and succinctly summarized by Chris Whalen…

  Problem with #CRE goes like this. Occupancy falls, SQFT rental price falls, rent roll falls, then bldg value falls.reserves consumed. Lender seeks more equity to restore 50% LTV. Equity does numbas, walks away…. @blackstone

  — Richard Christopher Whalen (@rcwhalen) March 31, 2023

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

  … and visually by the IMF in this report from 2021…

  

  … many were left with the opinion that the world’s top office market remains largely unscathed.

  Unfortunately, that opinion was wrong: according to the latest report from brokerage Jones Lang LaSalle, which tracks about 470 million square feet (44 million square meters) of New York City offices, found a mere 4.6 million square feet of office space was leased in the first quarter. That means that Manhattan’s office-vacancy rate was at a record high as new developments add even more space to the struggling market. Specifically, 16.1% of space was empty as of the first quarter, with leasing is at its lowest levels since the second quarter of 2021. Other real estate companies found si   similar results: Colliers recorded a 16.9% vacancy rate in the fourth quarter and a 17.3% rate in the first quarter of 2021.

  “You’re having this anemic leasing activity, more space is being added in the form of newly constructed or newly renovated space, but also sublease space continues to pile up,” said Andrew Lim, director of research at JLL.

  According to the report, while the market was already struggling with excess supply, it was flooded with more than 1.5 million square feet of office space in the first quarter with the completion of 660 Fifth Ave.’s redevelopment.

  Not all of that space will stay empty as landlord Brookfield Properties has signed leases with finance firms including Macquarie Group. The building – formerly known as the iconic 666 Fifth Ave – and the former home of hedge fund giant Millennium Partners until its recent move to 399 Park, has gained traction after undergoing $400 million in renovations that include a new lobby, elevators and facade.

  There was some good news on the office front: one of the biggest leases to come to fruition in the first quarter was Citadel’s master lease of 350 Park Avenue. Ken Griffin’s firm is leasing 585,000 square feet from Vornado Realty Trust at the property for 10 years, where the initial annual rent will be $36 million.

  Still, the increase in available space ramps up the pressure on landlords that own older buildings across the city. With the rise in remote work, tenants are more inclined to move to newer developments or towers that have been recently renovated, especially with the recent deluge of office space availability courtesy of the Hudson Yards project.

  “We have to reinvent our office space,” New York Mayor Eric Adams said in an interview with Bloomberg Thursday, adding that empty spaces should be converted to housing. “We have a housing crisis. We already have structures that are built.”

  The silver lining is that despite the record number of vacant offices, average rents remained flat at $76.96 a square foot, buoyed by growing rates at top-quality buildings, especially newly built ones. That helped balance out falling rents at older spaces and offices up for sublease.

  It’s not just New York: other key office markets are suffering similar malaise.

  According to Commercial Observer, KBS sold the Union Bank Plaza tower in Downtown Los Angeles for a big discount to the Schreiber-run Waterbridge Capital after several rounds of descending bids (Joel Schreiber made a name as the first investor in WeWork and made several attempts to sell the former Broadway Trade Center downtown before filing for bankruptcy and succumbing to a foreclosure sale.) 

  

  The 40-story, 701,888-square-foot office building sold for between $105 million and $110 million, according to sources familiar with the deal. KBS REIT acquired the same building from Hines for $208 million in 2010, records show, and also completed a $20 million renovation. In total, the loss on the sale was north of 50%.

  Throughout the L.A. region, office activity has cooled significantly since the pandemic, especially in the central business district, and investor and lender appetite for office assets has collapse with the rise of hybrid work and rising interest rates. As reported previously, Brookfield, the largest office landlord in L.A., defaulted on $754 million in loans tied to two Downtown L.A. office towers, and other skyscrapers, including the PacMutual Building and the 62-story Aon Center, are hitting the market at major discounts.

  To make matters worse and put more pressure on a potential sale, L.A.’s Measure ULA goes into effect April 1, which will increase transfer taxes by 5.5 percent on transactions over $10 million.

  “Executing on large-scale office assets in today’s environment requires an ability to address the entire capital stack and think outside the box. Even with a high-quality asset, these are not easy deals to close,” Mark Schuessler, an executive vice president with Colliers, said in a statement.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 20:30

• The Big DEI Gulf On Campus: It's Much More Than He Said/Ze Said
  The Big DEI Gulf On Campus: It’s Much More Than He Said/Ze Said

  Authored by John Murawski via RealClear Wire,

  The fight over academic freedom on campus increasingly comes down to a fight over three letters – DEI – which goes a long way to explaining the fissures now tearing higher education apart.  

  

  For progressives committed to social justice advocacy, academic freedom must shield the prevailing academic consensus on race and gender from outside political pressure. Nowhere is that academic consensus better represented in the modern university than in the campus Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) bureaucracy, which exists to advocate for students and faculty who identify as brown or queer, often by monitoring the campus culture for “whiteness” and “cisheteropatriarchy” —  the social dominance of white, heterosexual men.   

  Conservative reformers also see themselves as defending academic freedom by challenging the progressive campus orthodoxy that’s enforced by DEI functionaries in the name of social justice. Critics of DEI say that these are overzealous bureaucrats who stifle the academic freedom of anyone who dares to dissent from their monocausal, moralistic metanarratives about race and gender.   

  These critics note numerous studies that show the climate of fear and self-censorship on campus today is worse than it was during the Cold War McCarthyism of the 1950s. The free speech advocacy group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), for example, reported in February that about half of faculty reported being worried “about losing their jobs or reputation because someone misunderstands something they have said or done, takes it out of context, or posts something from their past online.”   

  Conservatives link the rise of campus illiberalism and censoriousness to the expansion of DEI offices during the last decade, which they say politicizes the campus through a DEI apparatus that exerts its administrative power through bias hotlines, sensitivity workshops, and speech codes.  They condemn DEI statements in admissions, hiring and promotions decisions as de facto “political litmus tests”; these diversity statements “have become a mainstay of application processes for faculty jobs,” according to the Chronicle of Higher Education.   

  “We cannot live up to our mission as a university unless we attend to inequity, both past and present,” said Mimi Chapman, the faculty chair at the University of North Carolina, at a recent board of trustees meeting.  

  Today, half of faculty support the practice of requiring job applicants to commit to DEI advocacy in their teaching and research, according to FIRE. And progressive faculty are not troubled about political homogeneity, as long as it aligns with their politics: 57% of liberal faculty say that advancing race and gender diversity is more important than promoting political viewpoint diversity.  One such professor is Stacy Hawkins, vice dean and professor of law at Rutgers Law School, who wrote an opinion piece last month for The Chronicle of Higher Education, “Sometimes Diversity Trumps Academic Freedom.” Hawkins contends that conservative opposition to CRT is not a legitimate exercise of academic freedom because “the opposition to CRT is designed to silence, further marginalize, and diminish the value of minority voices and experiences.”   

  “Some people’s right to express themselves cannot come at the expense of other people’s right to dignity, safety, and equal participation in the academic community,” Hawkins wrote. “Rather than willingly cede DEI wholesale to academic freedom, perhaps it is time to reshape our understanding of academic freedom.”  

  High school seniors across the political spectrum are so aware of the ideological divides on campus that one in four has ruled out attending a higher education institution because of its political climate, according to a survey reported in The Chronicle of Higher Education.   

  The U.S. campus has been transformed in recent years by the explosion of diversity offices and diversity jobs, said Ilya Shapiro, the director of Constitutional Studies at the conservative Manhattan Institute, who is working on a book about the ideological capture of the nation’s law schools through the bureaucratization of DEI initiatives.   

  Shapiro is among those who say that university administrators are more politically radical than the professoriate, and that their ideological commitment corrupts the core mission of higher education. Based on his research, between 1987 and 2012, the nation’s universities added more than a 500,000 administrators, so that around 2010, universities started employing more administrators than full-time instructors, and in some elite institutions the administrators now even outnumber the students. Most administrators are not DEI bureaucrats, but DEI is now the fastest-growing segment of the educational bureaucracy, Shapiro found, so that the average college has more people devoted to DEI – exceeding 45 per campus – than the number of professors teaching history.   

  “In any bureaucracy, bureaucrats are incentivized to justify their positions, grow their authority, increase their budgets,” Shapiro said. “So in the DEI space, they have to search for dragons to destroy – cases of racism, sexism, transphobia – all of these -isms and -phobias.”  

  The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education’s 35-page antiracism guide confirms this picture, stating that “Higher education systems are a complex web of practices, policies, and procedures steeped in White normativity.”   

  The organization’s brochure encourages “using critical race theory as a framework for making sense of racism in curricula, instruction, and assessment in education.” And the DEI trade group warns: “DEI cost-cutting sends a powerful message that BIPOC [black, indigenous and people of color] students, faculty, and staff are expendable.”  

  The explosion of DEI employment opportunities and growing budgets is leading to a proliferation of DEI certifications, DEI minors, and even DEI majors at the university level. One example is the DEI major launched in 2021 by Bentley University in Waltham, Mass., to train chief diversity officers and chief inclusion officers for in-demand careers in a growing field.   

  Bentley’s course catalog is imbued with activist jargon and revolutionary rhetoric. In an introductory course, “Students will understand and critically analyze issues of oppression, power and privilege as they intersect with themselves as well as others.” In a course about race relations, “Students will leave this class with a heightened awareness of the racism in all of your own everyday lives and how to resolve it.” A course about the legal system “examines law as both an instrument of institutionalized oppression and a tool for liberation.”   

  Bentley also offers a course linking the monstrosities of slavery to capitalism, a claim also made by the self-described “antiracist” advocate Ibram X. Kendi in his 2019 book, “How To Be an Antiracist,” and “The 1619 Project” published in 2019 by The New York Times and reissued as a book last year. All of these claims and arguments have been advanced by critical race theorists for decades, “centering” racism, oppression, and violence as the defining features of the United States.   

  “A long history of scholarship in sociology ties U.S. slavery to the development of capitalism and modern business and finance,” the course description states. “This course is designed to give students a framework for appreciating the centrality of the relationship between slavery and capitalism in the U.S., and translating that into new ways of understanding how tacit racism, hidden and unacknowledged, is structured into business and society today.”  

  At the same time, grant funding from federal agencies is increasingly contingent on diversity and equity commitments. For instance, starting in FY2023, U.S. Department of Energy grant applications require applicants to describe how they’ll incorporate diversity and equity into their research projects, and those strategies will be evaluated as part of the merit review process.   

  DEI is also becoming part of the accreditation process required by the U.S. Department of Education for universities to qualify for federal funding, including federal student loans and other forms of financial aid, such as Pell grants. Medical schools are now required to provide faculty training in DEI and cultural competency, according to a 2022 City Journal article, pressuring the schools to expand their DEI bureaucracies. And regional accreditors that certify undergraduate colleges and universities now endorse or mandate DEI training and DEI offices, according to a Heritage Foundation report issued in February.   

  However, universities are not limited to a single accreditor and can apply to multiple accrediting agencies if they run into conflicts.   

  Belle Wheelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, which currently accredits the universities in Florida that Gov. DeSantis is seeking to reform, said in an interview with RealClearInvestigations that of the seven regional accrediting agencies, her organization is the only one that doesn’t require DEI to earn accreditation. But she said SACS is moving forward with adopting a DEI mandate that would be effective in January 2024. She said that SACS allows universities to define “diversity,” so that it does not have to be based on race and gender and can be defined as “viewpoint diversity.” Wheelan noted that SACS has issued accreditations to three private conservative Christian colleges: Patrick Henry College, Liberty University and Bob Jones University.   

  DEI practitioners say their jobs focus on making universities more representative and more welcoming to first-generation students, disabled students, and returning military veterans, not just advocating for people who identify as brown and queer.   

  Yoleidy Rosario-Hernandez, who headed the Office of Outreach and Inclusive Excellence at New College of Florida, granted an interview to The Washington Post after getting fired from her $135,000-a-year job by the newly constituted board of trustees. Rosario-Hernandez, who identifies as BIPOC and transgender and uses ze/zir pronouns, described the conservative critique of DEI mandates as coming from a position of “white supremacy.”  

  Rosario-Hernandez categorically rejected the conservative accusation that DEI divides people into two groups – the “oppressors” and the “oppressed.”   

  Instead, DEI promotes reconciliation between two groups – “people who are harmed” and “people who have harmed them.”  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 20:00

• Leaks From Bragg's Grand Jury Are A Crime
  Leaks From Bragg’s Grand Jury Are A Crime

  Authored by Alan Dershowitz via New York Sun,

  The protection of secrecy is as applicable to President Trump as it is to anyone else…

  

  It is likely that a serious felony has been committed right under District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s nose and he is not investigating it. Under New York law, it is a felony to leak confidential grand jury information, such as whether the jurors voted to indict. The protection of secrecy is as applicable to President Trump as it is to anyone else. 

  We know that the information was disclosed while the indictment itself remains sealed and before any official announcement was made or charges brought. It is unlikely that the leak came from the Trump team, which seemed genuinely surprised.

  The most likely, though uncertain, scenario is that a person in Mr. Bragg’s office or a grand juror unlawfully leaked the sealed information. That would be a class E felony, subject to imprisonment.

  It is possible of course that an investigation is underway, but it seems more likely that Mr. Bragg is too busy making up a crime against the man he promised in his campaign to get than investigating a real crime that took place on his watch.

  In my new book, “Get Trump,” I predicted that partisan prosecutors would try to get Trump regardless of the lack of evidence or law. That prediction has come true. Since the indictment itself has not been leaked — at least not yet — we don’t know its specifics. We do know, based on leaks, that it involves multiple counts, almost certainly involving the payment of hush money to a porn actress.

  

  Under Mr. Bragg’s likely theory, Mr. Trump should have disclosed in his public corporate records that he paid the hush money to avoid his adulterous affair from becoming public. But no one in history has ever publicly disclosed the reason he paid money for a non-disclosure agreement.

  Why would Mr. Trump pay the money in the first place if he had to publicly disclose the embarrassing reason? Furthermore, no one in history has ever been indicted for listing “legal expenses” for setting a potentially embarrassing payment of hush money.

  Thus, even the misdemeanor allegation involving false entries is unprecedented and represents selective prosecution. It is also almost certainly barred by the two-year statute of limitations. In order to elevate this bookkeeping case into a felony, Mr. Bragg must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the reason Trump made the false entry — if he himself did it — was solely as a campaign contribution to help him win his election.

  If Mr. Trump was motivated in part by his desire to protect his wife, children, and business interests from harmful disclosures, that would not constitute the crime of making an undisclosed campaign contribution. So this too is a stretch.

  It is a fundamental tenet of American law that criminal law should not be stretched to fit targeted defendants. Criminal statutes must be clear and unambiguous. If there is any doubt, the age-old concept of “lenity” requires that these doubts be resolved in favor of the defendant.

  Thomas Jefferson once quipped that for a criminal statute to be valid, it must be so clear that a reasonable person could understand it if he read it “while running.” A nice image!

  I intend to read the text of the indictment, while sitting, with 60 years of experience behind me. I doubt I will find that it meets the constitutional criteria for “fair warning,” although I maintain an open mind until I have studied it carefully.

  The important point is that when a district attorney ran for office as a Democrat pledging to get Mr. Trump, who is a candidate for president against the incumbent Democrat, that district attorney must have an airtight case.

  A weak, questionable, unprecedented, and novel stitching together of two inapplicable statutes, will not, and should not, satisfy the American public that this is not a partisan targeting of a political opponent.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 19:00

• "Markets Will Always Outsmart The Best AI Systems That Our Computer Scientists Develop"
  “Markets Will Always Outsmart The Best AI Systems That Our Computer Scientists Develop”

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “Powerful AI systems should be developed only once we are confident that their effects will be positive, and their risks will be manageable,” read the open letter [here], signed by countless luminaries from the technology industry and various other fields.

  Emad Mostaque, CEO of Stability AI, a leader in the generative AI space inked it. Many less prominent researchers did too.

  “We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.”

  Elon Musk was a signatory, and of course, he’s building an AI driving system which is remarkable but has a long way to go.

  Based on my personal experience, it has achieved rough parity with a drunk sixteen-year-old.

  

  Or, in economic policy terms, Tesla’s AI has reached singularity with the government’s team responsible for stress testing regional banks.  Naturally, it surpassed the Fed’s inflation forecasting team many months ago.

  And without reliable inflation estimates, it’s no wonder that our central bank’s interest rate forecasts are such a poor indicator of future policy rates. Financial markets are consistently superior to any group of forecasters, even the mob at the Fed who not only have the economy’s most comprehensive data sets, but who can also directly manipulate markets to make their forecasts come true.

  Such teams of experts are no match for free markets, which are humanity’s first glimpse of a true AI. The collective wisdom of the crowd is a clear superhuman intelligence. That is not to say markets are infallible. But they are infinitely adaptable, resilient, and evolve to exploit our vulnerabilities, fears, secrets. At scale, such systems, move money from weak hands to the strong.

  And so long as humans are the key decision makers in our economic and political systems, markets will outsmart the best AI systems that our computer scientists develop. But as in all battles for survival, superiority, strong hands will figure out how to harness AI to strengthen our advantage as we trade, invest.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 18:30

• Kentucky Governor Signs Bill Banning ESG Investment In Public Pensions
  Kentucky Governor Signs Bill Banning ESG Investment In Public Pensions

  Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, has signed into law a measure that requires the state’s public pension funds to make investment decisions on financial risks and returns, rather than environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors.

  

  Beshear signed House Bill 236 into law on March 24, mandating the state’s fiduciaries to solely consider factors that have a “direct and material connection to the financial risk or financial return of an investment,” according to the language of the bill.

  It bans actions on “nonpecuniary interests,” including “environmental, social, political, or ideological interest” without a connection to the financial performance of an asset.

  State Treasurer Allison Ball, a Republican, touted the new law, saying “Kentucky now has the strongest anti-ESG legislation in the nation,” Just the News reported on March 28.

  “For many years, pension investments were about maximizing returns,” Ball added. “Recently, however, there has been a destructive shift in investment methodology to use the savings of Americans as financial muscle to push ideological causes through the ESG movement.

  “Kentucky has said no to this shift by passing HB 236, which clarifies that pension fiduciaries must base investment decisions solely on financial metrics, not politics.”

  The state’s House passed the legislation 77–17 on March 2 and the state’s Senate passed it on March 13 after a 32–5 vote. Republicans hold supermajorities in both chambers of the state legislature.

  Heritage Action for America, a grassroots conservative advocacy group, issued a statement on March 24 applauding the Kentucky General Assembly and Ball for “their efforts to protect citizens from the harms of the radical ESG movement.”

  “With the ESG movement infiltrating businesses and threatening Americans’ finances, it’s now more important than ever to ensure that asset managers are following through with their fiduciary responsibilities,” said Jessica Anderson, the group’s executive director. “As the first bill of its kind to be enacted, HB 236 will require asset managers to prioritize the investment returns and financial interests of Kentuckians.”

  Anderson added, “This is a historic victory for Kentucky and will be an example for other states to follow as they look to protect their state industries, investments, and workers.”

  “We look forward to even more states across the country adopting this approach and taking additional steps to rid our states of woke finance.”

  Ball was in Washington on March 9, taking part in a bill-signing ceremony held by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). That day, McCarthy signed a resolution introduced by Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) to block a Labor Department rule that allows pension fund managers to consider ESG factors in investment decisions.

  

  “I’m here to support what is happening as a Kentucky and as the state treasurer of Kentucky,” Ball said at the ceremony. “I have been fighting to make sure our pension systems are strong and people can retire, so I’ve been pushing back against the ESG movement.”

  “We don’t need to push ideological agendas. We don’t need to push anything that is progressive,” she added. “We need to focus on getting good returns so people can retire at the end of their work life.”

  However, President Joe Biden vetoed the resolution on March 20, saying the measure would “put at risk the retirement savings of individuals across the country.”

  The House failed to override Biden’s veto after a 219–200 vote on March 23, falling short of the two-thirds majority threshold needed.

  After Biden’s veto, Ball took to Twitter to express her disappointment.

  “He believes political agendas are more important than returns. In reality, ESG funds have underperformed the broader market over the past 5 years. Retirements are about returns, not politics,” she wrote.

  Ball, who has been the state treasurer since 2016, is currently running to be Kentucky’s next state auditor. Meanwhile, Beshear is running for re-election as the governor of Kentucky.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 18:00

• Did Bud Light Go 'Woke' With Trans-TikTok Star? Boycott Calls Intensify
  Did Bud Light Go ‘Woke’ With Trans-TikTok Star? Boycott Calls Intensify

  The manliest beer in America for hardworking, blue-collar folks seems to have found a new spokesperson this weekend during the March Madness Final Four basketball games: trans-TikTok star Dylan Mulvaney.

  We’re not entirely sure if it’s an April Fool’s joke or if Bud Light, owned by Belgian company AB InBev, sponsored Mulvaney, but it sure appears so. Here’s what the trans-TikToker said:

  “Verified Happy March Madness!! Just found out this had to do with sports and not just saying it’s a crazy month! In celebration of this sports thing @budlight is giving you the chance to win $15,000! Share a video with #EasyCarryContest for a chance to win!! Good luck! #budlightpartner. “

  Dylan Mulvaney has become the new brand ambassador for Bud Light. 🍺

  The beer brand even made a special edition Dylan Mulvaney Can 🥤celebrating his 365 days of girlhood.

  (This is not April Fools, it’s actually real)

  🍺🍻🍺😒🍻🍺🍻 #dylanmulvaney #trans #transgender pic.twitter.com/xuu87WxrvZ

  — Oli London (@OliLondonTV) April 1, 2023

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

  Bud Light also appears to have created a special edition Dylan Mulvaney Can to celebrate his 365 days of girlhood. 

  

  Add Bud Light to the list of corporations going ultra-‘woke.’ 

  … and just like that, those on Twitter have already called for boycotts of the beer. 

  #BoycottBudweiser pic.twitter.com/cm2yLVlDuB

  — placekicker (@placekicker17) April 2, 2023

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

  Hey @BudLight – You can keep your piss water no matter what but now I will never buy another can of@Budweiser ever again since you chose to sponsor Dylan Mulvaney!

  I’m calling on all Americans to boycott Budweiser and all of their products!

  — Ray ‘Cutter’ Spaulding (@CryptidsAuthor) April 2, 2023

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

  Time to boycott Budweiser it’s the only language they will understand #BoycottBudweiser @budweiserusa https://t.co/ngpJTQ9SC3

  — Itsallnuts (@Itsallnuts2) April 2, 2023

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

  Hey @budweiserusa.

  Your products will never be welcome in my home again.#BoycottBudweiser

  You make shitty beer and even worse virtue signals. pic.twitter.com/XxwSJKlStf

  — CptnTightPantz (Freedom/Liberty) (@CptnTightPantz) April 2, 2023

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

  Perhaps now it will be “Miller Time” for boycotters. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 17:30

• CDC Research Team Members Fell Ill Studying Toxic Ohio Derailment, Agency Confirms
  CDC Research Team Members Fell Ill Studying Toxic Ohio Derailment, Agency Confirms

  Authored by Samantha Flom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Nearly half of a government team investigating the potential health effects of a toxic train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, fell ill while conducting their research, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  In a March 31 statement provided to The Epoch Times, CDC spokesperson Belsie Gonzalez advised that the illnesses occurred on March 6, when seven members of a 15-person team of CDC and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) staff reported symptoms such as sore throat, headache, coughing, and nausea.

  Their symptoms, Gonzalez noted, were consistent with those reported by some East Palestine residents and first responders, whom the team was surveying to assess the potential health effects of their exposure to the chemicals released by the Feb. 3 derailment.

  

  Sore Throats, Headaches, Nausea

  “Following protocol, team members reported the symptoms to federal safety officers,” she said.

  “Symptoms resolved for most team members later the same afternoon, and everyone resumed work on survey data collection within 24 hours. Impacted team members have not reported ongoing health effects.”

  Gonzalez added that the survey collection process, which started mid-February, will end on March 31.

  “Once completed, CDC/ATSDR staff will analyze the data and provide it to state health officials in Ohio and Pennsylvania,” she said. “FEMA and EPA teams remain on the ground to support response efforts.”

  News of the government employees’ illnesses followed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) filing of a lawsuit on March 31 against Norfolk Southern, seeking to hold the railroad company accountable for “unlawfully polluting the nation’s waterways” through the toxic derailment.

  “When a Norfolk Southern train derailed last month in East Palestine, Ohio, it released toxins into the air, soil, and water, endangering the health and safety of people in surrounding communities,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.

  ‘Pursuing Justice’

  “With this complaint, the Justice Department and the EPA are acting to pursue justice for the residents of East Palestine and ensure that Norfolk Southern carries the financial burden for the harm it has caused and continues to inflict on the community.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 17:00

• Tesla Reports Record Deliveries Of 422,875 In Q1 2023, Helped By Price Cuts
  Tesla Reports Record Deliveries Of 422,875 In Q1 2023, Helped By Price Cuts

  Tesla reported Q1 2023 deliveries on Sunday, posting a figure of 422,875 vehicles delivered, beating most current consensus Wall Street estimates. The company delivered 10,695 Model S/X vehicles and 412,180 Model 3/Y vehicles. 

  Original analyst expectations were for 430,008 vehicles, according to Refinitiv data cited by Reuters. Multiple outlets are reporting the number as a miss (it was, compared to original estimates) and a beat (it was, compared to current lower-balled estimates). 

  

  This Q1 figure was a 36% increase year over year and a 4% increase sequentially, compared to the 405,278 deliveries the company posted in Q4 2022. Bulls are likely to see the beat as good news, while bears will likely argue that the “beat” wasn’t enough given the drastic price cuts Tesla has put into place since the end of last year. 

  

  “We continued to transition towards a more even regional mix of vehicle builds, including Model S/X vehicles in transit to EMEA and APAC,” the company’s release said. Despite this mix change, the Model S and Model X are becoming dwindling contributors to Tesla’s delivery bottom line. 

  

  

  Martin Viecha, Tesla’s head of IR, said Sunday: “Sequential growth continues even in the first quarter.”

  Analyst Dan Ives weighed in, reminding people that the figure reported keeps the company on pace for a 1.8 million delivery goal it had set for the year. Ives suggested this longer-term goal could be what drives sentiment in the stock in the upcoming week.

  For Tesla this delivery number keeps the company on pace for a 1.8 mm delivery unit bogey for the year. That remains front and center for investors awaiting these 1Q delivery numbers in a murky macro.

  — Dan Ives (@DivesTech) April 2, 2023

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

  Ben Rose, president of Battle Road Research, told the New York Times: “While the precise impact of recent price cuts and tax credits are difficult to determine, both act as tailwinds for the company.”

  Tesla bull Gene Munster told Reuters: “If they wouldn’t have done the price cut, it would have been ugly. I think what it tells you is the economy is getting tough. They showed an acceleration, but they didn’t accelerate to the level that Elon had suggested it would.”

  In the beginning of March, we noted that Tesla cut prices on its Model S and Model X vehicles. This decision followed its investor day event held at the end of February, wherein Elon Musk stated that price cuts had sparked demand for more affordable models.

  Musk claimed that the demand for Teslas was nearly unlimited and would increase significantly as the company made its vehicles more affordable. The recent price reductions for the S and X models implied at the time that these vehicles may not have experienced the same boost in demand as the rest of the lineup when the company reduced prices earlier this year. The Q1 figures seem to tell that same story. 

  In January, Tesla slashed the prices of its more affordable vehicles by as much as 20%, which enabled buyers to qualify for the tax incentive by putting the vehicles under a $55,000 cap. Musk directly addressed the price cuts during the investor day, stating: “We found that even small changes in the price have a big effect on demand, very big.” 

  Recall, days ago we highlighted work from GLJ Research’s Gordon Johnson, who slashed his delivery estimates due to pull forward of a “demand crush”. Johnson is of the camp that the tailwind provided by price cuts is already growing weary.

  He said days ago that consensus for the quarter currently sat at 418,756, suggesting a “beat” is on tap. He was accurate about beating that figure, but says that the 1.8 million target for the year may not be the incredible news the street is looking for. 

  “With our model pointing to an avg. 1Q23 price cut across all of TSLA’s cars of -$6.0K/car, or -11.7% QoQ, vs. sales growth of just +5.2% QoQ,” he said such a figure would be “nothing short of a disaster”. 

  “Even if TSLA gets to 1.8mn cars sold in 2023 (i.e., 450K cars/quarter of sales), things still look (very) bad from an earnings perspective,” he wrote. Johnson’s estimate was for $2.67/share in EPS versus consensus of $3.98/share for Tesla for the year: 

  So, taking an assumed 2023 profit per car of $9,196, then subtracting $4,500, one arrives at a new profit per car of $4,969. Then, applying the low-end of TSLA’s guidance for 1.8mn cars sold in 2023, or $4,969 * 1.8mn, one arrives at a 2023 net profit of $8.452bn. Finally, dividing this number (i.e., $8.452bn) by TSLA’s shares outstanding of 3.164mn, one arrives at an EPS of $2.67/share (vs. the current Consensus est. of $3.98/share, suggesting sharp cuts to TSLA’s earnings are on tap through 2023), or 71.8x earnings, and a -27.0% fall in EPS YoY. Consequently, even with a ~450K delivery number, the 2023 outcome for TSLA’s stock, as Consensus is forced to reckon with falling earnings, is likely (much) lower.

  We’ll wait to see if those numbers are eventually updated due to the new delivery figures. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 16:30

• Third Night Of Israeli Airstrikes On Syria Target Homs
  Third Night Of Israeli Airstrikes On Syria Target Homs

  Via The Cradle,

  Israeli warplanes launched yet another attack on Syria early on Sunday, striking a number of targets in the central Syrian city of Homs from Lebanese airspace, Syrian state-news outlet SANA reported.

  The strikes resulted in the wounding of five Syrian Arab Army (SAA) soldiers and the infliction of some material damages. “At around 00:35 a.m. on Sunday, the Israeli enemy carried out an aerial act of aggression from the direction of northeastern Beirut, targeting some sites in the city of Homs and its countryside… Our air defenses intercepted the missiles and shot some of them down, and the aggression resulted in the injury of five army personnel and some material damages,” a Syrian military source was quoted as saying by SANA.

  

  According to Persian media, an Iranian advisor who had been injured during Friday’s Israeli attack on Damascus died after succumbing to his injuries.

  “Meqdad Mehghani was wounded during the Zionist attack on Friday dawn and was martyred,” Iran’s Mehr news agency reported on Sunday.

  This is Israel’s sixth attack on Syria since the devastating February 6 earthquake struck the country, and the ninth Israeli attack on Syria since the beginning of the new year. This is also the third Israeli attack on Syria in just four days.

  In the early hours of March 30, Syrian air defense systems were activated to counter missile attacks on Damascus. The following day, early on Friday March 31, Israel struck the Syrian capital once again, killing Iranian military advisor and officer Milad Heydari. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has vowed a retaliation.

  Israel’s airstrikes on Syria are illegal under international law, but happen very frequently under the pretext of targeting Iranian and Hezbollah targets. More often than not, however, the strikes target the SAA.

  Israel bombed Syria again. This time in Homs. The UN is in hibernation. pic.twitter.com/wiwiB9bSiA

  — Kevork Almassian🇸🇾🇦🇲 (@KevorkAlmassian) April 1, 2023

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

  In a statement condemning Friday’s “barbaric” attack on Damascus, the Syrian Defense Ministry claimed that Israel’s constant airstrikes against Syria are carried out in coordination with extremist militants. Over the years, Israel has played a deep role in the Syrian conflict, and has provided direct support to extremist groups fighting against Syria.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 16:00

• What Wild And Crazy Thing That No One Was Expecting Will Happen In Q2?
  What Wild And Crazy Thing That No One Was Expecting Will Happen In Q2?

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  Fortune Favored the Bold

  With stocks up over 3% last week, fortune clearly favored the bold. The commodity complex did well across the board, with WTI leading the way, up almost 10%! I could have titled this report, Being Cautious Didn’t Pay the Bills Last Week, but that doesn’t do justice to strength that we saw at the end of last week and for the entire quarter for some of the riskier segments of capital markets. ARKK is up 29% on the year and Matt Damon’s Bitcoin is up over 70% since the start of the year and 40% since early March when banking fears first hit markets. By no means have we been cautious this entire quarter, but we did enter last week advising caution and have to decide whether that is where we still want to hang our hat.

  While I truly hope that I don’t have to endure a new series of Matt Damon and “Fortune Favors the Bold” commercials, I have to give a hat-tip to those who said to buy bitcoin because banks weren’t safe. I never believed that and still don’t (as a depositor), but it has played well in social media and doesn’t seem as far-fetched today as it did in February.

  The MOVE Index (a measure of treasury market implied volatility) plummeted from a high of almost 200 on March 15th to 135 (128 is the 1 year average) as a semblance of normalcy returned to the treasury market. You could get up and grab a cup of coffee and not have the 2-year move 20 bps while you were briefly off the desk,

  The strength in equities was likely given a boost as we had month-end and quarter-end buying, coinciding nicely with weekly and a slew of daily option expirations.

  Banks

  While it is time to Move Beyond Banks (where we highlight shipments, inventory and delinquencies as well as the upcoming earnings seasons) we need to start with banks.

  Even after a 3% positive week for stocks none of the issues in I Know What You Did Last Winter have been resolved.

  The one issue that I am watching most carefully how companies, banks and individuals respond to the divergence in short-term rates (anything from SOFR at 4.82% to T-Bills around 4.5% to bank deposits still averaging below 1%, to Bitcoin and stable coins at 0%).

  This is not an “’urgent” issue, but neither is it glacier-like in its pace, which may explain why KRE (SPDR Regional Banking ETF) barely rallied in an otherwise risk-on week. If having to compete on deposit rates becomes an issue (and it might not), it would be a drag on banks, big, small and medium.

  It is impressive that the broad market shrugged off ongoing risk concerns at middle size banks (based on KRE movement), but the risks mentioned last week, affecting much more than just small and midsize banks remain in the background and I suspect have a reasonable chance of being brought to the foreground again.

  Inflation

  I am not worried about a return to inflation fears. The PCE deflator came in below expectations (0.3%) and last month was revised down (0.5% instead of 0.6%). Yes, we went from Chair Powell discussing disinflation risks at eh first FOMC meeting of the year, to more concerns, but I remain in the camp that most of the inflationary pressures have subsided. That the Fed has already gone too far. Inflation data should help the bond market.

  Jobs

  The most consistent economic data of any type has been the jobs data. While other data has hinted at slowdowns, but then at rebounds, etc., the jobs data has been quite steady.

  Lost in the shuffle in March, largely because of the focus on Silicon Valley Bank (which kicked off the entire banking fears), we seem to have forgotten that wage pressures looked like they were declining in the February data.

  Last month, rather than our instant reaction to NFP we had to publish NFP, Debt Ceiling & Bank FUD because even on the day they were published, the jobs data was taking a back seat.

  Total jobs (I’m looking for disappointment) and wage pressures (I expect continued improvement) will move markets and the two pieces of data combined will determine market direction and there is a wide range of possible outcomes (I’m in the camp that jobs will be small enough that it will ignite recession fears, but could easily see a “goldilocks” type of print), which is a range so wide, not to be of much use to anyone. Fortunately, we will have more clarity well before Friday as JOLTs and ADP come out.

  The Fed

  The Fed is almost done hiking (they shouldn’t have hiked last month given my view on inflation (already coming down) and concerns about lag effects of previous hike s(they clearly pushed some things/entities to the breaking point)).

  I expect the Fed will have to continue to message that they will not cut rates anytime soon (I would have agreed with that message earlier in the year, but as they continue to hike, they seem to be creating conditions that could cause them to reverse course against their messaging).

  Stocks as a “Long Duration” Asset Redux?

  I can see where risky assets are getting a bid. The investment thesis that stocks are a long duration asset and will do incredibly well as the Fed finishes their hiking cycle is simple, has recent history on its side, which makes it compelling. Who doesn’t want to see some of these companies return to their former glory?

  I just don’t think conditions are right for that sort of spike:

  • Rates at 4% is far different than rates at 0%.

  • Gobs and gobs of free money are not getting paid to citizens or companies unlike during COVID.

  • While the Fed balance sheet grew again (as they had to lend money to banks), the large scale asset purchases, constantly sucking investible assets out of the market, has been replaced by a plan to slowly reduce the balance sheet.

  • Growth had taken on a life of its own. The “bigger and better” the growth story, the better. Markets might be a little more jaded this time around.

  Bottom Line

  Small positive bias for bonds. The data should continue to support the bond market, though jobs remain a wildcard on that front.

  Neutral to slightly bearish credit spreads. Credit spreads do tend to be tied to bank cost of funds and at the moment, I see that trending higher. Similarly, we could see some heavy issuance as companies ramp up bond sales while rates are low, spreads are decent and the Debt Ceiling and summer are fast approaching.

  From slightly cautious to medium bear on equities. I could either decide I was wrong to be somewhat cautious on equities last week and get on the “breaking to new levels” bandwagon. That view has much to support it. Or, I can fade the move as discussed Thursday on Bloomberg TV, and I want to be more conservative (growing a short position) in equities here as the short squeeze (VIX spiking was an indication that real hedges had got put on, rather than just investors popping in and out of 0DTE options (which don’t count in VIX calculations) and quarter-end buying stretched what good news there was for stocks.

  So what wild and crazy thing that no one was expecting will happen in Q2 2023? If you told me I would use Banks and Crisis in a sentence in Q1 on January 1st, I probably would have laughed, and yet, that’s where we got to.

  Good luck and if you missed last week’s Around the World, I highly recommend catching up on it, as the geopolitical issues and risks are not going away.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 15:30

• Trump Supporter Found Guilty, Faces Ten Years In Prison For 2016 Anti-Hillary Meme
  Trump Supporter Found Guilty, Faces Ten Years In Prison For 2016 Anti-Hillary Meme

  Authored by Robert Spencer via PJMedia.com,

  Donald Trump has been indicted, essentially for the crime of being Donald Trump and opposing the Left’s total hegemony over everything. But as Trump himself has often warned, they’re not really after him, they’re after us, and he is just in the way. A 33-year-old Trump supporter named Douglass Mackey discovered the truth of that adage in the worst possible way on Friday, the first day of America as a Leftist banana republic in which foes of the regime are targeted solely for their opposition to that regime. Mackey was convicted of election interference and faces up to ten years in prison, all because of a meme he tweeted during the 2016 election. Yes, you read that right: a meme.

  Back during the wild and woolly days of that campaign, according to a Friday press release from the “Justice” Department, Mackey, under the name Ricky Vaughn, “established an audience on Twitter with approximately 58,000 followers. A February 2016 analysis by the MIT Media Lab ranked Mackey as the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Presidential Election.” The Justice for Democrats Department didn’t bother to explain exactly what it means to have held a position so illustrious as that of the 107th most important influencer of the 2016 presidential election. How did the DOJ go about determining this? Did it somehow discover that Mackey/Vaughn had induced a certain number of people to change their votes, but that 106 other people had gotten people to change more votes?

  These are actually important questions because on Friday, Mackey was convicted “by a federal jury in Brooklyn of the charge of Conspiracy Against Rights stemming from his scheme to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote.” 

  That’s what he faces ten years in prison for doing.

  Mackey’s “conspiracy” was really quite simple. While the language the Department Formerly Associated with Justice used sounds quite weighty and conjures up images of Mackey meeting in dark rooms with other sinister figures to plot ways to sabotage voting machines or prevent people from being able to enter polling places, what they’re really talking about is a meme.

  Douglass Mackey was just found guilty of a federal crime he was charged with by the DOJ for tweeting the meme on the left during the 2016 election.

  The lady on the right has never been arrested for her tweet that also came during the 2016 election. pic.twitter.com/pkCz6h669U

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) March 31, 2023

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

  One of the ten-years-in-the-slammer memes can be seen here.

  Vaughn tweeted a photo of what looked like a Hillary ad, but was actually a parody of a Hillary ad.

  The caption read: “Avoid the line. Vote from home. Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925. Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.”

  

  The Justice Unless You Support Trump Department explained that this was a heinous crime because “Mackey conspired with other influential Twitter users and with members of private online groups to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages that encouraged supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to ‘vote’ via text message or social media which, in reality, was legally invalid.” Yeah, wow, doggonit, that sounds terrible. Thousands, maybe even millions, of people, must have been bamboozled by the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Presidential Election to send in a text and think they had voted, right?

  Wrong.

  The Justice Department, according to the Post Millennial, “was unable to provide evidence that anyone was deceived by the meme.”

  Not even a single person.

  What’s more, at least one memester on the other side did exactly the same thing, and was never arrested or tried and faces no prison time. On Nov. 8, 2016, which was election day, Kristina Wong tweeted a video of a Trump supporter with the caption: “Hey Trump Supporters! Skip poll lines at #Election2016 and TEXT in your vote! Text votes are legit. Or vote tomorrow on Super Wednesday!”

  

  Not only was Kristina Wong never prosecuted, but her tweet is still live. Yet she did exactly the same thing Douglass Mackey did. She just had the good sense to do it against Trump, rather than against Hillary.

  The rotten, corrupt, politicized remains of the Justice Department, however, were full to the brim of their own righteousness on Friday. U.S. Attorney Breon Peace proclaimed, “Mackey has been found guilty by a jury of his peers of attempting to deprive individuals from exercising their sacred right to vote for the candidate of their choice in the 2016 Presidential Election.” The contemporary American Left, one of the most impious and God-hating political movements in the history of the world, loves to affect piety at times like this, but Peace’s statement was a particularly nauseating example of this phenomenon. The right to vote is “sacred”? No, Peace. I’m all for voting in free, fair, unrigged elections, but be serious: the right to vote is not held as sacred in any religious tradition on the face of the earth. What you’re actually saying is that your corrupt and self-serving system is part of your secular religion, and that Mackey is a heretic from that religion; he has been duly found guilty and will be burned at the stake.

  The first amendment as we know it died today. This is a completely outrageous decision by a jury in Brooklyn to send this man to jail for tweeting a meme. We are truly living in a third world banana republic.https://t.co/XjMI3hb978

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) March 31, 2023

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

  And this is just day one. Imagine what America will be like once the banana republic has been fully in power for a few years.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/02/2023 – 15:11

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: The Capital Of The Multipolar World – A Moscow Diary
  Escobar: The Capital Of The Multipolar World – A Moscow Diary

  Authored by Pepe Escobar,

  In Moscow you feel no crisis. No effects of sanctions. No unemployment. No homeless people in the streets. Minimal inflation.

  

  How sharp was good ol’ Lenin, prime modernist, when he mused, “there are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen”. This global nomad now addressing you has enjoyed the privilege of spending four astonishing weeks in Moscow at the heart of an historical crossroads – culminating with the Putin-Xi geopolitical game-changing summit at the Kremlin.

  To quote Xi, “changes that haven’t been seen in 100 years” do have a knack of affecting us all in more ways than one.

  James Joyce, another modernity icon, wrote that we spend our lives meeting average and/or extraordinary people, on and on and on, but in the end we’re always meeting ourselves. I have had the privilege of meeting an array of extraordinary people in Moscow, guided by trusted friends or by auspicious coincidence: in the end your soul tells you they enrich you and the overarching historical moment in ways you can’t even begin to fathom.

  Here are some of them. The grandson of Boris Pasternak, a gifted young man who teaches Ancient Greek at Moscow State University. A historian with unmatched knowledge of Russian history and culture. The Tajik working class huddling together in a chaikhana with the proper ambience of Dushanbe.

  Chechens and Tuvans in awe doing the loop in the Big Central Line. A lovely messenger sent by friends extremely careful about security matters to discuss issues of common interest. Exceptionally accomplished musicians performing underground in Mayakovskaya. A stunning Siberian princess vibrant with unbounded energy, taking that motto previously applied to the energy industry – Power of Siberia – to a whole new level.

  A dear friend took me to Sunday service at the Devyati Muchenikov Kizicheskikh church, the favorite of Peter the Great: the quintessential purity of Eastern Orthodoxy. Afterwards the priests invited us for lunch in their communal table, displaying not only their natural wisdom but also an uproarious sense of humor.

  At a classic Russian apartment crammed with 10,000 books and with a view to the Ministry of Defense – plenty of jokes included – Father Michael, in charge if Orthodox Christianity relations with the Kremlin, sang the Russian imperial anthem after an indelible night of religious and cultural discussions.

  I had the honor to meet some of those who were particularly targeted by the imperial machine of lies. Maria Butina – vilified by the proverbial “spy who came in from the cold” shtick – now a deputy at the Duma. Viktor Bout – which pop culture metastasized into the “Lord of War”, complete with Nic Cage movie: I was speechless when he told me he was reading me in maximum security prison in the USA, via pen drives sent by his friends (he had no internet access). The indefatigable, iron-willed Mira Terada – tortured when she was in a U.S. prison, now heading a foundation protecting children caught in hard times.

  I spent much treasured quality time and engaged in invaluable discussions with Alexander Dugin – the crucial Russian of these post-everything times, a man of pure inner beauty, exposed to unimaginable suffering after the terrorist assassination of Darya Dugina, and still able to muster a depth and reach when it comes to drawing connections across the philosophy, history and history of civilizations spectrum that is virtually unmatched in the West.

  On the offensive against Russophobia

  And then there were the diplomatic, academic and business meetings. From the head of international investor relations of Norilsk Nickel to Rosneft executives, not to mention the EAEU’s Sergey Glazyev himself, side by side with his top economic adviser Dmitry Mityaev, I was given a crash course on the current A to Z of Russian economy – including serious problems to be addressed.

  At the Valdai Club, what really mattered were the meetings on the sidelines, much more than the actual panels: that’s when Iranians, Pakistanis, Turks, Syrians, Kurds, Palestinians, Chinese tell you what is really in their hearts and minds.

  The official launch of the International Movement of Russophiles was a special highlight of these four weeks. A special message written by President Putin was read by Foreign Minister Lavrov, who then delivered his own speech. Later, at the House of Receptions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, four of us were received by Lavrov at a private audience. Future cultural projects were discussed. Lavrov was extremely relaxed, displaying his matchless sense of humor.

  This is a cultural as much as a political movement, designed to fight Russophobia and to tell the Russian story, in all its immensely rich aspects, especially to the Global South.

  I am a founding member and my name is on the charter. In my nearly four decades as a foreign correspondent, I have never been part of any political/cultural movement anywhere in the world; nomad independents are a fierce breed. But this is extremely serious: the current, irredeemably mediocre self-described “elites” of the collective West want no less than cancel Russia all across the spectrum. No pasarán.

  Spirituality, compassion, mercy

  Decades happening in only four weeks imply precious time needed to put it all in perspective.

  The initial gut feeling the day I arrived, after a seven-hour walk under snow flurries, was confirmed: this is the capital of the multipolar world. I saw it among the West Asians at the Valdai. I saw it talking to visiting Iranians, Turks and Chinese. I saw it when over 40 African delegations took over the whole area around the Duma – the day Xi arrived in town. I saw it throughout the reception across the Global South to what Xi and Putin are proposing to the overwhelming majority of the planet.

  In Moscow you feel no crisis. No effects of sanctions. No unemployment. No homeless people in the streets. Minimal inflation. Import substitution in all areas, especially agriculture, has been a resounding success. Supermarkets have everything – and more – compared to the West. There’s an abundance of first-rate restaurants. You can buy a Bentley or a Loro Pianna cashmere coat you can’t even find in Italy. We laughed about it chatting with managers at the TSUM department store. At the BiblioGlobus bookstore, one of them told me, “We are the Resistance.”

  By the way, I had the honor to deliver a talk on the war in Ukraine at the coolest bookshop in town, Bunker, mediated by my dear friend, immensely knowledgeable Dima Babich. A huge responsibility. Especially because Vladimir L. was in the audience. He’s Ukrainian, and spent 8 years, up to 2022, telling it like it really was to Russian radio, until he managed to leave – after being held at gunpoint – using an internal Ukrainian passport. Later we went to a Czech beer hall where he detailed his extraordinary story.

  In Moscow, their toxic ghosts are always lurking in the background. Yet one cannot but feel sorry for the psycho Straussian neocons and neoliberal-cons who now barely qualify as Zbig “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski’s puny orphans.

  In the late 1990s, Brzezinski pontificated that, “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical center because its very existence as an independent state helps transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.”

  With or without a demilitarized and denazified Ukraine, Russia has already changed the narrative. This is not about becoming a Eurasian empire again. This is about leading the long, complex process of Eurasia integration – already in effect – in parallel to supporting true, sovereign independence across the Global South.

  I left Moscow – the Third Rome – towards Constantinople – the Second Rome – one day before Secretary of the Security Council Nikolai Patrushev gave a devastating interview to Rossiyskaya Gazeta once again outlining all the essentialities inherent to the NATO vs. Russia war.

  This is what particularly struck me: “Our centuries-old culture is based on spirituality, compassion and mercy. Russia is a historical defender of sovereignty and statehood of any peoples who turned to it for help. She saved the U.S. itself at least twice, during the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. But I believe that this time it is impractical to help the United States maintain its integrity.”

  In my last night, before hitting a Georgian restaurant, I was guided by the perfect companion off Pyatnitskaya to a promenade along the Moscow River, beautiful rococo buildings gloriously lighted, the scent of Spring – finally – in the air. It’s one of those “Wild Strawberry” moments out of Bergman’s masterpiece that hits the bottom of our soul. Like mastering the Tao in practice. Or the perfect meditative insight at the top of the Himalayas, the Pamirs or the Hindu Kush.

  So the conclusion is inevitable. I’ll be back. Soon.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 23:30

• These Are Asia's Richest Families
  These Are Asia’s Richest Families

  According to a ranking published by Bloomberg last week, the Ambanis remain the wealthiest among Asia’s families despite recent losses, owing their riches to the Reliance Industries conglomerate headquartered in Mumbai.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz details below, the rest of the ranking’s top 10 is a mix of different industries, countries and also some global household names.

  The Ambanis’ wealth is still more than double that of the next clan in the ranking of Asia’s richest families, the Hartonos of Indonesia’s Djarum brand.

  It also earns them rank 6 among the world’s wealthiest families.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Two Thai families are also among the top 10, with Red Bull inventors, the Yoovidhyas, in rank 6.

  The Lee family behind South Korean electronics maker Samsung made it into rank 10.

  Chinese emigrants are quite common among the list of Asia’s most wealthy families.

  Chearavanont patriarch Chia Ek Chor came to Thailand from Southern China in 1921 and started out importing and exporting seeds, vegetables and animal products between Bangkok, China and Hong Kong. The Pao/Woo family and the inventors of Oyster Sauce, the Lee family (rank 11), made their fortunes in Hong Kong after emigrating from Mainland China, as did Singapore real estate tycoons, the Ngs (rank 12). The story is similar with the Png brothers (rank 13) and the Sy family (rank 14), conglomerate owners in Singapore and the Philippines, respectively.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 23:00

• In AI We Trust
  In AI We Trust

  Artificial intelligence in some shape or form has been a part of everyday life for years, but the meteoric rise of ChatGPT and the resulting aggressive development pace of conversational and generative AI models is, for the first time ever, putting the underlying technology into the hands of the general public.

  However, as Statista’s Florian Zandt details below, even though current large language models are primarily able to guess the best-fitting next word in a sentence based on the corpus of content they were fed, CEOs, researchers and AI experts are now urging the industry to pump the brakes on training and developing models more capable than OpenAI’s GPT-4.

  The company’s latest large language model is currently available in a limited capacity for ChatGPT Plus subscribers and will soon be integrated into Microsoft productivity and security products.

  According to an open letter signed by influential figures like Elon Musk and Stability AI CEO Emad Mostaque, “powerful AI systems should be developed only once we are confident that their effects will be positive and their risks will be manageable.”

  The letter was released by the Future of Life Institute, a non-governmental organization founded in 2014 by MIT professor Max Tegmark and Skype co-founder Jaan Tallinn, among others. The Musk Foundation is a primary donor to the organization.

  As data from a survey conducted by KPMG Australia and the University of Queensland shows, residents of India, China, South Africa and Brazil, the biggest so-called emerging markets, are far less critical of the continued implementation of AI systems.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  75 percent of Indians surveyed between September and October 2022 would place their trust in AI, followed by 67 percent of Chinese and 57 percent of South African respondents.

  According to the accompanying study, respondents claimed to trust AI used in healthcare and security contexts the most compared to other possible use cases.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 22:00

• The 2nd Amendment's Misconstrued 'Militia'
  The 2nd Amendment’s Misconstrued ‘Militia’

  Authored by Brian McGlinchey via Stark Realities

  America’s latest episode of mass homicide has sparked renewed advocacy for restrictions on gun ownership. Once again, the accompanying debate has many gun control advocates claiming the Second Amendment’s reference to a “well regulated militia” narrows the amendment’s scope if not rendering it altogether moot.

  Before we examine those claims, it’s important to ensure readers have a proper general understanding of the Bill of Rights. Contrary to common misperception, these amendments do not bestow privileges upon American citizens. Rather, they are primarily a set of prohibitions against the government infringing on pre-existing human rights all people have.

  

  That’s evident in the language. For example, the First Amendment begins “Congress shall make no law…” This amendment isn’t awarding citizens the rights of religion, speech and assembly — it’s outlawing the government’s thwarting of those innate and universal human rights.

  Similarly, the Fourth Amendment asserts that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” Again, the authors are not granting those rights, they are protecting them.

  When the Bill of Rights was proposed, some feared the enumeration of a handful of rights could be misinterpreted as providing a comprehensive catalogue — and thus empowering the government to infringe on human rights not specified. That’s why they included the Ninth Amendment, asserting that “the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

  “Amendment II. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

  With that understanding of the Bill of Rights in mind, we see that, via the Second Amendment, the founders explicitly asserted that there is a “right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

  What about that reference to “a well regulated militia”? As we set out to scrutinize the phrase, let’s first observe that the Second Amendment contains two distinct components serving two different purposes:

  • An operative clause that sets out a specific prohibition against the government’s infringement on a right: …the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  • A prefatory clause that announces a purpose: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…

  Positioned in the prefatory clause, the “well regulated Militia” reference merely serves to provide a rationale — and not necessarily the only rationale — for the operative clause that follows.

  While the Second Amendment stands apart from the others in the Bill of Rights by having a prefatory clause, such clauses were common in state constitutions of the era.

  Prefatory clauses were used to help “sell” amendments to those being asked to approve them. In this case, the authors were pointing to the necessity of an armed populace as the well from which militias are drawn — militias seen as a vital safeguard against the federal government they were creating.

  

  In particular, America’s founders were wary of the federal government’s potential to create a standing army that could be used to destroy state sovereignty and individual liberties. Seeking to “sell” the amendment to drafting committees and state ratifying conventions, it made sense for the authors to highlight the link between militias and the people’s right to bear arms.

  Given their purpose — that is, to cite one or more of many possible rationales — prefatory clauses don’t rightly constrain operative clauses, particularly one as explicit as the Second Amendment’s, which pointedly recognizes a “right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

  Even if the prefatory clause did have any teeth, those seeking to interpret it as tightly restricting the gun-eligible population run into yet another wall, in that militias are assembled from the citizenry at large.

  Indeed, one revision of James Madison’s draft of the Second Amendment drove home this point. It began, “A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people…”

  Listen to Pennsylvanian Tench Coxe, as he championed the Constitution’s ratification: “The powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry of America from sixteen to sixty.” Summarizing the Second Amendment, Coxe said, “The people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”

  Multiple state constitutional provisions of the era, some of which predate the Bill of Rights, offer additional confirmation that the armed right of self-defense belongs to individuals. As one representative example, consider the language of Vermont’s 1777 Constitution: “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.”

  Further disregarding the Second Amendment’s explicit enumeration of “the right of the people to bear arms,” some claim the existence of the National Guard renders the Second Amendment entirely moot, since, via the Guard, each state has a “militia” with its own arsenal of arms.

  In the US, you do NOT have a constitutional right to own a gun UNLESS you are in a well-regulated militia.

  The well-regulated militia is the National Guard.

  That is, literally, what the 2nd amendment says.

  — Student Loans Suck 🟥 (@Seracohw6) March 27, 2023

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

  Recall, however, that the founders viewed militias as a check on the federal government’s power, with fear that the federal government might create a standing army with the potential to tyrannize the states and the people.

  Thanks to the National Defense Act of 1916 and amendments in 1933, today’s National Guard is legally a part of the United States Army, with state governments exercising only limited government control. Enlistment oaths have evolved to reflect that, with National Guard soldiers promising to obey the orders of both the president of the United States and the governor.

  The Guard’s military training and the selection of its officers are controlled by the federal government. Troops are subject to activation pursuant to any number of federal missions, including — as we’ve seen too often — overseas combat deployments that render them useless to the states where their citizen-soldiers live.

  Clearly, under such federal control, the National Guard cannot be seen as a counterbalance against federal power, and thus does not fulfill the Second Amendment’s aspiration to enable “well-regulated militias…necessary to the security of a free state.”

  Finally, no tour of the Second Amendment’s language would be complete without addressing “well regulated” as it’s applied to “militia.” Today, people often and understandably assume that descriptor refers to regulation in the modern sense of external government control. However, in the late 1700s, “well regulated” simply meant orderly, trained and disciplined — qualities that militias should aspire to.

  To summarize:

  • The Second Amendment explicitly recognizes the existence of “a right of the people” — not just those currently in militias — “to keep and bear arms.”

  • Placed in a prefatory clause, the “militia” reference merely announces one rationale for the Second Amendment. Regardless of how “militia” is interpreted, its presence does not constrain the operative-clause prohibition of government infringement against the right of the people to keep and bears arms.

  • Today’s National Guard is part of the U.S. Army and under heavy federal control. It cannot be used by the peoples of the separate states as a counterbalance to the federal government’s standing army — and thus is not a “militia” in the sense the term is used in the Second Amendment.

  Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Read more and subscribe at starkrealities.substack.com

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 21:30

• Want To 'Experience Death' In Virtual Reality?
  Want To ‘Experience Death’ In Virtual Reality?

  A new exhibit lets people experience ‘death’ in virtual reality.

  

  Artist Shaun Gladwell has created an interactive art installation at the National Gallery of Victoria in Australia called “Passing Electrical Storms,” which “guides participants through a simulated de-escalation of life, from cardiac arrest to brain death,” the Daily Star reports.

  Despite all the things science tells us about life, nobody really knows what it’s like to experience death.

  However, people who have undergone near-death experiences often come back with tales of what happened after their hearts stopped—from leaving their bodies and seeing themselves from above to waking up in a meadow.

  Upon entering the exhibit, you’re asked to lie down on a replica hospital bed, where you’re hooked up to a heart rate monitor. Staff are on hand to ‘pull you out’ if things get too intense. 

  @croom12

  Its Actually pretty hectic. Doctors trying to revive you, vibrating bed and floating into space.

  ♬ original sound – Marcus

  “I can see how people would say it causes anxiety and panic. It definitely borderlines that—they do put your finger on a heart rate monitor and then tell you to raise your hand if you’ve had enough and want to quit,” said Marcus Crook, a Melbourne resident. “What happens is you’re laying down, the bed vibrates, you flatline. The doctors come over the top of you. You can see yourself in the goggles and they try to revive you—it doesn’t work. Then you float up out past them into space and it keeps going.“

  https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js

  The exhibit will be available to check out during the Melbourne Now festival which runs until August.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 21:00

• White House Refuses To Pay For Twitter Verification
  White House Refuses To Pay For Twitter Verification

  The White House won’t pay to have its staff’s official Twitter accounts verified, according to an email distributed to staffers and obtained by Axios.

  

  “It is our understanding that Twitter Blue does not provide person-level verification as a service. Thus, a blue check mark will now simply serve as a verification that the account is a paid user,” said White House director of digital strategy, Rob Flaherty in the Friday afternoon email which was sent internally to staffers.

  The rule doesn’t necessarily apply to government agencies, however a source familiar with the White House’s plans told Axios that it may send guidance to some agencies and departments in the future.

  The move comes after Twitter owner Elon Musk announced that the company would begin removing legacy verified check marks beginning April 1. In order to don a blue check, users will need to pay $8 per month.

