• Where Is Rugby Popular?
  Where Is Rugby Popular?

  The 10th mens Rugby World Cup has kicked off in France and is running until October 28.

  A total of 48 games will take place over seven weeks in nine venues across the country, with the final match in the Stade de France, north of Paris.

  

  To mark the occasion,Statista’s Anna Fleck created the following chart taking a look at how the sport’s fanbase compares across six of the competing nations.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  According to the latest wave of Statista’s Consumer Insights survey, 33 percent of sports fans in France follow rugby competitions and/or teams.

  This figure is fairly similar to that of Australia (34 percent), but significantly higher than in the UK (25 percent).

  Among the nations analyzed, rugby is most popular among South Africans, with 51 percent of respondents saying they watched it.

  No data was available for New Zealand and Ireland… but we suspect it was even higher.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/14/2023 – 02:45

• Ukraine Plays Key Role In Biden Impeachment Inquiry, Just As It Did With Trump
  Ukraine Plays Key Role In Biden Impeachment Inquiry, Just As It Did With Trump

  Authored by Petr Svab via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Both the newly announced impeachment of President Joe Biden and that of President Donald Trump center on the same incident in Ukraine, but from different sides.

  

  The impeachment inquiry announced by House Republicans against President Joe Biden centers on his involvement with Ukraine, just as the Eastern European country figured prominently in the first impeachment of President Donald Trump. In fact, both impeachments touch upon the same incident, but from opposite sides.

  House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) announced the impeachment inquiry on Sept. 12, summarizing the results of the investigations to date, including nearly $20 million in alleged payments from foreign sources to the Biden family and associates, the president’s past communications with his son Hunter Biden about his overseas business dealings, as well as whistleblower allegations that the Department of Justice extended special treatment to the Biden family.

  “These are allegations of abuse of power, obstruction, and corruption and they warrant further investigation by the House of Representatives,” Mr. McCarthy said.

  The centerpiece of the allegations goes back to 2016, when then-Vice President Biden used a $1 billion loan guarantee as leverage to have Ukraine fire prosecutor Victor Shokin, who was investigating Ukrainian energy company Burisma. At the time, the vice president’s son Hunter Biden was collecting $1 million a year to sit on the company’s board and Burisma associates were pressuring him to ensure any investigations into the company’s owner were quashed.

  It was President Trump’s requesting assistance from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in investigating this matter during a 2019 phone call that prompted House Democrats to launch an impeachment inquiry of him and later voting to impeach him. President Trump was acquitted by the GOP-led Senate at the time.

  Ukraine has long been a crucible of geopolitical tensions, culminating in Russia’s invasion of the country in 2022. Hunter Biden was given the Burisma position in 2014, three months after Vice President Biden was designated by President Barack Obama as “point-man” for Ukraine.

  Mr. Shokin was appointed Ukraine’s prosecutor general in February 2015 and later that year started preparing a money laundering case tied to Burisma.

  On Nov. 2, 2015, Hunter Biden received an email from Burisma owner Mykola Zlochevsky’s adviser, Vadym Pozharskyi, demanding “deliverables” and saying that the “ultimate purpose” was to “close down any cases or pursuits” against Zlochevsky.

  Several weeks later, Vice President Biden visited Ukraine and, among other things, demanded the removal of Mr. Shokin.

  

  While there were some accusations that Mr. Shokin was corrupt, the U.S. government seemed satisfied with his performance.

  Just weeks before the vice president’s visit, a joint task force of U.S. State, Treasury, and Justice Department officials deemed Ukraine’s progress on anti-corruption sufficient to earn it another $1 billion loan guarantee.

  In addition, Victoria Nuland, then-assistant U.S. secretary of state, wrote to Mr. Shokin in June 2015 that “we have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government.”

  When Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko didn’t initially act on Vice President Biden’s demand, the latter threatened to withhold the $1 billion loan guarantee. He later boasted about the incident during a 2018 Council on Foreign Relations event.

  On July 25, 2019, when President Trump called President Zelenskyy to congratulate him on winning a majority in the Ukrainian parliament, he mentioned that he would like Ukraine to examine the circumstances of Mr. Shokin’s firing and former Vice President Biden’s role in the matter. He said then-Attorney General Bill Barr would call to discuss the matter.

  “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great, Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me,” he said.

  Democrats interpreted it as President Trump’s abusing his power to have his political opponent investigated.

  President Trump has insisted the call was nothing wrong with the call and that Democrats were trying to cover up the Biden family’s corruption.

  Republicans now say there indeed was corruption worth investigating. In addition to the money Hunter Biden received in Ukraine, they also point to payments from Elena Baturina, the wife of a former mayor of Moscow, as well as money from companies linked to the Chinese Communist Party.

  They also capitalize on evidence that contradicts President Biden’s claims that he never discussed with his son his overseas business and that there was a “wall” between those business dealings and his official position.

  “Not only did they discuss business, they discussed strategy, they discussed when they were going to meet with these people, they discussed what the narrative was going to be, how they were going to lie to the American people when word got out that they were being investigated for corruption in Ukraine and being investigated for tax crimes and things like that,” Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), who chairs the House Oversight committee, recently told Newsmax.

  “There was never a wall between Joe Biden and his family’s shady business dealings, and I think what we’re going to find is that Joe Biden not only knew about them, but Joe Biden was the ringleader in all of the crimes that his family’s committed.”

  Mr. McCarthy put Mr. Comer in charge of the inquiry together with Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), head of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.), head of the House Ways and Means Committee.

  “Regardless of your party or who you voted for, these facts should concern all Americans,” Mr. McCarthy said.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/14/2023 – 02:00

• Death By A Thousand Cuts: The Many Ways Our Rights Have Been Usurped Since 9/11
  Death By A Thousand Cuts: The Many Ways Our Rights Have Been Usurped Since 9/11

  Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”

  – Abraham Lincoln

  Those who gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights believed that the government exists at the behest of its citizens. It is there to protect, defend and even enhance our freedoms, not violate them.

  

  Unfortunately, although the Bill of Rights was adopted as a means of protecting the people against government tyranny, in America today, the government does whatever it wants, freedom be damned.

  In the 22 years since the USA Patriot Act—a massive 342-page wish list of expanded powers for the FBI and CIA—was rammed through Congress in the wake of the so-called 9/11 terror attacks, it has snowballed into the eradication of every vital safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse.

  The Patriot Act drove a stake through the heart of the Bill of Rights, violating at least six of the ten original amendments—the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Amendments—and possibly the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments, as well.

  The Patriot Act also redefined terrorism so broadly that many non-terrorist political activities such as protest marches, demonstrations and civil disobedience are now considered potential terrorist acts, thereby rendering anyone desiring to engage in protected First Amendment expressive activities as suspects of the surveillance state.

  The Patriot Act justified broader domestic surveillance, the logic being that if government agents knew more about each American, they could distinguish the terrorists from law-abiding citizens—no doubt a reflexive impulse shared by small-town police and federal agents alike.

  This, according to Washington Post reporter Robert O’Harrow, Jr., was a fantasy that “had been brewing in the law enforcement world for a long time.” And 9/11 provided the government with the perfect excuse for conducting far-reaching surveillance and collecting mountains of information on even the most law-abiding citizen.

  Federal agents and police officers are now authorized to conduct covert black bag “sneak-and-peak” searches of homes and offices while you are away and confiscate your personal property without first notifying you of their intent or their presence.

  The law also granted the FBI the right to come to your place of employment, demand your personal records and question your supervisors and fellow employees, all without notifying you; allowed the government access to your medical records, school records and practically every personal record about you; and allowed the government to secretly demand to see records of books or magazines you’ve checked out in any public library and Internet sites you’ve visited (at least 545 libraries received such demands in the first year following passage of the Patriot Act).

  In the name of fighting terrorism, government officials are now permitted to monitor religious and political institutions with no suspicion of criminal wrongdoing; prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government has subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation; monitor conversations between attorneys and clients; search and seize Americans’ papers and effects without showing probable cause; and jail Americans indefinitely without a trial, among other things.

  The federal government also made liberal use of its new powers, especially through the use (and abuse) of the nefarious national security letters, which allow the FBI to demand personal customer records from Internet Service Providers, financial institutions and credit companies at the mere say-so of the government agent in charge of a local FBI office and without prior court approval.

  In fact, since 9/11, we’ve been spied on by surveillance cameras, eavesdropped on by government agents, had our belongings searched, our phones tapped, our mail opened, our email monitored, our opinions questioned, our purchases scrutinized (under the USA Patriot Act, banks are required to analyze your transactions for any patterns that raise suspicion and to see if you are connected to any objectionable people), and our activities watched.

  We’re also being subjected to invasive patdowns and whole-body scans of our persons and seizures of our electronic devices in the nation’s airports. We can’t even purchase certain cold medicines at the pharmacy anymore without it being reported to the government and our names being placed on a watch list.

  In this way, “we the people” continue to be terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance by a government that cares nothing for our lives or our liberties.

  The bogeyman’s names and faces have changed over time (terrorism, the war on drugs, illegal immigration, a viral pandemic, and more to come), but the end result remains the same: in the so-called name of national security, the Constitution has been steadily chipped away at, undermined, eroded, whittled down, and generally discarded with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts.

  A recitation of the Bill of Rights—set against a backdrop of government surveillance, militarized police, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, eminent domain, overcriminalization, armed surveillance drones, whole body scanners, stop and frisk searches, vaccine mandates, lockdowns, and the like (all sanctioned by Congress, the White House, and the courts)—would understandably sound more like a eulogy to freedoms lost than an affirmation of rights we truly possess.

  What we are left with today is but a shadow of the robust document adopted more than two centuries ago. Sadly, most of the damage has been inflicted upon the Bill of Rights.

  Here is what it means to live under the Constitution, with the nation still suffering blowback from the permanent state of emergency brought about by 9/11 and COVID-19.

  The First Amendment is supposed to protect the freedom to speak your mind, assemble and protest nonviolently without being bridled by the government. It also protects the freedom of the media, as well as the right to worship and pray without interference. In other words, Americans should not be silenced by the government. To the founders, all of America was a free speech zone.

  Despite the clear protections found in the First Amendment, the freedoms described therein are under constant assault. Increasingly, Americans are being persecuted for exercising their First Amendment rights and speaking out against government corruption. Activists are being arrested and charged for daring to film police officers engaged in harassment or abusive practices. Journalists are being prosecuted for reporting on whistleblowers. States are passing legislation to muzzle reporting on cruel and abusive corporate practices. Religious ministries are being fined for attempting to feed and house the homeless. Protesters are being tear-gassed, beaten, arrested and forced into “free speech zones.” And under the guise of “government speech,” the courts have reasoned that the government can discriminate freely against any First Amendment activity that takes place within a so-called government forum.

  The Second Amendment was intended to guarantee “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” Essentially, this amendment was intended to give the citizenry the means to resist tyrannical government. Yet while gun ownership has been recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court as an individual citizen right, Americans remain powerless to defend themselves against red flag gun laws, militarized police, SWAT team raids, and government agencies armed to the teeth with military weapons better suited to the battlefield.

  The Third Amendment reinforces the principle that civilian-elected officials are superior to the military by prohibiting the military from entering any citizen’s home without “the consent of the owner.” With the police increasingly training like the military, acting like the military, and posing as military forces—complete with heavily armed SWAT teams, military weapons, assault vehicles, etc.—it is clear that we now have what the founders feared most—a standing army on American soil.

  The Fourth Amendment prohibits government agents from conducting surveillance on you or touching you or encroaching on your private property unless they have evidence that you’re up to something criminal. In other words, the Fourth Amendment ensures privacy and bodily integrity. Unfortunately, the Fourth Amendment has suffered the greatest damage in recent years and has been all but eviscerated by an unwarranted expansion of governmental police powers that include strip searches and even anal and vaginal searches of citizens, surveillance (corporate and otherwise), and intrusions justified in the name of fighting terrorism, as well as the outsourcing of otherwise illegal activities to private contractors.

  The Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment work in tandem. These amendments supposedly ensure that you are innocent until proven guilty, and government authorities cannot deprive you of your life, your liberty or your property without the right to an attorney and a fair trial before a civilian judge. However, in the new suspect society in which we live, where surveillance is the norm, these fundamental principles have been upended. Certainly, if the government can arbitrarily freeze, seize or lay claim to your property (money, land or possessions) under government asset forfeiture schemes, you have no true rights.

  The Seventh Amendment guarantees citizens the right to a jury trial. Yet when the populace has no idea of what’s in the Constitution—civic education has virtually disappeared from most school curriculums—that inevitably translates to an ignorant jury incapable of distinguishing justice and the law from their own preconceived notions and fears. However, as a growing number of citizens are coming to realize, the power of the jury to nullify the government’s actions—and thereby help balance the scales of justice—is not to be underestimated. Jury nullification reminds the government that “we the people” retain the power to ultimately determine what laws are just.

  The Eighth Amendment is similar to the Sixth in that it is supposed to protect the rights of the accused and forbid the use of cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Supreme Court’s determination that what constitutes “cruel and unusual” should be dependent on the “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” leaves us with little protection in the face of a society lacking in morals altogether.

  The Ninth Amendment provides that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution are nonetheless retained by the people. Popular sovereignty—the belief that the power to govern flows upward from the people rather than downward from the rulers—is clearly evident in this amendment. However, it has since been turned on its head by a centralized federal government that sees itself as supreme and which continues to pass more and more laws that restrict our freedoms under the pretext that it has an “important government interest” in doing so.

  As for the Tenth Amendment’s reminder that the people and the states retain every authority that is not otherwise mentioned in the Constitution, that assurance of a system of government in which power is divided among local, state and national entities has long since been rendered moot by the centralized Washington, DC, power elite—the president, Congress and the courts.

  Thus, if there is any sense to be made from this recitation of freedoms lost, it is simply this: our individual freedoms have been eviscerated so that the government’s powers could be expanded.

  It was no idle happenstance that the Constitution, which was adopted 236 years ago on Sept. 17, 1787, opens with these three powerful words: “We the people.” As the Preamble proclaims:

  We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.

  In other words, it’s our job to make the government play by the rules of the Constitution.

  We are supposed to be the masters and they—the government and its agents—are the servants.

  We the American people—the citizenry—are supposed to be the arbiters and ultimate guardians of America’s welfare, defense, liberty, laws and prosperity.

  Still, it’s hard to be a good citizen if you don’t know anything about your rights or how the government is supposed to operate.

  As the National Review rightly asks, “How can Americans possibly make intelligent and informed political choices if they don’t understand the fundamental structure of their government? American citizens have the right to self-government, but it seems that we increasingly lack the capacity for it.”

  Americans are constitutionally illiterate.

  Most citizens have little, if any, knowledge about their basic rights. And our educational system does a poor job of teaching the basic freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

  Teachers and school administrators do not fare much better. A study conducted by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis found that one educator in five was unable to name any of the freedoms in the First Amendment.

  Government leaders and politicians are also ill-informed. Although they take an oath to uphold, support and defend the Constitution against “enemies foreign and domestic,” their lack of education about our fundamental rights often causes them to be enemies of the Bill of Rights.

  So what’s the solution?

  Thomas Jefferson recognized that a citizenry educated on “their rights, interests, and duties”  is the only real assurance that freedom will survive.

  From the President on down, anyone taking public office should have a working knowledge of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and should be held accountable for upholding their precepts. One way to ensure this would be to require government leaders to take a course on the Constitution and pass a thorough examination thereof before being allowed to take office.

  Some critics are advocating that students pass the United States citizenship exam in order to graduate from high school. Others recommend that it must be a prerequisite for attending college. I’d go so far as to argue that students should have to pass the citizenship exam before graduating from grade school.

  Here’s an idea to get educated and take a stand for freedom: anyone who signs up to become a member of The Rutherford Institute gets a wallet-sized Bill of Rights card and a Know Your Rights card. Use this card to teach your children the freedoms found in the Bill of Rights.

  A healthy, representative government is hard work. It takes a citizenry that is informed about the issues, educated about how the government operates, and willing to do more than grouse and complain.

  As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, “we the people” have the power to make and break the government.

  The powers-that-be want us to remain divided over politics, hostile to those with whom we disagree politically, and intolerant of anyone or anything whose solutions to what ails this country differ from our own. They also want us to believe that our job as citizens begins and ends on Election Day.

  Yet there are 330 million of us in this country. Imagine what we could accomplish if we actually worked together, presented a united front, and spoke with one voice.

  Tyranny wouldn’t stand a chance.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 23:40

• Hunter Biden Sues Former Trump WH Aide Who Published Laptop Contents
  Hunter Biden Sues Former Trump WH Aide Who Published Laptop Contents

  Hunter Biden is suing a former Trump White House aide for publishing the contents of his infamous ‘laptop from hell,’ which contains all sorts of evidence against the Biden family, along with private photos, emails and text messages between the first son and his associates.

  

  Yes, the same laptop that 51 former intelligence officials said had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation,” and which Antony Blinken (then a top Biden campaign official) had a ‘central role‘ in discrediting after the New York Post reported that Hunter Biden exploited his father’s position as then-VP foer personal gain.

  According to a Wednesday night filing, Hunter Biden’s legal team is suing Garrett Ziegler, who operates the website Marco Polo.

  The 13-page lawsuit alleges that Ziegler and others violated federal and California privacy laws by “accessing, tampering with, manipulating, altering, copying and damaging computer data” gathered from Hunter Biden’s purported laptop and iPhone cloud storage without consent.

  The lawsuit details how Ziegler and unnamed defendants allegedly obtained sensitive materials by hacking into encrypted data on Hunter Biden’s devices and uploading them to Ziegler’s website, where it remains public. In the lawsuit, Hunter Biden’s lawyers assert that the defendants had refused requests to “cease their unlawful activity” and return private data belonging to the president’s son. –CBS News

  In response, Ziegler told CBS News: “I nor the nonprofit, Marco Polo, have been served with a lawsuit — but the one I read this morning out of the Central District of California should embarrass Winston & Strawn LLP. It’s not worth the paper it’s written on,” adding “Apart from the numerous state and federal laws and regulations which protect authors like me and the publishing that Marco Polo does, it’s not lost on us that Joe’s son filed this SLAPP one day after a so-called Impeachment Inquiry into his father was announced. The president’s son is a disgrace to our great nation.“

  Earlier this year, Hunter Biden sued a Delaware-based computer repairman, John Paul Mac Issac, with whom Hunter abandoned his now-infamous laptop – the contents of which have been featured in multiple Congressional hearings.

  

  Last year Mac Isaac recalled to the New York Post about how Hunter Biden arrived at his shop in Wilmington, Delaware, in April 2019.

  “I’m glad you’re still open,” Hunter Biden allegedly told him. “I just came from the cigar bar, and they told me about your shop, but I had to hurry because you close at seven.”

  “I need the data recovered off these, but they all have liquid damage and won’t turn on,” Mac Isaac recalled him saying.

  Mac Issac maintains that he obtained the information from Hunter’s laptop legally, and that Biden himself dropped it off in April 2019, never returning to claim it. In fact, says he walked into the Albuquerque FBI office, where he explained what he had, but was rebuffed by the FBI. He was told basically, get lost. This was mid-September 2019.

  Two months passed and then, out of the blue, the FBI contacted John Paul Mac Issac. Two FBI agents from the Wilmington FBI office–Joshua Williams and Mike Dzielak–came to John Paul’s business. He offered immediately to give them the hard drive, no strings attached. Agents Williams and Dzielak declined to take the device.

  Eight months later, Isaac provided a copy to then-President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who provided a copy of the hard drive to The Post.

  Last year, several FBI whistleblowers told Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) that agents investigating Hunter Biden “opened an assessment which was used by an FBI headquarters team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease,” adding that his office received “a significant number of protected communications from highly credible whistleblowers” regarding the investigation.

  Grassley added that “verified and verifiable derogatory information on Hunter Biden was falsely labeled as disinformation,” according to the Washington Examiner.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 23:20

• Rothschild Admits ESG Failure As Globalists Shift To "Inclusive Capitalism" Agenda
  Rothschild Admits ESG Failure As Globalists Shift To “Inclusive Capitalism” Agenda

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  In July of last year as the hype surrounding the covid pandemic was finally dying out I published an article about a barely publicized project called the “Council For Inclusive Capitalism.”

  The group, headed by Lynn Forester de Rothschild who now seems to be the public face of the notorious Rothschild dynasty, is the culmination of decades of various globalist agendas combined to represent the ultimate proof of “New World Order” conspiracy.

  

  Remember when people used to say that global governance by elitists was a paranoid fantasy? Well, now the plan is an openly admitted reality.

  The CIC is intimately tied to institutions like the World Economic Forum, the UN and the IMF, but it is primarily an attempt to link all these organizations more closely to the corporate world in an open display of collusion. The group pushes the spread of what they call “Stakeholder Capitalism” – The idea that international corporations have a responsibility to participate in social engineering, and that they are required (in the name of the greater good) to manipulate civilization through economic punishments and rewards.

  We witnessed this agenda in action during the covid lockdowns and the rush to enforce vaccine passports. These efforts would not have been possible without the participation of major corporate chains working hand-in-hand with national governments and the World Health Organization. Luckily, the strategy failed as local governments and the public fought back.

  We have also seen the ugliness of stakeholder capitalism in the push for ESG rating systems among major companies. Most readers are probably familiar with ESG at this point; just keep in mind that the public was oblivious to the terminology until the past 2 years. Globalists have been developing ESG rules since 2005. What is ESG?  As Klaus Schwab of the WEF notes:

  “The most important characteristic of the stakeholder model today is that the stakes of our system are now more clearly global. Economies, societies, and the environment are more closely linked to each other now than 50 years ago. The model we present here is therefore fundamentally global in nature, and the two primary stakeholders are as well.

  …What was once seen as externalities in national economic policy making and individual corporate decision making will now need to be incorporated or internalized in the operations of every government, company, community, and individual. The planet is thus the center of the global economic system, and its health should be optimized in the decisions made by all other stakeholders.”

  ESG was intended to be the tool that globalists and governments would use to force companies into the stakeholder capitalism model. It is much like the Chinese communist social credit system, but for businesses rather than individuals. The higher a company’s ESG score, the more access lending and government funding they would have (easy money). It started out in 2005 focused on climate controls (influencing corporations to accept carbon credits and taxation). But, by 2016 it became something else; ESG widely adopted woke politics including Critical Race Theory, feminism, trans ideology, various elements of Marxism, etc.

  This was the modern ESG that all of us are aware of today.  The goal was to incentivize corporations into bombarding the public with woke messaging 24/7.  Every movie, every TV show, every book, every comic, every children’s cartoon, every commercial, every product, every major social media site, every employee handbook, every social interaction would be tainted with the poison of woke propaganda.  There would be nowhere to hide, nowhere to escape the messaging.  And it worked, for a little while…

  The exposure of ESG is perhaps one of the greatest triumphs of the alternative media. It was proof that the “wokification” of our economy and society was not the result of some grassroots activist movement or the natural evolution of civilization. No, everything woke was a rigged agenda, an astroturf movement forced into existence by corporations and globalists using ESG as the vehicle.

  It is with some disappointment I’m sure that Lynn Forester de Rothschild recently admitted the defeat of ESG at the B20 Summit in India. Though, Rothschild also suggests that the goal will be to replace the term “ESG” with something else that the public is not as privy to.   In other words, the globalists have been forced to abandon ESG but will continue to look for other methods to trap companies into the far-left hive.

  It is typical for globalists to re-brand their projects whenever they get exposed as a way to throw the public off the scent. However, I don’t think this tactic is going to work anymore. Researchers are locked onto the ESG dynamic and changing the name will not help the establishment avoid scrutiny.

  Interestingly, I have noticed a dramatic shift by globalists towards a defensive posture, rather than the offensive posture they held a couple years ago. I can only conclude that something went very wrong for them during covid. They were brazen with their rhetoric in 2020, basically admitting their intentions to enforce a global authoritarian system. Now they are sheepish and much more careful in the things they say.

  To this end, most of the honest discussion on globalism is no longer found in the statements of the WEF or the halls of the Davos forums. People like Klaus Schwab are fading into the background.  The true agenda is now discussed at more obscure climate change events such as B20 in India or the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris which I covered in July. These are the events where globalists feel more free to talk about what they REALLY want.

  One interesting comment from Rothschild at B20 was her claim that Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act” is one of the best models for incentivized climate controls. This confirms what we already suspected:  The Inflation Reduction Act had nothing to do with inflation. Rather, it was a way to divert taxpayer funds into government subsidies for carbon taxation and green tech. That is to say, Rothschild and the CIC want to dictate global business and force companies to adopt ESG-like policies using trillions of dollars in climate funds ($7.5 trillion per year, to be exact).

  Look at it this way: Any company that “volunteers” to use less efficient green tech and to promote climate ideology gets access to government subsidies – they get rewarded. Any company that refuses to go along with the plan will ultimately face heavy taxation while trying to compete with their subsidized peers – They are forced out of business. This is, essentially, the early stages of a global communist/collectivist economic regime.

  And this is where we get to the crux of the issue.

  There is no “inclusive capitalism.” There is no “stakeholder capitalism.” There is no “ESG.”

  Climate change as an existential threat is a farce, just as covid was never a legitimate threat to the vast majority of people. All of these issues represent smoke and mirrors, a way to distract the populace from the root intent – To create total financial centralization in the hands of a select few elites.

  It’s not about the environment.  It’s not about public health.  It’s ALL about the economy. 

  The end game for them is to convince the public to embrace economic micromanagement.

  Once the economy is locked into an ideological prison where businesses are forced to virtue signal, once access to private trade can be denied by a handful of bureaucrats working with corporations, the establishment then has the means to dictate every other facet of society.

  Our behaviors, our beliefs, our principles, our morals; everything is up for grabs. 

  For if the oligarchy has the power to determine if you and your family eat or starve, they then have the power to make you do anything they want you to do.

  *  *  *

  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
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 22:40

• "AI Crusades Have Begun": Robo-Taxi Involved In Hammer Attack In San Fran Following 'Coning' Incidents
  “AI Crusades Have Begun”: Robo-Taxi Involved In Hammer Attack In San Fran Following ‘Coning’ Incidents

  A viral video with over a million views on X shows a person dressed in all-black striking a driverless car repeatedly with a hammer on the streets of crime-ridden San Francisco. 

  X user “(((BrokeAssStuart)))” said, “Someone seen destroying a RoboTaxi in San Francisco this weekend.” 

  Someone seen destroying a RoboTaxi in San Francisco this weekend.

  What do you think, hero or villain?

  🎥: @caterywta on IG pic.twitter.com/KTdwGKrgWF

  — (((BrokeAssStuart))) (@BrokeAssStuart) September 11, 2023

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

  They asked: “What do you think, hero or villain?” 

  Back in July, we pointed out that members of Safe Street Rebels, a group that states cars are “polluting, dangerous & murderous,” were coning driverless cars across the city, which disables the vehicle and forces it to stop. 

  Here is some of the footage of coning incidents:

  Week of Cone – Night One was a hit! Keep sending in your coning submissions 🦄 pic.twitter.com/c4KZLbFvhy

  — Safe Street Rebel (@SafeStreetRebel) July 6, 2023

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

  One X user said, “The AI crusades have begun.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 22:20

• The Death Of Informed Consent
  The Death Of Informed Consent

  Authored by Stella Paul via AmericanThinker.com,

  Here’s what never happened in the hospital during COVID:

  …a doctor sat down next to a patient and said,

  “You have a choice.  

  We can give you Remdesivir, which killed 53% of the patients in an Ebola trial.  It was so bad the trial had to be shut down.  And you’ll notice here in Remdesivir’s fact sheet, it says, ‘Not a lot of people have used Remdesivir.  Serious and unexpected side effects may happen.’  

  Or we can give you ivermectin, a safe and effective drug that’s been successfully used for decades, and send you home.  Which do you prefer?”

  The reason that conversation never happened is that it would have cost the hospital too much money.  If the hospital gave you ivermectin and sent you home, the federal government paid the hospital $3,200.  If the hospital gave you Remdesivir, the federal government paid the entire hospital bill, plus a 20% bonus.  So the hospital executives’ choice was to receive $3,200 or $500,000, which was the average hospital bill.  No contest.  Patients were going to get Remdesivir — whether they wanted it or not.

  Informed consent died a grotesque death in the hospitals during COVID, and we need an autopsy.  There was no information, and there was no consent, and without them, patients are reduced to helpless victims, exploited for corrupt financial gain and immoral experiments.

  Informed consent has been enshrined in numerous judicial rulings as the foundation of ethical medical practice and seared into the public’s conscience from the Nuremberg trials.  Seven Nazi doctors were hanged in Germany by an American military tribunal for “murders, tortures, and other atrocities committed in the name of medical science.”  Yet murders, tortures, and other atrocities are exactly what was committed by medical staff in the hospitals against thousands of Americans during COVID.

  Take, for example, Ray Lamar, who arrived in the emergency room with a message written with a black sharpie pen on his arm: “NO VENT NO REMDESIVIR.”  On his other arm, he wrote the same message and added his wife’s name and phone number.  Yet the doctors gave him Remdesivir anyway, without ever informing him.  His widow Patti told me she constantly wonders what she could have done to save him.

  

  Image via Patti Lamar.

  Christine Johnson told the doctors that she discussed all her medications with her daughter, who is a nurse, and she concluded that she didn’t want Remdesivir.  It didn’t matter.  Christine was given Remdesivir while she was sleeping, and now her daughter Michelle doesn’t have her mother.

  Rebecca Stevens was an avid reader of Epoch Times, where she learned about Remdesivir’s dangers.  She declined Remdesivir on five separate occasions, as her hospital records confirm.  But the medical staff didn’t care what Rebecca wanted.  She was given Remdesivir without her knowledge, and now Rebecca’s five grandsons are bereft.

  I asked Michael Hamilton how it’s possible to give Remdesivir to patients without them knowing.  Hamilton is a lawyer for several families who are suing California hospitals for the murder of their loved ones, and he’s heard thousands of victims’ stories. 

   “They would lie right to your face,” he said.  

  “You’d tell the nurse that you didn’t want Remdesivir and she’d say, ‘Fine.  But you’re a bit dehydrated, so let’s get some fluids in you.’  And she’d hook up the IV, but it wasn’t fluids.  It was Remdesivir.”

  Hamilton told me that another favored tactic was to knock out patients with sedatives like morphine and fentanyl.  While they lay there in a stupor, they were injected with Remdesivir.

  If secret injections of Remdesivir weren’t enough to kill you, the hospitals had more torture lined up.  After all, the federal government paid hospitals a big bonus to ventilate patients — so patients were going to get ventilated, whether they wanted to or not.  A lot of patients turned down being vented, because the whole process is a nightmare.  You’re painfully intubated, rendered unable to talk; your lungs start shredding, and you may acquire bacterial pneumonia, which the hospital will refuse to treat.

  But “no” is not an acceptable answer when the hospital has money at stake.  The medical staff’s preferred method for gaining “consent” was relentless bullying, screaming, coercion, and threats until the patient finally caved.  Patti Lamar, Ray’s widow, told me that when she refused to let them ventilate her husband, the doctors screamed at her over and over, “You’re killing him!  You’re killing him!  You’re killing him!”  When she couldn’t take it anymore, she reluctantly gave in.  Ray died shortly thereafter, and Patti lives with the trauma of that moment.

  

  Image via Dayna Stevens.

  Michael Hamilton told me the fate of his friend who was a nurse, hospitalized in the place where she had worked for 26 years.  When she refused ventilation, the doctor shrieked,

  “You’re refusing medical advice!  Now your insurance company won’t pay your hospital bill when you die!  Do you want to bankrupt your family?  Do you?  Do you?”  The nurse panicked, and to protect her family, she “consented.”  

  Two days later, she died.

  “This was a very common technique,” Hamilton said.  

  “I’ve heard it hundreds of times.  You tell the patient that unless they do what the doctor says, they’ll bankrupt their family because insurance won’t pay the hospital bills.  Nobody wants to do that to their family.”  

  Does this sound like informed consent to you?  It sounds more like medical battery to me.

  The entire hospital environment was a hellscape of abuse in which informed consent wasn’t even a distant memory.  Hamilton told me that patients were routinely denied all access to food and water, stupefied with 50 medications that included drugs contraindicated for each other, tortured with oxygen machines set at such high levels that they couldn’t breathe, and zip-tied to the bed till their wrists bled and their hands turned black.  His stories align with 1,000 collected testimonies of the COVID-19 Human Betrayal Memory Project, which documents the victims’ fates.

  The ultimate denial of informed consent was the hospitals’ refusal to allow the patients to leave. 

  “Patients lost all rights when they went in the hospital,” Senator Ron Johnson told Patty Myers in her documentary, Making A Killing.  

  “They became prisoners.”  

  A cottage industry of hospital rescues cropped up, as desperate family members hired lawyers to try to spring their loved ones out of hospital “care.”  Ralph Lorigo, a lawyer in Buffalo, told me that in every case when he succeeded in getting a patient’s case before a judge and the judge ruled in the family’s favor, the patient went home and survived.  In all cases where the judge refused to hear the case or ruled against the family, the patient died.

  

  Every American is a sovereign individual with inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a sack of meat to be treated as a profit opportunity.  Informed consent must be revived from the grave if Americans are to have a fighting chance against powerful financial interests allied against them.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 22:00

• Will Hurricane Lee Have A 'Maine Event'? 
  Will Hurricane Lee Have A ‘Maine Event’? 

  Hurricane Lee remained a Category 3 storm on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. Lee is “beginning its northward turn” with potential landfall impacts as soon as Friday night across New England or Nova Scotia, the National Hurricane Center said Wednesday.

  “Satellite images suggest that Lee seems to be beginning its northward turn on the western side of a subtropical ridge situated over the central Atlantic,” NHC said, adding the system should “gradually increase in forward speed while moving northward on the west side of the ridge during the next couple of days, taking the core of the system to the west of Bermuda Thursday and Thursday night.”

  

  Then, on Friday, the storm’s crosshairs are focused on New England or Nova Scotia: 

  “The combination of a shortwave trough and a building ridge extending into Atlantic Canada could cause Lee to turn slightly to the left Friday night and Saturday, which will likely bring Lee close to southeastern New England before it reaches Maine and Atlantic Canada later in the weekend.”

  Spaghetti models of Lee’s path are messy, but some ask: “Will Lee have a Maine Event?” 

  Will #Lee have a Maine Event? pic.twitter.com/eRcHM22lMT

  — Mike Zaccardi, CFA, CMT 🍖 (@MikeZaccardi) September 13, 2023

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

  Local media outlet WGME 13 warned, “The significant impacts of Hurricane Lee will be felt along the immediate coastline and into Downeast Maine.” 

  WGME 13 said Maine’s largest electricity transmission and distribution utility, Central Maine Power, with over 620,000 customers and about 80% of the state’s customer base, has put line crews on standby.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 21:40

• The Reported Russian-North Korean Military Deal Is All About Geostrategic Balancing
  The Reported Russian-North Korean Military Deal Is All About Geostrategic Balancing

  Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

  Russia and North Korea’s complementary balancing acts at the global and national levels vis-a-vis China coupled with China’s reluctance to burn all bridges with the West as it begins building alternative global institutions are the real driving forces behind the first two’s reported military deal.

  

  Many observers believe that Russia and North Korea have decided to strengthen their military ties due to shared threats from the West. Reports claim that they’re exploring a swap whereby Russia would share hypersonic, nuclear, satellite, and submarine technology with North Korea in exchange for Soviet-era ammunition and artillery. The first part of this deal would balance the emerging US-South Korean-Japanese triangle while the second would keep Russia’s special operation going into next year.

  There’s likely a lot of truth to this assessment since it makes sense for them to help each other against their shared opponents in the New Cold War, but there’s more to it than just that. For starters, the preceding report about their impending swap doesn’t account for Russia’s growing edge in its “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with NATO that’s responsible for defeating Kiev’s counteroffensive. Even without North Korea’s Soviet-era supplies, Russia is still impressively holding its own against all of NATO.

  This proves that Russia’s military-industrial complex (MIC) already meets its needs in the present and beyond, thus raising the question of why Russia would countenance a military deal with North Korea in the first place, let alone such a seemingly lopsided one. A cogent explanation is that Russia’s MIC might struggle in that scenario to meet its military-technical obligations to third parties, ergo the need to purchase lower-quality supplies so that production facilities can prioritize higher-quality exports.

  Even if that’s the case, then it doesn’t answer the question of why Russia would be willing to share such potentially game-changing military technology with North Korea for these supplies instead of simply paying for them with hard currency, nor why it either can’t or won’t try to get them from China. Likewise, one might also wonder why North Korea can’t receive the aforesaid military technology from China and would have to request it from Russia as part of their reported swap.

  The answer to those three questions concerns China’s reluctance to burn all bridges with the West as well as Russia and North Korea’s shared interests in preemptively averting potentially disproportionate dependence on the People’s Republic. Beginning with the first balancing act, while President Xi arguably envisages China leading the creation of alternative global institutions as strongly suggested by his decision to skip last weekend’s G20 Summit in Delhi, he’d prefer for this to be a smooth process.

  Any abrupt bifurcation/”decoupling” would destabilize the global economy and therefore sabotage his country’s export-driven growth, but the US might force this scenario in response to China’s large-scale arming of Russia and/or transfer of game-changing military technology to North Korea. For that reason, President Xi likely wouldn’t agree to either of those two deals except if they were urgently required to prevent their defeat by the West, but neither is facing that threat so China won’t risk the consequences.

  As for the second part of this balancing act, even if President Xi offered to meet Russia’s and North Korea’s military needs, those two would still probably prefer to rely on one another for them instead of China in order to not become disproportionately dependent on the People’s Republic. Both regard that country as one of the top strategic partners anywhere in the world, but each would feel uncomfortable if they entered into relationship where Beijing plays too big of a role in ensuring their national security.

  From Russia’s perspective, it’s a matter of principle to never become disproportionately dependent on any given partner since such ties could curtail the Kremlin’s foreign policy sovereignty even if its counterpart doesn’t have any nefarious intent. In the Chinese context, relations of that nature might make some policymakers less interested in maintaining their country’s balancing act between China and India, thus leading to them subconsciously favoring Beijing and pushing Delhi closer to Washington.

  Should that happen, then the global systemic transition to multipolarity would revert back towards bipolarity (or rather bi-multipolarity) as Russia turbocharges China’s superpower trajectory in parallel with India helping the US retain its declining hegemony. The result would be that only those two superpowers would enjoy genuine sovereignty while everyone else’s would be greatly limited by the natural dynamics of their competition. Russia obviously wants to avoid this scenario at all costs.

  Unlike Russia’s global interests, North Korea’s are purely national, but they’re still complementary to Moscow’s. Pyongyang had been disproportionately dependent on Beijing since the end of the Old Cold War after the USSR collapsed, but China later leveraged this relationship to expand ties with the West by approving UNSC sanctions against North Korea. Russia did the same for identical reasons, but North Korea wasn’t dependent on Russia so Pyongyang didn’t hold a grudge against Moscow like it did Beijing.

  It was this growing distrust of China that inspired Kim Jong Un to seriously explore Trump’s ultimately unsuccessful de-nuclearization proposal in order to rebalance his country’s relations with the People’s Republic. The same motivation was why Myanmar agreed to a rapprochement with the US under Obama that also ultimately failed. Both countries felt that their disproportionate dependence on China was disadvantageous and accordingly sought to rectify it by rebalancing ties with the US.

  Since the American dimension of their balancing acts didn’t bear any fruit and is no longer viable, each is now looking towards Russia to play that same role in helping them relieve their disproportionate dependence on China. Russian-Myanmarese relations were explained here while Russian-North Korean ones will now be elaborated on a bit more. From Pyongyang’s perspective, even if Beijing gave it game-changing military technology, this could always be cut off one day if China reached a deal with the US.

  In fact, China probably wouldn’t consider giving North Korea such technology anyhow since that could make it more difficult for Beijing to ever leverage its influence over Pyongyang again in pursuit of such a deal with Washington, thus limiting China’s own foreign policy sovereignty. The likelihood of Russia reaching a major deal with the US anytime soon is close to nil after all that’s unfolded over the past 18 months, so North Korea believes that Russia will be a much more reliable long-term military partner.

  Russia and North Korea’s complementary balancing acts at the global and national levels vis-a-vis China coupled with China’s reluctance to burn all bridges with the West as it begins building alternative global institutions are the real driving forces behind the first two’s reported military deal.

  This grand strategic insight enables one to better understand the true state of relations between these countries and therefore helps objective observers produce more accurate analyses about them going forward.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 21:20

• "Resign Today": Maryland Republicans Voice Outrage Over Superintendent's Education Scandal
  “Resign Today”: Maryland Republicans Voice Outrage Over Superintendent’s Education Scandal

  Last weekend, Fox45 News’ Project Baltimore asked Maryland Governor Wes Moore about the massive grade scandal and alleged cover-up in Baltimore City Public Schools, which ranks as the country’s fourth most funded school system. Moore went on to say that he has transparency concerns about Maryland State Superintendent Mohammed Choudhury over an encrypted messaging app to do official state business. 

  “I want transparency, I want accountability, and I want a superintendent that believes in it and can deliver it. The results we are seeing right now are not satisfactory results, and I demand better, and we need to make sure we are getting better results for our kids,” Moore said. 

  Over the weekend, @FOXBaltimore asked
  Governor Wes Moore if he supports giving Maryland
  State Superintendent of Schools Mohammed Choudhury a new contract. Here’s what Moore had to say after telling us it’s not his decision.@chrispapst https://t.co/KIZXyoazhL pic.twitter.com/39waMJPith

  — Project Baltimore (@Project_Bmore) September 12, 2023

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

  Superintendent Choudhury’s contract is set to expire in June 2024. The state board was scheduled to vote on a new contract in July but postponed it for two months due to ‘transparency issues.’ Now, the vote is set for later this month. 

  However, the odds of the top Maryland education official receiving a contract extension from the state board wanes. That’s because lead investigator journalist Chris Papst of Fox45 News reported Wednesday that calls for Choudhury’s resignation are growing: 

  “Two MD Delegates & one Senator calling on @MdPublicSchools State Superintendent to RESIGN TODAY! They cite Project Baltimore reports concerning Mohammed Choudhury using a hidden email account, deleting texts on his phone and using an encrypted messaging App for work.”

  BREAKING: Two MD Delegates & one Senator calling on @MdPublicSchools State Superintendent to RESIGN TODAY! They cite Project Baltimore reports concerning Mohammed Choudhury using a hidden email account, deleting texts on his phone and using an encrypted messaging App for work. pic.twitter.com/BxSqY6n31e

  — Chris Papst (@chrispapst) September 13, 2023

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

  Papst previously spoke to Sean Kennedy from the Maryland Public Policy Institute. Kennedy said, “I see this as an unfolding scandal where the superintendent is going to have to resign. It’s just a matter of when.”