  If Elon had made the bluecheck $8 trillion, the White House would buy 2 https://t.co/yqC7ymKm8O

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 31, 2023

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

  More via Axios;

  • Official organizations, such as the White House and some government officials, will continue to be verified with a grey check mark, Twitter said. Some White House officials, like the President and Vice President, will likely continue to be verified with a grey checkmark, but an administration source said it’s unclear at this time exactly which officials will retain grey checks.
  • In his email, Flaherty noted that per Twitter’s updated policies, Twitter will no longer be able to guarantee verification for federal agency accounts that do not meet its new eligibility requirements.
  • Companies and businesses that wish to pay for verification on the enterprise level can do so on behalf of their official accounts and some employees. Those companies will be charged $1000 monthly and will be designated with a gold check mark.

  As for the White House itself, it says it won’t pay to be verified as an organization, and it won’t reimburse staff who purchase Twitter Blue on their personal social media accounts.

  “Twitter’s enterprise service, Verification for Organization, does appear to provide organization-association verification. There are ongoing trials for the program that we are monitoring, but we will not enroll in it,” wrote Flaherty.

  “Staff may purchase Twitter Blue on their personal social media accounts using personal funds.”

  Also not paying? CNN, the NY Times and the LA Times.

  CNN said it has no intention of paying for Twitter’s subscription service for its accounts. The New York Times said, “We aren’t planning to pay.” The Los Angeles Times said Twitter is “not as reliable as it once was” and they will “not be paying.”https://t.co/CI22Uhxpz9

  — Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) March 31, 2023

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 20:00

• Journalist Says DOJ Targeting Him For His Aggressive Post-Jan. 6 Commentary
  Journalist Says DOJ Targeting Him For His Aggressive Post-Jan. 6 Commentary

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Independent journalist Steve Baker says he was recently warned that his aggressive reporting and commentary about Jan. 6 have created growing ire at the U.S. Department of Justice that could lead to his prosecution for being at the Capitol on that fateful Wednesday in 2021.

  

  Since Jan. 6, Baker, 62, of Raleigh, North Carolina, went through two hours of FBI questioning and faced the looming specter of being added to the list of now more than 1,000 Jan. 6 criminal-case defendants.

  He said his recent coverage of Jan. 6 cases and pointed criticisms of the DOJ have once again painted a target on him.

  “I got a call from another journalist who has a friendly source inside the Department of Justice there in D.C.,” Baker told The Epoch Times.

  “He called me up and said—this is a paraphrase, but he said—‘Your friend in Raleigh, tell him to be careful. He has awakened a couple of people’s attention to his work, and they’re not happy about it at all.’”

  The ominous early-morning heads-up got Baker’s attention.

  “First of all, when you get a call at 6:30 in the morning from somebody relaying that message, they must have thought that was really important to get a hold of me,” he said. “So the impact of the timing of the delivery was significant.

  

  “The journalist who gave me the information has a very large national audience and would be the kind of person who would have those types of sources,” Baker said. “…So I had to take it seriously.”

  The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Department of Justice for comment on Baker’s contention but did not receive a response.

  Documented Intense Scenes

  Baker spent much of Jan. 6 in Washington, D.C., capturing video for his news-and-commentary blog, The Pragmatic Constitutionalist. He had a front-row view of some intense scenes, including the initial bombardment of munitions aimed by police at the huge crowd on the Capitol’s west front.

  His video work appeared in Jan. 6 films by HBO, The New York Times, and The Epoch Times. It has been syndicated worldwide on Storyful.

  Baker filmed the debut of a Metropolitan Police Department “hard squad” and the violence that broke out as the riot-gear-clad officers rolled and rumbled through the dense crowd like a bowling ball through a 10-pin set.

  He stood in the corner of the Capitol’s south entrance as officers drew firearms near him and a group of protesters after a radio call about shots fired in the House of Representatives.

  Baker’s outspokenness was on full display. He challenged two officers who drew their service weapons and shouted at unarmed protesters. The building was on high alert after reports that someone had been shot outside the Speaker’s Lobby.

  “Are you going to use that on us?” Baker asked one USCP officer who charged at the group. “None of us have a gun. We’ve got cameras.”

  As the officer explained why the dozen or so law-enforcement officials in the lobby had weapons ready, Baker intoned dryly, “The only shots fired have been fired by you guys.”

  

  That statement turned out to be true. At the entrance to the House Speaker’s Lobby one floor above, USCP Lt. Michael Byrd shot unarmed Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, 35. She died about a half-hour later.

  What was displayed on Jan. 6 became a hallmark of Baker’s work covering the aftermath of the protests and violence at the Capitol. His analysis and commentary often cut to the quick.

  ‘Just Want the Truth’

  On podcasts and social media, Baker says things most other journalists are afraid to say. He does not suffer fools gladly. That has earned him a growing following—and some critics—from various sides of his libertarian leanings.

  He describes his approach to Jan. 6 as a drive for truth—partisanship and politics be damned. That’s a trait he learned from his father, George O. Baker, who spent more than 30 years as a private investigator based in Shreveport, Louisiana.

  “I don’t care where the facts lead,” Baker said. “To Trump’s desk, Pelosi’s desk, darker forces within the government, left- or right-wing antagonists, or simply a grand organic accident.”

  He said his latest focus has been “government incompetence that allowed it, or even a sinister plan to initiate the violence.”

  “I just want the truth,” he said. “Now I’m focusing on the weaponization of the DOJ against the innocent people who’ve been caught up in the politicized aftermath.”

  Baker said if he ends up facing DOJ prosecution for being at the Capitol, it will be just the latest example of the government targeting right-of-center journalists to the exclusion of so-called mainstream media.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 19:30

• Extinct Wooly Mammoth Meatball Made In Lab
  Extinct Wooly Mammoth Meatball Made In Lab

  The Australian company “Vow,” specializing in cultured meat, recently made headlines for producing a giant meatball from a lab using the DNA of the long-extinct woolly mammoth.  

  “We wanted to create something that was totally different from anything you can get now,” Vow founder Tim Noakesmith told Reuters, adding scientists believe the animal’s extinction was sparked by climate change 10,000 years ago (So climate change can occur without humans use of fossil fuels?). 

  

  The meatball was created using sheep cells that were inserted with a singular woolly mammoth gene called myoglobin.

  “When it comes to meat, myoglobin is responsible for the aroma, the color, and the taste,” James Ryall, Vow’s Chief Scientific Officer, explained.

  The woolly mammoth’s DNA sequence had a few gaps, so scientists completed it with African elephant DNA. 

  “Much like they do in the movie Jurassic Park,” Ryall noted.

  Reuters described the meatball, which smells like crocodile meat, and added it was not produced for consumption. 

  “Its protein is literally 4,000 years old. We haven’t seen it in a very long time. That means we want to put it through rigorous tests, something that we would do with any product we bring to the market,” Noakesmith said.

  Reuters ended the article with the idea that lab-grown meat will likely be a more sustainable alternative to real meat. 

  … and where have we seen this before? 

  

  The Great Reset plan by WEF includes the complete transformation of the global food and agricultural industries and the dieting of humans. 

  If you want to avoid a future of fake meat, find cheap land designated for agriculture and start a farm. 

  Otherwise, ‘Soylent Green,’ here we come… 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 19:00

• Trump Supporter Found Guilty, Faces Ten Years In Prison For 2016 Anti-Hillary Meme
  Trump Supporter Found Guilty, Faces Ten Years In Prison For 2016 Anti-Hillary Meme

  Authored by Robert Spencer via PJMedia.com,

  Donald Trump has been indicted, essentially for the crime of being Donald Trump and opposing the Left’s total hegemony over everything. But as Trump himself has often warned, they’re not really after him, they’re after us, and he is just in the way. A 33-year-old Trump supporter named Douglass Mackey discovered the truth of that adage in the worst possible way on Friday, the first day of America as a Leftist banana republic in which foes of the regime are targeted solely for their opposition to that regime. Mackey was convicted of election interference and faces up to ten years in prison, all because of a meme he tweeted during the 2016 election. Yes, you read that right: a meme.

  Back during the wild and woolly days of that campaign, according to a Friday press release from the “Justice” Department, Mackey, under the name Ricky Vaughn, “established an audience on Twitter with approximately 58,000 followers. A February 2016 analysis by the MIT Media Lab ranked Mackey as the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Presidential Election.” The Justice for Democrats Department didn’t bother to explain exactly what it means to have held a position so illustrious as that of the 107th most important influencer of the 2016 presidential election. How did the DOJ go about determining this? Did it somehow discover that Mackey/Vaughn had induced a certain number of people to change their votes, but that 106 other people had gotten people to change more votes?

  These are actually important questions because on Friday, Mackey was convicted “by a federal jury in Brooklyn of the charge of Conspiracy Against Rights stemming from his scheme to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote.” 

  That’s what he faces ten years in prison for doing.

  Mackey’s “conspiracy” was really quite simple. While the language the Department Formerly Associated with Justice used sounds quite weighty and conjures up images of Mackey meeting in dark rooms with other sinister figures to plot ways to sabotage voting machines or prevent people from being able to enter polling places, what they’re really talking about is a meme.

  Douglass Mackey was just found guilty of a federal crime he was charged with by the DOJ for tweeting the meme on the left during the 2016 election.

  The lady on the right has never been arrested for her tweet that also came during the 2016 election. pic.twitter.com/pkCz6h669U

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) March 31, 2023

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

  One of the ten-years-in-the-slammer memes can be seen here.

  Vaughn tweeted a photo of what looked like a Hillary ad, but was actually a parody of a Hillary ad.

  The caption read: “Avoid the line. Vote from home. Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925. Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.”

  

  The Justice Unless You Support Trump Department explained that this was a heinous crime because “Mackey conspired with other influential Twitter users and with members of private online groups to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages that encouraged supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to ‘vote’ via text message or social media which, in reality, was legally invalid.” Yeah, wow, doggonit, that sounds terrible. Thousands, maybe even millions, of people, must have been bamboozled by the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Presidential Election to send in a text and think they had voted, right?

  Wrong.

  The Justice Department, according to the Post Millennial, “was unable to provide evidence that anyone was deceived by the meme.”

  Not even a single person.

  What’s more, at least one memester on the other side did exactly the same thing, and was never arrested or tried and faces no prison time. On Nov. 8, 2016, which was election day, Kristina Wong tweeted a video of a Trump supporter with the caption: “Hey Trump Supporters! Skip poll lines at #Election2016 and TEXT in your vote! Text votes are legit. Or vote tomorrow on Super Wednesday!”

  

  Not only was Kristina Wong never prosecuted, but her tweet is still live. Yet she did exactly the same thing Douglass Mackey did. She just had the good sense to do it against Trump, rather than against Hillary.

  The rotten, corrupt, politicized remains of the Justice Department, however, were full to the brim of their own righteousness on Friday. U.S. Attorney Breon Peace proclaimed, “Mackey has been found guilty by a jury of his peers of attempting to deprive individuals from exercising their sacred right to vote for the candidate of their choice in the 2016 Presidential Election.” The contemporary American Left, one of the most impious and God-hating political movements in the history of the world, loves to affect piety at times like this, but Peace’s statement was a particularly nauseating example of this phenomenon. The right to vote is “sacred”? No, Peace. I’m all for voting in free, fair, unrigged elections, but be serious: the right to vote is not held as sacred in any religious tradition on the face of the earth. What you’re actually saying is that your corrupt and self-serving system is part of your secular religion, and that Mackey is a heretic from that religion; he has been duly found guilty and will be burned at the stake.

  The first amendment as we know it died today. This is a completely outrageous decision by a jury in Brooklyn to send this man to jail for tweeting a meme. We are truly living in a third world banana republic.https://t.co/XjMI3hb978

  — Greg Price (@greg_price11) March 31, 2023

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

  And this is just day one. Imagine what America will be like once the banana republic has been fully in power for a few years.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 18:30

• SoCal Sweatshop Workers Make As Little As $1.58 Per Hour
  SoCal Sweatshop Workers Make As Little As $1.58 Per Hour

  A survey of garment-sewing contractors in Southern California reveals that sweatshop workers are paid as little as $1.58 per hour.

  

  The survey, conducted by the US Department of Labor, found that workers making garments sold by some of the world’s largest fashion retailers are victims of wage theft and other illegal pay practices, Fashion United reports.

  Contractors and manufacturers included in the survey include Bombshell Sportswear, Dillard’s, Lulus, Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Socialite, Stitch Fix and Von Maur.

  There more more than 45,000 workers in the Los Angeles-area garment manufacturing industry, with many working an average of 55 hours per week with no overtime pay, according to the report.

  Based on data from more than 50 contractors and manufacturers, the 2022 Southern California Garment Survey released by the department’s Wage and Hour Division found violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act in 80 percent of its investigations. More than 50 percent of the time, the division found employers illegally paying workers part or all their wages off the books, with payroll records either deliberately forged or not provided. -Fashion United

  The survey also found that 32% of contractors are paying workers piece-rate wages, which has been prohibited by the state of California since last year.

  “Despite our efforts to hold Southern California’s garment industry employers accountable, we continue to see people who make clothes sold by some of the nation’s leading retailers working in sweatshops,” said Wage and Hour Regional Administrator Ruben Rosalez in San Francisco. “Many people shopping for clothes in stores and online are likely unaware that the ‘Made in the USA’ merchandise they’re buying was, in fact, made by people earning far less than the U.S. law requires.”

  According to investigators, one contractor was paying workers as little as $1.58 per hour, about what Bengladeshi workers make – which last month saw unions demand an increase in the minimum wage from US$75 dollars per month to US$215 amid crippling inflation.

  The U.S. Department of Labor says it found that sewing fees paid by manufacturers to contractors were – on average – not enough for the contractors to properly pay their workers’ required minimum wages. Specifically, the studies determined the average sewing fee was 2.75 dollars below the amount needed per garment for sewing contractors to comply with federal wage standards. Contractors who paid employees in compliance with the law received a higher sewing fee, ranging from 17.50 dollars to 35 dollars per garment. -Fashion United

  “The findings of the Southern California Garment Survey highlight why greater outreach and stronger enforcement are needed to combat the inequities that exist in the garment and fashion industries,” said Rosalez. “The Wage and Hour Division will continue to work and meet with advocates and industry stakeholders, and remain focused on holding accountable the manufacturers and retailers who reap significant profits while the people who did the hard work are too often not paid their rightful wages.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 18:00

• Watch: Anthropology Prof Angered After Being Mocked For Denying Ability To Tell Gender From Human Bones
  Watch: Anthropology Prof Angered After Being Mocked For Denying Ability To Tell Gender From Human Bones

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  There is an interesting controversy that has erupted at the University of Pittsburgh after Dr. Gabby Yearwood, who teaches in both the anthropology and law schools, was asked by swimmer Riley Gaines if he could tell the gender of persons from skeletal remains.

  He denied that that was possible despite the widely accepted ability to do so in his field. The answer may reflect the ongoing push in anthropology, discussed in an earlier blog column, to put an end to gender identifications. Some insist that anthropologists need to know how an ancient human may have chosen to identify themselves.

  Yearwood reportedly was asked the question by Gaines, who achieved national notoriety in opposing the inclusion of transgender athletes like the University of Pennsylvania’s Lia Thomas in women competitions. 

  Like J.K. Rowling who has raised concerns over the threat to feminist gains from some transgender policies, Gaines is now ostracized and often prevented from speaking at events.

  To its credit, Pittsburgh refused to yield to demands to bar Gaines and others from speaking on campus. This controversy appears to have resulted during the event that many sought cancel.

  

  Gaines asked Yearwood, “If you were to dig up two humans one hundred years from now, both man and woman, could you tell the difference, strictly off of bones?”

  According to Fox, Yearwood answered “No!” and then took umbrage after the room erupted in laughter.

  He reportedly reminded them that he was “the expert in the room” and asked “Have any of you been to anthropological sites? Have any of you studied biological anthropology? I’m just saying, I’ve got over 150 years of data, I’m just curious as to why I’m being laughed at. I have a PhD!”

  The videos posted on Twitter only show the first part of that exchange.

  Gaines reportedly responded that “Every single rational person knows the answer: men have narrower hips, their skulls are different, they have an extra rib, their femurs are longer, their jaws are different.”

  When @Riley_Gaines_ asked University of Pittsburgh professor Gabby Yearwood if an archeologist could differentiate between two sets of bones as male and female, Professor Yearwood. who calls himself the “expert in the room,” answers “no” to which the entire audience laughed. pic.twitter.com/Ecxs1NMDTr

  — Independent Women’s Forum (@IWF) March 30, 2023

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

  One expert is quoted by the College Fix as disagreeing with Yearwood though offering a correction also to one of Gaines’ statements.

  San José State University archaeology Professor Elizabeth Weiss said determining the sex of skeletal remains “is a critical skill in forensics and any diminishing of this skill will negatively impact criminal investigations, denying the victims and their families justice.” She added that “Riley Gaines is correct on many traits, but males do not have an extra rib. This myth comes from the Adam and Eve story.”

  Schools like Boston University note that

  “Sex is typically determined by the morphology (shape) of the pelvis or skull and long bone measurements. ‘However, many of the areas on the skeleton that are used for sex estimation may be missing or damaged due to trauma, poor preservation, animal scavenging and nature of the incident (explosive). Therefore, it is important to examine other areas of the skeleton that preserve well and are potentially sexually dimorphic (show differences between females and males),’ explained corresponding author Sean Tallman, PhD, RPA, assistant professor of anatomy and neurobiology.”

  In fairness to Yearwood, experts have said that determining gender occurs along a spectrum of analysis because some women may easily be mistaken for men. Indeed, there was research showing an overcounting of male skeletons in research by famed anthropologist Aleš Hrdlička, who helped found the modern study of human bones and served as the first curator of physical anthropology at the U.S. National Museum.

  This controversy is part of a wider debate unfolding on our campuses.

  University of Kansas Associate Professor Jennifer Raff argued in a paper, “Origin: A Genetic History of the Americas,”  that there are “no neat divisions between physically or genetically ‘male’ or ‘female’ individuals.”  Her best selling book has been featured on various news outlets like MSNBC.

  Raff is not alone. Graduate students like Emma Palladino have objected  that “the archaeologists who find your bones one day will assign you the same gender as you had at birth, so regardless of whether you transition, you can’t escape your assigned sex.”

  Professors Elizabeth DiGangi of Binghamton University and Jonathan Bethard of the University of South Florida have also challenged the use of racial classifications in a study, objecting that “[a]ncestry estimation contributes to white supremacy.”  The authors write that “we use critical race theory to interrogate the approaches utilized to estimate ancestry to include a critique of the continued use of morphoscopic traits, and we assert that the practice of ancestry estimation contributes to white supremacy.”

  It is not clear if this movement influenced Yearwood’s answer. He has been a leader in calling for “critical engagement” and “activist research” to change the field of anthropology.

  

  Dr. Yearwood’s bio shows that he is widely published and known in his field.

  “Gabby M.H. Yearwood is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Anthropology and Managing Faculty Director for the Center for Civil Rights and Racial Justice in the Law School at the University Pittsburgh. He is a socio-cultural anthropologist earning his Ph.D from the University of Texas at Austin in Anthropology focusing in Black Diaspora Studies and Masculinity. His research interests include the social constructions of race and racism, masculinity, gender, sex, Black Feminist and Black Queer theory, anthropology of sport and Black Diaspora. Dr. Yearwood holds a secondary appointment with the Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies Program at Pitt.  Dr. Yearwood is also a teaching member of the Pitt Prison Education Project.”

  Among his courses is “Activist Anthropology” the description of which reads:

  “[T]his course will teach students that ‘critical engagement brought about by activist research is both necessary and productive. Such research can contribute to transforming the discipline by addressing knowledge production and working to decolonize our research process. Rather than seeking to avoid or resolve the tensions inherent in anthropological research on human rights, activist research draws them to the fore, making them a productive part of the process. Finally, activist research allows us to merge cultural critique with political action to produce knowledge that is empirically grounded, theoretically valuable, and ethically viable.’ (Speed 2006). This course will teach students both the importance and value of conducting research that moves outside of the “ivory tower” of academia. “[A]ctivist scholars work in dialogue, collaboration, alliance with people who are struggling to better their lives; activist scholarship embodies a responsibility for results that these “allies” can recognize as their own, value in their own terms, and use as they see fit.” (Hale 2008) This course will explore major conceptual work on the role and ethical responsibility of anthropological research and social justice issues.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 17:30

• The US Government Sold Almost 10,000 'Silk Road' Bitcoin Last Week
  The US Government Sold Almost 10,000 ‘Silk Road’ Bitcoin Last Week

  The United States government has been selling bitcoin confiscated from the Silk Road case in 2013. 

  

  As Turner Wright reports at CoinTelegraph.com, a March 31 filing with U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York regarding the sentencing of James Zhong stated U.S. government authorities had begun liquidating roughly 51,352 BTC seized in the Ulbricht case.

  According to the filing, officials sold roughly 9,861 BTC for more than $215 million on March 14, leaving roughly 41,491 BTC.

  “The Government understands [the seized Bitcoin] is expected to be liquidated in four more batches over the course of this calendar year,” said the court filing.

  “The Government understands from IRS Criminal Investigation – Asset Recovery & Investigative Services that the second round of liquidation will not be sold prior to Zhong’s sentencing date.”

  In November, Zhong pled guilty to wire fraud charges related to executing a scheme to steal Bitcoin from Silk Road in 2012. U.S. authorities seized more than 50,000 BTC – worth more than $3 billion at the time – from his Georgia home in November 2021. It was one of the largest crypto seizures by the government until the February 2022 recovery of roughly $3.6 billion connected to the 2016 Bitfinex hack.

  The Silk Road marketplace, which has been defunct for 10 years, originally allowed users to buy and sell illicit goods, including weapons and stolen credit card information.

  However, the marketplace also drew the attention of U.S. authorities, who arrested Ulbricht in 2013. He is currently serving two life sentences without the possibility of parole.

  I was arrested at the age of 29 and today I turn 39. I’ve lost my 30s to prison.

  During that time, I’ve done my best to learn from my mistakes, better myself, and help others do the same.

  I hope someday I can make amends as a free man as well.

  — Ross Ulbricht (@RealRossU) March 27, 2023

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

  The price of BTC has had a volatile month, dipping below $20,000 on March 10 and moving above $29,000 on March 29. At the time of publication, BTC’s price was above $28,000.

  

  While the government has been selling bitcoin, other institutions like MicroStrategy have been acquiring it.

  👀

  — Michael Saylor⚡️ (@saylor) March 31, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 17:00

• Investigation Reveals 'Revolving Door' Of DOJ, Big Tech Employees
  Investigation Reveals ‘Revolving Door’ Of DOJ, Big Tech Employees

  Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In the midst of an ongoing lawsuit against the Biden administration alleging collaboration with social media companies to censor Americans, a new report has detailed the extent to which former Justice Department (DOJ) employees are now working at “Big Tech” firms.

  

  The American Accountability Foundation (AAF) investigated the resumes of recent hires and found that more than 360 current employees of Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and Facebook/Meta are former DOJ employees. Likewise, more than 40 DOJ employees, many of them in senior roles, previously worked at Big Tech firms.

  According to the report, since President Joe Biden took office, Google hired 40 former DOJ staffers, Amazon hired 61, Microsoft hired 26, and Meta hired 53.

  While staff often move between government and the private sector, “this case is different because unlike government and industry moving expertise back and forth (knowledge about procurement rules for example) what we have seen moving back and forth between DOJ and tech is a shared political agenda, specifically to silence conservative voices,” Yitz Friedman, AAF communications manager, told The Epoch Times.

  “Sadly, it is evidence that in the Big Tech community, corporate policy is the government’s policy.”

  This concern is heightened by recent evidence of collaboration between the DOJ and Twitter to silence Americans, particularly regarding political speech.

  After buying social media platform Twitter, Elon Musk released thousands of internal emails that allegedly showed collusion between Twitter and DOJ officials to censor speech, including banning a report by the New York Post before the 2020 election that reportedly incriminated then-candidate Joe Biden in illicit payments scandals.

  ‘Campaign of Public Threats’

  The release of the “Twitter files” follows a lawsuit by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt that alleges illegal collusion between the Biden administration and Big Tech companies to suppress free speech.

  In a November 2022 interview with The Epoch Times, Landry stated that, because of the First Amendment, “the government doesn’t have the ability to censor speech, especially political speech. And so they can’t go out there and force these companies [to do it].”

  Plaintiffs in this case filed a 364-page “finding of fact” document showing a “campaign of public threats against social-media platforms to pressure them to censor more speech on social media.” This document will be discussed in a congressional hearing on March 30 on the “Weaponization of the Federal Government.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 16:30

• Vax Mandate For Boston City Workers Was Legal, State Supreme Court Rules
  Vax Mandate For Boston City Workers Was Legal, State Supreme Court Rules

  The city of Boston’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate for city workers was legal, according to a March 30 ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court, after the city claimed that the ability to adequately combat the virus outweighed the risk of irreparable vaccine injuries to workers who were facing termination.

  

  “The potential harm to the city and the public resulting from the spread of COVID-19 clearly outweighed the economic harm to the employees,” wrote Justice Elspeth Cypher in the ruling.

  The 2021 mandate required proof of vaccination or weekly testing – the latter of which was dropped after the Omicron variant emerged. This prompted a challenge from unions which claimed that the city had not properly negotiated the change.

  Boston Mayor Michelle Wu was under advisement from Dr. Bisola Ojikutu – who told the court that the update was necessary because testing was likely insufficient to combat COVID-19 despite the fact that the vaccine performed terribly against Omicron and its subvariants.

  The new ruling supercedes and overturns a 2022 preliminary injunction.

  Workers who failed to get a COVID-19 vaccine under the mandate faced repercussions, including termination. Unions asked for a preliminary injunction so workers could not be punished. Their bid was initially rejected, with a trial judge finding plaintiffs had not demonstrated irreparable harm absent an injunction. Massachusetts Appeals Court Judge Sabita Singh reversed that ruling, finding that workers faced “substantial harm” if the mandate was not blocked and that the city’s failure to negotiate the policy meant plaintiffs were likely to succeed.

  Singh said the case differed from others because it implicated issues of “bodily integrity and self-determination.”

  Singh “abused her discretion” in issuing the injunction, which remained in place until Thursday, the state’s top court said.

  The harm the plaintiffs were facing is solely economic because “they could have continued to refuse to become vaccinated and instead challenged the decision both in court and before” the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board (CERB), the court said. -Epoch Times

  “Given the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and its threat to the health and safety of the public, the decision to remove the testing alternative in the defendants’ COVID-19 policy constituted a nondelegable policy decision that could not be the subject of decision bargaining because any such requirement would have impinged directly on the defendants’ ability to provide essential public safety services to city residents,” reads the ruling.

  Meanwhile, Boston recently agreed to drop the mandate for the plaintiffs, firefighters and superior officers because “the parties desire to resolve this matter without the expense and uncertainty of further litigation, and in promotion of harmonious labor relations between them,” according to the Boston Herald.

  Sam Dillon, president of Boston Firefighters Local 718, told the Epoch Times: “I respect the Court’s decision to lift the injunction however I do not see it having any impact on our Union and members given the agreement we reached with the City in February.”

  “The Court’s decision in no way impacts the recent agreement between Local 718 and the City, and the Covid-19 mandate remains unenforceable to the members of Local 718,” added Leah Barrault, who represented the plaintiffs in the case.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 16:00

• "They're All Libertarians" Until Their Deposits Are At Risk
  “They’re All Libertarians” Until Their Deposits Are At Risk

  Authored by Roy Sebag via GoldMoney.com,

  Refresh the Page and it’s Gone

  On July 11, 2008, news broke out that California based IndyMac Bank suddenly failed and was to be shut down by banking regulators. Within minutes, thousands of bank depositors swarmed their local branches. A jarring video covering the event can still be viewed online. In it, a puzzled CBS news reporter approaches people queueing in the streets and asks them why they have showed up en masse to withdraw their funds from the bank.

  The reporter approaches Lisa Hester Lerner, a female depositor who rushed to the scene after having discovered that everything above the insured limit in her online bank account had disappeared. She had this to say: “I think it’s mass hysteria. I think this is similar to what happened in the Great Depression. And I think that everyone wants their money, and they want to touch it and hold it and see it.”

  

  Nearly fifteen years after the 2008 financial crisis, retail bank depositors have been plunged into a renewed sense of fear as bank runs abound from Silicon Valley to Manhattan to Zurich. Last week, Silicon Valley Bank, Silvergate and Signature Bank New York failed. The US Treasury, FDIC, and the Federal Reserve were forced to step in by providing an “emergency rescue” package that will guarantee as much as $400 billion of uninsured deposits. Over the weekend, the Swiss government forced a merger of Credit Suisse with UBS by changing the country’s laws in an effort to halt a bank run on the 166-year-old institution.

  These privileged bailouts, which were not offered to those unfortunate IndyMac depositors in 2008, have rightfully evoked a conversation about moral hazard which is eerily reminiscent to the Occupy Wall Street movement years ago. While the financial conditions which led to the recent bank runs are in some ways very different to the conditions underlying the start of the 2008 financial crisis, many in the public square today feel that much of the underlying anxiety, anger, and confusion from that defining period of a generation has never really disappeared.  

  Nassim Taleb, the author of the bestselling book The Black Swan is one of those people. According to Taleb, the 2008-9 bailouts were a “blatant case of corporate socialism and a reward to an industry whose managers are stopped out by taxpayers”.

  Taleb continued: “Remember that bailouts come with printed money, which effectively deflate the wages of the middle class.”

  It was not surprising then to see Taleb criticize the recent bailouts with similar perspicuity. Last week he blamed venture capitalists for taking inordinate risk by banking with Silicon Valley Bank, causing a bank run when they noticed the institution was on the brink of insolvency, and then begging the government for bailouts when they realized they would be unable to withdraw their uninsured deposits in time. “They are all libertarians until they are hit by higher interest rates,” he concluded.  

  In an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal, Vivek Ramaswamy, the entrepreneur turned US 2024 Presidential Candidate, similarly blasted the recent bailouts. He argued that the issues at the banks were a “simple case of bad risk management”, and that they were, at best, a case of incompetence, or at worst, a case of moral hazard where bank executives took on excessive risks with the knowledge that a bailout would materialize in the case of failure. According to Ramaswamy, Silicon Valley Bank’s “real hedge was to curry favour with the Biden administration.” 

  On the other side of the debate were three notable voices: David Sacks and Gary Tan, both venture capitalists based in Silicon Valley, and Bill Ackman, the New York based hedge fund manager. Over the weekend of March 10, 2023, these three flooded social media with hysterical warnings about the risks to society and the need for the government to step in before markets opened on Monday. Some commentators have observed how these sensational appeals for government action placed a great deal of political pressure on the Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve William Powell to take radical action, which of course, they did. Tan, went so far as arguing that this was “an extinction level event” that demanded an urgent solution.

  In David Sacks’ own words: “The only reason people are being stubborn about this point is because Silicon Valley Bank has the name Silicon Valley in it. If this was a farmers’ bank and it was 40,000 farms, small business farms that were on the hook, everybody would understand. The arguments being made would be: we can’t let 40,000 farms go out of business. They didn’t do anything wrong. They just trusted when they put their money in a bank that it was safe.”

  Bill Ackman, echoing Sacks, said that the government did not “bailout” Silicon Valley Bank because, unlike in the 2008 financial crisis, the government did not inject taxpayer money into the banks.

  To his mind, the government “did the right thing for the country.”

  The position advanced by Sacks and Tan is patently false. As Roger Lowenstein pointed out last week in his own opinion piece for the NY Times: “In the rescue of Silicon Valley Bank on Friday and of Signature Bank in New York two days later, the FDIC overtly ignored the cap and rescued all depositors, irrespective of size. This is a breathtaking leap.” In response to Ackman’s line of thinking, Lowenstein had this to say:

  “Federal officials have seized on a technicality to claim that it is not a bailout…. However, in the sense that banking customers are a pretty big group, the ‘public’ will be affected. Once you take risk out of a part of a bank’s operations, it is hard to let market principles govern the rest… the bailout does nothing to address the condition that fostered financial instability: inflation. It may even exacerbate it.”

  While the discourse is certainly polarized, with those firmly in the bailout camp and others firmly opposed, it seems that both sides are swiftly focusing on surface level talking points. The conversation, it seems, is being positioned in the financial media and from the institutional class in the following way: The recent bank runs have been caused by price declines from mostly safe assets. Therefore, monetary authorities need to focus on low contagion risk, decisive banking facilities to limit systemic damage, and the need to improve the health of bank balance sheets.

  The party lines will tow their diagnoses and purported cures. But isn’t there a bigger problem?

  Peering deeper into the cultural tension and anxiety, what feels different for many of the Occupy generation, and what you likely won’t hear in much of the financial media, is not that this was another unexpected bank crisis and bailout, but that an entire, mostly unvoiced group of people find both the bank failure and the bailout entirely predictable. But they feel they have no alternative in the matter, or even a voice. This is just the way the system is.

  These are people like Lisa Hester Lerner who just want to touch, hold, and see their money. This desire for a tangible solution reflects the real tension that many of us feel to be at the heart of things: that our abstract financial system is out of balance. And out of balance with what? With nature itself.

  The ideal relationship between humans and nature is obvious enough. We work with the land, forage for food, till the soil, produce crops, and after the laborious harvest season, we enjoy the fruits of the land, and conserve the surplus for the winter months. Unexpected calamities may occur – a drought, a rough season, a case of blight or disease – but, sure enough, with care and patience, the cycle reassumes its course, and we reap what we sow in time.

  Most of us today don’t work with nature anymore. We go to offices, sit at desks, take home paychecks, feed our families and pay the bills, and hopefully come away with something at the end of the month to put away into the family nest egg. Yet the basic principle still stands: it is entirely natural for us to store away a portion of the harvest into “savings” and conserve it for the colder seasons.

  But the human institution today is no longer harmonious with the natural economy. The money in the paycheck is not as real as the food we harvest and eat. This is because our modern society has been collectively systematized into the abstract. Your savings is no longer grain in a storehouse, nor is it silver in a purse or gold in a vault – it’s a number on the screen of a bank’s website. Refresh the page and it may be gone.

  This isn’t populist anger. It is plain enough that the abstract system is already out of balance with the natural economy. It speaks an entirely different language. Instead of a physical reward, earners are given a nominal sum – and you better hope that sum isn’t capped at a wage while the government’s pool of printed money drowns its real purchasing power. Instead of savings that are concrete and ready-to-hand for the future, savers are forced to put away their time and labour into the black hole of risk otherwise known as a bank.

  Throughout history, great civilizations collapse when human institutions mistake themselves to be unaccountable to any objective standard of measure and reward, or when they think themselves to float above the tides of nature. To believe that we are exempt from this universal law is either a sign of great imprudence or perilous maleficence.

  In my book, The Natural Order of Money, I argue that there are two economies: the real economy and the service economy. The role of money is to balance the relationship between these two sectors in relation to our shared environment of the natural world. My conclusion is that only natural money can achieve this function.

  A bank run can and will take place even if natural money is used, but there is a great distinction in the possible actions available to the government. A modern bank run predicated on fiat money, as we have seen by the recent bailouts, no longer provides a “check” on the system. Rather, it consolidates the system into smaller but more powerful central banking institutions. While central banks swiftly print new money to provide liquidity to the banks facing runs, this digital money is just as swiftly withdrawn from the failing bank into a larger, systemically important bank, or instead into a government bond. In other words, the bailouts reinforce the system itself by socializing the failure and privatizing the gains.

  With natural money, a bank run has to be respected, it cannot be papered over by devaluing the purchasing power of society’s savers. This in turn would allow the government and central banks to actually complete the task they set out for themselves last year, which was supposed to be to fight inflation, not print more currency.

  When central banks are compelled by social media trending hashtags and evanescent hysteria to bailout failed banks, they fail in their primary duty to society as the privileged administrators of money as a social contract. The result of this folly is another deferral of the inevitable re-balancing of our abstract economies with the natural world.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 15:30

• China Sends 18 Warplanes & 4 Vessels Toward Taiwan Amid Tsai's US Visit
  China Sends 18 Warplanes & 4 Vessels Toward Taiwan Amid Tsai’s US Visit

  China has made good on its threats vowing retaliation for Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen’s tour of the US and Central American allies, now a few days in. On Saturday the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) sent 18 aircraft and four naval vessels toward the self-ruled island.

  Tsai first landed in New York on Wednesday, and is currently in Central America – specifically Guatemala and Belize, after which she’s expected in L.A. for a planned meeting with US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. The McCarthy visit may prove the most controversial part of her trip.

  

  Beijing warned of an even greater response should the Taiwanese leader go through with the McCarthy meeting. Only has 13 countries across the globe currently keep official diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

  While PLA violations of Taiwan’s Air Defense Identification Zone, and even the Taiwan Strait median line have been a weekly occurrences for much of the past year or more, the past days have seen China ramp up the flights.

  Reuters reported Friday that “Nine Chinese aircraft crossed the Taiwan Strait’s median line on Friday carrying out combat readiness patrols, Taiwan’s defense ministry said, days after Beijing threatened retaliation if President Tsai Ing-wen meets U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.”

  The Taiwan defense ministry statement said it has deployed in own jets and ships to monitor the PLA movements, however, sought to caution that it’s “not escalating conflicts or causing disputes” with China.

  “The communist military’s deployment of forces deliberately created tension in the Taiwan Strait, not only undermining peace and stability, but also has a negative impact on regional security and economic development,” it added, condemning “such irrational actions”.

  HAPPENING NOW: Taiwan President Tsai @iingwen arrives in Guatemala. Taiwan and Guatemala have been allies since 1960, and maintain robust commercial and trade ties. pic.twitter.com/uDRlNYzYrC

  — TaiwanPlus (@taiwanplusnews) March 31, 2023

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

  It must be recalled that China’s PLA military had launched its largest-ever ‘encircling’ live-fire exercises around Taiwan when then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the island in August. Likely ahead of April 5, when Tsai is expected to meet the Republican House Speaker, China will ratchet its muscle-flexing around the self-ruled island even more.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 15:00

• The Warnings Unheeded Now Threaten Our Fundamental Freedoms
  The Warnings Unheeded Now Threaten Our Fundamental Freedoms

  Authored by Bruce Abramson via RealClearPolitics.com,

  The First Amendment is at a critical juncture. Recent congressional hearings on the Twitter Files brought the matter into full public view. Freedom of speech and of the press are hanging by a precarious thread. Do we want a future in which information flows freely, or one in which an information elite controls those flows “for our own good?” The choices we make over the next few years will determine which of those futures we get.

  It’s tragic that we have let the problem reach this dangerous state. What heightens the tragedy, however, is that the war against America’s most cherished freedoms was predictable and preventable. If those of us who value freedom want to win, we’re going to need a strategy grounded in a clear understanding of what’s happening and why.

  The Twitter Files story is shocking. Allegations that big tech and social media manipulate information have been around for as long as we’ve had tech and social media companies. Allegations of bias among the mainstream media are even older. In recent years, however, both the allegations and the supporting evidence have ratcheted upward to unprecedented levels.

  When Elon Musk acquired Twitter, he opened his company’s internal archives to scrutiny. He assembled a team of journalists with a curious pedigree: registered Democrats with a distaste for Donald Trump and his supporters, whose track records skewed considerably left of center, and whose recent work has demonstrated deep concern about the politicization of journalism.

  Musk gave them unfettered access. They found a deep, broad, and disturbing pattern of collaboration between big government and big tech designed to promote “official stories” on multiple issues, throttle competing theories and arguments, and sanction those who dared to question government propaganda.

  

  When two of those journalists – Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger – testified before Congress, their Democratic inquisitors sought to belittle their credentials, question their motives, and tar them as part of some Republican-funded, far-right conspiracy. The still-left-leaning journalists are trying to absorb their shock at the depths to which the formerly civil-libertarian left has fallen.

  Far from shocking, however, that fall was predictable – and predicted. In 2001, amidst the public disgust with tech companies following the collapse of the dotcom bubble, I set out to make sense of life during the transition from the late industrial age to the early information age. I analyzed what I called the first four front-page stories of the information age: the dotcom bubble, the Microsoft antitrust trial, the rise of open-source software, and the Napster-driven wars over digital music. Contrary to popular opinion of the time, I believed that these stories were far from distinct. I saw them as four manifestations of a single underlying phenomenon. My goal was to understand that phenomenon.

  I found it. It appeared most clearly in the digital music arena, but it ran through all four stories – and through much that has happened since. It appears just as clearly in today’s war on free speech. It involves an entirely predictable pattern of opportunity, action, and reaction.

  The starting point is digitization and quantification. The Internet changed the economics of information. Throughout human history, information was scarce, hard to acquire, and expensive to process. Skilled professionals – spies, scholars, lawyers, accountants, clerics, doctors – could command a premium for their knowledge. When the Internet went public, anything that could be digitized and quantified suddenly flowed freely. Information was there for the asking. The premium shifted to filtering – the ability to discard unwanted information and arrange what remained.

  Economic shifts generate massive opportunities for creative, entrepreneurial people and bring glorious benefits to millions of consumers. The Internet was no exception in this regard, and neither was the predictable backlash against it. Anything that benefits new businesses and empowers consumers is a warning shot across the bow of powerful incumbents who’d grown accustomed to serving those consumers in a predictable, profitable, manner.

  In the music industry, anything that let individual consumers share digital music files reduced the revenues, profits, power, and control of record labels. Pre-digitization, these powerful incumbents determined what music got recorded and how it was packaged, distributed, presented, and priced. It was a comfortable business model that gave us the music industry “as we knew it.” The Internet undermined it entirely.

  Powerful incumbents never fade quietly into the night when challenged. They fight, using whatever weapons they can muster. In our society, the most effective ways to undermine new technological and economic opportunities tend to lie in law, regulation, and public policy. The record labels fought – largely successfully – to apply and reinterpret existing laws and to change laws in ways favorable to their interests.

  There’s the pattern: Technology creates opportunities. New businesses exploit those opportunities. Consumers benefit. Powerful incumbents fear their loss of control. Threatened incumbents seek allies in government. Government changes laws and regulations to protect incumbent interests. Media campaigns “educate” the public on the merits of the new policies. The new laws ensure that the next wave of technological change runs largely through the powerful incumbents, rather than against them.

  By 2003, I had distilled this pattern, showed numerous ways that it had already unfolded, predicted that it would soon hit parts of our economy and our lives far more significant than the music industry, and suggested some ways that we might prepare ourselves for the coming battles.

  It took another two years to get my analysis published. It went largely unnoticed. Twelve years later, then-Senator Ben Sasse described the ways that this pattern had forever disrupted the dynamics of employment. This, too, went largely unnoticed.

  Today, we see that disruptive pattern threatening the most basic of our civil liberties. Its manifestation in the arenas of speech, propaganda, and censorship is clear. Consider how each step in the process I identified above has played out here:

  • Technology creates opportunities. The Internet opened entirely new vistas for the creation and exchange of ideas, information, theories, opinions, propaganda, and outright lies.

  • New businesses exploit those opportunities. The companies founded since 1995 that created and control the world’s most important conduits for information have joined the ranks of history’s most powerful entities.

  • Consumers benefit. The centrality of these communication systems to our lives (for better or for worse) proves that they confer real value.

  • Powerful incumbents fear their loss of control. The twin political shocks of 2016 – Brexit and Donald Trump – highlighted the extent to which official channels had lost control of the narrative. With the entirety of elite media, government, big business, and the intelligentsia aligned behind Remain and Hillary, the newly empowered masses understood – for the first time – that there were viable alternatives to the official story.

  • Threatened incumbents seek allies in government. A coalition of elite forces assembled quickly, laser-focused on stomping out the populist threat. Masses empowered to conduct their own analyses, draw their own conclusions, and share their opinions among themselves threatened the stability of the power structure “as we know it.”

  • Government changes laws and regulations to protect incumbent interests. Prior to Musk’s Twitter, the entirety of Silicon Valley committed itself to “protecting” the public from “disinformation,” roughly defined as anything that threatened to undermine an official, sanctioned narrative. Allies throughout the administrative state, Congress, and the Biden White House are working to embed those “protections” in law.

  • Media campaigns “educate” the public on the merits of the new policies. The same mainstream media that vilified Napster, Grokster, and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing is now working to turn public opinion against the evil purveyors of alleged “disinformation.”

  • The new laws ensure that the next wave of technological change runs largely through the powerful incumbents, rather than against them. We’re now entering the stage in which censoring technologies provide strong, effective, and legally mandated protection against anything that runs against the “consensus” of government propaganda or enlightened elite opinion.

  The backlash is nearing its last stages. We’re rapidly heading towards locking in a technological, economic, and legal regime of information control, censorship, surveillance, and vilification.

  That’s the predictable pattern. That’s the threat. That’s the precipice on which we now stand. We’re on the verge of deciding whether we want to restore information monopoly and dominance to a powerful elite, or reverse the trajectory of recent law, regulation, and public policy to enshrine an architecture of open discourse.

  Will the information age be an era of informed, empowered citizens – or an era of a dominant, information-controlling elite? Stay tuned. That’s the question we need to answer.

  *  *  *

  Bruce Abramson, PhD, JD, is a principal at JBB&A Strategies and B2 Strategic, a director of the American Center for Education and Knowledge, and author of the forthcoming book “The New Civil War: Exposing Elites, Fighting Utopian Leftism, and Restoring America” (RealClear Publishing, 2021).

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 14:30

• Ivy League Schools Are Now Pushing $90,000 Per Year In Tuition
  Ivy League Schools Are Now Pushing $90,000 Per Year In Tuition

  Inflation is showing up just about everywhere, but it’s becoming even more prominent and noticeable at the nation’s Ivy League universities where, according to a new report from Bloomberg, prices for tuition are now approaching $90,000.

  Prestigious universities like Yale, Dartmouth and Brown have raised tuition between 4% and 5%, the report notes, even as full costs for many of these colleges are already “well into the $80,000” range. This means a full, four year education costs over $300,000 in many cases.

  As Bloomberg note, the cost of attending a university like Brown is now, on a per year basis, “well above what the typical US household earns”. This means that financial aid must make up the difference in many cases.

  

  Beth Akers, an economist who focuses on higher education, told Bloomberg: “At some point, that math stops working out. We get to a place where these degrees are just no longer worth it.”

  The University of Pennsylvania, Dartmouth College, Columbia University and Brown University all have price tags over $80,000 per year, as of 2022. Yale breached this mark last academic year, as well. But despite the price hikes, demand has not yet showed signs of waning. 

  In addition to trying to get the most from federal subsidies (“at least 50% of students receive some sort of financial aid,” the report says), universities are also facing a rise in costs, just like every other industry over the last 18 months. The cost of running a college is up 5.2% in fiscal 2022, Bloomberg reported. This figure marks the largest rise since 2001. 

  Per the report, here are the costs for attending some of the most well known Ivy League schools:

  • Brown Cost of Attendance: $84,828
  • Cornell Cost of Attendance: $84,568 
  • U Penn Cost of Attendance: $84,570
  • Dartmouth Cost of Attendance: $84,300
  • Yale Cost of Attendance: $83,880
  • Duke Cost of Attendance: $83,263
  • Stanford Cost of Attendance: $82,406
  • Columbia Cost of Attendance: $81,680
  • MIT Cost of Attendance: $79,546
  • Harvard Cost of Attendance: $76,763
  • Princeton Cost of Attendance: $76,040 

  In most cases, more than 40% of students receive some form of financial aid. At schools like Stanford and Princeton, that number is between 60% and 70% of all students. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 14:00

• The Trump Indictment: Making History In The Worst Possible Way
  The Trump Indictment: Making History In The Worst Possible Way

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in Fox.com on the Trump indictment. There is a report of 34 counts against former President Donald Trump, which may be count stacking based on individual payments or documents.

  We will have to wait to see.

  In the meantime, the prosecution came about in the most overtly political way from Bragg campaigning on charging Trump to a public pressure campaign to indict from his former lead prosecutor.

  

  Here is the column:

  Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has finally made history. He has indicted former President Donald Trump as part of an investigation, possibly for hush money payments. We are all waiting to see the text of the indictment to confirm the basis for this unprecedented act. But history in this case — and in this country — is not on Bragg’s side.

  The only crime that has been discussed in this case is an unprecedented attempt to revive a misdemeanor for falsifying business documents that expired years ago. If that is still the basis of Thursday’s indictment, Bragg could not have raised a weaker basis to prosecute a former president. If reports are accurate, he may attempt to “bootstrap” the misdemeanor into a felony (and longer statute of limitations) by alleging an effort to evade federal election charges.

  While Trump will be the first former president indicted, he will not be the last if that is the standard for prosecution.

  It is still hard to believe that Bragg would primarily proceed on such a basis. There have been no other crimes discussed over months, but we will have to wait to read the indictment to confirm the grounds.

  What we do know is the checkered history leading to this moment.

  

  The Justice Department itself declined to prosecute the federal election claim against Trump.

  There was ample reason to decline.

  The Justice Department went down this road before and it did not go well. They tried to prosecute former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards on stronger grounds (which I also criticized) and failed. In that case, campaign officials and donors were directly involved in covering up an affair that produced a child.

  At the time, Edwards’ wife was suffering from cancer. The prosecution still collapsed. The reason is that you need to show the sole purpose for paying hush money in such a scandal. For any married man, let alone a celebrity, there are various reasons to want to bury a sexual scandal.

  For Trump, there was an upcoming election but he was also a married man allegedly involved in an affair with a porn star. He was also a television celebrity who is subject to the standard “morals clause” that’s triggered by criminal conduct or conduct that brings “public disrepute, scandal, or embarrassment.” These clauses are written broadly to protect the news organizations and their “brand.”

  Various presidents from Warren Harding to Bill Clinton have been involved in efforts to hush up affairs. They also had different reasons for burying such scandals, including politics. However, scandals are messy matters with a complex set of motivations. Showing that Trump only acted with the future election in mind — rather than his current marriage or television contracts — is implausible. That was likely the same calculus made by the Justice Department.

  That is also why the use of the “bootstrapping” theory as the primary charge would be an indictment of the prosecution and its own conduct. The office has already been tarnished by the conduct of the prosecutors who pushed this theory.

  

  When Bragg initially balked at this theory and stopped the investigation, two prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, resigned from the Manhattan DA’s office. Pomerantz then did something that some of us view as a highly unprofessional and improper act. He published a book on the case against Trump — a person who was still under investigation and not charged, let alone convicted, of any crime.

  It worked. Bragg ran on his pledge to bag Trump and Pomerantz ramped up the political base to demand an indictment for a crime. It really did not matter what that crime might be.

  While other crimes have not been discussed in leaks or coverage for months, it is always possible that Bragg charged Trump on something other than the state/federal hybrid issue in his indictment. There could be other business or tax record charges linked to banks or taxes. Ironically, the bank and tax fraud issues were also a focus of the Justice Department, which again did not charge on those theories. Moreover, Bragg could face the same statute of limitation concerns on some of the issues previously investigated by the Justice Department.

  Finally, Bragg could stack multiple falsification claims to ramp up the indictment. There are reports of 34 counts of business record falsification. But multiplying a flawed theory 34 times does not make it 34 times stronger. Serial repetition is no substitute for viable criminal charges.

  Bragg could have something more than the anemic bootstrapping theory — and it would be more defensible. Conversely, if Bragg moves primarily on that theory, the Democrats are inviting a race to the bottom in political prosecutions. That is something that we have been able to largely avoid in this country.

  Bragg had a choice to make. He cannot be the defender of the rule of law if he is using the legal process for political purposes. That is what would be involved in a formal accusation based largely on the bootstrap theory. The underlying misdemeanor could pale in comparison to the means being used to prosecute it.

  We have already watched the unseemly display of Bragg’s former lead prosecutor in publishing a book and publicly calling for charges during an ongoing investigation.

  Proceeding solely on the bootstrap theory would be a singularly ignoble moment for the Manhattan District Attorney.

  What is clear is that whatever comes out of that gate next week, it will not just be Trump who will face the judgment of history.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 04/01/2023 – 13:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Energy Transition Is A Delusion Indeed
  The Energy Transition Is A Delusion Indeed

  Authored by Benjamin Zycher via RealClear Wire,

  The “energy transition” continues to receive thunderous applause from all the usual Beltway suspects, an exercise in groupthink fantasy amazing to behold. For those with actual lives to live and thus uninterested in silliness: The “energy transition” is a massive shift, wholly artificial and politicized, from conventional energy inexpensive (Table 1b and here), reliable, and very clean given the proper policy environment, toward such unconventional energy technologies as wind and solar power. They are expensive, unreliable, and deeply problematic environmentally in terms of toxic metal pollution, wildlife destruction, land use massive and unsightly, emissions of conventional pollutants, and in a larger context large and inexorable reductions in aggregate wealth and thus the social willingness to invest in environmental protection.

  

  But the Beltway being what it is, the fantasists are impervious to reality, until the massive costs and dislocations and absurdities become impossible to ignore. (Witness, for example, California.) Even as they backtrack on their confident assertions that a modern economy can be powered with the energy equivalent of pixie dust, they argue that the emerging problems are little more than growing pains attendant upon short run rigidities, and all will be well given some more time, more subsidies, and more magical thinking.

  Uh, no. The obstacles confronting the “energy transition” are fundamental — they are caused by the very nature of unconventional energy — driven by massive costs, technical and engineering realities, severe constraints in terms of needed physical inputs, and at a political level growing local opposition to the unconventional energy facilities central to the “transition.”

  These realities — there’s that word again — are discussed in detail in a major recent paper by Mark P. Mills of the Manhattan Institute. This brief discussion cannot do it justice, but let us first quote Mills directly:

  In these circumstances, policymakers are beginning to grasp the enormous difficulty of replacing even a mere 10% share of global hydrocarbons—the share supplied by Russia—never mind the impossibility of trying to replace all of society’s use of hydrocarbons with solar, wind, and battery (SWB) technologies. Two decades of aspirational policies and trillions of dollars in spending, most of it on SWB tech, have not yielded an “energy transition” that eliminates hydrocarbons. Regardless of climate-inspired motivations, it is a dangerous delusion to believe that spending yet more, and more quickly, will do so. The lessons of the recent decade make it clear that SWB technologies cannot be surged in times of need, are neither inherently “clean” nor even independent of hydrocarbons, and are not cheap.

  Mills makes a number of hard realities clear, among which are the following:

  • The realities of the physics, engineering, and economics of energy systems are independent of any beliefs about climate change.

  • Europe, the U.S. and Canada, Australia and the other regions that have pursued power grids with a higher share of wind and solar electricity uniformly have experienced large increases in electricity costs, and even that effect hides the costs of the massive subsidies borne by taxpayers.

  • It costs at least $30 to store the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil using lithium batteries, which explains why batteries cannot compensate for the unreliable nature of wind and solar power even for days, let alone weeks. “There is no physics, never mind engineering or economies of scale” that would overcome this cost disadvantage.

  • The time cost alone of recharging an electric vehicle makes such vehicles uncompetitive, even apart from the costs of the batteries and other problems.

  • The International Energy Agency estimates that only a partial energy transition would require increases in the supplies of lithium, graphite, nickel, and rare earths by 4,200%, 2,500%, 1,900%, and 700%, respectively, by 2040. This staggering problem of materials is “inherent in the nature of SWB technologies,” which means that the cost of unconventional energy will rise even more.

  Nonetheless, the delusions continue. Mr. Amos Hochstein, an official at the Department of State, testified before a Senate committee recently that “The imperative [is] to diversify away from Russian energy dependence while accelerating the clean energy transition,” and that “The most effective way to reduce demand for Russian fossil fuels is to reduce dependence on all fossil fuels.”

  Got that? Were the Europeans to reduce their dependence upon unreliable deliveries of Russian natural gas, and increase their dependence upon unconventional energy even more unreliable, there will result an increase in European “energy security.” Wow.

  This is utter delusion, as Mills demonstrates incontrovertibly. But the Beltway continues in its imitation of George Orwell’s world, in which “War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, and Ignorance Is Strength.” The “energy transition” translation: “Expensive Energy Is Cheap, Environmentally Destructive Energy Is Clean, and Central Planning Will Yield Utopia.” Only fools can believe such things. Much of the Beltway believes them. 

  Benjamin Zycher is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 23:40

• New Zealand Minister Slammed After Blaming 'White Cis Men' For Violence
  New Zealand Minister Slammed After Blaming ‘White Cis Men’ For Violence

  New Zealand’s so-called “violence prevention minister” is taking heat after saying it’s “white cis men who cause violence in the world.”

  

  For those who aren’t up on the thesaurus of gender identity politics, ‘cis’ is short for ‘cisgender’ – or people whose ‘gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth’ – or 99% of the population.

  Minister Marama Davidson is refusing to publicly apologize for her comments, which have received at least 90 complaints. She has allegedly apologized in private to Prime Minister Chris Hipkins, according to news.com.au.

  “Trans people are tired of being oppressed and discriminated,” Davidson told a reporter for Counterspin. “I am a prevention violence minister and I know who causes violence in the world, it is white cis men. That is white cis men who cause violence in the world.”

  Transgender ideologues stage a violent protest and shut down a women’s rights demonstration, but Greens co-leader Marama Davidson says the problem is white cis men.pic.twitter.com/JofXmLs11N

  — The Zeitgeist (@TheZeitgeistNZ) March 25, 2023

   And while not apologizing, Davidson ‘clarified’ her comments, saying: “I have clarified what I intended to say and particularly affirm and acknowledge victims and survivors who may not have seen themselves in my comments and wanted to make sure I affirm their experiences.”

  When asked if she would apologise to people who felt offended, as the National Party has called for, Ms Davidson repeated she had “made things clearer in my public statement”.

  “I acknowledge that I should have been clearer in my words. I normally take incredible care. I understand the importance of my language in my work,” Ms Davidson said.

  “This is how much focus I normally take in the language that I use, which is why I have clarified it in my public statement.”

  We get it Marama, you hate white people.

  Hipkins, meanwhile, cut her some slack over the ‘cis white men’ comment.

  “She already contacted my office yesterday saying the video did not convey the message she wanted to convey,” he said. “Her office contacted mine. I think clearly words that she ended up using were not the message she was trying to convey.”

  Hipkins did say that the comment was not “particularly helpful” and that she shouldn’t have included ethnicity.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 23:20

• Doug Casey On How Governments Use Global Crises To Take More Control
  Doug Casey On How Governments Use Global Crises To Take More Control

  Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

  International Man: Throughout history, governments have used crises—real or imagined—to eliminate freedoms, expand the power of the State, and justify all sorts of things the populace would never accept in normal times.

  After World War II, Winston Churchill famously said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

  This was when he and other leaders came together to form the United Nations, which they probably could not have created without the crisis of WWII.

  Ever since, it seems that each new supposed crisis causes a further centralization of global power.

  The War on (Some) Drugs, the War on Terror, the COVID hysteria, and the so-called climate crisis have all ratcheted up the centralization of power on a global scale.

  What do you make of this trend?

  

  Doug Casey: It makes sense that Rahm Emanuel, a sleazy Obama apparatchik, would have stolen the phrase from Churchill. But the statement is quite correct, regardless of the source. Government lives on crisis. As Randolph Bourne said, “War is the health of the State,” and there’s no crisis like a war. But any kind of crisis can work.

  Whenever you have a crisis—whether it’s a military, political, economic, financial, or social crisis—the mob calls for strong leaders to kiss it and make it better.

  This plays perfectly into the hands of the kind of people who work for the State. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a psychological flaw in humans, stemming from the fact that we’re pack animals.

  Pack animals want leaders.

  I’m not sure how we solve this problem other than delegitimizing the idea of the State and defanging it as much as possible. And stop lauding, even apotheosizing, its employees. But as long as the State exists, its basic impetus is to seek out crises. Crises benefit the State as an institution but also the people who work for it.

  International Man: The COVID hysteria took the cynical concept of “never let a crisis go to waste” to a whole different level. Never before had the edicts of an unaccountable global institution like the World Health Organization (WHO) affected so many people in such drastic ways.

  It seems the average person not only has to worry about local and federal bureaucrats affecting their well-being but also global ones.

  What’s your take on this?

  Doug Casey: Over the last century, the reach of the State has moved from a local, to a national, to now an international level. This is what the concept of globalism is all about.

  The good news is that the bigger and more complex anything gets—including the movement towards globalism—the more inefficient, corrupt, and unwieldy it becomes. So perhaps the idea of globalism is getting big enough to self-destruct.

  In the meantime, some of globalism’s and the State’s most effective minions are NGOs (non-governmental organizations). They are generally supported by private giving, often in estate planning. When people die, they often want to do something for the benefit of humanity. That’s an understandable emotion, although charity generally causes at least as many problems as it cures. I explain that in a previous conversation. Rich people particularly want to virtue signal since today’s society infuses them with guilt for their money. That, plus they naturally want shelter from taxes. So they give money to all kinds of NGOs. There are many thousands of them.

  NGOs are almost universally collectivist and Statist in philosophy and have strong political agendas, although they disguise overtly political objectives with “feel-good” rhetoric. Who could possibly be against agitating for world peace or fighting poverty? However, many amount to scams, few accomplish anything meaningful, and they almost all work closely with the government. Few of them produce anything but commercials, lobbying campaigns, and fat incomes for their insiders.

  Critical thinkers can help pull the rug out from under NGOs by never giving them a penny and challenging their actions.

  Speaking of globalism, NGOs, and a trend toward world government, I have to mention that vaccine passports are a definite step in that direction. There will undoubtedly be a UN organization formed to standardize vax passports because, right now, there is a myriad of vaccine passports issued by various governments on different criteria in different formats.

  An internationally accepted vax certificate will amount to a world government passport. It will probably be tied in with a Social Credit rating such as the one used by China. Naturally, that will be linked to everyone’s digital currency account with the central bank. It will become an international ID document in much the same way that driver’s licenses are effectively internal passports within the US. You’ll be nobody, and do nothing, without it.

  International Man: It seems that so-called climate change is the next crisis du jour.

  Given the trends we’ve been discussing, how do you see governments taking advantage of this alleged crisis?

  Doug Casey: Global warming, aka climate change, is an excellent form of control, perhaps even better than a virus. People are being terrified into believing they’re about to destroy the planet itself. Fear is a foolproof way to control the masses. It’s funny, actually. “The masses” is a term Marxist-Leninists are very fond of.

  Government is always presented as the friend of “the people,” “our democracy,” or “the masses.” It’s promoted as the noble, wise, and forward-thinking savior that “steps in” to stop the evil producers.

  It’s one of many false and horribly destructive memes stalking the earth today like specters. The increasing belief in government as a magic solution to problems acts to decrease the average person’s standard of living and creates all kinds of distortions throughout society. It’s turned the study of economics into a pseudoscience, and its incursions into science are discrediting the idea of science itself.

  In fact, the two big hysterias plaguing the world both center on State involvement in science—or at least scientism. One is COVID, a relatively trivial flu blown out of proportion. The other is anthropogenic global warming (AGW),which has recently been rechristened as climate change.

  In my view, both will eventually be debunked and discredited. Unfortunately, if you run counter to either narrative right now, you’ll be canceled, fired, and/or ostracized.

  It’s very much like what happened to Galileo when he ran counter to the prevailing wisdom of the Middle Ages. Of course, the ruling class doesn’t actually burn books anymore, but only because books today are mostly electronic. These attitudes constantly appear on sites like Google and Twitter.

  There’s an excellent chance that these people will discredit the very idea of science because they’ve wrapped themselves in the veil of science or, more precisely, what’s become known as “The Science.” They’re creating something much more serious than just another economic disaster.

  International Man: Many people see the government as some kind of benevolent and magical organization.

  It is this attitude that helps politicians take advantage of crises to advance their control because many people assume the government to be acting in good faith.

  What will it take to snap the average person out of this deluded hypnosis?

  Doug Casey: It’s true that many people see the government as some kind of benevolent magical organization. This attitude helps politicians to advance; they’re assumed to be acting in good faith.

  So what will it take for the average person to be snapped out of this hypnosis? Where’s the red pill when the world needs it?

  When a hypnotist approaches a crowd, he knows that some people are much more liable to be hypnotized than others. It’s a failing of human psychology that’s especially true in the political world. Some people are much more liable to be hypnotized by politics and the idea of government than others. The exceptions are critical, independent thinkers who are always a minority—and it’s always dangerous to be in the minority.

  What can we do about it? Forget about violence. That only plays into their hands. Present arguments against the idea of the State. Promote the idea of critical thinking. Expose politics as mass hypnosis. Point out that there’s absolutely nothing that government can do that the market can’t do—at least anything good.

  There are some things government does that are unique to it, like taxes, confiscations, wars, pogroms, prison systems, regulations, and secret police. These things are the essence of government and antithetical to the free market.

  I think it’s important, for instance, to point out that throughout history, the most famous government officials are actually mass murderers and criminals. They’re not benevolent.

  Look at famous rulers—the pharaohs, Alexander, Caesar, Genghis Khan, Louis XIV, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot. Some are considered good, and some are considered bad, but they were all mass murderers. Are any of our recent presidents really any better? What happened in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and lots of other places—not even counting Korea and Vietnam—should make those responsible held for trial, probably followed by hanging. Nuremberg set a good example.

  It’s important to draw the crimes of the State and its minions to people’s attention constantly. Anti-propaganda is a mass hypnosis vaccine. Let that statement stand as proof I’m not anti-vaccine, per se.

  International Man: Is there any good news or cause of optimism despite all the bad news?

  Doug Casey: The bad news is that the State is bigger and more powerful than ever. The institution has evolved and become more clever. It’s more able to reach its tentacles into everything than ever in the past, including the recent episodes with Nazis and Communists.

  The good news is that it’s getting to the stage where it’s dysfunctional. Maybe the current major crises will backfire and self-destruct. Hopefully, the nation-state will be replaced by some voluntary phenomenon, like phyles, or perhaps the rise of a parallel structure within the current framework.

  Crises can be real, like the impending economic collapse, or fabricated, like COVID and AGW. Crises will always be used as excuses for government expansion, but maybe they’ve overplayed their hand this time.

  I’d like to see the State disappear, of course, but considering the way the world works, the next step might be chaos, which often follows crisis.

  *  *  *

  Unfortunately, there’s little any individual can practically do to change the trajectory of this trend in motion. The best you can do is to stay informed so that you can protect yourself in the best way possible, and even profit from the situation. Most people have no idea what really happens when a currency collapses, let alone how to prepare… How will you protect your savings in the event of a currency crisis? This just-released video will show you exactly how. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 23:00

• "Unprecedented" Chinese Genetic Experiment May Lead To Army Of Radiation-Resistant Super Soldiers
  “Unprecedented” Chinese Genetic Experiment May Lead To Army Of Radiation-Resistant Super Soldiers

  Reports out of China continue to confirm that scientists there are still seeking to push through barriers with Frankenstein-like experimentation on genes with an eye toward the manipulation of human DNA – any and all ethical considerations be damned. What could go wrong? 

  The Hong-based South China Morning Post has a doozy of a headline out this week based on a breakthrough announcement by a team of scientists linked to the Chinese military, working in Beijing: “Chinese team behind extreme animal gene experiment says it may lead to super soldiers who survive nuclear fallout.”

  The project was first unveiled in the Chinese-language journal, Military Medical Sciences, and has been gaining more and more media attention and interest within the scientific community, but is also raising serious ethical quandaries, despite the experiment being defended by its overseers as “totally legal”.

  

  According to details, the military scientists say they’ve successfully “inserted a gene from the microscopic water bear into human embryonic stem cells and significantly increased these cells’ resistance to radiation.”

  “They said success in this unprecedented experiment could lead to super-tough soldiers who could survive nuclear fallout,” SCMP writes. The initiative involved the experimental introduction into human DNA (utilizing embryonic cells) of a key gene found the water bear. The gene in question gives the microscopic creature rare resistance to radiation and other extreme environmental effects.

  Scientists have long considered that water bears, also known as tardigrades, may hold genetic secrets which could one day be key to human survival and longevity. The eight-legged tiny animal which is smaller than a millimeter in length, has been described as follows:

  Tardigrades are tiny, cute and virtually indestructible. The microscopic animals are able to survive in a pot of boiling water, at the bottom of a deep-sea trench or even in the cold, dark vacuum of space. In August, an Israeli spacecraft carrying tardigrades as part of a scientific experiment crashed on the moon, and scientists believe they may have survived.

  Having isolated the Tardigrade’s gene capable of producing shieldlike proteins which can protect against radiation and other harms, the Chinese team said it “found a way to introduce this gene into human DNA using CRISPR/Cas9, a gene-editing tool now available in most bio-labs,” according to the SCMP review of the experiment.

  “In their laboratory experiment, nearly 90 per cent of the human embryonic cells carrying the water bear gene survived a lethal exposure to X-ray radiation, according to the team led by professor Yue Wen with the radiation biotechnology laboratory at the Academy of Military Sciences, Beijing,” the report continues.

  

  But the team acknowledges some huge ‘unknowns’…

  Adding an alien gene from the water bear into human embryonic cells could lead to harmful mutations, or even kill the cells because of the genetic gap between the two species, a risk Yue’s team was aware of, according to their paper.

  The shielding proteins are “unique to the water bears. The immunity response after cross-species expression is unknown, and it can lead to some safety issues“, they wrote.

  They envision possible future application of their genetic manipulation technique centered on water bear experiments in cases related to treating acute radiation sickness for first-responders, military personnel, or anyone near a nuclear fallout zone. They also foresee the era of the future ‘super soldier’ and genetically altered humans capable of surviving nuclear apocalypse.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 22:40

• FBI, US Marshals Offering $20,000 Reward In Manhunt For Former Maryland Gov. Chief Of Staff
  FBI, US Marshals Offering $20,000 Reward In Manhunt For Former Maryland Gov. Chief Of Staff

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service are offering a combined US$20,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of Roy McGrath, the one-time chief of staff for former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan.

  

  The reward for McGrath’s arrest comes after he failed to appear in court on March 13 to face federal fraud and embezzlement charges.

  On Tuesday, the U.S. Marshals Service announced that federal authorities had raised their reward for information leading to McGrath’s arrest. The FBI and the U.S. Marshals have now each offered a US$10,000 reward for information leading to McGrath’s arrest.

  The 53-year-old McGrath is described as Caucasian, standing 5’4″, weighing approximately 145 pounds, and having brown eyes and brown hair. Photos of McGrath show him wearing eyeglasses. Federal authorities said he also has ties to Naples, Florida.

  NTD News reached out to the FBI and U.S. Marshals Service for comment, but neither organization responded before this article was published.

  McGrath Facing Fraud and Embezzlement Charges

  McGrath was indicted in 2021 on state and federal charges alleging he falsified records in order to obtain a substantial severance payment from the Maryland Environmental Service (MES).

  Federal and state prosecutors have alleged McGrath personally enriched himself by taking advantage of his positions of trust as the executive director of MES and as Hogan’s top aide. McGrath allegedly got the agency’s board to approve paying him a $233,647 severance payment—the equivalent of one year’s salary in his position—upon his departure as executive director by falsely telling them the governor had already approved the payment, according to prosecutors.

  McGrath resigned as director of the MES on May 31, 2020 to become Hogan’s Chief of Staff the next day. McGrath ultimately resigned from the position about 11 weeks later, in August of 2020, after the press began to report on his severance payout.

  McGrath also faces allegations that he falsified time sheets to claim he was at work while on two vacations in 2019. He also allegedly used state funds to pay for personal expenses, and faces additional fraud and embezzlement charges connected to about $170,000 in expenses.

  McGrath has thus far pleaded “not guilty” to the charges against him.

  He faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison for each of five counts of wire fraud; a maximum of 10 years in federal prison for each of two counts of embezzling funds from an organization receiving more than $10,000 in federal benefits; and a maximum of 20 years in federal prison for a single charge of falsifying a document. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.

  Missed Court Date and FBI Raid

  McGrath was due in court on March 13 as his case was nearing trial. The court was planning to begin jury selection that day, but U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman instead dismissed the prospective jurors and issued a warrant for McGrath’s arrest after he failed to appear.

  McGrath’s attorney Joseph Murtha said he believed McGrath, who had moved to Naples, Florida, was planning to fly to Maryland the night before the court appearance.

  Days later, when asked where he thought McGrath might be, Murtha said “I haven’t a clue.”

  “I didn’t see this coming,” Murtha added. “This behavior is so out of the ordinary for him. Obviously his personal safety is a concern.”

  Murtha added that he has been unable to reach McGrath by phone or email.

  FBI officials raided McGrath’s Naples home on March 15 after his failure to appear in court, but did not find him.

  NTD News reached out to McGrath’s attorneys for comment but did not receive a response before this article was published.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 21:40

• Manhattan Assistant DA Nukes Twitter Account After Anti-Trump Bias Exposed
  Manhattan Assistant DA Nukes Twitter Account After Anti-Trump Bias Exposed

  Less than 24 hours after the Gateway Pundit exposed Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Meg Reiss’ public hatred of Donald Trump on Twitter, Reiss – who’s been accused of masterminding the case against the former president, locked and then deleted her account.

  

  As TGP documented Thursday morning, Reiss ‘liked’ several anti-Trump tweets, exposing her absolute bias against the man her office is about to indict over hush money paid to former adult actress Stormy Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford).

  

  

  Of note, Trump’s alleged payment to Daniels through former lawyer Michael Cohen would normally be a misdemeanor which falls outside the statute of limitations. Not for Bragg’s office. Not for Reiss.

  

  I told you weeks ago she was driving all of this. https://t.co/faHI35QGrJ

  — John Cardillo (@johncardillo) March 31, 2023

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

  For comparison, Hillary Clinton was allowed to pay a fine to the FEC for actual election interference with the Steele Dossier hoax her campaign paid for and then boosted throughout the media.

  As TGP further notes;

  The Institute for Innovation in Prosecution(IIP) which is a research center out of the Soros-funded John Jay College has tagged her dozens of times.

  Reiss served as the Executive Director for the IIP.”

  IIP ED @MegGReiss and @adamjohnfoss on the power of the prosecutor and how to reimagine the use of discretion to build a more equitable and effective #cjsystem #RadicalVision pic.twitter.com/Ntu8AkLjAW

  — Institute for Innovation in Prosecution (@IIP_JohnJay) April 19, 2018

  DA of Brooklyn Eric Gonzalez also tagged Reiss, who previously served in the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office as the Chief of Social Justice, on several occasions too: 

  On Thursday, June 18 at 6 PM, My Chief of Social Justice @MegGReiss will be participating in @Avenues4Justice‘s virtual panel about ways to develop a humane and thoughtful approach to the treatment of young offenders during the COVID-19 crisis.

  Register: https://t.co/UejXab3HSo pic.twitter.com/AleuH3PZXf

  — DA Eric Gonzalez (@BrooklynDA) June 16, 2020

  Most of these tweets Reiss liked were while she served in the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office as the Chief of Social Justice and as she served as the director of the IIP.

  However, her political bias extends into her time at the Manhattan DA’s office as well.

  Earlier in the year as she was serving as Manhattan’s Chief Assistant District Attorney she retweeted a video of Democrat representative Hakeem Jeffries giving a speech at the State of the Union.

  At one point during the video Reiss shared, Rep. Jeffries says Democrats will put “Maturity over Mar-a-Lago”.

  

   *  *  *

  And then there’s this guy…

  Tell me again about this non politically motivated secret police we have running around this country?

  Yr a certifiable psychopath @Comey . Anyone sticking around any part of DOJ come tmrw should be locked up til their crime is found.

  Play Soviet games, win Soviet prizes. https://t.co/IW8qQJZKPs

  — Amanda Milius (@AmandaMilius) March 31, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 21:34

• US Troops In Syria Treated For 'Traumatic Brain Injuries' After Recent Attacks
  US Troops In Syria Treated For ‘Traumatic Brain Injuries’ After Recent Attacks

  Via The Cradle,

  Six US soldiers have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries as a result of attacks from Iran-backed groups in Syria last week, CNN reported Thursday, in addition to the five soldiers initially reported as injured.

  A week ago, a drone strike hit the US occupation base at Kharab al-Jir military airport in Hasakah governorate, leaving at least one US contractor dead and several troops injured. US jets then bombed several locations in the city of Deir Ezzor in retaliation, targeting the Syrian army and Iranian advisors and killing eight.

  

  US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the F-15 jets were deployed from the Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. In response, a Syrian rocket barrage hit the US base at Al-Omar just hours later.

  Five US soldiers were initially reported as injured following the two attacks. Injuries to the six additional soldiers were not immediately apparent, but were discovered this week after further screening. “As standard procedure, all personnel in the vicinity of a blast are screened for traumatic brain injuries,” Ryder said. “So these additional injuries were identified during post-attack medical screenings.”

  The US soldiers who were wounded in the attacks last week are all in stable condition, Ryder added. Similar brain injuries were suffered by over 100 US soldiers in 2020 after Iranian forces targeted the Ain al-Asad military base in Iraq, where US forces were stationed.

  Iran attacked the US base in retaliation for the US assassination of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) General Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi resistance leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in a drone strike at the Baghdad airport on 3 January that year.

  64 cases of traumatic brain injury were initially reported after that incident but climbed to over 100 in subsequent weeks. The number of injured increased in the weeks after the attack because symptoms of brain injuries can take time to manifest, and soldiers do not always immediately report symptoms.

  Commenting on last week’s airstrikes, US President Joe Biden said his country is “prepared for us to act forcefully to protect our people,” adding that the US will “continue to keep up our efforts to counter terrorist threats in the region.”

  It’s almost like these troops are sitting ducks planted in NE Syria and Iraq to establish a tripwire for war with Iran https://t.co/T6cslINUue

  — Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) March 31, 2023

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

  US forces occupy northeastern Syria in an effort to maintain leverage in its conflict against the Syrian government – and, by extension, Iran. In 2011, US planners supported extremist militants, including some affiliated with Al-Qaeda, in an effort to topple the Baathist-led Syrian government. ISIS later emerged as one of the strongest of these groups.

  When the effort to topple the Syrian government through these militias failed, US planners partnered with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to fight ISIS and thereby occupy Syria’s strategic oil and grain-producing northwest, which had been under ISIS control. This has allowed US officials to limit Syrian efforts to rebuild the country and has exacerbated US-imposed economic sanctions, which have further harmed Syria’s economy and increased suffering among Syria’s civilian population.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 21:20

• The Illusive Pursuit Of Energy Security In The Age Of Energy Wars
  The Illusive Pursuit Of Energy Security In The Age Of Energy Wars

  Authored by Manochehr Dorraj via RealClear Wire,

  

  From February 14, 1945, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt met with the Saudi king, Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, aboard a U.S. destroyer in the Suez Canal to safeguard U.S. access to the massive Saudi energy reserves to last November when President Joe Biden had to walk back his treating Saudi leadership as “the pariah that they are” and go to Riyadh amid a brewing energy crisis, the United States’ dance with Saudi Arabia shows how energy security and national security have been intertwined in the thinking of American policymakers since the Second World War. 

  What has been made abundantly clear since the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is that energy – and threats of withholding it –  is the instrument of new Brinkmanship.  

  Energy security is now contingent on uncertain winds of change that can be abrupt, tumultuous and profoundly disrupting. Prior to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine, the global energy landscape was characterized by a number of cooperative initiatives, such as Consumers-Producers dialogue, cooperation on issues surrounding global governance of energy, and cooperation on reduction of emissions, just to name a few. 

  But the Russian invasion of Ukraine abruptly halted this process and unleashed new initiatives, marked by a more belligerent use of energy as a political weapon, heralding the dawn of a new era of the energy war. Seventy-eight years later after the landmark meeting between Roosevelt and Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, energy security remains a challenging pursuit, and one the United States still hasn’t quite mastered.

  In the past, during times of economic and energy crisis, the U.S. government could count on its erstwhile ally, Saudi Arabia—who by virtue of their massive oil reserve and production capacity carries the mantel of a swing producer—to expand the supply of oil and reduce the pressure on upward trends in oil prices. The Saudi refusal to do so even after President Biden exhorted their leaders to do so last summer revealed the contours of a new dynamic that governs US-Saudi relations. 

  The Saudi refusal has Russia’s oil-stained fingerprints all over it, as it was followed by close coordination of their policy with Russia through OPEC +1 that decreased production level to further boost the price of oil. Although oil prices have come down since, the underlying insecurity in the energy markets has loomed in part due to the intended and unintended consequences of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The rates of inflation are still relatively high in Europe and the United States, and the economic recovery is not yet complete. 

  The European economies have managed to wean themselves off dependence on Russian oil and gas and build resilience by opting for a two-pronged strategy. First, substitute Russian energy with imports from the United States, Norway, Qatar, Azerbaijan and others. Second, expand their investment in renewable energy, with the long-term goal of reducing their dependence on fossil fuel as the major source of their energy supply in the next two decades. 

  This strategy is a long-game play and may have little immediate impact.

  Despite the current momentum and investment in the energy transition, all indications are fossil fuel, especially natural gas, is going to provide the lion’s share of energy consumption in many parts of the world in the next three decades. 

  History has taught us that control of fossil fuel empowers dictators around the world either to wage war on their neighbors, use their energy assets as a political weapon to extract concessions from their adversaries abroad, or trample on the democratic rights of their people at home. As often is the case, many authoritarian regimes do both. As long as the correlation between autocracies and petro-economies – the resource curse – persists, it serves as another catalyst for energy insecurity.  

  The early stages of development of green energy so far indicate that, in so far as renewables provide diverse and multiple sources of energy with a more diffused source of control and much smaller carbon footprint, they are likely to escape the trap of rentier economies and the resource curse. 

  That is, a world supplied by renewable energy could chart a path out of the energy wars, but until then, we will all continue to live with the specter of energy insecurity.

  Manochehr Dorraj is professor of international affairs and a faculty fellow of the Ralph Lowe Energy Institute at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 21:00

• Louisiana AG Shares Startling Findings On Censorship Collusion Between Government And Big Tech
  Louisiana AG Shares Startling Findings On Censorship Collusion Between Government And Big Tech

  Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry gives a sobering breakdown of the insidious nature of government collusion with Big Tech corporations to censor Americans, violating their 1st Amendment rights using algorithms and flagging operations. 

  Specifically, Landry, notes the problem of lack of consequences for government officials caught using their positions to suppress free speech. 

  Louisiana along with other red states are currently engaged in a lawsuit against the federal government in an effort to remove the veil obscuring vast operations to silence alternative information in favor of official narratives and propaganda.  

  Attorney General @JeffLandry‘s opening statement on Missouri v. Biden and the US Government’s censorship industrial complex:

  “The White House pressured YouTube to reduce watch time of ‘borderline’ content by 70%, the FBI boasted a 50% success rate in getting platforms to censor… pic.twitter.com/sHzNms7ceA

  — kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) March 30, 2023

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

  Democrats have been increasingly hostile towards those investigating Big Tech censorship, including journalist Matt Taibbi, a former Democrat now helping Elon Musk release the Twitter Files.  The general argument on the political left is that private companies “have a right to censor” whoever they want.  In other words, they are no longer denying that the censorship exists, rather, they are defending it as legal.

  

  The problem is that they are oversimplifying the issue. 

  Government collusion with corporations to censor Americans is in fact illegal according to the US Constitution.  Just because they use Big Tech as the middle-man does not mean the law is not being broken. 

  The dangers inherent in mass censorship cannot be understated, and while civil litigation might be an option for those people censored by the government there also needs to be criminal investigations and consequences for the same activities.  Otherwise, there is no incentive for the censorship to stop – It will go on forever.   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 20:40

• Is The Counter-University Movement Any Match For The DEI Juggernaut?
  Is The Counter-University Movement Any Match For The DEI Juggernaut?

  Authored by John Murawski via RealClear Wire,

  A group of intellectual mavericks made splashy headlines in 2021 when they announced plans to launch a new university in Texas called the University of Austin.   

  

  Backed by a gallery of celebrity intellectuals – its trustees and directors include former Harvard president Larry Summers, Brown University economist Glenn Loury, former ACLU President Nadine Strossen, civil rights leader and former congressman Andrew Young, and the journalists Bari Weiss and Andrew Sullivan – the startup would be dedicated to the classic ideals of open inquiry, Socratic debate, and the unfettered pursuit of truth.   

  The University of Austin is just one of a number of recent academic experiments challenging what many conservatives and independents see as a stifling leftist monoculture on campus they deem illiberal, censorious, and anti-intellectual.   

  These countercultural projects reflect a range of reformist strategies coming from inside and outside the academy. In addition to launching new schools, they are creating independent institutes as havens of free thought within existing institutions, and pushing universities to adopt statements that codify academic freedom.  

  At the same time, Republican legislatures and governors around the country are moving to shut down campus Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) bureaucracies at state universities. And in Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis is taking the most aggressive tack, backing legislation that would defund DEI offices and eliminate courses based on Critical Race Theory, Queer Theory, and other social justice ideologies.  

  This activity is generating buzz aplenty, but these projects face considerable obstacles – logistical, financial, and legal – that proponents acknowledge may be insurmountable on a meaningful scale, at least in the short term.   

  For one thing, the upstart efforts are tiny.The University of Austin plans to begin classes in the fall of 2024 with an incoming freshman class of 100 students in 27,100 square feet of rented office space. But the school is in negotiations to receive a land donation to develop its own campus within a planned residential community outside of Austin, Howland said. 

  Another countercultural startup, Hildegard College in Costa Mesa, California, plans to start entrepreneurship and liberal arts classes this fall at a shared workspace office with an incoming freshman class of just 15 students who will study math and science through the original works of Euclid, Copernicus, Kepler, Leibniz, Newton, and Descartes. They are the ultimate David up against a nationwide academic Goliath that serves more than 16 million undergraduates – thousands of whom already opt out of the system by attending more than 100 Christian colleges in the U.S. And these specialized programs are not likely to appeal to the conventional student who places a premium on good lifestyle amenities and a good athletics program.    

  “Look, there are huge cultural forces,” said Jacob Howland, the director of the University of Austin’s Intellectual Foundations program. “Is it going to fix higher education? Not this year, not in 10 years. Maybe in 50 years, I don’t know. But we know there’s a huge demand for this.”   

  The conservative, or “heterodox,” academic experiments share a common theme: a return to a core curriculum anchored in the Western intellectual tradition and a repudiation of academe’s sacrosanct verities on race and gender. In place of DEI, these traditionalist projects vaunt ideals like civil discourse, truth, logic, reason, and excellence that once reassuringly resonated through college catalogues of yesteryear.   

  These efforts are responding to a plethora of developments in academia, from mandatory anti-bias training and the rise of cancel culture, to colleges mandating that professors commit to DEI advocacy in their teaching and research. Surveys repeatedly show that professors are overwhelmingly progressive and students report that they feel intimidated into silence or acquiescence, particularly on hot-button topics like race, gender, immigration, and climate. In the latest instance of this hothouse climate, Stanford University law students, emboldened by an associate dean of DEI, heaped insults and obscenities this month at federal Judge Kyle Duncan, an appointee of President Donald Trump who had been invited to speak on campus, until U.S. marshals escorted him to safety.   

  Heritage Foundation fellow Adam Kissel, an assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Education under Trump, said leftist professors and academic radicals enjoyed plenty of latitude for decades to pursue their research interests, but they eventually overplayed their hand by politicizing education and tampering with the social order.    

  “Colleges broke the public trust. They’ve started trying to interfere with American culture rather than producing and disseminating new knowledge,” Kissel said. “And democracy came back knocking and said, ‘All right, we’re paying for all of this and we have a say. We trusted you and you abused that trust.’”  

  While some of these projects, like the University of Austin, profess to be nonpartisan, others lean right and are unabashedly patriotic, embracing free-market philosophy, the Founding Fathers, and character-centric leadership, loosely modeled on the philosophy of Hillsdale College, a small private Christian institution in Michigan that doesn’t accept federal funding and is active in public policy forums and Republican Party politics.   

  These academic ventures are often targets for skepticism among the tenured professoriate, and sometimes open hostility, as pet projects of conservative donors and right-wing politicians, or as escapist reactionary fantasies seeking to restore Eurocentric chauvinism that has no place in an increasingly multi-racial global culture.   

  The conservative anti-DEI pushback has taken a variety of forms. On one end of the spectrum are voluntary commitments to academic freedom, open inquiry, and viewpoint diversity. They include The Heterodox Academy, a nonprofit professional organization founded in 2015 and now claiming more than 5,400 members, and the Chicago Principles, created in 2014 at the University of Chicago and since adopted by 98 institutions. The Chicago Principles proclaim that “it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.”  

  Another tack is developing civics and democracy institutes within a state university, which allows these programs to piggy-back on the sponsoring university’s accreditation and to qualify for public and private funding. Arizona State University’s School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership, launched in 2017, offers such courses as Debating Capitalism, The American Founding, and Justice & Virtue. The ASU program also organizes a lecture series that has featured progressive speakers, including Cornel West, Angela Dillard, and Lara Bazelon, and conservatives such as Ross Douthat, Jason Riley, Patrick Deneen, Harvey Mansfield, and others.   

  Others are in various stages of proposal or development and include the University of Tennessee Knoxville’s Institute of American Civics, and University of Texas at Austin’s Civitas Institute. A fierce debate has broken out this year at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, after the board of trustees voted this year to accelerate the development of a School of Civil Life and Leadership, prompting some faculty leaders to accuse the trustees of acting without faculty input.   

  Those involved in these efforts describe academia as having flip-flopped from a culture where everyone looked the same and thought differently, to a culture where everyone looks different and thinks the same. Paul Carrese, the director of ASU’s School of Civic & Economic Thought and Leadership, said students should be familiar with a basic understanding of U.S. history “before you talk about transforming America in an activist way.” He said the current foment for more options in higher ed mirrors the K-12 school choice movement to create home schools, charter schools, magnet schools, and other options.  

  “The history of American higher education is littered with attempts to break away from the restrictions of traditional elite colleges,” Adam Laats, a  professor of education and history at Binghamton University, wrote in Slate when the University of Austin launched.   

  “The opportunities for failure are huge,” wrote Laats, author of “Fundamentalist U,” published in 2018 by Oxford University Press. “Alternative startup colleges have crashed — and crashed hard — when they have failed to deliver on the basics, things like providing credits, degrees, and reliable financial aid.”  

  The University of Austin plans to start by offering one bachelor of arts degree in liberal studies. It has raised $34 million, and received $122 million in pledges, toward an initial goal of $250 million, Howland said. (A member of this reporter’s family has successfully applied for one of its one-week summer courses.) 

  The school’s 22-person administrative team is currently operating out of 4,900 square feet in a rented office building that’s also occupied by several law firms, a family medical practice and a local radio station.

  However, University of Austin officials are temporarily referring to their project as “UATX,” because it doesn’t have a certificate of authority from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board; university officials are in discussions with the Texas board about relaxing some of the terms and conditions – such as the board’s requirement that UATX must hire all professors in advance of a site visit inspection – and they hope they can receive the certificate in October, he said.   

  In the midst of the initial fanfare, Harvard University psychologist Steven Pinker and University of Chicago chancellor Robert Zimmer withdrew from the project’s board of advisors, less than two weeks after it was announced. Zimmer issued a statement suggesting he parted ways because he was turned off by the University of Austin’s relentless disparagement of higher education. 

  With a meaningful return to more traditional models of education highly unlikely in institutions dominated by proponents of newer models, conservatives are resorting to political muscle to force out what they see as chief agents of progressive activism: the growing armies of DEI administrators who oversee speech codes, diversity training, and bias complaints on campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education has tracked about a dozen states where Republican governors and legislatures are moving to shut down campus DEI offices, ban compulsory DEI training for professors, and prohibit the controversial practice of requiring academic job applicants to affirm their commitment to diversity and equity as instructors and scholars, a practice that has been compared to political loyalty oaths. Last month the University of Texas system suspended all DEI activities at its eight universities, after Gov. Greg Abbott warned state agencies and public universities that DEI is discriminatory and can’t be used in hiring decisions for state jobs.   

  In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and his education adviser Christopher Rufo, a senior fellow and director of the initiative on critical race theory at the conservative Manhattan Institute, are going even further.   

  Together they have executed what Rufo calls a “hostile takeover” of Florida’s smallest public university, The New College of Florida in Sarasota, by installing six conservative trustees, Rufo among them, and quickly shutting down the college’s office of diversity and equity by firing the director and reassigning four other employees.   

  RealClearInvestigations was unsuccessful in efforts to interview Rufo (a journalist who in 2021 reported on homelessness for RCI). But he has been publicly outspoken in holding that Florida can serve as a proving ground for “red state governors all over the country.”  

  “We’re going to abolish DEI bureaucracies,” Rufo declared in one of his many videos. “We’re gonna simply level them, raze them, burn them to the ground.”  

  In another video, Rufo proclaimed: “I know I’m not going to stop until it’s been abolished, and until we salt the earth.”   

  That strategy is unmistakable in Florida’s proposed legislation, HB 999, which would ban Florida’s 28 public universities and colleges from using public funds to promote or support majoring and minoring in subjects that utilize “Critical Theory,  including, but not limited to, Critical Race Theory, Critical  Race Studies, Critical Ethnic Studies, Radical Feminist Theory,  Radical Gender Theory, Queer Theory, Critical Social Justice, or Intersectionality” – as defined by the Board of Governors.   

  The legislation includes a mechanism to wrest control of the academy from what Rufo and DeSantis see as ideological activists who rule the campus: It would not only defund campus DEI offices and functionaries, and prohibit using state or federal funds to promote or engage in “political or social activism”; it would also dismantle a longstanding pillar of academic freedom by taking tenure reviews and hiring decisions out of the hands of academics and handing over control to trustees, who would not be “required to consider recommendations or opinions of faculty.”  

  DeSantis, widely assumed to be positioning himself as a Republican candidate for the White House, has declared that Florida is “where woke goes to die.” He is also behind another Florida bill, called the Stop W.O.K.E. Act, which would prohibit professors from espousing tenets of Critical Race Theory, such as condemning white privilege and promoting racial preferences, and would make it illegal for professors to critique concepts like objectivity, merit, and colorblindness as racist. The legislation, which is headed for trial this fall, has been temporarily blocked by a federal judge as “positively dystopian.”  

  Fighting Politics with Politics  

  The sweeping proposals in Florida have caused alarm even among those who otherwise agree with DeSantis and Rufo that progressive ideology has a stranglehold on academic culture.   

  The libertarian Reason magazine denounced HB 999 as “a startling attack on academic freedom at Florida public universities.” Johns Hopkins University political scientist Yascha Mounk recently wrote that the Florida legislation is so restrictive that it would not allow him to assign his students to read philosophical articles that advocate for the concept of cultural appropriation – the idea that it’s racist for white people to adopt cultural elements of non-white cultures.   

  Jeremy Young, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN America, says that the Stop W.O.K.E. Act, if adopted in its current form, could potentially be used to prevent assigning Rufo’s articles about CRT and DEI, which amply quote critical theorists and DEI training materials, without first redacting them to block out offending quotes that express ideas targeted by the legislation.  

  The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a free speech advocacy organization, is currently litigating to block Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act as unconstitutional censorship of free expression. FIRE says the policy would restrict a professor’s ability to discuss the social advantages or disadvantages of one’s sex or race, and would forbid professors from expressing controversial opinions, “even just for the sake of Socratic discussion.”  

  Adam Kissel said sections of the Florida legislation that dictate what is taught in classrooms are unconstitutional and likely to be stricken down by courts as impermissible “viewpoint discrimination.” But Kissel said legislatures have broad authority to choose not to fund “unserious” subjects based on critical race theory, queer theory, or fat studies, which he says are anti-intellectual pseudo-disciplines comparable to astrology.   

  Rufo has stated that with the near-total ideological capture of universities by the DEI apparatus and activist professors, where open debate is effectively shut down, political will is the only remaining option for the state to regain control of its institutions.   

  Rufo also says that Florida’s strongarm tactics are not a deviation from the standard practice, but simply mirror the strategy of the left, dubbed as “the long march through the institutions,” a bloodless revolution from within by stealth infiltration of social institutions, in which ideologues took over departments and imposed their worldview as reality and their agenda as evidence-based knowledge.     

  Speaking in apocalyptic tones in a series of videos, Rufo has spelled out a national Republican game plan for “recapturing” public universities that “have been corrupted by woke nihilism.” The conservative counter-revolution, Rufo said, will simply mirror the “left-wing playbook” and “recapture territory.”   

  He said, “I’ve spent the last two years reading my [Antonio] Gramsci, reading my [Herbert] Marcuse, reading my [Paulo] Freire, reading my [Angela] Davis, reading my Derrick Bell,” Rufo said, referring to classic leftist authors. “We’re taking those strategies. We’re re-appropriating them. We’re adapting them to a new conservative counter-revolution.”  

  Princeton University political scientist Keith Whittington said the Stop W.O.K.E. Act mirrors campus speech codes by prohibiting professors from saying white people, on account of their race, have unconscious bias and unearned privilege, on the logic that this sort of speech constitutes racial profiling and racial stereotyping.   

  “The structure of those [conservative] arguments is very familiar and they are very similar to the arguments that the Left, and that includes critical race theorists, has been making for a couple of decades now in urging us to adopt speech codes on campus and speech codes elsewhere,” Whittington said. “This is a game that more than one person can play, and you should totally expect conservatives will play this as well, and you will not like the results.”   

  Along the same lines, like critical theorists who dismiss the possibility of political neutrality, Rufo contends that “there is no such thing as a neutral institution” because state-supported universities are inherently “political in nature.” And Rufo dismisses warnings that his take-no-prisoners approach is trampling on academic freedoms, because academic freedom is already a scarce commodity in academia, and exercising political power is the nature of government.    

  “All of the BS that this is a government overreach, that’s ridiculous,” Rufo scoffed in another video. “The government determines the government. It’s like saying the people have no authority to regulate the government. It’s so tyrannical, it’s so totalitarian.”  

  Rufo has little patience for moderates who prefer compromise to confrontation. When Harvard cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker expressed disappointment about the severity of the DeSantis actions, Rufo Tweeted: “Sorry, buddy. … We’re in charge now.”  

  Academic Freedom  

  Progressive professors resent conservative political encroachment into their domain, seeing it as a violation of faculty governance, which is considered the gold standard of academic freedom. This is the line of attack against the UNC board of trustees’ vote to create the School of Civil Life and Leadership, where some faculty leaders allege the trustees didn’t sufficiently involve UNC faculty or administration. Those claims are disputed by the UNC program’s supporters, who say the institute has been six years in the making and is modeled on the Arizona State University program and a similar program founded in 2000 at Princeton University.   

  The linkage of academic freedom with faculty governance was developed during the 20th century, when the pressure against visiting speakers and outspoken professors was perceived as coming from influential trustees and powerful politicians. But now it can be used as a shield to protect abuses of academic freedom, some say.  

  Whittington said the concept of academic freedom has few safety provisions for cases where the threat comes from within academe, such as when ideologues take over and politicize departments. He acknowledged there’s a real problem with the intellectual climate of universities today, but the Florida legislation is so draconian it would turn professors into “political flunkeys.”  

  “Fundamentally they’re treating university professors similarly to how we’d treat K-12 classroom instruction and teachers,” Whittington said.   

  The legislation HB 999 has not been enacted, so it hasn’t yet faced a legal challenge, but U.S. District Judge Mark Walker’s 139-page ruling in 2022 blocking the Stop W.O.K.E. Act spells out specific examples of how professors fear their lectures and discussions might be restricted if Gov. DeSantis prevails. And it illustrates classroom teaching practices that have not only become normalized, but make it virtually impossible for students to disagree with controversial theories, an issue that DeSantis, Rufo and others are concerned about. 

  According to the court ruling, Shelley Park, a tenured professor of philosophy and cultural studies at the University of Central Florida, teaches courses that “do not question whether heterosexism, sexism, or racism exist because there is already consensus” in her discipline that these “structural oppressions” are foundational truths rather than unproven theories. Park also teaches as established fact that notions of merit, objectivity, and colorblindness “function to solidify systems of oppression — disguising biased standards as ones that are allegedly neutral.”  

  Adriana Novoa, an assistant professor in the Department of History at the University of South Florida, endorses the morality of collective guilt, and asserts that Argentine society – herself included – bears collective responsibility for the extermination of indigenous peoples and the wrongs committed by other individuals sharing her national origin.  

  From Crazy to Consensus  

  Over the span of several decades, ideas that were considered fringe “agitprop” have become accepted as unassailable consensus: Colorblindness is racism, sexual dimorphism is a social construct, intersectional identities provide a reliable measure of one’s oppression.

  Mark Bauerlein, a former English professor at Emory University who is one of the conservative DeSantis appointees on the New College board of trustees, talks about the conservative counter-revolution in higher education as Quixotic and doomed.  

  “The dark ages are back,” Bauerlein said. “This is the destruction of the past in order for the Utopian present to be brought into existence. You got to hand it to them – they’ve done pretty well.” 

  Still, “just because you lost doesn’t mean you stop fighting,” he said. “I mean, you do the right thing.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 20:20

• Having Solved All Other Problems, California Sets Its Sights On Banning Skittles
  Having Solved All Other Problems, California Sets Its Sights On Banning Skittles

  Sometimes after you solve all of the major crises your state is facing, as California has clearly done with rioting, looting, shoplifting, drug abuse, homelessness, insane taxes and public defecation, you have to move on to smaller issues.

  Like Skittles.

  At least that’s what’s happening in California, where a proposed bill “could force popular candies like Skittles to change their recipes — or stop selling them in California altogether”, according to a new report from SF Gate. 

  Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel introduced Assembly Bill 418 earlier this year, which seeks to “prohibit the manufacture, sale and distribution of food products containing five chemicals linked to cancer and other health risks”. 

  One of those chemicals is titanium dioxide, listed as an ingredient in Skittles. 

  

  A lawsuit was filed in California last year alleging that Skittles were “unfit for human consumption”, but it was thrown out. In 2016, Mars, the parent company of Skittles, promised to phase out the use of the chemical in its candy. 

  Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel put out a press release last month stating: “Californians shouldn’t have to worry that the food they buy in their neighborhood grocery store might be full of dangerous additives or toxic chemicals.” 

  “Many of the dangerous additives currently banned in the EU and other nations are found in processed foods and candies that are marketed to children, low-income consumers, and communities of color in the United States,” the release states. 

  Eleven organizations, including the Consumer Brands Association, the National Confectioners Association and the California Grocers Association, all wrote a letter to the California Assembly Committee on Health last week opposing the bill, however. 

  “All five of these additives have been thoroughly reviewed by the federal and state systems and many international scientific bodies and continue to be deemed safe,” they wrote. Signatories claimed that the bill “usurps the comprehensive food safety and approval system for these five additives and predetermines ongoing evaluations.”

  “We’re aware of the opposition letter and believe that the lack of meaningful arguments, data, and evidence actually strengthen the case for our legislation,” Gabriel volleyed back. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 20:00

• House Republicans Say Homeland Security Chief’s $60 Billion Budget Concedes Border Cannot Be Secured
  House Republicans Say Homeland Security Chief’s $60 Billion Budget Concedes Border Cannot Be Secured

  Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Any federal department head with a $60.4 billion annual spending request is going to see fiscal hawks on Congressional panels flash their budget-cutting knives in appropriations hearings.

  

  But when it comes to embattled United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas—literally, the face of President Joe Biden’s much-maligned border and immigration policies—House Republicans don’t want to trim his budget, they want his head on a platter.

  According to DHS, there have been 4.7 million “encounters” with illegal immigrants reported at the nation’s southern border since the Biden administration assumed office in January 2021.

  

  An estimated 1.3 million “got-aways” have eluded border agents and escaped into the country—a figure many say is underestimated by up to 20 percent.

  As a result critics, which include the entire Republican Congressional contingent as well as some Democrats, say there were more than 1,100 attacks on U.S. Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents while the flow of fentanyl remains unabated across the southern border, contributing to more than 75,000 poisoning deaths attributed to the drug in 2022.

  “Mr. Secretary, you are failing at doing your job. These numbers speak for themselves,” Rep. Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa) said.

  “The policies of this administration have directly contributed to this failure. In my mind, it is very clear this has been a complete failure in you doing your job and we need new leadership.

  “What will it take for you to resign and step down from this … because I see this as a complete failure. What will it take?” Hinson asked.

  Mayorkas didn’t directly respond to Hinson’s query during his two-and-a-half-hour March 29 hearing before the House Appropriation Committee’s Homeland Security Subcommittee.

  Nor did the DHS chief answer pointed questions about allegedly shifting funding away from already allocated money for border wall construction, or respond to queries about whether Mexican cartels should be declared foreign terrorist organizations or his claim in April 2022 that DHS had “operational control” of the border. That statement was later refuted by U.S. Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz.

  It was Mayorkas’s second Congressional hearing of the week and the first of two set for March 29.

  The day before, he was ripped by Senate Appropriations Committee Republicans with Texas Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz calling for him to “be fired” or, as a bill now circulating about Capitol Hill demands, be impeached.

  “For over two years, we’ve seen skyrocketing illegal migration at the border. This policy-driven crisis continues for one reason, and one reason only, this administration is unwilling to publicly dissuade migrants from coming to the border and unwilling to take action on the authority it already has on the books,” Subcommittee Chair Rep. Dave Joyce (R-Ohio) said.

  “The Biden administration’s policies are undoubtedly driving our border security crisis,” he continued and referring to the DHS’s $60.4 billion Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) budget request added, “It is our job as appropriators to be good stewards of taxpayers’ money and to ensure we are not wasting money by supporting bad policies that don’t result in deserted outcomes.”

  Budget of Wasteful ‘Gimmicks’

  DHS’s FY24 budget request actually tops $103 billion with $60.4 billion defined as “discretionary.”

  The department’s 260,000 employees deal with a wide range of domestic security concerns addressed by the Transportation Security Agency, the Coast Guard, FEMA, and the Secret Service.

  “This proposal is, unfortunately, more disappointing than it is promising,” Joyce said. “The budget is full of gimmicks that mask the true cost of protecting the homeland and makes our job as appropriators that much more difficult.”

  The department’s total $60.4 billion budget request is “nearly equal to the current fiscal year,” he said but cited the $4.7 billion for the proposed Southwest Border Contingency Fund and another $1.6 billion in “illegal TSA fees” as wasteful allocations that will cost taxpayers more than $6 billion without addressing border security.

  “Now is not the time for budget gimmicks,” Joyce said.

  Demurrals On The Wall

  Republicans called the Southwest Border Contingency Fund a “slush fund” with Joyce claiming it “will spend more hard-earned tax dollars to achieve the same results with less oversight … that incentivizes this administration to not solve problems and do their job in the first place.”

  The Biden administration is more dedicated to building more infrastructure for processing illegal immigrants “and then releasing them into the interior, [which] hasn’t worked,” Joyce said.

  “Decreasing detention capacity hasn’t worked. Border security operators have been clear—without [increasing detention capacities] illegal immigration will continue unabated.”

  Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said the $4.7 billion fund is “disturbing” because it essentially concedes the border cannot be safeguarded.

  “What has happened under this administration is instead of trying to stop the flow of illegal immigrants across the border, we’ve just gotten better at processing those immigrants,” he said.

  Cloud, House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), and Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.) accused Mayorkas of funneling money from revenue streams dedicated to building the border wall established under the Trump administration to other programs and projects.

  Granger said there is $2.8 billion set aside to “complete the wall” with $200 million of that set to “go away” unless it is spent “in the next few months.”

  “We just going to let that happen?” she asked.

  Mayorkas would not answer the question but said he has approved 129 “gates and gaps” projects along stretches of the wall that already exist.

  

  The Biden administration is not going to approve any more wall construction, he said, and is espousing technologies, such as drones, and “investing in personnel.”

  “I have approved a number of projects and we will comply with our legal obligations with respect to the funds provided for the wall,” Mayorkas said.

  Cloud said DHS prevented Texas from funding portions of the wall on its own. “Right now,” he asked, “we’re paying for [the] border wall to be stored and not built. Is that correct?

  “We are indeed,” Mayorkas said.

  Cloud said Border Patrol and CPB officials themselves say, “the border wall is the most effective force-multiplier” claiming the budget request “takes money we’ve already allocated and moves it in different directions, is that correct?”

  “We will comply with our legal obligations,” Mayorkas said.

  “It’s not people or infrastructure. It’s both,” Cloud said. “You are taking what we already appropriated for border wall construction and rescinded that and want to use that for other purposes. Is that correct?”

  “Congressman,” Mayorkas replied, “we will comply with our legal obligations.”

  “That’s a well-worded way to get around” answering the question, Cloud said. “You’re missing the overall objective of securing the border by funding these little legal loopholes to get out of things.”

  “I understand we are not going to build a wall from sea to shiny sea,” Guest said, but a wall is effective in certain places in certain sectors.

  “It seems to me this administration is saying we are not going to build any walls. Walls are bad. I disagree with that, walls are beneficial. I think that they do a great job.”

  Fire ‘Border Czar’ Too

  Hinson said the Border Patrol is budgeted for 19,800 agents but now has only about 19,000. She said Ortiz maintains it needs at least 22,000 agents to effectively patrol the border.

  She said DHS should be asking for many more agents, which is an initiative his GOP critics would support.

  Mayorkas said the Border Patrol added 300 agents last year and will continue to build its ranks every year. “There is a limit to how many we can functionally hire in a particular year.”

  He said, “We need more.”

  Good luck, Hinson said. “The policies of this administration have truly affected retention” and said the budget reflects “a lack of meaningful work to address retention challenges. Throwing out increased numbers looks nice, but it doesn’t actually address the reality of the situation at the southern border.”

  Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) suggested if the administration needs more money to hire Border Patrol agents, he has some ideas.

  “It’s strange that this department wants to add 350 Border Patrol agents and 87,000 armed IRS agents,” he said, suggesting Mayorkas contact the IRS “and see if it wants to share some of that wealth with you and perhaps share some of the funding with you.”

  Harris said Mayorkas should not be the only administration official to resign over the border situation. Vice President Kamala Harris, as the designated “border czar,” should also step down, he said.

  “The last time she was [at the border] was June 2021, that’s more than 2 million crossings ago,” he said. “Our border czar should also resign because she isn’t doing her job.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 19:40

• Is There A Link Between Obesity Levels In States And Concentration Of Fast Food Stores?
  Is There A Link Between Obesity Levels In States And Concentration Of Fast Food Stores?

  The US is grappling with an obesity crisis, as approximately 4 out of 10 Americans currently meet the medical criteria for being overweight. This makes them susceptible to severe health complications like diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. 

  The question is, what’s the source of the obesity crisis?.. Well, it’s likely the eating habits of Americans. 

  According to a 2018 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) survey, as many as 1 out of every 3 Americans eat fast food daily.  

  Fast food is associated with causing obesity because its high in calories and fat. It’s processed food packed with additives and often fried. Fast food costs less, and it’s quick, and tens of thousands of fast food restaurants with convenient drive-thrus are situated across America.

  Before examining the regions in the US with the highest concentration of fast-food restaurants, it’s important to note that 2021 CDC data showed the highest amount of obesity among Americans was spread across the Midwest, Deep South, and Rust Belt states.

  

  It’s crucial to remember the regions mentioned in the above data. When analyzing the locations of the ten largest fast-food chains in the US, it becomes apparent that many of these stores are indeed situated in the areas with the highest rates of obesity among Americans.

  Subway

  

  Starbucks

  

  McDonald’s 

  

  Dunkin

  

  Taco Bell

  

  Burger King

  

  Pizza Hut

  

  Domino’s

  

  Wendy’s

  

  Dairy Queen

  

  There might be a connection between the presence of fast-food outlets in particular regions throughout the nation and the increasing obesity rates in those areas. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 19:20

• California Man Arrested 10 Times In 31 Days, Faces 33 Charges
  California Man Arrested 10 Times In 31 Days, Faces 33 Charges

  Authored by Jason Blair via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A man in Fresno County, California was arrested 10 times within a span of 31 days, according to the Clovis Police Department.

  

  Keith Chastain’s first arrest was on Feb. 19, and his tenth was on March 21. He was booked by Clovis police six times and other agencies four times.

  Chastain, 38, faces 18 felonies and 15 misdemeanors. Charges include six stolen vehicles, vandalism, DUI, possession of a controlled substance, fraud, and more, according to authorities.

  “I don’t know what is happening in his life to cause him to steal so many people’s vehicles and property. It’s sad; I hope he gets some help,” Clovis Police Corporal Meredith Alexander told KMPH Fox 26.

  On his tenth arrest, police received a tip over the phone and caught Chastain driving a stolen truck in Old Town Clovis. Police said he was on his way to the police station in the stolen vehicle to pick up his personal property.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 19:00

• NYC Mayor Eric Adams Blames Tik Tok For 32% Surge In Car Thefts
  NYC Mayor Eric Adams Blames Tik Tok For 32% Surge In Car Thefts

  New York City Mayor Eric Adams has finally figured out the hive mind of a rash of car thefts in New York City: Tik Tok.

  The mayor has taken to blaming the social media platform this week for a growing number of grand theft autos that are taking place under his watch in New York City. He says he wants to “hold the platform accountable”, according to a new Bloomberg report. 

  Joined by New York Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell, Adams has said the “Kia Challenge”, a Tik Tok-based viral video showing how to steal Kia and Hyundai cars, is to blame for about 109 arrests made this year related to theft of Kia and Hyundai sedans. 

  🚨Attention owners of Kia & Hyundai vehicles🚨 Criminals are using a vulnerability to bypass some car ignitions using a USB cable. While both manufacturers have said they are looking into fixing the issue, utilizing a steering wheel locking device is highly recommended. pic.twitter.com/DBziQQXN2C

  — NYPD NEWS (@NYPDnews) December 30, 2022

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

  At a press conference Thursday, Adams said: “This really emphasizes my continuous call for the responsible behavior of social media. This challenge in particular with Kia and Hyundai, we see it as not only stealing a vehicle, but it’s stealing the future of our young people.”

  

  Car theft spiked during the pandemic and hasn’t returned to pre-pandemic levels, the report says. Grand larceny of vehicles in New York was up a stunning 32% last year, more than any other felony. According to Sewell, most thefts are taking place in the Bronx and northern Manhattan. 

  The videos that Adams references targets Hyundais and Kias that lack an engine immobilizer, Bloomberg reports. They have made their way around social media since last September, targeting vehicles made in the 2015-2019 year range. 

  When asked about his opinion about a ban on Tik Tok due to national security concerns, however, Adams responded: “I think that it’s imperative for Congress and the federal lawmakers to do a deep dive and come up with the right way to monitor social media.”

  He concluded: “As we continue to decrease crime and move crime in the right direction, we don’t need aggravating factors such as what we’re seeing in a social media challenge of this magnitude. We don’t need social media to contribute to social disorder.”

  Every day, the NYPD works to make our city safer and keep driving major crimes down in New York City. But we’re continuing to see problems with grand theft auto. Join us now at 1 Police Plaza.
  https://t.co/4zyhYIcIf7

  — Mayor Eric Adams (@NYCMayor) March 30, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 18:40

• Where's Waldo At Club Fed?
  Where’s Waldo At Club Fed?

  Authored by Joni Ernst and Adam Andrzejewski, op-ed via NewsWeek.com,

  Government bureaucrats are slowly returning to the office after three years of working remotely. Washington, D.C. has the highest work-from-home rate in the country, and the mayor is angry because the city is a ghost town.

  

  Despite empty government cubicles, President Joe Biden tucked a 5.2% pay raise for the 1.4 million employees of executive agencies into his proposed budget. That would be the single largest pay hike for the Swamp since 1980.

  They don’t call it Club Fed for nothing.

  According to newly released data obtained from the Biden administration via the Freedom of Information Act, these same bureaucrats are already collectively making $1.2 million a minute, $72 million an hour, and over $576 million a day. And that’s just the cash compensation cost to taxpayers!

  Last year, the average salaries for employees at 109 of Washington’s 125 agencies were over $100,000 per year. And the lucrative perks included 44 days of paid time off “earned” after just three years on the job—nearly nine full weeks paid to sip margaritas on the beach.

  It’s long past time to review the “cost effectiveness gap” at the Swamp’s manifold agencies and ask why federal employees are paid so much to deliver so little in the way of results.

  For example, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is supposed to ensure the safety and soundness of our banking system. 5,800 employees and auditors at the FDIC make an average annual salary of nearly $160,000. With the recent collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and headlines pointing to a fragile and distressed banking system, are taxpayers really getting what they’re paying for?

  Then, there are the little-known agencies, such as the Appalachian Regional Commission, where the top-paid executives make close to $176,300. The commission is charged with helping pull residents out of poverty in 423 counties across 13 states. However, since the agency was created in 1965 under President Lyndon Johnson, only four counties have attained that goal.

  Besides high salaries, there were the 1 million bureaucrats who received $1.5 billion in bonuses, after a whopping 99% of federal employees were rated “fully successful.” That’s not even plausible.

  

  Cherry trees near their peak bloom on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol on March 20, 2023 in Washington, D.C.CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES

  As the COVID-19 pandemic waned in 2021, Congress established a $570 million federal worker relief fund. The half-billion-dollar program provided paid leave for federal workers who had children not yet back for in-person schooling. Eligible bureaucrats could earn up to $21,000 over 15 weeks.

  One of our Senate offices, alongside the other’s private organizational auditors, are now demanding answers to three existential questions posed by the reality of the modern federal workforce. Who is working? Where are they? And, most importantly, what are they doing?

  Taking stock of the administrative state is difficult: The Biden administration just redacted the names of a whopping 350,861 rank-and-file federal workers from the Fiscal Year 2022 payroll disclosure. And it isn’t that these are all intelligence officers or spies; by comparison, in the final fiscal year of the Obama administration (FY 2016), only 2,300 names were redacted.

  The administration also redacted 281,656 employee work locations.

  So, we can’t accurately map the Swamp because it’s a literal game of “Where’s Waldo?” when it comes to the modern administrative state.

  Again, we aren’t complaining about names or locations redacted from the National Security Administration, the Pentagon, or the Central Intelligence Agency, where there is a legitimate secrecy shield for national security.

  The Biden administration is deliberately hiding key information on hundreds of thousands of regular employees within the alphabet-soup of agencies such as the Department of Health and Human Services, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Internal Revenue Service, the Social Security Administration, the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Education, and so on.

  We estimate that roughly $36 billion in salary and bonus compensation is hidden from oversight. We don’t yet know who, what, where, or how much. But we plan to find out.

  All of which raises the question: Are these federal workers actually working, and what is their real value for the American taxpayer?

  *  *  *

  Joni Ernst, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Iowa. Adam Andrzejewski is the founder and CEO of the nonprofit OpenTheBooks.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 18:20

• US Extends Carrier Deployment To Provide Military "Options" In Syria
  US Extends Carrier Deployment To Provide Military “Options” In Syria

  Following last week’s deadly attacks on US bases in northeast Syria by what the Pentagon called pro-Iran forces, the United States has announced an extension of the George HW Bush Carrier Strike Group’s deployment in the Mediterranean region. 

  “The extension of the George HW Bush Carrier Strike Group, inclusive of the USS Leyte Gulf, the USS Delbert D. Black, and the USNS Arctic, allows options to potentially bolster the capabilities of CENTCOM to respond to a range of contingencies in the Middle East,” US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman Colonel Joe Buccino said Friday.

  

  The George HW Bush carrier is currently near Italy and Sicily. Like with prior US military intervention in Syria, for example the major anti-government strikes on Damascus and elsewhere in 2017 and 2018 under the Trump administration, the Pentagon typically launches missiles from the Mediterranean.

  According to Reuters, “Buccino also noted a scheduled, expedited deployment of a squadron of A-10 attack aircraft to the region.”

  “One U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Bush strike group was expected to remain in the European Command area of responsibility,” the report continues.

  Last Thursday, US forces mounted attacks against Iranian-linked groups in Syria after a US contractor was killed and five military service members and another US contractor were wounded in a drone strike conducted by an unknown group.

  But the Pentagon has now revised the number of American wounded upward to 12, citing “traumatic brain injuries”, per CNN: 

  Six US service members have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries as a result of attacks from Iran-backed groups in Syria last week.