  “There cannot continue to be scandal after scandal after scandal,” Kennedy said, adding, “The drip, drip, drip has become a downpour, and the State Board of Education is going to be forced to act.”

  Last week, Papst revealed that corruption at the Baltimore City Public Schools level extends all the way up to the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools. 

  Messages sent through an encrypted cell phone app and never meant to be seen by the public are now shedding light on what’s happening at the Maryland State Department of Education.https://t.co/VTfLOVrIFT

  — FOX Baltimore (@FOXBaltimore) September 10, 2023

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

  And earlier this year, Papst’s team released this shocking report in February: ‘Education Crisis’: 23 Baltimore City Schools Have No Students Proficient In Math. 

  This year, 23 Baltimore public schools had 0 students test at grade level in math. But the corrupt Maryland State Superintendent Mohammed Choudhury remains in charge, even though he’s been caught forging test scores and deleting incriminating messages.https://t.co/H9u6q5o0dX

  — Steve Hanke (@steve_hanke) September 11, 2023

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

  One must wonder why taxpayers aren’t more furious about the massive education scandal in a state governed by out-of-control progressives. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 21:00

• How Deep Is The Deep State?
  How Deep Is The Deep State?

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  We received some seemingly excellent news over the weekend. The appellate court of the 5th Circuit has reimposed the restrictions on the White House, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the FBI to stop bullying social media companies to censor content.

  

  This has taken place ahead of the actual trial because two judges found that the practice was so egregious that it needed to be stopped right now before more damage is done to the First Amendment.

  “The officials have engaged in a broad pressure campaign designed to coerce social-media companies into suppressing speakers, viewpoints, and content disfavored by the government,” a three-judge panel wrote in Missouri v. Biden.

  “The harms that radiate from such conduct extend far beyond just the Plaintiffs; it impacts every social-media user.”

  That’s all excellent news so far.

  But there’s a fly in this ointment.

  The lower court’s injunction included restrictions on a whole host of agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security (and its sub-unit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA), and the State Department and its relationships with other third-party agencies.

  I was personally disappointed that the initial injunction didn’t name the CIA and all of its thousands of proxies, to say nothing of the other 400-plus agencies in the administrative state of the federal government.

  What’s strange and disappointing is that the appeals court stripped all of this out of its ruling.

  It vacated the most devastating parts of the injunction, including that which hit the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department. It specifically stripped out the list of defendants.

  I’m not a lawyer or an expert in administrative law, but the decision is packed with hints and suggestions that this injunction might be mostly cosmetic. It stops the most aggressive and overt censorship but also offers a road map for how they can do this in other ways, simply by burying the mechanisms of control one layer more deeply.

  In short, the initial injunction didn’t go nearly far enough. The renewed injunction, with its careful carve-outs, is far more toothless still.

  What are the next steps? There will eventually be a trial and decision. That’s likely to be settled for the plaintiffs in some measure and will imply certain policies. That could be appealed to the Supreme Court, which might take years to unfold. In the meantime, it’s unclear as to whether and to what extent the true Deep State does face much of a restriction on its activities.

  One way that we will know could come in a matter of days.

  • If the White House appeals this injunction to the Supreme Court for an emergency ruling, it would suggest that some people at the top are very worried, even to the point of panic.

  • If they do nothing, which is very possible, it means that they can live with the current ruling. That would be a very bad sign.

  There’s very little public knowledge of the extent of the problem here. Over the weekend, at a scholars and fellows retreat for Brownstone Institute, we heard a presentation by Andrew Lowenthal, one of the journalists who was given access to the Twitter files after Elon Musk took over. Mr. Lowenthal and his colleagues found vast evidence of an extensive and complex network of censorship that reaches every part of mainstream social media: Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Pinterest, TikTok, Reddit, Wikipedia, and beyond.

  The controlling parties are the Department of Homeland Security and all of its agencies, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, all of their contractors in universities and state and local governments, media organs including The New York Times and The Washington Post, and all major technology companies, especially Google and Microsoft. Looking at what he calls the “Censorship Industrial Complex” on the screen during his presentation was truly ominous.

  Talking with Mr. Lowenthal afterward, I pointed out to him that CISA wasn’t just censoring. This agency on March 19, 2020, issued an edict to the country that defined every U.S. worker as either essential or nonessential. It created a techno-feudal structure that gave rights to the elites and those who serve them, while excluding the vast middle layer of the U.S. workforce as unessential.

  CISA issued the kind of edict that no free and civilized society would or should ever tolerate. It was incredibly egregious. And yet there has been little to no public discussion of this outrage, and hence no awareness of how this came to be. Exactly who decided to do this? What was its impetus? Keep in mind that there are deep links between CISA and Big Tech, which suggests that this central plan was hatched in cooperation with the companies that benefited from it.

  Mr. Lowenthal naively asked why the Department of Labor wasn’t consulted. I explained that the department is an old-time civilian bureaucracy packed with old-fashioned public servants with no interest in high-tech hijinx. They’re there just to assemble data. What happened in March 2020 was a coup d’état by a new generation of techno-despots from the intelligence community. They have their own agencies and methods of control—all suited toward the 21st century.

  As I further pointed out to him, this isn’t only about censorship. The censors do what they do for a bigger purpose. What they’re really seeking is complete control of society itself; that is, human beings. And they don’t just work on a national basis but an international one, which is why most countries on the planet Earth had exactly the same policies. The intelligence community that’s ruling this machinery is truly global at this point.

  In other words, this isn’t just a Censorship Industrial Complex. It’s a totalitarian hegemon that wants total control of our bodies, lives, and communities. The purpose of the censorship is to keep this from being debated and protested by the public. The censorship is bad, but its purpose points to something far worse than merely controlling the flow of information.

  And there’s another layer of control that wasn’t even on the chart: the money-laundering machinery of, for example, FTX. There’s little doubt that this crypto-exchange was set up to launder funding from venture capitalists to nonprofits and political candidates. That was the whole point. It was a ruling-class pump and dump. There’s no political or legal process ongoing that will prevent something such as this from happening again.

  It’s easy to look at such realities, realize the depth of the Deep State, and get discouraged. Sometimes, it feels as if we’re just a tiny band of writers and podcasters with zero influence or power. But Mr. Lowenthal was careful to point out that this isn’t true. The bad guys in this story feel very much outgunned and under vast pressure from all sides. They’re right now under the impression that they’re losing badly. That’s because public opinion keeps shifting in the direction of freedom and democracy and against control and compulsion from the centralized despots.

  I hope that he’s right because it’s hard to think of a struggle more important than this one.

  “There can be little doubt that man owes some of his greatest successes in the past to the fact that he has not been able to control social life,” economist F.A. Hayek wrote more than 60 years ago in “The Constitution of Liberty.”

  “His continued advance may well depend on his deliberately refraining from exercising controls which are now in his power.

  “In the past, the spontaneous forces of growth, however much restricted, could usually still assert themselves against the organized coercion of the state. With the technological means of control now at the disposal of government, it is not certain that such an assertion is still possible; at any rate, it may soon become impossible. We are not far from the point where the deliberately organized forces of society may destroy those spontaneous forces which have made advance possible.”

  We can’t have freedom and democracy with a deep state run by the intelligence community, in league with all the major universities and corporations, running our lives, elections, and communications. Something has to give. And without public understanding of the problem, there will never be a fix.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 20:40

• 30 Detainees Remain At Guantánamo
  30 Detainees Remain At Guantánamo

  In April, transfers decreased the Guantánamo prison population to 30 bringing President Joe Biden closer to his stated goal of finally closing the notorious prison camp while large obstacles persist with remaining high-profile prisoners and their cases.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As Staista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, just last week, Biden refused to approve some conditions of a plea bargain that is being brokered by lawyers of five of the 10 remaining detainees which have been charged in the military commissions system.

  Biden declined to guarantee no post-conviction solitary confinement as well as trauma care for torture victims. The potential deal would see the five defendants plead guilty to terrorism charges and serve life sentences in exchange for being spared the death penalty.

  On top of the 10 charged detainees, 16 have already been recommended for transfer, which means that they have not been charged and are no longer recommended to remain in confinement for national security reasons.

  There have already been 750 other detainees with the same fate that were transferred back to their home countries or in the case of this being deemed unsafe or not possible, a third country that accepted them.

  Detainments for these prisoners ranged from just a few years to more than two decades.

  Many men have endured torture at the hands of guards that have been extensively documented. 

  One more detainee at Guantánamo is serving a life sentence.

  Three others have been deemed unfit for release, yet have not been charged, according to The New York Times.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 20:20

• Fox Corp Sued By New York City Pension Funds, Oregon Over 2020 Election Coverage
  Fox Corp Sued By New York City Pension Funds, Oregon Over 2020 Election Coverage

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  New York City Pension Funds and Oregon have filed a lawsuit against Fox Corporation’s board related to alleged false narratives in post-2020 election coverage.

  

  The state of Oregon joined New York City Pension Funds in filing a stockholder derivative lawsuit on Tuesday against the board of Fox Corporation, the corporate parent of Fox News, accusing it of a breach of fiduciary duty by opening it up to defamation lawsuits by “peddling known falsehoods” in its post-2020 election coverage.

  The lawsuit was filed under seal in Delaware Chancery Court. In a statement Tuesday, Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum accused Fox Corporation’s board of allegedly knowingly exposing the company and its shareholders to significant risks by perpetuating allegedly false narratives about the 2020 elections for profit.

  Ms. Rosenblum claimed Fox Corporation’s board “took a massive risk in pursuing profits by perpetuating and peddling known falsehoods.

  “The directors’ choices exposed themselves and the company to liability and exposed their shareholders to significant risks,” said Ms. Rosenblum. “That is the crux of our lawsuit, and we look forward to making our case in court.”

  The corporation’s board comprises media tycoon Rupert Murdoch, the chair, and his son Lachlan Murdoch, executive chair and CEO. Other members include William Burck, Chase Carey, Anne Dias, Roland Hernandez, Jacques Nasser, and Paul Ryan.

  The Oregon attorney general is representing the Oregon Public Employee Retirement Fund (OPERF), an investor in Fox Corporation, which holds 150,146 shares of Class A stock and 76,169 shares of Class B stock, with a total approximate value of $5.2 million.

  The lawsuit stems from a joint investigation carried out by the Oregon Department of Justice and the Oregon Treasurer’s Office earlier this year, the attorney general’s office said. Her office said the joint investigation revealed that Fox Corporation’s management, acting on behalf of the company, allegedly harmed investors, including Oregon’s public employees.

  The complaint alleges that Fox Corporation’s board was fully aware that Fox News’ promotion of political narratives, irrespective of the underlying factual accuracy, created substantial exposure to defamation charges.

  “Furthermore, by pushing narratives that appealed to their audience regardless of the facts, Fox’s Board should have been especially sensitive to risks of defamation,” the attorney general’s office stated.

  “Yet, Fox’s business model is to promote false claims.“

  Tuesday’s lawsuit, which includes the New York City Pension Funds as a co-plaintiff, further alleges that Fox Corporation made no genuine efforts to monitor or mitigate the risk of defamation, setting it apart from nearly every other major media organization in the country.

  New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who oversees the pension funds, accused the Fox Corporation board of failing to ensure journalist standards.

  “Fox’s board of directors has blatantly disregarded the need for journalistic standards and failed to put safeguards in place despite having a business model that invites defamation litigation,” Mr. Lander said in a statement on Tuesday. “A lack of journalistic standards and a proper strategy to mitigate defamation has clearly harmed Fox’s reputation and threatens their bottom line and long-term profitability.”

  Treasurer Tobias Read, who is also a member of the Oregon Investment Council, said that safeguarding the retirement investments of Oregon’s public servants is of the “utmost importance.”

  “We aim to hold Fox’s board of directors, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, accountable for their decisions,” Mr. Read said. “We believe that this action is necessary in fulfilling our obligation to our beneficiaries.”

  Fox Corporation declined to comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 20:00

• Jailed Proud Boy Leader: Feds Tried To 'Coerce Me' Into Implicating Trump
  Jailed Proud Boy Leader: Feds Tried To ‘Coerce Me’ Into Implicating Trump

  Former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio said in a jailhouse interview that federal prosecutors tried to “coerce” him into implicating former President Donald Trump in the Capitol riot.

  

  “They weren’t trying to get the truth,” Tarrio told the Washginton Post. “They were trying to coerce me into signing something that’s not true.“

  Tarrio was sentenced to 22 years in prison last week by US District Judge Timothy Kelly, despite the fact that he wasn’t at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

  “I was looking and seeking what the plea offer would look like, right?” Tarrio said. “They didn’t want to give me a number. I need a number. To me, the most important thing is when I get home to my family.”

  …prosecutors asked him what role then-President Donald Trump played in getting the Proud Boys to attack the Capitol. He said the prosecutors, accompanied by FBI agents in the Miami jail where Tarrio was being held at the time, showed him messages that he exchanged with a second person, who in turn was connected to a third person who was connected to Trump. Tarrio said he told the investigators that he didn’t know the third person. He refused to name the people who prosecutors said allegedly connected him to Trump. -WaPo

  

  He also told the Post that “there was never an open-ended question after” the feds tried to get him to implicate Trump.

  Tarrio said prosecutors in Miami last fall did not ask him about Roger Stone, a longtime Trump confidant who was an acquaintance of Tarrio’s, or Ali Alexander, a promoter of the “Stop the Steal” rally. He said the federal visitors did not ask him questions about his knowledge of Jan. 6 beyond the theorized connection to Trump. “There was never an open-ended question after that,” Tarrio said.

  Prosecutors did later offer Tarrio a deal: nine to 11 years in prison if he pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy, according to court records. Tarrio declined.

  During his sentencing hearing, Judge Kelley said Tarrio was the “ultimate leader, the ultimate person who organized, who was motivated by revolutionary zeal.”

  There have been 370 individuals sentenced to prison in connection with the Capitol riot out of 1,100 people charged in the incident.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 19:40

• UAW Boss Says 'Targeted Strikes' On Standby As Talks With Automakers 'Far Apart'
  UAW Boss Says ‘Targeted Strikes’ On Standby As Talks With Automakers ‘Far Apart’

  Update (1930ET): 

  “For the first time in our history, we may strike all of the Big Three at once,” United Auto Workers boss Shawn Fain told members in a Wednesday evening Facebook Live event. 

  Fain said General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis increased their wage offers but rejected some of the union’s other demands. 

  “We do not yet have offers on the table that reflect the sacrifices and contributions our members have made to these companies.

  “To win we’re likely going to have to take action. We are preparing to strike these companies in a way they’ve never seen before.”

  He said if no deal is reached by 11:59 p.m. on Thursday, then “standup strikes” will be unleashed at different auto plants to keep the automakers guessing. “We will not strike all of our facilities at once” on Thursday,” he added. 

  Targeted strikes will help the union sidestep ‘strike pay,’ which amounts to $500 a week per member. 

  Fain said the goal of the targeted strikes is to reach a fair labor deal for members, “but if the companies continue to bargain in bad faith or continue to stall or continue to give us insulting offers, then our strike is going to continue to grow.” 

  With 24 hours left in labor talks, UAW and the automakers are still far apart. 

  *    *    * 

  Talks between United Auto Workers and Detroit’s “Big Three” automakers – General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis, appear stalled on Wednesday morning as the deadline for a new four-year labor deal with automakers quickly approaches.

  UAW boss Shawn Fain is set to speak to the 146,000 members during a Facebook Live event at 1700 ET regarding the ongoing labor negotiations with Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis. According to Bloomberg, Fain is expected to discuss a potential strike strategy.

  

  AP News reports the Facebook Live event could have the union boss shed more light on “targeted strikes at a small number of factories run by each of Detroit’s three automakers if they can’t reach contract agreements by a Thursday night deadline.” 

  Strikes at parts plants could spark production halts at multiple assembly factories. We detailed Tuesday a large enough strike could plunge Michigan’s economy into a recession. 

  Last week, automakers submitted contract offers to UAW. Fain quickly threw those in the trash, calling General Motors “insulting.” 

  Bank of America Securities warned clients a “strike is almost guaranteed” because UAW demands and automaker offers are so wide apart.  

  Nelson Lichtenstein, a history professor at the University of California Santa Barbara, told AP if UAW strikes later this week — it would be the largest in decades. 

  

  Labor actions will likely occur at part factories for pickup trucks and big SUVs, according to Marick Masters, a business professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. 

  

  “They’re trying to impose some hardship on the companies and apply an accelerating level of pressure to encourage them to make an offer which will be acceptable to the rank and file and goes further toward meeting the demands that they have on the table,” Masters said. 

  He said it would make sense for UAW to target the weakest point of the supply chains: 

  “You would go after the components that would shut down as many of those product facilities as possible.

  “The tactic would force the companies to lay off workers at assembly plants, and they would get unemployment benefits rather than money from the union strike fund.” 

  Meanwhile, pro-union President Biden and his administration appear unconcerned about imminent strike threats across America’s manufacturing automobile hub. 

  

  It appears the president likes spending time more time at his liberal white-elitest Rehoboth Beach house than actually working. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 19:30

• Growing Maze Of State And Local Laws Challenging Biden's Energy Push
  Growing Maze Of State And Local Laws Challenging Biden’s Energy Push

  Authored by Steve Miller via RealClear Wire,

  Grassroots resistance to the Biden administration’s ambitious push for a “zero-carbon” economy is coalescing in varied new state laws and local ordinances that threaten to bog down solar and wind development in a multi-front legal and regulatory war on a scale not seen before. 

  

  Until recently and with few exceptions, squabbles pitted loosely organized local residents against renewable developers, with an average of two major projects a month facing protests and legal action in mostly rural areas, according to a database of renewable rejections compiled by Robert Bryce, a former fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute. 

  But the escalation of local protests has gradually drawn more elected officials into the fray, with new laws and regulations auguring ever-varying multi-dimensional contests at the federal, state, and local levels to gain approvals, often involving international players: 

  • Laws passed in Ohio and Kansas in 2021 and 2022, respectively, give stronger input to towns and villages that are often the target of well-heeled power companies seeking to use rural land to construct large-scale renewable energy projects. 

  • In Michigan, a group called Michigan Citizens for the Protection of Farmland plans a ballot proposal that would ban large-scale solar farms on agriculturally zoned land across the state, combating a strong renewable lobby in the Democrat-controlled state. 

  • In Maine, lawmakers heeded the formidable fishing lobby and passed a law in 2021 banning wind farms in state waters off the coast. 

  • In the crucial early primary state of Iowa, where farming interests are powerful, opponents are pursuing legislation halting solar plants on land suitable for agriculture within 150 feet of a neighboring property. The bill was introduced earlier this year but did not move past subcommittee approval. 

  Meanwhile, lawmakers in 12 states, including Republican strongholds Florida and Iowa, have passed measures that limit or remove local control of renewable projects, handing more authority to the state. 

  “States get to set their own energy policy,” James Coleman, a law professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, told RealClearInvestigations. “For example, New York has left a lot of money on the table with natural gas because it doesn’t like fracking, and the federal government has allowed that.” 

  “We need to replace all fossil fuels plants with renewables … so my suggestion is that we need some kind of federal intervention for that,” said Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. “I think it is possible given the magnitude of the need.” 

  There’s little question that states and towns are chafing at the rush to development and full deployment of wind and solar. 

  “Our county is under assault,” Bill Hicks, a resident of Franklin County, population 10,000, in east Texas, said at a March hearing in Austin for a proposed legislative measure that would give more power to Texas landowners who resist renewable energy developers. 

  Hicks noted six pending solar plants, adding: “Folks, one of them is 5,000 acres and stretches for nine miles along a highway.” 

  Opponents of the Texas bill represented interests from as far away as Norway and Spain, with billions of dollars in revenue and investments from multi-national corporations. 

  “This is an anti-renewable energy bill,” one opponent, Jeff Clark, president of the Advanced Power Alliance, an advocacy group for an international consortium of renewable producers, said in written testimony. “Senate Bill 624 is designed to stop renewable energy development … everywhere in Texas.” 

  Conflicts over renewable source placement from Vermont to Nevada have put locals at odds with the Biden administration’s dream of a carbon-free electric sector by 2035 to combat a “climate crisis” that it claims is driven by fossil fuels. 

  Regulations on renewable plant siting vary widely by state, ranging from a hybrid of local and state authority to outright local or state control. State approval is required of most any energy project, be it oil, gas, wind, or solar. Some states require additional scrutiny of projects over a specified size, while others apply uniform standards regardless of scope. 

  While 31 states have adopted requirements that a percentage of electricity come from renewable sources in the future, where the plants for this electric generation are situated largely rests with private developers, noted Gerrard of Columbia University. 

  “They will decide where to buy and rent the land and where it will work the best,” Gerrard said. “Private developers are very good at that, and it is subject to government approval.” 

  Opposition has a strong element of so-called NIMBY-ism, an acronym for “not in my backyard,” and both sides have turned to the courts on some occasions, with mixed results. 

  Local opponents cite some of the same arguments used against the oil industry for decades: Development means the potential loss of farmland, the impact of developing roads and infrastructure on the environment, and water runoff that endangers the water supply. 

  “A big part of this tears communities apart,” said Jack Van Kley, a Columbus, Ohio-based attorney who has represented groups of residents opposing solar and wind developments. “It becomes a green energy civil war in some places.” 

  With the heft of state law giving these citizens broader say in locating projects on large tracts of wilderness or farmland, energy companies will have to be more diligent when selecting locations. 

  The corporations say large tracts are ideal for siting solar and wind farms close to transmission conveyances, and therefore more profitable. 

  “They also want an area with flat ground, which often means farm ground,” said Van Kley, the Ohio lawyer, whose clients are mostly farmers. 

  Connie Ehrlich has staved off solar development in Pulaski County, Indiana, for three years with a tenacious fight that has included lawsuits, social media blitzes, and overtures to state leaders for help. 

  But Indiana’s political leadership has not cooperated. “They’re all in on solar,” she said, including the state’s Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb, who joined executives from Israeli-owned Doral Renewables at a solar plant groundbreaking last year in Pulaski County. Even the Indiana Farm Bureau, which is supposed to represent farmers in such situations, “has been a real disappointment,” Ehrlich said. “They have been more involved with solar developers than us, hosting events with them. It will cost them membership.” 

  In the state legislature, Indiana Republicans proposed taxpayer-funded payouts to municipalities that allow solar and wind farms. But residents are outspoken against them: “This bill would take our own Indiana taxpayer dollars and offer them back to us as a bribe,” Judith Noll, a resident of rural Whitley County, told legislators during a hearing on the measure. 

  Indiana Farm Bureau President Randy Kron and Vice President Kendell Culp – also a state representative whose political donors include out-of-state solar industry entities – did not respond to interview requests. 

  Utility siting, be it for fossil fuels or renewable energy, is a political art with huge stakes that has yet to be perfected. 

  The issue has been studied for decades, starting with the designation of land for oil and gas exploration, and is decried for the alleged potential of groundwater pollution. Nuclear facilities are disparaged for the possibility of meltdowns and leaks. 

  Today, objectors look at renewables as a danger to the environment from consuming valuable agricultural or recreational land. Solar developers have flocked to the hinterlands of Nevada, with flat tracts of sunny land viewed as the perfect landscape for vast panel arrays. 

  The area is even more attractive because most of it is federal property, controlled now by an administration foisting billion-dollar breaks on the renewables industry. In July, Warren Buffet’s NV Energy bought 7,200 desert acres from the feds for $82 million in an auction. The land, set to be covered with solar panels, is close to the town of Beatty, Nevada, which leverages its proximity to Death Valley National Park as a recreation and tourism draw. 

  The town’s leaders fear that even though Beatty has so far managed to stave off largescale solar development, the new land deal 11 miles south is a dark portent. 

  “When NextEra Energy came to the town and wanted to put a facility in, they asked us, ‘What do you want?’” said Erika Gerling, who chairs the Beatty Town Advisory Board. “They offered to build some big fancy visitor center thing, but we don’t want any of that. We want to have our own economy.” NextEra wanted to build a 3,000-acre solar plant that would go right up to the entrance to Death Valley, on a scenic desert-scape that defines the region’s stark natural beauty. 

  To fight large corporate interests, “people have to stand up and be strong and be outraged,” said Gerling, who has been pleased by the support of two Democratic state senators, Jacky Rosen and Catherine Cortez Masto. “It’s one thing if I write a letter for the advisory board but another when 100 citizens from the town come out to talk about it.”  

  Several of the major renewable corporations, including NextEra and Invenergy, did not respond to requests to speak about their siting policies.  

  Several communities in Michigan have passed moratoriums on solar development, some under a 1974 law that allowed farmland to be protected by the state for a specified period ranging up to 90 years. But Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer ordered the statute amended in 2019, allowing solar panels to be placed on the protected land. A spokeswoman for the state of Michigan did not respond to emailed questions on the Democratic governor’s action. 

  Her order rankles some members of the state’s farming community, who are working on a ballot proposal to protect farmland. 

  “Making sure these renewable projects are done right is about protecting the country, and at the end of the day we have to protect our farmland,” said Erin Hamilton, who is leading an effort to enforce Michigan’s protection of agricultural land. “Look at history, and any civilization that has gone under … One of the things that broke it is that they lost control of their food supply.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 19:20

• UN Agency Crowns Biden's Southern Border As 'Deadliest Migration Route Worldwide' 
  UN Agency Crowns Biden’s Southern Border As ‘Deadliest Migration Route Worldwide’ 

  President Biden and the Democrats’ radical open border policies have sparked the worst US-Mexico border crisis on record. Readers have already known this, but a new report from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) revealed the southern border is the most dangerous route in the world on record. 

  IMO documented 686 migrant deaths and disappearances across the southern border in 2022, accounting for about half of all incidents in the Americas that year. With 1,457 total migrant deaths and disappearances in the region, 2022 stands as the deadliest year since the organization started compiling data in 2014.

  

  Since President Biden took office, more than 5.8 million illegals have flooded the southern border, a number comparable to the population of Denmark. The surge in migrants can be directly linked to Democrats’ far-left open border policies. 

  AZ built a border wall out of shipping crates. TX built a floating wall in the Rio Grande.

  The Biden administration sued both states and forced them to take it down

  It’s not a border crisis, it’s a plot pic.twitter.com/JKkm856jZA

  — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) September 7, 2023

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

  “Although the data shows that deaths and disappearances in the US-Mexico border decreased by 6 percent from the previous year, the 2022 figure is likely higher than the available information suggests, due to missing official data, including information from Texas border county coroner’s offices and the Mexican search and rescue agency,” IMO said. 

  The IOM Regional Director for South America, Marcelo Pisani, called the border crisis a “grim reality.” At the same time, she said, “The impacts on the families left behind to search endlessly for a lost loved one are profound.” 

  REPORT: The Biden administration is considering, not securing the southern border, but forcing Texas to keep migrants in the state as the crisis spirals out of control in so-called “sanctuary cities.”

  Clown show 🤡

  The news comes as Democrat leaders are losing their minds over… pic.twitter.com/k1EpXnX8xC

  — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 8, 2023

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

  Recall that in Biden’s first 100 days of office, his administration used 94 executive actions on immigration, including halting the border wall construction. 

  Fast forward to the present day, the border crisis has spread to New York City. New York Mayor Eric Adams warned last week the migrant crisis will ‘destroy New York City‘ and slammed the Biden administration for doing nothing about the problem they created.

  And Democrats are turning on each other. 

  Even the liberal women on The View don’t want these migrants. 

  New York City mayor Eric Adams wants to secure the border to stop the inflow of migrants.

  The liberal women of “The View” want to deport migrants from their city.

  Adams now is announcing substantial budget cuts in New York City in response to the migrant crisis.

  In just 2… pic.twitter.com/5DAW2GsqK7

  — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 10, 2023

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

  Democrats own the border chaos spreading like a virus through US cities.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 19:00

• Marching Orders: White House Letter Tells Media To "Ramp Up Their Scrutiny" Of GOP In Response to Impeachment Inquiry
  Marching Orders: White House Letter Tells Media To “Ramp Up Their Scrutiny” Of GOP In Response to Impeachment Inquiry

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  I have previously written how the level of advocacy and bias has created a danger of a de facto state media in the United States.

  It is possible to have such a system by consent rather than coercion.

  Given that long concern, a letter drafted by the Biden White House Legal Counsel’s Office was striking in a call for major media to “ramp up their scrutiny” of House Republicans “for opening an impeachment inquiry based on lies.”

  

  The message is curious and concerning, particularly in the aggressive role being played by the White House Counsel’s office under Stuart Frank Delery.

  First, as I have previously noted, the White House is now actively involved in pushing narratives and denying factual allegations linked to the Biden corruption scandal.

  That could create Nixonian-type allegations of the abuse of office in the use of federal employees to counter impeachment efforts.

  Second, the letter was drafted by Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s Office. So White House lawyers are now enlisting the media in a counter media campaign against impeachment?

  The letter removes any pretense of separation between the Biden personal legal team and the White House Counsel’s office. Sams has been the most aggressive White House official in actively swatting down allegations of corruption as well as the President’s documents investigation.

  Third, the letter calls for the media to actively support the White House account.

  The draft of the letter is a call for what I have previously criticized as “advocacy journalism” where reporters frame stories to advance their own viewpoints or values.

  Sams wrote “[c]overing impeachment as a process story – Republicans say X, but the White House says Y – is a disservice to the American public who relies on the independent press to hold those in power accountable.” In other words, media should (and it has for years) decline to give equal attention to allegations against the Bidens and instead tell the public what the truth is.

  It is a call for media to tailor the coverage to push the position of the White House against this effort to ramp up the investigation into corruption.

  It is an approach that is already embraced by many in the media. That was evident in the meltdown of Washington Post columnist Philip Bump recently when he was confronted by countervailing evidence in the Biden scandals.

  Before storming out, Bump chastised the interviewer for not just taking his work as the “putative expert” and said that he had enough “because you don’t listen to the press. I’m sitting here and I’m telling you, you’re wrong about these things, and you don’t listen, and you continue to insist upon things that are, you know, parsing of language.”

  That appears the approach pushed by Sams, who specifically references Facebook and Fox as enemies of the truth:

  “in the modern media environment, where every day liars and hucksters peddle disinformation and lies everywhere from Facebook to Fox, process stories that fail to unpack the illegitimacy of the claims on which House Republicans are basing all their actions only serve to generate confusion, put false premises in people’s feeds, and obscure the truth.”

  The letter has an uncomfortable feeling of marching orders to the media. 

  This is a media that followed the lead of Biden associates in spreading the false story that the Hunter laptop was Russian disinformation.

  This is the media that refused to acknowledge the authenticity of the laptop until only recently — long after the presidential election.

  This was the media that only recently admitted that President Biden has been lying about denials related to his son’s influence peddling.

  Yet, the White House is now calling for the media to again circle the wagons around the President and attack the impeachment effort as it did the laptop and the corruption investigation.

  

  Once again, what is most disturbing is that the White House shows no reluctance or concern in making such an open pitch to the press. There is a sense of license in using the media as an extension of the White House press push. The fact that this is a representative of the White House counsel’s office is particularly chilling. This is not the press office but the counsel for the President calling on media to form a unified front against the Republicans and the impeachment inquiry.

  The letter is an alarming erosion of separation of the White House Counsel’s office from the Biden defense team. It also confirms an active and aggressive role of White House officials in swatting down allegations against the President. While the staff obviously is not expected to be neutral on impeachment, there is a careful line that past White House counsels have walked between fulfilling their duties to the office as opposed to the officeholder.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 18:40

• China Brings Taliban Out Of Total Isolation In Sending New Ambassador
  China Brings Taliban Out Of Total Isolation In Sending New Ambassador

  The Taliban government of Afghanistan is seeking to break loose from its isolation on the world stage, with a little help from Communist China, of all countries. 

  For the first time since the Taliban seized power in August 2021 amid the disastrous and bloody rapid American pullout, Kabul has welcomed a new Chinese ambassador to Afghanistan. 

  

  The Taliban apparently pulled out all the stops Wednesday in creating a lot of fanfare to greet Ambassador Zhao Sheng, with The Associated Press observing that his “car swept through the tree-lined driveway of the Presidential Palace escorted by a police convoy,” after which he was “greeted by uniformed troops and met top-ranking Taliban officials, including Mohammad Hassan Akhund, who heads the administration, and Foreign Affairs Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi.”

  “It is the first time since the Taliban takeover that an ambassador to Kabul has been afforded such lavish protocol,” the report noted. 

  While the vast majority of countries around the world, including the US, have not formally recognized Taliban rule, China has remained among the few that have maintained a diplomatic mission in Kabul. 

  China as the globe’s second largest economy has expressed a desire to better ties with Afghanistan, especially on a commercial and investment front, also given the potential for Belt & Road related infrastructural works. But it remains that security and terror attacks have plagued the country. 

  Attempting to put on a new positive face for the world to see of ‘responsible rule’, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid had this to say:

  “It also signals to other countries to come forward and interact with the Islamic Emirate,” said Mujahid. “We should establish good relations as a result of good interactions and, with good relations, we can solve all the problems that are in front of us or coming in the future.”

  Once upon time when the Taliban leaders used to be strictly against pictures and videos. They reformed themselves here. China’s new ambassador presented his credentials to Afghanistan’s interim Mullah Mohammad Hasan Akhund in Kabul. pic.twitter.com/PkhgaEnd57

  — Mushtaq Yusufzai (@MYusufzai) September 13, 2023

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

  Within months after the US-NATO pullout from the country, following a more than 20-year occupation, there were widespread rumors that China was eyeing moving troops into abandoned US military bases. This never materialized, but it’s likely Beijing is more interested in the central Asian country’s rare earth minerals.

  One CNN headline noted that the Taliban is sitting on at least $1 trillion worth of rare earth minerals, but extracting this in the long term amid a deteriorated security environment is quite another story. China could be positioning itself to provide the kind of technology and infrastructure needed for such future projects.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The UK's Coming Eco-Totalitarianism
  The UK’s Coming Eco-Totalitarianism

  Authored by David Craig via The Daily Sceptic,

  The Government’s plans to force Britain to achieve ‘Net Zero’ CO2 emissions by 2050 seem to be falling apart. Few people seem interested in buying expensive, range-limited electric vehicles. Even fewer want to replace their cheap efficient gas boilers with expensive and poor-performing heat pumps. Offshore windfarms were a key part of our Government’s ‘Net Zero’ decarbonisation plans, yet there were no companies bidding for the recent group of offshore windfarm contracts. And our rulers seem unable to make up their minds about which technology to choose for Britain’s new generation of SMRs (small modular nuclear reactors) even though Rolls Royce has already developed a version which can work in the hostile underwater operating environment of nuclear-powered submarines and so could be quickly and inexpensively adapted for use on dry land.

  

  However, having realised that it cannot provide sufficient electricity to power Britain as a supposed ‘renewable energy superpower’, the Government has come up with a brilliant solution – force us to use much less electricity.

  I recently wrote an article for the Daily Sceptic explaining some of the more worrying aspects of the Energy Bill currently approved by a massive majority in the Commons and likely to be enthusiastically passed with a similar massive majority in the Lords.

  In my article I quoted several sections from the Energy Bill. However, as these were written in almost incomprehensible legalese, I thought it might be useful to describe three common scenarios which will arise once the Energy Bill has become law.

  • First, there is the replacement of existing electricity and gas meters. Our electricity and gas meters have a registered lifetime of anywhere between 10 and 25 years depending on the type of meter. Once a meter’s lifetime has expired, it should be replaced. Under the terms of the Energy Bill, someone from your power supplier will have the right to enter your home to replace your current meter with a smart meter. If you refuse him entry or try to refuse having a smart meter installed, he can legally return with police back-up, force entry into your home and use what is called “reasonable force” to restrain you while he rips out your old-fashioned meter and replaces it with a smart meter. “Reasonable force” might just mean handcuffing you during the installation or could even mean detaining you in a cell at the local police station while your meters are changed.

  • Second, there is what happens when you wish to rent or sell your home or another property. It seems likely that we will be banned from renting out or selling any residential property unless it has an EPC (Energy Performance Certificate) rating of ‘C’ or above. Currently there are just over one million home sales a year in Britain. Of these home sales, around 41% have an EPC rating of ‘C’ or above. This means that under the terms of the Energy Bill, over 590,000 homes a year would have to have alterations made to improve their EPC rating before they could be rented out or sold. These alterations could range from just installing double glazing or adding a little loft or wall insulation to spending tens of thousands of pounds installing a heat pump which would include replacing all the pipes and radiators in a home and could even require ripping up carpets and floors to install underfloor heating.

  • Third, there are what are known as Energy Saving Opportunity Schemes (ESOS), where “opportunity” has a distinctly Orwellian flavour. With ever more homes having smart meters, energy suppliers will be able to identify towns, neighbourhoods, streets and even individual homes which Government ‘experts’ consider to be using too much electricity. The Energy Bill introduces ESOSs, which would give the legal right for energy inspectors to enter any home, using “reasonable force” if necessary, in order to make an energy-saving assessment and propose ways the homeowner could improve the property’s energy efficiency.

  In all three of the above three scenarios, refusal by the homeowner to comply with the Government’s requirements would be a criminal offence with penalties of fines of up to £15,000 and imprisonment of up to one year.

  That a supposedly “Conservative” Government would use its parliamentary majority to introduce such intrusive and oppressive eco-totalitarianism is something that few of us would have imagined possible.

  *  *  *

  David Craig is the author of There is No Climate Crisis, available as an e-book or paperback from Amazon.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/13/2023 – 02:00

• JFK Assassination Witness Breaks 60-Year Silence, Refutes Key Claim
  JFK Assassination Witness Breaks 60-Year Silence, Refutes Key Claim

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

  A witness to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy spoke out for the first time in 60 years and refuted a key claim regarding the 1963 incident and a “magic bullet.”

  

  Paul Landis, an 88-year-old former Secret Service agent, was just a few feet away from when President Kennedy was shot and killed in Dallas, Texas. At the time, he was assigned to protect Jackie Kennedy, the former first lady.

  Mr. Landis, in a recent interview with the New York Times, cast doubt on the government-backed Warren Commission’s finding that a “magic bullet” struck and exited the president before it struck then-Texas Gov. John Connally Jr., a theory that has been the subject of criticism for decades and has helped fuel a range alternative theories about the former president’s assassination. Officially, the U.S. government and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has maintained that a lone gunman—Lee Harvey Oswald—was the sole perpetrator.

  Based on discrepancies between things that he witnessed during the assassination and the Warren Commission’s report that investigated the president’s death, he said “I’m beginning to doubt myself” and that “now I begin to wonder.”

  In the interview with the paper, published on Sept. 9, Mr. Landis recalled hearing multiple gunshots at Dealy Plaza in Dallas as he went behind President Kennedy’s limousine, seeing the president moving forward after being shot in the head. After the assassination, Mr. Landis recalled picking up what he called a near-perfect-condition bullet from the back seat of President Kennedy’s limousine, near where the president had been sitting.

  The former agent then transported the bullet to the hospital where President Kennedy was taken and put on a stretcher to be examined. The reason why he took it is because he believed someone might pocket the bullet, which he did not describe in detail, as a keepsake.

  Mr. Landis suggested in the interview that the reason why investigators believed that the “magic bullet” struck both the former president and the Texas governor, Mr. Connally, is because the bullet that Mr. Landis discovered was later found on a stretcher belonging to Mr. Landis. It wasn’t until the NY Times interview this week that Mr. Landis confirmed that it was he who found the bullet and placed it there.

  He added that he did not believe the bullet went too deeply in President Kennedy’s back before, according to him, “popping back out” before he was removed from the limousine.

  “It was a piece of evidence that I realized right away [was] very important,” Mr. Landis told the outlet. “And I didn’t want it to disappear or get lost. So it was, ‘Paul, you’ve got to make a decision’—and I grabbed it.”

  

  After the incident, he recalled that “there was nobody there to secure the scene, and that was a big, big bother to me,” adding, “All the agents that were there were focused on the president.”

  The paper quoted him as saying that it wasn’t until 2014 that he realized that the location of the bullet’s recovery that was cited by him was different than what was cited in the Warren Commission. He then checked with several officials but received skepticism, with officials saying he filed multiple written reports himself with the Commission decades ago.

  According to the paper, Mr. Landis said he filed two separate reports with the Warren Commission and neither statement made reference to finding the near-perfect bullet or placing it on a stretcher. Instead, he reported only hearing gunshots. Mr. Landis said he was in a state of shock and hadn’t slept much when he filed the statements.

  The Warren Commission has long dismissed claims that the bullet came from President Kennedy’s stretcher.

  Explaining why he hasn’t spoken out for 60 years, the former agent said, “I didn’t want to talk about it.” He left the Secret Service months after the assassination. “I was afraid. I started to think, did I do something wrong? There was a fear that I might have done something wrong and I shouldn’t talk about it,” he said.

  Historian James Robenalt, who helped work on Mr. Landis’s forthcoming memoir, said his eyewitness account raised the possibility of there being more than one gunman.

  “If the bullet we know as the magic or pristine bullet stopped in President Kennedy’s back, it means that the central thesis of the Warren Report, the single-bullet theory, is wrong,” he told the NY Times.

  Writing for Vanity Fair, Mr. Robenbalt posited that if the “magic bullet” didn’t hit both President Kennedy and Mr. Connally, there may have been a separate shot.

  “The FBI recreation suggests that Oswald would not have had enough time to get off two separate shots so quickly as to hit Connally after wounding the president in the back,” he wrote. Mr. Oswald, according to officials, had used a bolt-action Carcano Model 38 infantry carbine.

  Referring to his memoir, meanwhile, Mr. Landis said that “there’s no goal at this point. I just think it had been long enough that I needed to tell my story.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 23:45

• Russia's Navy Port At Sevastopol On Fire After Massive Ukraine Missile Attack
  Russia’s Navy Port At Sevastopol On Fire After Massive Ukraine Missile Attack

  In the overnight and morning hours of Wednesday (local time) a major attack has ensued on Russia’s key Black Sea naval port of Sevastopol. Multiple social media videos emerged showing massive blazes at the Sevastopol shipyard, with possible deaths, and at least 24 people being reported injured. 

  Initial reporting in Reuters and CNN strongly points to a missile attack, based on statements by Sevastopol governor Mikhail Razvozhaev, who said “Our enemies attacked Sevastopol” and that “The air defense was at work.”

  #War At the Sevastopol Shipyard, 24 people were injured from the night attack of the APU, 4 of them in serious condition. pic.twitter.com/qNPvE55MBt

  — Capt(N) (@Capt_Navy) September 13, 2023

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

  The precise location of the large fire is the Kilen-Balka area of Sevastopol. Reuters reports that “A Ukrainian air attack early on Wednesday sparked a fire at the Sevastopol Shipyard in Crimea, injuring at least 24 people, the Russia-installed governor of Sevastopol, Mikhail Razvozhayev, said on the Telegram messaging app.”

  At least four of the injured have been reported as being in “serious condition”.

  

  Initial and unconfirmed social media photographs show what appears to be a direct hit on one or more military vessels docked at the naval port.

  The aftermath of the attack was captured from multiple angles, appearing to confirm significant damage to ships and port infrastructure…

  Fire in #Sevastopol Marine Plant 🔥🔥🔥 pic.twitter.com/lhPHwnOLDy

  — Aurora Borealis 🤫 (@aborealis940) September 13, 2023

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

  Open source analysts are already suggesting that at least one docked Russian submarine may have been taken out in the attack. 

  An assault of this size is indeed likely more than just the work of drones; instead Ukraine probably utilized long-range missiles supplied from Western NATO partners. 

  Appears that Ukrainian forces have successfully hit the Sevastopol Shipyard drydocks this morning, likely occupied by a Russian Kilo-class sub and Ropucha landing ship. pic.twitter.com/wNJHaVfF3t

  — OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) September 13, 2023

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

  Currently, the Biden administration is moving toward supplying Kiev with either ATACMS or GMLRS missiles. These are long-range systems and the administration was previously reluctant to supply them on fear of direct escalation with Russia. 

  Huge initial fireball captured by local residents…

  Huge explosions as a result of a presumed Ukrainian attack in Sevastopol, the HQ of the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea. Russian authorities say the Sevmorzavod shipyard has been targeted. Ships based in Sevastopol frequently fire missiles at Ukrainian cities. pic.twitter.com/dKgb0CEtLr

  — Yaroslav Trofimov (@yarotrof) September 13, 2023

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

  But this massive attack on Sevastopol seems another act of desperation. Given the failing counteroffensive, it looks like Kiev is “going big” on attacks against Russian territory, in hopes of sparking a broader conflict that draws NATO in, which Ukraine likely sees as its only hope. 

  One more item of note, presented with no commentary. On the day Elon Musk’s biography drops, amid mainstream media’s desperate spin of the SpaceX founder’s interference with Starlink in Ukraine, there was a major, global, outage of the satellite internet service…

  

  Source: DownDetector.com

  SpaceX acknowledged the Starlink outage on X at 2033ET, and then wrote at 2139ET on X that “The network issue has been fully resolved.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 23:21

• Forget The Second Home At The Lake, US Vacation Home Buyers Are Going To Mexico
  Forget The Second Home At The Lake, US Vacation Home Buyers Are Going To Mexico

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

  With the average 30-year fixed mortgage interest rate now over 7 percent and a shockingly low inventory of homes available, Americans are looking for second or vacation residences out of the country more than ever. According to a report from Coldwell Banker, 92 percent of high-net-worth Americans actively looked at real estate overseas last year and two-thirds (67 percent) of those surveyed said they already own residential property outside the United States, according to Mansion Global. So, what country is experiencing the highest rate of American home buyers? Mexico.

  

  “Buying a home is not as cheap in Mexico as it once was, but you get a lot for the money,” Certified International Property Specialist for Worth Clark Realty Daniel Seidel told The Epoch Times. A Mexican native, Mr. Seidel says there’s a lot to like about buying a second home in Mexico. “When you experience the culture, the food, the people and the fact it’s just a short plane ride away from the States, it’s a popular choice for my clients. If you live there half-time, it’s ideal. My advice is to work here, make money, go there and spend it.”

  According to a new study from online Real Estate marketplace Point2, based on 136,530 monthly searches on Google, Mexico is the most popular home-buying location, especially for men in the 35- to 44-year-old age group. But what are these buyers looking for?

  “First off, it should be a better version of the home they already live in and boast all the amenities they love or would love to have; and second, the location should be exceptional. That’s why beach and waterfront properties in countries like Mexico, Puerto Rico and Costa Rica immediately come to mind,” Andra Hopulele of Point2 said in a statement to The Epoch Times. She also mirrored Mr. Seidel’s belief that countries like Mexico are high up the wish list because of its proximity to the United States. “These locations also make sense to the American buyer because they’re closer than, say, European countries like Italy or Spain, which might be lovely to visit but are harder to access as a homebuyer.”

  In the Homes2 study, Canada was the second most popular destination for U.S. homebuyers, with monthly searches jumping 54 percent since last year’s edition. Costa Rica was third and Puerto Rico was fourth for most popular locations.

  “Locations like the ones that made the top 10 seem to have it all,” Ms. Hopulele said. “They are not home, but they are close to home; they capture home seekers’ imagination with their incredible potential for rest, relaxation, and entertainment due to their amazing climate, never-ending beaches and turquoise waters, and fascinating cultures. Best of all, these homebuying destinations often have more affordable home prices.”

  However, according to a recent report from the National Association of Realtors (NAR), foreign investors are not returning the favor, and are instead backing off from purchasing in the United States for the same reasons Americans are looking elsewhere: high prices, mortgage rates, and a lack of inventory. According to the NAR, the number of existing homes purchased by foreign buyers from April 2022 to March 2023 decreased to its lowest level since 2009. International buyers purchased $53.3 billion worth of U.S. residential properties during the period, down 9.6 percent from the previous year and the 84,600 existing homes sold was down 14 percent.

  Mr. Seidel said that while Mexico continues to top lists for U.S. buyers and expats in the country, the journey to homeownership there is challenging.

  “As a foreigner [in Mexico], it’s difficult unless you have a business in the country or a local bank relationship, but even then, I’m not sure they’d give you the loan,” he said. “It really depends on a pretty sizeable down payment, north of 40 percent. You also have to buy life insurance in case something happens to you so the bank can make sure the mortgage is paid.”

  Home2’s report stated that Canada’s increase in U.S. buyer attention reflects the “calmer and more peaceful lifestyle” in the country is becoming more appealing to American home seekers “than Mexico’s dreamy beaches and lively, vibrant culture.”

  Crime in Mexico has become a big concern for Americans looking to move or purchase property. According to a U.S. State Department advisory earlier this year, “Organized crime activity – including gun battles, murder, armed robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, forced disappearances, extortion, and sexual assault – is common along the northern border and in Ciudad Victoria.” There have also been many news reports focused on increased crime in popular tourist destinations such as Cancun and Puerto Vallarta.

  But Mr. Seidel says the benefits of moving to Mexico outweigh the crime concerns. “The hot buying areas are the beaches like Puerta Vallarta, Cabo [San Lucas] and Oaxaca. Crime in Puerta Vallarta is hit-and-miss and with the current government on the way out, crime has risen and it’s all over the place. You just have to be a little more careful. Listen, parts of London and Spain aren’t safe either,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 22:45

• CIA Bribed Analysts To Change Lab-Leak Conclusions: 'Senior-Level' Whistleblower
  CIA Bribed Analysts To Change Lab-Leak Conclusions: ‘Senior-Level’ Whistleblower

  A ‘senior-level’ CIA whistleblower has come forward to allege that the agency bribed analysts to change their opinion that Covid-19 most likely originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, according to the NY Post.

  

  The whistleblower told House committee leaders that his agency ‘ tried to pay off six analysts who found SARS-CoV-2 likely originated in a Wuhan lab if they changed their position and said the virus jumped from animals to humans,’ according to a Tuesday letter from the chairmen of two House subcommittees investigating the pandemic response and US intelligence, Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) and Mike Turner (R-OH).

  The pair have requested all documents, communications and pay info from the CIA’s Covid-19 Discovery Team by Sept. 26.

  “According to the whistleblower, at the end of its review, six of the seven members of the Team believed the intelligence and science were sufficient to make a low confidence assessment that COVID-19 originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China,” reads the letter from the House panel chairmen.

  “The seventh member of the Team, who also happened to be the most senior, was the lone officer to believe COVID-19 originated through zoonosis.

  “The whistleblower further contends that to come to the eventual public determination of uncertainty, the other six members were given a significant monetary incentive to change their position,” the letters continue, adding that the analysts were “experienced officers with significant scientific expertise.”

  Wenstrup and Turner also asked for documents and communications between the CIA and other federal agencies, including the State Department, FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Energy Department.

  In a separate letter, the House committee leaders identified former CIA Chief Operating Officer Andrew Makridis as having “played a central role” in the COVID investigation and asked him to sit for a transcribed interview. -NY Post

  In June, the US Intelligence Community declassified a 10-page report on COVID origins, in which it found “biosafety concerns” and “genetic engineering” taking place in Wuhan, but that most of its “agencies assess that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically engineered.”

  As the Post points out, however, several scientists at the WIV fell ill in late 2019 with symptoms “consistent with but not diagnostic of COVID-19,” according to the intelligence report, which concluded that the CIA and another intelligence agency “remain unable to determine the precise origin of the COVID-19 pandemic, as both hypotheses rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting.”

  Pushback

  Not all former US intelligence officials agree with the declassified report – such as former DNI John Ratcliffe, who told Congress that the “lab leak theory” was the “only” credible explanation for the pandemic.

  

  “My informed assessment as a person with as much access as anyone to our government’s intelligence … has been and continues to be that a lab leak is the only explanation credibly supported by our intelligence, by science and by common sense,” he told the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic in a hearing.

  “If our intelligence and evidence supporting a lab leak was placed side by side with our intelligence and evidence pointing to a natural origins or spillover theory, the lab leak side of the ledger would be long, convincing, even overwhelming — while the spillover side would be nearly empty and tenuous,” Ratcliffe continued.

  Read the letters below:

  Sscp Hpsci Letter to CIA Re… by New York Post

  Sscp Hpsci Letter to Makrid… by New York Post

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 22:11

• Flash Mob Robberies Are Not "Just Kids From Social Media", They're Organized Crime
  Flash Mob Robberies Are Not “Just Kids From Social Media”, They’re Organized Crime

  Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

  There’s an epidemic spreading across America, and it isn’t the one the mainstream media is talking about. It’s the epidemic of flash mob robberies. This is not only causing problems due to the violence and trauma inflicted on those present during the event. It’s also driving up costs even further in a nation facing unprecedented inflation.

  According to Loss Prevention Magazine, each event costs retailers approximately $700,000 for every billion dollars in sales, and it’s happening almost daily.

  A lot of people seem to brush off flash mob robberies as a bunch of kids who got together through social media getting out of hand. But they’re symptoms of a bigger rot: organized crime and neutered criminal justice policies that are spreading across our country fast.

  What’s a flash mob robbery?

  If you haven’t heard of these, you may be wondering what a flash mob robbery is.

   A flash mob robbery is a form of organized crime that occurs when groups of people suddenly enter a store, steal as many items as possible, and vanish as quickly as they appear. For those around them, it’s often terrifying and disturbing. The schemes are usually thought out via social media and executed within a matter of minutes. The groups typically disguise themselves by wearing masks, hoodies, or gloves. Often, aggressive behavior is used and causes those who are present great distress.

  The trend began in California, but it’s important not to think, “Oh, I’m safe because I don’t live in California.” It’s beginning to spread outside of the state because of several reasons.

  1.) Nobody stops them. People in retail outlets just stand back for their own safety. (Most locations require employees to do this.)

  2.) On the off chance the criminals are caught, they’re generally released within a matter of hours because of bail reform.

  It may just be a big city problem right now, but I am certain we’ll see this spread more and more as the criminally inclined – or even younger folks in general – see others getting away with it with no consequences.

  Best Buy has previously cited organized retail crime as the reason their profits have continued to dip.

  It’s not just kids out for kicks.

  Before we start dumping on the younger generation, however, it’s important to note that, in many cases, this is organized crime. According to the GVWire:

  The flash mobs are usually organized by local people who recruit their crews and send them to steal specific merchandise requested by criminal organizations throughout the country, said Ben Dugan, president of the Coalition of Law Enforcement and Retail.

  Those who do the stealing get paid between $500 and $1,000 to take as much as they can and bring it back to organizers who ship it to other parts of the country.

  “Crew bosses organize them, they’ll give him the crowbars, and in some cases even rent them cars, or provide them with escape routes or a list of products to actually go out and steal. It looks very chaotic but it’s actually very well organized,” Dugan said.

  The flash mobs are a symptom. The organizers are the illness.

  It’s not just high-end luxury stores either.

  The Los Angeles Daily News cited a podcast when explaining the issue in a recent article.

  However, according to the National Retail Federation, high-end stores with luxury items represent the minority when it comes to targets for organized retail crime.

  “(Organized retail crime) groups also target everyday consumer goods,” David S. Johnston, vice president of asset protection and retail operations with the federation, said in a video the organization made on retail crime. “They have a preference (for) goods of lesser value with an increased resale value.”

  Some then sell the stolen merchandise to individuals or a group, called a “fence” by law enforcement, through online marketplaces, swap meets or seemingly legitimate businesses, CHP officials said. The buyers may or may not be aware the items they purchase were stolen.

  The LADN continues to explain:

  LAPD has dealt with groups of high school kids overwhelming convenience store clerks for several years, but said these flash mobs are well-planned and organized.

  “They’ve cased it out, they’ve looked at it, they get it over with quickly,” Pitcher added. “It’s different from the thrill of doing it for public consumption.”

  Organized retail crime rings target items that are difficult to track and are easily resold. Stolen items such as Tide detergent, baby formula, cosmetics, Louis Vuitton handbags and vitamins that once were hawked at flea markets or street corners are now fenced online by gangs to raise money for their activities, said Rachel Michelin president and CEO of the California Retailers Association.

  “What we are seeing is more sophistication,” Michelin said. “We see a lot more recruiting; they recruit street gangs, the homeless. They will pay them 100 bucks to go in and steal.”

  In many cases, the suspects – almost all wearing hoodies and masks – have been in and out in between two and four minutes, Pitcher said. Police are also learning most of the getaway vehicles are either rented under fictitious names, or “cold plated”, meaning they’re affixed with license plates that don’t match the vehicle’s registration, most likely because a thief has stolen a license plate off another car.

  Store security isn’t really much help, as the numbers are so overwhelming, and they are restricted by laws that don’t allow them to use force in the protection of merchandise.

  Bystanders, whether they’re store staff or shoppers, are encouraged by law enforcement and management to “be good witnesses” and not do anything to prevent the thefts.

  What can be done?

  Until these crimes are prosecuted and the organizers sniffed out, there’s little that can be done to prevent the ongoing spread of flash mob robberies. Weak policies that allow criminals to leave after being arrested with zero-dollar bail offer little in the way of deterrence.

  Mall and retail security expert David Levenberg and Ben Dugan, president of the Coalition of Law Enforcement and Retail, talked to The AP about it:

  “Crew bosses organize them. They’ll give him the crowbars, and in some cases even rent them cars, or provide them with escape routes or a list of products to actually go out and steal. It looks very chaotic, but it’s actually very well organized,” Dugan said.

  “We’re not talking about someone who needs money or needs food. These are people who go out and do this is for high profit, and for the thrill,” he said.

  In some cases, though, the thieves may be copycats rather than people working with organized networks, Levenberg said. He said the thieves may be thinking: “‘Did you see what happened in San Francisco? Let’s go to the Grove and do it.’”

  And while smash-and-grab thefts are occurring nationwide, Levenberg said cities with progressive prosecutors — like Los Angeles and San Francisco — are especially hard-hit because the punishments for perpetrators are not as harsh as in other cities.

  “The consequences are minimal, and the profits are substantial,” said Levenberg, founder of Florida-based Center Security Services.

  There’s not a lot that can be done on the personal end to prevent such crimes.

  • Retailers are advised not to put expensive goods near windows or exits and to focus employees on keeping customers safe rather than interacting with thieves.

  • The other important factors are installing district attorneys who are tough on crimes like this. These modern catch-and-release policies don’t work, and we’re seeing what happens when laws are not enforced with enough deterring factors to make people think twice.

  • The other side of the coin is that you should be careful what you buy off websites like Craigslist and Facebook Marketplace. Those bundles of laundry soap you’re getting for a dime might not be as appealing if you realize they could be stolen goods.

  If you’re present at a flash mob robbery, think carefully before engaging. Personally, I’m not putting myself or my family at risk to engage with a group of 20+ people intent on stealing someone else’s merchandise. You may feel differently, but it’s essential that you don’t put other innocent people in harm’s way to confront a group of criminals.

  *  *  *

  Daisy Luther is a coffee-swigging, adventure-seeking, globe-trotting blogger. She is the founder and publisher of three websites.  1) The Organic Prepper, which is about current events, preparedness, self-reliance, and the pursuit of liberty; 2)  The Frugalite, a website with thrifty tips and solutions to help people get a handle on their personal finances without feeling deprived; and 3) PreppersDailyNews.com, an aggregate site where you can find links to all the most important news for those who wish to be prepared. Her work is widely republished across alternative media and she has appeared in many interviews.

  Daisy is the best-selling author of 5 traditionally published books, 12 self-published books, and runs a small digital publishing company with PDF guides, printables, and courses at SelfRelianceand Survival.com You can find her on Facebook, Pinterest, Gab, MeWe, Parler, Instagram, and Twitter.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 22:05

• $1.5 Trillion Dollars Worth Of 'White Gold' Found In Supervolcano On Nevada-Oregon Border
  $1.5 Trillion Dollars Worth Of ‘White Gold’ Found In Supervolcano On Nevada-Oregon Border

  An ancient supervolcano along the Nevada-Oregon border contains what could be the world’s largest single deposit of lithium. The findings could reshape the West’s supply of the critical metal — and might even change the geopolitical game with China. 

  Researchers from Lithium Americas Corporation, GNS Science, and Oregon State University published their findings in the Journal for Science Advances on Aug. 31. They found the McDermitt Caldera, a caldera measuring 28 miles long and 22 miles wide, on the Nevada-Oregon border, contains around 20 to 40 million metric tons of lithium – a figure that would dwarf deposits in Australia and Chile.

  

  Commenting on the findings is Anouk Borst, a geologist at KU Leuven University and the Royal Museum for Central Africa in Tervuren, Belgium, who told Chemistry World that the McDermitt Caldera deposit “could change the dynamics of lithium globally, in terms of price, security of supply and geopolitics.” 

  Data from the United States Geological Survey, presented by Visual Capitalist Bruno Venditti, shows the US lags behind the world in terms of lithium production. 

  

  Even though the US has the third largest reserves. 

  

  If you can believe it, the US only has one producing lithium mine – Silver Peak – in Nevada (about halfway between Las Vegas and Carson City) – while worldwide demand is surging due to the government-forced clean energy transition. We noted in July that Exxon Mobil Corp. was in the beginning stages of possibly becoming a ‘lithium kingpin.’ 

  Thomas Benson, a geologist with Lithium Americas Corporation and co-author of the new study, expects mining operations at the McDermitt Caldera to begin in early 2026. 

  Lithium prices have been on a rollercoaster of a ride since Coivd. Battery-grade lithium carbonate prices in China (priced in dollars) were as low as $5,850 per ton in the summer of 2020 and jumped as much as 1,200% through the peak of $80,000 in early 2022. Prices have since collapsed to $30,000. 

  

  Daily Mail pointed out, “As of 2022, the average battery-grade lithium carbonate price was $37,000 per metric ton, meaning the volcano is potentially sitting on $1.48 trillion worth of the precious metal.” 

  McDermitt Caldera positions Nevada as possibly the epicenter of the ‘green energy white gold rush’ amid a massive push by the Biden administration to force people to drive electric vehicles — all because they say there’s a ‘climate emergency.’ 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 21:45

• First Case Of White Dot Syndrome Emerged After COVID-19 Vaccine And Subsequent Infection, Study Shows
  First Case Of White Dot Syndrome Emerged After COVID-19 Vaccine And Subsequent Infection, Study Shows

  Authored by Mary Gillis via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Scientists from New Zealand have uncovered the first case of a rare eye disease linked to both the COVID-19 vaccine and the virus itself, a new study published in the Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection reveals.

  

  A 28-year-old otherwise healthy patient was diagnosed with multiple evanescent white dot syndrome (MEWDS) after complaining of vision problems just two days after receiving her second dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

  The woman’s symptoms included dark blind spots, phantom light flashes, and overall decreased vision—all specific to her right eye.

  According to the study, doctors discovered that the vision in her right eye went from 20/20 to 20/50. In addition, her eye tissue was torn, optic nerves were swollen, and multiple pale-colored lesions were scattered throughout the back of her eye.

  

  After three months and without treatment, vision in her right eye returned to normal, and all other symptoms subsided.

  One year later, the woman showed similar symptoms and was once again diagnosed with MEWDS, only this time in the left eye. Symptoms emerged seven days after she tested positive for COVID-19, leading researchers to suspect a link between the two events.

  Similar to the first instance, no treatment was required, and symptoms resolved after nine months.

  What Is MEWDS?

  According to the study, MEWDS dates back to 1984 and is considered an idiopathic inflammatory disease of the outer retina that occurs spontaneously and without concrete explanation. It is thought to be an autoimmune response.

  It often occurs in young, myopic women, with a mean age of 28. However, it is also seen among people over 65.

  MEWDS patients may have flu-like early symptoms that include:

  • Visual disturbances such as flashes of light.
  • Sudden, painless decline in central acuity in one eye.
  • Partial color blindness.

  It can be bilateral in some cases.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 21:25

• USAF Shares New Images Of B-21 Raider 
  USAF Shares New Images Of B-21 Raider 

  America’s newest stealth bomber may be nearing its first test flight, with speculations suggesting it could take place as soon as December. 

  The United States Air Force has released never-before-seen angles of Northrop Grumman’s B-21 Raider ahead of the maiden flight. The first image is the stealth bomber inside the hanger, likely at the defense manufacturer’s facility in Palmdale, California. 

  

  The second image is outside of the hanger. 

  

  This is only the USAF’s second time showing off the new bomber. The first was the unveiling event in December 2022 (read: here) and early March (read: here). 

  There is still much to be learned about the B-21, but it is widely understood that it will replace the USAF’s Rockwell B-1 Lancer and B-2 bombers by the end of the decade.

  Any similarities? 

  

  Speculation mounts on when the maiden flight will occur, “Most believe December will be the first flight,” according to one X user. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 21:05

• New Civics Program Can Help Bolster American Democracy
  New Civics Program Can Help Bolster American Democracy

  Authored by Margaret Spellings via RealClear Wire,

  Proposed changes to the U.S. citizenship exam have renewed the question of how many natural-born American citizens could pass this basic civics test. The troubling answer is that one in three can’t. Healthy democracy requires not only popular participation but an understanding of who we are, where we came from, and how and why our system of government functions the way it does. 

  

  For years, I, along with other former Secretaries of Education, have called for a national renewal of civics education to provide our citizenry with the knowledge and critical thinking skills necessary to engage in our democracy in a meaningful and constructive way.  

  Unfortunately, recent educational assessment data warns that we’re moving in the wrong direction. 

  In May, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), released the “nation’s report card” for civics education. For the first time since 1998 – the year the federal government began testing eighth-grade students for civics acumen – scores declined. Nearly 80% of students, the results reveal, are not proficient in civics – a jaw-dropping statistic for anyone concerned with America’s staying power. The need for creative approaches to civics education could not be more urgent. 

  Thankfully, there’s an exciting new model for renewing interest in civics by making it fun.

  Last month, middle school students from across Texas assembled at the George W. Bush Presidential Center in Dallas hoping to stake their claim as the state’s first-ever National Civics Bee champion. These students wrote an essay about a community issue, prepared for months and were first victorious at regional competitions held this spring throughout Texas, organized by local chambers of commerce.

  These events aren’t unique to Texas. In fact, the idea to launch these competitions sprang from an innovative partnership between the Daniels Fund – a private charitable organization based in Denver, Colorado – and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation in Washington, D.C. More than 50 communities in nine states held their own National Civics Bee competition this year, and the plan is to supersize this approach to civic engagement by expanding to several more states in 2024.

  Big problems demand bold solutions, and philanthropic organizations are uniquely suited to tackle the challenge of civics education – one which government intervention risks politicizing. Voluntary associations like the partnership between the U.S. Chamber Foundation and the Daniels Fund can move swiftly to solve a community problem that benefits everyone.

  Civics can’t be an afterthought if American democracy is to endure. Hanna Skandera, president of the Daniels Fund, remarked at the recent Texas competition that “from the very beginning, the founders of our country understood that for the American form of government to thrive, its citizens would need to be informed and engaged in our processes.” No doubt. In fact, her organization and the U.S. Chamber Foundation are making a major bet that this unique approach to civics education can catch fire. But they can’t do it alone.  

  Here’s how you can help: If you’re an elected official, step up to be a judge at a local or state competition. Inspire your local chamber to host a local competition. If you’re a business, coordinate with your local chamber to help sponsor and facilitate these important events. As a parent, take a proactive role in encouraging your son or daughter to participate in next year’s competition.

  Our democracy has undergone a number of stress tests in recent years, and there will be more to come. By renewing interest in history and civics among our students, families, and businesses, we can equip all Americans with the knowledge and resources needed to bridge our divides. America’s future depends on all of us doing our part to ensure its vibrancy and endurance, and the National Civics Bee is a wonderful and worthy experiment on which to build.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 20:45

• Criminals In Washington Are Intentionally Crashing Into Vehicles To Carjack Them
  Criminals In Washington Are Intentionally Crashing Into Vehicles To Carjack Them

  Just when you thought you’d seen it all: now, criminals are intentionally wrecking vehicles in order to carjack them, according to a new report from KIRO7. 

  Bellevue Police in Washington are alerting motorists to a new carjacking tactic taking place in their jurisdiction, the article says.

  Officers responded to an attempted carjacking near the crossroads of Bel-Red Road and 156th Avenue Southeast in Bellvue, Washington, around 2:30 a.m. on a recent Friday.

  The carjacking victim had reported a minor crash with a white Kia and said that upon exiting his vehicle to assess the damage, two individuals emerged from the Kia, brandishing guns and demanding his car keys.

  

  The victim refused to hand over his keys, and the suspects fled in the Kia, the report continues. 

  Police are now warning that this event has similarities with other incidents taking place locally wherein assailants initiate minor accidents before attempting armed robbery.

  Bellevue Police, as a result, recommend staying aware of your environment and avoiding distractions like texting. They have warned residents to opt for well-lit, busy roads, particularly at night, and steer clear of isolated or dimly lit areas.

  Finally, they are telling residents to ensure their car doors are locked and windows are up, and to remain in their car if they feel endangered before calling 911. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 20:25

• Americans Are Making 'Huge Mistake' to Believe Certain 'Booming' Economy Narratives: Jamie Dimon
  Americans Are Making ‘Huge Mistake’ to Believe Certain ‘Booming’ Economy Narratives: Jamie Dimon

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

  JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon told a financial conference in New York on Monday that people who assume that the U.S. economy will continue to boom for years on the back of consumer strength are making “a huge mistake.”

  

  Mr. Dimon made the remarks at the Barclays Global Financial Services Conference on Sept. 11, at which he warned of a number of risks to the economy, including the Ukraine war, monetary tightening by the Federal Reserve, and increasing reliance on government spending.

  “To say the consumer is strong today, meaning you are going to have a booming environment for years, is a huge mistake,” he said.

  The booming economy narrative rose to prominence in recent months, driven by strong retail sales and wage growth, while recession fears have eased. But there are signs that the recent rise in consumer sentiment has been short-lived and that the economy is facing some headwinds.

  Consumer Strength Weakening?

  Consumer spending, which represents roughly 70 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, posted solid growth in July, the latest month of available data. However, economists widely expect the past year of aggressive Fed interest rate hikes to weigh more heavily on domestic demand.

  The latest data on retail sales showed that Americans spent more than expected in July, splurging on hobbies, sporting goods, and clothing, prompting economists at Goldman Sachs to raise their third-quarter gross domestic product estimate by seven-tenths of a percentage point to a 2.2 percent annualized rate.

  However, there are signs that the boom may not last as the latest consumer tracker for August from Deloitte says that financial well-being sentiment has stagnated, with the percentage of consumers worried about savings and postponing big purchases on the rise, while spending intentions “remain on a long-term downtrend.”

  A separate barometer of consumer confidence from the Conference Board found that, after a sharp uptick in July, its gauge retreated to a reading “a hair above 80—the level that historically signals a recession within the next year.”

  While financial markets have, over the summer, largely dismissed recession fears, fresh data suggests that the country may be facing a “stagnation” point.

  “A near-stalling of business activity in August raises doubts over the strength of U.S. economic growth in the third quarter,” Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said in a report that showed new orders tumbling, input cost inflation rising, and the pace of job creation slowing.

  Mr. Dimon’s remarks at Monday’s conference tapped into this sentiment, with the JPMorgan chief saying that the health of U.S. consumers and businesses was still “pretty good,” although he warned against being overconfident.

  Key concerns that he mentioned were the twin factors of central bank efforts to roll back easy money policies—which have pushed inflation to multi-decade highs—and governments “spending like drunken sailors.”

  “I think there’s a false sense of security that those two things will end up being OK. I don’t know,” he said.

  Higher Capital Requirements

  At the conference, Mr. Dimon also took aim at the higher capital requirements U.S. regulators have proposed for banks, warning that such measures could starve the economy of credit and amount to another hurdle to growth.

  “I wouldn’t be a big buyer of a bank,” he said, drawing laughter from the audience, while calling the new proposal “hugely disappointing.”

  Mr. Dimon, who heads America’s biggest lender, questioned what regulators were trying to accomplish by proposing the new rules, which would require bigger U.S. banks, with total assets of $100 billion or more, to set aside billions of dollars to bolster their ability to absorb losses when times get tough.

  “All I want is fairness, transparency, openness,” Mr. Dimon said with regards to the regulatory proposal, which would require banks with total assets of $100 billion or more to maintain an additional 2 percentage points in capital above current levels.

  The regulatory proposal has been roundly criticised by the banking industry, with Bank Policy Institute (BPI) President and CEO Greg Baer warning of “higher costs to consumers and greater instability for markets,” in a statement obtained by The Epoch Times.

  Mr. Dimon said that the new regulatory proposal would require JPMorgan to hold 30 percent more in capital than a European lender, which he said was an unfair burden on U.S. banks.

  In contrast to Mr. Dimon’s take on tougher bank capital rules, some U.S. regulators have said the proposal doesn’t go far enough.

  Minneapolis Federal Reserve President Neel Kashkari recently said he expects more government regulation of the banking sector in light of several high-profile bank failures.

  Mr. Kashkari also said that he’d like to see the proposed capital requirement rules apply to smaller institutions with less than $100 billion in total assets, though he didn’t specify what threshold he had in mind.

  At Monday’s conference, Mr. Dimon also said he believes that the Chinese market is no longer as attractive to foreign investors as it once was.

  “In terms of our own business, the risk-reward [from China], which was very good, has now become okay. The risk is bad,” he said, adding that JPMorgan has become more cautious about managing its risk.

  Caution has also entered the homebuyer market in the United States, with mortgage applications dropping last week to their lowest point since 1996.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 20:05

• Locked Items, Self-Checkouts & Disappearing Staff: Rising Theft And Slowing Sales Eat Away At Retail
  Locked Items, Self-Checkouts & Disappearing Staff: Rising Theft And Slowing Sales Eat Away At Retail

  Across the retail industry, a trend is emerging: less employees, more self-checkouts and more items locked up behind safety doors.

  The cause? Slowing sales and rising theft are eating into profits, according to the Wall Street Journal, who wrote this week that the “countermeasures” being used by retailers to fight theft and other shrink could make in-person shopping “even more miserable than it already is”.

  

  In addition to having to deal with normalized looting across the country thanks to Democratic DAs, retailers also are dealing with “the steepest annual wage growth since the 1980s,” the report says. Average wages in the sector have now risen to about $20.54 per hour, the report says.

  Remember that the next time some cashier wearing Airpods sighs when you ask them to take a stick of deodorant out of its alarmed hiding spot. 

  And so as a result, retailers have cut head cut and have not returned to their pre-pandemic staffing levels. Retail sales workers fell 12% from 2019 to 2022 and stores like Macy’s and Kohl’s have lost as many as 20% of their staff. Gap and Best Buy cut their staff by 25% and 22%, respectively. Only a handful of companies like Lululemon, Nike, T.J. Maxx and Costco have raised their employee headcounts.

  

  Lorraine Hutchinson, retail-sector equity analyst at Bank of America says that the employees that are in stores now spend their time filling online orders. 

  Shrink remains a key concern with retailers like Ulta now locking up 50% of its fragrances at stores. The practice has become so widespread that it is now a talking point on almost all retailer earnings calls. 

  David Bassuk, global leader of the retail practice at AlixPartners, commented: “Unfortunately, we’re facing a situation where shrink is a CEO topic. It used to be a store-manager topic.”

  Neil Saunders, managing director of research firm GlobalData confirmed that retailers like Dollar General are seeing poorer performance due to a lower in-store employee footprint. He said that Macy’s poor results were due to an “incredibly sloppy attitude to retail” and called their staffing a “complete breakdown”. Dollar General has said they need to “further elevate the in-store experience and better serve its customers.”

  

  Best Buy has been a positive example of the “new” retail: despite employing 35,000 fewer individuals in 2022 compared to 2019, the company has surpassed Wall Street’s revenue expectations in eight out of the last ten quarters. By emphasizing cross-training, they’ve enabled their workers to perform multiple roles, from customer service to online order processing.

  Moreover, in their recent earnings report, Best Buy indicated that automated virtual agents are handling 40% of customer inquiries without human intervention

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 19:45

• Parents Should Not Post Children's Photos Online, Warn Safety Experts
  Parents Should Not Post Children’s Photos Online, Warn Safety Experts

  Authored by Masooma Haq via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  With children spending an increasing amount of time on the internet and many uploading photos to their social media accounts, sexual predators continue to steal these images to produce child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

  Further compounding the proliferation of CSAM is the easy access to artificial intelligence (AI), and law enforcement agencies and child protective organizations are seeing a dramatic rise in AI-generated CSAM.

  Yaron Litwin is a digital safety expert and chief marketing officer at Netspark, the company behind a program called CaseScan that identifies AI-generated CSAM online, aiding law enforcement agencies in their investigations.

  Mr. Litwin told The Epoch Times he recommends that parents and teens not post photos on any public forum and that parents talk to their children about the potential dangers of revealing personal information online.

  “One of our recommendations is to be a little more cautious with images that are being posted online and really try to keep those within closed networks, where there are only people that you know,” Mr. Litwin said.

  The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry said in 2020 that on average, children ages 8 to 12 spend four to six hours a day watching or using screens, and teens spend up to 9 hours a day on their devices.

  Parents Together, a nongovernmental organization that provides news about issues affecting families, released a report in 2023 (pdf) stating that “despite the bad and worsening risks of online sexual exploitation, 97% of children use social media and the internet every day, and 1 in 5 use it ‘almost constantly.’“

  One of Netspark’s safety tools is Canopy, an AI-powered tool that gives parents control to filter out harmful sexual digital content for their minor children, said Mr. Litwin, while giving children freedom to explore the internet.

  Exploitative Content Expanding

  The amount of CSAM online has gone up exponentially since generative AI became mainstream at the start of 2023, Mr. Litwin said. The problem is serious enough that all 50 states have asked Congress to institute a commission to study the problem of AI-generated CSAM, he said.

  “There’s definitely a correlation between the increase in AI-generated CSAM and when OpenAI and DALL-E and all these generative AI-type platforms launched,” Mr. Litwin said.

  The FBI recently warned the public about the rise of AI-generated sexual abuse materials.

  “Malicious actors use content manipulation technologies and services to exploit photos and videos—typically captured from an individual’s social media account, open internet, or requested from the victim—into sexually-themed images that appear true-to-life in likeness to a victim, then circulate them on social media, public forums, or pornographic websites,” said the FBI in a recent statement.

  Mr. Litwin said that to really protect children from online predators, it is important for parents and guardians to clearly discuss the potential dangers of posting photos and talking to strangers online.

  “So just really communicating with our kids about some of these risks and explaining to them that this might happen and making sure that they’re aware,” he said.

  

  Dangers of Generative AI

  Roo Powell, founder of Safe from Online Sex Abuse (SOSA), told The Epoch Times that because predators can use the image of a fully-clothed child to create an explicit image using AI, it is best not to post any images of children online, even as toddlers, she said.

  “At SOSA, we encourage parents not to publicly share images or videos of their children in diapers or having a bath. Even though their genitals may technically be covered, perpetrators can save this content for their own gratification, or can use AI to make it explicit and then share that widely,” Ms. Powell said in an email.

  While some people say AI-generated CSAM is not as harmful as images depicting the sexual abuse of real-life children, many believe it is worse.

  AI-generated CSAM is produced much more quickly than conventional images, subsequently inundating law enforcement with even more abuse referrals, and experts in the AI and online parental control space expect the problem to only get worse.

  In other cases, the AI-generated CSAM image could be created from a photo taken of a real-life child’s social media account, which is altered to be sexually explicit and thus endangers those otherwise unvictimized children, as well as their parents.

  In worst-case scenarios, bad actors use images of real victims of child sexual abuse as a base to create computer-generated images. They can use the original photograph as an initial input, which is then altered according to prompts.

  In some cases, the photo’s subject can be made to look younger or older.

  In 2023, the Standford Internet Observatory at Stanford University in conjunction with Thorn, a nonprofit focused on technology that helps defend children from abuse, released a report titled “Generative ML and CSAM: Implications and Mitigations,” referring to generative machine learning (pdf).

  “In just the first few months of 2023, a number of advancements have greatly increased end-user control over image results and their resultant realism, to the point that some images are only distinguishable from reality if the viewer is very familiar with photography, lighting and the characteristics of diffusion model outputs,” the report states.

  Studies have shown a link between viewing CSAM and sexually abusing children in real life.

  In 2010, Canadian forensic psychologist Michael C. Seto and colleagues reviewed several studies and found that 50 to 60 percent of people who viewed CSAM admitted to abusing children themselves.

  Even if some AI-generated CSAM images are not created with the images of real children, the images fuel the growth of the child exploitation market by normalizing CSAM and feeding the appetites of those who seek to victimize children.

  Sextortion on the Rise

  Because of how realistic it is, AI-generated CSAM is facilitating a rise in cases of sextortion.

  Sextortion occurs when a predator pretends to be a young person to solicit semi- or fully-nude images from a victim and then extorts money or sexual acts from them under threat of making their images public.

  In the case of AI-generated cases, the criminal can alter the victim’s image to make it sexual.

  In one case, Mr. Litwin said a teenage weightlifting enthusiast posted a shirtless selfie that was then used by a criminal to create an AI-generated nude photo of him to extort money from the minor.

  In other cases, the perpetrator might threaten to disclose the image, damaging the minor’s reputation.  Faced with such a threat, many teens comply with the criminal’s demands or end up taking their own lives rather than risk public humiliation.

  The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) operates the CyberTipLine, where citizens can report child sexual exploitation on the internet. In 2022, the tip line received over 32 million reports of CSAM. Although some of the reports are made multiple times about a single viral child sex abuse image, that is still an 82 percent increase from 2021, or close to 87,000 reports per day.

  In December 2022, the FBI estimated 3,000 minor sextortion victims.

  “The FBI has seen a horrific increase in reports of financial sextortion schemes targeting minor boys—and the fact is that the many victims who are afraid to come forward are not even included in those numbers,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray in a 2022 statement.

  The Parents Together report further states that “recent research shows 1 in 3 children can now expect to have an unwelcome sexual experience online before they turn 18.”

  In addition, a 2022 report by Thorn (pdf) states that 1 in 6 children say they have shared explicit images of themselves online, and 1 in 4 children say the practice is normal.

  

  Using Good AI to Fight Bad AI

  Prior to the wide availability of AI, editing and generating images required skills and knowledge of image editing software programs. However, AI has made it so quick and easy that even amateur users can generate life-like images.

  Netspark is leading the fight against AI-generated CSAM with CaseScan, its own AI-powered cyber safety tool, said Mr. Litwin.

  “We definitely believe that to fight the bad AI, it’s going to come through AI for good, and that’s where we’re focused,” he said.

  Law enforcement agencies must go through massive amounts of images each day and are often unable to get through all of the CSAM reports in a timely manner, said Mr. Litwin, but this is exactly where CaseScan is able to assist investigators.

  Unless the police departments are using AI-centered solutions, police spend an extensive amount of time assessing if the child in a photo is a fake AI-generated or an actual sexual abuse victim. Even before AI-generated content, law enforcement and child safety organizations were overwhelmed by the immense volume of CSAM reports.

  Under U.S. law, AI-generated CSAM is treated the same as CSAM of real-life children, but Mr. Litwin said he does not know of any AI-generated CSAM case that has been prosecuted, so there is no precedent yet.

  “I think today it’s hard to take to court, it’s hard to create robust cases. And my guess is that that’s one reason that we’re seeing so much of it,” he said.

  To prosecute the producers of this online AI-generated CSAM, laws need to be updated to target the technologically advanced criminal activity committed by sexual predators.

  Mr. Litwin said he believes predators will always find a way to circumvent technological limits set up by safety companies because AI is constantly advancing, but Netspark is also adapting to keep up with those that create AI-generated CSAM.

  Mr. Litwin said CaseScan has enabled investigators to significantly reduce the amount time it takes to identify AI-generated CSAM and lighten the mental impact on investigators who usually must view the images.

  Tech Companies Must Do More

  Ms. Powell said social media companies need to do more in the fight against CSAM.

  “To effectively help protect kids and teens, Congress can mandate that social media platforms implement effective content moderation systems that identify cases of child abuse and exploitation and escalate those to law enforcement as needed,” she said.

  “Congress can also require all social media platforms to create parental control features to help mitigate the risk of online predation. These can include the ability for a parent user to turn off all chat/messaging features, restrict who’s following their child, and manage screen time on the app,” she added.

  In April, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced the STOP CSAM Act of 2023, which includes a provision that would change Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and allow CSAM victims to sue social media platforms that host, store, or otherwise make this illegal content available.

  “If [social media companies] don’t put sufficient safety measures in place, they should be held legally accountable,” Mr. Durbin said during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee meeting in June.

  Ms. Powell said she believes Congress has a responsibility to do more to keep children safe from abuse.

  “Laws need to keep up with the constant evolution of technology,” she said, adding that law enforcement also needs tools to help them work faster.

  Improving NCMEC

  Reps. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) and Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) recently introduced the Child Online Safety Modernization Act of 2023 to fill the gaps in how CSAM is reported, ensuring criminals can be held accountable.

  Currently, there are no requirements regarding what online platforms must include in a report to the NCMEC’s CyberTipline, often leaving the organization and law enforcement without enough information to locate and rescue the child. In 2022, that amounted to about 50 percent of reports being untraceable.