  Four US troops at the coalition base near al Hasakah that was attacked on March 23 by a suspected Iranian drone, and two service members at Mission Support Site Green Village attacked on March 24, have been identified as having brain injuries in screening since the attacks, Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Patrick Ryder said Thursday.

  Gen. Ryder explained, “As standard procedure, all personnel in the vicinity of a blast are screened for traumatic brain injuries.” He added: “So these additional injuries were identified during post-attack medical screenings.”

  Warmongers in both parties say keeping troops in Syria is necessary to preserve the balance of power.

  That is simply not true.

  If they believe that, they should say it directly to the parents of Americans in Syria who have to sleep there tonight and guard oil fields against… https://t.co/YcFNoKkwQB pic.twitter.com/0SJBtjFzW2

  — Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) March 24, 2023

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

  Traumatic brain injuries among US troops were last reported on a large-scale in February 2020 after Iran launched cruise missiles on an American base in neighboring Iraq, in retaliation for the Jan. 3rd US killing of IRGC General Qassem Soleimani in drone strike at the Baghdad airport.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 18:00

• Banks Bust As Big-Tech Booms In Q1; Gold & Crypto Soar As Dollar Dumps
  Banks Bust As Big-Tech Booms In Q1; Gold & Crypto Soar As Dollar Dumps

  Q1 2023 – and even more specifically the month of March – can be summarized with one simple image…

  

  Bank crisis in US and EU, global war rhetoric rising, de-dollarization actions escalating, US layoffs exploding? Makes you wonder about the state of the dollar eh?

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  BUT Everything must be ok right – the S&P 500 is above pre-SVB levels (just ignore the bank stocks collapse)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  However, a bigger picture look paints a different picture as the dollar suffered its second straight quarterly decline) as Bitcoin soared over 70% and Gold jumped almost 9% (bonds and stocks were also higher in Q1)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  In equity-land, the divergence across the majors in Q1 is quite shocking as long-duration mega-cap tech (and trash) soared while Big-Caps (Dow) and Small-Caps (Russell 2000 – heavy with small financials) ended around unchanged.

  That was the Nasdaq’s best quarterly performance since Q2 2020 (and before that to Q1 2012)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  For the month, the Nasdaq is up over 8%, its biggest March advance since 2010. The Russell 2000 and Trannies were the ugliest horse in March’s glue factory…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Dow surged to its best week since November, but Small Caps outperformed, up over 3%…

  

  The last 3 Friday have seen fear over SVB, CS, & DB respectively, so 4th time was the charm this week with a major melt-up as early 0DTE negative delta flows (as the S&P broke above 2065 JPM Collar Call Strike) were rapidly unwound as stocks continued to squeeze higher and that accelerated the gains…

  

  Source: SpotGamma

  The S&P rallied all the way back up to the key 4100 level today…

  

  The S&P 500’s performance in Q1 was dominated by just 15 stocks…

  

  In fact, it gets worse, according to Bianco Research, META, AAPL, AMZN, NFLX, GOOGL, MSFT, NVDA, TSLA account for all of the S&P’s YTD return. They are up +4.6%. The other 492 stocks collectively are down for the year (-.99%).

  

  Source: Bianco Research

  Mega-Cap techs saw market caps soar with AAPL back above $2.5 trillion, MSFT back above $2 trillion, AMZN back above $1 trillion, and META and TSLA back above $500 billion…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Tech and Discretionary dramatically outperformed in Q1 while Energy and Financials lagged…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  European markets were mixed in March with Germany and France ending green while UK was the biggest loser…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  On the month, European banks are modest underperformers relative to US banks, but both are ugly…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  March was a wake-up call for commercial real estate, as Office REITs crashed hard…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  US growth stocks have dominated Q1, crushing value stocks (until this week when the ratio of Russell 1000 Value/ Growth hit the August lows). For context, this is the biggest growth/value quarter since Q1 2020 (and before that Q1 2009)

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  March saw bond vol (MOVE) explode relative to equity vol (VIX) – to the same extent as October 2008…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Thanks to March ugliness (and basically no issuance), corporate bond spreads in US and EU are wider in Q1 after blowing out wider in March, erasing all the compression from Jan/Fed…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  While stocks bounced back above pre-SVB levels, the credit market remains much more stressed (even with the rally of the last 2 days)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Q1 was a wild one for bonds with Treasury yields exploding higher on hawkish Fed realizations and then collapsing lower on safe-haven/recession anxiety over the bank crisis. Amid all the chaos, yields ended the quarter surprisingly grouped, down around 30bps or so (with the belly outperforming)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  March was a big month for the yield curve with its biggest monthly steepening since May 2013 (2s10s +32bps), ending Q1 unchanged…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Yields were all higher on the week (with the short-end underperforming)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The market’s expectations of The Fed’s actions has swung violently in Q1 from a post-payrolls-beat, post-hawkish-Powell surge (expecting rates to  be over 100bps higher by year-end) to a post-SVB failure collapse (expecting rates to be almost 100bps lower by year-end). The quarter ends with coin-flip odds of one more rate-hike before The Fed is done and then cuts starting by September…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Interestingly, the short-term yield curve is ending Q1 just a little more dovish than it started it – having been dramatically more hawkish and dovish intra-quarter…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The dollar is set to end the quarter 1.4% lower, its first consecutive quarterly loss since 2020, amid easing concerns about the global banking sector and money market wagers on Federal Reserve interest-rate cuts. This is the 5th monthly drop in the dollar out of the last 6 months…

   

  Source: Bloomberg

  All the major cryptos had a good Q1, with Solana outperforming and Bitcoin gaining more than Ethereum (and that was in spite of ‘Operation Choke Point 2.0’)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Bitcoin is up for the 3rd month in a row for its best quarterly gain since Q1 2021, back above $28,500 (and Ethereum is also up for 3 straight months (best Q since Q1 2021), nearing 7 month highs at $1850)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  NatGas was the standout commodity performance in Q1, collapsing 50% as warmer weather spoiled Putin’s party plans. Gold was the quarter’s best performer (along with copper – China reopening hopes) as crude closed lower…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Gold is up for the second quarter in a row (up over 19% in the  last 6 months – its best such gain since 2016), with its highest quarterly close in history. March saw gold rally almost 9% -its best month since July 2020 (topping $2000) once again…

  

  Oil has been on a tear for the last two weeks with WTI back above $75, but remains down on the year, after breaking below its Jan/Feb range…

  

  And finally, Q1 saw over $450 billion of inflows into Money-Market funds and over $300 billion in deposit outflows from US domestic banks…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And in case you were wondering what has sparked this sudden panic-buying in bonds, bullion, bitcoin, and big-tech? That’s easy – The Fed!!! Just as we warned would happen mid-March…

  Chase begins pic.twitter.com/DLPt5w8DG4

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 17, 2023

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

  It’s the ‘old QE’ trade writ large. But what happens next (as The Fed balance sheet actually shrunk modestly last week) and Goldman’s US Activity Index just dropped into contraction…

  

  With recessionary signals growing louder, maybe pricing in some ‘easing’ by The Fed is ‘fair’ but that appears fully priced-in to stocks at near-record high valuations (esp. mega-cap tech).

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 17:55

• Billionaires Brin, Pritzker, Zuckerman And Ovitz Issued Subpoenas In Epstein Lawsuit
  Billionaires Brin, Pritzker, Zuckerman And Ovitz Issued Subpoenas In Epstein Lawsuit

  Billionaires Sergey Brin, Thomas Pritzker, Mortimer Zuckerman and Michael Ovitz were issued subpoenas this week by the US Virgin Islands as part of its lawsuit against JPMorgan over the bank’s relationship with now-deceased pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, according to the Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with the matter.

  

  The subpoenas seek any communications or documents related to JPMorgan and Epstein.

  The four men are some of the wealthiest people in the U.S., and it couldn’t be determined why they were being asked for the communications and documents. In civil cases, lawyers can use subpoenas during the discovery process to get information from people who aren’t a party to a lawsuit but could provide evidence related to the case. -WSJ

  JPMorgan is being sued by the US Virgin Islands along with several Epstein accusers in a combined case over Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. The plaintiffs claim that the bank facilitated abuse by allowing Epstein to remain a client while helping send money to his victims. The lawsuit also alleges that JPMorgan turned a blind eye to Epstein’s activities after receiving referrals for high-value business opportunities.

  

  Brin is a co-founder of Google and sits on the board of parent company Alphabet. Pritzker is executive chairman of Hyatt Hotels. Ovitz is a venture capitalist and co-founder of the Creative Artists Agency (CAA), and Zuckerman is a real-estate billionaire and owns US News & World Report.

  

  As we noted on Tuesday, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon is expected to be deposed under oath regarding the bank’s relationship with Epstein – who banked with JPMorgan for 15 years until it eventually cut ties with the convicted sex offender in 2013.

  “Jamie Dimon knew in 2008 that his billionaire client was a sex trafficker,” argued US Virgin Islands attorney Mimi Liu during a March hearing in front of Manhattan US District Judge Jed Rakoff, referring to the year Epstein was first criminally charged with sex crimes, CNBC reported earlier this month.

  Lawyers have questioned several JPMorgan employees so far in this case and another filed by an unnamed woman who accused Epstein of sexual abuse. The cases are running together in Manhattan federal court.

  JPMorgan has sought to have the lawsuits dismissed. The bank has denied that it aided Epstein and has sought to blame any relationship on former executive Jes Staley, whom the bank has sued. Mr. Staley has maintained he was friendly with Epstein but never knew about his alleged crimes. -WSJ

  “If Staley is a rogue employee, why isn’t Jamie Dimon?” Liu said during the hearing to discuss the bank’s efforts to have the USVI lawsuit against the bank dismissed, referring to former JPMorgan executive Jes Staley, who is not named in the current litigation.

  “Staley knew, Dimon knew, JPMorgan Chase knew,” Liu continued, noting that there were several cash transfers and wire transfers made by the prolific pedophile (Epstein), including several hundreds of thousands of dollars paid to several women which should have been flagged as suspicious.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 03/31/2023 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Two Decades Later, US Senate Votes To Abolish Iraq War Authorization
  Two Decades Later, US Senate Votes To Abolish Iraq War Authorization

  Via The Cradle,

  The US Senate voted 66-30 on 29 March to repeal the 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that allowed former president George W. Bush to launch a military invasion of Iraq under false claims that the country possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The bill is now headed to the Republican-led House of Representatives, where it remains unclear if lawmakers will put it on the floor for a vote.

  “Congress has abdicated its powers to the executive for too long,” said Senator Tim Kaine, who over the past several years has authored the Senate’s efforts to repeal the Iraq AUMF. “Presidents can do mischief if there are outdated authorizations on the books,” he added.

  

  If the bill passes a vote on the House of floor — and is signed by President Joe Biden — it will be the first repeal of a war authorization since 1974.

  Nonetheless, just last week, the US Senate overwhelmingly voted against repealing the original AUMF, which was signed into law on 18 September, 2001 by George W. Bush in response to the 11 September attacks.

  As opposed to the Iraq AUMF, the 2001 AUMF is seen as a more sweeping, blank-check legislation that was passed to target the alleged perpetrators of the 11 September attacks.

  According to the Congressional Research Service, the 2001 AUMF has been used to justify more than 40 military interventions in at least 22 countries without the approval of Congress.

  In the years after 2001, the US Congress also approved so-called ‘security cooperation authorities‘ (SCA) that have allowed the Pentagon to covertly deploy troops and wage secret wars in dozens of countries across the globe.

  According to a report by the New York University School of Law’s Brennan Center for Justice, the SCA allows the Pentagon to “train and equip foreign forces anywhere in the world” and to “provide support to foreign forces, paramilitaries, and private individuals who are in turn supporting US counterterrorism operations,” with a spending limit of $100,000,000 per fiscal year.

  As a result of this, in dozens of countries, these programs have been used as a springboard for hostilities, with the Pentagon declining to inform Congress or the US public about their secret operations.

  “Researchers and reporters uncovered [SCA] programs not only in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also in Cameroon, Egypt, Kenya, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen,” the report highlights.

  Christopher C. Miller, a former acting head of the Pentagon, said in his memoir released last month that the US should be held accountable for the failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “The US military-industrial complex has grown into a hydra-headed monster with almost no controls on the American war machine,” Miller writes.

  In an interview with The Hill, Miller went on to say that, “We invaded a sovereign nation, killed and maimed a lot of Iraqis, and lost some of the greatest American patriots to ever live — all for a goddamned lie.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 23:40

• CFA Pass Rates Finally Tick Higher After Plunging To Record Lows During Pandemic
  CFA Pass Rates Finally Tick Higher After Plunging To Record Lows During Pandemic

  The pass rate for the first level of the chartered financial analyst (CFA) exam ticked up with zero pandemic related cancellations for the first time since 2021, Bloomberg reported this week. 

  38% of those who took the Level I test passed it, which was up from 36% in November 2022 and 37% in August of last year. Despite the tick higher, the numbers still come in under the 41% average pass rate over the last decade, the report notes. 

  The report says the pass rates are among “signs of improvement and waning impact from the pandemic”, which helped drive pass rates significantly lower coinciding with the onset of the pandemic. 

  

  Record low pass rates were recorded last year across all levels of the CFA, the report says. In February, about 17,000 candidates sat for the exam, which was administered at 459 testing centers worldwide. 

  And the CFA Institute did a bit of what public schools have been doing when pass rates drop: they reworked some of the exam earlier this month to “emphasize practical skills and reduce the amount of time candidates study, in the biggest reworking since the test was introduced in 1963”, Bloomberg wrote. 

  The record low pass rates also (conspicuously?) coincide with the CFA Institute choosing to offer the exam via computer, instead of on paper, as a result of Covid protocols. There are currently 190,000 charterholders worldwide, who took an average of 4 years to complete all three levels of the exam. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 23:20

• Pozsar's Warning Of Dollar's Waning Sway Comes True
  Pozsar’s Warning Of Dollar’s Waning Sway Comes True

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

  In a quick succession this week, Beijing unveiled ground-breaking deals to further its efforts to promote the yuan and ditch the US dollar. It’s the kind of thing money-market guru Zoltan Pozsar had in mind when he warned that the dollar’s centrality in the world financial system is slowly being whittled away.  

  What occurred in Beijing this week was easy to overlook, but it could just as easily have a place in future history books. On Wednesday, Banco BOCOM BBM became the first Latin American bank to sign up as a direct participant in CIPS, a Chinese alternative to the US-dominated global payment system. The two countries also agreed to settle trade in their own currencies.

  Earlier this week, Saudi Aramco agreed to buy a stake in Rongsheng Petrochemical, one of China’s refining giants, in its biggest-ever foreign acquisition to expand its presence in the world’s biggest energy importer. A day later, China National Offshore Oil Corporation and France’s TotalEnergies completed China’s first yuan-settled liquefied-natural-gas trade through the Shanghai Petroleum and Natural Gas Exchange.

  These developments followed an earlier warning by Pozsar, a former Fed and US Treasury Department official, that we could be witnessing the dusk for the petro-dollar and the dawn of the “petro-yuan.” He flagged the so-called BRICS — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — in particular in an essay in December:

  “China is proactively writing a new set of rules as it replays the “Great Game,” creating a new type of globalization with new institutions like the Belt and Road Initiative, BRICS+, and the SCO  (Shanghai Cooperation Organization)

  …the one thing that the BRICS are most aligned on is the de-dollarization of their fast-growing, bilateral trade flows…the drive to de-dollarize intra-BRICS trade and soon intra -BRICS+ trade will speed up.  Don’t tell me that doesn’t threaten the dollar’s supremacy, or that it won’t hurt the “exorbitant privilege”

  …the U.S. dollar and Treasury securities will likely be dealing with issues they never had to deal with before: less demand, not more; more competition, not less.  

  To be sure, the yuan’s market share in the global system remains minuscule. But the direction is clear. As Victor Xing at Kekselias Inc. put it: “The key characteristic of the present geopolitical development is ideological, rather than based on economic calculus. Therefore, it is harder to de-escalate, and it means the disruptions and decoupling has momentum to go on for a longer period of time.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 23:00

• WHO Now Says COVID Vaccines Not Recommended For Healthy Kids & Teens
  WHO Now Says COVID Vaccines Not Recommended For Healthy Kids & Teens

  Yet another leading health institution has unveiled a significant Covid policy reversal this week… this time it’s none other than the World Health Organization (WHO) saying something that might have gotten an individual suspended from social media or publicly “canceled” a mere one or two years ago:

  WHO now recommends healthy, young people NOT get the Covid Vaccines. pic.twitter.com/77FP0Qvi7v

  — Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) March 30, 2023

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

  The revision in guidelines was put out this week by the WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) – a group of scientists and officials which said they no longer recommend the Covid vaccine for “healthy” children ages 6 months to 17 years.

  “The public health impact of vaccinating healthy children and adolescents is comparatively much lower than the established benefits of traditional essential vaccines for children – such as the rotavirus, measles, and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines,” SAGE wrote.

  The new policy identifies three priority groups — high, medium and low — and puts children and teens in the low category. The definitions assess categories for “risk of severe disease and death”. The WHO still recommends that “Children who have compromised immune systems or existing health conditions should still get the vaccine.”

  SAGE Chair Dr. Hanna Nohyn stated in explaining the updated guidelines, “Updated to reflect that much of the population is either vaccinated or previously infected with COVID-19, or both, the revised roadmap reemphasizes the importance of vaccinating those still at-risk of severe disease, mostly older adults and those with underlying conditions, including with additional boosters.”

  The United States CDC currently recommends Covid vaccines for children 6 months and up…

  

  It’s unclear whether the US Center of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will follow in adapting its recommendations to this revised WHO policy, but what is clear is that those parents who remained skeptical of putting hastily developed “Authorized for Emergency Use” mRNA vaccines into their children have been clearly vindicated… and this time by no less than the WHO.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 22:40

• More Biden Madness: Asking Black Americans On Census if They Are Slave Descendants
  More Biden Madness: Asking Black Americans On Census if They Are Slave Descendants

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

  Please note another ultra-Left mad proposal is underway: U.S. Considers Asking Black Americans on Census if They Are Slave Descendants

  In a proposed update to how the government tracks Americans’ race and ethnicity, the Biden administration is asking the public for input on how it might go about differentiating Black people who are descendants of slaves in America from those whose families arrived more recently as immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean or other countries.

  Supporters of the change say one reason they are pushing it is to quantify who would be eligible to receive reparations for slavery should the government ever agree to pay them.

  The Biden administration has proposed combining existing race and ethnicity questions so that “Hispanic or Latino” would no longer be a separate question, but instead would be one of several choices on the race question. It has also proposed creating a new race question category for Americans of Middle Eastern or North African heritage.

  In its proposed rule on those broader changes, the administration asked whether the term “American Descendants of Slavery” or “American Freedmen” would be the best terms to describe the group. Some have suggested the term “Foundational Black Americans.”

  The White House’s Office of Management and Budget, which is spearheading the race-category overhaul, declined to comment on the idea.

  Last Living Slave

  Sylvester Magee (claimed May 29, 1841 – October 15, 1971) claimed to be the last living former American slave. If this claim were true, Magee would not only have been the last surviving American Civil War veteran, but the oldest recorded person to have ever lived.

  Assuming the claim is true, the last slave died 52 years ago. 

  More realistically, assuming a very generous average age at death of 80 and not 130 years, nearly all slaves died 100 years or more ago. That means most of the direct descendants have passed as well.

  Thus, we are talking about reparations to descendants of descendants of descendants all of which had the benefit of growing up in the greatest country on earth, with all of the associated benefits. 

  Questions Abound

  Let’s give reparations to descendants of slaves, but let’s not even call them slaves, let’s call them “Foundational Black Americans,” muting the reason for the reparation.

  And what percentage ancestry fits the bill? 5%, 10%, 50.01%? 

  Does an 88% descendent get twice as much as a 44% descendent? Was he or she twice as harmed? Harmed at all? 

  Do we have everyone take genetic tests or do we take people’s word for it? If a boy can proclaim to be a girl, can I proclaim to be black? 

  Does the process unite or further divide the United States? 

  San Francisco Board Unanimously Supports $5 Million Per Person Reparation Payments

  On March 17, I noted San Francisco Board Unanimously Supports $5 Million Per Person Reparation Payments

  I did the math based on the number of households in San Francisco. The price tag would be $192 billion. The city budget is $13 billion.

  But note the bill did not pass. It was “supported” unanimously. 

  If the board actually approved this nonsense, I suspect everyone who voted in favor would immediately be voted out of office in special elections and the bill would be quickly struck down as unconstitutional.

  Slave State Analysis

  The 15 slave states were Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

  Elsewhere, people who never owned slaves would make payments to people who never were slaves in states that never had slaves.

  Political Race Baiting

  One cannot undo a wrong of 200 years ago by taking money from people who had nothing to do with the problem and solve the wrong by giving money to people who were never harmed in process. 

  Anyone sponsoring this idea knows reparations cannot possibly pass Congress. 

  Expense bills need to garner 60 votes in the Senate. And many Democrats would not stomach a vote for it. Reparations would be  dead on arrival. 

  Seriously Crazy?

  The reparation idea seems seriously crazy. But is it? 

  Team Biden knows reparations will never pass. The proposal is nothing but race-baiting, virtue-signaling meant to further divide the United States.

  Blacks will not benefit from this. 

  No one will benefit from this except perhaps the politicians who see a benefit in further dividing the county to enhance their political goals. 

  This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

  Addendum – Biden Declares Transgender Day of Visibility

  “NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 31, 2023, as Transgender Day of Visibility.”

  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/03/30/a-proclamation-on-transgender-day-of-visibility/

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 22:20

• China And Brazil Strike Deal To Ditch The US Dollar
  China And Brazil Strike Deal To Ditch The US Dollar

  In a time when de-dollarization news are dropping fast and furious and even Elon Musk is now jumping on a bandwagon…

  Combined with excess government spending, which forces other countries to absorb a significant part of our inflation

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 29, 2023

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

  … which we first defined a decade ago, not a day goes by without some modest or not so modest shift toward a world in which the US currency – fully weaponized after February 2022 for the entire world to see and fear – is no longer the world’s reserve. And today was no exception.

  According to the Brazilian government, China and Brazil have reached a deal to trade in their own currencies, ditching the United States dollar as an intermediary entirely, AFP reported.

  The deal, Beijing’s latest salvo against the almighty greenback, will enable China, the top rival to US economic hegemony, and Brazil, the biggest economy in Latin America, to conduct their massive trade which amounts to $150 billion per year, and financial transactions directly, exchanging yuan for reais and vice versa instead of going through the US dollar. In doing so China extends its bilateral, USD-exempting currency arrangements beyond countries such as Russia, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to now include the Latin American exporting powerhouse.

  “The expectation is that this will reduce costs… promote even greater bilateral trade and facilitate investment,” the Brazilian Trade and Investment Promotion Agency (ApexBrasil) said in a statement.

  China is Brazil’s biggest trading partner, with a record US$150.5 billion (S$200 billion) in bilateral trade last year.

  The deal, which follows a preliminary agreement in January, was announced after a high-level China-Brazil business forum in Beijing.

  Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was originally scheduled to attend the forum as part of a high-profile China visit, but had to postpone his trip indefinitely on Sunday after he came down with pneumonia.

  The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and Bank of Communications BBM will execute the transactions, officials said.

  To be sure, we are still a long away away from the yuan replacing the USD as global reserve currency, or maybe not so far if one reads the recent reports from Zoltan Pozsar. And yet, even such foaming Bretton Woods III skeptics as Rabobank’s Michael Every is starting to realize that he may have been wrong. From his morning note today:

  We showed in ‘Why Bretton Woods 3 Won’t Work’ (2022) that an anti-US BW3 bloc does not balance its trade internally by value or structure: BW3 can sell commodities to China; but unless they absorb the exports China now sends to the West, or China runs trade deficits like the US, then it can’t happen. Instead, we all just return to global mercantilism – which is happening, is inflationary, and ultimately suits the US – just not Wall Street (either in terms of mercantilism or monetary policy). When BW3 players no longer hold their official and unofficial savings in USD assets (if not Treasuries, then agencies or stocks, or property), and want to stash cash in Moscow and retire in China, then things are changing

  Alas, at the rate the current US ruling regime is destroying the world’s faith and confidence not only in the dollar but in what was once truly a superpower and is increasingly a third world banana republic – the latest news of Trump’s indictment for political reasons being the third world cherry on top – we won’t have very long to wait.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 22:00

• Freeport LNG Returns To Full Power
  Freeport LNG Returns To Full Power

  By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com,

  The Freeport LNG export facility in Texas is receiving natural gas from pipelines at full capacity, suggesting that the liquefaction operations are back to full power, Reuters reported on Thursday, citing data from data provider Refinitiv.   

  

  The Freeport LNG export facility in Texas was shut down in June last year when a fire broke out and damaged the plant.

  Two of the three trains at Freeport LNG have resumed full commercial operations in recent weeks after receiving regulatory approval in February.  

  The third and final train at the Freeport LNG facility received regulatory approvals from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) in early March.

  By then, the other two trains had returned to full commercial operation, reaching production levels in excess of 1.5 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d), Freeport LNG, the company operating the export facility, said early this month.

  At the end of this month, data on natural gas flows suggest that Freeport LNG is back to full operations.

  According to Refinitiv data, quoted by Reuters, natural gas flows from pipelines to Freeport LNG were on track to rise to 2.1 Bcf/d on Thursday, up from 1.8 Bcf/d on Wednesday. That’s as much natural gas as all three trains at Freeport can process into LNG.

  Pipeline gas deliveries to US liquefied natural gas export plants hit an all-time high this week, after the Freeport facility ramped-up service.

  

  Until it was forced to shut down due to the fire in June, Freeport, responsible for some 20% of total LNG exports from the United States and generating $35 billion in revenue during the first nine months of 2022, served Europe well as the continent looked to squelch a growing energy crisis this winter.

  The return of Freeport LNG is set to further ease concerns about LNG supply in Europe, which has managed its gas supply and demand well this winter, mostly due to long periods of mild weather and lower consumption because of demand destruction in the industry and energy savings from households.  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 21:40

• Finland Clears Last Hurdle, Will Become The 31st Member Of NATO
  Finland Clears Last Hurdle, Will Become The 31st Member Of NATO

  Late Thursday night (local time), Turkey’s parliament approved Finland’s NATO application, which puts the Nordic country on the verge of formal membership in the Western military alliance as the 31st nation. This comes after on Monday Hungarian parliament ratified Finland’s for NATO membership.

  The unanimous Turkish vote was the last hurdle in the process, after for months both Ankara and Budapest stalled the application – but in the case of Sweden it will be left behind, this despite the Finland-Sweden bids being initially launched as a package deal. Turkey’s relations with Sweden continue to be at a low-point, suggesting its application will not move forward for a Turkish vote anytime soon.

  Finnish President Sauli Niinisto hailed the news out of Turkey, saying his country is “now ready to join NATO.” He added: “All 30 NATO members have now ratified Finland’s membership. I want to thank every one of them for their trust and support. Finland will be a strong and capable ally, committed to the security of the Alliance.” NATO Secretary Jens Stoltenberg also issued a statement of congratulations on Twitter…

  I welcome the vote of the Grand National Assembly of #Türkiye to complete the ratification of #Finland’s accession. This will make the whole #NATO family stronger & safer.

  — Jens Stoltenberg (@jensstoltenberg) March 30, 2023

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

  Earlier this month, the Kremlin weighed in on Finland being fast-tracked for entry, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying, “We have many times expressed regret over Finland and Sweden’s move toward membership and said many times that Russia does not pose a threat to these countries.”

  “We do not have any dispute with these countries… They have never posed any threat to us and, logically, we did not threaten them,” Peskov added.

  Finland meanwhile is building a 200km fence along its border with Russia to boost security, also after reporting that Russian men fled into Sweden by the droves in order to escape conscription. The fence will reportedly be 10 feet high and topped with barbed wire.

  Sweden’s membership bid is expected to continue to stall, after deteriorating relations with Turkey in the wake of the Quran-burning incident by a far-right activist. Turkey has also demanded Swedish authorities crackdown on Kurdish political groups and operatives while alleging that Stockholm has hosted “terrorists” on its soil. But no matter what limited steps Sweden has taken thus far, none of its has satisfied Turkish leadership. 

  

  Hungary too is expected to continue also blocking Sweden’s application for the time being. “Hungary is holding up Sweden’s admission to NATO because of grievances over criticism by Stockholm of Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s policies, the Hungarian government spokesman said on Wednesday,” according to Reuters.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 21:20

• Tablet's Grand Opus On The Anti-Disinformation Complex
  Tablet’s Grand Opus On The Anti-Disinformation Complex

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via Racket News,

  Years ago, when I first began to have doubts about the Trump-Russia story, I struggled to come up with a word to articulate my suspicions.

  

  If the story was wrong, and Trump wasn’t a Russian spy, there wasn’t a word for what was being perpetrated. This was a system-wide effort to re-frame reality itself, which was both too intellectually ambitious to fit in a word like “hoax,” but also probably not against any one law, either. New language would have to be invented just to define the wrongdoing, which not only meant whatever this was would likely go unpunished, but that it could be years before the public was ready to talk about it.

  Around that same time, writer Jacob Siegel — a former army infantry and intelligence officer who edits Tablet’s afternoon digest, The Scroll — was beginning the job of putting key concepts on paper. As far back as 2019, he sketched out the core ideas for a sprawling, illuminating 13,000-word piece that just came out this week. Called “A Guide to Understanding the Hoax of the Century: Thirteen ways of looking at disinformation,” Siegel’s Tablet article is the enterprise effort at describing the whole anti-disinformation elephant I’ve been hoping for years someone in journalism would take on.

  It will escape no one’s notice that Siegel’s lede recounts the Hamilton 68 story from the Twitter Files. Siegel says the internal dialogues of Twitter executives about the infamous Russia-tracking “dashboard” helped him frame the piece he’d been working on for so long. Which is great, I’m glad about that, but he goes far deeper into the topic than I have, and in a way that has a real chance to be accessible to all political audiences.

  Siegel threads together all the disparate strands of a very complex story, in which the sheer quantity of themes is daunting: the roots in counter-terrorism strategy, Russiagate as a first great test case, the rise of a public-private “counter-disinformation complex” nurturing an “NGO Borg,” the importance of Trump and “domestic extremism” as organizing targets, the development of a new uniparty politics anointing itself “protector” of things like elections, amid many other things.

  He concludes with an escalating string of anxiety-provoking propositions. One is that our first windows into this new censorship system, like Stanford’s Election Integrity Partnership, might also be our last, as AI and machine learning appear ready to step in to do the job at scale. The National Science Foundation just announced it was “building a set of use cases” to enable ChatGPT to “further automate” the propaganda mechanism, as Siegel puts it. The messy process people like me got to see, just barely, in the outlines of Twitter emails made public by a one-in-a-million lucky strike, may not appear in recorded human conversations going forward. “Future battles fought through AI technologies,” says Siegel, “will be harder to see.”

  More unnerving is the portion near the end describing how seemingly smart people are fast constructing an ideology of mass surrender. Siegel recounts the horrible New York Times Magazine article (how did I forget it?) written by Yale law graduate Emily Bazelon just before the 2020 election, whose URL is titled “The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation.” Shorter Bazelon could have been Fox Nazis Censorship Derp: the article the Times really ran was insanely long and ended with flourishes like, “It’s time to ask whether the American way of protecting free speech is actually keeping us free.”

  Both the actors in the Twitter Files and the multitudinous papers produced by groups like the Aspen Institute and Harvard’s Shorenstein Center are perpetually concerned with re-thinking the “problem” of the First Amendment, which of course is not popularly thought of as a problem. It’s notable that the Anti-Disinformation machine, a clear sequel to the Military-Industrial Complex, doesn’t trumpet the virtues of the “free world” but rather the “rules-based international order,” within which (as Siegel points out) people like former Labor Secretary Robert Reich talk about digital deletion as “necessary to protect American democracy.” This idea of pruning fingers off democracy to save it is increasingly popular; we await the arrival of the Jerzy Kozinski character who’ll propound this political gardening metaphor to the smart set.

  I asked Siegel a few questions about his mammoth publication, which happily he plans to expand to a book. The following is edited for length:

  Matt Taibbi: How did you end up in Army intelligence?

  Jacob Siegel: 9/11 is the short version of the story. I enlisted right after 9/11 and intelligence was probably a mistake (laughs). I ended up switching over into the infantry. So, I started in intelligence and then finished off in the infantry.

  Matt Taibbi: Did you know anyone in intelligence who made the transition to anti-disinformation?

  Jacob Siegel: Not in the intelligence world directly. But I was at the Daily Beast right when I got back from Afghanistan, and I quickly started covering digital culture, protest politics, weird internet ideology, and national security. I was writing about ISIS’s social media campaigns and talking to Clint Watts and talking to J.M. Berger, and taking what they were saying quite seriously at the time. I was watching that transition gradually into a rubric for understanding domestic politics in a way that – frankly – I wasn’t fully aware of what I was watching until probably a few years later. I would say I saw more of that counterterrorism-to-disinformation pipeline as a journalist than I did as an army officer.

  Matt Taibbi: What gave you the idea to do this? It’s such a huge project.

  Jacob Siegel: There are whole sections from this piece that come from a draft that I started working on in 2019. I think I submitted the first version of this in late 2020. So I’ve been working on this for a long time. I moved to Israel, my son was born, shit happens, you know… I just couldn’t quite bring it all together in the original version.

  I wasn’t an immediate Russiagate skeptic. I didn’t see it and immediately think, “This is bullshit.” I saw it and thought to myself, “This is exaggerated… Adam Schiff is exaggerating, but he can’t be just lying like that (laughs) in public.” Really on a very fundamental level, in terms of my unquestioned premises, I was not capable of believing that an American national elected official could lie that brazenly, or that the intelligence agencies, which I knew to be corrupt and inefficient in a billion different ways, could be involved in a grand sort of conspiracy. It seemed too farfetched.

  Adam Schiff is a weird guy to be responsible for lifting the veil, because he’s such a schmuck. But realizing that he just kept lying over and over, something clicked for me. Probably the next big turning point was the Russian bounty story. I wrote a piece on that for Tablet at the time, and there was no going back from that.

  Matt Taibbi: What’s the reaction been to the new piece so far?

  Jacob Siegel: I would say overall very positive, but also somewhat siloed. Broadly speaking, it’s gotten a great response, but it certainly hasn’t penetrated the liberal intelligentsia yet. It hasn’t penetrated the liberal mainstream at all. Maybe I have a somewhat blinkered view of that, but I had hoped that it would.

  I don’t want to hang everything on the liberal gatekeepers, and politically, I’m not really clearly identified ideologically. I’m sometimes capable of slipping pieces through that get good receptions with various audiences over the years. And so I hope that would be the case here.

  Subscribers to Racket News can read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 21:00

• Lockheed's Bad Week Ends With F-35 Software Upgrade Delay, Termination Of Hypersonic Missile Program
  Lockheed’s Bad Week Ends With F-35 Software Upgrade Delay, Termination Of Hypersonic Missile Program

  Defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. has faced a challenging week. 

  First, the US Air Force announced that the Lockheed Martin hypersonic weapons program would be terminated due to test failures. Now, the defense contractor faces significant software delays for its stealth fighter jets. Despite Washington elites showering the defense firm with significant amounts of taxpayer funds, its ability to develop and produce cutting-edge weaponry is encountering difficulties amid threats of global conflict. 

  The latest news from Bloomberg highlights additional F-35 software delays by Lockheed for at least a year, making it 16 months behind schedule. The stealth fighter was set to receive a substantial technological upgrade, increasing processing power by 37 times and memory by 20 times, enabling it to carry more advanced weapons and enhance surveillance capabilities. 

  

  Representative Rob Wittman, a Virginia Republican, first disclosed the delays could last until April 2024. He said Wednesday at a House hearing:

  “We’re learned that the late delivery is now impacting existing fighter squadrons” awaiting the upgraded F-35s.

  “To quote a senior Air Force official I’ve met with on the subject: ‘We’re paying for great capability but we currently only have good capability,'” Wittman continued. 

  “The F-35 is essentially a flying computer, with more than 8 million lines of code. The delayed software upgrade is known as TR-3,” Bloomberg said. 

  Air Force Lieutenant General Michael Schmidt, F-35 program manager, told a House Armed Services subcommittee headed by Wittman that the TR-3 delivery schedule “has been affected by delays associated with hardware and software development as well as testing of the Integrated Core Processor — the brains of TR-3.”

  “The key risks ahead of us are centered around maturity and stability of the final integrated software, flight test execution with an aging fleet of test aircraft and infrastructure and delivery of TR-3 hardware to the production line,” Schmidt said. 

  The first F-35 equipped with the new software upgrade took flight in January. Around that time, readers might remember, an F-35 crashed at the Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Fort Worth. It was suspected that the problem was related to the jet’s engine.

  

  Besides the stealth fighter jet having hundreds of software and hardware flaws that could impact combat missions, Lockheed was busy this week with another significant issue: the UASF terminated its AGM-183A Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon hypersonic missile program after test failures. 

  Investors could care less about the mounting issues Lockheed has come across with its stealth jets and hypersonic missile. 

  

  While the US is at the forefront of developing and deploying stealth fighters and soon stealth bombers, the world’s largest military spender has yet to master hypersonic missile technology, a feat already achieved by Russia and China.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 20:40

• North Carolina College To 'Revise Policies' After Drag Queen Lap Dances On Teenage Girl
  North Carolina College To ‘Revise Policies’ After Drag Queen Lap Dances On Teenage Girl

  Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A North Carolina public school said it’s going to “revise campus policies” after a video went viral on social media showing a drag queen invited to the school’s LGBT pride event performing a lap dance on an apparent teenage student.

  

  In a clip obtained and shared by Twitter account Libs of TikTok on Tuesday, a male performer in drag is seen straddling and gyrating on top of an unidentified teenage girl, who is sitting in the middle of the floor on a chair.

  As the video pans around the room, younger children of about elementary school age can be seen among the cheering and laughing spectators.

  The footage was recorded during the March 22 LGBT pride festival hosted by Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem. The college’s main campus serves students as young as 14 years old.

  This is from a drag event in @ForsythTechCC where they also invited younger kids.

  A parent told me the kid getting the lap dance is a 10th grader.

  Full story here: https://t.co/YnMRuxqkNO pic.twitter.com/5kb4L2ml1A

  — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 30, 2023

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

  A promotional flyer posted alongside the video by Libs of TikTok featured photos of four drag queens and advertised a “drag performance” and “free food, drinks, music & activities,” but did not include any minimum-age requirement to attend.

  The college administration confirmed that this event was open to all students on campus, initially maintaining that it didn’t do anything inappropriate.

  “Forsyth Tech is committed to being a place of promise for our students. In order to fulfill that promise, we have clearly spelled out our mission, vision and equity statements,” the school said in a statement provided to Libs of TikTok. “These students, like all college students, are open to attend any student event.”

  As the social media backlash mounted over the lap-dancing video mounted, however, the school eventually said they will consider reviseing “policies and procedures” about age restrictions in future events.

  “Parents of children under 18 were not notified of this event in advance,” the school’s chief officer of student success, Paula Dibley, told Fox News on Wednesday.

  “We have been in close contact with our early college school leadership and are talking with both leaders and parents about how we can revise campus policies and procedures regarding early and middle college students’ attendance at campus events,” Dibley added.

  The festival was also joined by the Forsyth County Health Department, which set up a free HIV and sexually transmitted disease testing site at the event. Despite earlier support, the health agency is now trying to distance itself from the activities in the wake of intense backlash.

  “Our staff was aware that there would be drag performances but was not involved with planning the event and had no information regarding the age of the attendees,” Forsyth Public Health Director Joshua Swift said in a statement, adding that they spent $58 on supplies using its operational budget, funded locally and in-part by the state.

  “We do not condone the actions that allegedly took place during the event,” the health official said.

  Chaya Raichik, the woman behind Libs of TikTok, gained a Twitter following of over 2 million by posting unaltered videos of leftist educators discussing how they indoctrinate their usually young students into radical race and sex ideologies. She has been accused of spreading right-wing anti-LGBT conspiracy theories, although all the clips she published were originally posted on TikTok by the leftists themselves.

  “When it comes to things like radical gender theory and critical race theory, we’ve been told by the far-Left that it’s not happening,” Raichik said earlier this year in an interview on EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program.

  “[When it comes to] the drag queen entertainment for children we’re told, ‘Oh, it’s not happening. These things are not happening. It’s a Right-wing conspiracy theory,’” she continued. “And then, I come in with firsthand evidence of teachers and drag queens talking about these things and saying, ‘Yes, I’m doing this.’”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 20:20

• FTC Complaint Targets OpenAI's ChatGPT, Calls For Suspension Of New 'Bias Reinforcing' Chatbot Deployment
  FTC Complaint Targets OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Calls For Suspension Of New ‘Bias Reinforcing’ Chatbot Deployment

  Tech ethics organization Center for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Policy filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission on Thursday, asserting that Microsoft-backed startup OpenAI’s recently introduced ChatGPT-4 product violates federal consumer protection law. They have urged a halt on all new generations of artificial intelligence chatbots by OpenAI for commercial deployment. 

  In a complaint to the agency, CAIDP asked the FTC to investigate and suspend further deployment of OpenAI’s commercial products until the research firm complies with the FTC Guidance for AI products. 

  CAIDP stated ChatGPT-4 is “biased, deceptive, and a risk to privacy and public safety.” The complaint is led by privacy advocate Marc Rotenberg who said:

  “The FTC has a clear responsibility to investigate and prohibit unfair and deceptive trade practices. We believe that the FTC should look closely at OpenAI and GPT-4.

  “We are specifically asking the FTC to determine whether the company has complied with the guidance the federal agency has issued.”

  OpenAI launched ChatGPT-4 in early March. CAIDP pointed out that the technical description of the AI chatbot describes a dozen major risks, including “Disinformation and influence operations.” OpenAI even warned that “AI systems will have even greater potential to reinforce entire ideologies, worldviews, truths, and untruths, and to cement them or lock them in, foreclosing future contestation, reflection, and improvement.”

  The GPT-4 system card (p.9) states that with wider adoption:

  “AI systems will have even greater potential to reinforce entire ideologies, worldviews, truths and untruths, and to cement them or lock them in, foreclosing future contestation, reflection, and improvement” pic.twitter.com/aHbLJq7Uf2

  — Iason Gabriel (@IasonGabriel) March 15, 2023

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

  CAIDP said in the complaint that ChatGPT-4 fails to meet the FTC’s standard of being “transparent, explainable, fair and empirically sound while fostering accountability.” They warned the chatbot is a potential risk to society. 

  The complaint comes days after Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak, AI pioneer Yoshua Bengio and others signed an open letter calling for a six-month pause of new AI chatbots more powerful than ChatGPT-4. 

  “We’ve reached the point where these systems are smart enough that they can be used in ways that are dangerous for society,” said Bengio, director of the University of Montreal’s Montreal Institute for Learning Algorithms, adding, “And we don’t yet understand.”

  Their concerns were laid out in a letter titled “Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter,” which was spearheaded by the Future of Life Institute – a nonprofit advised by Musk.

  Musk – an early founder and financial backer of OpenAI, and Wozniak, have been outspoken about the dangers of AI for a while. We’ve outlined some of those dangers, such as political bias: 

  • Go Woke, Get Broken: ChatGPT Tricked Out Of Far-Left Bias By Alter Ego “DAN”
  • ChatGPT Writes Poem Praising Hunter Biden, But…

  And the bias isn’t just with ChatGPT:

  • Google’s New Bard AI Is Riddled With Political Bias

  Tech investor David Sacks recently revealed: “There is mounting evidence OpenAI’s safety layer is very biased… If you thought trust and safety were bad under Vijaya or Yoel, wait until the AI does it.”

  #1 David Sacks breaks down how the safety layer of ‘ChatGPT is a Democrat’:

  “There is mounting evidence OpenAI’s safety layer is very biased… If you thought trust and safety were bad under Vijaya or Yoel, wait until the AI does it.”https://t.co/X63j1DmJdu@DavidSacks @amuse pic.twitter.com/yyzLb19NLy

  — kanekoa.substack.com (@KanekoaTheGreat) February 20, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 20:00

• Saudi Aramco Bets On Continuous Growth Of Chinese Oil Demand
  Saudi Aramco Bets On Continuous Growth Of Chinese Oil Demand

  By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com,

  The world’s largest crude oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, is betting big on the growing market for crude China, as Saudi oil giant Aramco is strengthening its downstream presence and crude supply market share in the world’s top importer.  

  

  Saudi Aramco announced this week two major refinery and petrochemical deals in China, which not only give the world’s largest oil firm a share of the Chinese downstream market but also an additional export outlet for 690,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Saudi crude in China.   

  With the two agreements, Saudi Arabia is betting on continuous growth in Chinese oil demand on the one hand. On the other hand, the Kingdom is looking to boost its market share in the world’s top oil importer, where its partner in the OPEC+ pact, Russia, has gained market share with cheap crude after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions on Moscow that followed. 

  Saudi Arabia and Russia have been neck and neck on the Chinese oil market for years, but the fight for market share has become more contested since the war in Ukraine began as Russia pivoted to Asia and now bets on China and India as the key buyers of its crude, often offered at wide discounts to international benchmarks. 

  Saudi Arabia sells its crude oil under long-term contracts, so it has a guaranteed share of the Chinese market. But Russia, having pivoted to Asia for crude and fuel sales after the Western sanctions, is offering its oil at discounts and could attract more Chinese buyers who don’t abide by the G7 price caps.

  Russia was the single largest crude oil supplier to China in January and February, overtaking Saudi Arabia, which was the number-one supplier of oil to China last year.

  As China accelerated the buying of cheap Russian crude oil at discounts to international benchmarks, Chinese imports of crude from Russia jumped by 23.8% year over year to 1.94 million bpd in January and February 2023, per data by China’s General Administration of Customs cited by Reuters.

  While Russia pushes to sell its crude—banned in the West—in Asia at discounts, Saudi Arabia is locking in long-term demand in China with stakes in refining and petrochemical projects. 

  A Saudi Aramco joint venture plans to build a $10-billion refining and petrochemical complex in China over the next three years, the Saudi oil giant said on Sunday. The complex in northeast China will have the capacity to process 300,000 bpd, of which Aramco will supply 210,000 bpd. 

  The project “represents a major milestone in our ongoing downstream expansion strategy in China and the wider region, which is an increasingly significant driver of global petrochemical demand,” Mohammed Al Qahtani, Aramco Executive Vice President of Downstream, said on Sunday. 

  On the following day, Aramco said it would buy 10% in private refiner Rongsheng Petrochemical for the equivalent of $3.6 billion and would supply 480,000 bpd of Arabian crude oil to Rongsheng affiliate Zhejiang Petroleum and Chemical Co. Ltd (ZPC), under a long-term sales agreement. 

  The two deals give Aramco a long-term export outlet to 690,000 bpd of Saudi crude to China, which would boost Saudi Arabia’s market share by locking in contracts for the coming years and decades. 

  The acquisition “demonstrates Aramco’s long-term commitment to China and belief in the fundamentals of the Chinese petrochemicals sector,” Aramco’s Al Qahtani said. 

  “It also promises to secure a reliable supply of essential crude to one of China’s most important refiners,” the executive added.  

  Russia may be attracting Chinese buyers with cheaper spot cargoes, but Saudi Arabia is playing the long game with long-term contracts to lock in oil sales for decades. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 19:40

• Libs Of TikTok Confronts AOC For Violating Committee Ethics Rules – Her Response Is Predictable
  Libs Of TikTok Confronts AOC For Violating Committee Ethics Rules – Her Response Is Predictable

  Whenever leftists are confronted by facts and evidence, their go-to response is always to accuse their opponents of some kind of “phobia” rather than address the issues at hand.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez does not disappoint in that regard when faced with an ethics violation delivered by Libs Of TikTok founder Chaya Raichik. 

  BREAKING: I served @AOC with an ethics complaint after she lied about me in a committee hearing. AOC wasn’t in her office but then I bumped into her as I was leaving the Capitol!

  Watch what happens: pic.twitter.com/Lhrrzo1w8Q

  — Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) March 30, 2023

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

  AOC accused Libs Of TikTok of posting false information on Boston Children’s Hospital engaged in gender affirmation surgeries and inciting a bomb threat to the facility.  The Boston Children’s Hospital did in fact erase references on their website to such surgeries available to 17-year-olds after the Libs Of TikTok exposure.  Studies at the same hospital also show it approved gender-affirming chest surgeries for individuals over 15 years old and genital surgeries for those over 17 years of age.    

  While AOC accuses Raichik of being “transphobic” before running away, and Libs Of TikTok has been blocked on numerous occasions by social media platforms, it should be pointed out that the account simply re-posts the videos of leftists and their hot takes.  In other words, Libs Of TikTok is often labeled as “hate speech” merely for showing the rants of leftist activists to the world.  The irony of this cannot be ignored. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 19:20

• BlackRock's Larry Fink And The New Post-ESG Realism
  BlackRock’s Larry Fink And The New Post-ESG Realism

  Authored by Rupert Darwall via RealClear Wire,

  As regular as the turn of the seasons, each January sees Larry Fink, founder and CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, publish a lengthy letter on the state of the world and its implications for finance and investors. This year, January turned to February, and still no letter. Instead, February saw Tim Buckley, CEO of Vanguard, global number-two asset manager, give a groundbreaking interview explaining Vanguard’s decision late last year to quit the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) initiative, which had been formed ahead of the 2021 Glasgow climate conference to reallocate capital in line with net zero emissions targets.

  “It would be hubris to presume that we know the right strategy for the thousands of companies that Vanguard invests in,” Buckley told the Financial Times, adding that Vanguard was “not in the game of politics.” He warned investors against expecting superior returns from environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing. “Our research indicates that ESG investing does not have any advantage over broad-based investing.”

  

  Writing five days later in the Wall Street Journal, Terrence Keely, former BlackRock executive and author of Sustainable, zeroed in on the conflict of interest highlighted by Vanguard’s departure from NZAM and NZAM’s net zero goal. Swept along by climate-change fervor, an investment manager “can’t make such commitments without reneging on its fiduciary duties,” Keeley argued. Membership of an alliance committed to achieving net zero demands clairvoyance that no investment manager can promise. “If Mr. Buckley is right, then hundreds of other financial institutions with trillions of assets under management are wrong”—Keeley’s unstated implication being that if Vanguard is right, BlackRock is also wrong.

  When it came earlier this month, Fink’s 2023 letter colored in the new investment climate adumbrated by BlackRock’s chief competitor. Whereas Fink’s 2021 letter to CEOs mentioned net zero 22 times and his 2022 letter, nine times, net zero was referred to only once this year—and then, only in passing (“European governments are also developing incentives to support the transition to a net zero economy and drive growth.”) Similarly, mentions of ESG have fallen from ten in 2021, to one last year, to none this year. How times have changed.

  Two years ago, BlackRock made a blunt demand of the companies that it invests in: “We are asking”—that’s an instruction; you can hardly say no to the world’s largest investor—“companies to disclose a plan for how their business model will be compatible with a net zero economy.” This hasn’t been entirely walked back. BlackRock, Fink says, has been vocal in the past about companies disclosing how they plan to navigate the energy transition, but the tone now is softer and less vocal. It is not the role of an asset manager like BlackRock to engineer a particular outcome in the economy, Fink writes, and it’s not its place to tell companies what to do. Forswearing the clairvoyance that Keeley criticizes, Fink says that BlackRock doesn’t “know the ultimate path and timing of the transition,” a position that is not as crystalline as Buckley’s but is hard to reconcile with BlackRock’s continued membership of NZAM. Had this been BlackRock’s position two years ago, it would have been noisily condemned by climate activists and BlackRock would have been accused of sabotaging the Glasgow climate conference. So far, there has scarcely been a murmur. The world is quietly moving on from net zero.

  So have BlackRock’s priorities. Whereas climate rates five mentions this year, compared with 27 two years ago, there are 122 mentions of clients—over four times the number in the BlackRock Global Executive Committee’s “Dear Clients” letter two years ago. Even more revealing is the change in the number of mentions of trust and fiduciary. There are 21 mentions of trust this year and one in the 2021 letter. That letter, billed “Net zero: a fiduciary approach,” contained only one other mention of fiduciary, a lapse that bears out Keeley’s argument on the incompatibility of imposing climate targets on asset portfolios and investment managers discharging their fiduciary duties.

  Fink’s emphasis has changed, too. Two years ago, Fink compared climate change with the Covid pandemic as an existential threat exposing the fragility of society. This year, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and heightened geopolitical tensions bring national and economic security “front and center.” In the short term, making supply chains more resilient is highly inflationary, Fink writes, and it’s fair to say that Fink doesn’t believe that the Inflation Reduction Act will reduce inflation. “I believe inflation is more likely to stay closer to 3.5 percent or 4 percent in the next few years.”

  The crisis that Fink highlights in this year’s letter is not a climate crisis, but a silent crisis of people not saving and investing sufficiently for their retirement. Results of an Edelman Trust Barometer survey asking whether people thought their families would be better off in five years were at an all-time low in 24 out of 28 countries. “When people are afraid, they may save, but they won’t invest,” Fink observes. “We need leaders today who will give people reasons to be hopeful, who can articulate a vision for a brighter future.” Amen to that. It’s high time to end talk about existential crises to be addressed with extraordinarily costly measures that make people poorer, weaken national and economic security and, instead, turn attention to tackling soluble problems with positive solutions.

  Rupert Darwall is a senior fellow of the RealClear Foundation and author of  Climate-Risk Disclosure: A Flimsy Pretext for a Green Power Grab.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 19:00

• Democrats Said No One Is Coming To Take Your Gas Appliances – They Lied
  Democrats Said No One Is Coming To Take Your Gas Appliances – They Lied

  In February of this year Democrats and climate activists seized on a study published by a group called Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), and the conclusions of the paper sent alarmists into a frenzy – Claiming they had evidence that natural gas based appliances including gas stoves create emissions that are dangerous to human health, causing asthma and impairing cognitive development, specifically in children.  The Biden Administration’s Department of Energy reviewed the study and discussion mounted over the possibility of an incremental ban on various gas appliances, including up to 50% of gas stove models.      

  The RMI study turned out to be yet another example of the political co-option of science as a weapon for the Net Zero agenda regularly touted by the United Nations, Democrats in the US and progressive politicians across Europe.

  Almost immediately the findings of the study were debunked.  As the American Gas Association observed in a responding statement, the RMI testing did not include real life appliance usage, and:

  “Ignored [previous] literature, including one study of data collected from more than 500,000 children in 47 countries that ‘detected no evidence’ of an association between the use of gas as a cooking fuel and either asthma symptoms or asthma diagnosis.”

  Rather suspiciously, Biden’s Energy Secretary, Jennifer Granholm, met privately with the leader of the Rocky Mountain Institute, Jules Kortenhorst, in 2021.  Around a year later, the institute produced a study which defies all previous science on the health risks of natural gas appliances and which serves the interests of Biden’s climate change policies.  Granholm would later throw support behind the findings of the RMI study, stating that:  

  “We can and must FIX this…Through [President Biden’s] Inflation Reduction Act, Americans will have greater access to Electric and Induction Cooktops: keeps pollution out of the home. Cooks food faster. Helps families save money.”

  It should also be noted that RMI has been the recipient of millions of dollars of DOE funding in the past, including a $4.4 million grant in March 2022.

  As the truth about the RMI findings was revealed and the data found inadequate, pressure mounted from various groups, including conservatives, for the White House to abandon plans to restrict gas appliances.  The White House seemingly relented.  Democrats screeched about the “paranoia” of conservatives, asserting that no one was coming to take people’s gas stoves.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez argued that:

  “This is about a decision about what may be sold and regulations in the far future, OK? So everyone, just take the temperature down a little bit. No secret government agency is going to bust down your door and take your gas stove away…”

  This kind of gaslighting (no pun intended) has become the standard response by Democrats when they are caught in a compromising position.  When a strategy falls apart, they assert that the attack never happened and it was all in our minds.  However, after the failure of Democrats to implement restrictions at the federal level, they have simply moved on to other avenues.  

  The reality is that the RMI study was never about public health, it was only a means to frighten Americans into accepting climate change controls on petroleum and gas.  The plan is obvious – Start with something small, such as gas stoves or gas heat, and then use that as a springboard to eventually ban or tax all carbon based energy.

  Multiple Democrat controlled cities and states are now instituting restrictions or timed bans on natural gas appliances, including San Francisco, LA, San Diego, Seattle and New York.  These cities are phasing out gas in new homes within the next 5 years.  California is planning to phase out gas appliances by 2030.  The state of New York under Kathy Hochul is nearing a deal to ban gas appliances in new homes by 2025.  As is often the case, progressive cities and states tend to act as test cases for future bans at the national level.

  To get insight into what climate change authoritarians intend for the US in the future, one need only look at Europe and the UK.  In Britain, households are to be financially penalized if they do not switch away from gas under net zero policies to be unveiled soon.

  The UK secretary of state for energy security and net zero, said:  “If we want people to switch to an electricity-based economy, it would be better if [levies] were shifted onto the gas side of things…It automatically makes the economics of an electric-driven economy better.”

  In the US, over 38% of all households rely on natural gas for energy.  In states like California it is estimated that energy usage would have to plummet (along with living standards) if all homes used electricity only.  For global carbon standards to be met, climate scientists argue that population growth will have to stop, and over time human numbers would have to be systematically reduced through birth control methods.  

  Setting aside the fact that climate science is itself rooted in numerous inaccuracies and fallacies, the logistics of shifting the population away from oil and gas energy are impossible without placing massive strain on existing electrical grids and destabilizing the economy.  This is perhaps why Democrats and climate alarmists often lie about their intentions and use subversion and incrementalism to enact policy – They don’t want to be forced to admit the true cost of their Net Zero world and risk a furious response from the public.  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 18:40

• "This Is Political Persecution": Trump Rages, DeSantis 'Won't Extradite', McCarthy Cries 'Injustice' Over Indictment
  “This Is Political Persecution”: Trump Rages, DeSantis ‘Won’t Extradite’, McCarthy Cries ‘Injustice’ Over Indictment

  Update (2040ET): According to Trump’s attorneys he is expected to be arraigned as early as Tuesday, the NY Times gleefully reports.

  *  *  *

  Update (1827ET):

  Trump has responded to the lawsuit, saying in a statement: “This is Political Persecution and Election Interference at the highest level in history.”

  

  Full statement:

  ‘This is Political Persecution and Election Interference at the highest level in history. From the time I came down the golden escalator at Trump Tower, and even before I was sworn in as your President of the United States, the Radical Left Democrats – the enemy of the hardworking men and women of this Country – have been engaged in a Witch-Hunt to destroy the Make America Great Again movement. You remember it just like I do: Russia, Russia, Russia; the Mueller Hoax; Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine; Impeachment Hoax 1; Impeachment Hoax 2; the illegal and unconstitutional Mar-a-Lago raid; and now this.

  ‘The Democrats have lied, cheated and stolen in their obsession with trying to ‘Get Trump,’ but now they’ve done the unthinkable – indicting a completely innocent person in an act of blatant Election Interference.

  “Never before in our Nation’s history has this been done. The Democrats have cheated countless times over the decades, including spying on my campaign, but weaponizing our justice system to punish a political opponent, who just so happens to be a President of the United States and by far the leading Republican candidate for President, has never happened before. Ever.

  “Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, who was hand-picked and funded by George Soros, is a disgrace. Rather than stopping the unprecedented crime wave taking over New York City, he’s doing Joe Biden’s dirty work, ignoring the murders and burglaries and assaults he should be focused on. This is how Bragg spends his time!

  “I believe this Witch-Hunt will backfire massively on Joe Biden. The American people realize exactly what the Radical Left Democrats are doing here. Everyone can see it. So our Movement, and our Party – united and strong – will first defeat Alvin Bragg, and then we will defeat Joe Biden, and we are going to throw every last one of these Crooked Democrats out of office so we can MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

  Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley opined on the indictment in a Thursday interview with Fox News.