  In addition, the law does not mandate that online platforms report instances of child sex trafficking and enticement.

  According to a 2022 report by Thorn, the majority of CyberTipline reports submitted by the tech industry contained such limited information that it was impossible for NCMEC to identify where the offense took place, and therefore the organization could not notify the appropriate law enforcement agency.

  The Child Online Safety Modernization Act bolsters the NCMEC CyberTipline by 1) requiring reports from online platforms to include information to identify and locate the child depicted and disseminator of the CSAM; 2) requiring online platforms to report instances of child sex trafficking and the sexual enticement of a child; and 3) allowing NCMEC to share technical identifiers associated with CSAM to nonprofits.

  The bill also requires that the reports be preserved for an entire year, giving law enforcement the time they need to investigate the crimes.

  Stefan Turkheimer, interim vice president for public policy at RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network), said Ms. Wagner’s bill is crucial to aiding law enforcement to successfully investigate CSAM reports.

  “The Child Online Safety Modernization Act is a step towards greater cooperation between law enforcement and internet service providers that will support the efforts to investigate, identify, and locate the children depicted in child sexual abuse materials,” Turkheimer said in a recent press statement.

  Making this improvement is crucial to stopping the sexual exploitation of children, said Ms. Powell.

  “In our collaborations with law enforcement, SOSA has seen a perpetrator go from the very first message to arriving at a minor’s house for sex in under two hours. Anyone with the propensity to harm children can do so quickly and easily from anywhere in the world just through internet access,” she said.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 19:25

• 'Medicane' Breaks Dams, Floods Eastern Libya: Up to 10,000 Feared Dead
  ‘Medicane’ Breaks Dams, Floods Eastern Libya: Up to 10,000 Feared Dead

  A rare “medicane” or Mediterranean tropical-like cyclone battered Libya on Saturday, causing deadly floods in the eastern part of the country and resulting in the death of at least 2,000 people. Some estimates already suggest the death toll could jump to 10,000. 

  CNN quoted Tamer Ramadan, head of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies delegation in Libya, who stated, “Our teams on the ground are still doing their assessment, but from what we see and from the news coming to us, the death toll is huge.” 

  The devastating Medicane that hit #Libya deadly flooding, can be seen in Met-11 imagery as it made landfall, via Jochen Kerkmann #LibyaFloods pic.twitter.com/VLXFcBbd3j

  — EUMETSAT Users (@eumetsat_users) September 12, 2023

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

  The city of Derna was the most affected when two dams collapsed, flooding parts of the town. 

  🌊Devastating #floods have left more than 2,000 people ☠dead and thousands missing in 🇱🇾 #Libya after torrential 🌨#rain. The situation in Derna is catastrophic. Part of the city has been 💥wiped off the map. (Libyan press agency) #extremeweather #climate #nature #destruction pic.twitter.com/oTjgofkySg

  — Genesis Watchman Report (@ReportWatchman) September 12, 2023

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

  Othman Abduljalil, health minister in Libya’s eastern administration, told Libya’s Almasar TV that the damage in the city is “catastrophic.” 

  🔴 Flash floods in eastern #Libya killed more than 2,300 people in the Mediterranean coastal city of Derna alone, the emergency services of the #Tripoli-based government said on Tuesday. @GavinLeeNews has the latest 👇 pic.twitter.com/KcoqJe9zLB

  — FRANCE 24 English (@France24_en) September 12, 2023

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

  🚨 ATTENTION – Deadly Flooding in Derna, Libya after storm Daniel resulted in collapsing of 2 dams nearby the city 😔🙏🇱🇾

  – 2300 people confirmed dead
  – 10,000 people Missing#Libya #Flood #Derna #StormDaniel#Emergency #Fema pic.twitter.com/B3XufUJFLh

  — T R U T H P O L E (@Truthpole) September 12, 2023

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

  Abduljalil said, “The bodies are still lying on the ground in many parts. Hospitals are filled with bodies. And there are areas we have yet to reach.” 

  The devastation is as far as the eye can reach. #Derna desperately needs international assistance! Estimates are rising into the thousands of dead. #Libya pic.twitter.com/OgPrTXVmqv

  — Anas El Gomati (@AGomati) September 12, 2023

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

  Ramadan told a video news conference Tuesday that the death toll will jump:

  “We confirmed from our independent sources of information the number of missing people is hitting 10,000 persons, so far.” 

  Last week, the storm brought catastrophic flooding to Greece before developing into a medicane. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 19:05

• California Leaders' Virtue-Signaling Is Mainly Gaslighting
  California Leaders’ Virtue-Signaling Is Mainly Gaslighting

  Authored by Christian Milord via The Epoch Times,

  The Democratic Party has wielded a monopoly on power in Sacramento for some time and the results are obvious.

  One-party dominance can often lead to corruption, poor governance, and an erosion in quality of life indices.

  

  Let us count the ways how the ruling party talks a good game but delivers lousy results for Californians.

  First, Gov. Gavin Newsom played up the fact that California had a large surplus in the state coffers, but then it suddenly morphed into a $30 billion deficit.

  Did the surplus really exist? One can only wonder. Plenty of state funds were spent ineffectively during the pandemic, and tax dollars are being wasted on a high-speed rail system that will be vastly underutilized. Excessive spending is a driver of persistent inflation.

  Next, during the pandemic, several Democratic leaders, including Mr. Newsom, didn’t adhere to the edicts they forced on the public.

  Either the pandemic was more “pandemia” than pandemic, or they felt that they were superior to the masses and could flout their own mandates. Public policies inflicted colossal damage by shuttering businesses, houses of worship, and schools for many months.

  We now know that the narrative of mask, lockdown, and vaccine effectiveness was dead wrong. Primarily, folks with comorbidities and the elderly needed care and protection. The COVID narrative was merely gaslighting from a nanny state that craves ultimate power over the people it is supposed to serve.

  On Sept. 10, on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Mr. Newsom said “we’re all geniuses now” in hindsight, and “I think we would’ve done everything differently” regarding COVID. But he failed to explain why some states made better choices while California did not. How will he know which choices to make next time?

  Third, Mr. Newsom has put forth a proposal to alter the Second Amendment with a redundant 28th amendment to the Constitution.

  He claims that this new amendment would save lives by extending the age to purchase a firearm to 21, require a minimum waiting period, and improve background checks.

  

  California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a press conference in Sacramento on Feb. 1 2023. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

  This proposal likely will be a non-starter because the second amendment is time tested, and criminals don’t abide by gun laws. They either steal guns or buy them on the black market. Newsom ought to stick to crime prevention by supporting law enforcement. Once again, more gaslighting from a politician whose salary is paid with your tax dollars.

  Fourth, several state leaders have tried to force school boards to implement a distorted Marxist version of American history into the public schools.

  They have also arm-twisted school districts to add transgender concepts into the health and science curricula, all in the name of protecting children.

  This unscientific charade sows confusion among impressionable boys and girls by magnifying transgenderism and doling out diabolical advice that can cause irreversible suffering. This unscrupulous child abuse and coercion defies moral law and the biological laws of nature. Consequently, it is an example of gaslighting on steroids.

  Moreover, some politicians and school board members treat parents as lepers when they question woke policies in public schools. Free speech is criminalized while actual criminal behavior receives a wrist slap. Parents with common sense and truth on their side are treated as extreme, while Orwellian policies are normalized. With rampant absenteeism and underwater student test scores, can schools afford to waste time by force-feeding Marxist theories into vulnerable young minds?

  

  Parents in support of the Temecula Valley Unified school board’s decision to terminate the district’s superintendent amid controversy surrounding critical race theory and other school curriculum attend a board meeting in Temecula, Calif., on June 13, 2023. (Micaela Ricaforte/The Epoch Times)

  Fifth, Mr. Newsom talks a good game regarding democracy and the rule of law in California, yet at every turn he tends to undermine freedom, prosperity, and lawfulness.

  Similar to George Soros-backed district attorneys, he seems to view felonies as misdemeanors and enables homelessness. Yet he and other Democrats pretend that California doesn’t have an upsurge in crime and homeless statistics. Are they tone deaf? Denying that the state has these problems won’t make them disappear no matter how much they pass the buck. This is why so many folks are fleeing the state.

  Sixth, state leaders claim that they care about minorities, yet they pressure their allegiance through addictive government programs that discourage individual initiative.

  They also gloss over border insecurity as if it’s a figment of our imagination. Progressive mayors take pride in their “sanctuary cities” yet start whining when unlawful migrants are sent to cities like Los Angeles or San Francisco. They only change their welcome tune when unlawful immigration impacts them directly. Otherwise, it’s someone else’s problem.

  Seventh, California leaders often spout great American principles yet at the same time strive to intervene in every area of our lives.

  They initiate endless anti-religious culture wars and cry foul when called out for their absurd schemes and glaring hypocrisy. They can’t even get their own house in order, yet constantly boast to other states how great their policies are, as if Americans can’t govern themselves.

  

  California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference in Sacramento, Calif., on May 12, 2023. (Hector Amezcua/The Sacramento Bee via AP)

  Finally, these politicians speak with a forked tongue by saying one thing and doing another.

  Denying or glossing over serious economic, security, and social challenges doesn’t get the job done. Is this statesmanship? Genuine statesmen don’t recklessly spend other people’s money. They labor to prevent problems from unfolding instead of reacting when it’s too late.

  Our representatives are supposed to serve the public interest—not their own personal aggrandizement. Statesmen don’t blame others for their own self-inflicted blunders. Unfortunately, Sacramento leaders have turned gaslighting (virtue-signaling) into a fine art while Californians pay the price. To a degree, disinformation emanating from Sacramento is similar to that of the old Soviet Union under Stalin, delineated accurately in Rod Dreher’s book, “Live Not By Lies.” The Democrats should read it.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 18:45

• Renewed Forced-Labor Cloud Darkens Solar's Moment In The Las Vegas Sun
  Renewed Forced-Labor Cloud Darkens Solar’s Moment In The Las Vegas Sun

  Authored by Carrie Sheffield via RealClear Wire,

  This week nearly 27,000 clean energy professionals will descend on the Las Vegas Strip for the annual RE Plus renewable energy Conference. The event includes thousands of exhibitors and a host of presentations with a keynote from Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff. The Senator will undoubtedly tout the expansion of solar energy industry jobs in his state by Korean manufacturer Hanwha Q-Cells, while conveniently ignoring allegations of Hanwha’s deep connections to reported forced labor in the Xinjiang region in China.

  

  It’s been a little more than a year since the groundbreaking human rights law, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA), went into effect. The law created a rebuttable presumption that all goods manufactured in whole or in part in the Xinjiang region of China use forced labor and are thus not admissible into U.S. commerce. While U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the law enforcement agency tasked with enforcement of the law, has done an admirable job at detaining cargo to assess applicability of law to certain goods, the scope of enforcement is lacking and focused on a very small number of importers and ignores many more manufacturers widely known to use key materials from China that have very high risk of origin in part from Xinjiang. 

  Perhaps the most glaring omission among CBP’s UFLPA enforcement is the well-connected Hanwha Q-cells. There is very clear open source data that ties the company to the Xinjiang region of China. Despite the glaring connections to the region, Hanwha executive Vitaly Lee has repeatedly claimed the company modules are “forced labor free.”  

  Just last month, another damning report dropped from Sheffield Hellam University titled “Over-Exposed: Uyghur Region Exposure Assessment for Solar Industry Sourcing”, which found Q-Cells to have a “very high” risk of ties to forced labor in Xinjiang. Specifically, the Sheffield Report found Meike Solar Technology, a Chinese company which gets raw material from Xinjiang, reported Q-Cells as one of its largest customers in the first half of 2022, even though Q-Cells claims it cut off the supplier’s relationship in 2021. The initial Sheffield Report, In Broad Daylight, focusing on large Chinese manufacturers like Longi, Trina and JinkoSolar, appears to have influenced CBP’s targeting but it remains to be seen if this updated report will have the same effect.

  It’s difficult to ascertain whether the lack of enforcement is due to the high-profile political visits, including Vice President Kamala Harris, an upcoming visit from President Biden, and of course Senator Ossoff. Political connections, however, should never serve as a means to avoid the law or get a free pass from CBP detentions and UFLPA scrutiny. Unfortunately, the Biden administration claims it wants America to lead in “clean energy” production, but is instead blocking American producers from developing the critical, rare-earth minerals to make it happen domestically.

  Ironically, the political cover seems to be bipartisan. Another company that has escaped CBP scrutiny is Canadian Solar, while often portraying itself as Canadian the company is, in fact, wholly Chinese from its management to its manufacturing. Recently, Canadian Solar announced a $250 million 5GW solar manufacturing facility in Mesquite, Texas. This project was heralded by both Governor Greg Abbott and Senator Ted Cruz despite Canadian Solar’s ties to the Xinjiang region and potential violations of the UFLPA. The Sheffield Report determined Canadian Solar has a “high” risk of exposure to Xinjiang. 

  Fortunately, CBP’s lack of universal enforcement has not gone unnoticed by everyone in Congress. Rep. Carol Miller (R-W.Va.) at a hearing before the Ways and Means Committee called out JA Solar for attempting to avoid the UFLPA. Specifically, she noted an executive with JA Solar, another company with “very high” exposure to Xinjiang, was caught on tape discussing port-shopping as one method the company employs to avoid UFLPA detentions.  

  In a public webinar CBP’s Trade Remedy Law Enforcement Executive Director acknowledged companies were employing this exact UFLPA enforcement avoidance technique, along with changing the name of the exporting entity and several other salacious maneuvers. CBP cannot allow this type of evasion to continue, especially when Congress has appropriated more than $100 Million to enforce the UFLPA and combat forced labor globally. 

  Unfortunately, at this year’s RE Plus there will be plenty of solar companies –including the title sponsor Maxeon, another very high-risk manufacturer according to the Sheffield Hallem report – enjoying the Las Vegas sun while escaping CBP scrutiny despite serious forced labor allegations. Even in Sin City political relationships and high-profile sponsorships should not be currency to evade U.S. trade laws. CBP must work to ensure the UFLPA is implemented forcefully and equally.

  Carrie Sheffield is a senior policy analyst for the Center for the Center for Economic Opportunity at Independent Women’s Forum. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 18:05

• RFK Jr. As Third Party Candidate Will Make It Harder For Democrats To 'Cheat': Kari Lake
  RFK Jr. As Third Party Candidate Will Make It Harder For Democrats To ‘Cheat’: Kari Lake

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

  Former GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake is expecting a potential third-party candidate like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to make it harder for candidates to “cheat” in the upcoming 2024 presidential race.

  

  Her comments came following RFK Jr.’s suggestion that he may consider “other alternatives” rather than simply pursuing a Democratic nomination.

  “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is talking about running as a third party candidate,” Ms. Lake said on “The Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Show” on Sept. 9. “That’s going to make it really hard when there’s three people, three parties running in any election, whether it be the senate seat in Arizona, the presidency. It makes it a lot harder for these people to cheat because they don’t know what’s going to be on the inside of the ballot. It might be a Democrat voting, but that Democrat might be voting independent this time around to vote for RFK Jr.”

  “So, I think we’re going to see some dynamics in this election that’s going to make it harder for them to cheat and we’re going to work through the court system to also make it harder for them to cheat.”

  Mr. Kennedy had said in a Sept. 8 interview with Forbes that he may look for “alternatives” rather than solely focusing on fighting the 2024 presidential race as a Democrat.

  “It’s pretty clear that the DNC (Democratic National Committee) does not want a primary. I don’t want to say that they want a coronation, but I think that that’s a fair way to put. They’re essentially fixing up the process so that it makes it almost impossible to have democracy function. They’re effectively disenfranchising the Democratic voters from having any choice and who becomes the Democratic nominee.”

  Mr. Kennedy stated that the DNC made rules that none of the votes cast for any Democrat candidate campaigning in Iowa or New Hampshire would be tallied.

  “In other words, any delegate that I win in New Hampshire or Iowa would go instead to the president. And now they’re trying to change it so that if I campaign in New Hampshire, that none of the votes cast for me in Georgia will count. That’s significant because it’s hard to win the nomination without Georgia.”

  The DNC is “rigging it,” he said.

  “We’re looking at it, the tabulations that look like If you add up all the super delegates that they control and all of the automatic delegates that just go to the party and go to the president, I would have to win on almost 80 percent of all of the states in order to beat President Biden even if he only wins 20 percent.”

  

  The DNC is also considering forcing RFJ Jr. and other Democrat candidates like Marianne Williamson to pay for primaries based on the reasoning that the party does not need a primary as they already have a presidential candidate in Biden, RFK Jr. said.

  “We live at a time in American history when a lot of Americans think that democracy is broken, that the political system is rigged, and that there’s not really any democracy. And unfortunately, the DNC is taking a lot of steps that confirm on that outlook.”

   

  “If the DNC is going to rig it so that it is simply impossible for anybody to challenge President Biden … I need to look at other alternatives.”

  The Third Candidate

  The possibility of Mr. Kennedy running as a third-party candidate could be bad news for the party as he is the second most popular figure among Democrats in the race after President Biden.

  According to opinion poll analysis firm FiveThirtyEight, President Biden had the support of 65.8 percent of voters in the Democratic primaries, followed by second-placed Mr. Kennedy with 12.3 percent, as of Sept. 8.

  

  A recent poll commissioned by American Values 2024, a SuperPAC supporting Mr. Kennedy, showed that RFK JR. received 41 percent support in New Hampshire against President Biden’s 49 percent in case of a two-way match between them.

  In a three-way poll between President Biden, Mr. Kennedy, and Ms. Williamson, the former held his ground with 31 percent support against President Biden’s 46 percent.

  The reason why a third-party candidate like RFK Jr. is dangerous for Democrats is that he can end up taking away votes from President Biden in key races, which could play in the favor of former President Donald Trump.

  RFK Jr. can also create a situation where no presidential candidate succeeds in securing 270 electoral votes necessary for a win. This would allow state delegations of the House to choose the winner of the presidential election. Such a situation can also benefit President Trump as Republicans have a majority in the House.

  In addition to RFK Jr., another alternative that could play a spoilsport in the 2024 presidential race is No Labels, an organization that could field a candidate in the race. No Labels has already won ballot access in 10 states and intends to get access in all 50 states plus Washington D.C.

  A survey by No Labels in eight battleground states found that 63 percent of registered voters were open to a moderate independent candidate.

  Several groups aligned with the Democratic Party are pressuring elected officials to denounce any presidential campaign from No Labels. The Arizona Democrat Party had filed a lawsuit to stop No Labels from appearing on ballots in the state.

  “No Labels and RFK Jr. are the two biggest threats to Democrats defeating a far-right Republican like Trump or DeSantis,” Sawyer Hackett, a Democratic strategist and consultant, said in a June 28 post on X.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 17:25

• "This Is Philadelphia": A Shocking Video Of Yet Another Democrat City Imploding 
  “This Is Philadelphia”: A Shocking Video Of Yet Another Democrat City Imploding 

  Approaching the 2024 presidential election cycle, which is set to commence this fall, it’s challenging to find just one well-managed major city under Democratic leadership. Many of these metro areas have collapsed into a third-world-like state, plagued with violent crime, homelessness, out-of-control shoplifting, open-air drug markets, and even some with shit-covered streets. 

  Death, destruction, and chaos follow failed progressive policies across many Democratic-run cities, such as Detroit, Baltimore City, San Francisco, Portland, Chicago, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Chicago, and Philadelphia. Democrats have been in control of major cities long enough that they should take responsibility for the downfall of these metro areas but have deflected blame on everything but themselves.

  The seriousness of the blame game is so alarming that in New Mexico, the tyrannical Democrat governor just suspended constitutional gun rights for law-abiding citizens in Albuquerque — blaming the gun rather than disastrous policies and open southern borders for the spike in violent crime. 

  Focusing our attention on Philadelphia, just north of imploding Baltimore City and just south of migrant-infested New York City, the ‘City of Brotherly Love’ has streets that look straight out of the zombie apocalypse TV series “The Walking Dead.” 

  

  X user Catch Up shared a startling video titled “This is Philadelphia,” showing zombie streets of working-class folks overdosing on drugs. The video did not specify what drugs these folks were on, but we have detailed before Philadelphia was hit with a veterinary sedative xylazine, also known as the “tranq” epidemic. 

  This is Philadelphia. pic.twitter.com/2xKFei0w7m

  — Catch Up (@CatchUpFeed) September 10, 2023

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

  Meanwhile, the shit-covered streets in San Francisco are so bad that Democrats in City Hall have decided to hire a new tourism official to shift the perception of the crumbling metro area. Good luck with that one.

  Democrats must stop pretending their major cities are ‘rainbows and unicorns’ and address the chaos. If they don’t, it’s up to the voters in 2024 to hold these politicians accountable. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 17:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Inside China's Global Military Expansion
  Inside China’s Global Military Expansion

  Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  For two decades, China’s communist regime has poured tens of billions of dollars into low- and middle-income nations, funding massive port projects in the name of global development.

  

  However, experts and lawmakers are warning that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which rules China as a single-party state, seeks to expand its global military presence by creating new overseas naval bases out of the commercial ports it has funded and built abroad.

  According to a new report by AidData, a think tank that analyzes government aid expenditures on international development projects, the regime has spent nearly $30 billion on overseas port infrastructure since 2001.

  For those in Congress who are tasked with countering the threat from a newly expansionist CCP, the regime’s pursuit of new basing opportunities is an alarming development that requires immediate action.

  Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), who chairs the House Select Committee on the CCP, believes that the only means of countering such an expansion is through increased military and diplomatic investments by the United States. Such investments in partner nations, he hopes, will counter the creeping influence of the CCP.

  “The Chinese Communist Party’s expansion of its overseas naval presence is a blaring alarm, and we keep hitting snooze,” Mr. Gallagher told The Epoch Times.

  

  “To counter the CCP’s malign influence and military aggression, the United States needs to both boost its own military-industrial capacity and be more present in the Indo-Pacific, expanding development and diplomacy with key partners to ensure they don’t succumb to debt-trap diplomacy.”

  China Seeks Global Military Expansion

  AidData’s report, “Harboring Global Ambitions,” analyzes more than 20 years of official investments by China’s state-owned entities into overseas seaport projects that might form the groundwork for a new naval base.

  From 2000 to 2023, Beijing spent a staggering $29.9 billion through loans and grants for 123 different projects at 78 ports in 46 low- and middle-income nations, according to the report.

  Each of these projects was funded directly by Beijing or state-owned companies.

  This means that the report doesn’t even begin to look at the potential spending of shadow corporations without official ties to the regime, nor does it account for the regime’s policy of military-civil fusion, which demands that all private Chinese entities create a military advantage for the CCP.

  Paul Crespo, president of the Center for American Defense Studies think tank, believes that the monumental effort is partly driven by the regime’s desire to hold the United States at threat anywhere in the world.

  “China is rapidly creating a large, offensive, blue water navy capable of challenging the [United States] far beyond the western Pacific, especially during a war over Taiwan,” Mr. Crespo said.

  “In addition to allowing it to threaten our supply lines, China has long wanted to make the [United States] feel the way it feels with a foreign superpower navy on its doorstep.”

  The CCP currently only acknowledges one overseas military base in Djibouti, in the Horn of Africa. Chinese officials have long acknowledged a more global ambition for their military, however, and suggested that similar bases could be in the works.

  Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in 2016 that China was amenable to working with partner nations to develop similar facilities to that in Djibouti.

  

  Likewise, the 2020 edition of “Science of Military Strategy” (pdf), published by China’s National Defense University, suggested that a new network of long-range naval facilities was necessary to extend China’s reach.

  “To improve the naval force’s ocean-going support capabilities, in addition to the development of large-scale accompanying support ships, we must also attach importance to the construction of long-distance maritime comprehensive replenishment points, and multi-channels to ensure naval forces carry out overseas military operations in the ocean,” the document reads.

  Mr. Crespo, who previously served as a naval attache at the Defense Intelligence Agency, said that such a network of bases would be a prerequisite for the long-term sustainment of China’s increasingly global military presence.

  “To challenge the U.S. Navy globally, China needs bases for rearming, refueling, [resupplying], and to repair its rapidly expanding fleet,” Mr. Crespo said.

  Similarly, the AidData report places the regime’s many overseas investments within the broader context of a tug-of-war for global influence with the United States.

  

  In contrast to Mr. Gallagher’s ironclad commitment to counter might with might anywhere in the world, the report suggests that such an approach may only worsen global tensions.

  “The [United States] and allies must be vigilant and allocate resources wisely, fostering alliances and partnerships with countries considering moving toward China,” the report reads. “But Western coalitions should not overreact to news or rumors of China establishing a base here or there.

  “A headlong rush by a Western country or alliance to establish new bases overseas as a means of counterbalancing might provide exactly the justification or cover China needs to site a naval base of its own.”

  Whatever approach the United States takes, it remains an open question just where exactly the next CCP base will spring up.

  By comparing total investments in individual port projects and weighing the strategic value of a geographic location, the strength of the CCP’s relations with the local elites, regional political stability, and the nation’s voting alignment with China on the world stage, the AidData report suggests a few countries as top contenders for new Chinese military infrastructure.

  

  The choices stretch from the Indo-Pacific to the Atlantic, with each region offering distinct advantages and disadvantages.

  Indo-Pacific Base Most Likely

  The Indo-Pacific is, perhaps, the most logical place for a new military base.

  The CCP seeks to break out past the first island chain, thereby securing its commercial and military vessels’ free rein of the seas. Likewise, it seeks greater control of fishing territories and precious resources throughout the region, from the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean.

  If the CCP is to hold the United States and its allies at immediate threat and gain unfettered control of the world’s most valuable trade routes, it needs greater control of the Indo-Pacific.

  Sam Kessler, geopolitical analyst at risk management firm North Star Support Group, believes that a base in this region is the logical step for the regime in its ascent to global domination.

  “At this current moment, it is realistic to see Beijing focusing on building future naval bases that are closer to their area of influence rather than be sprawled out on various continents,” Mr. Kessler said.

  Likewise, the AidData report finds that “the Pacific and the Indian Oceans are China’s highest priority maritime environments.”

  In particular, the report finds Hambantota in Sri Lanka the most likely contender for China’s next overseas base due to its strategic location off of India, the popularity enjoyed by the regime among local elites, and its track record of voting in line with CCP interests internationally.

  Indeed, the CCP owns a 99-year lease on Hambantota Port. The agreement is a result of what some analysts dub China’s “debt trap” diplomacy: The lease was negotiated in exchange for relief of more than $1 billion in Chinese debt.

  

  Mr. Kessler agrees. The strategic and economic benefits of a Sri Lankan base are just too valuable to overlook.

  “Like the Belt and Road Initiative, the CCP needs a networking web or a shield of protection that surrounds their main realm of control, which is mainland China,” Mr. Kessler said.

  “Ports with high-level investments like Gwadar and Hambantota serve strategic value and enable the CCP to extend their power projection capabilities throughout the Indian Ocean, Indo-Pacific, Middle East, and also Eurasia.”

  Indeed, Beijing has invested more than $2 billion into the Hambantota International Port in the past two decades, making it the CCP’s single-largest port investment. The CCP has also invested more than $430 million into Sri Lanka’s nearby Port of Colombo, which could offer similar or support facilities. Both would allow China to rule the seas as a direct rival to India.

  Sri Lanka, though an obvious choice, isn’t the only possibility. The AidData report and Mr. Kessler note the possibility of Gwadar in Pakistan and Port Luganville in Vanuatu, near Australia.

  To that end, the regime has invested some $577 million into Gwadar and $97 million into Port Luganville, each offering its own benefits.

  A Vanuatu base would allow the regime to break its apparent containment by U.S. and allied forces, according to the report, while one in Pakistan would further cement the regime’s expansion of the Belt and Road Initiative into the Middle East and allow it greater control of the vital Strait of Hormuz.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/12/2023 – 02:00

• Has The West Closed All Its 'Project Ukraine' Exits?
  Has The West Closed All Its ‘Project Ukraine’ Exits?

  Authored by Yves Smith via NakedCapitalism.com,

  Many analysts and commentators have been speculating about how the US and NATO will find their way to an endgame in the Ukraine conflict. Some focus, for humanitarian or pragmatic reasons, on a negotiated settlement between the US and Russia. Even though as a matter of form Ukraine would be party to such a deal, with Ukraine now fully dependent on Western arms and funding, there’s no pretending who is really driving this train.

  We described earlier how the various factions in the US/NATO side would spend huge amounts of time arguing among themselves to come up with ideas for how exit the conflict that they’d developed in a vacuum, with no substantive exchange with Russia and not even any real consideration of repeated statements by Russian officials, including draft treaties presented in December 2021 and in the aborted peace talks in Marcy 2022.

  The new peace chatter seems to amount to:

  Ceasefire > *Magic* > Russia goes away with its tail enough between its legs that we and Ukraine can declare victory

  At first we thought this dynamic was the result of splits among various key parties. After all, multiparty negotiations are messy.

  But upon further reflection, it may be that the West has effectively set boundary conditions for itself that make ending the war impossible… absent changes in leaders of key governments that result in a willingness to relax boundary conditions and/or such a visible collapse of Ukraine’s military that the West has to rethink its self-imposed constraints.

  

  The West wants to have a Schrodinger’s war: to pretend that its involvement in the conflict is in an indeterminate state when the US and NATO are clearly co-belligerents.

  Keep in mind that so far, NATO members have slipped the leash of Ukraine attempts to depict various shellings as attacks on NATO members

  Remember, we and others have pointed out that there is no reason to assume the belligerents will hammer out an agreement, since many conflicts end without a deal.

  And as we said from very early on, there isn’t good reason to think one will happen here.

  A top priority for Russia is to get Ukraine to commit to neutrality or otherwise keep it out of NATO’s hands, while the US position is that nobody outside NATO has a say in who might be a NATO member. And for Ukraine, or at least the Banderites, the war must be kept going as long as possible. Once US/NATO money and materiel largely evaporates, the current Ukraine leaders will be at the mercy of the Russian government, with their personal power and prospects for further enrichment very much diminished. A few might survive and even prosper, but as a group, they will suffer a very big fall.

  And as noted the US and NATO are still trying to escalate….or at best, escalating because past measures like the great Ukraine counteroffensive have failed. And worse, Western experts are admitting that Russia has been improving its tactics and weapons over the course of the war, as Simplicius the Thinker recounts in his latest post. So the US, which earlier nixed F-16s for Ukraine now will be sending them. ABC has reported that the US is now likely to send ATACMS missiles, which have a longer range than HIMARS. Many commentators Ukraine will use to strike Crimea and the Kerch Bridge.1

  Why do we think the West has caught itself in a bind?

  For Russia, the war is existential. Too many Western officials have depicted victory as Russia being so battered that Putin is ousted and even the breakup of Russia. Russian opinion has hardened due those pronouncements, along with Western efforts not just to support the Ukraine war, but also to cancel Russian athletes, performers, and even its culture, and to continued Ukraine missile strikes on the civilian Donetsk city.

  At least for now, the US/NATO combine is acting as if the war is existential, even though, as Ray McGovern has pointed out, there is not a shred of evidence that Russia has any interest in acquiring territory in NATO countries. Consider how Germany has allowed itself to be deindustrialized and has not acted in response to the Nord Stream attack, which the German press depicts as the handiwork of its ally Ukraine, and the US cannot plausibly have not known what was up. Those actions show the depth of commitment.

  As for Russia’s posture towards Ukraine, Putin rejected the efforts of the Donbass separatists to join Russia prior to the special military operation, and moved to annex the four oblasts that Russia had partially occupied only after the embarrassing pullbacks from Kherson and Kharkiv last year. That left the civilians who had helped the Russians exposed to reprisals, and others in areas where Russia had taken ground worried about Russia’s commitment. But now that sentiment in Russia has hardened and the West is not backing down, Russia seems destined to gobble up more of Ukraine. And what happens to Western Ukraine then is very much an open question.

  However the US/NATO position that the NATO will always have an open door policy may wind up being existential for NATO. If the US were to get over itself, it could agree to stop NATO expansion eastward where it is now (not that Russia would necessarily believe that) which might allow NATO to continue to exist only a bit bruised via how badly the NATO-trained and equipped forces in Ukraine fared versus Russia. Instead, NATO is actually doubling down, for instance via the pleasing-nobody compromise floated by a deputy of NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg, of Ukraine ceding land to Russia in return for an immediate NATO membership. What about “Russia will not accept NATO on its border” don’t you understand? This sort of thing only further confirms the notion that the West has no interest in considering Russia’s security needs.

  And Russia can’t have missed Anthony Blinken’s position when head of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley had the temerity last fall to suggest that Ukraine negotiate after it had recaptured some ground so as to improve its bargaining position. Milley was made to walk his mention of negotiations back at that time. Blinken committed the US and NATO to continuing to arm Ukraine to revisit the war at a later date. Key extracts from his Washington Post interview with David Ignatius:

  Secretary of State Antony Blinken outlined his strategy for the Ukrainian endgame and postwar deterrence during an interview on Monday at the State Department….

  He also underlined President Biden’s determination to avoid direct military conflict with Russia, even as U.S. weapons help pulverize Putin’s invasion force. “Biden has always been emphatic that one of his requirements in Ukraine is that there be no World War III,” Blinken said.

  Russia’s colossal failure to achieve its military goals, Blinken believes, should now spur the United States and its allies to begin thinking about the shape of postwar Ukraine — and how to create a just and durable peace that upholds Ukraine’s territorial integrity and allows it to deter and, if necessary, defend against any future aggression. In other words, Russia should not be able to rest, regroup and reattack.

  Blinken’s deterrence framework is somewhat different from last year’s discussions with Kyiv about security guarantees similar to NATO’s Article 5. Rather than such a formal treaty pledge, some U.S. officials increasingly believe the key is to give Ukraine the tools it needs to defend itself. Security will be ensured by potent weapons systems — especially armor and air defense — along with a strong, noncorrupt economy and membership in the European Union.

  The Pentagon’s current stress on providing Kyiv with weapons and training for maneuver warfare reflects this long-term goal of deterrence. “The importance of maneuver weapons isn’t just to give Ukraine strength now to regain territory but as a deterrent against future Russian attacks,” explained a State Department official familiar with Blinken’s thinking. “Maneuver is the future.”

  Given that the current Ukraine government continues to insist that it must recapture all of the pre-2014 Ukraine, it’s clear that any rearming of Ukraine by the West would lead to new hostilities…and not instigated by Russia.

  However, as an aside, the Post also unwittingly tells us why Project Ukraine is doomed. The US has not adapted to the new ISR paradigm which Russia is perfecting with every passing day. As various military experts have pointed out, maneuver warfare (which among other things depends on massing forces to punch through enemy lines) is no longer possible with a peer power. Your build-up of men and materiel will be seen and attacked before you launch your big punch.

  Keep in mind what Blinken’s position also implies: the US believes it can run what amounts to a two front war. Blinken posits Russia somehow loses in Ukraine so as to allow the US and NATO to rearm it at their leisure so as to harass, um, pressure Russia further down the war. At the same time US is also determined to Do Something to its official Enemy #1, China. Since economic sanctions are working about as well against China as they have against Russia, what does the US and its Pacific allies have left besides military escalation? Or will mere relentless propaganda be enough to snooker the credulous American public?

  So unless the US relents, Russia has no option but to continue to prosecute the war until Ukraine is prostrated or Russia has otherwise precipitated regime change in Kiev. Russia needs to capture Ukraine, either politically or practically. This outcome becomes even more important if the US sends ATACMS. Russia will need an even wider buffer zone (300 km versus 77 km for the HIMARS previously sent) to prevent their use against Russian territory.

  However, an undeniable Ukraine loss, no matter how much porcine maquillage US and EU spokescritters apply, will, as Alastair Crooke in particular described long-form in a recent Duran program, will rattle smaller NATO members, who will doubt they can rely on NATO to come to their rescue. NATO may still be fit for purpose as a defensive alliance. However, the fact that the US and NATO members sent in a whole mess of heavily-hyped wunderwaffen that did pretty much nothing to blunt Russian operations, and some of which were impressively destroyed, like Leopard 2 and Challenger tanks and the West is not responding with a Sputnik-level effort to get Western firepower up to Russian levels, means there is good reason to doubt how well the NATO shield would hold up if tested.

  Mind you, Crooke explained in a related article that US is (or the hawks think it is) moving in the direction of a long, low intensity conflict, which is consistent with the Blinken remarks above. But that US/Ukraine hope ignores again that the war is generally very much going in Russia’s direction, with Ukraine continuing to throw men and materiel against Russian positions, and Russia only engaging in fairly minor advances in and near Kupiansk to produce even more of the same. Russia wanted to attrit Ukraine and is getting that outcome. And Russia can and will increase the intensity when it suits Russia.

  One would think, given both the weakening Ukraine position, and the all-too-obvious need for the Biden Administration not to suffer a visible defeat in Ukraine, the optimal time would be between March and October 2024. However, that still may not take the form of the too-eagerly-hoped for big arrow attacks unless the Ukraine army is severely degraded.2 But the flip side is when Russia finally cracks the last Ukraine line of defense in the Donbass, there’s not much in the way of defensible positions west of Lugansk up to the Dnieper.3

  In other words, the way to an end game is regime change. And the weak regimes are all in the West.

  *  *  *

  1 Admittedly, the US has pushed back the delivery date of Abrams tanks to next year….but they are so heavy they would probably be useless in the soon-to-arrive mud season. Dima at Military Summary today noted that Russia has not engaged in the sort of massive missile strikes of Ukraine that had been its habit, although it is still regularly striking selective targets, such as yesterday an ammo depot in Kiev, rumored to hold depleted uranium shells. He speculates they are accumulating stocks for big strikes in the winter to again damage the electrical grid. If Russia indeed has been caching missiles, they could also be keeping them in reserve for major retaliatory strikes.

  2 Another issue is that Russia knows it is dealing with people who do not have a good grip on reality, and you don’t make sudden moves around crazy people, particularly when they possess nukes.

  3 This makes the continuing fight over Bakhmut rational. That is on the third of four Ukraine defensive lines, but the last is seen as weak. If Russia were to move forces up to the Dnieper, it is hard to see how the West could not see that as undeniable evidence of Russian success, which would threaten the position of the Ukraine regime with its patrons.

  *  *  *

  This is Naked Capitalism fundraising week. 677 donors have already invested in our efforts to combat corruption and predatory conduct, particularly in the financial realm. Please join us and participate via our donation page, which shows how to give via check, credit card, debit card or PayPal or our new payment processor, Clover. Read about why we’re doing this fundraiser, what we’ve accomplished in the last year,, and our current goal, continuing our expanded news coverage.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 23:40

• Another One Fails: Subprime Auto Dealership Hit With "Unprecedented Changes To Auto-Retail Landscape"
  Another One Fails: Subprime Auto Dealership Hit With “Unprecedented Changes To Auto-Retail Landscape”

  Earlier this year, we discussed the ‘big profitability squeeze‘ on auto dealerships and the subsequent failure of a subprime dealership with dozens of locations. Now, another dealership has failed as cracks across the industry worsen. 

  A popular used car dealership in South Florida, called “Off Lease Only,” filed for Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code in the District of Delaware last Thursday, citing “unprecedented changes to the automotive-retail landscape.”

  

  “The industry has been impacted by inventory scarcity, and vehicle price inflation stemming from supply chain disruptions and multi-year declines in new vehicle production,” the company wrote in a press release. 

  The company also blamed elevated used car prices and soaring interest rates that “further deteriorated conditions in the automotive retail market, weakening consumer demand and affordability.” 

  Off Lease Only’s demise was due to collapsing demand after used car interest rates skyrocketed while used car prices remained elevated, sparking an affordability crisis. 

  

  The Florida-based company listed assets and liabilities each of between $100 million and $500 million on its bankruptcy filing. It noted a range of strategic options were being explored for “an orderly wind-down of the business.” 

  In April, another subprime auto dealership called US Auto Sales abruptly closed dozens of locations and filed for bankruptcy in August amid headwinds gathering in the used car market.  

  The fact is, mid/low-tier consumers can’t afford monthly $1,000 payments for a used car as costs for shelter and food remain elevated. Further, many of these folks are financially tapped out, as we shared in the latest note titled “Slide In Consumer Credit Accelerates As Excess Savings Exhausted, Average Credit Card Rate Hits 22%.”

  Consumers are in very bad shape.  

  

  And if consumers were hoping for relief in used car prices, think again: “Used Vehicle Prices May Have Bottomed For The Year.” 

  

  We can only imagine there are many other subprime dealerships on the verge of collapse. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 23:20

• Taibbi: A Day That Never Ended
  Taibbi: A Day That Never Ended

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via ‘Racket News’ substack,

  America thought it left the War on Terror behind, but the emergency never stopped expanding…

  

  Twenty-two years ago jet planes crashed into the Twin Towers in New York. Within two hours they fell, starting fires that still burned eight days later, on September 19th, when Attorney General John Ashcroft asked for a sweeping expansion of executive power, telling congress on a Wednesday to have a bill by the end of the week.

  “We need every tool available to us,” Ashcroft said, and congress quickly delivered with “roving” wiretaps, warrantless searches, “trap and trace” searches, law enforcement and intelligence access to grand jury information, use of FISA monitoring for non-foreign situations, reduction or elimination of predicate requirements for FBI investigations, and elimination of judicial review for most of these activities, among many other things in the USA PATRIOT Act.

  It all passed on October 26th, marking just the beginning of what turned into a long period of radical change.

  From 2001 to 2008 the U.S. internationally became the world’s Death Star, constructing the most fearsome military-intelligence state ever seen.

  Between 1.9 and 3 million Americans served in wars after 9/11, as the open-ended 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force led not only to invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, but deployments in Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Niger, and parts unknown, the list of foes covered by the AUMF remaining classified.

  Passage of new military commissions law made Guantanamo Bay the face of an anything-goes secret justice system, kept filled with “combatants” by troops from a swelling archipelago of 750 foreign bases.

  A “targeted killing” program headed by a fleet of CIA-run drone programs was likewise kept busy by a vast global surveillance net, newly consolidated after the creation of the 240,000-person Department of Homeland Security, the largest federal reorganization since the Defense Department’s birth in 1947.

  It’s forgotten, but Barack Obama was sent to the White House in what a lot of the voting public at the time considered a referendum on the security state.

  The genteel Obama played up “constitutional lawyer” credentials, announcing in a national security address at the Wilson Center in 2007 his opposition to the “color-coded politics of fear” and “a war in Iraq that should never have been authorized.”

  Candidate Obama added it was time to “turn the page” with more peaceful means of “drying up” support for terrorism, a strategy that hurtled him past favored Hillary Clinton in primary season.

  Privately however he’d already met with people like Richard Clarke, who told him, “As a president, you kill people.”

  This is who Obama would actually be in office, an “idealist without illusions” who expanded the buildup, institutionalized the “kill list,” and in one of his last major acts, created a new counter-disinformation authority that helped birth the censorship state.

  The 5th Circuit Court’s decision in the Missouri v. Biden case last week, which allowed the Department of Homeland Security (and its Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA) to squirm free of an anti-censorship injunction, underscored the central delusion of post-9/11 America.

  Voters thought they shut down the War on Terror in 2008, but American citizens were instead swallowed up by it, made subjects of the global dragnet.

  From the Towers to Trump to Covid to today, the emergency state not only never receded but tried continually to expand, looking to make the panic of twenty-two years ago a forever thing.

  How do we end this day?  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 23:00

• City Slickers Caused Rural Populations To Explode During Pandemic — Leaving A Trail Of Resent And Strained Infrastructures
  City Slickers Caused Rural Populations To Explode During Pandemic — Leaving A Trail Of Resent And Strained Infrastructures

  The influx of transplants from urban living to rural areas during the pandemic has been well documented, as the lure of a cheaper cost of living and wide open spaces vs. the prospect of riding out lockdowns in a $5,000 / month postage stamp was no brainer for many.

  

  And so for the first time in three decades, rural America’s population has outgrown that of urban areas, driven by remote work, affordability and lifestyle changes. Tech-savvy Californians have led this great migration. Driven by exorbitant living costs and an ever-intrusive (and tax-thirsty) state government, they are fleeing the Golden State for places like Montana. However, this movement is sparking backlash from longtime residents, with bumper stickers saying, “Don’t California my Montana,” highlighting the growing resentment.

  The result? Rural America is booming – yet, underneath the surface problems are beginning to emerge – most notably resent among longtime locals over now-prohibitively expensive real estate prices, and a growing strain on infrastructures around the country.

  The trend is sparking resentment as house prices in the top 10 rural counties that have seen the biggest population increases surging more than 40% over the past three years. Schools are overloaded and the shift is even impacting farmland prices. -Bloomberg

  Farmland prices are also at record highs, driven by higher commodity prices and inflation hedging.

  “There’s a lot of resentment,” said Maggie Doherty, a writer and columnist living in Flathead County, Montana. “There’s bumper stickers that say ‘Montana’s full’ or ‘Don’t California my Montana.’” she told Bloomberg.

  Tech-savvy Californians are leading this great migration. Driven by exorbitant living costs and an ever-intrusive (and tax-thirsty) state government, they are fleeing the Golden State for places like Montana. However, this movement is sparking backlash from longtime residents, with bumper stickers saying, “Don’t California my Montana,” highlighting the growing resentment.

  In Jackson County, Georgia, finding affordable homes is now near impossible – as prices rose 50% in the first half of this year vs. three years earlier, according to Zillow. Thanks to Jackson’s proximity to Atlanta, the county has attracted a flood of hybrid workers.

  

  “There’s been a lot of battles politically over building and where to build,” said Jackson County Democratic head Pete Fuller. “There are organized groups that do not want affordable housing being built.”

  Rents are also surging. In the past two years, according to Zillow, Harnett County and Moore County in North Carolina, Gallatin County in Montana, and Iron County in Utah have all seen rent increases between 13% to 24%, Bloomberg reports.

  “Rent is completely through the roof,” said Tennessee resident Wendy Cerne. “There are a lot of new people that have moved into the region and I’ve experienced that first hand.”

  As noted above, the price of farmland has never been this high either.

  “Anything that helps broaden and deepen what I would call the opportunity set for off-farm income is good for producers, which is a good underpinning for land prices,” said Tom Halverson, CEO of rural lender CoBank ACB.

  “The states in the South and East have been some of the biggest beneficiaries of this population movement,” he said. “They also are the parts of the agricultural production complex in this country that that are most reliant on off-farm income. So there’s an interesting correlation dynamic there.”

  

  No Affordable Retirement in California

  Bob Ficken, a retiree from California, encapsulates the dilemma: “Retiring in California is near impossible. The state ends up taking between 25% and 30% of everything you make.”  This situation, coupled with deteriorating cityscapes in urban areas, is fueling the rush towards rural America.

  Political Fault Lines

  The demographic shifts are also exacerbating existing political divides. As newcomers bring along their political preferences, battleground states like Georgia and North Carolina become even more unpredictable, adding a layer of complexity to the 2024 presidential election calculus.

  The migration has the potential to change voting patterns in both the places people are leaving and the ones they’re going to, adding an additional layer of unpredictability in battleground states like Georgia and North Carolina in the 2024 presidential election. -Bloomberg

  And lastly, aging infrastructures are being tested like never before.

  “You see huge issues with infrastructure as well with roads, roads that were not meant to handle truck traffic a lot of times are breaking down,” said Fuller, adding “There’s been two new high schools built here in the last couple years just to accommodate growth.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 22:40

• 'Utter Madness:' Elon Musk Reacts To California's Proposed Gender Affirming Law
  ‘Utter Madness:’ Elon Musk Reacts To California’s Proposed Gender Affirming Law

  Authored by Dorothy Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Tech entrepreneur and California resident Elon Musk criticized an assembly bill in the state, calling the proposed law to require that parents affirm their child’s transgender identify for custody rights “a wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

  Mr. Musk’s comment came as the Democratic-majority State Assembly approved the legislation on Sept. 8, sending it to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.

  The bill, AB 957, incorporates parents’ “affirmation of the child’s gender identity or gender expression” into the concept of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare.” If passed, the bill will require a judge to consider whether a parent affirms a child’s ideas about gender transition when determining custody or visitation rights.

  “This bill is a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” Mr. Musk wrote on Friday on X, formerly called Twitter. “What it would actually mean is that if you disagree with the other parent about sterilizing your child, you lose custody. Utter madness!“

  The bill was initially introduced by Assemblywoman Lori Wilson, a Democrat, in February. She previously argued the legislation doesn’t prioritize a parent’s gender-affirming over other judicial criteria that determine custody disputes.

  “If you have a child going through that system, a judge has discretion, like they do looking at the totality of circumstances related to the health, safety, and welfare of a child, to consider different factors,” the Assemblywoman told ABC7 in June after the bill made its way through California Legislature.

  “One of the factors, not the factor, but one of the factors, would be the parent’s affirmation of a child’s gender identity.”

  At the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Ms. Wilson said the bill was intended to address “parents antagonistic to their child’s gender identity.”

  State Sen. Scott Wilk, a Republican, said there have been many policies introduced to protect children during his 11 years in the state legislature. But now, he said, it’s time to start protecting parents.

  “In recent years, we have put government bureaucrats between parents, children, and doctors when it comes to medical care. And now, we have this, where if a parent does not support the ideology of the government, [children] are going to be taken away from the home,” Mr. Wilk said. “If you love your children, you need to flee California.”

  How to Raise Children

  On Sept. 6, the bill cleared the state Senate in a near-party-line vote, 30-9. Democrats argue that the legislation would help to protect the well-being of LGBTQ+ children whose parents are going through a divorce.

  Every Republican in the state Senate voted against the bill, with state Sen. Kelly Seyarto, who represents Murrieta in Southern California, arguing that lawmakers were interfering too much with how parents choose to raise their children.

  The Democrat governor now has until Oct. 15 to either sign the bill into law or veto it.

  Some parental rights groups warned the bill would leave parents involved in a child custody battle with no choice but to consent to recommendations of gender change for their child at any age, for any gender identity.

  “Newsom needs to veto it because if he doesn’t, he is aligning with breaking up families. He’s aligning against parents and also judicial discretion. It’s the state control of our judges,” Jennifer Kennedy, spokesperson for Our Duty, a parental rights group, told The Epoch Times on Sept. 8. “Why would Newsom attack families already in crisis? He needs to read the room and veto AB 957.”

  Ms. Kennedy, a civil rights attorney, argued the bill would infringe parental rights and remove the discretion of judges to consider the facts involved in child custody disputes on a case-by-case basis.

  “The affirming parent will always be given the benefit of the doubt. They will always be favored in custody and visitation, so it’s completely unconstitutional.”

  ‘Legislated Evil’

  Chloe Cole, who agreed to have a “gender-affirming” surgeon remove her breasts at the age of 15—a life-changing decision she regrets after reaching the age of majority—also took to social media to voice her opposition.

  “This issue is wildly unpopular yet the Cali Gov pushes forward with more and more radical policies,” she said in response to Mr. Musk’s post. “@ProtectKidsCA is trying to introduce ballot measures that will stop the sterilization of kids in California.”

  Michael Seifert, the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of PublicSq, called the bill a “legislated evil.”

  “California is determined to discover rock bottom,” he said in a post on Friday. “I’m so glad we left that state.”

  “I don’t even recognize my former home anymore.”

  The Associated Press and Brad Jones contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 22:20

• What Electricity Sources Power The World?
  What Electricity Sources Power The World?

  In 2022, 29,165.2 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity was generated around the world, an increase of 2.3% from the previous year.

  In this visualization, Visual Capitalist’s Chris Dickert and Sam Parker look at data from the latest Statistical Review of World Energy, and ask what powered the world in 2022.

  

  Coal is Still King

  Coal still leads the charge when it comes to electricity, representing 35.4% of global power generation in 2022, followed by natural gas at 22.7%, and hydroelectric at 14.9%.

  

  Source: Energy Institute

  Over three-quarters of the world’s total coal-generated electricity is consumed in just three countries. China is the top user of coal, making up 53.3% of global coal demand, followed by India at 13.6%, and the U.S. at 8.9%.

  Burning coal—for electricity, as well as metallurgy and cement production—is the world’s single largest source of CO2 emissions. Nevertheless, its use in electricity generation has actually grown 91.2% since 1997, the year when the first global climate agreement was signed in Kyoto, Japan.

  Renewables on the Rise

  However, even as non-renewables enjoy their time in the sun, their days could be numbered.

  In 2022, renewables, such as wind, solar, and geothermal, represented 14.4% of total electricity generation with an extraordinary annual growth rate of 14.7%, driven by big gains in solar and wind. Non-renewables, by contrast, only managed an anemic 0.4%.

  The authors of the Statistical Review do not include hydroelectric in their renewable calculations, even though many others, including the International Energy Agency, consider it a “well-established renewable power technology.”

  With hydroelectric moved into the renewable column, together they accounted for over 29.3% of all electricity generated in 2022, with an annual growth rate of 7.4%.

  France’s Nuclear Horrible Year

  Another big mover in this year’s report was nuclear energy.

  In addition to disruptions at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine, shutdowns in France’s nuclear fleet to address corrosion found in the safety injection systems of four reactors led to a 4% drop in global use, year-over-year.

  The amount of electricity generated by nuclear energy in that country dropped 22% to 294.7 TWh in 2022. As a result, France went from being the world’s biggest exporter of electricity, to a net importer.

  Powering the Future

  Turning mechanical energy into electrical energy is a relatively straightforward process. Modern power plants are engineering marvels, to be sure, but they still work on the same principle as the very first generator invented by Michael Faraday in 1831.

  But how you get the mechanical energy is where things get complicated: coal powered the first industrial revolution, but heated the planet in the process; wind is free and clean, but is unreliable; and nuclear fission reliably generates emission-free electricity, but also creates radioactive waste.

  With temperature records being set around the world in the summer, resolving these tensions isn’t just academic and next year’s report could be a crucial test of the world’s commitment to a clean energy future.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 22:00

• Israeli Officials Make First Ever Public Visit To Saudi Arabia
  Israeli Officials Make First Ever Public Visit To Saudi Arabia

  Via The Cradle,

  An official Israeli delegation has arrived in Saudi Arabia to serve as observers during the 45th session of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, marking the first public visit by government officials to the kingdom.

  An Israeli official who spoke with AP said the delegation is led by Amir Weissbrod, a deputy director-general in the Israeli foreign ministry, and includes several diplomats. The official also stressed that the delegation is “not on a bilateral visit.”

  

  “We are happy to be here – it’s a good first step … We thank UNESCO and the Saudi authorities,” a member of the delegation who did not want to be named told AFP.

  The delegation reportedly traveled through Dubai on their way to the kingdom. They only take part as observers due to Tel Aviv quitting UNESCO in 2017 and accusing the organization of being “biased” over Israel’s historical abuses against Palestinians and the military occupation of their land.

  Last week, Israeli media accused the kingdom of “delaying granting visas” for the delegation, as the group was reportedly set to include Foreign Minister Eli Cohen and Education Minister Yoav Kisch. In March, Riyadh refused Israel’s request to grant entry to Cohen for the UNESCO conference.

  The public visit by low-level Israeli officials to Saudi Arabia has been described as a coup for the US in its plans to secure a normalization agreement between the two nations.

  Normalization would be part of a so-called “mega-deal” with the US, which also calls for a defense pact from Washington, access to more advanced weaponry for the Saudis, and US help in developing a civilian nuclear program that would include uranium enrichment on Saudi soil.

  Saudi Arabia has also publicly declared that normalization hinges on the implementation of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which calls for the creation of an autonomous Palestinian state. The Palestinian Authority (PA) has reportedly set conditions to support Saudi-Israeli normalization.

  As part of a Saudi-Israel deal, Palestinians have requested admission to the UN as a full member, ie statehood

  US officials rejected this, showing again that the US has in practice abandoned the 2-state solution

  Only breadcrumbs seem to be on offer…https://t.co/sfkfuGPFoP

  — Trita Parsi (@tparsi) September 11, 2023

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

  Although the current visit by Israeli officials is being hailed as a major step toward normalization, last year, the kingdom relaxed its entry rules for Israeli passport holders. Furthermore, reports suggest dozens of Israeli businesspeople traveled to Saudi Arabia over the past year.

  Hebrew media revealed last year that several senior security and political figures, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, visited the kingdom over the past decade. Israeli tourists have also been spotted in the planned futuristic megacity of NEOM in Saudi Arabia, which is still under construction.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 21:40

• Computer Models Show Hurricane Lee Could Make Landfall In New England 
  Computer Models Show Hurricane Lee Could Make Landfall In New England 

  Hurricane Lee formed nearly a week ago (read here) and rapidly intensified into a Category 5 (read here) on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. Lee has since been downgraded to a Cat. 3 with risks of restrengthening into a Cat. 4 this week while it churns toward the northeast Caribbean. New computer models show landfall impacts could be across Maine and the rest of New England.

  Lee was located about 340 miles north of the northern Leeward Islands, with maximum sustained winds of 120 mph, according to a 0500 ET update by the National Hurricane Center. 

  “A slow west-northwestward motion is expected during the next couple of days, followed by a gradual turn toward the north by midweek,” NHC said. 

  

  The weather agency has no coastal watches or warnings in effect for the US mainland but does expect dangerous surf conditions across the Lesser Antilles, the British and US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Hispaniola, the Turks and Caicos Islands, the Bahamas through this week. 

  Computer models favor Lee to ride parallel hundreds of miles offshore of the US East Coast by late week, with landfall impact concerns in the New England area next week. 

  

  “It remains too soon to know what level of impacts, if any, Lee might have along the US East Coast and Atlantic Canada late this week, especially since the hurricane is expected to slow down considerably over the southwestern Atlantic,” NHC said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 21:20

• What If We Had A Functional Media?
  What If We Had A Functional Media?

  Authored by Frank Miele via RealClearPolitics.com,

  Could you imagine the difference if, in the fall of 2020, the Washington Post had accepted a copy of the Hunter Biden hard drive and actually investigated the thousands of emails, photos, text messages, and other evidence that implicated not just Hunter but his father Joe Biden in sundry unethical and criminal enterprises?

  What about CBS, NBC, and ABC?

  Shouldn’t we as news consumers expect these leviathans “to give the news impartially, without fear or favor, regardless of party, sect, or interests involved,” as the new owner of the New York Times declared way back in 1896?

  Yet in October 2020, when the New York Post wrote a series of stories describing the corrupt nature of the Biden family as exposed by the Hunter Biden laptop, there were few mainstream media outlets that dared to follow.

  Or really, not dared, but chose. Because there is nothing daring about doing your job correctly.

  You would think that when all the major social media companies like Facebook and Twitter blocked any discussion of the New York Post’s reporting on the laptop, these other major news corporations would have come to the aid of the Post.

  If any of them had done their own investigation of the laptop, do you think that Twitter could have continued to censor the news under the false claim that it was Russian disinformation? Hardly.

  But no mainstream media outlets were willing to put their own reputations on the line to support free speech – because their reputations are based entirely on being guardians of the left, and protecting Hillary, Barack and the Bidens is more important than fidelity to any chimeric sense of fairness and honor.

  

  And Hunter Biden’s laptop is just a symptom.

  In instance after instance, most of the media either closes its eyes to stories that implicate liberals or Democrats in unethical or illegal behavior, or pretends they are of no importance. Examples abound, from the whitewashing of Hillary Clinton’s involvement in the invention of the Russia collusion hoax to the complete lack of curiosity about the sweetheart deal offered to Hunter Biden by the so-called independent Justice Department.

  It’s no wonder that much of the public at large is convinced there is no evidence that warrants the impeachment of Joe Biden for bribery or treason.

  That’s what happens when you depend on biased news sources to form your opinion.

  And what’s worse: These are not just biased news sources, but ignorant ones. Take, for example, the case of Philip Bump of the Washington Post.

  Bump, a prized columnist and news analyst, was recently embarrassed by podcast host Noam Dworman, who is best known as the owner of a New York City comedy club. Bump claimed there was no evidence that President Biden had done anything improper in regard to his son’s business deals with foreign adversaries, and when Dworman rattled off some of the most important evidence suggesting otherwise, Bump took off his headset and walked away.

  The interview ended when Dworman asked Bump: “What do you take from [Hunter’s] text message to his adult daughter — Hunter texted her, “I had to give 50% of my income to Pop.”

  Bump, the Washington insider who molds public opinion by telling the rest of us what to think, declared meekly, “I have no idea what that means. I don’t. I have no idea what that means.”

  And let’s be clear.

  He doesn’t want to know what it means. That’s because he is not a real journalist; he is a propagandist for Democratic officials, ideas, and policies.

  Most importantly, it is when Dworman challenged Bump to acknowledge what a real journalist would do – ask questions of Hunter Biden’s daughter to get to the bottom of the story – that the columnist walked out.

  DWORMAN: Has anybody asked her?

  BUMP: I don’t know. I don’t know!

  DWORMAN: Don’t you think somebody should ask her?

  Hell no, because then the mainstream media would be serving the American public instead of Joe Biden. Perhaps even more nefariously than what it has done to protect the Bidens, the media has fed the public with a steady stream of lies about Donald Trump. Most relevant today, as the former president faces 91 felony counts and four indictments, is the insistent drumbeat of claims that Trump led an insurrection against the federal government or that he knowingly lied about election fraud.

  Again, just like with the Hunter Biden laptop, the average citizen is supposed to sheepishly accept the dismissive reporting of the media about election irregularities as the unadulterated truth, and any deviation from that narrative is met with silence or scorn.

  We have a perfect example of that in the investigative reporting of the Gateway Pundit last month that revealed extensive election fraud in Michigan during the 2020 election. If you are scratching your head, and asking what the heck I’m talking about, then it’s because you have fallen victim to the media’s refusal to cover any news that reflects positively on President Trump.

  Chances are, you have never even heard of the Gateway Pundit unless you are a dedicated conservative who has sought out alternative sources of news that counter the mainstream narrative. Anyone else would probably be scared away by the public assessments of such left-wing institutions as Wikipedia, which calls the Gateway Pundit “an American far-right fake news website…. known for publishing falsehoods, hoaxes, and conspiracy theories.”

  But if you want to know the facts about a police investigation that started in October 2020 and found that more than 10,000 mostly fake voter registrations were submitted to election officials in Muskegon County, Michigan, you would need to read the Gateway Pundit, or one of the conservative websites that picked up their stories. Because there is no way that the New York Times or NBC will ever report on this explosive story.

  And it doesn’t matter whether the Gateway Pundit is a conservative advocacy website or not.

  True, the website doesn’t have journalistic credentials, but who cares?

  Journalism as an institution is in total disrepair. No one cares about credentials; we care about credibility. What matters is the evidence the website’s reporters provide to substantiate their claims that a pattern of election fraud in Michigan and other states was discovered prior to the 2020 election and then covered up after the election. And there is plenty of evidence. Most importantly, the Gateway Pundit’s reporters obtained the Michigan State Police report that detailed an extensive preliminary investigation found credible evidence of a scheme to create fake voters.

  In many ways, the oppression of the Muskegon election interference story parallels the techniques used to oppress the New York Post’s laptop story. If you do a Google search for “Muskegon voter registration police report” (without the quotes) you will see an interesting pattern. 

  First, the blacklisting of Gateway Pundit from the Google results. Second, the utter silence of the elite media on this hugely significant story. Third, a number of so-called “fact checks” that downplay the veracity of the story. The only thing missing is a letter from 51 intelligence agents calling the whole thing a “Russian information operation.”

  The closest we ever got to a mainstream news acknowledgment of the Gateway Pundit’s reporting was when the Detroit News ran a shocking admission from Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s office that the facts of the story were accurate and that the election fraud was reported to the FBI:

  Nessel’s press secretary, Danny Wimmer, said the total number of suspected fraudulent forms delivered to the Muskegon clerk by the individual was 8,000 to 10,000 ahead of the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election.

  ‘The city clerk in Muskegon detected the fraudulent material provided and alerted the proper authorities,’ Wimmer said in a statement. ‘A thorough investigation was conducted by multiple agencies within the state and no successful fraud was perpetrated upon the state’s election process or qualified voter file.’

  In other words, because the 10,000 fake registrations were detected by an alert election official, there was nothing to worry about. Huh?

  First of all, attempted election fraud on that scale should worry us all, but more importantly, there is no reason to think that all the election fraud was caught just because one election scammer was caught one time.

  The Michigan State Police report on the investigation was extensively redacted, but on page 14, the authorities failed to redact the name of GBI Strategies, a Democrat-aligned election-turnout specialist that has been confirmed as having 2020 operations in multiple states. The office of GBI Strategies that was searched under a warrant turned up as many as 19 vehicles used by the company’s workers, certainly more than one lone worker would need. In addition, the woman who tried to submit more than 10,000 fake registrations told state police that she had “done work” in Detroit, Ypsilanti, Southfield, Flint, and Lansing as well as Muskegon.

  Despite Nessel’s celebration of how 10,000 fake registrations were detected by an alert election clerk, there is absolutely no reason to believe that thousands of fake registrations were also uncovered in those other cities where GBI Strategies was hard at work. Conclusion? Joe Biden’s victory by 154,000 votes in the Great Lakes State may have been less great than we were led to believe. In fact, it may not have been a victory at all. The only way to find out would be to demand a forensic audit of voter registrations submitted in the month or two prior to the election.

  But that will never happen if the only voice demanding it is the Gateway Pundit. Because just as there was a concerted campaign to discredit the New York Post when it revealed the extent of the corruption in the Biden family as exposed on Hunter’s laptop, there has been an equally dishonest campaign to discredit the Gateway Pundit.

  Although you won’t find one story published by the Gateway Pundit when you look at the top 100 results of a Google search for the Muskegon police report on election fraud, you will not surprisingly find three “fact checks” claiming the story is fake news. Politifact, Lead Stories, and Newsweek all managed to find their way into the top 100 search results to debunk a story that Google was pretending didn’t even exist.

  Each of these “fact checks” followed the same pattern. They repeated the evidence in the Michigan State Police report that the Gateway Pundit based its reporting on, and then they said “It doesn’t matter” because the state attorney general said no fraud occurred. Really? That’s what we call a fact check these days?

  How about this? Let’s get the New York Times, CBS, the Washington Post and NBC to assign their best investigative reporters to comb through voter registration records in Michigan. Why not track down the CEO of GBI Strategies and question him about what techniques the company uses to increase voter turnout, which states they operated in during the 2020 election, and what relationship exists between GBI Strategies and the Democratic Party or the Biden campaign?

  But that will never happen, which is why the Gateway Pundit and similar citizen journalist organizations are necessary. They may not be perfect, but they provide a service we can’t get from most media outlets today  – they aren’t a mouthpiece for the official narrative being sold to us by the Deep State, the Democratic Party, and the donor class.

  And until the mainstream media rediscovers the value of reporting the news “without fear or favor,” I’ll rely on the Gateway Pundit, Breitbart News, and Citizen Free Press to provide the news the powers that be don’t want me to know.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 21:00

• NATO Prepares For Biggest Military Exercise Since Cold War, And Close To Russia
  NATO Prepares For Biggest Military Exercise Since Cold War, And Close To Russia

  The upcoming Steadfast Defender NATO war drills, set for early 2024, are expected to be the biggest military exercises in Europe since the end of the Cold War, the Financial Times is reporting Monday.

  At a moment the war in Ukraine grows more and more unpredictable, given neither Russia nor the West have shown any signs of backing down, the FT writes that “Nato is preparing its biggest live joint command exercise since the cold war next year, assembling more than 40,000 troops to practice how the alliance would attempt to repel Russian aggression against one of its members.”

  

  Like with the ongoing, smaller ‘Northern Coasts’ war games currently being executed by NATO in Baltic waters, the Steadfast Defender 24 drills will simulate how the military alliance would respond in the face of a hypothetical Russian invasion. 

  NATO officials were quoted in FT as saying the planned exercises are seen as a key part of “demonstrating to Moscow that the alliance is prepared to fight.”

  Steadfast Defender is slated to run in February and March, and is likely to be seen as a provocation by Moscow given it will take place in various locales across Germany, Poland, and the Baltic states – the latter which border Russia. According to more from the FT report detailing the upcoming giant war game:

  “It will start in spring next year and is expected to involve between 500 and 700 air combat missions, more than 50 ships, and about 41,000 troops, Nato officials said.”

  “It is designed to model potential maneuvers against an enemy modelled on a coalition led by Russia, named Occasus for the purposes of the drill.”

  Crucially, the Baltic Sea coastline – where NATO has increasingly flexed its military might with more and more exercises – is very important to Russia as its strategic Kaliningrad exclave sits on it, sandwiched between two NATO members, Poland and Lithuania. Last year’s Defender drills had been the largest up to that point, and they continue to get expanded year-by-year.

  A July Politico report explained that “NATO has steadily increased its control of the Baltic Sea — a crucial maritime gateway for the Russian fleet which has bases near St. Petersburg and in the heavily militarized Kaliningrad exclave.”

  Who would be free to roam around the “NATO Lake” without suspicion? #Nordstream

  The Baltic Sea Became a Nato Lake https://t.co/llOiEApK0X

  — Gilda Mundson (@GildaMundson) September 28, 2022

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

  The publication also noted that “During the Cold War, only Denmark and Germany at the far western edge of the Baltic were in the alliance. Poland joining NATO in 1999 and the three Baltic republics in 2004 put most of the sea’s southern shore under alliance control.”

  Russia has meanwhile at times “answered” these games by staging large drills in the Black Sea. But dangerously at this moment the western Black Sea region is in a state of war, given Russian warships are launching missiles against Ukraine from there.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 20:40

• Novak Djokovic For Director Of The World Health Organization
  Novak Djokovic For Director Of The World Health Organization

  Authored by Roger Simon via The Epoch Times,

  Myriad posters on X, formerly Twitter, late on Sept. 10 noted (36-year-old!) Novak Djokovic’s 24th Grand Slam championship.

  Extending his own men’s record – Margaret Court won as many when tennis was as Tiddlywinks to today’s game – was accomplished in front of signs for Moderna Inc., the maker of COVID-19 shots and a main advertiser for this year’s U.S. Open.

  

  Yet, as the world well knows, the greatest tennis player of all time – and arguably among the greatest athletes ever – forswore the COVID-19 vaccinations on offer, even though it meant that he would be banned from numerous tournaments, every one of which he would have been seeded No. 1.

  

  He also was banned from the United States and Australia altogether.

  Think of what his statistics would be had this not been so. They’re already unbelievable.

  Instead of taking the shots, he followed his own rigorous health regime of diet and exercise that few of us could emulate. I know I couldn’t.

  The results, however, speak for themselves, including, shortly, an unheard-of 400 weeks at world No. 1.

  Djoker, as he is called, also is an intelligent fellow who speaks several languages.

  So, I have a not-so-modest proposal. Why not make Novak the director-general of the World Health Organization?

  He would certainly do a better job than the objectively pro-Chinese communist incumbent who drags behind him all kinds of COVID-19-related misjudgments and misrepresentations.

  Instead of diktats from the top, we would have an actual example of physical excellence to mirror and inspire us.

  What would be better for humanity on average: to be a race of people who are gluten-free, pescatarian, and exercise daily, or a race that takes COVID booster shots annually or semi-annually on the advice of some totalitarian statists who claim medical expertise?

  I would bet my proverbial house on the former. In a landslide.

  Yes, Mr. Djokovic has had his moments when he has been too lax, such as when he did some partying with his fellow tennis players, and several contracted COVID-19.

  But undoubtedly, he has learned from the experience, just as he has an uncanny ability to learn from his opponents on the court and defeat them.

  You may think this is a silly recommendation, but in reality, it’s not.

  The appointing of a Novak Djokovic to a role such as that would have great symbolic significance, reminding us that the ultimate control over our bodies is most often our own.

  We can be masters of our physical fates, at least for a while, through our behaviors.

  Our mental fates are intimately tied to that.

  But, yes, I readily admit that isn’t going to happen. Mr. Djokovic isn’t about to retire as a tennis player. He seems to have more Grand Slam championships in him.

  How many exactly, only God knows.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 20:20

• Watch: Germany's Baerbock Humiliated In Dressing Down By Ukraine Foreign Minister
  Watch: Germany’s Baerbock Humiliated In Dressing Down By Ukraine Foreign Minister

  German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock was utterly humiliated by her Ukrainian counterpart Dmytro Kuleba in a joint press conference on Monday. Baerbock had traveled to war-ravaged Ukraine on her fourth visit since Russia’s invasion. She engaged the Zelensky government in high level talks, at one point announcing 20 million euros more in humanitarian aid (Berlin has now provided 380 million euros this year).

  But naturally the Ukrainian side pressed her on supplying more advanced weapons, in particular the Swedish-German produced long-range Taurus cruise missile. That’s when Kubela lashed out at Germany’s top diplomat in a deeply embarrassing moment for Berlin…

  Kuleba wipes his feet on Annalena Baerbock. When asked if she gave him any hope that Germany will supply Ukraine with Taurus missiles:

  “No, she didn’t go beyond the official position of the German government… but you’ll do it anyway, it’s just a matter of time”

  Embarrassing. pic.twitter.com/9oSChwxJ1e

  — Olga Bazova (@OlgaBazova) September 11, 2023

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

  Things took a turn at the joint presser when a journalist asked about the difficulties of the counteroffensive along the southern front, and posed whether Kubela thinks Kiev’s Western backers should supply weapons like the Taurus “quicker and faster”….

  Kubela then explained he had pressed the German delegation for Taurus deliveries as soon as possible, but that Baerbock left him no “hope” in these meetings. He then in a smug and patronizing tone looked toward her and said:

  “No, she didn’t go beyond the official position of the German government… but you’ll do it anyway, it’s just a matter of time.”

  “You will do it anyway, its just a matter of time, and I don’t understand why we are wasting time,” Kuleba said in response to a question at a press conference.

  Kubula then described that more and more Ukrainian lives have been lost due to Western delays in weapons approval and deliveries. The suggestion was that it’s Berlin’s fault (and that of other slow to play along allies).

  Online commentators were quick to point out how “embarrassing” and “pathetic” the moment was for the German side. Others pointed out the “arrogance” on display by Kubela, given also she made the lengthy, dangerous trip into Kiev to announce new humanitarian aid. Such “gifts” weren’t enough.

  One regional commentator had this to say in response to the clip: “So here we have a US protectorate (Germany) being publicly mocked by a US proxy (Ukraine). One of the pitfalls of military alignment — the interests of the alliance as defined by the alliance leader is always supreme.”

  The UK and other Kiev backers have previously charged (typically behind closed doors) that Zelensky is generally being ‘ungrateful’…

  Perhaps the Ukrainian side didn’t like that Baerbock had pointed to deeply rooted corruption among the country’s leadership. Reuters had cited that she earlier in the meetings said “Ukraine’s place was in the European Union” but then “urged it do more to fight corruption” if it hopes to be let in.

  Increasingly, both the Biden administration as well as staunch supporters like Poland have vented occasional frustration at Zelensky and his officials being “ungrateful”.  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 20:00

• School Rehires Transgender Female Coach After He Used Girls' Locker Room & Bathroom
  School Rehires Transgender Female Coach After He Used Girls’ Locker Room & Bathroom

  Via The College Fix,

  Board members of the Gettysburg Area School District in Pennsylvania recently voted to rehire a transgender female tennis coach despite reports he had used a girls’ locker room and bathroom in the past year.

  

  According to PennLive.com, the school board rehired Sasha Yates on September 5 by a 6-2 vote after deadlocking 3-3 on the issue a few weeks earlier.

  The report notes board members provided “scant” details about Yates’ coaching contract, but denied it was due to his gender preference.

  It also mentions – briefly – that a year ago Yates had received a memo from Gettysburg High School Principal Jeremy Lusk “outlining concerns” and noting it is “imperative to maintain professional boundaries.”

  These concerns included Yates (pictured above) changing in and “walking through” the girls’ locker room, and “talk[ing] to students about undergarment preferences and menstruation.”

  A more detailed report in The Epoch Times from late August notes that Yates, formerly known as “David,” had been coaching at Gettysburg since 2018. He switched to “Sasha” last year, and after being terminated in the spring reapplied in July.

  The board’s initial 3-3 vote had maintained Yates’ termination; this was overturned last week.

  Why was Yates let go in the first place?

  The Times notes that in the fall of 2022 Yates changed his clothes in the girls’ locker room — “stripping down to bra and panties” — where the (girls) soccer team also was changing.

  Members of the team had reported “it was clear from what they saw that Mr. Yates was still fully a man.”

  The following spring, Yates used a girls’ bathroom in which a member of the softball team was present. Yates reportedly “tried to strike up a conversation” with the 16-year-old female athlete, leading the girl to text her coach “[T]his damn tennis coach just walked into the girls bathroom … Like, [expletive] You’re a [expletive] man.”

  The girl’s father brought the matter to the attention of school officials, whereupon he was informed Yates “would not be rehired for another season of coaching.”

  He thus considered the matter closed.

  That is, until Yates’ name popped back up on a list of school coaches this summer.

  “Now, everybody in this area seems to be crying that it is hate—that nobody wants this guy back because he’s transgender and it’s hate,” the father said.

  “This has absolutely nothing to do with hate on my part. I don’t care what the guy wants to call himself. My job as a parent is to protect my child. And he had no business going into that bathroom, and his actions proved that he cannot be trusted.”

  Why was Yates brought back?

  The Times notes that following the bathroom incident, a solicitor convinced board members not to fire Yates immediately as they could end up being sued.

  The solicitor then warned about a possible lawsuit if the board did not rehire Yates after he (re)applied.

  PennLive reports while there were more people who spoke against Yates at the latest board meeting, “the majority of the comments were still squarely in the coach’s corner.”

  A PennLive editorial essentially ignores the locker room and bathroom incidents, opting instead (in conditional language) to call for Pennsylvania lawmakers “to protect LGBTQ+ people”:

  The state legislature should move immediately to provide clear protections for LGBTQ+ people in Pennsylvania and ensure what many fear is happening in Gettysburg doesn’t happen again.

  No one should face discrimination because of their sexual orientation. No one should face obstacles to securing housing or access to services because they are gay, lesbian, or transgender. No one should be denied a job or face being fired because of their sexual orientation.

  But supporters of Coach Yates believe that is the reason she hasn’t gotten her contract renewed to continue teaching tennis.

  PennLive also quotes a student on the boys tennis team who said “there’s no validity to the disgusting claims […] about [Yates]” and that he “cannot stand here and refuse to acknowledge that blatant transphobia is the main motivation behind this commotion.”

  The student also claimed a cisgender coach who had used the locker room would not have faced similar scrutiny.

  But the softball player’s father reiterated that Yates’ initial termination wasn’t “because of what he calls himself” – it was “because of his actions and the fact that he can’t follow directions.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 19:40

• 'We Would Have Done Everything Differently': Gavin Newsom Takes Mulligan On Botched Pandemic Response
  ‘We Would Have Done Everything Differently’: Gavin Newsom Takes Mulligan On Botched Pandemic Response

  California Governor Gavin Newsom (D), who’s definitely not running for President in 2024 (until he does), is now on a damage control tour to rewrite history over his draconian pandemic mandates, which made California the “single worst state in every way” when it came to lockdowns, according to state Rep. Kevin Kiley (R).

  

  “I think we would’ve done everything differently,” Newsom told NBC‘s “Meet the Press” in a pre-taped interview which aired Sunday. “I think all of us in terms of our collective wisdom, we’ve evolved. We didn’t know what we didn’t know. We’re experts in hindsight. We’re all geniuses now.“

  Even host Chuck Todd pressed Newsom on his lockdown strategy, saying “You found a way to allow the motion picture industry and the movie industry to get back to work during COVID, but you didn’t allow people to grieve together at funerals or at churches.”

  Wow. Chuck Todd calls out Newsom:

  “You found a way to allow the motion picture industry and the movie industry to get back to work during COVID, but you didn’t allow people to grieve together at funerals or at churches.” pic.twitter.com/bmF4fFD0Uh

  — Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) September 10, 2023

  California state Rep. Kevin Kiley (R) called Newsom out in a Sunday post on X, writing; 

  Newsom is now admitting he botched California’s COVID response. But this is not, as he claims, a matter of “hindsight” being 20/20. We fought back against his disastrous decisions at the time because they so clearly ran afoul of science, common sense, and the basic precepts of a free society.

  Newsom now says “we didn’t know what we didn’t know.” But all 49 other Governors knew better. California was the single worst state in every way: the most onerous school shutdowns, business shutdowns, and church shutdowns; the most draconian mask mandates, vaccine mandates, and vaccine passports; the most complete collapse of checks and balances, personal liberties, and self-government.

  Despite all of this – despite the incalculable damage he did to our young people, our businesses, and our democratic institutions in the name of “public health” – California wound up with an excess mortality rate exceeding the national average, even though we had the benefit of a relatively young population.

  At every turn, Newsom prioritized getting himself in the headlines and rewarding Special Interests over the health and well-being of Californians. It was the most consequential political failure in modern American history – and the most disgraceful.

  Others echoed Kiley’s sentiment: 

  This was completely INTENTIONAL. Newsom cannot be permitted to get away with it again.

  April 2, 2020 “Newsom says coronavirus is an ‘opportunity for reimagining a more progressive era’. Let’s call this the corollary to Rahm Emanuel’s “Never let a crisis go to waste”.…

  — ReneJayeee (@MorningInUSA123) September 11, 2023

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

  And when confronted about this French Laundry dinner…

  He LIED and told the public it was outdoors.

  He still has not addressed that lie.

  — Myrtle (@MyrtlesGirdles) September 11, 2023

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

  Internal polling must be TERRIBLE.

  Or else Republicans found out how Democrats cheated and 2024 may be a functional election.

  Cuz Ted Lieu and Newsom don’t care about your rights. They would murder your children and laugh.

  Trump 2024 has them shook! pic.twitter.com/blA1zFc6oL

  — Cernovich (@Cernovich) September 10, 2023

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

  The reason we can’t accept Newsom’s “hindsight” argument is b/c it isn’t authentic.

  An authentic admission of wrong involves not only repentance, but pushing out the ideologues and elevating the dissentershttps://t.co/I2ZPbITiWq https://t.co/qfJX6FYbas pic.twitter.com/iDj5MC5mgu

  — PoIiMath (@politicalmath) September 11, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 19:20

• Victor Davis Hanson: The Frightened Left
  Victor Davis Hanson: The Frightened Left

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

  An impeachment inquiry looms and the shrieks of outrage are beginning.

  

  The Left is now suddenly voicing warnings that those who recently undermined the system could be targeted by their own legacies.

  So, for example, now we read why impeachment is suddenly a dangerous gambit.

  True, the Founders did not envision impeaching a first-term president the moment he lost his House majority. Nor did they imagine impeaching a president twice. And they certainly did not anticipate trying an ex-president in the Senate as a private citizen.

  In modern times, the nation has not rushed to impeach a president without a special counsel investigation to determine whether the chief executive was guilty of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

  But thanks to the Democrats, recent impeachments now have destroyed all those guardrails. After all, Trump was impeached the first time on the fumes of an exhaustive but fruitless 22-month, $40 million special counsel investigation—one designed to find him guilty of Russian “collusion” and thus to be removed from office but found no actionable offenses at all.

  Instead, dejected Democrats moved immediately for a second try. In September 2019 a few weeks after Trump had announced his 2020 reelection bid, the Democratic House began to impeach the president on the new grounds that he had talked to the President Zelensky of Ukraine and said he might delay offensive arms shipments—unless the Ukrainians could demonstrate that they had ended corruption and, in particular, were no longer influenced by the Biden family quid pro quo shakedowns.

  Trump was proven right: the Biden family is not just corrupt, but, in particular, Joe Biden as head of the family and Vice President had intervened in the internal politics of an aid recipient, by threatening not to delay but rather to cancel outright all U.S. aid to Ukraine—unless it fired Viktor Shokin, a Ukrainian prosecutor.

  Shokin was then looking into the misadventures of Biden’s son Hunter, and why the Vice President’s imbecilic son was receiving lucrative compensation on the boards of a Ukrainian energy company Burisma, yet without any demonstrable expertise or education in matters of energy policy.

  Since Trump was impeached, we now know that Joe Biden did lie that he had no connection with or even knowledge of his son’s business. And we know that the fired prosecutor believed the Bidens were recipients of bribes. We know that contrary to Biden’s assertions, he was not following State Department policy.

  In contrast, the U.S. had, in fact, lauded Shokin’s efforts to repress corruption. In sum, Biden was undermining the stated policy of the U.S. government to protect his son’s—and his own—efforts to leverage money from Kyiv by monetizing the influence of his own Vice Presidency. In some sense, Biden was guilty of the very “treason” charge—altering U.S. foreign policy for personal benefit—by which Rep. Adam Schiff had earlier falsely accused Trump.

  Given that reality, it is easy to argue that the House impeached Donald Trump in 2019 for crimes that he did not commit, but which the current president Joe Biden most certainly had during his Vice Presidency.

  But weaponizing impeachment is just one baleful legacy of the Left.

  There are plenty more of their own precedents that Leftists now would not wish to have applied to themselves:

  • Will the next president have the FBI pay social media censors to suppress the dissemination of any news it feels is unhelpful to the reelection of a Republican president?