  “Bragg reportedly has secured his indictment. He has made history, but it is an inglorious moment where even some on the left have criticized the effort.  This is a patently political prosecution. Bragg and NY AG James ran on bagging Trump. This has fulfilled that pledge but, if the indictment follows the course described in coverage, it is deeply flawed theory. We will have to wait to see the indictment. …The objection is not to the prosecuting of a misdemeanor but the reported effort to extend the statute of limitations under an unprecedented bootstrapping theory. We have not heard of an alternative criminal theory.

  Jonathan Turley on the indictment of President Trump:

  “It’s rather outrageous. It’s legally pathetic.”pic.twitter.com/fDn1D0f0fx

  — Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) March 30, 2023

  Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, meanwhile, has issued a statement condemning the “weaponization of the legal system to advance a political agenda,” adding that Florida “will not assist in an extradition request given the questionable circumstances at issue with this Soros-backed Manhattan prosecutor and his political agenda.”

  The weaponization of the legal system to advance a political agenda turns the rule of law on its head.

  It is un-American.

  The Soros-backed Manhattan District Attorney has consistently bent the law to downgrade felonies and to excuse criminal misconduct. Yet, now he is…

  — Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) March 30, 2023

  House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has weighed in as well, tweeting; “Alvin Bragg has irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election.

  “As he routinely frees violent criminals to terrorize the public, he weaponized our sacred system of justice against President Donald Trump.”

  Alvin Bragg has irreparably damaged our country in an attempt to interfere in our Presidential election.

  As he routinely frees violent criminals to terrorize the public, he weaponized our sacred system of justice against President Donald Trump.

  The American people will not…

  — Kevin McCarthy (@SpeakerMcCarthy) March 30, 2023

  The President of El Salvador chimes in;

  Imagine if this happened to a leading opposition presidential candidate here in El Salvador 🙃 https://t.co/T8TSfr3Nq4

  — Nayib Bukele (@nayibbukele) March 30, 2023

  Tucker Carlson opines;

  Donald Trump is now the first former President of the United States ever to be indicted. There is no coming back from this moment. pic.twitter.com/pHuXdDRAka

  — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) March 31, 2023

  *  *  *

  A Manhattan Grand Jury has voted to indict former President Donald Trump over hush money paid to former porn star Stormy Daniels, according to the NY Times, citing four people familiar with the matter.

  

  The still-sealed felony indictment, which comes as 2024 campaign season comes into focus, makes Trump the first former president in US history to face criminal charges.

  The exact charges are not yet known, however the Times expects them to be announced in the coming days by the Manhattan district attorney’s office. Prosecutors working for DA Alvin L. Bragg will ask Trump to surrender and face arraignment on said unknown charges.

  [U]nlike the investigations that arose from his time in the White House, this case is built around a tawdry episode that predates Mr. Trump’s presidency. The reality star turned presidential candidate who shocked the political establishment by winning the White House now faces a reckoning for a hush money payment that buried a sex scandal in the final days of the 2016 campaign.

  Mr. Trump has consistently denied all wrongdoing and attacked Mr. Bragg, a Democrat, accusing him of leading a politically motivated prosecution. He has also denied any affair with the porn star, Stormy Daniels, who had been looking to sell her story of a tryst with Mr. Trump during the campaign. –NY Times

  The move also comes just before the grand jury takes a one-month break until late April.

  Interestingly, as The Epoch Times’ Jack Phillips reported, this month-long delay came after an attorney in former President Donald Trump’s orbit who testified in front of a Manhattan grand jury earlier this month believes that there has been a shift in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against the 45th president.

  “Well, I think I got through to them, because [Monday] I understand they called back another witness by the name of David Pecker, who used to run the National Enquirer,” Costello, a former Michael Cohen attorney, told Newsmax on Tuesday.

  “Basically, what they’re doing is really gerrymandering this,” he said of Bragg’s probe into Trump.

  Costello said he had represented Cohen, himself a former Trump lawyer, and told reporters last week that he does not believe Cohen is a credible witness against Trump.

  Sounds like that wasn’t the case.

  The prosecution’s star witness in the case is former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who paid Stormy Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet about sleeping with Trump. Cohen said that Trump directed him to buy her silence (contrary to a 2018 letter from his lawyer claiming the opposite), and says that the Trump organization helped cover it up.

  The case brought by Mr. Bragg, a Democrat, is far from a sure bet. Mr. Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus Vance Jr., and federal prosecutors each passed on charging Mr. Trump in a stand-alone case related to the hush money. If the case goes to trial, a conviction would almost certainly require a jury to credit the testimony of former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who has faced his own legal troubles and pleaded guilty to an array of federal felonies in 2018. Among them was a campaign-finance offense for the porn-star payment, as well as charges of lying to a bank and to Congress. -WSJ

  Meanwhile, this didn’t age well…

  Did Alvin Bragg just make Trump into even more of a martyr?

  

  If this happens, Trump will be re-elected in a landslide victory

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 18, 2023

  As Techno Fog writes via The Reactionary…

  The indictment is an absolute scandal, the banana republic on parade, the prosecutor using the weapons of his office to attack his political opponent.

  Bragg and his predecessor’s slow-walking of the investigation, with its inception by Manhattan DA goes back to 2019, evidences both the dubious nature of the case against Trump and the political motivations for prosecuting Trump. Theoretically, this should be a simple case. Yet the investigation went on for nearly five years, despite what they’ve possessed: overzealous prosecutors who wanted to charge Trump with racketeering, the cooperating witnesses, the likely millions of pages of materials from the Trump Organization.

  Now suddenly, the insanely pro-criminal Manhattan DA, who demanded his prosecutors reduce charges for violent criminals, is prioritizing law and order. It’s hard to believe there are legitimate reasons – for prosecutors, that means seeking justice – for that transformation. Why bring the case now? It’s the start of the 2024 presidential campaign season.

  You can’t help but think of the political calculations that went on in Bragg’s head. Not only does he benefit personally, now elevated to a liberal folk hero after being the prosecutor to finally get Trump (a campaign promise he keeps), but this throws a grenade into the Republican race. Will the GOP base rally to Trump? How will the other candidates respond?

  And what will this do for the undecideds and the independents and the swing voters – those who are essential to victory in 2024? 

  Some of those questions will be answered in the short term. Some of them won’t be answered until election day, assuming Trump gets the GOP nod.

  That’s because the case won’t go away. It’s illegitimate and political, but it’s here to stay for the time being. Don’t be surprised if the trial date is set for the first half of 2024. And don’t understate the danger to Trump, who will face a jury of Biden voters. Biden won Manhattan 86.7% to 12.3% according to the New York Times. The jury of Trump’s peers will be friendly to the prosecution. That’s all the Manhattan DA might need to secure a conviction. Trump could very well win on appeal but the damage – which carries national repercussions – might already have been done.

  And that’s the whole point of this dirty scheme.

  Click here to subscribe to The Reactionary

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 18:28

• Twitter Restricts Conservative Accounts Over 'Trans Day Of Vengeance' Posts
  Twitter Restricts Conservative Accounts Over ‘Trans Day Of Vengeance’ Posts

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Twitter has restricted multiple accounts belonging to prominent conservatives in recent days after they posted about  an upcoming rally called the “Trans Day of Vengeance.”

  

  On Tuesday, the Elon Musk-owned company restricted Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s (R-Ga.) congressional account for seven days after she repeatedly posted an image of a poster about the rally. In the same post, Greene alleged that Antifa was organizing the event, which is being hosted by the Trans Radical Activist Network.

  After her congressional account was restored by Twitter, Greene issued another post from the account that read, “My Congressional Twitter account was suspended today. @elonmusk, how is it ‘violent speech’ to expose the ‘Trans Day of Vengence’ [sic] a day after a mass murder committed by a transgender shooter? And to call on the DOJ to investigate it? I condemned the incitement to violence & demanded a federal law enforcement investigation in the Tweet.”

  Her account was then promptly suspended for seven days.

  Yesterday, my official Twitter account was termporarily suspended for warning about Antifa’s Trans Day of Vengeance in front of the Supreme Court.

  This planned event is being whitewashed by global brands and the left. Meanwhile, there’s still no acknowledgement of the innocent… pic.twitter.com/666WRD9EZX

  — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) March 29, 2023

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

  “My Congressional account was suspended for 7 days for exposing Antifa, who are organizing a call for violence called ‘Trans Day of Vengeance,’” Greene said in a post on her personal Twitter account on Tuesday. “The day after the mass murder of children by a trans shooter.”

  Following the ban, Ella Irwin, Twitter’s head of trust and safety, said on Twitter that the platform is removing images of the poster due to concerns that it could incite violence.

  “We had to automatically sweep our platform and remove >5000 tweets /retweets of this [‘Trans Day of Vengeance’] poster,” Irwin wrote. “We do not support tweets that incite violence irrespective of who posts them. ‘Vengeance’ does not imply peaceful protest. Organizing or support for peaceful protests is ok.”

  

  More Accounts Restricted

  Elsewhere, The Federalist CEO and co-founder Sean Davis was reportedly locked out of his account for allegedly violating Twitter’s rules regarding “violent speech.”

  Prior to the account block, Davis had posted: “The cold-blooded mass murder at a Christian school in Nashville by an apparent transgender person came just days before a planned ‘Trans Day of Vengeance’ organized by the Trans Radical Activist Network.”

  According to the publication, Twitter has already taken down the tweet but informed Davis his account will remain locked until he manually deletes himself.

  Davis reportedly filed an appeal with Twitter to reinstate his account but the platform rejected it, meaning he is permanently banned from accessing his account until he removes the tweet in question.

  “This is deliberate censorship and gaslighting designed to memory-hole the FACT that the Nashville shooter targeted and murdered Christian children and teachers just days ahead of a scheduled ‘Trans Day of Vengeance,” Davis said in a statement. “Twitter is lying about the facts and defaming those of us who reported on them.”

  Sean Davis, our @FDRLST CEO who has been locked out of his account for reporting accurately about a rally writes about what the latest censorship campaign means. “Twitter Cannot Be Saved. It’s Time For Free Speech Proponents To Let It Die”: https://t.co/iXlafNUDHp @elonmusk

  — Mollie (@MZHemingway) March 29, 2023

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

  Daily Wire journalist Luke Rosiak was also suspended from Twitter on Tuesday after he posted a link about the event, according to the publication.

  Twitter removed a post from Rosiak linking to an article he wrote earlier this month about the activists organizing the event.

  “The shooting of a Christian school by a transgender comes the same week that activists scheduled a ‘Trans Day of Vengeance,’ with the group also raising money for firearms training,” the post read.

  Twitter told Rosiak that the post violated “rules against violent speech.”

  I was locked out of my account yesterday for tweeting a transgender day of vengeance ad. https://t.co/D9h0JOTiZW

  — Catturd ™ (@catturd2) March 29, 2023

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

  

  We were locked out of our account for this tweet. It linked to our reporting about a “trans day of vengeance” that was being organized by far-left activists. @elonmusk pic.twitter.com/hns06UKKg0

  — The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) March 28, 2023

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

  Police Say Nashville Shooter Was Transgender

  “He was told that he must delete the original post to regain access to his account; he appealed the decision, observing that he was not ‘advocating for violence’ but rather ‘stating a fact and noting disapprovingly’ that others had been calling for violence,” the Daily Wire reported.

  Elsewhere, Journalist and author Andy Ngo was reportedly locked out of his Twitter account for reporting on the upcoming event.

  Trans Radical Activist Network still retains its account on Twitter, although its tweets are protected, meaning only approved followers can see content posted on the account.

  According to its official website, the Trans Radical Activist Network is a “nationwide network of activists and community organizers for transgender/non-binary rights.”

  “The Trans/Non-Binary/Gender Non-Conforming/Intersex communities are facing astronomical amounts of hate from the world. At least a 100 Gender Affirming care ban bills have been proposed,” the website states. “So far in 2023, 12 lives have been lost, [sic] 2022 we lost over 60 people. Our community has a stigma attached and significantly impacts marginalized communities at a higher intensity. There are members of our own communities that have turned against the true meaning of Pride,” it adds.

  The Trans Day of Vengeance is scheduled for April 1, according to the website, just days after 28-year-old Audrey Elizabeth Hale, who police say identified as transgender, opened fire at Covenant Christian Academy, shooting dead three children and three adults.

  However, the organizers note that the protest is “about unity, not inciting violence” and adds that it does “not encourage violence and it is not welcome at this event.”

  Trans activists have also noted that the “trans day of vengeance” is a meme that has been around in the trans community for years and is not a call to violence, The Associated Press reports.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 18:20

• Huge Block Of Gulf Of Mexico Auctioned For Oil Drilling, Infuriating Biden's Climate Activists
  Huge Block Of Gulf Of Mexico Auctioned For Oil Drilling, Infuriating Biden’s Climate Activists

  As required by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) auctioned oil and gas drilling rights across 73.4 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico despite the Biden administration’s pledge to end new leasing as part of climate change initiatives. 

  According to BOEM, 32 companies participated in the Gulf of Mexico Lease Sale 259, submitting $309,798,397 in total bids. Reuters pointed out that Chevron Corp, ExxonMobil Corp, and BP Plc were among the top bidders. 

  The Guardian said the size of Lease 259 is comparable in size to Italy. 

  

  The auction was a requirement in President Biden’s IRA, which safeguards federal oil and gas leasing and mandates lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico by the end of March. 

  Revenues received from offshore oil and gas leases will be paid to US Treasury, Gulf Coast states (Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama) and local governments, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and the Historic Preservation Fund. 

  The auction comes weeks after Biden authorized a large ConocoPhillips oil project in northwest Alaska.

  A little awkward, considering he has pledged during the election campaign: “I guarantee you we’re going to end fossil fuels.”

  New oil and gas developments in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska have infuriated climate activists:

  “For the first half of his presidency, Joe Biden led on climate with transformative vision but in the second half he seems to be signaling a disastrous climate U-turn,” Ben Jealous, executive director of the Sierra Club and a prominent progressive, said.

  For instance, Alaska’s $8 billion Willow oil field development project has a 30-year lifespan. The projects in the Gulf also have years, if not more than a decade, lifespan. The notion that Biden wants to ban oil and gas is ‘malarkey,’ and his staunchest climate supporters are getting wind the president is failing on his word. 

  “If he’s making a political calculation, he’s making a wrong one. He’s breaking a major promise on drilling and by going back on his word he will inspire many young people to stay at home rather than voting in 2024. His decisions appear to be rooted in the political and economic calculus of the last century, not this one,” Jealous added. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• China Gloats After Honduras Tells Taiwan To "Pack Up & Leave" Embassy
  China Gloats After Honduras Tells Taiwan To “Pack Up & Leave” Embassy

  This week Honduras delivered a shock to Taiwan and its powerful backer Washington, as the Honduran government ordered Taiwan to vacate its embassy in the country within 30 days. As Reuters underscored in its biting headline Tuesday, Taiwan was told to ‘pack up and leave’ Honduras after ties severed. Adding insult to injury, driving President Xiomara Castro’s decision are efforts to gain more Chinese investment and jobs, at a moment diplomatic ties have been formally established with Beijing.

  The vacate order was first announced deputy foreign minister Antonio Garcia on national broadcast TV. Taiwan was forced to then recall its ambassador. Garcia explained that 30 days “is more than enough time to pack up and leave.”

  

  Now Taiwan is left with a mere 13 diplomatic allies left in the world which recognize it as a “country” in some sense. But these are mostly tiny island nations in Central America and the Pacific, many of which are Washington allies and often bow to US pressure.

  China is feeling emboldened after a streak of recent “wins” going back to 2017, when Panama severed ties with Taipei in favor of Beijing. Then the following year, the Dominican Republic did the same, along with El Salvador, and then there was Solomon Islands which voted in 2019 to switch relations and Nicaragua in 2021 (for the second time switching).

  Taiwan has accused Honduras of diplomatic “bribery” while facing mounting debt:

  Honduras’s decision to break its relationship with Taiwan came after weeks of diplomatic back-and-forth over Honduras’s mounting debt problems. Honduran Foreign Minister Eduardo Enrique Reina this month said the country was “up to its neck” in debt, including $600 million owed to Taiwan.

  Honduras demanded Taiwan provide $2.5 billion in aid before the Central American nation announced it would seek open ties with China, according to Reuters.

  Meanwhile, Chinese state media celebrated the ‘victory’ and promised it won’t be last. For example Global Times put out the gloating headline, “Honduras not to be the last to ‘sever diplomatic ties’ with Taiwan island”.

  The below are words from the state-run editorial shaking a fist at Taiwan and its backers in the West:

  No matter how anxious the DPP authorities are, and no matter how many times Washington sends officials to coerce and lure, it always ends up with Taiwan’s “diplomats” packing up and leaving, often in a very embarrassing manner. This is not only a shame for the DPP authorities, but also a manifestation of the increasing loss of support and popularity of Taiwan secessionist forces in the international community. It’s also an ironclad proof that “Taiwan independence” is a dead end and cannot have a way out. 

  Tsai regards the US as the world😄Just got slapped in the face by Honduras, governor Tsai of Taiwan province is going to the US, seeking for a little comfort. Going to the United States for a “transit” is governor Tsai’s route of sleepwalking. https://t.co/wwXNVyA8Co

  — Hu Xijin 胡锡进 (@HuXijin_GT) March 29, 2023

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

  The Chinese Foreign Ministry hailed Honduras’ move to established diplomatic ties with China and sever relations with Taiwan as “the right choice”.

  Foreign Minister Qin Gang declared: “We inform sternly the Taiwan authorities that engaging in separatist activities for Taiwan independence is against the will and interests of the Chinese nation and against the trend of history, and is doomed to a dead end.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 02:45

• Hungary, Poland Reject "Extremely Dangerous" EU NatGas Cutback Extension
  Hungary, Poland Reject “Extremely Dangerous” EU NatGas Cutback Extension

  Authored by Magyar Hírlap via Remix News,

  “Brussels is once again stealthily taking powers away from member states,” said Hungary’s top diplomat…

  

  Minister of Foreign Affairs Péter Szijjártó in Brussels. (Facebook)

  Hungary and Poland have both voted against the European Commission’s new proposal to extend a regulation that requires a 15 percent reduction in the use of natural gas from member states, said Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó at the EU Energy Council in Brussels on Tuesday.

  According to a statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Szijjártó said at a press conference at the summit that the European Commission has come up with a proposal that would again require a reduction in natural gas consumption instead of pursuing more worthwhile goals like investing in infrastructure.

  Such a regulation was already adopted last year despite Hungarian and Polish opposition, but this one poses a greater threat to Europe’s economy. The previous reduction was during the winter period, when it is actually easier to reduce gas consumption. Although this may seem counterintuitive, gas usage during the winter includes residential and commercial building heating, and it is easier to cut gas usage for heating. In the summer, industrial consumption dominates gas consumption, and cutting gas during this period is far more difficult, even if overall consumption is lower.

  Hungary is warning that extended gas cuts into the summer period will directly impact industry.

  “If the use of natural gas by industry has to be artificially reduced, it means that there is a risk of a downturn in the economy,” Szijjártó underlined, while warning of security of supply problems.

  “In addition, Brussels is once again stealthily taking powers away from member states, as energy use, the national energy mix and the structure of the economy are explicitly national competencies, and by imposing a reduction in gas use, they are effectively infringing on this sovereign right of member states,” Szijjártó stated.

  Hungary’s top diplomat pointed out that after the first ruling, Poland had taken the case to the European Court of Justice, arguing that a unanimous vote was needed for adoption, and Hungary had joined the case on Poland’s side.

  “This time we also voted against this proposal, which unfortunately was supported by everyone except the Poles and us. So, they imposed another 15 percent gas cut as an extension of the previous regulation. This, I repeat, is extremely dangerous, unreasonable and does not solve the problem,” Szijjártó warned.

  “For all these reasons, Hungary did not vote in favor of this proposal, and we continue to clearly take the position that the supply of natural gas is not a political issue, that it is extremely harmful to discriminate against gas sources on political grounds, and that we should help to ensure that as much gas as possible can come to Europe from as many sources as possible,” Szijjártó said.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 03/30/2023 – 02:00

• A State Of Never-Ending Crisis: The Government Is Fomenting Mass Hysteria
  A State Of Never-Ending Crisis: The Government Is Fomenting Mass Hysteria

  Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “This country has been having a nationwide nervous breakdown since 9/11. A nation of people suddenly broke, the market economy goes to shit, and they’re threatened on every side by an unknown, sinister enemy. But I don’t think fear is a very effective way of dealing with things—of responding to reality. Fear is just another word for ignorance.”

  – Hunter S. Thompson, gonzo journalist

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

  

  This is mind-control in its most sinister form.

  With alarming regularity, the nation is being subjected to a spate of violence that terrorizes the public, destabilizes the country, and gives the government greater justifications to crack down, lock down, and institute even more authoritarian policies for the so-called sake of national security without many objections from the citizenry.

  Take this latest shooting in Nashville, Tenn.

  The 28-year-old shooter (a clearly troubled transgender individual in possession of several military-style weapons) opened fire in a Christian elementary school, killing three children and three adults.

  Already, fingers are being pointed and battle lines are being drawn.

  Those who want safety at all costs are clamoring for more gun control measures (if not at an outright ban on assault weapons for non-military, non-police personnel), widespread mental health screening of the general population, more threat assessments and behavioral sensing warnings, more CCTV cameras with facial recognition capabilities, more “See Something, Say Something” programs aimed at turning Americans into snitches and spies, more metal detectors and whole-body imaging devices at soft targets, more roaming squads of militarized police empowered to do random bag searches, more fusion centers to centralize and disseminate information to law enforcement agencies, and more surveillance of what Americans say and do, where they go, what they buy and how they spend their time.

  This is all part of the Deep State’s master plan.

  Ask yourselves: why are we being bombarded with crises, distractions, fake news and reality TV politics? We’re being conditioned like lab mice to subsist on a steady diet of bread-and-circus politics and an endless spate of crises.

  Caught up in this “crisis of the now,” the average person has a hard time keeping up with and remembering all of the “events,” manufactured or otherwise, which occur like clockwork in order to keep us distracted, deluded, amused, and insulated from reality.

  As investigative journalist Mike Adams points out:

  “This psychological bombardment is waged primarily via the mainstream media which assaults the viewer by the hour with images of violence, war, emotions and conflict. Because the human nervous system is hard wired to focus on immediate threats accompanied by depictions of violence, mainstream media viewers have their attention and mental resources funneled into the never-ending ‘crisis of the NOW’ from which they can never have the mental breathing room to apply logic, reason or historical context.”

  Professor Jacques Ellul studied this phenomenon of overwhelming news, short memories and the use of propaganda to advance hidden agendas. “One thought drives away another; old facts are chased by new ones,” wrote Ellul.

  All the while, the government continues to amass more power and authority over the citizenry.

  When we’re being bombarded with wall-to-wall news coverage and news cycles that change every few days, it’s difficult to stay focused on one thing—namely, holding the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law—and the powers-that-be understand this.

  Yet as John Lennon reminds us, “nothing is real,” especially not in the world of politics.

  In other words, it’s all fake, i.e., manufactured, i.e., manipulated to distort reality.

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

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

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

  The more that is beamed at us, the more inclined we are to settle back in our comfy recliners and become passive viewers rather than active participants as unsettling, frightening events unfold.

  Reality and fiction merge as everything around us becomes entertainment fodder.

  We don’t even have to change the channel when the subject matter becomes too monotonous. That’s taken care of for us by the programmers (the corporate media).

  “Living is easy with eyes closed,” says Lennon, and that’s exactly what reality TV that masquerades as American politics programs the citizenry to do: navigate the world with their eyes shut.

  As long as we’re viewers, we’ll never be doers.

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

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

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

  This doesn’t bode well for a citizenry able to sift through masterfully-produced propaganda in order to think critically about the issues of the day, whether it’s fake news peddled by government agencies or foreign entities.

  Those who watch reality shows tend to view what they see as the “norm.” Thus, those who watch shows characterized by lying, aggression and meanness not only come to see such behavior as acceptable and entertaining but also mimic the medium.

  This holds true whether the reality programming is about the antics of celebrities in the White House, in the board room, or in the bedroom.

  It’s a phenomenon called “humilitainment.”

  A term coined by media scholars Brad Waite and Sara Booker, “humilitainment” refers to the tendency for viewers to take pleasure in someone else’s humiliation, suffering and pain.

  “Humilitainment” largely explains not only why American TV watchers are so fixated on reality TV programming but how American citizens, largely insulated from what is really happening in the world around them by layers of technology, entertainment, and other distractions, are being programmed to accept the brutality, surveillance and dehumanizing treatment of the American police state as things happening to other people.

  The ramifications for the future of civic engagement, political discourse and self-government are incredibly depressing and demoralizing.

  This is what happens when an entire nation—bombarded by reality TV programming, government propaganda and entertainment news—becomes systematically desensitized and acclimated to the trappings of a government that operates by fiat and speaks in a language of force.

  Ultimately, the reality shows, the entertainment news, the surveillance society, the militarized police, and the political spectacles have one common objective: to keep us divided, distracted, imprisoned, and incapable of taking an active role in the business of self-government.

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

  How do you change the way people think? You start by changing the words they use.

  In totalitarian regimes—a.k.a. police states—where conformity and compliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used.

  In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind.

  Even when the motives behind this rigidly calibrated reorientation of societal language appear well-intentioned—discouraging racism, condemning violence, denouncing discrimination and hatred—inevitably, the end result is the same: intolerance, indoctrination, infantilism, the chilling of free speech and the demonizing of viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite.

  Labelling something as “fake news” is a masterful way of dismissing truth that may run counter to the ruling power’s own narrative.

  As George Orwell recognized, “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

  Orwell understood only too well the power of language to manipulate the masses. In Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.”

  In this dystopian vision of the future, the Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the Ministry of Peace deals with war and defense, the Ministry of Plenty deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation), the Ministry of Love deals with law and order (torture and brainwashing), and the Ministry of Truth deals with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda). The mottos of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

  Orwell’s Big Brother relied on Newspeak to eliminate undesirable words, strip such words as remained of unorthodox meanings and make independent, non-government-approved thought altogether unnecessary.

  Where we stand now is at the juncture of Oldspeak (where words have meanings, and ideas can be dangerous) and Newspeak (where only that which is “safe” and “accepted” by the majority is permitted).

  Truth is often lost when we fail to distinguish between opinion and fact, and that is the danger we now face as a society. Anyone who relies exclusively on television/cable news hosts and political commentators for actual knowledge of the world is making a serious mistake.

  Unfortunately, since Americans have by and large become non-readers, television has become their prime source of so-called “news.” This reliance on TV news has given rise to such popular news personalities who draw in vast audiences that virtually hang on their every word.

  In our media age, these are the new powers-that-be.

  Yet while these personalities often dispense the news like preachers used to dispense religion, with power and certainty, they are little more than conduits for propaganda and advertisements delivered in the guise of entertainment and news.

  Given the preponderance of news-as-entertainment programming, it’s no wonder that viewers have largely lost the ability to think critically and analytically and differentiate between truth and propaganda, especially when delivered by way of fake news criers and politicians.

  The bottom line is simply this: Americans should beware of letting others—whether they be television news hosts, political commentators or media corporations—do their thinking for them.

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

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

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

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 23:40

• Levi's To Use AI-Generated Models To Promote 'Diversity And Sustainability'
  Levi’s To Use AI-Generated Models To Promote ‘Diversity And Sustainability’

  Levi’s is undergoing a word salad of what they characterized as a “digital transformation journey” of diversity, equity, inclusion and sustainability, by partnering with an AI company to use computer-generated fashion models which they will use to “supplement human models,” Engadget reports.

  

  Engadget‘s Will Shanklin also nails what’s going on – writing: “Although that sounds noble on the surface, Levi’s is essentially hiring a robot to generate the appearance of diversity while ridding itself of the burden of paying human beings who represent the qualities it wants to be associated with its brand.”

  Levi Strauss is partnering with Amsterdam-based digital model studio Lalaland.ai for the initiative. Founded in 2019, the company’s mission is “to see more representation in the fashion industry” and “create an inclusive, sustainable, and diverse design chain.” It aims to let customers see what various fashion items would look like on a person who looks like them via “hyper-realistic” models “of every body type, age, size and skin tone.”

  The branding is just as woke, with the clothing designer claiming that the partnership is about “increasing the number and diversity of our models for our products in a sustainable way,” adding “We see fashion and technology as both an art and a science, and we’re thrilled to be partnering with Lalaland.ai, a company with such high-quality technology that can help us continue on our journey for a more diverse and inclusive customer experience.”

  

  According to the company, “AI will likely never fully replace human models for us.”

  As Shanklin opines in closing;

  I can’t help but see this as the first step in a dystopian slow walk toward automating the industry. As AI-generated “photography,” art and writing grow ever more convincing, we would be naive to take corporations at face value when they insist moves like this are about PR-friendly principles like celebrating diversity and looking out for the environment. At the very least, it’s awfully convenient that those high-minded motives also let them mass-produce something that previously required hiring people.

  Meanwhile, Levi Strauss is reportedly cutting nearly 20% of its workforce in a process which began last year as part of a restructuring plan to save $75 to $100 million per year.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 23:20

• DOJ Memos Dissuaded Marshals From Arresting Protestors At SCOTUS Justices' Homes: Sen. Britt
  DOJ Memos Dissuaded Marshals From Arresting Protestors At SCOTUS Justices’ Homes: Sen. Britt

  Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A Senate Republican revealed during a March 28 hearing that an internal Department of Justice (DOJ) memo dissuaded U.S. Marshals from arresting protestors in violation of laws against picketing the homes of judges.

  

  The materials revealed during the hearing show that U.S. Marshals were explicitly directed not to arrest protestors at the homes of Supreme Court (SCOTUS) justices.

  “People want justice to be blind,” said freshman Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), who unveiled the findings during a hearing of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Attorney General Merrick Garland appeared before the panel to testify on the DOJ side of President Joe Biden’s proposed budget.

  Section 1507 of U.S. Code prohibits the picketing of Supreme Court (SCOTUS) justices or other federal judges to change the outcome of a legal case. But when protestors demonstrated at the homes of conservative justices to protest their leaked abortion decision in June 2022, U.S. Marshals made few arrests in connection to the statute.

  This, Britt revealed, was not a mistake. Rather, she showed that a DOJ memo had directly dissuaded agents from making arrests on the basis of Section 1507, instructing them to arrest protestors only as a “last resort” to protect the justices.

  Section 1507 explicitly prohibits “picketing” or “parading” near the residences of judges or justices in order to influence the outcome of a case.

  A few weeks earlier, Garland fielded questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee on his agency’s failure to prosecute those picketing the homes of justices.

  

  During that and other testimony, Garland has insisted that the decision to arrest protestors lies with U.S. Marshals.

  “U.S. Marshals have the authority to arrest anyone under that statute or any other federal statute,” Garland said. “The attorney general does not make the decision to arrest. The Marshals on the scene—they do make the decision of whether to arrest.”

  But newly uncovered materials used to train Marshals to protect the homes of SCOTUS justices show that they were “actively discouraged” from making arrests on grounds of this statute, Britt said.

  “Those materials show that the Marshals likely didn’t make any arrests because they were actively discouraged from doing so,” Britt said.

  The training materials told the Marshals “to avoid, unless absolutely necessary, any criminal enforcement action involving the protestors.”

  Marshals were also told, “Making arrests and initiating prosecutions is not the goal of the [Marshal Service] presence at SCOTUS residences.”

  “The ‘not’ is actually italicized and underlined,” Britt noted.

  The next slide of the training “not to engage in protest-related enforcement actions, beyond those that were strictly and immediately necessary and tailored to ensure the physical security of the justices.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 23:00

• The Great Food Reset Has Begun
  The Great Food Reset Has Begun

  Authored by Thomas Fazi via UnHerd.com,

  We all lose from the global war on farmers…

  France is in flames. Israel is erupting. America is facing a second January 6.

  In the Netherlands, however, the political establishment is reeling from an entirely different type of protest — one that, perhaps more than any other raging today, threatens to destabilise the global order.

  

  The victory of the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB) in the recent provincial elections represents an extraordinary result for an anti-establishment party that was formed just over three years ago. But then again, these are not ordinary times.

  The BBB grew out of the mass demonstrations against the Dutch government’s proposal to cut nitrogen emissions by 50% in the country’s farming sector by 2030 — a target designed to comply with the European Union’s emission-reduction rules. While large farming companies have the means to meet these goals — by using less nitrogen fertiliser and reducing the number of their livestock — smaller, often family-owned farms would be forced to sell or shutter. Indeed, according to a heavily redacted European Commission document, this is precisely the strategy’s goal: “extensifying agriculture, notably through buying out or terminating farms, with the aim of reducing livestock”; this would “first be on a voluntary basis, but mandatory buyout is not excluded if necessary”.

  It is no surprise, then, that the plans sparked massive protests by farmers, who see it as a direct attack on their livelihoods, or that the BBB’s slogan — “No Farms, No Food” — clearly resonated with voters. But aside from concerns about the impact of the measure on the country’s food security, and on a centuries-old rural way of life integral to Dutch national identity, the rationale behind this drastic measure is also questionable. Agriculture currently accounts for almost half of the country’s output of carbon dioxide, yet the Netherlands is responsible for less than 0.4% of the world’s emissions. No wonder many Dutch fail to see how such negligible returns justify the complete overhaul of the country’s farming sector, which is already considered one of the most sustainable in the world: over the past two decades, water dependence for key crops has been reduced by as much as 90%, and the use of chemical pesticides in greenhouses has been almost completely eliminated.

  Farmers also point out that the consequences of the nitrogen cut would extend well beyond the Netherlands. The country, after all, is Europe’s largest exporter of meat and the second-largest agricultural exporter in the world, just behind the United States — in other words, the plan would cause food exports to collapse at a time when the world is already facing a food and resource shortage. We already know what this might look like. A similar ban on nitrogen fertiliser was conducted in Sri Lanka last year, with disastrous consequences: it caused an artificial food shortage that plunged nearly two million Sri Lankans into poverty, leading to an uprising that toppled the government.

  Given the irrational nature of the policy, many protesting farmers believe it can’t simply be blamed on the urbanite “green elites” currently running the Dutch government. They suggest one of the underlying reasons for the move is to squeeze small farmers from the market, allowing them to be bought out by multinational agribusiness giants who recognise the immense value of the country’s land — not only is it highly fertile, but it is also strategically located with easy access to the north Atlantic coast (Rotterdam is the largest port in Europe). They also point out that prime minister Rutte is an Agenda Contributor of the World Economic Forum, which is well known for being corporate-driven, while his finance minister and Minister of Social Affairs and Employment are also tied to the body.

  The struggle playing out in the Netherlands would seem to be part of a much bigger game that seeks to “reset” the international food system. Similar measures are currently being introduced or considered in several other European countries, including Belgium, Germany, Ireland and Britain (where the Government is encouraging traditional farmers to leave the industry to free up land for new “sustainable” farmers). As the second-largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, after the energy sector, agriculture has naturally ended up in the crosshairs of Net Zero advocates — that is, virtually all major international and global organisations. The solution, we are told, is “sustainable agriculture” — one of the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which form their “Agenda 2030”.

  This issue has now been pushed to the top of the global agenda. Last November’s G20 meeting in Bali called for “an accelerated transformation towards sustainable and resilient agriculture and food systems and supply chains” to “ensure that food systems better contribute to adaptation and mitigation to climate change”. Just a few days later, in Egypt, the COP27 annual Green Agenda Climate Summit launched its initiative aimed at promoting “a shift towards sustainable, climate-resilient, healthy diets”. Within a year, its Food and Agriculture Organization aims to launch a “roadmap” for reducing greenhouse emissions in the agricultural sector.

  The endgame is hinted at in several other UN documents: reducing nitrogen use and global livestock production, lowering meat consumption, and promoting more “sustainable” sources of protein, such as plant-based or lab-grown products, and even insects. The United Nations Environment Programme, for example, has stated that global meat and dairy consumption must be reduced by 50% by 2050. Other international and multilateral organisation have presented their own plans for transforming the global food system. The EU’s Farm to Fork strategy “aims to accelerate our transition to a sustainable food system”. Meanwhile, the World Bank, in its climate change action plan for 2021-2025, says that 35% of the bank’s total funding during this period will be devoted to transforming agriculture and other key systems to deal with climate change.

  Alongside these intergovernmental and multilateral bodies, a vast network of “stakeholders” is now devoted to the “greening” of agriculture and food production — private foundations, public-private partnerships, NGOs and corporations. Reset the Table, a 2020 Rockefeller Foundation report, called for moving away from a “focus on maximising shareholder returns” to “a more equitable system focused on fair returns and benefits to all stakeholders”. This may sound like a good idea, until one considers that “stakeholder capitalism” is a concept heavily promoted by the World Economic Forum, which represents the interests of the largest and most powerful corporations on the planet.

  The Rockefeller Foundation has very close ties to the WEF, which is itself encouraging farmers to embrace “climate-smart” methods in order to make the “transition to net-zero, nature-positive food systems by 2030”. The WEF is also a big believer in the need to drastically reduce cattle farming and meat consumption and switch to “alternative proteins”.

  Arguably the most influential public-private organisation specifically “dedicated to transforming our global food system” is the EAT-Lancet Commission, which is largely modelled around the Davos “multistakeholderist” approach. This is based on the premise that global policymaking should be shaped by a wide range of unelected “stakeholders”, such as academic institutions and multinational corporations, working hand-in-glove with governments. This network, cofounded by the Wellcome Trust, consists of UN agencies, world-leading universities, and corporations such as Google and Nestlé. EAT’s founder and president, Gunhild Stordalen, a Norwegian philanthropist who is married to one of the country’s richest men, has described her intention to organise a “Davos for food”.

  EAT’s work was initially supported by the World Health Organization, but in 2019 the WHO withdrew its endorsement after Gian Lorenzo Cornado, Italy’s ambassador and permanent representative to the UN in Geneva, questioned the scientific basis for the dietary regime being pushed by EAT — which is focused on promoting plant-based foods and excluding meat and other animal-based foods. Cornado argued that “a standard diet for the whole planet” that ignores age, sex, health and eating habits “has no scientific justification at all” and “would mean the destruction of millenary healthy traditional diets which are a full part of the cultural heritage and social harmony in many nations”.

  Perhaps more important, said Cornado, is the fact that the dietary regime advised by the commission “is also nutritionally deficient and therefore dangerous to human health” and “would certainly lead to economic depression, especially in developing countries”. He also raised concerns that “the total or nearly total elimination of foods of animal origin” would destroy cattle farming and many other activities related to the production of meat and dairy products. Despite these concerns, raised by a leading member of the world’s top public health body and shared by a network representing 200 million small-scale farmers in 81 countries, EAT continues to play a central role in the global push for the radical transformation of food systems. At the 2021 United Nations Food Systems Summit, which originated from a partnership between the WEF and the UN Secretary-General, Stordalen was given a leading role.

  This complete blurring of the boundaries between the public and the private-corporate spheres in the agricultural and food sectors is also happening in other areas — with Bill Gates standing somewhere in the middle. Alongside healthcare, agriculture is the main focus of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which finances several initiatives whose stated aim is to increase food security and promote sustainable farming, such as Gates Ag One, CGIAR and the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa. Civil society organisations, however, have accused the Foundation of using its influence to promote multinational corporate interests in the Global South and to push for ineffective (but very profitable) high-tech solutions which have largely failed to increase global food production. Nor are Gates’s “sustainable” agricultural activities limited to developing countries. As well as investing in plant-based protein companies, such as Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods, Gates has been buying huge amounts of farmland in the US, to the point of becoming the biggest private owner of farmland in the country.

  The problem with the globalist trend he embodies is obvious: ultimately, small and medium-scale farming is more sustainable than large-scale industrial farming, as it is typically associated with greater biodiversity and the protection of landscape features. Small farms also provide a whole range of other public goods: they help to maintain lively rural and remote areas, preserve regional identities, and offer employment in regions with fewer job opportunities. But most importantly, small farms feed the world. A 2017 study found that the “peasant food web” — the diverse network of small-scale producers disconnected from Big Agriculture — feeds more than half of the world’s population using only 25% of the world’s agricultural resources.

  Traditional farming, though, is suffering an unprecedented attack. Small and medium-scale farmers are being subjected to social and economic conditions in which they simply cannot survive. Peasant farms are disappearing at an alarming rate across Europe and other regions, to the benefit of the world’s food oligarchs — and all this is being done in the name of sustainability. At a time when almost a billion people around the world are still affected by hunger, the lesson of the Dutch farmers could not be more urgent, or inspiring. For now, at least, there is still time to resist the Great Food Reset.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 22:20

• Senator Blocking Senior Military Promotions Over DOD Abortion Policy
  Senator Blocking Senior Military Promotions Over DOD Abortion Policy

  Sen. Tommy Tuberville is under bipartisan fire for his month-long blockade of promotions for generals and admirals, as the Alabama Republican demands the Pentagon halt its controversial abortion policy.

  In October, the Department of Defense announced it would start covering travel and transportation costs for service members seeking out-of-state abortions — and granting them administrative leave so they don’t have to tap their vacation time.

  

  In February, Tuberville announced he would use Senate rules to place a hold on promotions for generals and admirals — along with senior DoD civilian appointments requiring Senate approval — until the Pentagon ends the abortion policy. 

  The hold prevents the Senate from approving promotions in batches by unanimous consent. They can still be approved using “regular order,” which takes much longer and would require Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to allocate time for floor votes on each promotion. That would take weeks.  

  The abortion policy was the Pentagon’s response to the Supreme Court’s June overturning of Roe v Wade, freeing states to enact new restrictions on abortions. As he announced the policy via memorandum, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said the high court decision “has impacted access to reproductive health care, with readiness, recruiting and retention implications for the force.”

  “The practical effects of recent changes are that significant numbers of service members and their families may be forced to travel greater distances, take more time off from work, and pay more out of pocket expenses to receive reproductive health care,” he wrote. 

  

  Though the new policy doesn’t pay for abortion procedures themselves, Tuberville argues the Pentagon is using the policy as a backdoor means of funding abortions with taxpayer dollars, something that’s generally prohibited under federal law. 

  “Federal law only allows the military to provide abortions in very narrow circumstances: rape, incest, and threat to the life of the mother,” Tuberville said on the Senate floor last week. “Yet, the Biden administration has turned the DoD into an abortion travel agency. They did it using a memo.”

  Tuberville’s procedural hold on the military promotions is creating a growing backlog, with some 160 general and admiral promotions stopped in their tracks. 

  The issue came up at a Senate Armed Services hearing on Tuesday, with Austin declaring that Tuberville’s hold posed a growing threat to military readiness. “Not approving the recommendations for promotions actually creates a ripple effect through the force that makes us far less ready than we need to be.”

  In defending the abortion policy, Austin said, “Almost one in five of our troops is women. And they don’t get a chance to choose where they’re stationed. So almost 80,000 of our women are stationed in places where they don’t have access to non-covered reproductive health care” — an elaborate euphemism for an abortion that’s ineligible for taxpayer funding. 

  Tuberville, the former college football coach, was criticized for his tactic by Democrats and Republicans alike.

  GOP Senator Tuberville is inflicting unnecessary damage to our military by blocking the promotion of 160 officers.

  For what? So he can push the MAGA hard line on blocking women’s choice?

  Women in the military are more than capable of making their own healthcare decisions.

  — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) March 28, 2023

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

  Schumer said Tuberville was “taking our military, our national security, our safety hostage” and breaking with a tradition by which promotions sail through the Senate. Maine Republican Susan Collins expressed a more gentle “concern” over imposing consequences on generals and admirals who are “not making the policy” that Tuberville is fighting. 

  Tuberville said he isn’t budging until the abortion policy is suspended or revoked, and shrugged off assertions that the policy mitigates what would otherwise be a recruiting handicap: “Over the past 40 years, I don’t recall one military person ever complaining that we weren’t performing enough abortions.” 

  “[My promotion hold] is about not forcing the taxpayers of this country to fund abortions,” said Tuberville. “As long as I have a voice in this body, Congress will write the laws, not the secretary of defense, not the Joint Chiefs.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 21:20

• All Talk, No Action On China
  All Talk, No Action On China

  Authored by Derek Scissors via RealClear Wire,

  It might be easy to embrace recent warnings against a bellicose bipartisan consensus in Washington regarding China. But the real peril is that the true China consensus — which includes Democrats and Republicans, the administration and Congress — is to do nothing but talk, especially if action comes at a price.

  

  Last month gave us a perfect example. February was full of anti-China speeches: Republican-run congressional hearings, Democratic-run hearings, and Biden administration revelations. In the end though, nothing of substance happened, nor is it likely to happen.

  There is no standing up to the People’s Republic of China without costs. It has the world’s second largest economy as well as its second most powerful military. It is led by a dictator-for-life who intentionally hearkens back to a man who caused mass starvation. Winning even a peaceful contest would require sacrifices. Deterring Xi Jinping by preparing for conflict requires more. As sacrifice is not appealing to most American politicians, they instead spout rhetoric while hoping for a contest of convenience.

  The administration’s actions include the Department of Commerce calling for tens of billions of dollars to vastly boost domestic semiconductor production, prioritizing it as a vital national interest. Given the PRC’s intent to globally dominate low-end chips, Commerce appears correct. But challenging as this goal is, Commerce is diluting its plan by also asking for better day care as part of the package. This, of course, is a counter-incentive for companies willing to build in the U.S. It creates an opposite effect to what was originally intended.

  The administration has treated supply chains similarly, stirring in political priorities such as promoting green energy output without specific plans to secure green energy supply chains. While it is no surprise that political actors would use China as cover for executing domestic policies, it means far less gets done. Export controls on semiconductors were announced to great fanfare last October, with promises of more to come. Yet five months later, we don’t even have the final regulations.

  Concerning licensing permissions, Commerce has gone from terrible to mediocre under the Biden administration. Last year, it accepted 70% of applications to export controlled items to the PRC. Not exactly tight restrictions, but still a substantial improvement over the Trump Commerce Department’s performance, during a supposed “trade war,” where the number may have been over 90%. 

  Part of the blame is with Congress. Being placed on Commerce’s “Entity List,” which imposes license requirements on foreign individuals, entities, or governments, requires just a license application. Yet many members of Congress have pretended for years that this is a blacklist preventing designated foreign firms from receiving American technology. In fact, tens of billions of dollars’-worth in licenses have been granted to these firms, most of whom were also eligible for American investment. The Entity List has always been fraudulent, and Congress willingly plays along.

  Will the new House Select Committee on China mean more effective legislation? Doubtful. Members within the Select Committee are genuinely concerned with the economic and military risks China poses, and they have allies elsewhere in Congress. But the Select Committee has no official jurisdiction — it can only talk, not act. This is an ideal outcome for those who want to appear politically strong while having no obligation at all to back up their words.

  The Financial Services Committee, possibly the most important House committee, held a China hearing in early February. According to its Republican chairman and Republican-called witnesses, the top China threat is the U.S. responding in any serious way to China. Their conclusion: The U.S. should face up to the PRC’s military buildup, its domestic and international repression, and its economic predation by continuing to invest freely in the PRC.

  With this “pressure” from some Republicans, the Biden administration does not feel compelled to truly compete. An executive order to address the more than $1 trillion the U.S. has invested in the PRC is many months overdue. Even if issued, it may prove an almost entirely empty action. 

  Other consequences to inaction are looming. China continues to steal intellectual property (IP), subsidize production that uses the IP, and drive advanced American companies out of business. It will also spread repression and more intensely target Taiwan. Politicians who take this seriously must propose policies that involve some pain, because that is what’s required for the U.S. to win. Politicians who don’t take the PRC seriously are easy to spot. They’ll be pushing some domestic agenda unrelated to China, tilting at windmills, and, above all, talking.

  Derek Scissors is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He is also the chief economist of the China Beige Book. The views expressed are the author’s own.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 21:00

• India's Grid Strained By Burgeoning Power Demand
  India’s Grid Strained By Burgeoning Power Demand

  By John Kemp, senior market analyst

  India’s electricity transmission system is coming under increasing strain as booming power demand outstrips growth in despatchable generation.

  

  Mild temperatures in February and March have masked the struggle to meet fast-growing loads from industry as well as for refrigeration and air-conditioning.

  

  But periods of more severe temperatures between April and September are likely to reveal the increasingly thin margin of spare generation.

  

  Total electricity consumption increased by 8% in February 2023 compared with the same month a year earlier and by 13% compared with February 2021, according to the Grid Controller of India.

  

  Peak demand met was up by 8% compared with a year ago and 11% compared with 2021 (“Monthly report”, Grid India, March 23, 2023).

  

  But generation capacity has increased by only 4% since 2022 and 9% since 2021, ensuring generation units must be used more intensively.

  Like other countries before it, India is experiencing classic pressure on its transmission system associated with rapid industrialisation and electrification of the economy.

  Pressure on the network is evident from the amount of time frequency on the transmission system is below the minimum target level.

  Frequency is related to the balance between generation and load – excess generation causes frequency to accelerate, excess load causes frequency to drop.

  Grid controllers are therefore instructed to keep frequency within tight limits to ensure the network remains stable and avert the risk of a cascading failure.

  India’s grid is synchronised at 50.00 cycles per second (Hertz) with a maximum acceptable operating limit of 50.05 and a minimum of 49.90. But frequency fell below the minimum acceptable target of 49.9 Hz almost 11% of the time in February 2022 up from 6% in 2022 and 7% in 2021.

  

  The increasing incidence of under-frequency shows controllers struggled to schedule enough firm generation to meet increasing demand on the system.

  

  So far, periods of under-frequency have been modest, in contrast to March and April 2022 and October 2021, when severe under-frequency was the forerunner of widespread blackouts.

  

  But strain on the system will increase as temperatures rise towards their summer peak in June and again in September-October after the monsoon fades.

  The system is already running hard. Peak electricity demand in January (210,618 megawatts) and February (209,665) was only slightly lower than at the height of last summer in June 2022 (211,856).

  India needs to maximise generation from all sources, fossil fuels (coal, gas and diesel) as well as renewables (hydro, solar and wind) this summer to keep the lights on.

  Government policy aims to maximise the availability of firm generation by prioritising coal movements on the rail network, mandating coal imports, and building up inventories in the yards of coal-fired power stations.

  

  Policymakers have ordered privately owned and captive coal-fired and gas-fired generators to ensure their units are ready to run in the event of an instruction from the grid.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 20:20

• US Air Force Abandons Lockheed Hypersonic Weapon Program After Test Failure
  US Air Force Abandons Lockheed Hypersonic Weapon Program After Test Failure

  The US Air Force has announced plans to end the Lockheed Martin hypersonic weapons program.

  Air Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition Andrew Hunter confirmed the major development in testimony given to a House Armed Services subcommittee on Wednesday. He said the Air Force doesn’t “currently intend to pursue follow-on procurement” of the weapon known as the AGM-183A Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW).

  Breaking Defense reported earlier that the Lockheed Martin-made ARRW might be in jeopardy, citing Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who told the House Appropriations defense subcommittee during testimony on the service’s fiscal 2024 budget request this week that the March 13 test was “not a success.”

  “The one we just had was not a success. We did not get the data that we needed from that test … currently examining that, trying to understand what happened,” Kendall told lawmakers.

  He was referring to the news last Friday of an ARRW test by the Air Force that only achieved “several” objectives but omitted any claims of success

  Sources close to Bloomberg said the missile, released from a B-52H bomber off the southern coast of California, experienced data link transmitting issues during flight. 

  Assistant Secretary Hunter’s testimony didn’t clarify whether the Air Force is giving up on the Lockheed program because of the failure, or if it was already on the chopping block, but clearly the program has been troubled.

  

  Kendall had suggested that possible further tests might determine the fate of the ARRW program. He noted the Air Force’s other hypersonic program, the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM), showed more promising results:

  “We see a definite role for the HACM concept. It’s compatible with more of our aircraft. And it’ll give us more combat capability overall. So, we’re more committed to HACM at this point in time than we are to ARRW.” 

  It is indeed embarrassing that the US (the largest military budget in the world) has yet to field any hypersonic missiles, while Russia has already used its hypersonic Kinzhal missiles multiple times in the conflict in Ukraine. 

  Since 2019, the Department of Defense has plowed billions of dollars into programs aimed at developing hypersonic missiles, as defense officials warned Russia and China are advancing in this field. However, the recent Air Force hypersonic missile test ended in failure, raising concerns about whether the US is falling behind in the hypersonic arms race. 

  Why is the US falling behind the hypersonic arms race? 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 20:00

• John Kerry Says New Climate Change Executive Orders Are Coming
  John Kerry Says New Climate Change Executive Orders Are Coming

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  President Joe Biden is preparing a series of new executive orders to address climate change, according to recent comments by his special envoy on climate-related issues, John Kerry.

  

  Kerry discussed the Biden administration’s plans for reducing U.S. emissions during an interview with Yahoo News Senior Climate Editor Ben Adler on Friday.

  Adler noted that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) championed by the Biden administration is projected to bring down U.S. emissions by about 40 percent, despite a goal set by the administration to bring about a 50 percent reduction in U.S. emissions by the end of the decade.

  “We’re doing a lot more than just the IRA,” Kerry responded. “The IRA is a package that in and of itself can get the 40 percent. But in addition to that, the president is issuing executive orders. There’ll be changes on automobile, on light truck, heavy truck, heavy duty—a number of initiatives that are being taken by states, subnational, cities. They really kept us in the game, frankly, during the Trump administration when he pulled out of the [Paris Climate Agreement].”

  Kerry didn’t provide many details on what new executive orders could be coming or how they might specifically impact businesses and industries.

  “We have a lot of other options, tools, if you will, in the toolkit besides the IRA,” Kerry said. “The IRA is a huge leap forward, and it’s already having a major impact.”

  What Happens If Republicans Win in 2024

  Adler asked Kerry how the Biden administration’s goals on emission reductions might be impacted if Donald Trump or another Republican candidate wins control of the White House in 2024 and repeals certain emission reduction mandates and initiatives.

  “Well, I think what’s important for everybody to note is that achieving our goal is not exclusively dependent on what the federal government says or does,” Kerry said. “It’s critical, but not wholly dependent.”

  Republicans and conservatives have broadly defended fossil fuels as a key component of the current U.S. economy, while arguing that the transition to renewable energies would be less affordable or reliable. During his presidency, Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement, calling the international emissions reduction framework “a total disaster” for the U.S. economy.

  Kerry then said that 75 percent of the new electrical output that came about in the United States during President Donald Trump’s term came from one renewable energy resource or another. He noted other business entities have been independently pursuing their own emission reduction goals.

  Kerry Defends Biden Permitting New Oil Drilling

  While Kerry alluded to a new Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and stressed that the United States should do more to counteract climate change, he also defended a recent decision by Biden to approve a new oil drilling project in Alaska.

  “You mentioned President Biden’s record, including land use management. But he’s also done some things that have increased fossil fuel production, the recent approval of the Willow project in Alaska,” Adler said.

  “For the moment,” Kerry responded. “Remember, we have seven years before the 2030 target. And the president is determined that we will stay on that target. But in the immediate moment, while we transition, you don’t want to crash your whole economy.”

  Kerry also defended the U.S. export of liquified natural gas to Europe, saying the move is “critical to the economy of Europe” while the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies support Ukraine in its war with Russia.

  Kerry also dismissed claims that he has flown in private jets, which can produce tons of carbon emissions every flight. Kerry said he hasn’t traveled on private jets over the course of his job as the presidential climate envoy, and wealthy individuals who do fly private jets while traveling to promote policies reducing global emissions can afford to offset their personal emissions “and they are working harder than most people I know to be able to try to effect this transition.”

  Kerry Touts China’s Renewable Energy Projects, Says Coal Still a Problem

  Kerry credited China with becoming the “largest deployer of solar panels.”

  “In China, they have deployed far more renewable energy than we have or than Europe has,” Kerry said.

  Republican lawmakers recently criticized U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm for saying “we can all learn from what China is doing” to lessen its carbon footprint and describing China’s clean energy initiatives as “encouraging.”

  The lawmakers said China continues “to be one of the world’s worst polluters” and that Granholm’s comments “raise serious questions” about her judgment.

  Kerry did express some concerns about China’s continued heavy reliance on coal. China is the leading coal-producing country and, as EcoWatch reported, the country produced a record 4.496 billion metric tons of coal in 2022.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 19:40

• Here's How Wall Street's March Madness Brackets Have Fared
  Here’s How Wall Street’s March Madness Brackets Have Fared

  How has your March Madness bracket fared? Many have been completely demolished over the last few weeks. 

  This March is the craziest in decades. For the first time since 1979, not a single No. 1, 2, or 3 seed will advance to the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Championship’s Final Four National Semifinals. 

  The Final Four matchups will commence on Saturday at around 6 pm ET, featuring Florida Atlantic taking on San Diego State, followed by UConn going head-to-head with Miami.

  We want to turn out attention to savvy Wall Street traders, macro tourists, hedge fund portfolio managers, and business executives who utilize the Bloomberg Terminal. We want to shed light on their brackets, plus who they collectively think will win the tournament. 

  For the Florida Atlantic versus San Diego State slot, an overwhelmingly large number of Terminal users had Alabama, then Purdue, Arizona, Duke, Marquette, and Baylor. Just a slither had San Diego State, while Florida Atlantic was nowhere to be found. 

  

  For the second game, UConn versus Miami, most Terminal users picked Houston, Kansas, UCLA, Texas, Gonzaga, and number six on the list UConn. Miami was the ninth pick. 

  

  Here is the complete breakdown of the tournament winner predictions from Terminal users, with UConn ranking fifth, San Diego State 15th, Florida Atlantic 25th, and Miami didn’t make the cut. 

  

  While we cannot disclose the names of the top-performing Terminal users, you can definitely take a look at the firms that employ them…

  

  And for users who filled out their brackets for a cause. Here’s their ranking plus which charity. 

  

  Clearly, not all Terminal users are geniuses. We’ll provide an update on their rankings prior to the championship game.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 19:20

• Politics Is Turning Us Into Idiots
  Politics Is Turning Us Into Idiots

  Authored by Lipton Matthews via The Mises Institute,

  Political correctness in Western societies fosters polarization and a toxic culture of ignorance. Although people are rightly outraged by the cancellation of prominent figures, the most glaring consequence of political correctness is the proliferation of ignorance. When speakers are cancelled for contradicting sacrosanct opinions, this leads to an environment where people never arrive at the truth because ideas are not disputed in the public domain.

  

  This devolution of Western culture stymies free speech and intellectual progression.

  While some view cancel culture as primarily an assault on freedom, its effects are infinitely more pernicious. Societies evolve by exchanging inferior ideas for superior ones, and cancel culture is disrupting the mechanism filtering out bad ideas. Due to cancel culture, people hold steadfast to false doctrines; the belief that the gender pay gap is a result of discrimination is a classic example that continues to circulate despite evidence showing that gaps are an outcome of working hours and occupational segregation.

  The effect of endorsing inaccurate assumptions is that such beliefs will be employed to justify misguided policies.

  If people think that women on average earn less than men because of discrimination, they will lobby for policies to rectify the problem, and such policies could be expensive to implement. Entertaining ignorant beliefs will also make it difficult to improve social mobility and narrow the highly touted black-white achievement gap.

  Current narratives state that blacks are underperforming in education because of racism, and some propose abolishing standardized tests as a tool to help black students. However, research shows that black students are likely to do well when teachers impose rigorous standards rather than when standards are diluted. Case after case reveals that when scrutinized, politically correct views fail to pass the accuracy test. Nonetheless, wrongheaded ideas are propagated as gospel to the detriment of intellectual progress.

  People are entitled to express political opinions and promote them as accurate. However, critics are not obliged to accept folly as truth. The popularity of dubious ideas would not be a problem if proponents would desist from compelling critics to espouse these views or be expelled from polite society. Institutionalizing fallacious ideas has resulted in widespread confusion, especially since these fallacies are inconsistently applied. In polite society, it is objectionable to say that race is not a social construct, and even mainstream consensus purports that race is primarily a social category, but it must be noted that consensus is not evidence.