  • Is it OK now for the next Vice President to invite his son onto Air Force Two to cement multimillion dollars deals that benefit both, with Chinese, Russian, and Ukrainian oligarchs who enjoy government ties?

  • Should a conservative billionaire stealthily insert $419 million late in the 2024 campaign to absorb the work of registrars in key voting precincts?

  • If a Democratic president wins the 2024 election should conservative groups riot at the Capitol on Inauguration Day? Should a conservative celebrity yell out to the assembled crowd of protestors that she dreams of blowing up the White House? And if a Republican wins, should he prosecute any Democratic rioters who once again swarm Washington on Inauguration Day and charge them with “insurrection,” meting out long prisons sentences to the convicted?

  • Is Joe Biden now vulnerable to being impeached for systematic family corruption, or using the Department of Justice to obstruct the prosecution of his son in his last days in office, and then being tried in the Senate as a private citizen?

  • If the Republicans gain the Senate, will they move to end the filibuster in agreement with Democratic assertions that it is “racist” and a “Jim Crow relic”?

  • If the midwestern Electoral College “Blue Wall” seems to reappear, or if Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada recreate new blue walls, will there be a conservative effort to end the constitutionally mandated Electoral College?

  • If in 2024 there is a narrow Democratic win in the Electoral College, should conservative celebrities conspire to run ads urging the electors to reject their constitutional duties and not vote in accordance with their state’s popular vote that went Democratic? Should a Republican third-party candidate sue to stop a state’s selection of its electors on grounds the voting machines were rigged?

  • If Supreme Court decisions begin to appear to favor the left, will Republicans talk of packing the court, or have the DOJ turn a blind eye when mobs began to swarm the homes of liberal justices? Should the conservative media go after liberal judges with serial accusations of corruption? Should the Republican Senate leader assemble a mob of pro-life protestors at the doors of the court and call out Justices Sotomayor or Jackson by name, with threats that they will soon reap the whirlwind they have sowed, given they have no idea of what is about to “hit” them? Should conservative legal scholars urge the country to ignore Supreme Court decisions deemed liberal?

  • Will local prosecutors in red jurisdictions begin filing criminal charges against leading Democratic candidates on various charges, among them accusations of old inflated real estate assessments, campaign finance laws, questioning ballot results, or taking classified documents home? If Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton were to run in 2024, will their past illicit behavior gain the attention of a city or state attorney in Utah, West Virginia, or Wyoming?

  • If Joe Biden continues to decline at his present rate, will Republicans demand he be given the Montreal Cognitive Assessment? Will they subpoena Ivy League psychiatrists to testify that an intervention is needed to remove him from office? And will an FBI director and a deputy Attorney General plan to wear wires, and record Biden in his private moments of senility, as a way of convincing the cabinet or Congress that he is demonstrably mentally unfit for office?

  • In the 2024 election, should the Republican nominee hire a foreign ex-spy to compile falsehoods about the Democratic opponent and then seed them among the media, and Department of Justice? Should the FBI hire such a Republican contractor and likewise use him to gather dirt on the Democratic nominee?

  • If there appears incriminating evidence concerning a Republican nominee, should the FBI retrieve such evidence, keep it under wraps, lie about its veracity, and instead go along with media and ex-intelligence officers assertions that it is a fraudulent production of Russian intelligence?

  • Will conservative CIA and FBI directors, and the Director of National Intelligence be given exemptions from prosecutions for systematically lying while under oath in Congress or to federal investigators?

  • Will conservative celebrities ritually on social media, without fear of censorship, brag about ways of decapitating, shooting, stabbing, burning, or blowing up the Democratic nominee?

  • Since in many states the statues of limitations have not yet expired for arson, murder, assault, looting, and attacks on 1,500 police officers during the summer 2020 riots, will state prosecutors now begin identifying those 14,000 once arrested and mostly released, and begin refiling charges of conspiracy, racketeering—and “insurrection”?

  • Will they also file insurrection charges against those who torched a federal courthouse, a police precinct, and a historic Washington DC church, or conspired to riot and swarm the White House grounds in an effort to attack the President of the United States?

  • Will they file charges against Vice President Kamala Harris for “inciting” ongoing violent demonstrations with monotonous, emphatic, and repetitive threats in the weeks before her nomination? Contrary to liberal “fact checkers” at time of nationwide violence, Harris certainly did not distinguish violent from non-violent protests, but in fact implied that they were intimately tied to the upcoming election and beyond. So given the hundreds of police officers injured, the hundreds of millions in property damage, and the dozens killed, what exactly did Harris mean by tying that ongoing summer of often violent protests to Election Day?:

  “But they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop, and this is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after Election Day. Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up — and they should not. And we should not.”

  Was the above more or less inflammatory than Trump’s January 6 remarks for which in part he is under indictment:

  “We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore…I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard”?

  In sum, the Democratic leadership along with the media long ago deemed that Donald Trump posed such an existential threat to democracy that they were entitled to destroy democratic norms to destroy him.

  Their actions were predicated on three assumptions: one, they had that right because they were more sophisticated, morally superior, and smarter than the rest of America and thus deserved the exemption to blow up customs and norms to achieve the “correct” ends; two, whatever damage they did to long-standing protocols of equal justice under the law paled in comparison to the damage that Trump supposedly would or did do; and three, their conservative opposition either lacked the wherewithal, the brains, or the audacity to emulate such behavior and thus there was no worry anyone would dare do to them what they did to others.

  And now? For the first time, given recent polls, the Left is scared that a Republican House and perhaps soon a Republican Senate and White House might follow its own precedents, and use new leftwing guidelines to enact conservative agendas.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 19:00

• CJ Hopkins & The (Continued) Criminalization Of Dissent
  CJ Hopkins & The (Continued) Criminalization Of Dissent

  Authored by CJ Hopkins via The Consent Factory,

  So, the Berlin State Prosecutor has launched another criminal investigation of me.

  

  Apparently, I’m being charged with reporting on the original investigation of me that the Berlin State Prosecutor launched in June.

  What happened is, the prosecutor visited my blog and read a column I published in July, The Criminalization of Dissent (Revisited), which included screenshots of the alleged “hate-crime” Tweets that the original criminal investigation is based on, and that resulted in the Order of Punishment that the Berlin District Court handed down two weeks ago. So, the prosecutor opened a new criminal investigation and sent my attorney an official notice explaining the gravity of the additional charges.

  The charges are of the utmost gravity. I am officially accused of “relativizing” or “minimizing” the crimes of the Nazis … by republishing the two Tweets that I originally tweeted.

  Here, once again, are the Tweets …

  

  Yes, that’s right, I just published them again. I am going to explain why I published them again.

  I’m not going to explain the Tweets again. I have explained them in several previous columns. I have explained them to Matt Taibbi of Racket News, Max Blumenthal of The Grayzone, James Freeman, Patrick Henningsen, Elena Louisa Lange, Dirk Pohlmann, and Christine Black at Brownstone Institute (forgive me if I’m forgetting anyone). I explained them to Stefan Millius of Weltwoche, and to another journalist at a big Swiss newspaper. My attorney has explained them, in German, to the prosecutor, and to German audiences on Kontrafunk. RT published a piece explaining them. I believe they have been exhaustively explained.

  Not that they ever really needed explanation. You would have to be a certified moron to believe they “minimized,” or “relativized,” or in any way made light of the crimes of the Nazis. You and I are not certified morons. Neither is the Berlin State Prosecutor. Neither is the District Court of Berlin. Not to put too fine a point on it, the charges are horseshit, and everyone involved knows it. They are a blatant pretext to crackdown on dissent.

  OK, now let me explain why I just published the Tweets again, knowing full well that the Berlin State Prosecutor is probably going to read this column, become extremely agitated, and charge me with additional “hate crimes.”

  No, I am not a glutton for punishment. I’m not at all enjoying my introduction to the so-called “German legal system.”

  It is taking up my time.

  It is making me angry.

  It is upsetting my wife, which I do not appreciate.

  It is costing me a lot of money.

  It has forced me to ask other people for money, which is something I do not like to do.

  It’s screwing with my sleep.

  It is distracting me from my work.

  And so on. Which is exactly the point.

  The goal of horseshit prosecutions like mine (and those of many other dissidents currently) is (a) to punish us for speaking out against “New Normal” totalitarianism by making our lives as miserable as possible, (b) to make examples of us to discourage others from speaking out, and (c) to intimidate us into shutting the fuck up.

  Totalitarians, fascists, and other power freaks are essentially just glorified schoolyard bullies. They may cloak themselves in the mantle of the law, but their modus operandi is brute force. Beneath all the bullshit, their message is simple: “either do what we say, or we will hurt you.”

  OK, prepare yourself, because I’m going to give you some advice. I do not generally like to do that, but, in this case, I’m going to make an exception.

  Never, ever, give in to a bully.

  The second you do, that bully owns you.

  What the bully wants, more than whatever he is demanding, more than anything else in the world, is your fear. The bully interprets your fear as respect, because the bully doesn’t understand respect. The bully craves your fear, and your obedience, because they reify the bully’s “authority.” They enable the bully to feel powerful and important. The bully needs to feel “powerful” and “important” because the bully feels weak and unimportant, and afraid. All fascists are essentially cowards. They are cowards, and nihilists, who hate themselves, and fear themselves, and hate and fear life, which is why they are so obsessed with controlling everything.

  The point is, never give in to a bully. Never reify a bully’s “authority.” If you do, you will find yourself sucked into the bully’s sadistic, nihilistic “reality.” You will be playing by the bully’s rules. And that is all “reality” actually is, a set of rules we agree to play by, or, in this case, do not agree to play by.

  So, getting back to my criminal case, and the Berlin State Prosecutor’s latest attempt to bully me into shutting up and demonstrating my “respect” for the “authority” and “power” of the Berlin State Prosecutor, fuck that. I do not respond well to threats. I do not take orders from totalitarians and fascists, or any other type of authoritarians or bullies. So that is why I have republished those Tweets, and why I will continue to republish those Tweets every time the German authorities threaten me with additional criminal charges for refusing to obey their “authority.”

  Again, I am under no illusions. I expect the prosecutor to file new charges and issue further threats, which I will defy, which will lead to additional charges, and so on. I am not looking forward to that, but I don’t have any other choice, not if I want to be able to respect myself.

  If you have any doubts about whether that will happen (i.e., an endless cycle of new bullshit criminal charges stemming from my repeated refusal to respond to the German authorities’ bullying), well, let me tell you about another dissident the German authorities are currently persecuting. I’ll do it quickly, and then I’ll let you go.

  As many of my readers are aware, I am presently holed up in an undisclosed location in the Italian countryside.

  Michael Ballweg, the founder and lead organizer of the “Querdenken” movement, was also here for a while. Michael, who is an excellent cook, whipped up some delicious “extremist” dinners, after which we all sat around “denying Covid,” “conspiracy theorizing,” brainwashing each other with “Russian propaganda,” and “delegitimizing the state,” and so on. Late at night, when the other “extremists” were sleeping, Michael and I discussed our criminal cases.

  Michael’s case is a bit more serious than mine. Michael just spent nine months in jail. The German authorities have seized his assets, and frozen all his funds, so he is homeless, and bankrupt, and they are prosecuting him for attempted fraud, money laundering, and tax evasion, or, in other words, for launching a protest movement. If you’re not familiar with Michael and Querdenken, you can read the official propaganda disseminated by the usual “mainstream” media or the Intelligence officers who edit Wikipedia, or … here’s a Spiked article to start you off. Then, go ahead, do your own research.

  The most absurd aspect of Michael’s case is the German authorities’ “theory of his crimes.” According to this theory, Michael’s devious scheme was to commit serious fraud by … well, basically, launching a nationwide protest movement that was certain to get a ton of media attention and incur the wrath of the German authorities. As any criminal mastermind will confirm, the best way to commit major fraud is to absolutely infuriate the government by organizing a series of massive protests, and generate tons of media attention, because you definitely want as much publicity as possible while you are defrauding your unsuspecting supporters of their voluntary donations to your cause.

  Seriously, this is their “theory of the crime,” which would make Michael Ballweg the most idiotic and incompetent fraudster in the history of fraud.

  I could go on about his case, and mine, or those of the numerous other dissidents that are currently being made examples of, and about the broader GloboCap crackdown on dissent, which is happening, not just in New Normal Germany, but all throughout the New Normal Reich, but I need to end here and go water some plants. I am serving as “caretaker” of this thoughtcriminal sanctuary, and I take my responsibilities seriously.

  I’ll keep you (and the Berlin State Prosecutor) posted on my further “hate crimes.” In the meantime, best wishes from somewhere in Italy!

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 18:20

• IPO Renaissance Not So Clear: ARM 5x Oversubscribed, InstaCart Big Down-Round
  IPO Renaissance Not So Clear: ARM 5x Oversubscribed, InstaCart Big Down-Round

  Amid concerns of mounting economic headwinds and market volatility, there is renewed optimism that the 18-month slowdown in the initial public offering market, which collapsed equity underwriting revenues, could be due for a rebound. 

  On deck this week is the IPO for UK-based chip designer Arm Holdings Plc, which is more than five times oversubscribed. Financials Times spoke with people familiar with the IPO that said the company would raise about $4.9 billion with shares priced at the high end of $47 to $51 per share. The deal is expected to close as early as Tuesday. 

  Strong demand for the chip designer that SoftBank Group Corp owns could be what is needed to break the ice on the frozen US IPO market. A group of top tech companies have indicated interest in “purchasing up to an aggregate of $735 million of the ADSs offered” in ARM’s offering, including Apple, Nvidia, Google, AMD, and Taiwan Semiconductor. 

  However, Arm could be an outlier.

  Also on Monday, Instacart, one of the largest online grocery delivery firms, submitted an updated filing for its upcoming IPO, indicating a money raise of $616 million, with a value of $9.3 billion — or about 25% less than its private valuation two years ago.

  Following a surge in growth stocks that pushed US equity benchmarks to near-record highs, investors have been drinking the Wall Street ‘AI Kool-Aid’ with hopes of a robust stock market recovery. 

  “As we sit here in late August, looking towards the fall, IPO volumes are actually up 140% this year,” RBC Capital Markets’ John Kolz wrote in a recent note. 

  Kolz continued, “Follow-on issuance is up 43%. Converts are up 140%. But those numbers are off an extremely depressed base. The NASDAQ is up 27%, but there’s been virtually no tech IPOs. Deal volumes have been decent, but performance thus far has been fair at best. There’s real-time momentum in the markets right now, but what does that mean for rest of the year, and for IPOs specifically?”

  RBC’s Mike Ventura reaffirmed Kolz’s view: “If you think of the year-over-year comparisons you’ve listed, most of that deal volume came from a well-defined window in May and June, ahead of corporate blackouts. The market data has investors feeling good. The knock-on effect of the very strong follow-on performance has already led to a few green shoots in the IPO market.”

  While the headline of an oversubscribed Arm IPO brings relief for investors, there is still an unsettled macroeconomic environment where risks of a hard landing (read: Goldman questioning the soft landing narrative) mount despite investors latching onto the ‘Goldilocks’ view. 

  Moving beyond the AI bubble, which even JPMorgan’s top tech trader Ron Adler warned might have just popped, we shared a note Monday morning that shows a collapse in Bloomberg’s Smart Money Flow Indicator.

  There are rumblings under the surface… 

  

  Whether it’s the prospect for ‘higher for longer’ interest rates, another rate hike, or a scare in consumer spending, the market could be just one narrative away from de-risking, suggesting the IPO market recovery might be too premature and possibly a 2024 story.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 18:00

• 22 Years Later: America's Journey From Impenetrable Fortress To A Power In Decline
  22 Years Later: America’s Journey From Impenetrable Fortress To A Power In Decline

  Authored by Jordan Schachtel via ‘The Dossier’ Substack,

  America was an impenetrable fortress.

  That’s at least what the news and the believably competent people in charge said at the time.

  We just assumed that nobody would ever mess with us.

  Until one day, the Twin Towers came crashing down.

  

  On the morning of September 11, 2001, our country was widely understood as the lone hyper power that whooped that bad guy Saddam not so long ago. We also had just bombed the brakes off of Yugoslavia, but that was necessary to keep peace and such. When it came to military prowess, we were the NBA All Stars, and everyone else’s defense capabilities added up to a high school basketball team. At least that’s what we were told. China was not yet on the radar. America was the uncontested hegemon. And we were nice enough to maintain global order as the World Police, too!

  Before September 11, it was just assumed that the government would keep us safe from any foreign threats. One could just imagine how all of those ultra intelligent, wise and moral bureaucrats from those three letter agencies would have all of these super secret Star Wars-like tech measures in place to protect us from the barbarians beyond our shores.

  Looking back on it now, September 11, 2001 was the first day of my life that broadly challenged my preconceived notion that the government was our partner in preserving our freedoms and our constitutional system of order.

  

  What the heck? Why didn’t our ultra competent Pentagon defense systems protect us and shoot down the bad guys before they could hit us? Hmm, must’ve been a catastrophic error or something…

  But instead of allowing for an internal investigation into the developing paradoxes being introduced into the Millennial mind, the current regime quickly distracted the citizenry with the likes of Al Qaeda, Afghanistan, the Taliban, and co.

  I was in middle school across the river in New Jersey, and still remember that day like it was yesterday, when we were abruptly pulled out of class and sent home. Some of those kids’ parents worked in the original World Trade Center. For some classmates who lost a loved one, it would mark the last time I ever saw them. I hope they’re doing well now. Everyone knew someone, or several someones, who never made it back from work that day.

  In the New York City metro area, it was a time of disbelief, sadness, unity, and rage.

  

  Everyone remembers the unity. Many have to be reminded of the rage.

  There was an overwhelming sense that we needed to get even, and as soon as humanly possible.

  The likes of Ron Paul and other non-interventionist forces were shouted down as treasonous.

  It was time to get even, even if we didn’t really understand who or what our enemy comprised.

  The American war machine weaponized this rage, this indignant mission, into a multi decade boondoggle in dozens of nations.

  At the time of the 9/11 attacks, foreign policy was more of an intellectual exercise for the dorks in D.C.

  Very few Americans knew anything about the Muslim world, let alone Afghanistan (and later Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc).

  The people who claimed they knew stuff didn’t really know anything either. We were the easiest of marks.

  As the wars continued, George W. Bush reminded the nation that we had to “fight them over there so we do not have to face them in the United States of America.”

  

  But wait, how did they get here in the first place?

  There was no time for those kind of “insensitive” questions, even years after the 9/11 tragedy. It was always time to get the bad Al Qaeda guys, harbored by their Taliban sponsors. The mission was ever expansive, and it didn’t seem to matter. Anyone who wasn’t on board with the War On Terror agenda was on the side of the terrorists, we were told.

  Trillions in spending and thousands of lost American lives later, our country is no more secure than it was on 9/10/2001. Moreover, our sacred liberties have been trampled upon, and the country once understood as an impenetrable fortress is a power in decline.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 09/11/2023 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

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

  Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  *   *  *  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Enough is enough.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 22:30

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Could you do this? How fast?

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

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

  Do LLMs Enhance Productivity in Generating Ideas?

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

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

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

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

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

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

  ChatGPT vs the Screen Actors Guild

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

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

  Hoot of the Day from the World Socialist Organization

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

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

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

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

  Outright cruelty!?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  United Auto Workers (UAW) Demands

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

  Bernie Sanders Comments and an Accurate Rebuttal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  “What, me worry?”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

  Source: Bloomberg

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

  

  Source: Bloomberg

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

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

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

  

  Source: Bloomberg

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

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

  

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

  

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

  

  The problem for Goldilocks believers is Energy.

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  September seasonality dynamics tend to benefit consensual longs & Momentum…

  

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

  

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

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

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

  By Jean-Laurent Cadorel of Exante Data

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

  Motivation

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

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

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

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

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

  Results

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

  

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

  

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

  Mechanism

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

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

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

  Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Amaka Nwaokocha via Cointelegraph.com,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — John Hasson (@SonofHas) September 9, 2023

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

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

  That’s it.  That’s all she’s got. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Authored by Jeff Louderbeck via The Epoch Times,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  ‘Poison, Hatred, and Vitriol’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Ending the Ukraine War

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

  The American Dream

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Corporations Killing the Dream

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Primary Season

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  First Office in New Hampshire

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  “That applies to the vaccines and abortion.

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

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

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

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

  Censorship

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  In June, Instagram restored the account.

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

  Mr. Kennedy’s Facebook account has remained active.

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

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

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

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

  Allegations of Anti-Semitism

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

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

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

  Mr. Kennedy has vehemently denied the allegations.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Watch:

  The Left is turning on Biden. Newsom Time?

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

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

  — RPK Report (@RPKReport) September 7, 2023

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

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

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

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

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

  Made By China

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

  The following helps support that view:

  • The yuan is on the cusp of record weakness.

  

  This weakness should provide a competitive advantage for Chinese exports.

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

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

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

  Inflation versus a Slowdown

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Alpha
  Alpha

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  Alpha

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

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

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

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

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

  Anecdote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Did someone pay Bidens to weaken the United States?

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 24, 2023

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

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

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

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

  Watch:

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

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

  

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

  As Jack Gist opines in The Western Journal,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  How soon can this person be removed from office?

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 9, 2023

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 9, 2023

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  See you in court! 🔥

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

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

   See you in court, Governor Grisham.

  *   *   * 

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

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

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

  Authored by Jakub Bożydar Wiśniewski via the Mises Institute,

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  And more via The Moscow Times:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Modi and Lavrov at #G20Summit2023

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

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

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

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

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

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

Digest powered by RSS Digest

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

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse Blog,

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

  

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

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

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

  This is like something out of a science fiction novel.

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

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

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

  But it is.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Would such “entities” be truly human?

  Would they even have souls?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  But they know that their days are limited.

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

  This is another thing that shouldn’t be done.

  And it is probably dangerous.

  But nobody is going to stop them.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

   

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Read more here…

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

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

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

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

  

  As Visual Capitalist‘s Ehsan Soltani notes,

  The International Student Population

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

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

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

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

  

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

  

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

  A Billionaire Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  Health Officials Split on Masking

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

  Advertisement – Story continues below

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Governors on Mask Mandates

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  Fight Over Mandates on Capitol Hill

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

  How is Shareholder Wealth Creation Calculated?

  Bessembinder took three steps to measure lifetime shareholder wealth creation:

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

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

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

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

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

  The 25 Best Stocks in Modern History

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

  

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

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

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

  Finding the Next Winners

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

  As Visual Capitalist‘s Dorothy Neufeld notes:

  Wealthy in America: A Closer Look

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

  The Wealth Paradox

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

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

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

  

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

  Explaining the Divergence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

  ‘Poison, Hatred, and Vitriol’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

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

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

  

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

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

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

  He believes that he, and not President Biden, is the candidate who will best represent Democrats in 2024 and beyond.

  “I am the only choice that is going to end the war machine, that is going to really focus on rebuilding the American middle class, taming inflation,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  

  About gun control, Mr. Kennedy said, “I do not believe that, within that Second Amendment, there is anything we can meaningfully do to reduce the trade and the ownership of guns.”

  “Anybody who tells you that they’re going to reduce gun violence through gun control at this point, I don’t think is being realistic,” he said. “I think we have to think about other ways to reduce that violence.”

  Mr. Kennedy did note that he would sign an assault weapons ban if he were president and the legislation was placed on his desk.

  A vocal opponent of the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Kennedy vowed at a town hall in Brooklyn on Sept. 1 that he would ban pharmaceutical advertising.

  He is outspoken about the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccine for some in the population who were coerced to take them, but he told the Epoch Times that he is not “anti-vaccine.”

  “I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” he said. “I’ve said that hundreds and hundreds of times, but it doesn’t matter because that is a way of silencing me. Using that pejorative to describe me is a way of silencing or marginalizing me.”

  Mr. Kennedy has said that, initially, he was not in favor of former President Trump’s border wall. But after seeing the border firsthand in Arizona in July, he changed his mind. He said there is a need for increased infrastructure and technology at the border, including more segments of a physical wall, and sensors in areas where a wall isn’t feasible.

  Until the United States can seal the border, he said he doesn’t think it is possible to get an immigration reform package through Congress.

  

  Mr. Kennedy visited the Arizona–California border with Mexico in early June and met with illegal immigrants, Border Patrol agents, and other stakeholders.

  “The Democratic Party thinks our function should be welcoming all immigrants into the country no matter what, and to basically open the borders. And the experiment has been a disaster, a humanitarian catastrophe,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I watched it firsthand. I watched 300 people come across the border and then be processed and sent to locations all over the country with court dates seven years down the road.”

  “There’s now seven million people who have come across illegally and have no legal status in this country. Those people are very vulnerable now to unscrupulous employers who are paying them $5 and $6 an hour,” he said.

  Mr. Kennedy called the Biden administration’s open border policy “a way of funding a multibillion-dollar drug and human trafficking operation for the Mexican drug cartels.”

  “As president, I will secure the border, which will end the cartel’s drug trafficking economy. I will build wide doors for those who wish to enter legally so that the U.S. can continue to be a beacon to the world where diversity and culture make us great,” he said.

  “Immigration is good for our country, but this kind of immigration is unfair to everybody,” he said.

  Ending the Ukraine War

  Mr. Kennedy has called for de-escalating the war in Ukraine. He explained that he is sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause and added that Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded the country illegally, but he chastised the United States for its role in the conflict.

  “We have neglected many, many opportunities to settle this war peacefully,” he said. “We have turned that nation into a proxy war between Russia and the United States.”

  

  Mr. Kennedy has urged President Biden to negotiate a peaceful end to the Russia-Ukraine war, which started when Russia invaded the neighboring nation in February 2022.

  “Russia is not going to lose this war. Russia can’t afford it,” Mr. Kennedy said. “It would be like us losing a war to Mexico.”

  As part of his reasoning for ending the Ukraine war, Mr. Kennedy referenced his uncle, President John F. Kennedy.

  “My uncle Jack said that the primary job of an American President of the United States is to keep the country out of war. He kept out of Vietnam. He sent only 16,000 military advisers there—mainly Green Berets,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “In October 1963, he learned that one of his Green Berets had died, and he asked his aide to give him a combat casualty list, and the aide came back and said 75 had died so far. He said: ‘That’s too many.’”

  The American Dream

  When it comes to supporting labor unions, Mr. Kennedy’s ideas are similar to President Biden’s.

  “In my administration, you can expect vigorous action by the Justice Department and the Department of Labor to enforce laws against union-busting and unfair labor practices,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “We will also raise the minimum wage so that unions have a higher floor from which to bargain. We will negotiate trade treaties that don’t pit American workers against low-wage foreign workers in a race to the bottom.”

  At his campaign stops. Mr. Kennedy likes to talk about the flourishing economic period the nation experienced after World War II.

  “I grew up during the heyday of American economic prosperity. It was in the 1950s and 1960s that the archetype of the American Dream was born. It was not something available only to a lucky few; it was within the reach of most Americans,” he said.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 19:30

• CNN Political Director Admits Biden In Danger From "Troublingly Low" Approval Ratings
  CNN Political Director Admits Biden In Danger From “Troublingly Low” Approval Ratings

  A new poll from CNN conducted by SSRS found that President Biden’s reelection campaign is already in trouble, with 46% of voters, overall, saying that any GOP candidate would be preferred over Biden – including former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley.

  

  According to CNN political director David Chalian, Biden’s approval ratings are “troublingly low.”

  Amontg those polled, 58% say Biden’s policies have made economic conditions worse, and 70% say things in America are going badly. Just 33% of those polled described Biden as someone they’re proud to have as their president.

  CNN POLL: 70% of Americans say things are going badly in the country today pic.twitter.com/lGwoCvaThU

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 7, 2023

  “Look at that approval number over time. Since the spring, he’s been hanging out in this very low, troubling approval rating for him and It really has not fluctuated for him all that much,” said Chalian. “Take a look by party. You noted among Democrats, his approval rating is down a bit from where it was in July. He’s at 74% among his own party faithful. Independents, holding troublingly low for the president at 36%. Obviously, single digits among Republicans.“

  A recent Wall Street Journal poll also spelled bad news for Biden, with former President Donald Trump leading Biden by 11 points on the question of who had a better record. Trump also led Biden by 10 points in perceived mental fitness to hold office. Fifty-eight percent of those polled said the economy has gotten worse over the past two years, with a majority of those polled disapproving of Biden’s handling of the economy. -Daily Caller

  Watch the whole clip (via the Daily Caller),

  “And look at how Biden stacks up against all of his modern-era predecessors at this point in their presidency. Going to draw a line here to show he’s hanging out in this category with Trump and [Jimmy] Carter. Something about Trump and Carter, they lost their reelection efforts,” he continued.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 19:00

• New Mexico Lawmakers Call For Governor's Impeachment Over 2A Overreach
  New Mexico Lawmakers Call For Governor’s Impeachment Over 2A Overreach

  Update (1848ET):

  New Mexico State Representatives Stefani Lord (R-22) and John Block (R-51) called for the impeaching of Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) after she issued a public health emergency to strip the right away for law-abiding citizens to carry firearms in public in and around Albuquerque, the state’s largest city. 

  “This is an abhorrent attempt at imposing a radical, progressive agenda on an unwilling populous. Rather than addressing crime at its core, Governor Grisham is restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Lord wrote in a press release shared on X. 

  🚨PRESS RELEASE: @RepBlock & I are calling for the impeachment of @GovMLG. New Mexicans won’t stand by as she disregards her oath to uphold our Constitution.

  Read the full press release below! 👇 pic.twitter.com/r5kt9nOSvI

  — Rep Stefani Lord (@Lord4NM) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  While impeachment calls grow, Erich Pratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America, told us: “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.'”

  *   *   * 

  On Friday evening, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) issued an emergency order suspending the right of law-abiding citizens to open and conceal carry firearms in crime-ridden Albuquerque and the surrounding county for at least 30 days, after declaring a public health emergency in response to a spate of recent gun violence.

  

  Grisham, who apparently thinks criminals will follow her orders, says she expects legal challenges, but was ‘compelled to act’ following recent shootings, AP reports.

  The Governor of New Mexico has just declared the 1st & 2nd Amendment “does not exist” due to an “emergency.”

  Under this legal theory *all* of our “rights” are essentially eliminated.

  Watch the most evil & tyrannical 60 seconds you’ve ever heard from a politician: pic.twitter.com/xLpMSTbyi2

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop,” Grisham posted on X. 

  Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop. https://t.co/KJdXUMBVaG

  — Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Grisham declared in a statement, “As I said yesterday, the time for standard measures has passed. And when New Mexicans are afraid to be in crowds, to take their kids to school, to leave a baseball game—when their very right to exist is threatened by the prospect of violence at every turn—something is very wrong.”

  Yes governor, now law-abiding citizens won’t be able to match force with criminal threats while in public, after failed progressive policies transformed Albuquerque into a crime-infested metro area with soaring violence.

  According to a recent report by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Albuquerque had one of the highest homicide rates in the country.

  

  Constitutional law attorney Jonathan Turley said the move by Grisham is “flagrantly unconstitutional under existing Second Amendment precedent.” 

  Turley continued, “Democratic leaders have increasing turned to a claim used successfully during the pandemic in declaring a health emergency to maximize unilateral authority of governors.” 

  “The taking away of individual rights as an emergency measure is hardly new. For centuries, governments have claimed that the suspension of individual rights is necessary for the good of citizens,” he said. 

  You thought the “public health emergency” power grab was a one and done with COVID?

  Do not comply. https://t.co/PXLzgt280e

  — Sean Agnew (@seanagnew) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  According to Erich Pratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America, “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.’“

  According to @erichmpratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America said:

  “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.’” https://t.co/2Xj0b4QSv7

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Trial Balloon?

  Grisham’s move signals a new attack strategy by Democrats on the Second Amendment. We must remind readers ever since the ‘defund the police’ movement began several years ago, many Democratic-led cities have faced soaring crime rates. Failed social justice reform only sparked more violence, which may have been intentional to create a crisis and then offer a novel solution with even more gun control. 

  This “Public health order” is a trial balloon for things to come. The moment we allowed them to do this with COVID, we opened the door. https://t.co/FFSiwDHPzk

  — Nick Short ‎‎ (@PoliticalShort) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And this… 

  The 2nd amendment isn’t a recommendation. It’s a right.

  Friendly suggestion to @GovMLG on how to *actually* reduce violent crime in your state: focus on sealing your own state’s southern border & stop the virtue signaling elsewhere. https://t.co/RgzpFZAPs8

  — Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Democrats have faced gun control roadblocks ever since the US Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen in 2022, which hindered their ability to pass expansive laws restricting guns ever since.

  Now, the tactic is to use emergency orders to suspend rights – which police chiefs for both Albuquerque and Bernalillo Counties have said might be civil violations.

  Social media users on X weren’t pleased with the governor:

  Every law enforcement officer in your state should unite & ignore you.
  So should the citizens of NM. Do not comply.

  Because criminals will undoubtedly ignore you & this unconstitutional order empowers them. https://t.co/UCmavZwsJb

  — Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Given the real problem of crime in some places, and that people carrying for self-defense are not the perpetrators, the appropriate response is to refuse to comply. https://t.co/7XVqMYvfs1

  — J.D. Tuccille (@JD_Tuccille) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  These guys respect emergency declaration orders. They’ll voluntarily disarm just like in old Mexico where gun possession is illegal, I’m sure….. https://t.co/OXE2pUAtxI pic.twitter.com/QkT84WfQtZ

  — Randy Clark (@RandyClarkBBTX) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyrants always trample on rights under the false guise of safeguarding the public. https://t.co/MhrHjY5FhE

  — Justin Amash (@justinamash) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Literally treason. You’re not a dictator. You do not have the authority to disregard the US Constitution. The US Constitution cannot be altered via EO. You do not get to disregard your oath of office. Your days in office are numbered. https://t.co/msp9ufnSVu

  — Alex Shepard 🇺🇸 (@Sinnersaint39) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Albuquerque for the next 30 days: https://t.co/aRvnMo8L5C pic.twitter.com/bVIdTweBaN

  — Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) September 9, 2023

  How many of those murders, or any murders, are by people with CCW permits?

  Will you be personally reimbursing the taxpayers after the inevitable legal challenges result in the government having to pay plaintiffs’ legal fees under 42 U.S. Code § 1988? https://t.co/rp66l6Rdji

  — Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Remember the past.  

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  In New Mexico, Governor @GovMLG‘s capricious gun ban in the name of “public health” serves to remind us that history doesn’t always repeat itself but it often rhymes. https://t.co/7NL0No9235 https://t.co/7NL0No9235 pic.twitter.com/loqjzf9EfG

  — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) September 9, 2023

  Any bets on which Democrat governors will follow suit?

  pic.twitter.com/fGih3Czg6h

  — Natalie F Danelishen (@Chesschick01) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 18:58

• The Art Of The Lose-Lose Deal
  The Art Of The Lose-Lose Deal

  Authored by MN Gordon via Economic Prism,

  

  Has there ever been a worse time to be a lowly American wage earner?

  First, Washington spewed out $6 trillion in printing press money.  This pushed consumer price inflation to a 40 year high.  At the same time, it diluted wages from a standard lager to a pilsner light.

  Now, at this very moment, the demand for higher wages through union organization is leading to the mass culling of payrolls.  The higher wages go.  The less jobs will remain.

  Just last month, for example, Yellow Corp., a trucking company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.  Yellow CEO Darren Hawkins blamed the International Brotherhood of Teamsters for driving the company out of business.

  Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien pointed the finger at, “Yellow’s dysfunctional, greedy C-suite” for the company’s demise.  Adding, “They shamelessly pin their corporate incompetence on working people.”

  Who’s right?  Who’s wrong?  Who knows?

  What we do know is that some 30,000 workers are now looking for jobs.  For some of these truckers, losing their jobs at Yellow will be the best thing that ever happened to them.

  Maybe they’ll be compelled to learn a new skill.  One that demands higher compensation without the need for union strongarming.

  With some hard work and perseverance, they’ll come out far ahead of where working at Yellow ever got them.  They may be rewarded with fatter paychecks and greater satisfaction in their new endeavors.

  Others, however, will fall further behind.  Maybe they’ll take a job with a competitor at reduced income.  Maybe they’ll find themselves on the unemployment dole.

  Regardless, for millions of U.S. workers something’s got to give.  Incomes and the cost of living are at a significant mismatch.  And squaring the difference via credit cards is a dreadful solution.

  Expect the Unexpected

  The challenge for wage earners is that everything’s so doggone expensive these days.  The average gross annual wage income per full time employee in the U.S. is roughly $75,000.

  That may sound like a lot.  But it really doesn’t cut it.

  After factoring in federal and state income tax, social security and Medicare, $75,000 is eroded to about $57,000.  Then subtract 4 percent of gross (or $3,000) for 401k contribution and another 6 percent of gross (or $4,500) for health insurance premiums.  The $57,000 of after-tax income drops to just $49,000 in actual take home pay.  That comes to $4,125 per month.

  Now, subtract $2,000 for rent, $400 for a car payment, $100 for cell phone charges, $200 for gas, $300 for utilities, $800 for food, and you’re left with $325 to get through the month.  Buy the kids a pair of shoes and a couple of Happy Meals – or a round of puberty blockers – and the money is long gone.

  We recognize these numbers are gross generalizations.  In some American cities the costs will be more.  In others they will be less.  The point is a $75,000 income doesn’t get you very far these days.  That’s the reality Americans are facing.

  According to a recent study by SecureSave, 67 percent of Americans don’t have enough money saved to cover an unexpected expense.  However, unexpected expenses, as based on a broad spectrum of empirical evidence, should be expected.

  Inevitably a head gasket blows, a crown breaks, or the washer goes on the fritz.  Having savings set aside for expenses like these is essential.

  Work Less, Make More

  When wages fall short of expenses, the options for getting though the month are lacking.  The difference can be made up with credit card debt, which leads to bigger problems down the road.

  Another option available to wage earners is to take on a second job to boost their incomes.  Still, there are only so many hours in the day.

  Alternatively, families can downsize their lifestyles.  They can go on a beans and rice diet.  They can move into smaller apartments in seedy parts of town.

  If needed, several families can pile into the same residence.  The quality of life suffers.  But at least the bills are paid.

  Again, these options are lacking.  This is why promises of working less and making more are so, so appealing.

  Have you ever heard of Shawn Fain?

  We hadn’t heard of him until the Wall Street Journal published a special Labor Day article titled, Meet the Man Who Has Detroit on Edge.

  Fain, as we learned, is the 15th president of the United Auto Workers (UAW).  He recently took out incumbent Ray Curry and assumed office in March.

  Fain, a fan of ‘90s hip hop who carries one of his grandfather’s Chrysler pay stubs from 1940 in his pocket, has an incredible idea.  He wants auto workers to have a shorter, 32-hour workweek and a 46 percent wage increase.

  In fact, this is the deal he recently put forth as part of his negotiations of new labor contracts for about 146,000 hourly workers at General Motors, Ford Motor, and Stellantis (the global car company that now owns Jeep, Ram and Chrysler).

  The Art of the Lose-Lose Deal

  The existing contracts expire on September 14 – in less than a week.  According to Fain, if a deal isn’t reached by then, he’s ready to strike all three automakers at the same time.

  “‘How far are you willing to go to get the contract you deserve?’  Fain yelled to a roaring crowd at a recent rally, after walking on stage to Eminem’s ‘Not Afraid.’”

  Clearly, Fain knows exactly what he is doing.  Though, he may not get his intended result for the 146,000 hourly workers he represents.  He may get something much, much different than what he’s bargaining for.

  About a month ago, as part of his negotiating strategery, Fain made a public spectacle of throwing Stellantis’s bargaining proposals in the trash.  Fain said Stellantis was making “lowball” demands that are “a slap in the face” to union autoworkers.

  Two weeks later, UAW Vice President Rich Boyer revealed that Stellantis has threatened to relocate production of their Ram 1500 pickup trucks from its location in metro Detroit to a facility in Mexico.  Stellantis has yet to confirm or deny the move.

  As the clock ticks forward, the September 14 deadline is rapidly approaching.  With a unified strike of all three automakers, Fain and Boyer may get the ‘work less, make more’ deal they’re proposing.  They may even tout this as a big win.

  But who ultimately wins?  Not the UAW.  Not General Motors, Ford Motor, and Stellantis – at least initially.  But, rather, laborers in Mexico.

  Such are the sort of shabby lose-lose deals that union bosses and corporate executives must come to following an episode of extreme currency debasement.  An episode that is now only partially contained.

  At this rate, Detroit autoworkers – the ones that still have jobs – will soon find a 46 percent wage increase will be woefully insufficient.

  What will Fain and Boyer demand then?  What sort of discord and discontent will prevail?

  [Editor’s note: Is the Pentagon secretly provoking China to attack Taiwan?  Are your finances prepared for such madness?  Answers to these important questions can be found in a unique Special Report.  You can access a copy here for less than a penny.]

  Sincerely,

  MN Gordon
  for Economic Prism

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 18:30

• Watch: A Confused Biden At G20 Butchers Saudi Crown Prince's Name
  Watch: A Confused Biden At G20 Butchers Saudi Crown Prince’s Name

  At the G20, The Associated Press and others took note of President Biden’s “hearty handshake” with Mohammed bin Salman after the lesser and more ambiguous fist bump ​​​​​​of over a year ago, which at the time was supposed to represent some degree of greater distance between the US and the Saudi crown prince, who has long stood accused of ordering the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

  “Biden warmly greeted Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, Mohammed bin Salman, after they appeared together along with several other leaders at the Group of 20 summit Saturday in New Delhi. The leaders had gathered to announce an ambitious plan to build a rail and shipping corridor linking India with the Middle East and Europe,” the AP wrote. Smiles and warmth all around, as India’s Modi also draped his hand over the pair…

  

  But what the mainstream press has so far been largely silent about is the deeply awkward moment where Biden stumbled through the names of world leaders, and struggled to speak coherently while mumbling through some brief written remarks.

  While it would perhaps be funny and ironic if done on purpose (to shame Riyadh at a moment of continued tensions with Washington over oil output), he specifically butchered the name of Mohammed bin Salman.

  Watch as the US president—who is often dubbed in international press “the leader of the free world”—messes up not only the Saudi prince’s name but also mispronounces European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s name.

  JOE BIDEN: “The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salam, excuse me, Mohammed bin Salman … and since he’s not speaking today, I wanted to — well maybe he is speaking today. I had a note he wasn’t speaking. Any rate, I’m gonna stop there.”

  We Pity You America. pic.twitter.com/rkeHgoRymi

  — The Jaipur Dialogues (@JaipurDialogues) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  One might say MbS certainly deserves it, but again it didn’t appear purposeful, and a flummoxed Biden soon after just seemed to give up in saying, “I wanted to… well maybe he is speaking today. I had a note he wasn’t speaking. Any rate, I’m gonna stop there.”