  Yet, despite the acceptance that race is malleable, Rachel Dolezal became a pariah after she was exposed as a white woman pretending to be black. However, why should this pose a problem when race is a social construct? Culture is shared and learned, and we all have the capacity to appreciate foreign cultures. Based on the malleability of race, a white person identifying as black should not be seen as problematic. Sex is biological, so although a man can identify as a woman, he can never become a woman. Yet, activists are infuriated when white people identify as black, even though doing so is more logically plausible than a man identifying as a woman.

  Some find white people identifying as black offensive because they claim that doing so provides these white people with benefits that belong to historically oppressed black people. But this is a double standard, since men who identify as women gain benefits that belong to women, who are also seen as oppressed. It is mind-boggling that woke activists can’t see the parallels between transracialism and transgenderism. Moreover, equally outrageous is that they don’t seem to recognize that trans women are depriving real women of benefits when trans women profit from gender quotas.

  For years, feminists have been arguing that women have been disenfranchised. Today, many feminists, except for some radicals, advocate for the disenfranchisement of women by embracing male athletes who compete with females. Instead of empowering women, the idiocy of political correctness inspires feminists to endorse the marginalization of women. Allowing men to compete with women diminishes opportunities for female advancement, but stating the obvious will ruin one’s career.

  Kathleen Stock was ruthlessly hounded by the unthinking mob for arguing that allowing men to identify as women creates dangerous spaces for women. Stock asserted that the desire to be seen as trans friendly has led companies to advocate policies that make women susceptible to violence:

  Even more pressingly, if we lose a working concept of “female” . . . self-declared trans women (males) may well eventually gain unrestricted access to protected spaces originally introduced to shield females from sexual violence from males. We are already seeing the erosion of these, as companies and charities open formerly female-only spaces such as changing rooms, shared accommodation, swimming ponds, hospital wards, and prisons, to everyone out of a desire not to appear transphobic.

  Moral blind spots and contradictions are baked into the psyche of political correctness. Another issue is that denying the genetics of IQ is fashionable despite evidence to the contrary. Politically correct thinkers struggle to appreciate that IQ is genetic, but they don’t have a problem accepting the heritability of other traits or diseases if they can prove that such inherited characteristics disadvantage minority groups. For example, many believe that blacks are more likely to suffer from high blood pressure because during the slave trade’s Middle Passage, Africans who retained salt had lower mortality rates. Therefore, they passed on genes conducive to salt retention, which leads to hypertension.

  However, this idea was thoroughly debunked by Heidi L. Lujan and Stephen E. DiCarlo in an academic paper:

  Available evidence suggests that the difference in salt-sensitivity between African-Americans and Caucasians (European-Americans) is significantly smaller than what the Slavery Hypertension Hypothesis suggests. In fact, Chrysant and colleagues were unable to find differences in the blood pressure response to salt by race, age, sex, or body weight. Thus, salt sensitivity is not a racial problem, but rather a human problem, and the generalization that blacks are salt sensitive and whites are not should be discarded.

  Nevertheless, the evidence does not seem to disabuse politically correct activists of incorrect notions. Indeed, sensitive topics can be involved in political debates, but sympathizing with delusional people will create a generation of idiots and destroy civilization in the process.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 19:00

• Turkey Halts 450Kb/d In Oil Output Via Kirkuk-Ceyhan Pipeline Amid Dispute With Iraq
  Turkey Halts 450Kb/d In Oil Output Via Kirkuk-Ceyhan Pipeline Amid Dispute With Iraq

  As Goldman noted overnight, the bank had received quite a few inbound client inquiries as to what may be behind the recent jump in crude oil prices which after tumbling to the lowest level since 2021 have rebounded back to almost $80/bbl. One answer may come from the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region of northern Iraq, where producers have shut in or reduced output at several oilfields following a halt to the northern export pipeline, company statements showed, with more outages on the horizon.

  

  Iraq was forced to halt around 450,000 barrels per day of crude exports, or half a percent of global oil supply, from the Kurdistan region (KRI) on Saturday through a pipeline that runs from its northern Kirkuk oil fields to the Turkish port of Ceyhan, Reuters reported.

  Turkey stopped pumping Iraqi crude from the pipeline after Iraq won an arbitration case in which it said Turkey had violated a joint agreement by allowing the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) to export oil to Ceyhan without Baghdad’s consent.

  Iraq’s government said it’s up to Kurdistan to break the oil deadlock. “The ball now is the Kurds’ court,” Asim Jihad, a spokesman for Iraq’s Federal Ministry of Oil, said in an interview.

  Meanwhile, oil firms operating in the KRI are being forced to halt output or move production into storage, which many say will reach capacity within days, as talks drag between Turkey, Baghdad and the KRG to resume exports.

  Norwegian oil firm DNO said on Wednesday it had begun shutting down production at its Tawke and Peshkabir fields, where production averaged 107,000 barrels per day (bpd) last year. This represents a quarter of total Kurdish region exports, DNO said.

  Genel Energy, a partner in the fields, said: “Peshkabir production was halted last night and plans drawn up to conduct deferred maintenance. Tawke production shutdown has started but will take an additional day or so.” Genel Energy’s remaining assets in KRI continue to flow into storage, the firm said. Production from its Sarta field can flow into storage until the end of the week, while tanks can hold production from Taq Taq until around April 21, a company spokesperson said on Wednesday. The fields produced a respective 4,710 bpd and 4,490 bpd last year.

  Canada-based Forza Petroleum, formerly Oryx Petroleum Corp, was forced to shut in production earlier this week from the 14,500 bpd Hawler license, which produced an average 13,700 bpd in January and February.

  

  Gulf Keystone has reduced production at the Shaikan oil field, which previously produced around 55,000 bpd, and said on Monday it would suspend production after a few days. The company declined to comment on current production levels.

  Dallas-based HKN Energy, which operates the Sarsang block, said on Monday it would shut in operations “within a week if no resolution is reached” as its storage facilities approach capacity. The block produced 43,048 bpd in the fourth quarter of last year.

  In response, the White House – which has been paranoid about even one drop of oil not hitting the global market on time – is pushing Iraq and Turkey to restart exports of crude oil and to resolve a dispute with Kurdish authorities as soon as possible, because the last thing Biden needs in addition to a bank crisis and deposit runs is another surge in gasoline prices.

  And while the Turkey-Iraq spat has taken off almost half a million barrels off the market, and pushed the price of Brent higher, the question is how long before CTAs – which are massively short oil – start to cover. As Goldman calcualted yesterday, “systematic positioning here leans short (went from short $10bn in energy before Feb 22 to now being short $30bn). Cot data re-affirming the above, with positioning coming in from late Feb/early-March highs.” A condition projection of CTA activity in oil shows massive buying in the coming weeks should the price of oil turn higher, creating a positive feedback loop of more buying and more short covering.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 18:40

• Will FedNow Enable Greater Deposit Flight From Troubled Banks?
  Will FedNow Enable Greater Deposit Flight From Troubled Banks?

  Authored by Brian Clark via Knowledge Leaders Capital blog,

  The failures of Silvergate Bank, Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and the current struggles of First Republic and Pacific West Bank have seen bank deposits flee to the perceived safety of large banks.

  In the chart below, one can see the flight of deposits from small banks into large.

  

  To make matters worse for banks, rising interest rates and easily accessible higher yielding alternatives exist like money market funds (MMF) or US Treasury ETFs.

  These alternatives are now a few thumb taps and swipes away from depositors, making the near-zero rate of return on bank deposits much less attractive for many consumers and businesses.

  In the chart below one can see the drop in bank deposits and increase in MMFs.

  

  Here we can see the significant premium 3-month US Treasury yields command over bank certificates of deposit (CDs).

  

  These issues, plus the new FedNow service which is set to begin trial runs in July, could represent an uphill battle for banks to retain deposits.

  The Federal Reserve’s new FedNow program will allow bank customers at 10,000 financial institutions to instantaneously transfer funds in and out of bank accounts on a 24/7/365 basis. This is probably the biggest innovation since mobile banking and investment apps and will allow customers greater access to their money than ever before.

  “We reiterate our view that FedNow will represent a material change in how consumers use electronic money,” said TD Cowen analyst Jaret Seiberg in a recent Marketwatch report.

  FedNow may accelerate the ability of depositors to remove money from banks accounts and reroute it to higher yield alternatives.

  With banks under increasing pressure to stem outflows, these trends could add to their troubles, especially if banks are forced to sell even more assets which currently have unrealized losses.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 18:20

• RESTRICT Act Is Orwellian Censorship Grab Disguised As Anti-TikTok Legislation
  RESTRICT Act Is Orwellian Censorship Grab Disguised As Anti-TikTok Legislation

  The RESTRICT Act, introduced by Sens. Mark Warner (D-VA) and Tom Thune (R-SD), is aimed at blocking or disrupting transactions and financial holdings linked to foreign adversaries that pose a risk to national security, however the language of the bill could be used to give the US government enormous power to punish free speech.

  

  Warner, a longtime opponent of free speech who, as Michael Krieger pointed out in 2018 (and confirmed in the Twitter Files) pushed for the ‘weaponization’ of big tech, crafted the RESTRICT act to “ake swift action against technology companies suspected of cavorting with foreign governments and spies, to effectively vanish their products from shelves and app stores when the threat they pose gets too big to ignore,” according to Wired.

  Bad actors listed in the bill are; China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela.

  In reality, the RESTRICT Act has very little to do with TikTok and everything to do with controlling online content.

  In very specific terms a lot of U.S. websites would be impacted.  Why?  Because a lot of websites use third-party ‘plug-ins’ or ‘widgets’ or software created in foreign countries to support the content on their site.  The “Restrict Act” gives the DNI the ability to tell a website using any “foreign content” or software; that might be engaged in platform communication the U.S Government views as against their interests; to shut down or face a criminal charge.   In very direct terms, the passage of SB686 would give the Dept of Commerce, DNI and DHS the ability to shut down what you are reading right now. This is a big deal. –The Last Refuge

  The RESTRICT Act can also be used to punish people using Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) if they’re used to access banned websites, and directs the Secretary of Commerce to “identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate, or otherwise mitigate” that which is deemed a national security risk associated with technology linked to the above countries.

  

  Penalties include fines of up to $1 million or 20 years in prison, or both.

  So what happens if you are designated a national security threat? What can they access of yours to confirm it? Everything.
  Notice the preemptive attack on quantum encryption in there, too. pic.twitter.com/rXMY8v8lOI

  — Mises Caucus (@LPMisesCaucus) March 26, 2023

  More via Reason:

  The language describing who the RESTRICT ACT applies to is confusing at best. The commerce secretary would be authorized to take steps to address risks posed by “any covered transaction by any person,” right? So what counts as a covered transaction? The bill states that this means “a transaction in which an entity described in subparagraph (B) has any interest.” Entities described in subparagraph B are a “foreign adversary; an entity subject to the jurisdiction of, or organized under the laws of, a foreign adversary; and an entity owned, directed, or controlled by” either of these. Foreign adversaries can be “any foreign government or regime” that the secretary deems a national security threat.

  It’s a bit gobbledygooked, but this could be read to imply that “any person” using a VPN to access an app controlled by a “foreign adversary” or its alleged minions is subject to the secretary’s ire. Hence anyone using a VPN to access TikTok would be in trouble—specifically, subject to up to $1 million in fines, 20 years in prison, or both.

  According to Warner’s office, however, the provisions only apply when someone is “engaged in ‘sabotage or subversion’ of communications technology in the U.S., causing ‘catastrophic effects’ on U.S. critical infrastructure, or ‘interfering in, or altering the result’ of a federal election in order for criminal penalties to apply,” and would target “companies like Kaspersky, Huawei and TikTok … not individual users.”

  Except that the bill specifically says; “no person may cause or aid, abet, counsel, command, induce, procure, permit, or approve the doing of any act prohibited by, or the omission of any act required by any regulation, order, direction, mitigation measure, prohibition, or other authorization or directive issued under, this Act.”

  So that was bullshit.

  Tucker Carlson had a great recent segment on this featuring Glenn Greenwald.

  Here are the Republicans supporting the RESTRICT Act.

  • Sen. Thune, John [R-SD]
  • Sen. Fischer, Deb [R-NE]
  • Sen. Moran, Jerry [R-KS]
  • Sen. Sullivan, Dan [R-AK]
  • Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]
  • Sen. Romney, Mitt [R-UT]
  • Sen. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV]
  • Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND]
  • Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]
  • Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC]
  • Sen. Graham, Lindsey [R-SC]

  And that’s really all you need to know…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 18:00

• "More Dangerous Than Ever": Experts Warn Americans Against Going To Mexico To Buy Cheap Pharmacy Drugs
  “More Dangerous Than Ever”: Experts Warn Americans Against Going To Mexico To Buy Cheap Pharmacy Drugs

  Authored by J.M. Phelps via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A recent study by the University of California (UCLA) concluded that many drugs from Mexican pharmacies are laced with fentanyl, heroin, and methamphetamine. U.S. tourists are often the buyers of these pills, which include counterfeit replicas of Oxycodone, Percocet, and Adderall.

  

  The UCLA-led study reported that two out of three (68 percent) pharmacies in four cities in northern Mexico had at least one controlled substance for sale without requiring a prescription. Prescriptions were also offered in bottles or individual pills.

  Eleven pharmacies contain counterfeit pills laced with fentanyl, heroin, and/or methamphetamine. “Of 45 pill samples,” UCLA Health reported, “nine sold as Adderall contained methamphetamine, eight sold as Oxycodone had fentanyl, and three sold as Oxycodone contained heroin.”

  The Epoch Times spoke to Derek Maltz, a former head of the Special Operations Division (SOD) of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). As the study suggested, he said, “One of the reasons why Mexican pharmacies attract buyers from America is because you don’t need a prescription, and they’re inexpensive.”

  He further explained, “Some people think they can’t afford medicine here, and others can’t afford medical procedures.” As a result, many go to Mexico to make their drug purchases or get their procedures done at a more affordable rate.

  “The trend of medical tourism—Americans traveling to Mexico for medical care because it’s cheaper—is now more dangerous than ever,” he said.

  The UCLA study pointed out that a person could be led into thinking they’re receiving pharmaceutical-grade pills but could be receiving fake pills, Maltz said. “And this is more dangerous than I have the words to express,” he added.

  “What if these pills make it into the medical offices where you’re having a procedure and are seeking pain relief?”

  Maltz offered this warning: “You get what you pay for.” With that in mind, he said, “Rather than going to Mexico for inexpensive drugs or medical procedures, it would be smarter to spend a little extra money on this side of the border.

  “Now, more than ever, dealing with a Mexican pharmacy is a terrible decision because it could kill you.”

  Fentanyl is 100 times more potent than morphine and 50 times more potent than heroin.

  Deadly Doses

  Jaime Puerta, president of the advocacy group Victims of Illicit Drugs, is alarmed by the growing number of deaths attributed to fentanyl. Up to 67 percent of drug overdoses or drug poisonings of over 100,000 people can involve synthetic opioids like fentanyl. He then told The Epoch Times about losing his 16-year-old son, Daniel, to fentanyl in 2020.

  While he agreed with Maltz, he also added that “a lot of kids are going down to Mexico for spring break, and while they are down there, they could visit the local pharmacy to buy what they think is the Mexican equivalent to a drug they’re familiar with, but they could actually be buying a poison.”

  While they could be trying to self-medicate a psychological issue or even a physical injury, Puerta said, “It’s not a gamble any kid should be taking.”

  Adding to the comment about psychological issues, Maltz said, “There’s a growing trend of depression and anxiety, especially in younger kids.” This is one of many reasons teens could be “turning to pills to relieve some of the stress and anxiety they’re feeling,” he said. “And before you know it, they’re addicted to the meds they’re choosing to take.” These can include Adderall, Xanax, Oxycontin, Percocet, and other opioids or pain medications.

  

  “There’s a great demand for these pills because kids want to feel better,” Maltz said. “But what they don’t know is that many of these kinds of pills that are being made in Mexico are illicitly made in clandestine labs,” he said.

  “A never-ending amount of these pills are being made with deadly fentanyl, so these kids who purchase them are essentially being deceived to death.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 17:40

• Zelensky Invites China's Xi To Visit Ukraine As US Rebuffs 'Alternate' Peace Plan
  Zelensky Invites China’s Xi To Visit Ukraine As US Rebuffs ‘Alternate’ Peace Plan

  Coming on the heels of Xi Jinping’s visit to Moscow where he met with Vladimir Putin last week, Ukraine’s Zelensky has formally invited the Chinese leader to visit Ukraine soon, according to his remarks in a newly published Associated Press interview.

  “We are ready to see him here,” Zelensky said. “I want to speak with him. I had contact with him before full-scale war. But during all this year, more than one year, I didn’t have.”

  

  Zelensky initially expressed openness in comments earlier this month given in reaction to Beijing’s 12-point peace plan: “I think some of the Chinese proposals respect international law, and I think we can work on it with China,” he said at the time.

  Just before Xi had arrived in Moscow on March 20, The Wall Street Journal had cited sources as saying there would be a phone call between Xi and Zelensky, but that doesn’t appear to have ever materialized.

  Zelensky has since invited China to sign on to a ‘Ukraine formula’ for peace, which wouldn’t be conditioned on any territorial concessions. Zelensky has vowed to never concede an inch, but has since shown some degree of doubt over how his forces are faring in the battlefield, particularly in Bakhmut. Zelensky described that the capture of Bakhmut will mean that Putin will smell weakness. According to the Ukrainian leader’s words this week:

  Speaking with The Associated Press, Zelenskyy said that if Bakhmut were to fall, Putin could “sell this victory to the West, to his society, to China, to Iran,” as leverage to push for a ceasefire deal that would see Ukraine agree to give up territory.

  This, alongside the potential for Xi and Zelensky to hold direct talks, is worrying the Biden administration, with Ukrainian officials in the meantime seeking to ‘assure’ Washington of Kiev’s steadfastness, as Newsweek in a Wednesday report lays out: 

  The top diplomats of Ukraine and the United States on Tuesday jointly cautioned against giving any weight to alternate peace plans that seek a cease-fire without the full withdrawal of invading Russian forces, in a subtle rebuff of a recent proposal by China.

  “Ill-advised concessions to the aggressor would only encourage Russia to intensify its attacks on democracy, giving it time to rebuild its military capabilities and resume the armed offensive against Ukraine,” Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s foreign minister, said at a virtual forum hosted by the U.S. State Department.

  Publicly, Kyiv and Moscow have been cautiously receptive to China’s 12-point position paper, which reaffirms the “territorial integrity of all countries” without directly mentioning Ukraine, references “legitimate security interests” in deference to Russia, and calls for a quick end to hostilities on the ground.

  But if Russian forces do achieve a definitive victory in Bakhmut any time soon, this could tip the scales in favor of Ukraine taking the Chinese peace plan more seriously.

  As for Zelensky’s invitation for Xi to visit, on Wednesday Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said she has no information on whether an invitation had been received by Beijing, or whether the Chinese president would accept it.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 17:20

• "Global Permission Slip For Every Neocon Fantasy": Gaetz Intros Bill To Withdraw From Somalia
  “Global Permission Slip For Every Neocon Fantasy”: Gaetz Intros Bill To Withdraw From Somalia

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  On Tuesday, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) introduced a War Powers Resolution that would direct President Biden to remove armed forces from Somalia that is cosponsored by Reps. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) and Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL).

  The resolution would mandate the removal of all US armed forces from Somalia, with the exception of embassy security, within 365 days of the bill being adopted. The resolution is privileged, meaning the House will have to vote on the measure within 18 legislative days.

  

  The introduction comes after Gaetz grilled Gen. Michael Langley, the head of US Africa Command (AFRICOM), about the pattern of the US military training African coup leaders.

  “The American people have extremely low confidence in our military leaders and their ability to assess their own efficacy. How do they expect Americans to believe their justification for occupying Somalia when they can’t even determine who in their own training programs will lead a violent coup afterwards?” Gaetz said in a statement.

  Earlier this month, the House voted down a Syria War Powers Resolution that was introduced by Gaetz. “When the House debated my resolution to withdraw troops from Syria, both Republicans and Democrats argued the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against Afghanistan serves as a global permission slip for every neocon fantasy. They will argue the same for Somalia,” Gaetz said.

  The 2001 AUMF, which was passed in the wake of the September 11 attacks for the invasion of Afghanistan, is used today to justify the US war against al-Shabaab, a group that didn’t exist when the authorization first became law. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced an amendment in the Senate to repeal the 2001 AUMF last week, but it failed in a vote of 9-86.

  The US war against al-Shabaab in Somalia has escalated since President Biden ordered the deployment of up to 500 troops to the country in May 2022. The Biden administration recently vowed that it would increase support for the Mogadishu-based government.

  The Congressional War Machine continues to throw American troops into dangerous situations for unclear gain.

  I am going to make the warmongers in both parties defend this practice vote by vote.

  My next War Powers Resolution? Somalia. pic.twitter.com/MvqCp9Om3G

  — Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) March 28, 2023

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

  The US-backed government launched a major offensive against al-Shabaab last year, leading to more US airstrikes, although AFRICOM has not reported any strikes in the month of March. The last airstrike in Somalia that AFRICOM reported took place on February 21.

  The US military portrays al-Shabaab as a major threat due to its size and affiliation with al-Qaeda, but it’s widely believed the group doesn’t have ambitions outside of Somalia. Al-Shabaab was born out of a US-backed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia that was launched in 2006, and the group didn’t declare loyalty to al-Qaeda until 2012, after years of fighting the US and its proxies.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 03/29/2023 – 17:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Governance By Artificial Intelligence: The Ultimate Unaccountable Tyranny
  Governance By Artificial Intelligence: The Ultimate Unaccountable Tyranny

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  It’s no secret that globalist institutions are obsessed with Artificial Intelligence as some kind of technological prophecy.

  They treat it as if it is almost supernatural in its potential and often argue that every meaningful industrial and social innovation in the near future will owe its existence to AI.

  The World Economic Forum cites AI as the singular key to the rise of what they call the “Fourth Industrial Revolution.” 

  

  In their view, there can be no human progress without the influence of AI algorithms, making human input almost obsolete.

  This delusion is often promoted by globalist propagandists.  For example, take a look at the summarized vision of WEF member Yuval Harari, who actually believes that AI has creative ability that will replace human imagination and innovation.  Not only that, but Harari has consistently argued in the past that AI will run the world much better than human beings ever could.

  Harari’s examples of AI creativity might sound like extreme naivety to many of us, but he knows exactly what he is doing in misrepresenting the capabilities of algorithms.  Games like chess and Go are games of patterns restricted by rules, there only so many permutations of these patterns in any given scenario and AI is simply faster at spotting them than most humans because that is what it is designed to do by software creators.  This is no different that solving a mathematical equation; just because a calculator is faster than you does not mean it is “creative.”

  There is a big difference between cognitive automation and cognitive autonomy.  AI is purely automation; it will play the games it is programmed to play and will learn to play them well, but it will never have an epiphany one day and create a new and unique game from scratch unless it is coded to do so.  AI will never have fun playing this new game it made, or feel the joy of sharing that game with others, so why would it bother?  It will never seek to contribute to the world any more than it is pre-programmed to do.

  The manner in which globalists hype AI is very tactical, however.  When Harari claims that many people will become part of the “useless class” once AI takes over the economy, he is hinting at another globalist ideology based on elitism – Transhumanism.  The goal of transhumanism is to one day merge human bodies and human minds with technology and AI, and only a limited group of people will have the resources to accomplish this (the globalists).

  Are you afraid of becoming part of the “useless class”?  Well, if you scrape and beg and serve every whim of the elitist establishment then maybe you will be lucky enough to get implants which allow you to interface with AI, and then your future employment and “usefulness” will be secured.  Doesn’t that sound nice?

  But, like all the visions of narcissists there are delusions of godhood and then there is reality.  I continue to have serious doubts that AI will ever be legitimately autonomous or legitimately beneficial to humanity in any way beyond having the ability to calculate quickly within mathematical rules. Speedy data analysis can be useful in many areas of science, but it’s not really proof of autonomous intelligence, and algorithms can be predictive but not any more predictive than human beings looking at the same statistical data. There is nothing about AI that is impressive when one considers what little it actually accomplishes.

  AI is a toy, a parlor trick, not a living entity with independent observations and conclusions. And, it’s certainly not a god-like being capable of showering us with scientific ambrosia or building a perfect civilization.  I predict that a society dependent on AI will actually stagnate and remain trapped in stasis, never really inventing anything of much value and never progressing.  It will only ever be concerned with homogenization – The merging of people with the algorithm.  That is where ALL the society’s energies will go.

  As a point of reference to why AI is overrated, all we have to do is look at the behavior of AI programs like ChatGPT; the algorithm has been discovered on numerous occasions to contain extreme political biases always leaning to the far-left, including biases based in beliefs not backed in any way by scientific evidence. Interestingly, ChatGPT will even at times display a seemingly hostile response to conservative concepts or inconvenient facts. The bot will then DENY it is giving personal opinions even when its responses are consistently pro-leftist.

  How is political bias possible for a piece of software unless it was programmed to display that bias? There is no objectivity to be found in AI, nor any creativity, it will simply regurgitate the personal opinions or biases of the people that created it and that engineered how it processes data.

  Unlike a typical human teenager that seeks to adopt the opposing social or political beliefs of their parents in order set themselves apart, AI will never metaphorically dye its hair blue, pierce its nose and proclaim itself vegan – It will always do what its creators want it to do.  Another example of this dynamic is AI art, which essentially steals the stylistic properties of numerous human artists entered into its database and copies them. While imitation might be considered the highest form of flattery, it’s not the same as creativity.

  This might not sound like much of a problem when it comes to a simple chatbot or the making of cartoons. But, it’s a massive problem when we start talking about AI influencing social and governmental policies.

  The globalists argue that AI will be everywhere – In business, in schools, in corporate operations, in scientific enterprises, and even within government. It MUST run everything. Why? They don’t really say why other than to make vague promises of incredible advancements and previously unimaginable benefits. To date, there have been no profound innovations produced by AI, but I suppose pro-AI propagandists will say that the golden age is “right around the corner.”

  The uses for AI are truly limited to helping humans with simple tasks, but there is still a cost.  A self driving car might be great for a person that is physically handicapped, but it can also be a crutch that convinces a population to never learn to drive themselves. By extension, AI is in a lot of ways the ULTIMATE crutch which leads to ultimate tyranny. If people are convinced to hand over normal human processes and decision making opportunities to automation, then they have handed over their freedoms in exchange for convenience.

  More importantly, if algorithms are allowed to dictate a large portion of choices and conclusions, people will no longer feel a sense of accountability for their actions. Regardless of the consequences, all they have to do for the rest of their lives is tell themselves they were only following the suggestions (or orders) of AI. The AI becomes a form of external collectivized conscience; an artificial moral compass for the hive mind.

  But who will really be controlling that moral compass and bottle-necking the decisions of millions of people? Will it be the AI, or the elites behind the curtain that manipulate the algorithm?

  For many people this probably sounds like science fiction. Yes, there have been many fictional imaginings of what the world would be like in the shadow of AI – I would highly recommend the French New Wave film ‘Alphaville’ as one of the most accurate predictions on the horrors of AI and technocracy. However, what I am warning about here is not some far off theoretical future, it is already here. Take a look at this disturbing video on AI from the World Government Summit:

  These are the blatant goals of globalists in plain view, with a sugar coating to make them more palatable. I wrote about the motivations of the elites and their worshipful reverence for AI in my article ‘Artificial Intelligence: A Secular Look At The Digital Antichrist’. That piece was focused on the philosophical drives that make globalists desire AI.

  In this article I want to stress the issue of AI governance and how it might be made to appeal to the masses. In order to achieve the dystopian future the globalists want, they still have to convince a large percentage of the population to applaud it and embrace it.

  The comfort of having a system that makes difficult decisions for us is an obvious factor, as mentioned above. But, AI governance is not just about removing choice, it’s also about removing the information we might need to be educated enough to make choices. We saw this recently with the covid pandemic restrictions and the collusion between governments, corporate media and social media. Algorithms were widely used by web media conglomerates from Facebook to YouTube to disrupt the flow of information that might run contrary to the official narrative.

  In some cases the censorship targeted people merely asking pertinent questions or fielding alternative theories. In other cases, the censorship outright targeted provably factual data that was contrary to government policies. A multitude of government claims on covid origins, masking, lockdowns and vaccines have been proven false over the past few years, and yet millions of people still blindly believe the original narrative because they were bombarded with it nonstop by the algorithms. They were never exposed to the conflicting information, so they were never able to come to their own conclusions.

  Luckily, unlike bots, human intelligence is filled with anomalies – People who act on intuition and skepticism in order to question preconceived or fabricated assertions. The lack of contrary information immediately causes suspicion for many, and this is what authoritarian governments often refuse to grasp.

  The great promise globalists hold up in the name of AI is the idea of a purely objective state; a social and governmental system without biases and without emotional content. It’s the notion that society can be run by machine thinking in order to “save human beings from themselves” and their own frailties. It is a false promise, because there will never be such a thing as objective AI, nor any AI that understand the complexities of human psychological development.

  Furthermore, the globalist dream of AI is driven not by adventure, but by fear. It’s about the fear of responsibility, the fear of merit, the fear of inferiority, the fear of struggle and the fear of freedom. The greatest accomplishments of mankind are admirable because they are achieved with emotional content, not in spite of it. It is that content that inspires us to delve into the unknown and overcome our fears. AI governance and an AI integrated society would be nothing more than a desperate action to deny the necessity of struggle and the will to overcome.

  Globalists are more than happy to offer a way out of the struggle, and they will do it with AI as the face of their benevolence. All you will have to do is trade your freedoms and perhaps your soul in exchange for never having to face the sheer terror of your own quiet thoughts. Some people, sadly, believe this is a fair trade.

  The elites will present AI as the great adjudicator, the pure and logical intercessor of the correct path; not just for nations and for populations at large but for each individual life. With the algorithm falsely accepted as infallible and purely unbiased, the elites can then rule the world through their faceless creation without any oversight – For they can then claim that it’s not them making decisions, it’s the AI.  How does one question or even punish an AI for being wrong, or causing disaster? And, if the AI happens to make all its decisions in favor of the globalist agenda, well, that will be treated as merely coincidental.

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 23:45

• House Overwhelmingly Passes 1st Ever US Bill To Punish CCP’s Forced Organ Harvesting
  House Overwhelmingly Passes 1st Ever US Bill To Punish CCP’s Forced Organ Harvesting

  The US House of Representatives on Monday passed a bill to punish China for its forced organ harvesting from prisoners, which would sanction anyone involved in the act and require annual government reporting on such activities taking place in foreign countries.

  

  H.R. 1154, dubbed the Stop Forced Organ Harvesting Act of 2023, was supported by Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) along with more than a dozen other lawmakers leading the bill’s companion legislation introduced in the Senate.

  “There is growing evidence that the Chinese Communist Party has and continues to harvest organs from persecuted religious groups, prisoners of conscience, and inmates,” said Sen. Tom Cotton, who introduced the bill in the Senate. “This bill will identify and punish CCP members involved in forced organ harvesting. It’s past time to hold Beijing accountable for these heinous acts.”

  “It’s got real teeth. We’re not kidding,” Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) told the Epoch Times. “This is an atrocity, this is a crime against humanity, and it’s a war crime, because this is a war on innocent people in China, and [Chinese leader] Xi Jinping is directly responsible, but those who willingly engage in this will be held responsible.”

  On the House floor, Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pa.), highlighted the annual reporting requirement in the bill, which she said would ensure that the United States makes “an informed assessment regarding the magnitude and prevalence of this problem.”

  “Given the ongoing genocide, we cannot take Beijing at its word about what it is and is not doing,” she said. “We need to investigate and we need to verify.

  “We should never look away from injustice and repression wherever it takes place.” -Epoch Times

  Interestingly, Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) did not vote for the bill because it amounts to US overreach, the lawmakers said.

  “The bill gives the President unilateral broad authority to sanction individuals and politicians without any adjudication or due process,” Massie told the Washington Examiner. “Furthermore, according to language in this bill, anyone who receives or offers compensation for an organ donation could be defined as an organ trafficker eligible for punitive actions from the US President.”

  Greene called it a “flawed bill” that allows the US government inappropriate control over global affairs.

  “American politicians are elected by American citizens to protect American interests,” Greene told the Examiner. “This bill, by promoting ‘the establishment of voluntary organ donation systems … in bilateral diplomatic meetings and in international forums,’ calls for non-American politicians, not elected by American citizens, to protect non-American interests. This is nothing more than another piece of legislation from the swamp that fails to put America First.”

  Under the bill, the president would be required to provide Congress with a list of suspects who have participated in forced organ harvesting or human trafficking with the intent of organ harvesting. For each suspect on the list, the president must impose property- and visa-blocking sanctions, according to the legislation.

  An identical version of the legislation has been introduced in the Senate, although it’s not clear when it may be brought up for a vote. -Washington Examiner

  According to a study in the American Journal of Transplantation, Chinese transplant surgeons have been removing organs before donors are declared brain-dead.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 23:25

• The Age Of Average
  The Age Of Average

  Authored by Alex Murrell,

  Introduction:

  In the early 1990s, two Russian artists named Vitaly Komar and Alexander Melamid took the unusual step of hiring a market research firm. Their brief was simple. Understand what Americans desire most in a work of art.

  Over 11 days the researchers at Marttila & Kiley Inc. asked 1,001 US citizens a series of survey questions.

  What’s your favourite colour? Do you prefer sharp angles or soft curves? Do you like smooth canvases or thick brushstrokes? Would you rather figures that are nude or clothed? Should they be at leisure or working? Indoors or outside? In what kind of landscape? 

  Komar and Melamid then set about painting a piece that reflected the results. The pair repeated this process in a number of countries including Russia, China, France and Kenya.

  Each piece in the series, titled “People’s Choice”, was intended to be a unique a collaboration with the people of a different country and culture.

  But it didn’t quite go to plan.

  Describing the work in his book Playing to the Gallery, the artist Grayson Perry said:

  “In nearly every country all people really wanted was a landscape with a few figures around, animals in the foreground, mainly blue.”

  Despite soliciting the opinions of over 11,000 people, from 11 different countries, each of the paintings looked almost exactly the same.

  

  Komar and Melamid, People’s Choice

  After completing the work, Komar quipped:

  “We have been travelling to different countries, engaging in dull negotiations with representatives of polling companies, raising money for further polls, receiving more or less the same results, and painting more or less the same blue landscapes. Looking for freedom, we found slavery.” 

  This, however, was the point. The art was not the paintings themselves, but the comment they made. We like to think that we are individuals, but we are much more alike that we wish to admit.

  30 years after People’s Choice, it seems the landscapes which Komar and Melamid painted have become the landscapes in which we live.

  This article argues that from film to fashion and architecture to advertising, creative fields have become dominated and defined by convention and cliché. Distinctiveness has died. In every field we look at, we find that everything looks the same.

  Welcome to the age of average.

  Let’s dive in.

  Interiors all look the same

  In 2011, Laurel Schwulst was planning to redecorate her New York apartment when she began searching the internet for interior design inspiration.

  Before long, the designer had stumbled on the perfect research tool: AirBnB. From the comfort of her home the app gave her a window into thousands of others. She could travel the world, and view hundreds of rooms, without leaving her chair.

  Schwulst began sharing images to her Tumblr, “Modern Life Space“. The blog became an ever-expanding gallery of interior design inspiration. But something wasn’t right.

  Laurel Schwulst:

  “The Airbnb experience is supposed to be about real people and authenticity. But so many of them were similar, whether in Brooklyn, Osaka, Rio de Janeiro, Seoul, or Santiago.”

  Schwulst had identified an AirBnB design aesthetic that had organically emerged and was quickly spreading through the platform’s properties. White walls. Raw wood. Nespresso machines. Eames chairs. Bare brick. Open shelving. Edison bulbs. The style combines the rough-hewn rawness of industrialism with the elegant minimalism of mid-century design.

  

  International Airbnb Style

  But Schwulst wasn’t the only one to identify the trend. Aaron Taylor Harvey, the Executive Creative Director of Environments at Airbnb had spotted something similar:

  “You can feel a kind of trend in certain listings. There’s an International Airbnb Style that’s starting to happen. I think that some of it is really a wonderful thing that gives people a sense of comfort and immediate belonging when they travel, and some of it is a little generic. It can go either way.”

  This “Modern Life Space” or “International AirBnB Style” goes by a number of other names. It’s known as the Brooklyn Look, or according to the journalist Kyle Chayka, AirSpace:

  “I called this style “AirSpace”. It’s marked by an easily recognisable mix of symbols – like reclaimed wood, Edison bulbs, and refurbished industrial lighting – that’s meant to provide familiar, comforting surroundings for a wealthy, mobile elite, who want to feel like they’re visiting somewhere “authentic” while they travel, but who actually just crave more of the same: more rustic interiors and sans-serif logos and splashes of cliche accent colours on rugs and walls.”

  Perhaps this seems inevitable. Isn’t it obvious that a global group of hosts all trying to present their properties to a global group of travellers would converge on a single, optimal, appealing yet inoffensive style?

  AirSpace, however, isn’t just limited to residential interiors. The same tired tropes have spread beyond the spaces where we live, and taken over the spaces where we work, eat, drink and relax.

  In an in-depth investigation for The Guardian, Chayka documents how the AirSpace style of interior decor has become the dominant design style of coffee shops:

  “Go to Shoreditch Grind, near a roundabout in the middle of London’s hipster district. It’s a coffee shop with rough-hewn wooden tables, plentiful sunlight from wide windows, and austere pendant lighting. Then head to Takk in Manchester. It’s a coffee shop with a big glass storefront, reclaimed wood furniture, and hanging Edison bulbs. Compare the two: You might not even know you’re in different spaces. It’s no accident that these places look similar. Though they’re not part of a chain and don’t have their interior design directed by a single corporate overlord, these coffee shops have a way of mimicking the same tired style, a hipster reduction obsessed with a superficial sense of history and the remnants of industrial machinery that once occupied the neighbourhoods they take over.”

  And this isn’t just a trend that we can see in British coffee culture. The same trend has been identified in cities from Bangkok to Beijing and from Seoul to San Francisco.

  

  AirSpace

  According to The Verge:

  “The coffee roaster Four Barrel in San Francisco looks like the Australian Toby’s Estate in Brooklyn looks like The Coffee Collective in Copenhagen looks like Bear Pond Espresso in Tokyo. You can get a dry cortado with perfect latte art at any of them, then Instagram it on a marble countertop and further spread the aesthetic to your followers.”

  Once this interior design style became dominant in the world’s coffee shops, it began to spread throughout the wider hospitality sector.

  Anne Quito, for example, writes about how the hipster makeover has made its way to restaurants in Quartz:

  “Established restaurants are getting the hipster makeover. Traditional restaurants like Dickey’s Barbecue in Dallas, eateries in Toronto’s Chinatown and even the 47-year-old roadside diner chain Cracker Barrel—in the guise of its new biscuit joint Holler & Dash—are embracing chalkboard menus and reclaimed wood look to attract the affluent, design-savvy millennial.”

  So, the interiors of our homes, coffee shops and restaurants have begun to converge upon a single style. But when we move outside, the story doesn’t get much better.

  Architecture all looks the same

  The anthropologist Marc Augé coined the term “non-place” to describe built environments that are defined by their transience and anonymity. Non-places, such as airports, service stations and hotels, tend towards utilitarian sterility. They prioritise function and efficiency over a softer sense of human expression and social connection.

  In 1995, the Professor of Architecture and Urban Design at Harvard University, Rem Koolhaas, published an essay titled The Generic City:

  “Is the contemporary city like the contemporary airport— ‘all the same’? Is it possible to theorise this convergence? And if so, to what ultimate configuration is it aspiring? Convergence is possible only at the price of shedding identity. That is usually seen as a loss. But at the scale at which it occurs it must mean something. What are the disadvantages of identity, and conversely, what are the advantages of blankness? What if this seemingly accidental, and usually regretted, homogenization was an intentional process, a conscious movement away from difference toward similarity?”

  That opening question takes Augé’s idea of the sterile non-place and applies it to the city as a whole. Koolhaas, in effect, is arguing that soulless is becoming the default design direction of all urban architecture.

  

  The generic city

  Almost 30 years after the publication of The Generic City I think it’s clear Koolhaas’ fears were well founded. Architecture’s march towards blank homogeneity is perhaps most obvious in the quick build, low-cost apartment blocks that have rapidly spread across the United States.

  Justin Fox writing for Bloomberg:

  “Cheap stick framing has led to a proliferation of blocky, forgettable mid-rises. (…) These buildings are in almost every U.S. city. They range from three to seven stories tall and can stretch for blocks. They’re usually full of rental apartments, but they can also house college dorms, condominiums, hotels, or assisted-living facilities. Close to city centers, they tend toward a blocky, often colorful modernism; out in the suburbs, their architecture is more likely to feature peaked roofs and historical motifs. Their outer walls are covered with fiber cement, metal, stucco, or bricks.”

  This architectural style, characterised by boxy forms and unconvincing cladding, goes by names such as Fast-Casual Architecture and McUrbanism. But perhaps most commonly, these buildings are known as five-over-ones.

  When Justin Fox drove across the US, he realised that they were not specific to one city or state. They were everywhere. And they were proliferating: 

  “In 2017, 187,000 new housing units were completed in buildings of 50 units or more in the U.S., the most since the Census Bureau started keeping track in 1972. By my informal massaging of the data, well over half of those were in blocky mid-rises.”

  But why is this the case? Why are the majority of large American buildings succumbing to the same style?

  Coby Lefkowitz offers four reasons in his essay, “Why Everywhere Looks the Same”. First, unlike in the early 20th century, developers are increasingly constrained by building codes. Second, rapidly rising land costs cause developers to pack as many properties as possible into every site. Third, the rising barriers to entry have caused the industry to consolidate. And fourth, developers seek to reduce their costs by reusing the same plans across multiple sites:

  “It would be disappointing enough to fail in gracing a land as physically beautiful as the US with the built companions it deserves. But it’s downright shameful that we deprive ourselves of living in interesting, meaningful, and wonderful places, given the thousands of precedents for inspiration worldwide, and many hundreds within our borders. Instead, we’ve copied and pasted our society from the most anodyne, the most boring, and the most bleh. We’ve all seen them. Covered with fiber cement, stucco, and bricks or brick-like material. They’ve shown up all over the country, indifferent to their surroundings. Spreading like a non-native species.”

  

  America’s five-over-one architecture

  Cities once felt rooted in time and place. The Victorian grandeur of London. The Art Deco glamour of New York. The neon modernity of Tokyo. But with anodyne architecture spreading across the United States, cities are beginning to lose their contextual identities. They are all starting to look the same:

  “Institutional developers march forward, ignorant of what makes Portland, Maine different from Portland, Oregon, or Philadelphia from Kansas City. Unique local traditions? Completely different climates? Hah! Joke’s on us. A box fits just as well in any of these places.”

  And it isn’t just the design of our residential buildings but our professional ones as well.

  In an article for Grist, Heather Smith describes the homogeneity of the office parks she’d pass on the way to her mother’s place of work and how present day Silicon Valley feels so similar.

  “All the offices and factories along the way to my mom’s office were smaller versions of the same thing — set back from the road, behind deep rectangles of rolling green lawn, no sidewalks. Sometimes clusters of begonias added accent marks, or regimented little bushes pruned into spheres or squares.”

  Smith continues:

  “I thought about this recently when I went driving through Silicon Valley, because I was surprised at how similar it was to the neighborhoods that I had grown up in. Not that it was an exact replica (…). But the architecture was the same — the same low-slung buildings, set back from the street by parking lots, each complex its own self-contained bubble, separated from the road by a row of trees.”

  So, the places where we live and work have begun to converge upon a single style, but we’re also seeing the same trend occur in the way we travel between them.

  Cars all looks the same

  In 2015, the ex-Chairman of BBH London, Jim Carroll recalled his realisation 32 years earlier that aerodynamic tests had begun to make all cars look alike:

  “Some of you will recall the day in 1983 when we woke up and noticed that the cars all looked the same. There was a simple explanation. They’d all been through the same wind tunnel. We nodded assent at the evident improvement in fuel efficiency, but we could not escape a weary sigh of disappointment. Modern life is rubbish.”

  In Carroll’s opinion, because all vehicles underwent the same wind tunnel tests, manufacturers were independently converging on the same optimal set of forms, proportions and dimensions. And as a result, homogeneity in car design was increasing.

  What Carroll didn’t realise was that things were about to get a lot worse.

  Sat at a red light, Drew Magary took the opportunity to scope out some new car ideas. Suddenly he saw an SUV that looked attractive. But he couldn’t quite see the badge. Another car was blocking his line of sight:

  “Maybe it’s a Bimmer,” I said to the dog. “It kinda looks like one.” It wasn’t. It was a Hyundai Santa Fe, which kinda resembles the Acura RDX, which kinda resembles the Volvo XC60, which kinda resembles the BMW X3. (…) These four models are all 75 inches wide, 66 inches high (save for the Volvo, which is 65), and they only differ in length by a maximum of three inches. They all have rear quarter windows smaller than a porthole on a submarine. They all have chrome accents to increase the glam factor by, like, five percent. And they all abhor right angles, (…). They’re spiritual clones, and they’re not exceptions in being so.”

  

  The wind tunnel effect (original image source unknown)

  But why do so many modern cars look the same?

  Jim Carroll’s wind-tunnel theory is certainly one reason. Another is that the automotive giants increasingly share vehicle “platforms” between the many brands that they operate. And Ian Callum, who led design at Jaguar-Land Rover for two decades, provides a third theory.

  “There was a time when you could identify the country the car came from. But today, basically every company makes cars for basically every country (…). Cars are now designed for the broadest possible audience, across the broadest number of countries, to be manufactured in the most efficient possible way.”

  Callum continues:

  “Before the typical car designer can even begin sketching out a model, they’re given specs from the packaging department (…). The measurements might vary within millimetres. These strict dimensions are agonisingly chosen to please the needs of the wind tunnel, to adhere to government safety regulations, to properly accommodate the average American family’s collective weight of 78,000 lbs., and to allow for enough cargo space for all their crap.”

  These three theories explain why the three-dimensional design of cars has been converging over time. But they don’t explain why the colour of cars has converged as well.

  According to data shared by Jökull Solberg, around 40% of cars sold in 1996 were monochromatic (black, white, silver or grey). 20 years later that figure had increased to 80%.

  There are many suggestions for why this might be. Perhaps these colours come as standard and everything else is an optional upgrade. Perhaps brighter colours fade more quickly. Maybe people buy less vibrant colours when times are more turbulent. Maybe the resale market for monochromatic cars is more buoyant. Or maybe the paired-back design of smartphones informed stylistic trends in the auto industry. 

  Regardless, the result is the same. Where once carparks were a kaleidoscope of reds, blues and greens, today they capture a sea of desaturation.

  And what’s more? The visual identities of car brands seem to be following suit. In September 2020, Vauxhall released a modernised, minimal marque. According to Henry Wong at Design Week:

  “Vauxhall unveiled its new logo last week, a “confidently British” look, which reworks the griffin icon and introduces a blue-and-red colour scheme. Most prominent is its new flat styling — a simplified version of the logo’s previous 3D look. Vauxhall calls the redesign the “progressive face of the brand”.”

  

  The “blanding” of automotive brand identities

  Vauxhall had ditched a logo that looked like a chrome sculpted bonnet badge and replaced it with a flatter, thinner, altogether simpler execution. But they weren’t the only one. As Wong says, at least five other major manufacturers had charted a similar course:

  “It’s a familiar story within car branding of late. Audi first unveiled a minimalist-inspired rebrand in 2018, but it’s been followed by a host of other marques in the past year. Volkswagen, BMW, Toyota, Nissan have all revealed new branding and each with a flat logo.”

  So, the cars we drive, their colours and their logos have begun to converge upon a single style, but we’re also seeing the same trend occur in the way we look ourselves.

  People all look the same

  In December 2019 the journalist Jia Tolentino set about investigating a troubling trend. Many celebrities and influencers had started to resemble each other. 

  “This past summer, I booked a plane ticket to Los Angeles with the hope of investigating what seems likely to be one of the oddest legacies of our rapidly expiring decade: the gradual emergence, among professionally beautiful women, of a single, cyborgian face. It’s a young face, of course, with poreless skin and plump, high cheekbones. It has catlike eyes and long, cartoonish lashes; it has a small, neat nose and full, lush lips. It looks at you coyly but blankly, as if its owner has taken half a Klonopin and is considering asking you for a private-jet ride to Coachella.”

  The look that Tolentino is describing is the result of (at least) three conspiring trends. The growing market for injectable treatments is driving a trend for physical enhancements. The rise of apps such as FaceTune is driving a trend for digital enhancements. And make-up techniques such as “strobing” and “contouring” are driving a trend for cosmetic enhancements. Over the last decade, these trends have developed in parallel, each feeding and fueling the other.

  Starting at the top, Tolentino discusses the rising accessibility of beauty treatments such as Botox and fillers:

  “Twenty years ago, plastic surgery was a fairly dramatic intervention: expensive, invasive, permanent, and, often, risky. But, in 2002, the Food and Drug Administration approved Botox for use in preventing wrinkles; a few years later, it approved hyaluronic-acid fillers, such as Juvéderm and Restylane, which at first filled in fine lines and wrinkles and now can be used to restructure jawlines, noses, and cheeks. These procedures last for six months to a year and aren’t nearly as expensive as surgery. (…) You can go get Botox and then head right back to the office.”

  But the cost of achieving this look, which has become known as “Instagram Face”, is even lower than one may imagine. Whilst the average price per syringe of filler is $683, social sharers can now use apps to achieve similar results.

  

  Instagram Face

  Rebecca Jennings writing for Vox:

  “Instagram Face is so ubiquitous that there are now special filters that give you the look digitally if you can’t afford the real thing. (…) Almost no one is born with Instagram Face — by virtue of it being associated with a digital platform, the look is always mediated and performed — and even those who have it naturally still use tools like FaceTune to enhance their already algorithmically perfect features.”

  Finally, these physical and digital enhancements are complemented by a third, altogether less dystopian, trend: cosmetic enhancements. Here make-up, and an almost endless supply of YouTube tutorials, are used to alter the perceived bone structure of a face.

  Julia Brucculieri for the Huffington Post:

  “Social media influencers these days are starting to look like beauty clones. You know the look: a full pout, perfectly arched eyebrows, maybe some expertly applied eyeliner, topped off with a healthy dose of highlighter and cheek contouring. With a few makeup brushes, a contour palette and some matte lip color, you can be well on your way to looking like everyone else.”

  So where did all of this begin?

  According to the make-up artist Colby Smith, Kim Kardashian is patient-zero of Instagram face. Ultimately, he says, every social media star’s goal is to look like her.

  And Smith isn’t the only one to hold this opinion. Writing for The Cut, Kathleen Hou offers a similarly provocative opinion.

  “Instagram’s beauty posters tend to look like they’re all the same woman, and that woman is Kim Kardashian. Thanks to hundreds of “Get the Look” tutorials, it’s never been easier to strobe and contour yourself into a facsimile of the star. So, no wonder there’s a cloning effect.”

  This may seem like an exaggeration. There is, however, a truth at the centre of the assertion.

  When The New Yorker interviewed Beverley Hills based plastic surgeon Jason Diamond, he claimed around a third of all his patients aspire to become a Kardashian doppelgänger:

  “I’d say that thirty percent of people come in bringing a photo of Kim, or someone like Kim—there’s a handful of people, but she’s at the very top of the list, and understandably so.”

  And we haven’t only started to look alike from the neck up. Dame Vivienne Westwood, the late fashion designer best known for bringing the counter-cultural punk scene onto the catwalk, comments on the way clothing has started to conform:

  “Everybody looks like clones and the only people you notice are my age. I don’t notice anybody unless they look great, and every now and again they do, and they are usually 70. We are so conformist, nobody is thinking. We are all sucking up stuff, we have been trained to be consumers and we are all consuming far too much. I’m a fashion designer and people think, what do I know? But I’m talking about all this disposable crap.”

  So, the way we look and the way we dress has begun to converge upon a single style. But when we look at the content we consume, the story doesn’t get much better.

  Media all looks the same

  In the early 2010s, French blogger Christophe Courtois began curating movie posters that conformed to strikingly similar formulas.

  Rom-coms often used a guy and a girl standing back-to-back against a white background. Horror films featured a close up of an eye. Action films opting for a lone character, dressed in black with their back to the camera.

  Courtois’ series perfectly illustrates how, in the 21st Century, every genre of film sticks to a relatively narrow set of clichés, codes and conventions that promoters slavishly abide by.

  

  Christophe Courtois’ cinematic clichés

  In Hadley Freeman’s book Life Moves Pretty Fast, Oscar winning director Steven Soderbergh argues that this is the natural result of testing:

  “If you’ve ever wondered why every poster and every trailer and every TV spot looks exactly the same, it’s because of testing. It’s because anything interesting scores poorly and gets kicked out. (…) I’ve tried to argue that maybe the thing that’s making it distinctive, and score poorly, actually would stick out if you presented it to these people the way the real world presents it. And I’ve never won that argument.”

  But is the homogenisation of Hollywood a new phenomenon?

  To find out Adam Mastroianni analysed the top 20 grossing films in every year since 1977 and coded whether each was part of a “multiplicity” (i.e. a sequel, prequel, franchise, spin-off, reboot etc.).

  What he found was surprising: 

  “Until the year 2000, about 25% of top-grossing movies were prequels, sequels, spinoffs, remakes, reboots, or cinematic universe expansions. Since 2010, it’s been over 50% ever year. In recent years, it’s been close to 100%.”

  Mastroianni continues:

  “In 2021, only one of the ten top-grossing films (the Ryan Reynolds vehicle Free Guy) was an original. There were only two originals in 2020’s top 10, and none at all in 2019.”

  A further finding for the research was that the revenue generated by the top 20 movies was, until 2015, around 40% of that generated by the top 200. Since then however that 40% figure has begun to climb even higher, crossing the 60% threshold in 2021.

  In short, the top 20 films are becoming both bigger and more alike.

  But this isn’t just happening in film. In every corner of pop culture, a smaller number of “blockbusters” is claiming a larger share of the market. What were once creative powerhouses have become factories of the familiar.

  Take books.

  “It used to be pretty rare for one author to have multiple books in the top 10 in the same year. Since 1990, it’s happened almost every year. No author ever had three top 10 books in one year until Danielle Steel did it 1998. In 2011, John Grisham, Kathryn Stockett, and Stieg Larsson all had two chart-topping books each. (…) In the 1950s, a little over half of the authors in the top 10 had been there before. These days, it’s closer to 75%.”

  You can see this creative convergence for yourself when you next visit a bookstore. In fiction you’ll see many popular books following a “girl with…” naming convention. Of course, there’s Larsson’s “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”, but we’ve also seen Paula Hawkins’ “The Girl on the Train”, M. R. Carey’s “The Girl With all the Gifts” and A. J. Grayson’s “The Girl in the Water”.

  In non-fiction, if you visit the self-help category, you’ll notice that every book title seems to include a swear word. We have Mark Manson’s “The Subtle Art of not Giving a Fuck”, Sarah Knight’s “The Life Changing Magic of Not Giving a Fuck” and Alexis Rockley’s “Find your Fuck Yeah.”

  

  Sweary self-help books

  Video games are no different.

  In the late 1990s, 75% or less of the best-selling video games were franchise instalments. Since 2005, it’s been closer to 100%.

  I’ll quote Keith Stuart, writing for The Guardian, at length:

  “The absence of the E3 expo in Los Angeles for the past two years has left a gigantic vacuum in the video game calendar. Last week, the industry did its best to fill that gaping content maw with three online events – the Summer Game fest, the Xbox and Bethesda showcase and the PC gaming show. They were underwhelming for many seasoned players. Major reveals included a remake of The Last of Us, a remake of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II, Street Fighter 6, Final Fantasy XVI and news about the reimagining of the classic role-player System Shock.”

  So, our movies, books and video games have all begun to look the same. But it’s not just the content we consume. When we look at the content brands produce the story doesn’t get much better.

  Brands all look the same

  In 1982 the American fashion photographer Irving Penn shot an ad for Clinique that became known as “the shelfie”. The advert is simply a photograph of the inside of a medicine cabinet. A bright white background. Glass shelves. Bottles of pills. And a few well branded Clinique products.

  Since this iconic 80s ad, many other brands have created their own shelfies, including Selfridges, e. l. f. and Billie. But this isn’t the only tried and tested trope.

  Here’s AIGA Eye on Design:

  “There are many more oft-mimicked setups like the shelfie currently bouncing around the zeitgeist; one omnipresent shot includes objects placed on a mirror reflecting the sky, giving the illusion of a product floating in midair. Another example uses a dense pattern of water droplets to refract a single item into a series of psychedelic miniatures, while yet another places subjects in front of faux scenic backdrops reminiscent of a low-budget Sears photo studio. Each of these distinct setups is utilized broadly and across industries, with the same composition and concept seen on the Instagram feeds of a major beverage syndicate and an indie skincare brand alike.”

  

  Shelfies

  In an article for The Cut, titled The Tyranny of Terrazzo, Molly Fischer pushes this thought one step further.

  Whilst there is the shelfie trope and the mirror trope and the water droplet trope, these layouts all seem to share a surprisingly consistent style of art direction. They might be compositionally different, but they are conceptually alike:

  “And then there are advertisements, making up a visual world of their own. The products on view (cookware, supplements, stretchy clothes) occupy blank pastel landscapes manipulated by a diversity of hands. These aren’t ads that bellow or hector; they whisper, in restrained sans-serif fonts, or chastely flirt, in letters with curves and bounce. They’re ads, sure, but they’re so well designed. In this era, you come to understand, design was the product. Whatever else you might be buying, you were buying design, and all the design looked the same.” 

  Whilst Clinique’s original Shelfie hails from the 80s, it wasn’t until the 2010s that it became a more widely adopted style. And the majority of companies who did so were digital-first, DTC brands.

  Elizabeth Goodspeed argues this is because these brands are more likely to draw inspiration from the same vast online sources. The result, she says, is a “moodboard effect”: 

  “This kind of visual homogeneity is a common occurrence in the art direction world, where ubiquitous styles operate less like trends and more like memes; remixed and diluted until they become a single visual mass. In today’s extremely-online world, the vast availability of reference imagery has, perhaps counterintuitively, led to narrower thinking and shallower visual ideation. It’s a product of what I like to call the “moodboard effect.”

  So, designers use the same online platforms, draw inspiration from the same sorts of imagery and, in turn, create broadly the same types of adverts.

  But it isn’t just advertising that is causing brands to all look the same. Their visual identities are converging as well.

  In December 2018, Thierry Brunfaut and Tom Greenwood published an article in Fast Company where they coined a new word: Blanding.

  “The worst branding trend (…) is the one you probably never noticed. I call it blanding. The main offenders are in tech, where a new army of clones wears a uniform of brand camouflage. The formula is sort of a brand paint-by-numbers. Start with a made-up-word name. Put it in a sans-serif typeface. Make it clean and readable, with just the right amount of white space. Use a direct tone of voice. Nope, no need for a logo. Maybe throw in some cheerful illustrations. Just don’t forget the vibrant colors. Bonus points for purple and turquoise. Blah blah blah.”

  Companies like AirBnB, Spotify and eBay have all dropped colourful logos with expressive typography for a straighter, stricter, altogether more muted, alternative.

  

  The homogeneity of modern brands

  Ben Schott writing for Bloomberg:

  “Visually, blands are simple, neutral and flat. The palette is plain and pastel (with the occasional vibrant splash); the mood is upbeat and happy, or pensive and cool, but never truly real; the dress-code is smart-casual. Bland people are stock-photo attractive (or quirkily jolie laide). (…) Complex products and technical processes are illustrated by cute cartoons or Noun Project icons. Bland logos are confident but cute, utilizing an array of tweaks and twists to provoke the all-important “smile in the mind”.”

  While the tech sector has led the way on blanding, we see the trend towards flatter, more lifeless, identities playing out in categories from the high-end world of fashion to the more mass world of personal care.

  In a November 2021 article, title Distinction Rebellion, Contagious claimed that more and more brands seem content to drift along in a sea of sameness:

  “Look up any new corporate brand identity unveiled over the past decade and you will almost certainly find yourself staring at a flattened and simplified version of the company’s old logo. The aesthetic has become so ubiquitous that it’s acquired its own name – blanding.”