  Never mind the 2024 presidential election which is just around the corner, but how will Biden get through this G20 summit weekend in New Delhi? Things are off to a rough start.

  Meanwhile, The Daily Beast actually has this one correct (blind squirrel, nut etc)…

  Jamal Khashoggi was brutally killed and dismembered on the orders of Mohammed bin Salman in 2018.https://t.co/Awu5VsXniA

  — The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) September 9, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Another important development has been the G20’s inability to produce a statement condemning Russia and its invasion of Ukraine. This was somewhat expected, but Biden has so far failed to rally allies especially among BRICS and global south countries.

  “Diplomats had been working furiously to draft a final joint statement in the lead-up to the summit but hit snags on language to describe the Ukraine war,” CNN observed Saturday. “The eventual compromise statement amounted to a coup for the summit’s host, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but still reflected a position far softer those the United States and its Western allies have adopted individually.”

  The section of the G20 declaration where the US, UK and Europe hoped to include more teeth failed to so much as mention Russia at all. “All states must refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition,” it reads. And the declaration added more mutedly: “there were different views and assessments of the situation.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 18:00

• Trump Explains Why He Didn't Fire Fauci
  Trump Explains Why He Didn’t Fire Fauci

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Former President Donald Trump responded to questions about why he did not terminate the employment of former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci amid the early onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

  During an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt, President Trump was asked about Dr. Fauci, who had been on the Trump pandemic response force, in 2020.  “First of all, you’re not allowed,” the former president said when asked why he didn’t fire him, which Mr. Hewitt said was the “biggest knock” on his presidency.

  “No, no, no, Dr. Fauci was there. First of all, he’s civil service, and you’re not allowed to fire him. But forget that because I don’t necessarily go by everything … but Dr. Fauci would tell me things, and I wouldn’t do them in many cases. But also, he wasn’t a big player in my administration,” President Trump said. “Dr. Fauci became a big player in the administration of Biden. He’s a very big player in Biden’s administration.“

  The former president has received some criticism—namely from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis—for not firing Dr. Fauci, who ultimately became a controversial figure during the pandemic for his often dire predictions about the course of the virus. The former public health official also often recommended people wear masks, get the vaccines, and defended COVID-19-related lockdowns and stay-at-home orders.

  In response to President Trump’s comments this week, Mr. DeSantis dismissed the former president’s arguments that he couldn’t fire him. He said that President Trump’s comment differs from the ones he gave about Dr. Fauci in the past.

  “It’s important to point out for a long time that was not his excuse,” Mr. DeSantis told the Rubin Report on Wednesday. “His excuse had been that if you fired Fauci, both the Democrats and the media would have pitched a fit, which, of course, is 100 percent true.”

  “But that’s the price of leadership. You got to stand up and do what’s right,” the governor continued to say. “Clearly, he could have been fired from the White House Task Force. There was no obligation to run him out at press conference after press conference, have him doing media interviews.”

  During the pandemic, Mr. DeSantis grew a national profile for ending COVID-19 lockdowns early and reopening businesses while also backing laws that would prevent vaccine or mask mandates, or any new lockdowns. However, like other governors around the United States, Mr. DeSantis in March 2020 ordered a statewide lockdown due to the virus before he rescinded it several months later.

  “During the height of the COVID stuff in 2020, Fauci would do local hits in Florida media attacking me for having schools open and some of these other stuff,” he told the Rubin Report. “So, there was no obligation to do that. I think you could have also fired him from NIH because he had basically committed misconduct with the gain of function [research].”

  

  But President Trump said that Mr. DeSantis “shut down Florida,” and the state “was tight as a drum.” He added: “He had vax lines. He was vaxxing everything. Now, he talks about the vaccinations this and that.”

  “And let me tell you the other thing. I will send you, after this conversation, five articles about how much he loves Dr. Fauci,” he continued. “‘I do what Dr. Fauci says. This is Ron DeSantimonious. I do what Dr. Fauci says.’ That’s what he says. And I’ve got the articles here. But he doesn’t like to go back.”

  The spat over Dr. Fauci, who stepped down from his federal government positions in late 2022, comes as some hospitals, schools, and businesses have reinstated mask mandates. In a Thursday news conference, the Florida governor announced that there won’t be any new mandates in his state, reiterating a prior stance he has taken.

  The former president added: “To every covid tyrant who wants to take away our freedom, hear these words: we will not comply, so don’t even think about it. We will not shut down our schools; we will not accept your lockdowns; we will not abide by your mask mandates; and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.

  “Even today, parts of our country are forcing children to wear masks in the classroom,” Mr. DeSantis told the news conference. “Those mandates are [dead on arrival’ in Florida, and we will protect parents and children from this perpetual COVID hysteria.”

  As for President Trump, he released a video several days ago saying that Americans should “not comply” with any lockdowns, mandates, or other COVID-19 rules.

  “The left-wing lunatics are trying very hard to bring back COVID lockdowns and mandates with all of their sudden fearmongering about the new variants that are coming,” he said. “Gee whiz, you know what else is coming? An election.“

  The former president continued: “To every COVID tyrant who wants to take away our freedom, hear these words: we will not comply, so don’t even think about it. We will not shut down our schools; we will not accept your lockdowns; we will not abide by your mask mandates; and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 17:30

• Rand Paul Blasts Pentagon For Role In Niger, Demands To Know How Many Boots On Ground
  Rand Paul Blasts Pentagon For Role In Niger, Demands To Know How Many Boots On Ground

  Sen. Rand Paul has sent a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin demanding to know more about the Pentagon’s role in Niger, which recently underwent a coup wherein Niger’s US-trained military overthrow the democratically elected US-backed president. 

  Naturally, the senator from Kentucky has some questions. The letter was sent Tuesday and subsequently obtained by Politico. Among Paul’s chief aims is to assess just how many American troops are still in Niger, which is now being ruled by a junta, which includes Brig. Gen. Moussa Salaou Barmou, who received training by elite US forces.

  “Under what authorities, and or what purpose did U.S. forces provide training to Moussa Salaou Barmou or any other Nigerien forces and coup leaders who overthrew President Mohamed Bazoum,” Paul asked in the letter.

  

  He’s further demanding to know which specific Niger forces were beneficiaries of US security aid and support, and where US-supplied equipment went.

  “Is the Department of Defense concerned that any current recipients of funds, training, equipment or other kinds support … is currently engaged in human rights violations or engaged in human rights violations in the last ten years,” Paul wrote.

  The stakes couldn’t be higher, given the potential for broader regional war with foreign forces (including the French) in the middle, as Responsible Statecraft’s Kelly Vlahos points out:

  There are 1,016 U.S. troops still in Niger — a virtual powderkeg of political and military unrest since an armed junta overthrew its president and locked him and his family in the basement of the government palace in late July.

  As a result, regional governments under the banner of ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) is threatening to intervene militarily until the still-imprisoned leader is restored to office. The coup leaders have responded by rallying the people to their cause, as well as other armed juntas in the region.

  Below are a couple more pointed questions from the letter, which seem to allude remotely to the recent Afghan pullout fiasco:

  How many countries is the U.S. military operating in under the 2001 AUMF? How many are operating under Sections 333 and 127e of the U.S Code, and who specifically is receiving aid and training in those countries? How much money went to Niger?

  Aside from the tragic deaths of four American soldiers in October 2017 in an ambush, how many service members have come under fire in Niger since 2013? Under what authorities are being used to keep a U.S. military footprint there now?

  It should be noted that coup leaders like Brig. Gen. Barmou weren’t just trained by the Pentagon in Africa, but in his case he attended military schooling at Fort Benning, Georgia and the National Defense University in Washington, D.C.

  “As citizens of a Constitutional republic,” Sen. Paul concluded in his letter, “Americans must be informed of hostilities involving the Armed Forces so that the people can participate in national debates over war and peace.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 17:00

• ICC Lead Prosecutor: We Will Prosecute Cyber 'War Crimes'
  ICC Lead Prosecutor: We Will Prosecute Cyber ‘War Crimes’

  Authored by Connor Freeman via The Libertarian Institute, 

  In an article published last month in Foreign Policy Analytics, Karim Khan – the lead prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), based in the Hague – declared that his office will now be investigating and potentially prosecuting “war crimes” committed in cyberspace. This comes after Joe Biden ordered his administration to begin sharing evidence of alleged Russian war crimes committed in Ukraine with the ICC.

  Khan wrote that his office will investigate cyber crimes that possibly violate the Rome Statute. “Cyber warfare does not play out in the abstract. Rather, it can have a profound impact on people’s lives… Attempts to impact critical infrastructure such as medical facilities or control systems for power generation may result in immediate consequences for many, particularly the most vulnerable. Consequently, as part of its investigations, my Office will collect and review evidence of such conduct.”

  

  On Thursday, Washington and London sanctioned 11 people allegedly affiliated with Trickbot, a Russian hacking group accused of targeting businesses and government infrastructure, as well as hospitals, during the coronavirus pandemic. A US Treasury statement describes the individuals as “key actors involved in management and procurement” for Trickbot, which is claimed to be connected with Russian intelligence.

  Lindsay Freeman – the director of technology, law, and policy at Berkely’s Human Rights Center – explained that the ICC’s remit extends beyond hackers themselves to the command structure above them, which could lead to charges against higher level military officers or Russian President Vladimir Putin himself. The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin, he has been accused of kidnapping, and unlawfully deporting to Russia, thousands of Ukrainian children as well as teenagers.

  According to a report in Wired, Khan’s office confirmed the new cybercrime mandate with the outlet. “The Office considers that, in appropriate circumstances, conduct in cyberspace may potentially amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and/or the crime of aggression.” The spokesperson continued, “…such conduct may potentially be prosecuted before the Court where the case is sufficiently grave.”

  Disinformation, vaguely defined, is listed as one of Khan’s concerns in his article, “We are likewise mindful of the misuse of the internet to amplify hate speech and disinformation, which may facilitate or even directly lead to the occurrence of atrocities.” He suggests the ICC could prosecute people for leaking confidential information as well, writing “disinformation, destruction, the alteration of data, and the leaking of confidential information may obstruct the administration of justice at the ICC and, as such, constitute crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction that might be investigated or prosecuted.”

  It is noted, in the Wired report, that Kiev is currently conducting its own investigation into Russian “war crimes carried out via cyberattacks.” Evidence collected as part of the Ukrainian government’s investigation could also be provided to the ICC’s prosecutors to assist with their cases.

  Regarding the legal precedent, Bobby Chesney – director of the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas Law School – says “I don’t think anyone who’s serious about international law would dispute that there are at least some circumstances in which intentional harm to civilians can be carried out through cyber means in a way that qualifies as an attack” that violates the Rome Statute’s principle that warring parties distinguish between military targets and civilians. Neither Russia, Ukraine, nor the United States, are parties to the Rome Statute.

  Last June, Gen. Paul Nakasone, the head of US Cyber Command, revealed to Sky News that Washington has been aiding Ukraine by conducting “offensive” cyber-attacks against Russia. Nakasone said the US has “conducted a series of operations across the full spectrum; offensive, defensive, information operations” aimed at Russia, without offering more details.

  Ukraine formally joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Cyber Defense Center earlier this year. Biden has previously warned that cyber conflicts are liable to start a real war with Russia and China. “If we end up in a war, a real shooting war with a major power, it’s going to be as a consequence of a cyber breach of great consequence.”

  As with the United States, Russia is not a member of the ICC and does not recognize the court. In 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act, also known as the “Hague Invasion Act.” The bipartisan legislation goes as far as to authorize military action against the Netherlands – a fellow founding member of NATO – to prevent US officials and military personnel accused of war crimes from facing accountability before an international tribunal.

  During the Donald Trump administration, the US sanctioned ICC officials for attempting to investigate American war crimes committed in Afghanistan. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo charged the court is an “unaccountable political institution masquerading as a legal body.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 16:30

• Fired NYC Teachers Who Refused Vaccine To Be Reinstated With Back Pay: Judge
  Fired NYC Teachers Who Refused Vaccine To Be Reinstated With Back Pay: Judge

  A New York state judge on Wednesday ruled that 10 employees fired by the NYC Department of Education for refusing the Covid-19 vaccine must be reinstated with back pay.

  

  In his ruling, State Supreme Court Judge Ralph J. Porzio found that the city acted illegally when it denied religious exemptions to certain city teachers – who went to Children’s Health Defense to sponsor a lawsuit against the department following failed attempts to claim religious accommodation for the mandate.

  “This Court sees no rational basis for not allowing unvaccinated classroom teachers in amongst an admitted population of primarily unvaccinated students,” wrote Porzio, adding “As such, the decision to summarily deny the classroom teachers amongst the Panel Petitioners based on an undue hardship, without any further evidence of individualized analysis, is arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. As such, each classroom teacher amongst the Panel Petitioners is entitled to a religious exemption from the Vaccine Mandate.”

  Porzio also slammed the city’s assertion that allowing teachers religious exemptions would place undue hardship on the city, calling the claim “arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.”

  In the order, he granted relief to 10 plaintiffs who completed the administrative steps to request an exemption. He denied relief to six plaintiffs because they did not complete the administrative process.

  As part of his ruling, Judge Porzio made reference to Mayor Eric Adams’s lifting of a vaccine mandate for some private employees in 2022, notably celebrities and athletes. He said the decision was evidence that the mandate for public workers was done on an arbitrary basis.

  New York City imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all Department of Education workers that started on Oct. 1, 2021, and lasted until Feb. 10, 2023. Reports indicated that thousands of workers, teachers, and other staffers lost their jobs for not adhering to the mandate. –Epoch Times

  An attorney for the plaintiffs, Sujata Gibson, said that they have been “fighting for this since August of 2021 for these 10 people specifically. And we won and we won big for them,” adding “They were reinstated with back pay, with no break in service, and attorneys’ fees. That’s huge.”

  “The judge’s ruling yesterday, while not everything we wanted, is a precedent-setting victory, and a watershed moment in the teachers’ fight,” she added, noting that thousands of other unvaccinated workers were similarly denied a religious exemption, and can now sue the city based on this new precedent.

  Gibson added that another class action lawsuit may be in the cards.

  “The court’s ruling on class certification still leaves the door open to future relief for thousands of teachers negatively affected by the vaccine requirement,” she said, adding “We intend to file a motion of reconsideration on a narrower basis.”

  It comes months after a lawyer for another group of fired, unvaccinated New York City teachers claimed that Mayor Eric Adams’s administration blacklisted employees who refused to get the vaccine with a special code.

  “Loosely speaking, it is like a scarlet letter,” lawyer John Bursch told the New York Post earlier this year. “The employee’s personnel file shows a [generic] problem code that could just as easily be [for] committing a crime as declining to take a vaccine for religious reasons. In some instances, when plaintiffs tried to obtain employment elsewhere, they were told that they were red-flagged because of the problem code,” he said. -Epoch Times

  NYC Mayor Eric Adams rescinded the vaccine mandate for workers earlier this year, allowing some 1,700 fired workers to reapply for their jobs (without back pay or retroactive full benefits).

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 16:00

• Zelensky On Starlink-Gate: Musk "Committing Evil" & Driven By "Big Ego"
  Zelensky On Starlink-Gate: Musk “Committing Evil” & Driven By “Big Ego”

  Update(1640ET): Amid the continuing controversy over Elon Musk having previously made the decision to block Kiev from utilizing Starlink satellites to attack Crimea, Zelensky’s office has lashed out in what we might call a “bite the hand that feeds you” moment.

  Musk “committed” and “enabled evil” by denying the ability of Kiev to launch massive drone attacks on Crimea last year, Mikhail Podoliak, a senior aide to President Zelensky said Friday. Somewhat ironically, he wrote this charge on the Musk-owned platform X. Here’s what he said, framing the most hard-hitting lines suggesting Musk is doing “evil”… awkwardly in the form of a question (likely fearing Musk could at any time switch off Ukraine’s Starlink comms altogether):

  “Sometimes a mistake is much more than just a mistake,” Podoliak wrote. “By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via Starlink interference, Elon Musk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities.”

  “As a result, civilians, children are being killed. This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego. However, the question still remains: why do some people so desperately want to defend war criminals and their desire to commit murder? And do they now realize that they are committing evil and encouraging evil?”

  Sometimes a mistake is much more than just a mistake. By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via #Starlink interference, @elonmusk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities. As a result, civilians, children are…

  — Михайло Подоляк (@Podolyak_M) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  To recount, Musk has pointed out amid an avalanche of mainstream media “outrage” that—

  “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor,” he wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.

  “If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.”

  But to Zelensky and his aides, this is “evil” apparently. We wonder what’s next in this saga. Some online are going so far as to call for the US government to “nationalize” SpaceX’s systems which pertain to Ukraine…

  This guy’s assets, the ones pertaining to national security, should be nationalized. When the balloon goes up in the PACOM AOR we can’t have this idiot’s thumb on the scales for the enemy. https://t.co/otQTChm4PT

  — Jack Murphy (@JackMurphyRGR) September 8, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  * * *

  Since Elon Musk has apparently become Donald Trump – in that any lie/twist/gaslighting will do to further the narrative, no matter how false it is known to be – last night saw the mainstream media overwhelmed with circle-jerk-justified accusations that Musk meddled in the Ukraine-Russia war to stop a Zelenskyy-driven offensive (that likely would have turned the war and hailed victory ticker-tape parades up and down Kiev’s streets).

  

  Ok, admittedly that last bit was out hyperbole; but given a quick read of headlines from CNN and NBC, we could be forgiven for this view.

  Elon Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his company’s Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast last year to disrupt a Ukrainian sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet, according to an excerpt adapted from Walter Isaacson’s new biography of the eccentric billionaire titled “Elon Musk.”

  As Ukrainian submarine drones strapped with explosives approached the Russian fleet, they “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly,” Isaacson writes.

  NBC led with the following headline: Ukraine is furious with Elon Musk for thwarting an attack on Russia’s navy

  Tech billionaire Elon Musk has come under fire from Ukraine after it emerged he thwarted a major attack on the Russian navy.

  According to excerpts published by CNN, a soon-to-be-released biography of the SpaceX CEO claims that Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his Starlink satellite network over Russian-occupied Crimea last year in order to prevent a Ukrainian drone attack on Russia’s naval fleet.

  Elon Musk last year secretly ordered SpaceX engineers to switch off the Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast in order to thwart a Ukrainian surprise attack on Russia’s naval fleet, according to Walter Isaacson’s upcoming Musk biography. pic.twitter.com/uPto8hm1pW

  — The Recount (@therecount) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The mainstream media did not have to look too far to find someone willing to denigrate Musk:

  Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, blasted the tech billionaire on X, formerly Twitter, which Musk owns.

  “Sometimes a mistake is much more than just a mistake,” Podolyak wrote.

  “By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via #Starlink interference, @elonmusk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities,” he added.

  “As a result, civilians, children are being killed,” Podolyak said.

  “This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego. However, the question still remains: why do some people so desperately want to defend war criminals and their desire to commit murder? And do they now realize that they are committing evil and encouraging evil?”

  Isaacson quotes Musk at the time as questioning “How am I in this war?”

  “Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”

  Couple quick questions – how would Musk know – pre-emptively – of the attack, and choose to disable Starlink? Is his intel better than Putin’s; better than the CIA’s?

  The spin here is utterly mind-blowing.

  In fact, according to Musk – who responded to the accusations on X, the details are the exact opposite to how CNN described them…

  In fact, Musk NEVER turned Starlink on in those controversial border zones – for exactly this reason, as he feared using this technology near borders could prompt an escalation in the war.

  The Starlink regions in question were not activated. SpaceX did not deactivate anything.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  In fact, Musk did not ‘turn Starlink off’ but refused to ‘turn Starlink on’ for Ukraine’s offensive.

  There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol.

  The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor.

  If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and…

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Which makes more sense to you – the richest man in the world unilaterally switching off internet access to pre-emptively thwart a secret attack by Ukraine on Russia in a Blofeld-esque move? Or the CEO of a major communications company refusing to enable his technology to be used to escalate a war that could well lead to armageddon?

  Both sides should agree to a truce.

  Every day that passes, more Ukrainian and Russian youth die to gain and lose small pieces of land, with borders barely changing. This is not worth their lives.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 15:55

• Rail Volumes Fall For Third Straight Month In August
  Rail Volumes Fall For Third Straight Month In August

  By Carolina Worrell of Railway Age

  “August was the third straight month in which total year-over-year U.S. rail carloads have fallen,” Association of American Railroads (AAR) Senior Vice President John T. Gray reported on Sept. 6. Total combined U.S. traffic for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 16,173,208 carloads and intermodal units, a decrease of 4.9% compared to last year.

  

  Gray said that a major reason why is that “other than automotive manufacturing, the industrial economy, in recent months, has not been doing as well as other areas of the economy. Until industrial activity, and especially manufacturing recovers, rail volumes in many key markets could remain constrained.”

  According to AAR, U.S. Class I railroads for the first eight months of 2023 hauled a total of 7,852,770 carloads, up 0.0%, or 3,625 carloads, from the same period last year; and 8,320,438 intermodal units, down 9.2%, or 838,829 containers and trailers, from last year.

  U.S. railroads originated 1,133,375 carloads in August 2023, down 2.0%, or 23,323 carloads, from August 2022. U.S. railroads also originated 1,239,290 containers and trailers in August 2023, down 6.3%, or 83,717 units, from the same month last year. Combined U.S. carload and intermodal originations in August 2023 were 2,372,665, down 4.3%, or 107,040 carloads and intermodal units from August 2022.

  In August 2023, nine of the 20 carload commodity categories tracked by the AAR each month saw carload gains compared with August 2022. These included: motor vehicles and parts, up 9,374 carloads or 13.6%; petroleum and petroleum products, up 5,567 carloads or 12.9%; and primary metal products, up 1,792 carloads or 4.6%. Commodities that saw declines in August 2023 from August 2022 included: grain, down 22,064 carloads or 22.9%; coal, down 9,754 carloads or 2.8%; and pulp and paper products, down 2,334 carloads or 10.2%.

  Excluding coal, carloads were down 13,569 carloads, or 1.7%, in August 2023 from August 2022. Excluding coal and grain, carloads were up 8,495 carloads, or 1.2%.

  Week 35 (Ending September 2, 2023)

  Total U.S. weekly rail traffic was 476,851 carloads and intermodal units, down 5.4% compared with the same week last year

  

  Total carloads for the week ending September 2 were 231,113 carloads, down 1.6% compared with the same week in 2022, while U.S. weekly intermodal volume was 245,738 containers and trailers, down 8.7% compared to 2022.

  

  North American rail volume for the first 35 weeks of the year (ending Sept. 2) on 10 reporting U.S., Canadian and Mexican railroads totaled 337,338 carloads, down 0.1% compared with the same week last year, and 328,232 intermodal units, down 9.9% compared with last year. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 665,570 carloads and intermodal units, down 5.2%. North American rail volume for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 22,675,055 carloads and intermodal units, down 4.1% compared with 2022.

  Five of the 10 carload commodity groups posted an increase compared with the same week in 2022. They included motor vehicles and parts, up 2,274 carloads, to 16,073; metallic ores and metals, up 1,968 carloads, to 22,786; and chemicals, up 1,889 carloads, to 32,942. Commodity groups that posted decreases compared with the same week in 2022 included coal, down 4,408 carloads, to 68,598; grain, down 4,403 carloads, to 14,961; and nonmetallic minerals, down 1,219 carloads, to 32,305.

  

  Canadian railroads reported 89,904 carloads for the week, up 2.2%, and 72,134 intermodal units, down 14.6% compared with the same week in 2022. For the first 35 weeks of 2023, Canadian railroads reported cumulative rail traffic volume of 5,519,818 carloads, containers and trailers, down 3.3%.

  

  Mexican railroads reported 16,321 carloads for the week, up 9.2% compared with the same week last year, and 10,360 intermodal units, down 3.5%. Cumulative volume on Mexican railroads for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 982,029 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, up 5.1% from the same point last year.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 15:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The New Authoritarian Agenda Revealed (Globalism Rebranded)
  The New Authoritarian Agenda Revealed (Globalism Rebranded)

  From Brandon Smith

  In July of last year as the hype surrounding the Covid pandemic was finally dying out, I came across a video promoting a barely publicized project called the “Council for Inclusive Capitalism.”

  The group, headed by Lynn Forester de Rothschild, is the culmination of decades of various globalist agendas combined to represent the ultimate proof of conspiracy.

  Remember when people used to say that global governance by elitists was a paranoid fantasy?

  

  Well, now it’s openly admitted reality.

  The CIC is intimately tied to institutions like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but it is primarily an attempt to link all these organizations more closely to the corporate world in an open display of cooperation. The group pushes the spread of what they call “Stakeholder Capitalism.” This is the notion that international corporations are obligated to engage in social engineering. That’s another way of saying that corporations are required to manipulate citizens and governments with economic punishments and rewards.

  We witnessed this agenda in action during the Covid lockdowns and the rush to enforce vaccine passports. These efforts would not have been possible without the cooperation of major corporate chains working hand-in-hand with national governments. Luckily, the strategy failed as local governments and the public fought back.

  We have also seen stakeholder capitalism on display in the push for Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) guidelines among major companies. Most readers are probably familiar with ESG at this point, but keep in mind, the public was oblivious to the terminology until the past 2 years. Globalists have been developing ESG rules since 2005. As Klaus Schwab of the WEF notes in his book Stakeholder Capitalism:

  The most important characteristic of the stakeholder model today is that the stakes of our system are now more clearly global. Economies, societies, and the environment are more closely linked to each other now than 50 years ago. The model we present here is therefore fundamentally global in nature, and the two primary stakeholders are as well.

  …What was once seen as externalities in national economic policy making and individual corporate decision making will now need to be incorporated or internalized in the operations of every government, company, community, and individual. The planet is thus the center of the global economic system, and its health should be optimized in the decisions made by all other stakeholders.

  The carrot and the stick

  ESG was intended to be the tool that globalists and governments would use to force companies into the stakeholder capitalism model. It is a kind of social credit system, but for companies. The higher a company’s ESG score, the more access to capital and lending they would have (easy money).

  Modern ESG started out in 2005, initially focused on climate controls – influencing corporations to participate in the carbon credit marketplace or face additional taxation.

  But, by 2016 it became something else. ESG widely adopted woke politics including Critical Race Theory, feminism, trans ideology, various elements of Marxism, etc.

  This was the modern ESG that all of us are aware of today. It was an attempt to incentivize the business world to bombard the populace with woke messaging 24/7, and it worked, for a little while anyway.

  The exposure of ESG is perhaps one of the greatest triumphs of the alternative media. It was proof that the “woke-ification” of our economy and society was not the result of some grassroots activist movement or the natural evolution of civilization. No, everything woke was a product, forced into existence by corporate and globalist interests.

  It is with some disappointment I’m sure that Lynn Forester de Rothschild admitted the defeat of ESG at the B20 Summit in India recently. Though, as is usually the case, Rothschild admits that the goal will be to replace the term “ESG” with something else that the public is not as privy to while continuing to institute social credit scoring for companies as a means to dominate them.

  It is typical for globalists to re-brand their projects whenever they get exposed. It’s merely a way to throw the public off the scent. However, I don’t think this tactic is going to work anymore. Researchers are locked on to the ESG dynamic and changing the name will not help the establishment avoid scrutiny.

  Globalists go on the defensive

  I want to point out here that there has been a dramatic shift in globalist circles towards a defensive posture, rather than the offensive posture they held a couple years ago. Apparently, something went very wrong for them during Covid. They were brazen with their rhetoric not long ago, basically admitting their intentions to establish a global authoritarian system. Now they are sheepish and much more careful in the things they say.

  To this end, most of the honest discussion on globalism is no longer found in the statements of the WEF or the halls of the Davos forums. Rather, the true agenda is discussed at less prominent climate change events such as B20 in India or the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris which I covered in July. These are the events where globalists now feel increasingly free to talk about what they really want.

  Another admission by Rothschild at B20 should be noted as she suggests that Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act” is one of the best representations of incentivizing climate controls.

  This just confirms what we already suspected; the Inflation Reduction Act had nothing to do with inflation. Rather, it was a way to divert taxpayer funds into government subsidies for carbon taxation and green tech. Taking money out of your pocket and handing it over to corporations who toe the ESG line.

  The CIC wants to dictate global mandates that force companies to adopt ESG-like policies using trillions of dollars in climate funds ($7 trillion per year, to be exact).

  Think of it this way:

  1. Any company that “volunteers” to use less efficient green tech and to promote climate ideology gets access to government funds – they get rewarded.

  2. Any company that refuses to go along with the plan will ultimately face heavy taxation while trying to compete with their subsidized peers – they are forced out of business.

  Sound familiar? It’s not your imagination…

  This is, essentially, the early stages of a global communist/collectivist economic regime.

  “Inclusive capitalism” is a hoax

  And here we get to the crux of the issue.

  • There is no “inclusive capitalism.”

  • There is no “stakeholder capitalism.”

  • There is no “ESG.”

  • Climate change is not an existential threat.

  • Covid was never as severe as they wanted you to think.

  What do these things have in common? All of these issues represent smoke and mirrors, a way to distract the populace from the root intent to create total centralization in the hands of a select few elites. The prize for them is to convince the public to embrace economic micromanagement. This is what ESG was all about. This is what Inclusive Capitalism is all about.

  The globalists want to hand-pick winners and losers. Worse still, they want to use your money to reward the faithful and punish the skeptical. Their goal is to build a global economic panopticon, an unescapable prison where every transaction is monitored, evaluated, authorized or denied and (of course) recorded.

  A central bank digital currency (CDBC) is a crucial milestone in their progress toward this goal. Just imagine how much easier this will be when the 100 or so largest, most influential corporations in the world are on-board and enthusiastic about such a development…

  I wrote about this not long ago:

  All privacy in trade will be gone, except for those people engaging in barter, black markets and commodity-based transactions. This is one of the main reasons global central banks have persistently killed the idea of intrinsically-sound money, like physical gold and silver, for the last 50 years. Remember, barter and black markets are more or less by definition off the books. Untaxed, unregulated and untrackable.

  But don’t be misled – this is much more than an issue of privacy.

  Implementation of CBDCs would also mean that ownership of money and the ability to transact, to participate in the economy, will become privileges, not rights.

  In communist China, use of digital payments is tied to a social credit system. Want access to your checking and savings accounts? Better not say anything critical of the Party, or you could be reported by a neighbor (or a stranger) using the tattletale function on their smartphone. Digital money can disappear in seconds. Want your money back? Prove that you are “loyal” to the Party. There are many subtle levels between “upstanding citizen” and “outlaw,” though, and the CCP adjust their citizens’ financial statuses constantly. Bad social credit might mean taxis won’t even stop for you. That you’re prevented from purchasing from upscale shops. (Insufficiently healthy? Your e-yuan won’t even let you buy junk food at 7-11. Seriously!) The citizen is guilty until proven innocent.

  Once the economy is locked into an ideological prison and access to private trade can be denied by a handful of bureaucrats working with corporations, the establishment then has the means to dictate all of society.

  Our behaviors, our beliefs, our principles, our morals.

  For if the government has the power to determine whether you and your family eat or starve, they have the power to compel you to do anything.

  This is why owning untraceable, intrinsically valuable physical precious metals is crucial to your own personal liberty. Today, now, while you still can, diversify your savings with an alternative form of money that will always be accepted, without question, anywhere in the world.

  There’s a reason the globalists hate gold and silver. They’re virtually the only financial assets you can own that are “off the books.” Just as untrackable as cash (they hate cash, too, but not as much) and, better yet, uninflatable, unhackable and free from central bank meddling.

  Fight the globalist agenda every step of the way. And make sure that, no matter what, you and your loved ones can endure their tyranny without compromising your beliefs.

  *  *  *

  High inflation means your 401(k) or IRA will be worth less, potentially much less, when you retire. Personally, I recommend a Gold IRA for the ultimate retirement security. To see why, Click here to get a FREE info kit from Birch Gold Group about Gold IRAs. (This comes with NO obligation or strings attached.)

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 23:40

• The World Behind Bars
  The World Behind Bars

  El Salvador has the world’s highest prison population rate, according to data collected in the World Prison Brief by the Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research (ICPR).

  The Central American country had 1,086 people serving jail sentences per 100,00 inhabitants in May 2022.

  

  As Statista’s Florian Zandt shows in the chart below, most countries with a high prisoner-to-inhabitant ratio are small and could be considered developing economies – with one major exception.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  This exception is the United States, which boasts a prison population rate of 531.

  Technically, the U.S. is featured not only once but thrice in the top 8, with American Samoa and Guam being unincorporated territories.

  Other big economies mainly feature drastically lower on the ICPR’s list.

  Notable exceptions to this rule include Turkey, Brazil and Russia, placing 12th, 13th and 26th, respectively.

  When looking at the data from the perspective of the overall prison population, the picture is markedly different. By this indicator, the United States comes first, followed by China, Brazil, India and Russia.

  Interestingly, all five current BRICS nations but only one G7 member are featured in the top 15.

  While the ICPR’s dataset allows comparisons between countries, the reporting timeframes for the official figures often differ wildly from nation to nation. Given this caveat, the data doesn’t support showing the situation at one specific set date.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 23:20

• House Education Chair Says Groups Like Moms For Liberty Face Daunting Task
  House Education Chair Says Groups Like Moms For Liberty Face Daunting Task

  Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,

  Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., the chair of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said that despite recent victories in the clash against wokeness within the public education system, a daunting road lay ahead for grassroots groups like Moms for Liberty that have risen to combat the encroaching threats of classroom indoctrination and grooming.

  

  Foxx touted the House’s passage in March of the Parents Bill of Rights Act, which currently sits stalled in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions under chairman Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

  The committee, stacked with firebrand progressives and wishy-washy RINOs, leaves the bill’s fate uncertain for the foreseeable future.

  However, in the event that the socialist Sen. Sanders were to bring it to the floor as written, the bill would mandate a newfound level of transparency, requiring that school boards provide clear information on their curricula and materials; budget and revenues; safety concerns; enrollment and transfer options; and a litany of red-flag behaviors related to staff, counselors and contractors.

  That, according to Foxx, is when the real work would begin.

  “All of this is going to entail tremendous involvement at the local level,” she said during an exclusive interview with Headline USA along with Brooke Weiss, the chair of the Mecklenburg County Moms for Liberty chapter. “… It’s going to be a sustained and focused kind of thing.”

  Friends and foes alike could count on Moms for Liberty to “keep showing up because we know we are fighting for the survival of America,” Weiss said in response to Foxx’s call to action.

  “[Y]ou can bet we aren’t going anywhere,” she tweeted following the interview.

  “Moms for Liberty is 2½ years old, growing every day, and making major progress in restoring parental rights and improving public education,” she added. “We are successful because our mission is focused on a singular issue (education) & because we are able to mobilize people into real action.”

  I am so grateful to have had the opportunity to meet w/ @virginiafoxx today.
  You can bet we aren’t going anywhere. @Moms4Liberty is 2 1/2 years old, growing every day, & making major progress. 1/ https://t.co/hghFhRvLL0

  — Brooke Weiss, instapot insurrectionist (@BrookeWeiss) September 6, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Although the tendency among some—even conservatives—is to look to the government for solutions to solve the mess that decades of subversive Marxist influence and dark-money coercion have wrought in the school system, Foxx pointed out that this would be counterproductive at best.

  “Anytime somebody tells me ‘I want a national something,’ I tell them don’t do it,” she noted in response to a question about a national book-rating system, which Moms for Liberty has endorsed.

  “It is the wrong way to go,” Foxx continued. “You put power in the hands of people far away from you—it is the most dangerous thing to do.”

  Rather than pivot too far in either direction, though, Foxx, 80—an 18-year congressional veteran who spent time previously in the North Carolina state legislature and as a sociology professor at Appalachian State University—took a more pragmatic outlook.

  She signaled that she did not, in principle, oppose the idea of abolishing the federal Department of Education, as some conservatives have called to do.

  “If the Lord put me in charge, I’d get rid of everything,” she mused.

  Yet, she noted that when former President Ronald Reagan ran on a campaign of doing that very thing, he ultimately wound up strengthening it.

  The only solution, as she saw it, was to “devolve the money back to the states” and allow each individual jurisdiction to decide how best to spend its funding.

  Even so, that would not entirely addresss one of the biggest concerns facing schools, which is the influence of outside organizations seeking intentionally to politicize the local school agendas and infect them with controversial issues such as critical race theory and transgenderism.

  Foxx said she remained mystified by people—including the Democratic House colleagues with whom she is sometimes forced to find common ground—who would oppose common-sense measures like transparency and accountability for schools.

  “I don’t know what planet they grew up on,” she said. “… It’s truly amazing to me.”

  Nonetheless, it is citizen–watchdogs like Weiss, she said, who have both the power and the responsibility to do what the most powerful government in the world cannot.

  Moms for Liberty has only continued to grow in its renown following a national summit in Philadelphia over the summer that featured former President Donald Trump and other luminaries.

  While the biggest storyline from the event may have been the Left’s violent and destructive protests outside of it—shortly after the parent group was labeled a “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, in collusion with the Biden administration—Weiss said that exposing the true colors of left-wing extremists ultimately left M4L looking all the better.

  In June, M4L co-founders Tiffany Justice and Tina Descovich offered Headline USA a defiant statement via email in reaction to the SPLC’s insults.

  “Empowering parents continues to be our mission today and that has fueled our organization’s growth—like wildfire to now 45 states in the country,” said the statement.

  “Name-calling parents who want to be a part of their child’s education as ‘hate groups’ or ‘bigoted’ just further exposes what this battle is all about: Who fundamentally gets to decide what is taught to our kids in school—parents or government employees?” it continued. “We believe that parental rights do not stop at the classroom door and no amount of hate from groups like this is going to stop that.”

  Headline USA reached out to the group for additional reaction to Foxx’s recent remarks asking whether M4L was prepared for the “sustained and focused” fight ahead and will update with any response.

  Ben Sellers is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/realbensellers.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 23:00

• Chinese Imports Of Iran Oil Soar To Near Record In Clear Breach Of US Sanctions
  Chinese Imports Of Iran Oil Soar To Near Record In Clear Breach Of US Sanctions

  Less than a month ago, we reported that according to Kpler estimates, China was expected to import as much as 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil from Iran in August, the most since at least 2013.

  

  On Thursday, the latest China trade data confirmed just that when customs data revealed that China snapped up Iranian shipments, and state-owned processors ramped up operating rates after a period of maintenance work, in clear breach of US sanctions, soft as they may be, on Iranian oil purchases.

  China nation imported 52.8 million tons of crude oil last month, equivalent to 12.5 million barrels a day, 21% more than July, according to Bloomberg calculations. The monthly volume was near a record set in June 2020.

  Chinese purchases were driven by a binge on Iranian crude supplies, said Viktor Katona, lead crude analyst with Kpler ahead of data release, as offers from the Persian Gulf producer was “by far the most price-competitive option”. Additionally, imports were also driven by Chinese refiners’ re-stockpiling activity, he added.

  Importers were keen to buy discounted barrels from Russia and Iran in order to maximize profit margins from domestic and overseas fuel sales. State refiners were running at record rates in August, according to OilChem. A bumper exports quota issued last week means plants will keep their runs and inflows elevated in support for growth.

  Meanwhile, as noted earlier, Chinese oil products exports rose 11% to 5.89 million tons in August, the highest since February, as China aggressively ramped up its refinery output, in the process grabbing market share from Western processors crushed by idiotic, green and “woke” policies and regulations that seek to crush US fossil fuel industries and hand the market to China on a silver platter.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 22:40

• Government Gave Millions To Top Reproductive Health Org To Promote COVID-19 Vaccines To Pregnant Women
  Government Gave Millions To Top Reproductive Health Org To Promote COVID-19 Vaccines To Pregnant Women

  Authored by Megan Redshaw, J.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The premier professional membership organization for obstetricians and gynecologists accepted $11.8 million from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to promote COVID-19 vaccines to pregnant women, despite the exclusion of pregnant women from clinical trials and regulatory data showing the vaccine had not been tested for safety during pregnancy.

  

  To learn more about COVID-19 funding received by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) during the pandemic and what prompted the organization’s guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women, Dr. James Thorp, a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist and maternal-fetal medicine physician made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2022 to HHS.

  “My request was simple: It sought only to obtain documents involving the three ‘Cooperative Agreement’ grants HHS/CDC made to ACOG during the pandemic, one of which was for $11.8 million, listed on a publicly accessible open data source for federal spending, USASPENDING.gov,” Thorp told The Epoch Times.

  Documents obtained by Dr. Thorp show ACOG, on Feb. 1, 2021, was awarded the first of three cooperative agreement grants by HHS and the CDC. The receipt of COVID-19 grant money was contingent upon ACOG yielding substantial control over projects funded by the CDC to the agency and ACOG’s full compliance with CDC guidance on COVID-19 infection and control.

  “This is a cooperative agreement, and CDC will have substantial programmatic involvement after the award is made. Substantial involvement is in addition to all post-award monitoring, technical assistance, and performance reviews undertaken in the normal course of stewardship of federal funds,” the documents state.

  ACOG also agreed to allow the CDC program staff to “assist, coordinate, or participate in carrying out effort under the award.”

  The contracts further provided for the return of funding to the HHS if ACOG did not adhere to the federal government’s messaging that COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective for pregnant women and new mothers.

  HHS Funds ‘Trusted Messengers’ to Increase Vaccine Confidence

  HHS, on April 1, 2021, launched the “COVID-19 Community Corps,” a “nationwide, grassroots network of local voices and trusted community leaders to encourage vaccinations,” with more than 275 founding member organizations, including ACOG, that had the “ability to reach millions of Americans.” An archived HHS webpage states the program provides resources and fact-based public health information through HHS in partnership with the CDC.

  As part of the multibillion-dollar program, Vice President Kamala Harris and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy met with founding members to discuss the next phase of the “public education campaign from the White House” to encourage vaccinations and increase vaccine confidence.

  Members received weekly updates on the “latest scientific and medical updates, talking points about the vaccine, social media suggestions, infographics, factsheets with timely, accurate information, and tools to help people get registered for an appointment and vaccinated.”

  “As part of the COVID-19 Community Corps, HHS awarded billions of federal dollars to recruit what HHS referred to as ‘trusted community leaders’ who could push vaccines within our most private relationships,” Thorp said. “Much like modern-day trojan horses, these ‘trusted messengers’ would be unique in their ability to permeate all facets of private life.”

  ACOG Encourages Members to ‘Enthusiastically Recommend Vaccination’

  Former CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, on April 23, 2021, announced for the first time during a White House COVID-19 briefing the agency was recommending all pregnant women get vaccinated despite limited data on the safety of the shot, as pregnant women were not included in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials.