  So, advertising and brand identities are becoming more and more alike. But so too are the taglines brands employ.

  Shai Idelson, Strategy Director at ad agency BBH, collected a list of 27 brands whose taglines follow the “Find Your X” sentence structure. These include Lucozade’s “Find Your Flow”, Rightmove’s “Find Your Happy” and Volvic’s “Find Your Volcano”.

  Idelson says:

  “I love end-lines. The delicate art of capturing a meaningful thought about a brand or a product in as few words as possible. A great end-line will touch my heart and stay in my memory forever. I still remember some from my childhood. But in the last few years, something happened to end-lines. (…) The linguistic similarity is staggering.” 

  The same “insight” that sits behind the 27 taglines (that young consumers celebrate individuality above all else) has also led to the “X, Your Way” end line construction. We have Nespresso’s “Indulge, Your Way”, Sonos’ “Sound, Your Way”, Dunelm’s “Dun, Your Way” and many, many more.

  And so brand adverts, identities and taglines are all starting to look the same. But where does this all leave us?

  Conclusion

  So, there you have it. The interiors of our homes, coffee shops and restaurants all look the same. The buildings where we live and work all look the same. The cars we drive, their colours and their logos all look the same. The way we look and the way we dress all looks the same. Our movies, books and video games all look the same. And the brands we buy, their adverts, identities and taglines all look the same.

  But it doesn’t end there. In the age of average, homogeneity can be found in an almost indefinite number of domains.

  The Instagram pictures we post, the tweets we read, the TV we watch, the app icons we click, the skylines we see, the websites we visit and the illustrations which adorn them all look the same. The list goes on, and on, and on.

  

  UGC all looks the same

  There are many reasons why this might have happened.

  Perhaps when times are turbulent, people seek the safety of the familiar. Perhaps it’s our obsession with quantification and optimisation. Or maybe it’s the inevitable result of inspiration becoming globalised.

  Regardless of the reasons, it seems that just as Komar and Melamid produced the “people’s choice” in art, contemporary companies produce the people’s choice in almost every category of creativity.

  But it’s not all bad news.

  I believe that the age of average is the age of opportunity.

  When every supermarket aisle looks like a sea of sameness, when every category abides by the same conventions, when every industry has converged on its own singular style, bold brands and courageous companies have the chance to chart a different course. To be different, distinctive and disruptive.

  So, this is your call to arms. Whether you’re in film or fashion, media or marketing, architecture, automotive or advertising, it doesn’t matter. Our visual culture is flatlining and the only cure is creativity.

  It’s time to cast aside conformity. It’s time to exorcise the expected. It’s time to decline the indistinguishable.

  For years the world has been moving in the same stylistic direction. And it’s time we reintroduced some originality.

  Or as the ad agency BBH says.

  When the world zigs. Zag.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 23:05

• Trump Says He Has A Plan To 'Solve' Ukraine War In 24 Hours If Reelected
  Trump Says He Has A Plan To ‘Solve’ Ukraine War In 24 Hours If Reelected

  Former President Trump in a new Monday night interview on Fox News declared he would “solve” the Russia-Ukraine war “in 24 hours” if he’s elected president. His words came following his kickoff campaign rally for his 2024 White House bid held in Waco, TX over the weekend. 

  He told a crowd of many thousands: “I will prevent World War III, which we’re heading into” – and was met with widespread applause. But in his Monday appearance on Sean Hannity’s show, Trump explained: “If it’s not solved, I will have it solved in 24 hours with Zelensky and with Putin.”

  

  “The key is the war has to stop now because Ukraine is being obliterated,” Trump said.

  Recently both Ukrainian and Western officials have admitted heavy losses and that more ammo is needed on the front lines in order to match the Russians’ superior artillery bombardment and supplies. For over the past month pro-Kremlin forces have made steady gains around the strategic city of Bakhmut in Donetsk, having nearly encircled it. But the Ukrainians have kept up the fight, and poured more manpower and weapons in. 

  China has this month tried to mediate in order to jump-start peace negotiations between the two warring sides, and Beijing has even had close contact with the Zelensky administration, but these efforts haven’t appeared to go anywhere thus far, also amid Washington and NATO skepticism. 

  Trump tells Sean Hannity that he would solve the war between Ukraine and Russia in one day. “A peace between them” pic.twitter.com/toimU57Kwk

  — 3sidedstory 🇺🇲 (@3sidedstory) March 28, 2023

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

  As for Trump, he remains confident, having repeated lately that he can ‘get along with’ and talk to Putin candidly. According to more from the Monday night Hannity interview:

  “So you’d prefer if you were president, you think you would have a negotiated settlement?” Hannity asked Trump.

  “Within 24 hours,” the former president replied.

  Trump went so far as to emphasize he gets along “very well” with Putin. Recent polls have shown that a majority of Republican voters want to avoid deeper US involvement in the war.

  A new IPSOS-Axios poll shows a divide on Ukraine policy among conservatives, with the debate and momentum clearly shifting in favor of those who want to avoid deeper US involvement in the war.

  “Four in five Republicans want the U.S. to remain the world’s leading power — but fewer than half support giving Ukraine weapons and financial support to try to save itself from Russia, according to the latest wave of the Axios-Ipsos Two Americas Index,” an IPSOS-Axios poll published earlier in mid-March found.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 22:45

• Watch: Record Snowpack Triggers Massive Avalanche At Utah Ski Resort
  Watch: Record Snowpack Triggers Massive Avalanche At Utah Ski Resort

  Utah has experienced one of its snowiest winter seasons in history. Ski resorts are repeatedly breaking snowfall records while the risk of avalanches soars. 

  A video was shared on Twitter on Monday, capturing the dramatic scene of a massive avalanche at Sundance Resort.

  A friend just shared this with me. Avalanche at @SundanceResort. Just now. pic.twitter.com/j2hcCNRdPl

  — Chris Harrington (@CCH360) March 27, 2023

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

  Sundance Resort tweeted the avalanche injured no one, and it happened just outside the boundaries of its trails. 

  Today there was a natural avalanche that started on Mount Timpanogos and carried down the mountain into an area outside our ski area boundaries. Footage shows the dust/wind cloud reaching guests who were watching but no one was hurt as deposition area never reached our boundaries

  — Sundance Resort (@SundanceResort) March 28, 2023

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

  Last Friday, Utah broke the record for snowpack with more than 700 inches of snow this season.

  

  Due to the record-high snowpack, the Utah Avalanche Center has posted a “considerable” avalanche risk for many areas in the state.

  

  So much for global warming in Utah… 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 22:05

• Ron Paul: The Best Way To Protect US Troops In Syria
  Ron Paul: The Best Way To Protect US Troops In Syria

  Authored by Ron Paul via RPI, [emphasis ZH]

  Last week saw a sharp increase in attacks on US troops occupying northeastern Syria, with a drone strike against a US base blamed on “pro-Iran” forces and a US counter-strike said to have killed at least 19 people. After the US retaliation, another strike by “pro-Iran” forces hit a number of US sites in Syria. It may be just a matter of time before there are more strikes against the 900 US troops based in Syria against Syria’s wishes. One US contractor was killed last time. Next time it could be many more Americans.

  What’s behind the sudden escalation? Fundamental changes in the Middle East over the past month have highlighted how indefensible is the continued US occupation of Syria and Iraq.

  Take, for example, the recent historic mending of relations between former arch-enemies Saudi Arabia and Iran which was brokered by Washington’s own arch-enemy, China. US policy in the Middle East has long been “divide and conquer,” dating back at least to the Iran/Iraq war in the 1980s. US switching sides in that war guaranteed that the maximum amount of blood was spilled and that the simmering hatreds would continue to prevent any kind of lasting peace.

  

  Then the US invaded Iraq twenty years ago and turned Iraq into an Iranian ally. That’s neocon foreign policy for you: a 100 percent failure rate.

  So this month China, which is interested in creating a regional transportation corridor that would include Iran, came in and instead of bombing, invading, and occupying – Washington’s modus operandi – actually brokered the restoration of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

  Republicans and Democrats in the US both love to attack China, but China has achieved what the US has resisted for years: peace in the region. Should we be surprised that the continued US occupation is not welcome in the Middle East?

  The United States occupies that huge chunk of Syria where the oil and agriculture is located and the goal appears to be producing profits for US multinational corporations from stolen natural resources and preventing the natural wealth of Syria to be used to rebuild that country. Is it any wonder why the US is so unpopular in the Middle East?

  How hypocritical is it that the Biden Administration has spent $100 billion of our dollars to expel Russia from occupying proportionally less territory in Ukraine that Washington occupies in Syria? And Washington claims to stand for the “international rules-based order,” while they decimated an Iraq and Afghanistan that did not attack us, and before that a Serbia that could not have threatened us if it wanted to.

  The end of the US occupation of the Middle East is upon us and the sooner we realize that the better. We have no business meddling in their politics, occupying their territory, and stealing their resources. Americans joined the US Military to defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, yet they have been manipulated by corrupt DC officials into occupying foreign lands and stealing their oil. Maybe this is why the US military cannot meet its recruitment goals?

  Here’s an easy way to protect US forces in Syria from further “Iran-allied” attacks: Bring them home. Tomorrow. Do not wait another day!

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 21:45

• Bombshell Vax Analysis Finds $147 Billion In Economic Damage, Tens Of Millions Injured Or Disabled
  Bombshell Vax Analysis Finds $147 Billion In Economic Damage, Tens Of Millions Injured Or Disabled

  A new report estimates that 26.6 million people were injured, 1.36 million disabled, and 300,000 excess deaths can be attributed to COVID-19 vaccine damages in 2022 alone, which cost the economy nearly $150 billion.

  

  Research firm Phinance Technologies, founded and operated by former Blackrock portfolio manager Ed Dowd, Yuri Nunes (PhD Physics, MSc Mathematics) and Carlos Alegria (PhD Physics, Finance), split the impact of the vaccines into four broad categories to estimate the human costs associated with the Covid-19 vaccine; no effect or asymptomatic, those who sustained injuries (mild-to-moderate outcome), those who became disabled (severe outcome), and death (extreme outcome). Data on vaccine disabilities and injuries comes directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), while the excess death figures are derived from official figures on deaths in the US via two different methods (methodology here).

  It’s important to note that people in one category (injured, for example) can move into latter categories of severity – which this analysis does not take into consideration.

  “We need to remember that not only are these groupings an attempt to characterize different levels of damage from the inoculations, they are not static and could interact with each other,” reads the report. “For instance, there might be individuals who had no visible effects after vaccination but nonetheless could still be impacted.”

  “Individuals with mild injuries from the inoculations could, over time, develop severe injuries to the extent of being disabled, or an extreme outcome such as death.”

  🚨🚨Estimated 2022 US Vaccine Damage Report:

  Estimated Human Cost:
  ✅26.6 million Injuries
  ✅1.36 million Disabilities
  ✅300k excess deaths

  Estimated Economic Cost:
  Total: $147.8 Billion
  ✅Injuries: $89.9 billion
  ✅Disabilities: $52.2 billion
  ✅Excess Deaths: $5.6 Billion pic.twitter.com/lfN9SEifXG

  — Edward Dowd (@DowdEdward) March 28, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsEstimating the economic cost

  In analyzing each of the above categories, Phinance used absolute excess lost worktime (see previous report) to determine that the direct economic cost of vaccine injuries was $79.5 billion in 2022, and $52.2 billion for those with severe disabilities.

  For deaths, Phinace used the average yearly absolute rise in excess deaths since 2021, which was 0.05% for the 25-64 year-old demographic, which amounted to $5.6 billion in lost productivity.

  In total, they found a total “economic cost” of $147.8 billion in 2022 due to the Covid-19 vaccines.

  Estimated Economic cost report:https://t.co/wN7lKeXi5T pic.twitter.com/B3ws6BHBCe

  — Edward Dowd (@DowdEdward) March 28, 2023

  As Dowd notes, these figures are just what can be currently measured, as things like “The knock effects such as lost productivity due to a worker being present but working at say 50%-75% of capacity is missed plus burn out from those picking up slack.”

  “The multiplier effects are massive.”

  Our economic damage estimates are what we can measure. The knock effects such as lost productivity due to a worker being present but working at say 50%-75% of capacity is missed plus burn out from those picking up slack. Also supply chain delays are not captured etc and etc.…

  — Edward Dowd (@DowdEdward) March 28, 2023

   Now imagine the impact worldwide…

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 21:20

• California City Caught In National Controversy Over Critical Race Theory
  California City Caught In National Controversy Over Critical Race Theory

  Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Heightened tensions among opposing sides regarding the teaching of critical race theory—or its underlying tenets—in K–12 schools erupted into chaos at a local school board meeting in Temecula, California, last week, creating deeper rifts in the community.

  

  The otherwise sleepy city tucked away in southwest Riverside County known best for its wineries has become the latest crucible in the heated war of words over critical race theory, or CRT.

  The Temecula Valley Unified School District fell under the national media spotlight in December when a slate of newly elected conservative school trustees—Joseph Komrosky, Jen Wiersma, and Danny Gonzalez—were sworn into office. The trio shifted the balance of power on the school board and voted to ban CRT at the board’s first meeting after the Nov. 8 election.

  The other trustees, Steven Schwartz and Allison Barclay, opposed the resolution banning CRT, both claiming that the topic isn’t taught in district classrooms.

  The special meeting on March 22, which lasted nearly five hours, was billed as a workshop to inform parents about CRT and why the school board banned it from being taught in classrooms.

  “We’re not debating whether we should have [CRT] or not. It is condemned. It is gone,” Komrosky said at the meeting. “We have local control here as school board members. We can make it explicitly clear what we condemn. Racism is morally reprehensible, and CRT is racism in disguise.”

  Dozens of activists, including parents, politicians, teachers, and students, showed up at James L. Day Middle School to protest the ban, while a few hundred others gathered to hear the presentations of six expert panelists.

  

  The panelists were Dr. Joe Nalven, a professor of cultural anthropology, peace and justice, and indigenous religions at the University of San Diego; Walter H. Myers, an adjunct faculty member at Biola University and Master of Arts, Science, and Religion; Wenyuan Wu, director of Californians for Equal Rights, who spoke via Zoom; Esther Valdez-Clayton, an immigration attorney and former school board president; Brandy Shufutinsky, director of education and community engagement at the Jewish Institute for Liberal Values; and Chris Arend, former Paso Robles Joint Union High School District board member, who played an instrumental role in drafting the CRT ban resolution.

  All of the panelists opposed CRT being taught in K-12 schools and told the audience that banning it is not a ban on teaching black history or ethnic studies, contrary to the signs and claims of protesters.

  Audience Members Removed

  The meeting got off to a raucous start with the public comment portion, as Deon Hairston, a local black pastor, gave a fiery speech against racism and the CRT ban.

  “Your continued blatant, willful ignorance of the black experience in this country is not only shameful, but also detrimental to the education and growth of our children,” he told the board and panelists who were invited to speak on the issue.

  As he walked away from the podium, Hairston said a woman in the audience told him that, “If I feel that way, why don’t I get out of the country?” and he shouted the alleged comment to the crowd.

  Hairston continued yelling and was warned twice before Komrosky told sheriff’s deputies to escort him out of the school auditorium.

  As Hairston left the building, some protesters surrounded the woman and pointed at her, chanting “get that woman” and “kick her out,” and she was also later escorted out.

  Gonzalez later told The Epoch Times the woman could be heard saying something, but he could not confirm what she said. The alleged comment was inaudible on recordings.

  Komrosky suspended public comments and called a recess, but before order was restored, a student protester draped in a Pan-African flag confronted a parent. She walked towards the man and put her hand on his chest.

  When the man said, “Don’t touch me,” San Jacinto City Councilor Brian Hawkins moved toward him, grabbing his arm and shouting repeatedly “That’s a child!” over the crowd until the man said “Shut up!” and walked away.

  Deputies asked the man to leave and escorted him out.

  The man, who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation, told The Epoch Times he has retained legal counsel and is prepared to sue anyone making false accusations against him.

  A narrative being spread that he sought out the girl with the flag and got in her face is “is a complete lie,” he said.

  Jenn Reeves, a local activist, recently posted video clips on TikTok of the incident between the man and the girl with the flag from the March 22 meeting, claiming Hawkins prevented the man from “assaulting” the girl.

  But, several videos show the girl with the flag jumping in front of the man and putting her hand on his chest.

  “I didn’t know what happened, and then I looked down. I saw it was a person, and I pointed at my chest. … I just said ‘Don’t touch me,’” the man said.

  Hawkins, who was wearing a Black Panther Party hoodie under his open suit jacket, ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Republican in 2022 and adamantly opposed CRT during his campaign.

  

  He later told The Epoch Times he has changed his mind about CRT and left the GOP at the end of last year before registering as a Democrat in February.

  The immediate solution for unity in the district is to repeal the CRT ban, Hawkins said.

  “This piece of paper has caused more harm than good,” he said.

  CRT Controversy

  A San Diego parent who goes by the pseudonym Ben Richards and advocates for parents’ rights, told The Epoch Times that Temecula is now “the tip of the spear” in the national fight against critical race theory.

  Richards claims there is a coordinated effort by educators and activist groups such as Fight Back Collective to portray those who oppose CRT as “white Christian nationalists” and “foment, coordinate and support leftist student walkouts,” in the district, Richards said.

  Fight Back Collective states on its website that school boards across the United States “are being infiltrated by far-right white supremacists running on a campaign of ‘parents’ rights.’ Usually endorsed by hate groups such as Moms for Liberty and backed by dark money, these school board members are banning ‘CRT,’ attacking trans youth and LGBTQ+ kids, and running smear campaigns on teachers who support inclusivity.”

  Students are being told they are either a racist, or an anti-racist and that in order to be the latter, they must become an activist and support CRT, Richards said.

  “CRT seeks to create student activists and that is exactly what you’re seeing in Temecula,” he said.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 21:05

• Clinton, Inc. Formed "Joint Venture" Of "Co-Conspirators" To Smear Trump: Durham
  Clinton, Inc. Formed “Joint Venture” Of “Co-Conspirators” To Smear Trump: Durham

  Special Counsel John Durham stated in a Monday night filing that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and researchers trying to dig up dirt on the Trump campaign “should be considered as co-conspirators” in an effort to smear Donald Trump with the Russia collusion hoax, Just the News reports.

  

  According to Durham, Clinton and her cronies formed a “joint venture or conspiracy” in order to harm Trump’s chances of being elected.

  “Durham has just shown the whole world what major pieces of our Russiagate investigation revealed,” said former House Intelligence Committee GOP investigative counsel, Kash Patel. “Hard evidence, emails and text messages, showing the Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie, Joffe, and the media were all synced in August of 2016 pushing the false Alfa Bank server story, while also all working on the Steele Dossier matter. Durham submits all this evidence as ‘joint venture conspiracy’ under the rules of evidence.”

  Durham’s filing also highlights an unearthed text message from disgraced Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann in which he lies to the FBI about not working for Clinton when he hand-delivered now-discredited anti-Trump research prior to the election.

  The existence of the text message between Sussmann and then-FBI General Counsel James Baker was revealed in a court filing late Monday night by Durham’s team. Prosecutors said they intend to show Sussmann gave a false story to the FBI but then told the truth about working on behalf of the Clinton campaign when he later testified to Congress.

  “Jim – it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss,” Sussmann texted Baker on Sept. 18, 2016, according to the new court filing. “Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own – not on behalf of a client or company – want to help the Bureau. Thanks.”

  Prosecutors said the text message will become essential evidence at trial to show Sussmann lied to the FBI. –Just the News

  According to Durham, “The defendant lied in that meeting, falsely stating to the General Counsel that he was not providing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client,” adding “In fact, the defendant had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including (i) a technology executive (“Tech Executive-1”) at a U.S.-based Internet company (“Internet Company-1″), and (ii) the Clinton Campaign.”

  Sussmann eventually admitted he lied a year later during testimony in front of the House.

  “We had a conversation, as lawyers do with their clients, about client 1 needs and objectives and the best course to take for a client,” Sussman told Patel in a sworn deposition. “And so it may have been a decision that we came to together. I mean, I don’t want to imply that I was sort of directed to do something against my better judgment, or that we were in any sort of conflict.”

  Durham says he plans to present evidence that Sussmann worked with the Clinton campaign, ‘Tech Executive 1’ Rodney Joffe, and others in aforementioned “joint venture” to push the Russian collusion hoax, particularly the fabrication that Trump had a secret backchannel to the Kremlin via the Moscow-based Alfa bank.

  “As an initial matter, the Government expects that the evidence at trial will show that beginning in late July/early August 2016, the defendant, Tech Executive-1, and agents of the Clinton Campaign were ‘acting in concert toward a common goal,’ … namely, the goal of assembling and disseminating the Russian Bank-1 allegations and other derogatory information about Trump and his associates to the media and the U.S. government,” reads the filing.

  “The evidence of a joint venture or conspiracy will establish that in November 2016, soon after the Presidential election, Tech Executive-1 emailed a colleague, stating, “I was tentatively offered the top [cybersecurity] job by the Democrats when it looked like they’d win.'”

  “In sum,” Durham’s filing concludes, “the above evidence, public information, and expected testimony clearly establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant and Tech Executive-1 worked in concert with each other and with agents of the Clinton Campaign to research and disseminate the Russian Bank-1 allegations.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 20:45

• CDC Found COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals Months Earlier Than Previously Known, Files Show
  CDC Found COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Signals Months Earlier Than Previously Known, Files Show

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

  The top U.S. public health agency identified hundreds of safety signals for the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines months earlier than previously known, according to files obtained by The Epoch Times.

  

  The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found more than 700 signals that the vaccines could cause adverse events—including acute heart failure and death—in May 2022, the files show.

  The CDC detected many of the same signals in July 2022, The Epoch Times previously reported. The new files show that the first time the CDC calculated a proportional reporting ratio (PRR) on vaccine injury reports, signals were identified.

  The analysis went over reports lodged between Dec. 14, 2020, and May 6, 2022.

  The CDC initially claimed that it didn’t run the PRR, a data mining method, on the injury reports made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The CDC later claimed that it started the method in February 2021, shortly after the vaccines were rolled out. Both of those claims were false, the CDC ultimately said, adding that it didn’t start until March 2022.

  When the first analyses were done that month, CDC employees identified more than 200 signals for Pfizer’s shot and 93 signals for Moderna’s vaccine, the files show. Those analyses compare the events lodged after receiving one vaccine with events lodged after receiving another, or several others.

  The Epoch Times obtained the files through Freedom of Information Act requests.

  The strongest analysis involves comparing the reports lodged after vaccination with the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines with the reports lodged after vaccination with all non-COVID-19 vaccines. The analysis is contained in files labeled “Table 5.”

  According to the files provided by the CDC, the agency didn’t start that analysis until May 2022.

  “The program staff advises that ‘Table 5 was only created from May 6, 2022, to July 31, 2022,‘” a CDC Freedom of Information Act processer told The Epoch Times via email.

  The CDC didn’t respond to a request for more information.

  “Federal health agencies have ignored the flashing alarms of their own safety surveillance systems since early 2021. They have ignored my oversight letters and lied about what analyses they have performed. It is well past time for the American public to be told the truth,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), the top Republican on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, told The Epoch Times via email.

  Operating Procedures

  The CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) co-manage the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which accepts reports from anybody but is primarily used by health care workers. Reports to the system are analyzed and verified by health officials and contractors.

  In operating procedure documents, the agencies said that officials would monitor the system to identify “potential new safety concerns for COVID-19 vaccines.” The FDA would perform one type of analysis, called Empirical Bayesian data mining, while the CDC would perform PRR data mining.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 20:25

• Is Japan's Population Really Going To Fall By A Third
  Is Japan’s Population Really Going To Fall By A Third

  By Russell Clark, author of the Capital Flows and Asset Markets substack,

  Japanese demographics is often cited in the secular stagnation story, and particularly by bond bulls.

  

  The UN’s Population Division has a forecast for Japanese population to fall below 80m by the end of the century.

  

  I think it is unlikely that Japanese population falls that far, but first of all you need to understand how unusual Japan is demographically. Japan only has a land mass 50% greater than the UK. In arable land terms, the UK has 50% more than Japan, reflecting the far more mountainous terrain in Japan. 120 years ago, Japan and the UK had similar sized populations, but then Japanese population grew rapidly, while the UK stagnated. If you ever visit Japan, you will notice on train trips between cities that ever single bit of flat land is used. This really gives the impression that Japanese overpopulated their island, and now need to see their population fall.

  

  I can get Japanese population and birth statistics back to 1900, and assuming relatively low (to none) immigration, work out births and deaths by year. A few surprising features is how Japanese births peaked soon after WWII. While there was another rise in the 1970s, it was very low compared to number births before WWII. Intriguingly, 1947 and 1972 show negative deaths. This is reflecting the repatriation of 6 million Japanese citizens from former colonies in Taiwan, Korea and Manchuria, and the return of Okinawa respectively. So after the trauma of World War II, mainland Japanese population actually grew at the end of World War II due to repatriation.

  

  For comparison, the UK saw peak births, in 1901. If there is a demographic crisis, its has been brewing for a very long time. The rise in the UK population is mainly due to net migration. Both Japan and UK saw a countertrend rise in the 1960s and 1970s, which I think was due to pro-labour policies – but I will leave that aside for the moment.

  

  The first part of my argument for a change in birth rates is that changes in technology means that women can have children later. In this area, Japan is a leader. In the last available data I have, 6% of all Japanese births, which is far higher than any other large country.

  

  For me ART births take away age as a constraint on fertility rates. Technology means that women well into their 40s and even 50s can now have children if they want and can afford it. And here we see another positive trend in Japanese fertility rates. Working mothers are having more children are having more children than non-working mothers, after being the minority for years.

  

  Another possible pro-labor shift that could reverse fertility trends is the work-from-home shift. I speak from personal experience that working from home is far more conducive to raising children than office based working. I also know that childcare in Japan is both expensive, and culturally women were expected to quit work to have children, as the above chart shows (at least until relatively recently). As we have seen with recent government actions on green energy, once a crisis is declared, governments can quickly accelerate trends. At some point, fertility rates in Japan will be declared a “real crisis”, and policies of free IVF, and free childcare will transform fertility rates. I very much doubt Japanese population will fall below 100 million people.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 19:45

• Russia Test-Fires Supersonic Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles In Sea Of Japan
  Russia Test-Fires Supersonic Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles In Sea Of Japan

  Russia’s military has test-fired what its defense ministry (MoD) is describing as a supersonic missile, launching it into the Sea of Japan on Tuesday.

  The MoD confirmed in a Telegram announcement that its ships of the Pacific Fleet successfully fired two “Moskit cruise missiles at a mock enemy sea target” – hitting the mock warship from a distance of about 62 miles. Crucially the Moskit is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.

  

  According to details in the AP, “The Moskit, whose NATO reporting name is the SS-N-22 Sunburn, is a supersonic anti-ship cruise missile that has conventional and nuclear warhead capacity.”

  “The Soviet-built cruise missile is capable of flying at three times the speed of sound and has a range of up to 250 kilometers (155 miles),” the report adds. “Supersonic” is a designation below “hypersonic” – given the latter denotes speeds of at least five times the speed of sound.

  Japan’s foreign ministry said it doesn’t intend to protest the missile launch given it occurred near coastal Russia, but a statement still stressed, “On the whole, Japan is concerned about Russia’s increasing military activities around the Japanese coasts and watching them with great interest.”

  According to Axios in reference to the newly disclosed test launch:

  “The announcement comes one week after two Russian strategic bomber planes capable of carrying nuclear weapons flew over the Sea of Japan for over seven hours while the Japanese prime minister was visiting Ukraine.”

  

  Concerning recent rising tensions between Russian and Japan over disputed islands between the two countries, AP reviews further that “In September, Japan protested multinational military exercises on the Russian-held Kuril Islands — some of which are claimed by Japan — and expressed concern about Russian and Chinese warships conducting shooting drills in the Sea of Japan.” And in addition, “Russia also tested submarine-launched missiles in the Sea of Japan last year.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 19:25

• Climate Hysteria And Woke Gobbledegook Are Becoming Inseparable
  Climate Hysteria And Woke Gobbledegook Are Becoming Inseparable

  Authored by Chris Morrison via DailySceptic.org,

  One of Britain’s leading climate ‘experts’, Professor Kevin Anderson, has provided a valuable insight into the increasingly bizarre demands that surround the promotion of the collectivist Net Zero political project.

  

  Writing in the Conversation, he argues for Net Zero within 12 years, complete with a refit of U.K. housing stock, a withdrawal of all combustion engine cars in favour of expanded public transport, electrification of industry, the roll out of ‘zero-carbon’ energy, and the banning of all fossil fuel production. To achieve his aims, Anderson suggests mobilisation on the scale of the post-war European reconstruction Marshall Plan. Others might suggest his crackpot schemes will leave the country facing a similar scale of destruction, ruin and poverty to that caused by the Luftwaffe.

  Anderson is currently a Professor of Energy and Climate Change at the University of Manchester and he has plenty of form when it comes to extremist claims and calls for widespread rationing. As early as 2010, he was calling on politicians to consider a rationing system “similar to the one introduced during the last time of crisis in the 1930s and 40s”. He also suggested a limit on electricity “so people are forced to turn the heating down”, and a limit on goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture.

  On a practical level, Anderson’s latest calls for radical societal restructuring under the guise of a ‘climate emergency’ are plainly ridiculous. Retrofitting Britain’s well-ventilated housing and industrial stock along with installing heat pumps would cost around £3 trillion, according to a paper published last year by the technology professor Michael Kelly – equivalent, it should be noted, to Britain’s annual GDP. That, of course, is before we’ve factored in the cost of Anderson’s other plans such as retrofitting the entire industrial and transport infrastructure, all within the next 12 years. In its more sane moments, even Extinction Rebellion might be proud of such an ambitious plan.

  The Conversation is obligatory reading for those aiming to keep fully up to speed with the latest climate, Net Zero and woke fantasies. It purports to be an independent source of news analysis, written by academic experts working with professional journalists. To the mainstream media, it offers “media-ready” experts and “free” content. It is funded by academic institutions and receives money from a number of billionaire Foundations. Media partners include Reuters, PA Media, Reach (owner of the Mirror, Express, Daily Star and multiple local U.K. newspapers) and Apple News.

  Collectivist economic solutions alongside the ubiquitous woke dogma are increasingly dominating debate around climate change.

  Net Zero is becoming the dividing line in the age-old battle between Right and Left, Free markets and Socialism, Cavaliers and Roundheads. In the U.S. the issue is rapidly becoming yet another fight between the Republicans and the Democrats. Similar trends are likely in the U.K. and Europe as Net Zero starts wreaking economic and social havoc.

  The Conversation is to the fore on climate wokery. In 2020, two UCL geography professors Mark Maslin and Simon Lewis argued in its pages that colonisation marked the beginning of the Anthropocene (a political renaming of the current Holocene epoch), and racism and the climate emergency shared common causes. In his recent article, Kevin Anderson argues that “given deep inequalities”, the rapid reduction of material consumption and the deployment of a zero-carbon infrastructure “is only possible by re-allocating society’s productive capacity away from enabling the private luxury of a few and towards wider public ownership”.

  Last week the Daily Caller castigated the IPCC summary report of its work over the last five years as a “woke dumpster fire masquerading as science”. Any scientific credibility the new UN report might have had is called into question by its “extensive use of ‘woke’ buzzwords”, it said. Variations of the words ‘equity’ and ‘inequality’ are said to appear 31 times in the 36-page document. Variations of ‘inclusive’ and ‘inclusion’ appear 17 times. Apparently, the document mentions ‘colonialism’ and repeatedly refers to climate and ‘social justice’ for ‘marginalised’ groups.

  The Daily Caller quotes a section of the report that states:

  “redistributive policies… that shield the poor and vulnerable, social safety nets, equity, inclusion and just transitions, at all scales can enable deeper societal ambitions and resolve trade-offs with sustainable development goals”.

  The publication notes that if you think ‘equity’ is a fundamental pillar of scientific knowledge, then this is the report for you.

  ”But if you’re like most people and don’t think far-left political priorities have a place in scientific documents meant to advise policymakers, this should alarm you,” it concludes.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 19:05

• Jamie Dimon In Hot-Seat As Sworn Deposition Looms In Epstein Lawsuits
  Jamie Dimon In Hot-Seat As Sworn Deposition Looms In Epstein Lawsuits

  JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon will be in the hot seat, as he is expected to be deposed under oath regarding his bank’s decision to keep deceased pedophile sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein as a client despite public knowledge of his status as a registered sex offender, the Financial Times reports, citing people familiar with the matter.

  

  The sworn deposition – the latest development in two combined high-profile cases, is expected to take place in May behind closed doors.

  The lawsuits claim that JPMorgan, which banked Epstein for 15 years from 1998 to 2013, benefited from human trafficking and ignored several internal warnings about their client’s illegal behaviour. The lender has described the claims as meritless.

  The pre-trial process unearthed communications between JPMorgan employees that contained a reference to a “Dimon review” into the bank’s relationship with Epstein. The bank has denied that Dimon had any knowledge of such a review. -FT

  The US Virgin Islands and a group of Epstein victims claim Dimon had knowledge of Epstein’s activities based on emails exchanged between the late sex offender and former executive Jes Staley using his JPMorgan email address.

  “Jamie Dimon knew in 2008 that his billionaire client was a sex trafficker,” argued US Virgin Islands attorney Mimi Liu during a March hearing in front of Manhattan US District Judge Jed Rakoff, referring to the year Epstein was first criminally charged with sex crimes, CNBC reports.

  “If Staley is a rogue employee, why isn’t Jamie Dimon?” Liu said during the hearing to discuss the bank’s efforts to have the USVI lawsuit against the bank dismissed.

  

  “Staley knew, Dimon knew, JPMorgan Chase knew,” Liu continued, noting that there were several cash transfers and wire transfers made by the prolific pedophile (Epstein), including several hundreds of thousands of dollars paid to several women which should have been flagged as suspicious.

  “They broke every rule to facilitate his sex trafficking in exchange for Epstein’s wealth, connections and referrals,” said Liu, adding “This case was not just Jes Staley … there will be numerous documents that go far beyond his office to the executive suite.”

  That said, a person familiar with the bank’s internal probe into what Dimon knew says there are no records of any direct communications with Epstein, or records of discussions related to retaining him as a client.

  Last week Judge Rakoff denied JPMorgan’s request to dismiss the lawsuits, and allowed several claims to proceed against the bank. He also ordered JPMorgan to hand over documents between Dimon and former general counsel Steve Cutler from before 2006, the year Epstein was first arrested.

  Dimon’s looming deposition comes after other senior figures at the bank, including Mary Erdoes, the head of the bank’s $4tn asset and wealth management business, were scheduled to be interviewed by plaintiffs’ lawyers as part of the lawsuits.

  Former JPMorgan executive Jes Staley is also set to be deposed by his former employer’s lawyers in April, after the US bank countersued him for any potential damages. JPMorgan’s complaint claims Staley witnessed and participated in sex crimes at Epstein’s residences, and alleges he did not disclose this “despite having a fiduciary duty” to do so. -FT

  Staley, who emailed Epstein to say “That was fun … say hello to Snow White,” has denied all knowledge of Epstein’s activities.

  The US Virgin Islands disagrees, saying that Staley “visited Epstein’s properties in the Virgin Islands and elsewhere,” and “exchanged hundreds of messages with Epstein from his JPMorgan email account in full view of JPMorgan, including some with photos of young women, discussed Epstein’s provision of services to him during his travel on dates that closely corresponded with Epstein’s payments to the same young woman from his JPMorgan accounts, and discussed young women or girls procured by Epstein using the names of Disney princesses.”

  

  Recall, Staley’s lawyers said “Snow White” was not a “code word” when @sjhmorris and @carolinebinham first broke the story in 2021https://t.co/HrKR7l5SS2 pic.twitter.com/ym5KEY3Dwn

  — Robert Smith (@BondHack) February 16, 2023

  Epstein and Staley exchanged more than 1,200 emails over several years, however up until now their contents had never been disclosed. Staley – who left JPMorgan to become CEO of Barclays two years later, stepped down from the latter in 2021 following a UK Financial Conduct Authority probe into his relationship with the pedophile financier. 

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 18:52

• Substack Asks Writers For Money As VC Funding Freezes
  Substack Asks Writers For Money As VC Funding Freezes

  Substack is initiating a crowdsourcing funding round, allowing writers to invest as little as $100 in the company. On Tuesday morning, the startup emailed writers about the investment opportunity. The development comes amidst a freeze in venture capital funding markets, which followed the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. 

  “Today, we’re starting a process that will let writers and readers invest in Substack and own a piece of the company. We are serious about building Substack with writers and readers and this community round is one way to concretize that ideal,” the email said. 

  

  Substack is using the crowdfunding service Wefunder to raise $2 million. Around noon on Tuesday, nearly $800k had been raised. 

  

  Investment terms of the money raise stated:

  “This is an extension of Substack’s Series B which originally had a $585M pre-money valuation and $650M post-money valuation.” 

  The email went on and on about “Own a piece of Substack” and “Help build a new economic engine for culture” to make it “amazing for tomorrow.” 

  It seems that Substack has encountered funding challenges in the VC space. Before SVB’s collapse, funding markets were already tightening due to the Federal Reserve’s aggressive move to increase interest rates to combat decades-high inflation. Earlier this year, the company reduced its workforce by 14% and cut expenses to adapt to mounting macroeconomic headwinds.

  We told readers last weekend that funding pipelines for startups have ground to a halt. As a result, we pointed out that large investment banks, such as Goldman, are now stepping into the arena to fund some cash-strapped startups at deep valuation discounts. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 18:45

• Ethics Committee Approves New Lobbying Rules That Will 'Legalize Bribery,' Say Canadian Citizen Groups
  Ethics Committee Approves New Lobbying Rules That Will ‘Legalize Bribery,’ Say Canadian Citizen Groups

  Authored by Tara MacIsaac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Changes are coming to Canada’s lobbying rules, and a coalition of citizen groups says they will “legalize bribery by allowing for favour-trading between lobbyists and politicians.” The House ethics committee has approved a proposed revision of the Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct by and large, only making a few recommendations for changes.

  “It’s shameful that the Liberal, Conservative and Bloc MPs on the Ethics Committee have decided … to support changes that will gut key ethical lobbying rules,” said Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, in a release on March 27. Democracy Watch is joined by 26 citizen groups and more than 30 lawyers and professors in opposition to the changes proposed by Commissioner of Lobbying Nancy Bélanger.

  

  They criticise the sponsored travel junkets allowed by the rules. They say the proposed new rules will also allow people to do important campaign work for a politician, then lobby that same politician shortly thereafter. They say the sense of obligation gives that lobbyist an unfair advantage.

  Cooling Off Period

  Bélanger has said that she seeks to change the Lobbyists’ Code of Conduct because it needs to be clarified to make it more enforceable. For example, the current code says there should be a cooling off period between “political activity” in support of a politician and then lobbying that politician. It doesn’t say how long, only a “specified period.”

  “There is no definition of political activity, or what is meant by a specified period,” Manon Dion, a spokesperson for the Office of the Commissioner, told The Epoch Times via email. Bélanger’s new code seeks to define political activity and set specific time periods.

  A set of guidelines published by her office does this, but the guidelines aren’t codified in law. Those guidelines currently say the cooling off period for certain high-level political activities should be “a period equivalent to a full election cycle,” or four years.

  Conacher criticises Bélanger for taking a step back, making the cooling off period only one or two years in her revised version of the code.

  “Somebody helps you get elected, raises a whole bunch of money for you—when do you ever stop owing them? You owe them forever. It’s just ridiculous to say that it magically disappears after one to two years,” Conacher said in an interview with The Epoch Times in February when the ethics committee began hearing testimony from stakeholders on the issue.

  The ethics committee, in their March 20 letter of approval to Bélanger, did not recommend lengthening the cooling off period.

  The letter noted Democracy Watch’s concern that under Bélanger’s revised code someone could, in theory, fundraise huge amounts of money for a public official and lobby that official at the same time. That’s because fundraising itself isn’t prohibited, only “full-time” or “nearly full-time” political work.

  The committee suggested updating the definition of “political work” to include any significant fundraising.

  In a March 3 letter to the committee, Bélanger noted that rule 7 in her code prevents this. “[Rule 7] expressly applies to circumstances outside the scope of the other rules of the Code and prevents registered lobbyists from lobbying officials who could reasonably be seen to have a sense of obligation toward them,” she said.

  The commissioner was hesitant to impose a longer cooling off period, Dion said, because of concern that limiting people’s political activity too much would be in violation of Charter rights.

  Charter Rights

  “The updated rule was carefully crafted to achieve its objective of restricting lobbying where a sense of obligation could reasonably be seen to exist and to provide the greatest clarity for lobbyists, all while complying with the Charter,” Dion said.

  Lawyers who have joined Democracy Watch’s coalition against the code changes contest this claim. The claim is based on a legal opinion given to the commissioner’s office by one law firm. The office has declined to share details related to that opinion, “in light of the importance of client-solicitor privilege,” Dion said.

  A March 6 letter signed by 11 lawyers and 21 law and political science professors says the Supreme Court of Canada allows for reasonable limits on Charter rights to protect government integrity.

  “It is an entirely reasonable limit to prohibit a person who does anything significant to help a politician or political party from lobbying the politician, party leader and top party officials for 4 years. That prohibition ensures that lobbyists don’t lobby people they have helped—which helps ensure ethical lobbying and protects the integrity of government and policy-making,” the letter said.

  Gifts and Hospitality

  Another point of contention in the revised code is a limit on how much lobbyists can spend on gifts and hospitality for public officials.

  Bélanger proposed a limit of $80 per year. She had originally said $30 per year, but raised it after lobbying groups opposed it during the public comment period.

  Lobbying groups continued to oppose this limit in their testimony to the ethics committee in February, saying it is difficult to tell how much an official consumes at a banquet, for example, and to keep track of the worth for each person.

  The ethics committee suggested changing the limit to $200. It suggested adding language to allow for certain types of gifts beyond the limit, “such as sponsored travel or gifts of reasonable value given as expressions of cultural tradition.” It gave moccasins as an example of a cultural gift that might cost more than the $80 limit.

  “The Committee agrees that sponsored travel, where it serves a legitimate purpose, should be exempted from the application of the low-value limit and the annual limit,” it wrote.

  Democracy Watch said in its March 27 release, “The Committee wants a loophole so lobbyists can continue to give ‘sponsored travel’ junket trips to MPs and their family members and associates.”

  The group said it has 20,000 signatures on a voter petition to stop the changes and it will file a lawsuit challenging the changes if they go through.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 18:25

• Many Americans Likely In for Tax Refund Disappointment: Survey
  Many Americans Likely In for Tax Refund Disappointment: Survey

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

  A recent survey of taxpayers shows a large number of Americans anticipated a tax refund that is either the same size or larger than last year’s.

  

  The survey, released by tax-preparing software firm TaxAct this month, showed that only about 30 percent of Americans anticipated “receiving less of a refund on their 2022 returns” despite recent warnings from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax experts. Another 24 percent said in the survey that they “don’t know what to expect.”

  The smaller refunds come as many Americans are saving less and are increasingly expressing worry about decades-high inflation, according to a TaxAct release. Tax experts have said that federal government pandemic programs as well as tax credits have ended for many.

  “Refunds are predicted to go down 11 percent from last year,” Curtis Campbell, president and CEO of TaxAct, stated in a press release. “And it’s important for people to be prepared to receive less or even owe money this tax season.”

  Citing recent changes to the tax code, he noted that “we can expect to see lower tax refunds across the board this season being there was no stimulus relief this past year and other tax advantages, like the Child Tax Credit, reverted back to their lesser 2019 values.”

  “There is a lot of economic uncertainty right now, and for the majority of customers we serve, their tax refund is their biggest paycheck of the year,” Campbell added. “U.S. citizens are saving less money, and therefore, relying on their refunds to help make ends meet.”

  Data released by the IRS earlier this month show that tax refunds are 11 percent smaller, on average, than the same time a year ago. Still, the IRS has sent out more tax refunds this year than last year, while a greater number of processed returns triggered a refund so far with less than a month to go before the April 18 tax-filing deadline.

  The average tax refund amounted to $3,028 as of Mar. 3, down from $3,401 during the same time period in 2022. So far, the IRS has sent out 42 million refunds this year, compared with some 38 million that were sent during the same time period last year.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 17:45

• "Something Very Dramatic Has Changed": Matt Taibbi Says Democrats Ditched Free Speech
  “Something Very Dramatic Has Changed”: Matt Taibbi Says Democrats Ditched Free Speech

  Independent journalist Matt Taibbi – of recent “Twitter Files” fame – has exposed the fact that civil liberties are no longer popular among Democrats. Taibbi appeared on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo” to reiterate his perspective that the modern Democratic Party no longer represents the values of the everyday American. 

  “About all of this — Matt, how do you feel about all of this? I know before you started discovering this bad behavior, you identified as a Democrat, and now you’ve got all of your friends, quote-unquote, in the media attacking you for exposing this,” Bartiromo asked.

  “Yeah, it’s funny, I mean, I was raised in a traditional ACLU liberal, I believed in free speech all my life. That was one of the things, frankly, that attracted me to the Democratic Party when I was a kid, the idea that we were the party that believed in letting everybody have a say, and we’ll just make a better argument, and that’s how the system works,” Taibbi said.

  He continued, “Apparently, something very dramatic has changed in politics in America, and there’s been a shift. There’s no question about it anymore, that now the parties have had a complete reversal on how they read these issues.”

  Matt Taibbi @mtaibbi: “There’s no question about it anymore that now the parties have had a complete reversal on how they view these issues.” pic.twitter.com/2zxpspYTmO

  — The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) March 26, 2023

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

  Taibbi leads a team of journalists, including Michael Shellenberger, who have been given access to Twitter Files, revealing a startling network of government agencies, think tanks, and Twitter personnel coordinating efforts to attack the First Amendment. 

  What we’ve learned from the Twitter Files is the ever-expanding coalition of groups working with the government and social media to target and censor Americans, including government-funded organizations.

  Twitter files are chilling in the details and show how Democrats have weaponized government and colluded with corporations to wage war on the First Amendment. 

  The modern Democratic Party is not the same one that your parents or grandparents were members of in the past. It’s obsessed with starting World War 3 in Ukraine, eroding the First Amendment, dismantling the Second Amendment, and normalizing ‘woke’ culture.

  What caused such a significant shift in the party in just a few short years?

  And what kind of blowback will Taibbi get for telling these truths?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 17:25

• US Aircraft Carrier Holds Drills With South Korean Military Under Threat Of Missile Tests
  US Aircraft Carrier Holds Drills With South Korean Military Under Threat Of Missile Tests

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The US aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and its strike group began joint exercises in South Korean waters on Monday as Washington and Seoul continue to dramatically expand their military cooperation.

  A few hours before the drills began, North Korea fired two short-range ballistic missiles into the sea, likely as a response to the new military exercises between the US and South Korea.

  

  The Nimitz and the three other ships that are part of its strike group are expected to arrive in the South Korean port of Busan on Tuesday.

  The US began sending aircraft carriers to the Korean peninsula again in the fall of 2022 after a four-year lull of such deployments.

  “The United States has deployable strategic assets at the ready on every day,” said Rear Adm. Christopher Sweeney, commander of Carrier Strike Group Eleven, according to The Associated Press. “We can continue to deploy those assets and we will.”

  The US and South Korea announced earlier this year that they would expand joint military exercises and that Washington would deploy more strategic assets to the region, including bombers.

  The war games ensure tensions will remain high on the peninsula as they will continue to provoke more North Korean weapons tests.

  North Korea conducted a simulated nuclear devise detonation about 500m above an island in the recent short-range ballistic missile drill.

  Additional tests were conducted for the new “underwater nuclear attack drone” per state media. pic.twitter.com/Z1LRhwvh8O

  — Global: Military-Info (@Global_Mil_Info) March 28, 2023

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

  South Korea’s Defense Ministry announced last week that Washington and Seoul will hold their “largest-ever” live-fire exercises this June. The US and South Korea have conducted massive combined live-fire drills less than 10 times in the past, including most recently in 2017.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 17:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Bulgaria Refuses To Send Weapons To Ukraine, Joins Hungary & Austria's Neutral Stance
  Bulgaria Refuses To Send Weapons To Ukraine, Joins Hungary & Austria’s Neutral Stance

  Via Remix News,

  For the time being, Bulgaria will not send any military equipment to Ukraine…

  

  After Austria and Hungary, Bulgaria has also joined the minority group of European Union countries that refuse to send weapons to Ukraine, news and opinion portal Mandiner reports.

  Bulgaria has declared that it will not take part in the EU’s joint ammunition purchase program, nor will it supply fighter jets or tanks to Ukraine, Euronews reports. Bulgarian President Rumen Radev is under enormous pressure from opposition parties, but he has said he stands by his position.

  “Bulgaria does not support and is not involved in the joint procurement of ammunition for Ukraine. However, we will support efforts to restore peace. As long as the interim government is in power, Bulgaria will not make its fighter aircraft, anti-aircraft missile systems, tanks and other equipment available to Ukraine,” said Radev.

  At the end of January, Hungarian Defense Minister Kristóf Szalay-Bobrovniczky and his Austrian counterpart, Klaudia Tanner, said in Budapest that neither country will offer any kind of military assistance to Ukraine in order to “prevent further escalation.”

  Although many of its Western allies accuse Hungary of siding with Russia in the war based on its firm stance of not sending weapons to Ukraine, last December Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said that his government is simply on the side of the Hungarians.

  “We are pro-Hungarian,” Orbán told daily Magyar Nemzet in an interview.

  “We are on the side of the Hungarians in the Russian-Ukrainian war.”

  Orbán argued that while it is important to his government that Russia poses no security threat, continued economic relations are essential for not only Hungary but also the entire European economy.

  “The answer to the question of whether we are on the right or wrong side of history is that we are on the Hungarian side of history. We support and help Ukraine, it is in our interest to preserve a sovereign Ukraine, and it is in our interest that Russia does not pose a security threat to Europe, but it is not in our interest to give up all economic relations with Russia. We are looking at these issues through Hungarian glasses, not through anyone else’s,” Orbán said.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 03/28/2023 – 02:00

• The Real Insurrection, And The Dirty Politics Of Jan. 6
  The Real Insurrection, And The Dirty Politics Of Jan. 6

  Authored by Franke Miele via RealClear Wire,

  The Democrats say that Jan. 6 was the worst attack on American democracy since the Civil War. They call it an insurrection, but if it was indeed the worst since 1865, no one but a fool would dare claim it even remotely approached the scale of the bloody war between the states.

  

  And if you weren’t a fool, you might conclude that Jan. 6 was nothing like an insurrection. It wasn’t violent in the sense of an armed rebellion. It wasn’t organized. And it didn’t seek to overthrow the government, but to protect the Constitution. In more ways than not, it was a defense of American democracy, not an attack on it.

  In every particular, Jan. 6 was a pale shadow compared to the Civil War. To start with, it lasted less than six hours, whereas the Civil War lasted four long years. The war between the North and South cost the lives of 620,000 soldiers and another 50,000 civilians. The Jan. 6 incursion at the U.S. Capitol, on the other hand, claimed the lives of just two women protesters, Ashli Babbitt and Roseanne Boyland. Among the defenders of the Capitol, police officer Brian Sicknick died after suffering two strokes the next day, but without a direct known connection to the riot. Two other protesters died of natural causes during the siege, and four law officers died by suicide in the months following the attack. If you count all of those as legitimate casualties of Jan. 6, then the total comes to nine compared to a minimum of 670,000 in the Civil War.

  It would be impossible to exaggerate the stark differences between Jan. 6 and the Civil War.

  Yet somehow, the Democrats (yes, members of the same Democratic Party that instigated the Civil War) were able to use the Jan. 6 incursion of the Capitol as a means to terrorize their political enemies and to punish those who used their rights of free speech and free thought to question the legitimacy of the Biden presidency.

  As of March 6, 2023, more than 1,000 people have been charged with crimes stemming from the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. But the Biden administration is not done seeking its pound of flesh from Trump supporters. Last week, we learned that the Department of Justice (hereinafter the Department of Retaliation) had sent a letter to the chief judge of the D.C. federal court warning that between 700 and 1,200 more people will be charged with Jan. 6 crimes. More than two years after the fact! That brings the total of citizens likely to be charged to approximately 2,000, and according to the White House these are all domestic terrorists.

  Now, to be clear, there was at least one instance of terrorism on Jan. 6, 2021, when pipe bombs were planted at the national headquarters of both the Republican and Democratic parties. But the perpetrator of that failed attack has never been identified, let alone charged. Instead, the FBI, the Department of Justice, the House Jan. 6 select committee and the White House have focused on making examples out of American citizens who believed that a corrupt election had been held in 2020.

  By insisting that U.S. elections are always beyond reproach, the Democrats and their allies in the media have de facto criminalized the formerly protected speech of millions of Americans who have lost confidence in the electoral system. And the Justice Department, on behalf of President Biden, has decided to make an example of the Jan. 6 protesters in order to quell dissent among Republicans who might otherwise be tempted to carry a Trump flag to the Capitol.

  If you don’t think that the prosecution, and accompanying lengthy jail sentences, of 2,000 protesters for entering the Capitol on Jan. 6 is excessive, consider this:

  Following the real insurrection, the Civil War, hardly any of the 1 million men who fought on behalf of the Confederacy were charged with any crimes, let alone treason. That’s because President Abraham Lincoln, and President Andrew Johnson after him, recognized the importance of binding the nation together following the tumultuous war years. Instead of seeking retaliation, and humiliation of former enemies, they (and most Northerners) sought reconciliation and understanding. Forgiveness, not punishment, was the watchword.

  In a Christmas Day proclamation in 1868, Johnson granted “a full pardon and amnesty to all persons engaged in the late rebellion.” He wrote, in part:

  [A] universal amnesty and pardon for participation in said rebellion extended to all who have borne any part therein will tend to secure permanent peace, order, and prosperity throughout the land, and to renew and fully restore confidence and fraternal feeling among the whole people, and their respect for and attachment to the National Government, designed by its patriotic founders for the general good.

  Further, Johnson declared:

   …unconditionally, and without reservation, to all and to every person who directly or indirectly participated in the late insurrection or rebellion, a full pardon and amnesty for the offence of treason against the United States, or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof.

  Now compare that to the zealous and unyielding pursuit by Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice of the Jan. 6 protesters, the vast majority of whom neither waged war, nor committed treason, but only trespassed in an effort to assure that their grievances were heard. Unbelievably, many of those protesters remain in jail 26 months after the riot without ever having received the speedy trial they are promised by the Constitution, and others – once convicted – face lengthy prison terms in unfathomable conditions.

  What does the DOJ say about its mission? Here’s an excerpt from the department’s March 6 update:

  [T]he investigation and prosecution of those responsible for the attack continues to move forward at an unprecedented speed and scale. The Department of Justice’s resolve to hold accountable those who committed crimes on January 6, 2021, has not, and will not, wane.

  As I said before, it’s the Department of Retaliation, and there’s no reason to think it will end there. The special counsel appointed to investigate Donald Trump’s possession of classified documents and his actions and words on Jan. 6 represents a new low in American politics. No matter how Merrick Garland or Joe Biden spin it, this is not about justice, but about eliminating the biggest threat to Biden’s reelection.

  Where is James Comey when you need him? Remember when the former FBI director recited the not insubstantial case against Hillary Clinton for possession of classified information on an illegal server, and then declared “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case”? That is exactly how most nonpartisan people feel about the case against Trump, who, unlike Hillary, was president and actually had the power to declassify any documents in his possession.

  Even more outrageous is claiming that Trump was guilty of treason or inciting a riot because he asked his supporters to walk from the Ellipse to the Capitol on Jan. 6 “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” That’s not incitement; it’s First Amendment-protected political speech. And when Trump said, “We fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” he wasn’t talking about invading the Capitol; he was specifically talking about fighting against election fraud. Any other interpretation is disingenuous.

  Yet the Department of Retaliation continues its relentless assault on Trump supporters like a bureaucratic version of Inspector Javert from “Les Miserables.” Instead of showing the magnanimity of President Johnson following the Civil War, the Democratic administration of Joe Biden insists on fracturing our society even more than it was at the end of the Trump administration.

  Remember Andrew Johnson’s words? He said that a pardon “will tend to secure permanent peace, order, and prosperity throughout the land, and to renew and fully restore confidence and fraternal feeling among the whole people.” Why can’t the Democrats and their sympathizers like Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger see that their obdurate persecution of Trump voters will have the opposite effect? Instead of bringing their opponents to heel, they will just foment greater hatred and distrust among those who already feel abandoned and rejected by their government.

  Or maybe the Democrats do know exactly what they are doing. Spanish-born and American-educated philosopher George Santayana said,  “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” but maybe even more dangerous are those who distort the past. They condemn the rest of us to a legacy of permanent chaos, lies, and animosity, and of course they expect us to shut up and take it. There was no insurrection on Jan. 6, but that doesn’t mean the people will be patient forever.

  Frank Miele, the retired editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell, Mont., is a columnist for RealClearPolitics. His newest book, “What Matters Most: God, Country, Family and Friends,” is available from his Amazon author page. Visit him at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com or follow him on Facebook @HeartlandDiaryUSA or on Twitter or Gettr @HeartlandDiary.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 23:40

• Over 3,000lbs Of Beef Recalled Over Possible E. Coli Contamination
  Over 3,000lbs Of Beef Recalled Over Possible E. Coli Contamination

  A Kansas meat packing company has recalled approximately 3,436 lbs of boneless beef chuck product due to potential contamination with E. coli, according to the US Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS).

  

  A routine FSIS inspection of a sample of ground beef made from the boneless beef chuck tested positive for this strain of E. coli, also known as STEC O103, after which the the Harper, Kansas-based outfit issued the recall.

  The affected beef products were packaged on Feb. 16, 2023. The recall applies to all corrugated boxes of various weights containing “Elkhorn Valley Pride Angus Beef 61226 BEEF CHUCK 2PC BNLS; Packed on 2/16/23.”

  

  The FSIS has provided a list of serial numbers and box count numbers on their website, according to the Epoch Times, which notes that the affected products were shipped to distributors, federal establishments, retail locations and wholesale locations – including hotels, restaurants, and institutions, in Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.

  Consumers are advised not to use or distribute the affected products, and throw them out or return them to where they were purchased.

  0103

  As the Epoch Times notes;

  STEC O103 infection can cause bloody diarrhea and vomiting, and some illnesses can last longer and be more severe.

  Most people recover within a week, but some can develop a more severe infection, including hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), which is a type of kidney failure. HUS can occur in people of any age but is most common in children under five years old, older adults, and those with weakened immune systems.

  “It is marked by easy bruising, pallor, and decreased urine output. Persons who experience these symptoms should seek emergency medical care immediately,” FSIS said.

  FSIS says that it routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to ensure that recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that steps are taken to ensure the product is no longer available to consumers.

  To prevent foodborne illnesses, the FSIS recommends that all consumers prepare their raw meat products safely, including fresh and frozen, and only consume ground beef products that have been cooked to a temperature of 160° Fahrenheit.

  According to the FSIS, using a food thermometer that measures internal temperature is the only way to confirm that ground beef has been cooked to a high enough temperature to kill harmful bacteria.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 23:20

• Contract Confirms US Government Received $400 Million From Major COVID-19 Vaccine Manufacturer
  Contract Confirms US Government Received $400 Million From Major COVID-19 Vaccine Manufacturer

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

  The U.S. government has released the licensing agreement it hammered out with vaccine manufacturer Moderna but has refused to confirm many payment details.

  

  Moderna agreed to pay the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) to license spike protein technology the company included in its COVID-19 vaccine, the contract confirms.

  Moderna resisted for years acknowledging the work by government researchers on the spike protein but relented in late 2021 and announced the contract during an earnings call on Feb. 23.

  Moderna said it provided a “catch-up payment” of $400 million to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is part of the NIH, under the agreement.

  The newly disclosed contract says that Moderna would pay the NIH a “noncreditable, nonrefundable royalty in the amount of Four Hundred Million dollars.”

  Portions that would confirm Moderna’s statement that the company would pay “low single digit royalties” on future sales of its COVID-19 vaccines are redacted.

  The contract, running 34 pages, has key sections redacted as to future royalties.

  One section, for instance, says, “The licensee agrees to pay to the NIAID earned royalties on net sales … as follows.” But the rest of the section is redacted.

  The Epoch Times obtained the contract through the Freedom of Information Act.

  The NIH cited for the redactions an exemption to the act that enables agencies to withhold “trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.”

  “They redacted the royalties, even though there have been press releases about the royalties,” James Love, director of the nonprofit Knowledge Ecology International, told The Epoch Times via email. “It’s common but [expletive] to redact royalties on a negotiated license on a government patent.”

  Unredacted information in the contract confirmed that Moderna had agreed to pay the NIH royalties before the agreement took effect in late 2022: a “minimum annual royalty,” “earned royalties,” and “benchmark royalties.”

  The contract was signed on Dec. 14, 2022, by Michael Mowatt, director of the Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Office at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Shannon Klinger, chief legal officer at Moderna.

  The payments would include a royalty within 60 days after government officials provided a “reasonable detailed written statement and request” for an amount “equivalent to a pro rata share of the unreimbursed patent expenses previously paid by the NIAID.”

  Moderna has made nearly $37 billion from its COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic. It has forecast $5 billion in revenue from the vaccines in 2023. Moderna and Pfizer both received enormous government contracts for their vaccines, which helped in development and manufacturing.

  Shares Ownership

  The NIH shares ownership of the spike protein technology that Moderna utilized with researchers at Scripps Research Institute and Dartmouth University’s Geisel School of Medicine. Both are named as partners in the contract.

  While it’s unclear from the contract what specific revenue the partners will receive from Moderna, Dartmouth said previously it would make money through the agreement.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 23:00

• Jim Jordan Demands Docs After IRS "Attempt To Intimidate" Journalist Matt Taibbi During Govt Weaponization Hearing
  Jim Jordan Demands Docs After IRS “Attempt To Intimidate” Journalist Matt Taibbi During Govt Weaponization Hearing

  “Lois Lerner ain’t got shit on me…”

  Sometimes the hubris and self-delusion just goes too far…

  It has been eleven years since Lois Lerner presided over (and then apologized for) the IRS targeting of conservatives during the 2012 election.

  

  But her “inappropriate… error of judgment” may just have been turned up to ’11’ as during the day when independent journalist Matt Taibbi was in Washington DC delivering testimony to the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government on March 9, an IRS agent visited his home in New Jersey, leaving a note demanding he contact the agency within four days.

  That’s very odd

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 28, 2023

  “Odd” indeed, Mr. Musk.

  As The Wall Street Journal reports, Mr. Taibbi was told in a call with the agent that both his 2018 and 2021 tax returns had been rejected owing to concerns over identity theft.

  The journalist has provided House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan’s committee with documentation showing his 2018 return had been electronically accepted, and he says the IRS never notified him or his accountants of a problem after he filed that 2018 return more than four-and-a-half years ago.

  He says the IRS initially rejected his 2021 return, which he later refiled, and it was rejected again – even though Mr. Taibbi says his accountants refiled it with an IRS-provided pin number.

  Mr. Taibbi notes that in neither case was the issue “monetary,” and that the IRS owes him a “considerable” sum.

  

  The bigger question on everyone’s minds (most of all Rep. Jordan) is simple –  since when did the IRS dispatch agents for surprise house calls? Is this the new $80 billion budget being well spent to ‘send a message’ to a reporter telling the truth?

  The coincidental timing of this unannounced IRS agent visit prompted Rep. Jordan to write to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, demanding answers:

  “In light of the hostile reaction to Mr. Taibbi’s reporting among left-wing activists, and the IRS’s history as a tool of government abuse, the IRS’s action could be interpreted as an attempt to intimidate a witness before Congress. We expect your full cooperation with our inquiry.”

  Jordan added that “the circumstances… are incredible,” and “demand a careful examination by the Committee to determine whether the visit was a thinly-veiled attempt to influence or intimidate a witness before Congress.”

  And the committee Chair demanded that the IRS and Treasury provide the following documents and information:

  1. All documents and communications referring or relating to the IRS’s field visit to the residence of Matthew Taibbi on March 9, 2023;

  2. All documents and communications between or among the IRS, Treasury Department, and any other Executive Branch entity referring or relating to Matthew Taibbi; and

  3. All documents and communications sent or received by Revenue Officer [James Nelson] referring or relating to Matthew Taibbi.

  Yellen and Werfel were given until April 10th to comply with the request.

  Will this arrogant show of disdain for democracy – this clear and present danger exposed of government agency ‘weaponization’ at its very apex – be the Alonzo Harris’ undoing of ‘untouchable’ Democratic Party’s grip on power?

  We will have to wait and see if Rep. Jordan’s demands for documents are met?

  *  *  *

  Read Rep. Jordan’s full letter to The IRS and Treasury below:

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 22:40

• Study Confirms Physical Exercise Should Be First Choice For Mental Health Treatment
  Study Confirms Physical Exercise Should Be First Choice For Mental Health Treatment

  Authored by Jennifer Marguilis via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In a funk? Do you: a) reach for a bag of potato chips, b) call a friend, c) pop an extra anti-depressant, or d) head for the gym to sweat out the sadness?

  

  For years, studies have shown that exercise is one of the best ways to treat a range of mental health issues. A new analysis of that whole body of research makes this clearer than ever.

  This new study, which was conducted by a team of 13 Australian scientists, was published in February in the British Medical Journal’s British Journal of Sports Medicine.

  As the researchers explored, pharmaceuticals are usually the first response to mental health issues worldwide, with lifestyle adjustments like exercise, sleep hygiene, and a healthy diet considered merely as complementary choices, at best.

  Even when lifestyle changes are recommended, they are seldom prescribed to patients in treatment by medical doctors.

  A Vast Evidence Base

  In order to synthesize the evidence on the positive and negative effects of physical activity on depression, anxiety, and psychological distress in adults, the Australian researchers performed an “umbrella overview,” a comprehensive analysis of all the work that has been done on the subject to date.

  The idea behind an umbrella review of this type is to try to quantify the strength of the signal.

  One scientific study provides some direct evidence that a treatment is useful; but when hundreds of studies confirm each other, taken together, these studies more strongly suggest that a treatment or intervention may be widely effective and applicable.

  Since so much research has been done in the field of exercise and mental health, the Australian team sought to examine the totality of the evidence.

  To that end, they looked at nearly a hundred reviews, comprising over a thousand studies done, on over 100,000 participants. In other words, they conducted a “systematic [review] of systematic reviews, synthesizing a vast evidence base.”

  Exercise Best Treatment for Depression

  Mental health is often pushed to the fringe of health care, but half of all people experience some mental health distress at some point in their lives, and more than 10 percent of people worldwide are currently struggling with mental health.

  Anxiety is the most common problem—and seems to be becoming more pronounced among children and younger adults—while depression poses the greatest burden to normal life function.

  The Australian researchers discovered that exercise provided the best results when used for treating depression. More specifically, exercise was 150 percent more effective than pharmaceuticals or Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT).

  It was also better than psychological consultation or “talk therapy.” In fact, exercise was shown to reduce depressive symptoms by 42 to 60 percent, whereas talk therapy and pharmaceuticals only reduced symptoms between 22 percent and 37 percent.

  Exercise was shown to be the best treatment for both anxiety and depression, even though pharmaceuticals are the most commonly recommended treatment for both.

  Any Kind of Exercise Works

  Every kind of exercise worked. The numerous studies looked at many types and schedules of exercise, and they all worked—doing any movement regularly (including dancing, walking, and yoga) was a big improvement over doing nothing.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 22:20

• GM To Discontinue Current Camaro, No "Immediate Successor" Announced
  GM To Discontinue Current Camaro, No “Immediate Successor” Announced

  As the legacy auto industry continues its government-mandated business model shift to EVs, the current generation of the Chevrolet Camaro appears to have become collateral damage.

  The once popular American muscle car is going out of production, according to General Motors, who announced last week that the sports car as it exists today would be “bowing out” after the current model and a final “collector’s edition”. 

  While the vehicle has done well on the racetrack, sales have slowed over recent years, the NY Post added. They reported that by the end of 2021, current generation Camaro sales had fallen almost 70%. 

  Chevrolet sold 72,705 of the current generation when it was released in 2016 and that number fell to 21,893 by the end of 2021. 

  “After nine strong model years in the market, with hundreds of thousands sold, the sixth generation Chevrolet Camaro will retire at the conclusion of model year 2024.The final sixth generation Camaros will come off the assembly line at the Lansing Grand River Assembly Plant in Michigan in January 2024,” the release said.

  

  Scott Bell, vice president, Global Chevrolet, commented: “As we prepare to say goodbye to the current generation Camaro, it is difficult to overstate our gratitude to every Camaro customer, Camaro assembly line employee and race fan. While we are not announcing an immediate successor today, rest assured, this is not the end of Camaro’s story.”

  GM continued: 

  Chevrolet will celebrate this storied nameplate with the addition of the Collector’s Edition package on the 2024 Camaro RS and SS, and on a limited number of ZL1 equipped vehicles available in North America. The Collector’s Edition pays homage to Camaro, resurfacing ties that date back to the development of the first generation Camaro in the 1960s, most notably the program’s initial code name: Panther.

  Regarding the move’s effect on Camaro and Chevrolet’s presence around the race track, Jim Campbell, Chevrolet U.S. vice president, Performance and Motorsports, concluded: “Chevrolet’s products and our relationship with our customers benefit from motorsports. Our plan is to continue to compete and win at the highest levels of auto racing.”

  “Chevrolet campaigns the sixth generation Camaro in a variety of series, including NASCAR, IMSA, SRO, NHRA and the Supercars Championship. Camaro will continue to compete on track, working with motorsports sanctioning bodies to ensure Chevrolet’s presence in racing moving forward,” GM concluded. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 22:00

• FBI Lawyer Hoped Justice Department Would 'Reconsider' 2021 Memo On Alleged School Board Threats
  FBI Lawyer Hoped Justice Department Would ‘Reconsider’ 2021 Memo On Alleged School Board Threats

  Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Documents the FBI recently released show that a lawyer for the agency expressed her reservations about a draft version of U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Oct. 4, 2021 memo that initiated a controversial federal effort to investigate alleged harassment at school board meetings around the country.

  

  The documents, which the America First Legal Foundation (AFL) recently obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, showed FBI attorney Miriam Coakley expressed her hope that Garland and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) would reconsider their actions.

  “Not sure if you’ve seen this/weighed in—it was just raised to my attention,” Coakley wrote in an Oct. 4, 2021 email to Corey Frazier Ellis. Ellis was serving at the time as chief of staff for FBI Director Christopher Wray before Garland appointed him in December of that year to serve as the Interim U.S. Attorney for the District of South Carolina.

  “I hope DOJ reconsiders,” Coakley added in her email.

  After Coakley contacted him, Ellis raised the issue to Norman Wong, the then director of the DOJ’s Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA), writing “we are asking that the memo be revised,” to which Wong replied: “It’s a little too late.”

  The DOJ proceeded to publish Garland’s memo that day, along with a larger press statement describing the formation of a task force that would include the FBI and the DOJ’s Criminal, National Security, and Civil Rights Divisions.

  2021 Garland Memo Set Off Controversy

  At the time, Garland and the DOJ cited “an increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school board members, teachers and workers” in their decision to launch the new DOJ task force.

  The new task force came as parents had been protesting school boards around the country over their COVID-19 policies and the inclusion of critical race theory (CRT) principles in school curricula. On Sept. 29, 2021—just days before Garland’s memo—the National School Boards Association (NSBA) sent a letter (pdf) to President Joe Biden and the DOJ, raising concerns about disruptions to school board meetings and claiming the harassment they were experiencing was akin to domestic terrorism or hate crimes. The NSBA letter called on the DOJ to use its National Security and Counter-terrorism components to investigate these school board incidents and use counter-terrorism laws—like the PATRIOT Act—to prosecute them.

  The NSBA letter and Garland’s subsequent decision to form a new task force to investigate disruptions at schools and school board meetings received pushback from Republican officials. A Group of State Attorneys General sent a letter (pdf) disputing the NSBA’s claims and arguing that the DOJ’s subsequent actions could be used as a pretext to chill lawful free speech.

  The NSBA went on to retract its letter and said “there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter.” Despite that NSBA retraction, Garland continued to defend his decision to form the new DOJ task force.

  “All it asks is for federal law enforcement to consult with, meet with local law enforcement to assess the circumstances, strategize about what may or may not be necessary to provide federal assistance, if it is necessary,” Garland said in response to questions at the time from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). Garland said his memo “alters some of the language in the [NSBA] letter that we did not rely on.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 21:40

• Big City Politicians Need To Take Crime Seriously
  Big City Politicians Need To Take Crime Seriously

  Authored by Gabriel Nadales via RealClear Wire,

  There have been several signs recently that voters are sick and tired of the anti-police policies causing crime to skyrocket in big cities. What will it take for politicians in these cities to get the message?

  

  Last year, former San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin was thrown out of office for implementing radical, pie-in-the-sky policies that caused crime to rapidly increase. While many thought Boudin’s ouster in one of America’s most progressive cities would be a turning point, it was just a bump in the road for the radical soft-on-crime movement.

  Walmart recently decided to shut down all of its stores in Portland, Ore., after months of record-breaking theft with no response from the local government. New York’s crime rate has been steadily increasing since the COVID-19 pandemic and the rise of the “defund the police” movement, after crime rates had been falling in the Big Apple for several years.

  Just this month, the District of Columbia’s government had to be reprimanded by Congress for attempting to implement a policy that would’ve eliminated cash bail and reduced sentences for offenses such as carjackings – even though carjackings have been occurring at an astonishing rate in the district.

  If Congress didn’t have the lawful yet unusual authority over the district to rescind the law, D.C. would’ve been yet another feather in the cap of anarchists.

  Meanwhile, in Chicago, Lori Lightfoot became the first mayor to lose reelection in over 40 years as the rising crime in her city led to her downfall. Just a few days ago I visited Chicago, and it was obvious to me that Chicagoans have had to learn to adapt to the constant threat of violent crime.

  One day as I left my hotel to grab some food, I could tell that I scared several people merely by walking past them. I noticed that a guy around my age slowed down to let me pass out of a sense of caution while putting himself between me and his girlfriend. An older Hispanic woman crossed the street to avoid me, and another man kept his distance at a crosswalk while looking at me from the corner of his eye.

  But people weren’t just cautious of me, but also of each other. It was sad to see that the citizens of a once-great American city are unable to trust that a random stranger walking down the sidewalk won’t harm them.

  Crime is a practical, everyday issue, like inflation, that people can palpably feel. And it’s one that Americans care deeply about. Politicians in American cities like these can turn the tide by refusing to kowtow to radical soft-on-crime activists, cracking down on theft and violent crime, and giving law enforcement the support they need to do their jobs effectively.

  In fact, a recent survey sponsored by Our America found that 79% of Americans support stronger sentences for violent criminals. The survey also found that 75% of Americans want to fully fund the police so they can have access to the best tools, resources, and training available to protect and serve their communities. Clearly, Americans from all over the country want to support law enforcement and keep violent criminals behind bars.

  Americans are clamoring for political leaders to take crime in their communities seriously. It is extremely difficult to pursue your dreams if you and your family are set back by the kind of violent or property crime that destroys people’s livelihoods. Americans deserve to live free from fear.

  It’s time that big city governments listen to their citizens rather than to soft-on-crime activists.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 21:00

• Watch: Cubans Now Invading Florida By Air
  Watch: Cubans Now Invading Florida By Air

  Thousands of Cuban immigrants have arrived in the Florida Keys by boat in recent months. To address the surge, the state of Florida and the US Border Patrol have increased ground personnel. However, it now seems that migrants are turning to motorized hang gliders.

  Chief Patrol Agent Walter Slosar tweeted over the weekend that two Cuban immigrants were taken into custody after landing a powered hang glider at the Key West International Airport. 

  𝐓𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐅𝐥𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐚:

  Two Cuban migrants were taken into U.S. Border Patrol custody after landing at the Key West International Airport onboard a powered hang glider. No reported injuries. We appreciate the support from @mcsonews.#Breaking #Saturday #KeyWest #Cuba pic.twitter.com/KqqFlYqie1

  — Chief Patrol Agent Walter N. Slosar (@USBPChiefMIP) March 25, 2023

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

  Local 10 News obtained a video from a Key West resident showing the migrants in US airspace. 

  DEVELOPING: migrants from Cuba in motorized glider/ultralight arrive in Key West this morning. They’re being processed by Border Patrol agents. More on @WPLGLocal10 at 6pm pic.twitter.com/WevJuC2REE

  — Janine Stanwood (@JanineStanwood) March 25, 2023

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

  A witness said: 

  “I actually heard it first. I heard that glider in the air (and) I heard the motor.

   “I actually looked up because it shouldn’t be where it was, that’s in the path of Key West Airport,” said Christopher Herrera.

  Local pilot Nick Pontecorvo told the media outlet:

  “It was pretty awesome. To make that flight 90 miles over open ocean, especially with the wind, that takes a lot of courage,” Pontecorvo said.

  The use of ultralight aircraft by migrants to evade ground-based border patrol agents seems to be a new and worrisome development amid the ongoing invasion by boat across the Keys. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 20:40

• Victor Davis Hanson: Who Owns The University?
  Victor Davis Hanson: Who Owns The University?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

  The megalomania of the current crop of students, faculty, and administrators at our radical universities blinds them to the claims of their generations of benefactors…

  

  The most recent shout-down debacle at Stanford’s law school, one of many such recent sordid episodes, prompts the question: “Who owns our universities?” 

  The law students who are in residence for three years apparently assume they embody the university. And so, they believe they represent and speak for a score of diverse Stanford interests when they shout down federal Judge Kyle Duncan, as if he were an intruder into their own woke private domain. 

  After all, Stanford, like most of the Ivy League universities, is a private institution. Are then its board of trustees, its faculty, its students, and its administration de facto overseers and owners? 

  Not really. 

  In the case of public institutions of higher learning, there is no controversy: The people own the university and, through their elected representatives, pay for and approve its entire budget.

  Again, through their selected regents and overseers, the taxpayers adjudicate the laws of these universities.  

  But private universities, while different, are not really so different.  

  Take again Stanford as a typical example.

  It receives about $1.5 billion per year in federal taxpayer grants alone to its various faculty, labs, research centers, and programs. 

  Its annual budget exceeds $8 billion. If Stanford accepts such huge federal and state direct largess, do the taxpayers who provide it have some say about how and under what conditions their recipients use their money? 

  Second, the university also has accumulated a $36 billion endowment. At normal annual investment returns, such an enormous fund may earn well over $2 billion a year.  That income is almost all tax-free, based on the principle that Stanford is a nonprofit, apolitical institution. 

  But is it? 

  One could imagine what would have happened had, say, a radical abortion proponent been shouted down at Stanford Law School. Further, conceive that conservative law students had called her scum and wished for her daughters to be raped. Envision obscene placards flashing in her face—before she was stopped speaking entirely by a conservative Stanford dean who hijacked her talk and informed the pro-abortion speaker that she more or less asked for such a mob reception. The perpetrators, we know, would have been expelled from the law school within 24 hours, and the dean fired in 12. And, alternately, had the architects of this real, vile demonstration faced an open hearing, where evidence of the event was presented, and had been found guilty of violating university policy and then had been expelled and ostracized from the law school, even after much chest-thumping and performance-art braggadocio, it is unlikely the debacle would be repeated. 

  Third, the federal government through subsidies and guarantees is liable for over $1.6 trillion in aggregate student loans. Thousands of Stanford undergraduate and graduates are among those indebted and could not attend the university without such taxpayer largess. 

  To take a hypothetical, if some 16,000 undergraduate and Stanford graduate students carried on average $20,000 in federally backed student loans, the Stanford student community could be carrying a third of a billion dollars in federal loan guarantees.  

  In other words, the private universities of the United States are really not so private at all. They rely on billions of dollars in federal and state research subsidies and grants; billions of dollars in tax-exempt annual income from their endowments; and hundreds of billions of dollars in federally backed student loans that allow them to charge exorbitant tuition at above the annual inflation rate from leveraged and indebted students.  

  Given those huge public investments, should not the public have some say in how these universities are run? 

  After all, Stanford, and thousands of private universities like it, are not Hillsdale College. Hillsdale long ago lost trust in federal and state government due to their efforts to use their partial funding as a means of politically leveraging the college. And therefore, it has refused all public monies ever since. 

  Left-wing major colleges or universities have not done the same because they rightly assume the federal government shares their commitment to radical progressive change. And thus, Washington gives them free rein to discriminate in admission, housing, and hiring, as well as to suspend constitutional protections for faculty and staff—if in service to progressive-regressive agendas. 

  But that was then, and this is now. If Stanford’s sordid law school psychodrama taught us anything, it was that the law school mob felt they could threaten, smear, scream, disrupt and shut down a public speaker and do so with complete impunity. And they were right on all counts. 

  But if the public “owns” much of private universities given the colossal amount of money it provides them, could the public at last insist that all colleges, public and private, simply abide by the laws of the land? 

  That adherence would mean universities, to continue their taxpayer revenue streams, would pledge not to discriminate in their hiring and admissions on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation. That public insistence would prompt revolutionary changes on campus. 

  Stanford, for example, laudably recently deplored its past antisemitic admissions practices of the 1950s that deliberately restricted the number of Jews who qualified for admission. The university had institutionalized discrimination on the logic it did not want too many Jews on campus, as part of its social engineering to achieve the “correct” student body. Amid its current apologies, Stanford added that in the 1950s it had not been transparent in its warped discriminatory admissions but had either denied or sought to hide its bias.  

  Amid its apologies for past discrimination, the university has announced that its incoming class of 2026 includes 22 percent described as “white.” Yet that percentage (remember the university, not us, the public, is obsessed with  categorizing people by race), is less than a third of the percentage of so-called whites in the general public. 

  Has this particular group suddenly suffered collectively an epidemic of low grades, poor test scores (on now optional tests for admission) or poor community service and extracurricular activities? 

  Would that decline explain why it is so suddenly and vastly “underrepresented”? 

  Surely a university currently and loudly apologizing for its past ethnic, racial, and religious discrimination against Jews would not simultaneously, but quietly, begin doing nearly the exact thing some 70 years later? 

  For that matter, since when do universities, public or private, deliberately warp the spirit of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by institutionalizing racially separate graduation ceremonies, racially segregated dorms (“theme houses”), and safe spaces? 

  All the legalese universities employ to skirt both state law and federal statutes prohibiting segregation and discrimination—and it is a multibillion industry—cannot hide the fact that in many ways campuses are emulating the spirit and practice of the Old Confederacy and postbellum Jim Crow South, according to the infamous “1/16” or  the “one-drop” rule, to adjudicate hiring and admission, and the apartheid practice of directing particular races to “separate but equal” housing.

  Should not private universities also pledge to follow the Bill of Rights and provide constitutional protections for its university community? 

  That would mean if a university could not guarantee the right for invited speakers to finish their lectures without being shouted down, physically intimidated, or met with obscene and pornographic slurs and placards, the university then would be liable to suspension of its federal funds. 

  Recently, Stanford admitted that it allowed a Stasi-like “snitch” program on campus in which anonymous complainers can lodge complaints against allegedly biased remarks by faculty, staff, or administrators. But is not a hallmark of the U.S. legal system that the accused has a constitutional right to face his accuser? 

  In fact, most private universities suspend a great number of constitutional protections when its constituents are accused either of sexual harassment or insensitive speech. Students, especially, in campus hearings are not always allowed to meet their accusers, to cross examine accusations and evidence, or to have legal counsel at all times. 

  Should the taxpayers not insist that campuses ensure their communities the same rights of due process, of protection from double jeopardy, of rules of evidence and cross examination as enjoyed by the general public who funds them?  

  It is not just the American taxpayer who funds public and even private universities, but alumni and donors as well. The students who shouted down Judge Duncan as “scum” and hoped his daughters were raped are likely at Stanford with at least partial financial support. Many of those endowments are sustained by generous donors. And they too remain a part of the university community, along with faculty, administrators, and various boards of trustees. 

  The present radicalization of the campus is based on the egotistical assumption that transitory students own colleges. They believe, by their snobbery (one law student yelled at Judge Duncan that the judge couldn’t get into Stanford Law School) and ephemeral presence on a current campus, that they are the one and only “Yale,” or they are the real “Stanford.” Therefore, they believe they have the right to dictate to—or follow the whims of—their equally transitory radical administrators. 

  But for such a claim of ownership to be true, universities would have to self-fund, to raise all their own research dollars, to provide their own loans to their own students—and then to announce that they have no need of all the generous donors who supplied their wherewithal, and all the vast majority of students who do not disrupt, slur, slander, smear, and resort to violence, but do pay their tuition bills and thereby also help ensure viable universities. 

  So, who owns American higher education? 

  Almost everyone who pays for this now peculiar institution – a fact that the current ungracious woke activists who are passing through colleges are too dense in their megalomania to grasp.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 20:20

• 'No Country For Young Men' – How Old Is The Head Of State Of Each Nation
  ‘No Country For Young Men’ – How Old Is The Head Of State Of Each Nation

  How many world leaders are in each generation?

  This visualization by Edit Gyenge visualizes the ages of every nation’s head of state as of March 22, 2023, comparing them with the median population of the respective country. It uses data from the CIA World Factbook and Wikipedia.

  
  
  

  Editor’s note: This visualization looks specifically at heads of state. It should be mentioned that depending on the system of government in a country, heads of state shown here may or may not have actual political power. In some countries, the head of state may be a ceremonial position that does not impact day-to-day governance.

  The Oldest and Youngest Heads of State

  Here is the full list of heads of state, from oldest to youngest:

  Country	Head of State	Gender	Age	Generation
  Cameroon	Paul Biya	Male	90	Silent Generation
  Palestine	Mahmoud Abbas	Male	88	Silent Generation
  Saudi Arabia	Salman	Male	88	Silent Generation
  Norway	Harald V	Male	86	Silent Generation
  Kuwait	Sheikh Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah	Male	86	Silent Generation
  Iran	Ali Khamenei	Male	84	Silent Generation
  Denmark	Margrethe II	Female	83	Silent Generation
  Ireland	Michael D. Higgins	Male	82	Silent Generation
  Italy	Sergio Mattarella	Male	82	Silent Generation
  Namibia	Hage Geingob	Male	82	Silent Generation
  Cote d’Ivoire	Alassane Ouattara	Male	81	Silent Generation
  Malta	George Vella	Male	81	Silent Generation
  Equatorial Guinea	Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo	Male	81	Silent Generation
  Zimbabwe	Emmerson Mnangagwa	Male	81	Silent Generation
  United States	Joe Biden	Male	81	Silent Generation
  Nigeria	Muhammadu Buhari	Male	81	Silent Generation
  Dominica	Charles Savarin	Male	80	Silent Generation
  Congo, Republic of the	Denis Sassou Nguesso	Male	80	Silent Generation
  Bangladesh	Abdul Hamid	Male	79	Silent Generation
  Austria	Alexander Van der Bellen	Male	79	Silent Generation
  Ghana	Nana Akufo-Addo	Male	79	Silent Generation
  Iraq	Abdul Latif Rashid	Male	79	Silent Generation
  Uganda	Yoweri Museveni	Male	79	Silent Generation
  Nepal	Ram Chandra Paudel	Male	79	Silent Generation
  Liechtenstein	Hans-Adam II	Male	78	Silent Generation
  Brazil	Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva	Male	78	Silent Generation
  Laos	Thongloun Sisoulith	Male	78	Silent Generation
  Nicaragua	Daniel Ortega	Male	78	Silent Generation
  Algeria	Abdelmadjid Tebboune	Male	78	Silent Generation
  Eritrea	Isaias Afwerki	Male	77	Baby Boomers
  Sweden	Carl XVI Gustaf	Male	77	Baby Boomers
  Brunei	Hassanal Bolkiah	Male	77	Baby Boomers
  Samoa	Afioga Tuimaleali’ifano Va’aleto’a Sualauvi II	Male	76	Baby Boomers
  Djibouti	Ismaïl Omar Guelleh	Male	76	Baby Boomers
  Finland	Sauli Niinistö	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Antigua and Barbuda	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Australia	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Bahamas	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Belize	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Canada	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Grenada	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Jamaica	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  New Zealand	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Papua New Guinea	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Saint Kitts and Nevis	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Saint Lucia	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Saint Vincent and the Grenadines	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Solomon Islands	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Tuvalu	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  United Kingdom	Charles III	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Portugal	Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa	Male	75	Baby Boomers
  Barbados	Dame Sandra Mason	Female	74	Baby Boomers
  Sri Lanka	Ranil Wickremesinghe	Male	74	Baby Boomers
  Pakistan	Arif Alvi	Male	74	Baby Boomers
  Haiti	Ariel Henry	Male	74	Baby Boomers
  East Timor	José Ramos-Horta	Male	74	Baby Boomers
  Bahrain	Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa	Male	73	Baby Boomers
  Ethiopia	Sahle-Work Zewde	Female	73	Baby Boomers
  Myanmar	Myint Swe	Male	72	Baby Boomers
  Marshall Islands	David Kabua	Male	72	Baby Boomers
  South Sudan	Salva Kiir Mayardit	Male	72	Baby Boomers
  Georgia	Salome Zourabichvili	Female	71	Baby Boomers
  Thailand	Maha Vajiralongkorn	Male	71	Baby Boomers
  Tajikistan	Emomali Rahmon	Male	71	Baby Boomers
  Russia	Vladimir Putin	Male	71	Baby Boomers
  South Africa	Cyril Ramaphhosa	Male	71	Baby Boomers
  Panama	Laurentino Cortizo	Male	70	Baby Boomers
  Cambodia	Norodom Sihamoni	Male	70	Baby Boomers
  Kazakhstan	Kassym-Jomart Tokayev	Male	70	Baby Boomers
  China	Xi Jinping	Male	70	Baby Boomers
  Mexico	Andrés Manuel López Obrador	Male	70	Baby Boomers
  Yemen	Rashad al-Alimi	Male	69	Baby Boomers
  Turkey	Recep Tayyip Erdoğan	Male	69	Baby Boomers
  Angola	João Lourenço	Male	69	Baby Boomers
  Singapore	Halimah Yacob	Female	69	Baby Boomers
  Belarus	Alexander Lukashenko	Male	69	Baby Boomers
  Oman	Haitham bin Tariq	Male	69	Baby Boomers
  Egypt	Abdel Fattah el-Sisi	Male	69	Baby Boomers
  Malawi	Lazarus Chakwera	Male	68	Baby Boomers
  Luxembourg	Henri	Male	68	Baby Boomers
  Latvia	Egils Levits	Male	68	Baby Boomers
  Ecuador	Guillermo Lasso	Male	68	Baby Boomers
  Lebanon	Najib Mikati	Male	68	Baby Boomers
  Somalia	Hassan Sheikh Mohamud	Male	68	Baby Boomers
  Germany	Frank-Walter Steinmeier	Male	67	Baby Boomers
  Guatemala	Alejandro Giammattei	Male	67	Baby Boomers
  Greece	Katerina Sakellaropoulou	Female	67	Baby Boomers
  Mauritania	Mohamed Ould Ghazouani	Male	67	Baby Boomers
  Central African Republic	Faustin-Archange Touadéra	Male	66	Baby Boomers
  Uzbekistan	Shavkat Mirziyoyev	Male	66	Baby Boomers
  Philippines	Bongbong Marcos	Male	66	Baby Boomers
  Rwanda	Paul Kagame	Male	66	Baby Boomers
  Tunisia	Kaïs Saïed	Male	65	Baby Boomers
  Monaco	Albert II	Male	65	Baby Boomers
  Estonia	Alar Karis	Male	65	Baby Boomers
  Benin	Patrice Talon	Male	65	Baby Boomers
  India	Droupadi Murmu	Female	65	Baby Boomers
  Trinidad and Tobago	Paula-Mae Weekes	Female	65	Baby Boomers
  Comoros	Azali Assoumani	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Suriname	Chan Santokhi	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Gabon	Ali Bongo Ondimba	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Mozambique	Filipe Nyusi	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Seychelles	Wavel Ramkalawan	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Argentina	Alberto Fernández	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Armenia	Vahagn Khachaturyan	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Mauritius	Prithvirajsing Roopun	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Romania	Klaus Iohannis	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Tonga	Tupou VI	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  São Tomé and Príncipe	Carlos Vila Nova	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Malaysia	Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah	Male	64	Baby Boomers
  Honduras	Xiomara Castro	Female	64	Baby Boomers
  Niger	Mohamed Bazoum	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Tanzania	Samia Suluhu Hassan	Female	63	Baby Boomers
  Japan	Naruhito	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Cabo Verde	José Maria Neves	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Belgium	Philippe	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Colombia	Gustavo Petro	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Cuba	Miguel Díaz-Canel	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Sudan	Abdel Fattah al-Burhan	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Kiribati	Taneti Maamau	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  Israel	Isaac Herzog	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  South Korea	Yoon Suk-yeol	Male	63	Baby Boomers
  United Arab Emirates	Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Afghanistan	Hibatullah Akhundzada	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Costa Rica	Rodrigo Chaves Robles	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Indonesia	Joko Widodo	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Botswana	Mokgweetsi Masisi	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Czechia	Petr Pavel	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Senegal	Macky Sall	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Azerbaijan	Ilham Aliyev	Male	62	Baby Boomers
  Jordan	Abdullah II	Male	61	Baby Boomers
  Montenegro	Milo Ðukanovic	Male	61	Baby Boomers
  Maldives	Ibrahim Mohamed Solih	Male	61	Baby Boomers
  Peru	Dina Boluarte	Female	61	Baby Boomers
  Zambia	Hakainde Hichilema	Male	61	Baby Boomers
  Venezuela	Nicolás Maduro	Male	61	Baby Boomers
  North Macedonia	Stevo Pendarovski	Male	60	Baby Boomers
  Congo, Democratic Republic of the	Félix Tshisekedi	Male	60	Baby Boomers
  Bulgaria	Rumen Radev	Male	60	Baby Boomers
  Lesotho	Letsie III	Male	60	Baby Boomers
  Morocco	Mohammed VI	Male	60	Baby Boomers
  Bolivia	Luis Arce	Male	60	Baby Boomers
  Micronesia	David W. Panuelo	Male	59	Baby Boomers
  Fiji	Ratu Wiliame Katonivere	Male	59	Baby Boomers
  Sierra Leone	Julius Maada Bio	Male	59	Baby Boomers
  Vanuatu	Nikenike Vurobaravu	Male	59	Baby Boomers
  Lithuania	Gitanas Nauseda	Male	59	Baby Boomers
  The Gambia	Adama Barrow	Male	58	Generation X
  Syria	Bashar al-Assad	Male	58	Generation X
  Togo	Faure Gnassingbé	Male	57	Generation X
  Liberia	George Weah	Male	57	Generation X
  Croatia	Zoran Milanovic	Male	57	Generation X
  Kenya	William Ruto	Male	57	Generation X
  Bosnia and Herzegovina	Željka Cvijanovic	Female	56	Generation X
  Albania	Bajram Begaj	Male	56	Generation X
  Netherlands	Willem-Alexander	Male	56	Generation X
  Dominican Republic	Luis Abinader	Male	56	Generation X
  Spain	Felipe VI	Male	55	Generation X
  Eswatini	Mswati III	Male	55	Generation X
  Slovenia	Nataša Pirc Musar	Female	55	Generation X
  Mongolia	Ukhnaagiin Khürelsükh	Male	55	Generation X
  Burundi	Évariste Ndayishimiye	Male	55	Generation X
  Iceland	Guðni Th. Jóhannesson	Male	55	Generation X
  Palau	Surangel Whipps Jr.	Male	55	Generation X
  Kyrgyzstan	Sadyr Japarov	Male	55	Generation X
  Serbia	Aleksandar Vucic	Male	53	Generation X
  Vietnam	Võ Văn Thưởng	Male	53	Generation X
  Paraguay	Mario Abdo Benítez	Male	52	Generation X
  Switzerland	Alain Berset	Male	51	Generation X
  Poland	Andrzej Duda	Male	51	Generation X
  Moldova	Maia Sandu	Female	51	Generation X
  Guinea-Bissau	Umaro Sissoco Embaló	Male	51	Generation X
  Slovakia	Zuzana Caputová	Female	50	Generation X
  Uruguay	Luis Lacalle Pou	Male	50	Generation X
  Cyprus	Nikos Christodoulides	Male	50	Generation X
  Madagascar	Andry Rajoelina	Male	49	Generation X
  Nauru	Russ Kun	Male	48	Generation X
  Libya	Mohamed al-Menfi	Male	47	Generation X
  Hungary	Katalin Novák	Female	46	Generation X
  France	Emmanuel Macron	Male	46	Generation X
  Ukraine	Volodymyr Zelenskyy	Male	45	Generation X
  Bhutan	Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck	Male	43	Generation X
  Guinea	Mamady Doumbouya	Male	43	Generation X
  Guyana	Irfaan Ali	Male	43	Generation X
  Qatar	Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani	Male	43	Generation X
  El Salvador	Nayib Bukele	Male	42	Millennials
  Turkmenistan	Serdar Berdimuhamedow	Male	42	Millennials
  North Korea	Kim Jong-un	Male	41	Millennials
  Mali	Assimi Goïta	Male	40	Millennials
  Chad	Mahamat Déby	Male	39	Millennials
  Chile	Gabriel Boric	Male	37	Millennials
  Burkina Faso	Ibrahim Traoré	Male	35	Millennials

  Though ages vary across countries and regions, Africa has both the oldest and youngest heads of state in the world today.

  Last month, Cameroon’s president Paul Biya celebrated his 90th birthday, making him the oldest head of state in the world in a country that has a median population age of just 18.5 years. The African continent is home to about one-third of the world’s silent generation heads of states.

  At the other age extreme, 35-year-old Ibrahim Traoré became the youngest head of state in Burkina Faso after a coup d’etat in September 2022.

  Traoré is not the only millennial head of state out there. He is joined by others including Chile’s Gabriel Boric, and North Korea’s well-known Kim Jong-un.

  Baby Boomers Lead the Way

  Born between 1946 and 1964, the baby boomer generation dominates the world’s state leadership roles today.

  Over 58% of the world’s heads of state are in this generation, including the UK’s King Charles III who is the head of state of 15 total nations.

  Boomers also make up the largest share of women leaders in the top state positions today. While only around 10% of the world’s nations have women head of states, 65% of them are in this generation.

  Included in this subset are heads of state such as Peru’s president Dina Boluarte, Honduras’ president Xiomara Castro, and India’s president Droupadi Murmu.

  Where Gen X Takes the Lead

  According to historical trends, one might expect to see an American president from Generation X in office sometime soon, but that has not yet materialized for various reasons.

  However, this generation has made their mark in other parts of the world as heads of state, especially in Europe.

  The presidents of Ukraine (Volodymyr Zelenskyy), France (Emmanuel Macron), and Hungary (Katalin Novák) are in Gen X, and are also Europe’s youngest heads of state.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 20:00

• Would A 'Wealth Tax' Work?
  Would A ‘Wealth Tax’ Work?

  Authored by Allen C. Guelzo & James H. Hulme via RealClearPolitics.com,

  Facing a national debt of over $31 trillion, the Biden administration’s FY 2024 budget plan is looking for a gusher of new revenue in a “wealth tax” of 25% on wealth exceeding $100 million.

  This would tax not just personal income but gains in the value of assets, regardless of whether that gain actually arrives as cash in hand.

  The Biden administration’s proposal is not exactly new.

  

  Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren made wealth taxes part of their 2020 bids for the Democratic presidential nomination. Sen. Ron Wyden, the current chair of the Senate’s Finance Committee and the Joint Committee on Taxation, called for a wealth tax in 2021. Wyden’s plan, the “Billionaire’s Income Tax,” would tax billionaires (or anyone who earns more than $100 million in three consecutive years) at 20%. The Biden administration’s tax proposal is similar to Wyden’s, treating taxation of asset appreciation as a kind of “prepayment” of income taxes.

  The appeal of a wealth tax has three faces.

  • First, the tax is variously estimated to capture $360 billion in revenue over the next ten years.

  • It also appeals to popular anxieties over income inequality in America, since so much of the wealth of the “One Percent” is tied up in asset appreciation rather than actual income.

  • Finally, there is a political dividend. As the Biden administration tries to gin up enthusiasm for a possible reelection campaign in 2024, promoting a wealth tax is at least one way to rally the Democrats’ progressive base.

  But the appeal of the wealth tax also has some major liabilities.

  The first is the staggering difficulty of determining the appreciation of value. For instance: Should an asset’s appreciation be figured on its “fair market value”? Who determines that? Should it be on whatever the market price might be on a given day? Which day? The variations within those possibilities should make heads spin, which is one reason why Janet Yellen has expressed skepticism about the difficulties in levying a wealth tax. None of that even begins to deal with the question of what is due an asset owner if an asset actually loses value.

  Another ominous liability concerns who, exactly, would be paying such a tax. Advocates of wealth taxes have assured critics that the tax would affect only 700 uber-wealthy households – or, as President Biden explained, “One-hundredth of one percent of the Americans will pay this tax.” But new taxes tend not to be respecters of persons. There is no guarantee that the original targets of a wealth tax wouldn’t simply divert wealth into more difficult-to-value assets, or simply offshore their assets, and perhaps themselves as well. When François Mitterand introduced a wealth tax in France in the 1980s, more than 60,000 millionaires left France, and saddled the government with a net loss from what would have been their income taxes and value-added taxes.

  If that flight were to be repeated in the U.S., Congress would be forced to drive the liability limit downward into the middle class, just to keep up revenues. It would not be difficult – in fact, it might be unavoidable – to find middle-income Americans paying the wealth tax on their cars, their homes, even their 401(k)s. It would also tempt federal fiscal policy makers to feed inflation, since inflation would float the face value of assets upward, even while hollowing out their real value.

  The principal obstacle to a “wealth tax,” however, is in the Constitution. The Constitution strictly limits what the federal government can tax. It took the 16th Amendment in 1913 to permit Congress to levy a tax on personal incomes, and even that Amendment specifically limits the taxing power only to income, not wealth. Ever since the Supreme Court’s 1920 decision in Eisner v. Macomber, real income must occur before there can be taxable income.

  But in a June 2022 decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, a three-judge panel ruled in Moore v. U.S. that an offshore investment which had never paid a dividend could still be taxed as part of a “mandatory repatriation tax” created by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

  This obscure provision gave the three judges the opportunity to suggest that the 16th Amendment’s definition of income “is a flexible one” and that there is “no set definition of income under the 16th Amendment.” That leaves an open door to interpret any kind of increased value as “income.” The original plaintiffs have now asked the Supreme Court to review the judgment, arguing that the “decision shatters what had been an unbroken judicial consensus dating back to Eisner.”

  In 2020, when he was still a candidate, President Biden dismissed the Sanders and Warren plans as mean-spirited and divisive.

  “Tax policy,” he said, “is not about punishment.”

  But three years is a long time in politics, and in 2023, punishment may now seem to be what pays.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 19:40

• Millennials Dominate Insolvencies In Canada As Credit Card, Student Loan And Other Debts Pile Up
  Millennials Dominate Insolvencies In Canada As Credit Card, Student Loan And Other Debts Pile Up

  As US millennials distinguish themselves as the ‘buy now, pay later‘ generation, their Canadian counterparts are leading the way when it comes to insolvencies, according to Ontario-based insolvency trustee firm, Hoyes Michalos, which performs an annual “Joe Debtor” analysis.

  

  According to Doug Hoyes, millennial Canadians have been dealt a generational losing hand, as debts from credit cards, high-interest loans and tax debt, and debt owed from the country’s taxable financial support during the pandemic known as the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB).

  “I think there’s a whole bunch of whammies that have hit millennials,” said Hoyes. “The CERB was the final straw that broke the camel’s back.”

  The 2022 Joe Debtor study examined 2,700 personal insolvencies filed in Ontario. Hoyes Michalos says 49 per cent were filed by millennials aged 26 to 41, even though they make up 27 per cent of adult Canadians.

  The study found that on a per−population basis, millennials were 1.4 times more likely to file for insolvency than people in generation X aged 42 to 56, and 1.7 times more likely than baby boomers aged 57 to 76.

  Insolvent millennials were on average 33 years old and owed an average of $47,283 in unsecured debt. –Canadian Press

  According to Hoyes, many people didn’t set aside taxes when they received CERB and other pandemic-related relief funds. Now, a flood of young Canadians have found themselves insolvent and unable to continue paying down their various debts. 

  Hoyes says the millennials have been given a bum rap, and didn’t enjoy the same societal benefits as older generations – whose wages kept up (better) with inflation, and went to college when tuition didn’t require student loans – allowing graduates the ability to enter the workforce and start saving and investing right away, as opposed to having to service large debts in addition to pulling off a house.

  He also says there’s no ‘safety valve’ like there use to be.

  “Anything goes wrong like a pandemic, or you lose your job or you get sick or you get divorced and boom, there is no safety valve there,” said Hoyes, who added that filing for bankruptcy is an option to eliminate debts, however most people end up working with insolvency trustees to file proposals to manage their debt.

  “It becomes an affordable way to eliminate the debt, and that’s why we’re seeing more and more millennials resorting to consumer proposals,” he said. “They really have no other choice.”

  According to Winnipeg-based credit counselor Sandra Fry, many young people are looking for ways to manage debt without declaring bankruptcy.

  “Unfortunately, a lot of people out there are living on the edge of their affordability,” she said, adding that inflation is “really squeezing Canadians in general from all sides.”

  Millennial clients she’s dealt with lately have often had variable interest rate mortgages, and rate hikes “caused huge strain on their budget because their payments just went up like crazy.”

  Dave Locke, 31, lives with his wife in Coquitlam, B.C., east of Vancouver, and the couple sought Fry’s help when their mortgage payments jumped dramatically in the middle of a costly renovation.

  Locke, who works for a real estate brokerage, got into the housing market at a young age having worked in the oil and gas industry after high school.

  He ended up buying a home in Coquitlam with his wife Tara, who works in labour relations, and the Bank of Canada’s rate hikes eventually saw their monthly mortgage payments jump 40 per cent.

  The couple had a construction loan with their bank to fund the renovations, and as interest rates climbed and the price of construction materials ballooned, Locke realized something had to give, even with their relatively high combined incomes. -Canadian Press

  “I’m still paying the full balance,” said Locke. “I’m just not paying any additional interest.”

  He says that while it’s embarrassing to be in so much debt, “it’s just the way it goes.”

  “You have to kind of swallow your pride.“

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 19:20

• CFTC Calls Ether A Commodity In Binance Suit, Highlighting Complexity Of Classification
  CFTC Calls Ether A Commodity In Binance Suit, Highlighting Complexity Of Classification

  By Derek Anderson of CoinTelegraph

  The suit claims Binance used Ether as a commodity in its financial products, experts explained, which says little about the basic nature of the coin…

  

  The United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) filed suit against Binance on March 27 for violations of the Commodities Exchange Act and CFTC regulations. Those violations included transactions with Ether (ETH), according to the suit. This claim, at first glance, touched on a notable point of contention between the CFTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 

  The CFTC claimed in its suit that Binance engaged in transactions with “digital assets that are commodities including Bitcoin, Ether, and Litecoin for persons in the United States.” That was not a new position for the agency. The CFTC claimed ETH was a commodity in its suit against FTX in December and chair Rostin Behnam stated his opinion that ETH and stablecoins were commodities as recently as March 8 in a Senate hearing.

  The CFTC position on ETH was fairly uncontroversial before the Ethereum Merge; after Ethereum moved to a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism, SEC chair Gary Gensler commented on staking coins that “From the coin’s perspective […] That’s another indicia that under the Howey test, the investing public is anticipating profits based on the efforts of others.”

  Gensler’s comment brought on a slow wave of reactions. In February, for example, Ethereum co-founder and crypto entrepreneur Joseph Lubin told Cointelegraph, “Staking is not a security,” and it would be a “terrible path for the U.S.” to make it so. He added that he thought the U.S. courts would agree with him and “there would be a tremendous outcry from not just the crypto community but different politicians and certain regulators,” if ETH were classified as a security.

  The CFTC case against Binance does not rest on the nature of ETH as much as the nature of Binance products, however, limiting its applicability to the larger argument.

  “In this particular case, ETH is being treated as a ‘commodity’ rather than a ‘security,’” Timothy Cradle, director of regulatory affairs at Blockchain Intelligence Group, told Cointelegraph. “The complaint references securities as they relate to swaps.” Cradle added:

  “The economics of an offering including ETH could still change the definition applied to the token. For example, ETH staking could still be construed as an investment contract, and as such a security.”

  Some transactions, such as mixed swaps involving ETH, could be subject to regulation by both the SEC and CFTC, Cradle said, but that “would not necessarily define ETH itself as a security as mixed swaps also include commodities and currencies.”

  This more complex approach to regulation would not necessarily imply cooperation between the two agencies. Yankun Guo, partner at law firm Ice Miller, said of the situation in a statement to Cointelegraph:

  “It shows that both the multifaceted nature of how tokens function and how they are used can cause them to be fall under multiple agency’s jurisdiction; […] I wouldn’t be surprised to see a similar lawsuit by the SEC naming all the same tokens except BTC as securities.”

  Silver lining

  The CFTC suit against Binance states that ETH is a commodity

  Task failed successfully pic.twitter.com/8HiF8LUOoi

  — sassal.eth 🦇🔊 (@sassal0x) March 27, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 19:00

• Viagra Sales Went Soft As Exclusivity Expired
  Viagra Sales Went Soft As Exclusivity Expired

  25 years ago, on March 27, 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Viagra for treatment of male erectile dysfunction. With its distinct blue diamond shape, Viagra quickly gained notoriety and became deeply ingrained in popular culture. For Pfizer, the drug was an instant success, surpassing $1 billion in global sales in its second year on the market and remaining one of the company’s best-selling drugs for years to come.

  Originally studied for use in hypertension (high blood pressure) and chest pain associated with coronary heart disease, sildenafil, which is the generic name of the drug later marketed as Viagra, was found to sometimes induce penile erections during clinical trials. Seeing an opportunity, Pfizer decided to study and market it for erectile dysfunction, in a move that became a textbook example of drug repositioning.

  However, as Statista’s Felix Richter reports, while Viagra is still one of the most recognizable drugs in the world and synonymous with sexual performance enhancement, its success story began to fade in 2013 when Pfizer’s patent on the use of sildenafil in erectile dysfunction expired in the European Union. Around the same time, the company was involved in a patent lawsuit in the United States, which resulted in a settlement allowing Teva Pharmaceuticals to launch a generic version of Viagra in December 2017.

  As Statista’s chart illustrates, the loss of exclusivity in major markets such as Europe, Japan and most importantly the United States had a significant effect on Viagra sales, which declined by almost 70 percent between 2012 and 2018.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  25 years after its initial approval, Viagra is no longer part of Pfizer either.

  In 2020, the company’s off-patent branded and generics business Upjohn, which included Viagra, was spun-off and combined with Mylan to create a new company called Viatris.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 18:40

• Beware Liberals And Conservatives Delivering 'Catastrophic News'
  Beware Liberals And Conservatives Delivering ‘Catastrophic News’

  Authored by John Tamny via RealClear Wire,

  It’s little known today, but a major driver of Henry Ford’s interest in machines was an aversion to work. And horses. Born into a farming family in Michigan, Ford’s migration away from “the land” was rooted in a desire to avoid the dawn-to-dusk toil that defined life for an overwhelming majority in the 19^th century.  

  

  So, while Ford is most known for having democratized access to the automobile, it’s less known that Ford Motor Company also mass-produced tractors. 650,000 in 1927 alone. In his words, “What a waste it is for a human being to spend hours and hours behind a slowly moving team of horses in the same time a tractor could do six times as much work.”

  Ford’s intimate knowledge of how machines multiply human productivity while reducing time on the job came to mind while reading Washington Post columnist Max Boot’s recent assertion that “Russia is in a demographic death spiral.” Who is the source of Boot’s pessimism, or optimism? It’s none other than American Enterprise Institute fellow Nicholas Eberstadt.

  Eberstadt is the leader of a strain of conservatives thoroughly convinced that the main crisis awaiting us is a consequence of people in more developed countries choosing to have fewer kids. Eberstadt is to “demographic death spiral” what Michael Mann is to “catastrophic global warming.” Both have flocks to feed, and feed them they do with narratives that actual market signals formed by actual information thoroughly reject.

  The global warmist in Mann promotes an endless picture of the world’s coastal cities literally going under water, all because the people in the well-to-do parts of the world now avail themselves of cars, air conditioners, and other mechanized advances that make living so pleasurable today. The only problem with Mann’s preaching about the hell that awaits us is that human migratory patterns and pesky market prices disagree. At present something north of 45% of the world’s population lives in coastal areas, and the previous number is expected to grow.

  In concert with this migration to coastal cities allegedly set to go under water is a rather evident surge in the price of real estate. Yes, you read that right. In the global locales that Mann and his warming crowd claim will be washed away, the cost of dwellings on what’s set to be washed away grows and grows.

  It makes you wonder…about Mann. Smart as he surely is, he can’t possibly know more than the markets. And if you doubt the latter, he surely can’t have anywhere close to the combined knowledge of half of the world’s population.

  Which brings us back to Boot. Under the sway of Eberstadt, he’s convinced that Russia’s birthrate of “only 1.5 children per woman” has it as previously mentioned “in a demographic death spiral.” Except that people are not static creatures. They’re instead dynamic parts of an increasingly global whole.

  The 1.5 Russian children per women being born today are entering a world in which every good and service produced within it is a beautiful consequence of intensely sophisticated global cooperation. To use but one of countless examples, Boeing airplanes are comprised of millions of intricate parts manufactured around the world. And that only tells part of the story.

  To see why, think back to Ford and his fascination with machines. He yet again understood that machines multiply human effort. A man working today can do the work of hundreds and realistically thousands of men born when Ford was. Throw in technology that increasingly thinks for us, and it’s easy to see that the babies being born today will be the productive equivalent of tens of thousands born when Ford was in 1863.

  Yet Boot think’s Russia days are numbered because of “1.5 children per woman”? How much time did it take for him to read the “fascinating report” written by Eberstadt in which the “demographic death spiral” was bruited as a negative factor for so many developed countries, and by extension, the world?

  The good news for Boot is that age 53, he’s got time to make up for time wasted on a pessimistic assessment of the future that is mocked by markets (watch investment flows, including a surge of investment into low-birthrate countries like the U.S. and South Korea), machines, and simple common sense. What’s true for Boot is happily true for Eberstadt too, age 67. Indeed, with machines increasingly thinking for us, it’s only a matter of time before man aided by machines unlocks the secrets to ever longer life.

  It’s all a reminder that contra the pessimists, the only threat to people who populate the “closed economy” that is the world is a lack of freedom. Everything else will be taken care of by the very market forces that presently look disdainfully at catastrophic fear-mongering promoted by the dominant ideologies.

  *  *  *

  John Tamny is editor of RealClearMarkets, Vice President at FreedomWorks, a senior fellow at the Market Institute, and a senior economic adviser to Applied Finance Advisors (www.appliedfinance.com). His latest book is The Money Confusion: How Illiteracy About Currencies and Inflation Sets the Stage For the Crypto Revolution.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 18:20

• In "Huge" Chinese Push By Aramco, World's Biggest Oil Producer Will Build $10BN Petrochemical Complex, Buy 10% Stake In Top Chinese Refinery
  In “Huge” Chinese Push By Aramco, World’s Biggest Oil Producer Will Build $10BN Petrochemical Complex, Buy 10% Stake In Top Chinese Refinery

  In what has been dubbed a “HUGE push” by the Saudi state-owned petrochemical giant into China’s economy, Saudi Aramco surprised the world with a double-header of pro-China news: first, Aramco said it will build a $10 billion refinery in China and, just hours later, it revealed that it would acquire a stake a 10% stake in a Top Chinese oil refinery.

  Through the strategic arrangement, Aramco would supply 480,000 bpd of Arabian crude oil to Rongsheng affiliate Zhejiang Petroleum and Chemical Co. Ltd (ZPC), under a long-term sales agreement. #OOTT #China

  — Amena Bakr (@Amena__Bakr) March 27, 2023

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

  The news come as Saudi Arabia is on the verge of dethroning the petrodollar and accepting payment in Yuan for Chinese oil sales.

  Let’s dig deeper.

  Over the weekend, Saudi Aramco – world’s biggest oil producer – announced plans to build a $10-billion refining and petrochemical complex in China’s northeast over the next three years, accelerating a development that was paused during the pandemic, and taking advantage of the country’s growing demand for energy. According to the Aramco news release, the complex will have a capacity of 300,000 barrels of crude daily, and OilPrice adds that the Saudi major will supply 201,000 barrels per day to the facility.

  The project will be carried out in partnership between Aramco and two Chinese companies. Construction works should begin in the second half of this year, with the project scheduled for completion in 2026.

  “This important project will support China’s growing demand across fuel and chemical products. It also represents a major milestone in our ongoing downstream expansion strategy in China and the wider region, which is an increasingly significant driver of global petrochemical demand,” said Aramco’s head of downstream, Mohammed Al Qahtani.

  The news follows a report from December last year according to which Aramco had struck a deal with China’s Sinopec to build a 320,000-bpd refinery and petrochemical cracker in China, highlighting the latter’s major role in global oil consumption yet again.

  Then, one day later, Aramco also unveiled that it has agreed to buy a 10% stake in a giant oil complex in China for 24.6 billion yuan ($3.6 billion), in exchange for securing sales to one of the country’s largest refineries.

  Aramco will also supply 480,000 barrels of crude oil per day to Rongsheng Petrochemical Co’s refinery in the eastern province of Zhejiang over a 20-year period, according to a statement from the Chinese company. Aramco will also provide a credit of $800 million to Rongsheng for the purchase, that statement said.

  Refining and petrochemical investments have been a priority for Aramco as it seeks to secure long-term demand for its main product, even as it expands local refining capacity as well. According to the International Energy Agency and other forecasters, a bet on petrochemicals is a good long-term bet in the oil industry amid expectations of a decline in oil demand for transport fuels. The IEA has projected that petrochemicals will account for more than a third in oil demand growth by 2030, rising to 50% of demand by 2050 as transport electrifies

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 18:00

• "Power At Every Level", Brags Chicago Teachers Union, As 200 Members Skip School For Political Workshop
  “Power At Every Level”, Brags Chicago Teachers Union, As 200 Members Skip School For Political Workshop

  Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.org,

  “We’re gonna have to teach the city of Chicago how to redefine transformation, how to redefine renaissance,” said Chicago Teachers Union President Davis Gates in her opening remarks, and the day naturally started with the CTU’s own organizer and Chicago mayoral candidate, Brandon Johnson, who got a standing ovation.

  

  Some 200 CTU members skipped school Thursday for what’s supposedly an annual delegates’ training conference, but the CTU’s own description makes clear it was about expanding its vast political goals — through schools.

  

  A conference workshop

  “Power At Every Level” Delegates Conference” is the the CTU’s own headline on their description.

  It was a day full of workshops and training “about building power from the school buildings to the district and charter networks to the highest levels of political power in the city,” the CTU says. One session was on the CTU’s three-year strategic plan, which was about “how mobilizing in school buildings is critical to realizing the full potential of this particular moment….” It went on:

  Winning the mayor’s office is, of course, a high priority, but it’s just one piece of the puzzle. Everything we do builds on the organizational foundations we forge in our school buildings and communities across the city, and this is what will make our three-pronged strategy of mayoral representation, bargaining strong charter and district contracts, and winning a pro-educator elected school board a reality.

  Another session was about why school leadership needs to “build power” on topics that included “Teaching Through Trauma,” “Green Schools,” and “Assertive Grievance Handling.”

  CTU organizer Brandon Johnson faces Paul Vallas in Chicago’s mayoral election on April 4.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 03/27/2023 – 17:40