  Dr. Walensky said her decision was based on preliminary findings published in The New England Journal of Medicine on the use of COVID-19 vaccines during the first 11 weeks of the vaccine rollout.

  “We know that this is a deeply personal decision, and I encourage people to talk to their doctors and their primary care providers to determine what is best for them and for their baby,” Dr. Walensky said.

  ACOG, on July 30, 2021, along with the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM), began recommending COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.

  ACOG, founded in 1951, is the leading organization representing physicians and specialists in obstetrical care, with over 60,000 members. ACOG sets the standard of care for pregnant women and obstetrician–gynecologists generally follow the recommendations made by ACOG, just as pediatricians follow the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

  The SMFM represents more than 5,500 individuals with additional years of formal training in maternal-fetal medicine, making them “highly qualified experts and leaders in the care of complicated pregnancies.”

  ACOG’s former president, Dr. J. Martin Tucker, in a statement on the organization’s website, encouraged members to “enthusiastically recommend vaccination” to their pregnant patients and to emphasize the “known safety of the vaccines and the increased risks of severe complications associated with COVID-19 infection, including death, during pregnancy.”

  “It is clear that pregnant people need to feel confident in the decision to choose vaccination, and a strong recommendation from their obstetrician–gynecologist could make a meaningful difference for many pregnant people,” Tucker added. “Pregnant individuals should feel confident that choosing COVID-19 vaccination not only protects them but also protects their families and communities,” he added.

  Dr. William Grobman, president of SMFM, said experts in high-risk pregnancy should “strongly recommend” pregnant women get vaccinated and that vaccination is “safe before, during, or after pregnancy,” despite the absence of clinical trial data.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 22:20

• Which US Cities Have The Highest Airbnb Densities?
  Which US Cities Have The Highest Airbnb Densities?

  With 3,329 Airbnb listings for an estimated 94,589 inhabitants, Asheville, North Carolina, has the highest Airbnb density out of all U.S. cities and regions analyzed by InsideAirbnb as of June 2023.

  The project, which scrapes publicly available data from Airbnb’s website, was founded by activist and artist Murray Cox and has seen contributions by data journalists and researchers.

  As Statista’s Florian Zandt shows in the chart below, based on InsideAirbnb data, popular tourist spots don’t always have the highest amount of rental listings per 1,000 inhabitants.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As we detailed previously, New York City, for example, recently passed Local Law 18, which requires short-term rental businesses to register with the city, limits guests per property to two and requires the owners to live in the space they’re renting out. In practice, this scales back a booming business model rivaling hotels to an approximation of a paid version of traditional couch surfing.

  A lawsuit by Airbnb to prevent the law was dismissed in August. Interestingly, New York City only has a density of 4.9 Airbnb listings per 1,000 residents.

  

  Another hot spot for domestic tourists that recently made the news due to devastating wildfires, the island state of Hawaii, ranks much higher in comparison. On all of the islands combined, the ratio of listings by 1,000 inhabitants stands at 22.4. Other popular tourist destinations analyzed include Los Angeles (11.4 listings per 1,000 inhabitants), Broward County (9.1), San Francisco (8.5) and Clark County, which includes Las Vegas (6.9).

  While InsideAirbnb provides details of the prevalence of Airbnb listings in selected cities and regions, it can only show part of the whole picture. The overall importance of the U.S. market for Airbnb can be seen in the company’s financial results. In 2022, $4.2 billion of the vacation rental provider’s total revenue of $8.4 billion was generated in North America, $3.9 billion of which was in the United States. The EMEA region was responsible for $2.9 billion, while the company generated $643 million and $622 million in Latin America and Asia-Pacific, respectively.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 22:00

• A Deeper Dive Into The Role Of Spike Protein In Myocarditis And Blood Clotting After COVID-19 Vaccination
  A Deeper Dive Into The Role Of Spike Protein In Myocarditis And Blood Clotting After COVID-19 Vaccination

  Authored by Allison Kruig, MPH and Dr. Ram Durlseti via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In this series, “Promise or Peril: Alarming COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Issues,” we explore how the introduction of mRNA technology lacked an adequate regulatory framework, setting the stage for serious adverse events and other concerns related to inadequate safety testing of lipid nanoparticles, spike protein, and residual DNA- and lipid-related impurities, as well as truncated/modified mRNA species.

  Previously: In Part 1, we introduced how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relaxed the rules for mRNA vaccines compared to mRNA therapies and discussed the available data regarding LNP distribution throughout the body based on animal testing, the fact that human testing was not done, and the lack of mRNA or spike protein biodistribution data. In Parts 2 and 3, we explored how the LNPs are constructed and how they behave in the body and affect health.

  

  Now we turn to another problem—the cargo contained in the LNP capsules: the mRNA and its encoded spike protein. We introduce the inflammatory response to the spike protein and one of its subunit proteins and how they may contribute to serious adverse events such as myocarditis and blood clotting.

  Rochelle Walensky, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), stated on “Good Morning America” in June 2021 that myocarditis cases are “really quite rare … minor, self-limited, they generally resolve with rest and standard medications.” However, this assertion was made based on a preliminary review of 300 cases and before conducting long-term follow-up.

  A study published on Aug. 1 followed 40 adolescents in Hong Kong for up to a year. Follow-up testing performed in 26 patients with initial abnormal findings revealed that 58 percent of those with vaccine-associated myocarditis had persistent heart muscle scarring. The authors concluded: “There exists a potential long-term effect on exercise capacity and cardiac functional reserve during stress.”

  This series demonstrates how exposure to the spike protein results in downstream cardiovascular issues. Given that vaccination causes the body to produce more spike protein, it is clear that additional research was needed to understand the health impacts of vaccination prior to licensure.

  Summary of Key Facts

  • The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its S1 subunit have known impacts on the cardiovascular system, such as an increased risk of blood clotting.

  • The vaccine-induced spike protein and its S1 subunit have been found in the blood following vaccination.

  • In lab studies, the spike protein activates white blood cells and may trigger an inflammatory response or clotting.

  • Free spike protein was found in the blood of adolescents and young adults with post-mRNA vaccine myocarditis but not in healthy control subjects without myocarditis.

  • The S1 subunit can interact with ACE2, platelets, and fibrin and may be what leads to an inflammatory response driving serious adverse events, including clots, myocarditis, and neurological problems.

  • As discussed in Part 3, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) act as adjuvants, stimulating the immune system. This innate immune response peaks within six hours of vaccination and returns to baseline by about day nine, temporally corresponding to the onset of myocarditis, which typically occurs within the first seven days following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

  • Studies have not been done to evaluate how vaccination affects those who have already been infected with SARS-CoV-2.

  • The spike protein was implicated in small vessel microclots during COVID-19 illness; thus, postvaccination cardiovascular effects should have been anticipated.

  • The first deadline for FDA-mandated post-authorization safety studies has passed, yet to the best of our knowledge, the full report has not been made available to the public.

  The spike protein protrudes from the SARS-CoV-2 virus like a crown of sticky handles. The job of the spike protein is to grab onto the ACE2 receptor so the virus can enter the cell. The ACE2 receptor is found in many human cells in the lungs, kidneys, gut, heart, and the lining of the blood vessels.

  Spike protein is comprised of two parts: the S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit protein sits at the tip of the spike protein and is responsible for attaching to the ACE2 receptor. Once bound to the receptor, the spike protein changes shape to allow the virus to enter. Having accessed the inside of the cell, the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses the cell’s own protein manufacturing process to make new viral proteins.

  Effective vaccines select recognizable antigens that induce a robust immune response. The spike protein was chosen for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine because it is responsible for attaching to cells and gaining entry. However, research suggests that the spike protein and its S1 subunit may also be responsible for cardiovascular complications following both infection and vaccination.

  The S2 subunit may also interfere with tumor suppression, potentially explaining why COVID-19 can be more severe for cancer patients.

  

  Research shows that the spike protein is found in the blood following COVID-19 infection and vaccination. The spike protein modifies blood clotting and can stimulate an overactive immune response. A better understanding of these findings and the specific roles the spike protein and its S1 subunit play will help us determine who is most at risk for severe disease or vaccine adverse events.

  Cardiovascular Effects of Spike Protein Following Infection

  Although the studies are small, the spike protein has been found in the blood and clots of severely ill COVID-19 patients. The clinical evidence suggests a fingerprint of the spike protein’s cardiovascular effects.

  In a study of 41 patients published in Frontiers in Immunology, 30.4 percent of the 23 hospitalized were found to have significant levels of spike protein in their circulation. None of the remaining 18 uninfected or mildly ill individuals had circulating spike protein.

  A small case-control study detected the spike protein in clots retrieved from COVID-19 patients with acute ischemic stroke and myocardial infarction.

  Another study detected the S1 subunit in the plasma of 64 percent of COVID-19-positive patients, and S1 levels were significantly associated with disease severity. The nucleocapsid (N) protein, a marker for COVID-19 infection, was also detected. The authors speculated that the presence of S1 and N in plasma suggests that virus fragments enter the bloodstream, potentially due to tissue damage.

  The exact chain of events is not fully understood. Still, laboratory, clinical, and biopsy findings offer converging evidence suggesting a role for the spike protein and its S1 subunit in blood clotting and heart injury.

  Blood Clots Associated With Spike S1 Subunit

  In laboratory experiments like those performed in the Frontiers in Immunology study, the spike protein S1 subunit causes a chain reaction that sets up the right conditions for clots to form. In this chain reaction, the S1 protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on the cells lining the blood vessels. Binding to ACE2 then activates immune cells.

  This domino effect can also stimulate platelet binding, increasing clotting risk. Platelets are essential clotting agents that stop blood loss following injury by clumping together. The authors further noted that in vitro, “our group recently documented that exposing sera from severe COVID-19 patients to endothelial cells induced platelet aggregation.”

  In other words, the S1 subunit is of interest because, in vitro (in a test tube), it appears to cause changes to clotting mechanisms. If the S1 subunit can affect clotting agents like fibrin, complement 3, and prothrombin, this may be a mechanism through which SARS-CoV-2 can cause cardiovascular complications. Clotting causes changes in blood flow, potentially leading to thrombosis, stroke, and heart attack.

  Atypical Blood Clots

  Providing blood thinners to decrease the risk of clot formation did not appear to reduce the clotting risk in COVID-19 inpatients or outpatients. This may be because the clots formed after exposure to the S1 subunit may not be typical blood clots. Three findings suggest that the S1 subunit is important to clotting risk.

  1. Clots Resist Normal Breakdown

  First, when the S1 subunit was added to healthy blood in the lab, it created dense, fibrous clot deposits. These fibrous “amyloid” clots formed even when blood taken from healthy people was exposed to the S1 subunit.

  The S1 subunit appears to be associated with clotting resistant to fibrinolysis—the normal breakdown of clots necessary to restore blood flow after injury. These amyloid clots are shown in Figure 1 below.

  Amyloid clots occur when a protein is damaged and begins to fold abnormally on itself. When these abnormal amyloid proteins accumulate in the body, they can interfere with normal function.

  Figure 1. Amyloid Clots Formed in Response to Spike Protein S1

  

  2. S1 Subunit Can Induce Amyloid Substances

  Second, these dense clots may be caused by certain protein segments on the S1 subunit. The spike protein has seven protein segments (peptides) that can induce fibrous (amyloid) substances. While the fully intact spike protein (S1 and S2 subunits attached to form the full spike) did not form this amyloid, the S1 subunit did. This finding is interesting because it suggests that the subunits of the spike protein may have unique effects on cells.

  3. Spike Blocks Other Clot-Inhibiting Proteins

  Third, spike protein can outcompete other proteins, which prevent clots from forming. In another laboratory experiment designed to understand how this process plays out, scientists found that the spike protein blocks proteins important to breaking down clots.

  In summary, the in vitro (laboratory-based) research suggests that the spike protein subunit S1 can induce clot formation and impair clot dissolution. While we do not know precisely how this translates to processes in the body, Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek explored clotting and the role of spike protein with pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole on June 3 and Dr. Paul Marik on May 23. In the interview, Dr. Cole explained that the spike protein persists in the body longer, inflames tissues wherever it lands, and acts as an irritant or toxin in the body.

  Spike Protein Found in COVID-19-Vaccinated Myocarditis Patients

  Studies of COVID-19-vaccinated patients diagnosed with myocarditis found spike protein in the patients’ blood and heart muscles but not in those without myocarditis.

  Found in Blood

  The full-length spike protein has been found in the blood of vaccinated adolescents with myocarditis but not in the blood of those without myocarditis.

  It is unclear why the spike protein was circulating freely or unbound by antibodies. The adolescents who developed myocarditis had similar immune markers to those who did not develop myocarditis. In other words, the group with myocarditis did not appear to have any immune problems.

  Rather, these adolescents may have had an overactive natural immune response. Strong natural (“innate”) immunity helps the body fight off disease without any prior exposure. However, the first responders (inflammatory cytokines) can sometimes be exuberant. If the innate immune response overreacts, it may trigger myocarditis.

  Found in Heart Muscle

  The spike protein coded by mRNA has also been found in heart muscle cells. An endomyocardial (heart muscle) biopsy study was conducted among 15 patients with myocarditis following vaccination. No other viral infection could be found that might have caused the myocarditis.

  The investigators found SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in nine of the 15 patients. Immune cells (CD4+ T) were also detected in the biopsy samples. These observations suggest an inflammatory reaction to the spike protein.

  The authors concluded: “Although a causal relationship between vaccination and the occurrence of myocardial inflammation cannot be established based on the findings, the cardiac detection of spike protein, the CD4+ T-cell-dominated inflammation, and the close temporal relationship argue for a vaccine-triggered autoimmune reaction.”

  A 2022 modeling study also suggests that the spike protein can cause an autoimmune response by mimicking human molecules, causing antibodies to bind to “self” proteins.

  Spike S1 Detected in the Blood of Vaccinated Adults

  Another study found that 11 of 13 adults vaccinated with Moderna’s mRNA-1273 had the S1 subunit in their blood as early as one day after vaccination.

  Plasma was collected from 13 participants at various times during the first month after each dose. The antigens S1 and spike were measured to estimate the amount of mRNA translation into protein products.

  After the first 100-microgram dose, S1 antigen was detected in the plasma of 11 participants. In contrast, the spike antigen was detected in three of 13 participants. The S1 antigen peak was detected on average five days after vaccination. Again, the timing of this peak for S1 seems to add to the clues suggesting an autoimmune response in the week after vaccination.

  mRNA Detected in the Blood and Lymph Nodes After Vaccination

  Vaccine mRNA, which encodes the spike protein and its S1 subunit, also persists in the blood and lymph nodes. Following vaccination, spike-encoded mRNA has been found in the blood for 15 days and in lymph nodes for up to 60 days. Spike-laden exosomes have been found circulating in the blood for up to four months. This finding is important because it refutes the CDC’s claim that the mRNA is so fragile that it dissolves quickly at the injection site (see Figure 2a in Part 1).

  The lymph nodes continue creating better-fitting antibodies after any viral infection. This is a critical way that our bodies prepare for new variants naturally. However, persistently high levels of vaccine-induced mRNA and spike protein may not be helpful when the immune system is asked to respond to future variants. In other words, if the immune system is tasked with continuing to pump out antibodies to a previous variant, it may be less nimble when asked to create a high-quality antibody for a new variant.

  Inadequate Clinical Trials Leave Unresolved Questions

  Given what we know about the harmful effects of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we should not have assumed that the vaccine-encoded spike protein would be harmless.

  And, given what we know about clotting issues following COVID-19 infection, future studies should test whether the S1 subunit produced in response to vaccination can also cause clotting issues via the same pathway. These studies should include both lab experiments and human observations.

  In addition, we do not know the relative amounts of free spike protein in circulation following infection versus vaccination.

  In the case of the COVID-19 vaccines, the active ingredient was not studied prior to authorization. The manufacturers used mRNA that encodes for a substitute protein (luciferase) to test the safety and biodistribution of the mRNA vaccines.

  Pfizer submitted animal biodistribution data to regulatory agencies using the surrogate RNA encoding for luciferase, as discussed in Part 1 of this series.

  However, these studies were inadequate in describing how mRNA, the spike protein, its S1 subunit, and the LNP carrier would affect the human body.

  In this article, we described laboratory findings showing clotting associated with the S1 subunit. Studies like these reinforce why thorough preclinical studies are so crucial. The studies conducted by pharmaceutical companies were not sufficient to address these questions.

  We had very little information about how people would respond to vaccination depending on age, sex, immune status, overall health, or history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The original clinical trials did not enroll enough people who had already recovered from COVID-19; they were not designed to provide an understanding of how prior infection would affect a person’s response to vaccination.

  Required Pfizer Post-Authorization Safety Study Unavailable to Public

  Pre-authorization studies were clearly inadequate. Post-authorization, the FDA has only acknowledged that passive surveillance is insufficient to establish safety. The agency responded to adverse event reports by requiring Pfizer to conduct additional studies, with the first monitoring report due October 2022.

  On page 6 of the approval letter, the FDA acknowledges this fact (see Figure 2 below):

  “We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis.

  “Furthermore, the pharmacovigilance system that the FDA is required to maintain under section 505(k)(3) of the FDCA is not sufficient to assess these serious risks. Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are required to conduct the following studies. …”

  Has the FDA received the monitoring report from Pfizer, which was due by Oct. 31, 2022? The next report, the interim report, will be due in October.

  Figure 2. FDA Postmarketing Safety Study Requirements

  

  Read Part 1: FDA Overhaul Needed for New Vaccines and mRNA Therapies

  Read Part 2:Health Implications of Poor COVID-19 mRNA Testing: Miscarriage, Vision Loss, Immunotoxicity

  Read Part 3: Pulling Back the Curtain: mRNA Lipid Nanoparticle Design Created Potential for Clotting and Triggering Immune Overdrive

  Next: In Part 5, we will discuss the mRNA manufacturing issues affecting contamination with double-stranded DNA and the potential for genome integration.

  For all references, click here.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 21:40

• 'Defund The Police' Democrat Politician Left With Broken Leg, Bloodied Face, After Violent Carjacking In Minnesota
  ‘Defund The Police’ Democrat Politician Left With Broken Leg, Bloodied Face, After Violent Carjacking In Minnesota

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The second vice chairwoman for Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, who previously vowed to “dismantle” the Minneapolis Police Department amid widespread Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, is now calling for tougher crime laws after she was violently carjacked this week.

  

  In a lengthy Sept. 7 post on Facebook, Shivanthi Sathanandan claimed the carjacking incident took place in the driveway of her Minneapolis home in front of her children, who are aged 4 and 7.

  The incident left her with a broken leg, deep lacerations on her head, and bruising and cuts all over her body.

  Ms. Sathanandan shared a photo of herself with what appeared to be blood pouring down her face alongside the post.

  “Four very young men, all carrying guns, beat me violently down to the ground in front of our kids,” she wrote. “The young men held our neighbors up at gunpoint when they ran over and tried to help me. All in broad daylight.”

  “Look at my face in the picture. This is the face of a mother who just had the [expletive] beaten out of her,” she continued. “A mother whose only thought was, ‘let me run far enough and fight hard enough so that my kids have a chance to get away.’ This is the face of a mother who just listened to her four-year-old daughter screaming non-stop, her 7-year-old son wailing for someone to come help because bad guys are murdering his Mama in the back yard, her neighbors screaming in outrage… all while being beaten with guns and kicks and fists.”

  .@Shivanthi Sathanandan, the vice chair for the Democrat Party @MinnesotaDFL in Minnesota, virulently advocated for the dismantling of the Minneapolis Police Department even as neighborhoods in the city were burned to the ground by #BLM–#Antifa rioters.

  Now, she has come… pic.twitter.com/Plc4m2SSJO

  — Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) September 7, 2023

  Attackers Must be ‘Held Accountable’

  “These men knew what they were doing. I have NO DOUBT they have done this before. Yet they are still on OUR STREETS. Killing mothers. Giving babies psychological trauma that a lifetime of therapy cannot erase. With no hesitation and no remorse,” Ms. Sathanandan wrote.

  “I’m now part of the statistics. I wasn’t silent when I fought these men to save my life and my babies, and I won’t be silent now. We need to get illegal guns off of our streets, catch these young people who are running wild creating chaos across our city, and HOLD THEM IN CUSTODY AND PROSECUTE THEM,” she said.

  “Look at my face. REMEMBER ME when you are thinking about supporting letting juveniles and young people out of custody to roam our streets instead of HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS,” the Democrat wrote.

  A report from the Minneapolis Police Department obtained by KSTP states that Ms. Sathanandan’s vehicle was later abandoned by the suspects and recovered.

  It is not clear if any suspects have been arrested. The Epoch Times has contacted the Minneapolis Police Department for further comment.

  

  ‘Dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department’

  The alleged attack on Ms. Sathanandan and her subsequent comments come roughly three years after she accused police of having “systematically failed the Black Community,” and vowed to “dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department.”

   

  In a post on Facebook at the height of the BLM protests taking place throughout the country, sparked by the death of George Floyd while in police custody, Ms. Sathanandan wrote: “We are going to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department. Say it with me. DISMANTLE The Minneapolis Police Department.

  “MPD has systematically failed the Black Community, they have failed ALL OF US. It’s time to build a new infrastructure that works for ALL communities,” she wrote. “If you are still disagreeing with that BASIC FACT, I’m not sure what to say to you.”

  In her post on Thursday detailing the alleged carjacking, Ms. Sathanandan vowed that the criminals would not win.

  “We need to take back our city. And this will not be the last you hear from me about this,” she said.

  The Democrat concluded the lengthy post by thanking the “incredible Minneapolis 4th Precinct Officers, Mayor Frey, Chief O’Hara, Paramedics, neighbors, friends and DFL family” who “all came to our aide during this terrifying experience.”

  “I’m so grateful for this community that wraps us in love,” she wrote.

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 21:00

• Doug Casey On The 2024 Election
  Doug Casey On The 2024 Election

  Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

  

  International Man: President Biden is running for reelection in 2024.

  However, many Americans are questioning Biden’s physical and mental faculties. He appears half asleep on many occasions—often forgetting his train of thought or stumbling on his words.

  Biden will soon be 81, making him the oldest president in US history.

  What’s your take?

  Doug Casey: The very fact that he’s supposedly even contemplating running in 2024 is further proof that he’s non compos mentis. He’s so far gone that he doesn’t even realize what an embarrassment he is. But it’s not a question of his age, per se.

  A lot of people in their eighties are sharp as a tack. Age slows you down, true. But if you’ve gained wisdom through many years of experience, you can still play the game. The problem with Biden isn’t so much that he’s decrepit and feeble—although those things are highly undesirable in a national leader. It’s that he lacks any semblance of ability, has no judgment, and is devoid of morality and ethics. The world is asking: How degraded are the American people that they could not just elect but are thinking of reelecting, such a pathetic shell?

  Trump is only four years younger, but he appears hale and hardy. All this should be academic, however. It should, ideally, make little difference who the president is.

  Switzerland is the most prosperous country in Europe, and nobody knows or cares who the president of Switzerland might be. It would be nice if the president of the US was nothing but a figurehead, someone respectable to set a moral tone and give a good example. Perhaps that’s the biggest reason Biden shouldn’t run. He’s almost the antithesis of a role model. Although admittedly superior to his thoroughly degenerate son, who he once identified as the most intelligent man he knew.

  International Man: Despite the countless indictments against him, Donald Trump is still the frontrunner for the Republican ticket with an enormous lead.

  What’s your perspective on Trump this time around?

  Doug Casey: I did an interview here in 2016 when he first talked of running—and nothing has changed.

  He has absolutely no philosophical core; he flies by the seat of his pants. Trump is popular because he’s a traditionalist and a nationalist. He wants the US to return to the values of a kinder and gentler era. However, he’s not a libertarian. He has no understanding of economics, as evidenced by the fact that he wants massive duties on imports. He has no fear of gigantic deficits. He’s fine with borrowing even more money. He’s quite willing to put on regulations when he arbitrarily thinks it’s a good idea.

  At a time when the US is collapsing in on itself, bankrupt, crime-ridden, and overtaken by crazy wokeness, I believe most people would prefer a traditionalist—at least someone who’s not a Jacobin looking to overturn the whole basis of society. I hasten to add that Biden himself isn’t even the real problem—as degraded as he is—it’s the people who manipulate the doddering old fool. His cabinet and top officials are an assortment of criminal personalities. They are, without exception, stupid, incompetent, and/or psychotic. That’s a radical statement, but I believe it’s factual. The overweight tranny sporting an admirals costume while masquerading as a woman is far from the worst of the bunch.

  At least Trump is something of an outsider. The people in the evil party hate him simply because he’s an outspoken traditionalist who resonates with the hoi polloi. They suffer from what’s known as “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

  I’m not really a fan of Trump, except for the fact that he’s a traditionalist. It’s interesting that the people who do hate him, hate him just because he’s a traditionalist. I see zero evidence that he’s a criminal. He is just a successful self-promoter, a celebrity who made some money in real estate and has genuine concerns about his country. Plus, he’s very entertaining—that actually counts for something.

  International Man: Now that actual libertarians seem to be running the Libertarian Party, do you see anything interesting coming from them in 2024?

  Doug Casey: I neither follow nor care about the Libertarian Party. It only counts because it’s registered to run candidates in all 50 states. None of them have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning more than a local race for dogcatcher. That said, the major parties will each try to use it to draw votes from the other party. That was the case in 2016 when Johnson/Weld got 4.5 million votes, 3.3% of the total. That’s a big deal in a close election.

  Except for Ron Paul and Harry Browne, who intelligently used the election as a bully platform to spread the philosophy, the Libertarian Party’s candidates have been non-entities. I’m sure that’ll be the case this year as well.

  In fact, they’re worse than just narcissistic non-entities. Their 2016 candidate, Gary Johnson, was just a good-natured pothead who somehow got elected governor of New Mexico. He picked William Weld, ex-governor of Massachusetts and a classic Deep State operative, as his VP. How did that ever happen?

  I understand the Libertarian Party has evicted the party-archs who promoted that ticket. I used to say, if you’re going to vote, at least vote Libertarian as a protest vote. But it really is a wasted vote from every point of view these days. Not that it really matters. I understand the arguments why you should vote, but the fact is that your vote counts about as much as a grain of sand on a beach, especially if the election is rigged.

  International Man: Trump’s former chief strategist, Steve Bannon, suggested a Trump/RFK ticket would win in a massive landslide.

  Presuming the DNC rigs the primary against RFK Jr., what role do you see him playing in the general election?

  Doug Casey: They’re both outspoken and very entertaining—90% of politics is entertainment. They mostly agree on Covid, which is wonderful. They’re both anti-war. They’re both anti-Deep State.

  It’s possible that Bannon’s right; the public would love two refreshing semi-outsiders. But it would probably be like taking a couple of cats and tying their tails together.

  Kennedy, as I explained before, is basically an old-style “reasonable” Democrat. He believes in a “safety net” (i.e. welfare), regulation, the green agenda, and the rest of it. So does Trump, to a great extent. It’s not that Bannon’s wrong; it’s just that the two of them would always try to overshadow each other. But at least they’re not woke Democrats…

  In my view, the Republicans are the stupid party, and the Democrats are the evil party. Given a chance between stupid and evil, you should probably go for stupid. They might be less destructive. Although perversely, since stupidity is amorphous, illogical, and unpredictable, they could be just dangerous in a different way. It’s a classic Hobson’s Choice.

  International Man: What sort of dirty tricks do you see occurring in the run-up to the 2024 election?

  Is it possible the Deep State will find a way to cancel the election if it isn’t going their way?

  Doug Casey: You may recall that in 2016, I placed a money bet that, against all odds, Trump would win. In 2020, I gave six reasons why the Democrats would win.

  So I’m foolishly starting to think I’m a handicapper of the how hoi polloi will vote. Or at least who’s best at fixing an election.

  The Democrats might win simply because the American electorate has become so corrupt; they accept socialism in principle. In addition, the Dems currently control the apparatus of the State and are aggressively using it to cement themselves in power.

  They’re actual Jacobins, Neo-Marxists, and will do anything to stay in office. Like the way, they’re prosecuting Trump in four different jurisdictions for scores of nonsensical, fabricated charges. They’re attempting to bankrupt him with legal fees, de-legitimize him with unthinking voters, and tie up his time so it’s impossible for him to campaign.

  This is the type of thing, like the extraordinary sentences handed down for the Jan 6 protests, that goes on in Third World countries. Serious MAGA people could go wild. It’s possible that we won’t even have an election in 2024, as outrageous as that sounds.

  The Dems can’t run Biden. It’s egregious elder abuse; the old criminal is just a shell of a man. Nor can they run the cackling, dim-witted Kamala, even though many black people will predictably cry racism in today’s environment. She’s a parody of herself.

  So, who can the Democrats run? Michelle Obama? She is way too much of a hot potato ultra-leftist. Another option is Gavin Newsom, who’s undistinguished by anything except being good-looking and running California into the ground. I don’t see anybody else with name recognition.

  There are several other huge X factors. Between now and the election, we’re very likely to have a financial and economic crisis. The Greater Depression could well up from under the surface and explode like a volcano, creating chaos. The military crisis in the Ukraine could spin out of control into an actual war against Russia. The US continues to antagonize China, a big wild card. And Washington seems to be plumping for a war in North Africa.

  Perhaps most important is the fact that the red people and the blue people in the US actually hate each other. It’s much more serious and widespread than any culture clash we had in the past, including the late 1960s and early 1970s.

  It could lead to something resembling a civil war. The US Government itself is losing legitimacy with wide swaths of domestic and foreign public opinion. I know it’s outlandish to consider seriously, but is it possible that we could wind up with a military government in the US?

  Although the US military has become corrupt and is also collapsing on itself, it’s about the only government institution that Americans still trust. In a time of chaos, when neither party can put forward a candidate, we could get a general as a (temporary) solution. Likely an opportunistic leftist like the recently defrocked Petraeus.

  It’s a reasonably safe bet that 2024 is not going to be just a bad year but one for the record books.

  *  *  *

  Disturbing economic, political, and social trends are already in motion and now accelerating at breathtaking speed. The risks that lie ahead are too big and dangerous to ignore. That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse. It will help you understand what is unfolding right before our eyes and what you should do so you don’t get caught in the crosshairs. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 21:00

• FBI, HHS Stonewalling Congress Over Illegal Chinese COVID Lab In California
  FBI, HHS Stonewalling Congress Over Illegal Chinese COVID Lab In California

  The Chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic has threatened to subpoena the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) after they refused to produce information on an illegal Chinese lab that was “caught red-handed conducting dangerous research related to COVID-19 and other deadly diseases without a license by FBI agents and California officials.”

  

  In Thursday letters to the agencies (FBI letter, HHS letter), Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) noted their failure to respond to prior requests for information, and says that if they fail to comply with oversight, “we will be forced to evaluate the use of the compulsory process.”

  The letter also puts the agencies on notice that the Subcommittee may request that employees sit for voluntary transcribed interviews.

  As we previously noted, the lab was found in what was thought to be a empty storage building in Reedley, California – located in the central San Joaquin Valley.

  

  It was only discovered after a local code enforcement officer noticed a garden hose poking out a back wall of the building, according to YourCentralValley.

  Public Health staff also observed blood, tissue and other bodily fluid samples and serums; and THOUSANDS of vials of unlabeled fluids and suspected biological material.

  Additionally they found 900 genetically engineered mice, engineered to catch and carry COVID-19, living in “inhumane” conditions.

  773 of the mice had to be euthanized, and officials found another 178 mice already dead.

  “This is an unusual situation. I’ve been in government for 25 years. I’ve never seen anything like this,” said Reedley City Manager Nicole Zieba.

  Even county health officials were left in shock.

  “I’ve never seen this in my 26-year career with the County of Fresno,” said Assistant Director of the Fresno County Department of Public Health Joe Prado.

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tested the substances and detected at least 20 potentially infectious agents, including coronavirus, HIV, hepatitis and herpes, according to a Health and Human Services letter dated June 6.

  Agents also found thousands of package boxes – many with shipping labels from China. Below is a photo included in court documents in California.

  

  NBC News reports that an investigation found the tenant was Prestige BioTech, a company registered in Nevada and unlicensed for business in California. City officials spoke with Xiuquin Yao, who was identified as the company president, through emails included in the court documents.

  Yao told officials that Prestige BioTech moved assets belonging to a defunct company, Universal Meditech Inc., to the Reedley warehouse from Fresno after UMI went under. Prestige Biotech was a creditor to UMI and identified as its successor, according to court documents.

  Officials were unable to get any California-based address for either company except for the previous Fresno location from which UMI had been evicted.

  “The other addresses provided for identified authorized agents were either empty offices or addresses in China that could not be verified,” court documents said.

  Related:

  • Newsom Funded Chinese COVID Lab Known To Biden’s FDA

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 20:40

• Victor Davis Hanson: What Game Is Hunter Biden Playing?
  Victor Davis Hanson: What Game Is Hunter Biden Playing?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  What shameless act or felonious activity was not evidenced on Hunter Biden’s laptop?

  Racist attitudes toward Asians?

  Soliciting prostitution?

  Felonious use of drugs?

  Photographed nudity and perverse sex?

  Admissions to illicit foreign shakedowns?

  

  Hunter all but accused his own father, President Joe Biden, of also being on the foreign take:

  “I hope you all can do what I did and pay for everything for this entire family … Unlike Pop I won’t make you give me half your salary.”

  Hunter’s alleged felonies range from bribery to tax evasion. That he has not yet been prosecuted for anything is scandalous. His exemption is attributable only to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s likely weaponized directives to federal prosecutors to downgrade or forget altogether felony charges against Hunter.

  So given such wild behavior, why would not Hunter tone it down, stop the global grifting, cease the reckless behavior — and quit redirecting attention to the likely illegal acts of his father, the president?

  Why did not Hunter early on just settle the child support suit filed by his paramour Lunden Roberts? Why haggle over money for his own daughter?

  Hunter instead outrageously claimed near poverty. That excuse was hilarious given he flies on private jets and pays nearly $16,000 a month to rent a house in tony, celebrity-ridden Malibu.

  Why did Hunter ever get involved with a performance stripper in the first place after his past widely publicized liaisons with prostitutes? Why also with his own widowed sister-in-law?

  Given Hunter has little or no experience or training in high-stakes international finance and investment — and thus has no market value as an investor or broker. But he was infamous for translating that nothingness into millions in lucre due solely to his ability to monetize the influence of then-Vice President Joe Biden.

  So why now when under 24/7 scrutiny, would Hunter dare recreate himself as an “artist,” by blowing through straws in his mouth?

  His amateurish canvasses somehow have sold for up to $500,000 a pop. Both Biden donors and gamers saw their buys of such mediocre art as gambits either to meet with or profit from his father, Joe Biden.

  But would not his painting grift only bring greater prosecutorial scrutiny and greater embarrassment to the president?

  Hunter Biden’s attorneys sought to leverage federal prosecutors into agreeing to drop their charges — by threatening to call in as a pro-Hunter witness President Joe Biden himself and thereby likely invoke a constitutional crisis!

  In such a scenario, the president under oath would be forced to lie again that he had no knowledge of or involvement in Hunter’s illegal behavior. Or if he admitted the truth that he did, he would thus contradict years of his adamant denials.

  Why would Hunter put his father and president in such a publicity circus?

  Hunter has lost an incriminating laptop by abandoning it at a repair shop. He has forgotten his crack pipe in a rental car. His illegally registered handgun turned up in a trash dumpster near a school.

  So would not the carefree Hunter insist that all the Bidens in the spotlight remain extra careful never to abandon incriminating drugs — especially in the White House.

  Yet in a West Wing first, recently cocaine was found lost in an entrance vestibule. Various media outlets claimed it belonged to someone in the “Biden family orbit.”

  One of two things explain the continuous reckless behavior of wayward son Hunter Biden:

  • One, he is either still on drugs or so suffers from past addiction that he has lost all common sense and judgment, and simply cannot control his behavior.

  • Or, two, Hunter is an embittered, angry son. As the Biden bagman for foreign shakedown cash, he did the dirty work and most risked the legal exposure that made all the Bidens rich.

  Yet, instead of familial praise — or so the broke Hunter seems to whine on his laptop –Hunter gets no respect from those he enriched.

  And now he, not they, might first go to jail.

  As a result, does his continuous recklessness send a not so-subtle reminder to all the Bidens – his father the “Big Guy” especially?

  That is, Hunter is not going to take the fall.

  He will not end up in prison for decades while the other exempt Bidens continue to enjoy their ill-gotten riches, due to Hunter’s imaginative cons.

  No wonder the first family for months moved Hunter into the White House and put him on Air Force One.

  Is it now, “Keep Hunter close and self-important — or else”?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 20:20

• "I Don't Give A F***": Top Maryland Education Official Caught Using Encrypted Msg App As Grade Scandal Deepens
  “I Don’t Give A F***”: Top Maryland Education Official Caught Using Encrypted Msg App As Grade Scandal Deepens

  Investigative journalist Chris Papst of Fox45 News’ Project Baltimore has been leading the charge in exposing a massive grade scandal and subsequent cover-up in the country’s fourth most funded school system. The corruption isn’t confined to the Baltimore City Public Schools level; it extends all the way up to the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools. 

  SCANDAL: #ProjectBaltimore can now confirm the Maryland Schools Superintendent @MdPublicSchools used an encrypted, auto-deleting, messaging App (Signal) to conduct state business. Add this to his hidden email account and the 98 deleted texts we uncovered.https://t.co/lgu2t7xNHP

  — Chris Papst (@chrispapst) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The latest report Papst shared comes weeks after his team found metadata for 98 text messages sent or received by Maryland Superintendent Mohammed Choudhury in the first quarter of this year — around the time the state changed grades that no longer can be seen. 

  Before

  

  After 

  

  And why would the state change the grades? Well, it’s alleged that Superintendent Choudhury needs good optics for the crime-ridden metro area after Papst’s team released this shocking report in February: ‘Education Crisis’: 23 Baltimore City Schools Have No Students Proficient In Math. 

  Papst believes these text messages hold the answer to why the state government made the statistical cover-up. His latest report includes “an encrypted cell phone app and never meant to be seen by the public are now shedding light on what’s happening at the Maryland State Department of Education,” according to the Project Baltimore report. 

  Here’s the report:

  The messages appear to support concerns over the state superintendent’s leadership, transparency, and creation of a toxic workplace culture.

  Project Baltimore asked Superintendent Mohammed Choudhury about the messages at the August 22 state board of education meeting.

  “Mr. Superintendent, have you ever used the Signal Application in commission of your job?” Project Baltimore’s Chris Papst asked.

  Choudhury replied, “I have no comment. For my job, no.”

  “You’ve never used Signal for your job?” Papst asked again.

  “No,” replied Choudhury.

  On record, Choudhury told Papst that Signal wasn’t used for work-related purposes. However, new screenshots from a senior employee in Maryland Public Schools (who wished to remain anonymous) suggest otherwise. 

  Project Baltimore obtained screenshots of conversations between Choudhury and high-ranking employees within the Maryland State Department of Education.

  Each one is a “Signal Message” sent by “Mohammed Choudhury” to at least one high-level employee at MSDE who asked not to be identified. Project Baltimore received multiple text threads, which the source says were sent between late 2021 and 2022.

  In the screenshots, Choudhury’s name and picture are visible. The phone number is also registered to the superintendent. In the messages, Choudhury certainly appears to be talking about work.

  In one screenshot, Choudhury “set the disappearing message timer to 1 hour”, which applies to select messages.

  Choudhury writes, “All of that teacher assignment stuff is too much.”

  In another Signal message, Choudhury tells an employee a project needs “A LOT of work.” He goes on to say, “as of now, I’m not even close to green lighting anything there”.

  In another instance, Choudhury appears to berate his employee, saying, “What feels like a waste of time is tell (sic) me last minute we are changing survey links when I told you I didn’t want to do this.”

  The employee responds, “I don’t understand what you see the issue to be”

  Choudhury writes back, “I’ll make it easy for you guys. Your (sic) not changing it. It’s staying as is. Don’t meet with me today. Done. That’s a directive.”

  “So cancel the Qualtrics license?” Asks the employee.

  Choudhury responds, “Yes, I don’t give a F*** about Qualtrics at this point.”

  

  What remains troubling is why the superintendent would use Signal on his personal phone, with some messages disappearing in one hour for work-related tasks. 

  “And if those messages are set to disappear, they can’t be accessed under open records laws. Parents and taxpayers cannot see what’s being said by their state superintendent about public schools,” Project Baltimore said. 

  Here’s more from Papst. 

  Papst asked Tina Williams-Koroma, founder and CEO of TCecure, a Baltimore cybersecurity company: “Does it concern you that the highest-ranking public education official in the state is using signal to conduct state business?”

  “Yeah, I think it’s concerning to me that some of the information in records may not be accessible and discoverable,” Williams-Koroma replied.

  Where is the national outrage? 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 20:00

• Biden Biography Bombshell: Hillary Violated Logan Act, Drew Rebuke From Ex-Crony
  Biden Biography Bombshell: Hillary Violated Logan Act, Drew Rebuke From Ex-Crony

  Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,

  Once again, Hillary Clinton appears to have flagrantly violated federal law and faced no consequences for her actions, according to an inadvertent admission from a new biography of President Joe Biden.

  

  The book, Franklin Foer’s The Last Politician: Inside Joe Biden’s White House and the Struggle for America’s Future,” casts an otherwise rosy glow on Biden’s catastrophic tenure—perhaps as part of a last-ditch bid to rehab the flailing president’s popular support and legacy while making it appear as though his scripted policymaking has been carefully studied and scrutinized.

  But according to a report from the Associated Press on some of the key takeaways from it, the book reveals how Clinton, the former secretary of State under Barack Obama, took an active role in attempting to help Afghan women flee the Taliban after Biden’s botched military withdrawal plan went awry.

  Her efforts to assist the female refugees at first appeared noble—in particular due to the fact that they seemed so selflessly removed from Clinton’s thirst for money, power and acclaim.

  “She directed a group of them to wear white scarfs [sic] so they could be identified by U.S. Marines guarding the Kabul airport, and unilaterally contacted world leaders to find places for their eventual evacuation flights to land,” the AP reported.

  However, Clinton’s decision to “unilaterally contact” world leaders as a civilian also put her in direct violation of the Logan Act.

  The act prohibits any U.S. citizen “who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government… in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States…”

  Its punishment includes up to three years in prison, as well as a hefty fine.

  Specifically, after reaching out directly, without authorization, to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about the prospect of taking in Afghan refugees, Clinton drew a rebuke from her own former campaign policy adviser, Jake Sullivan.

  According to Foer’s book, Sullivan—who is currently the Biden administration’s national security adviser—told her “What are you doing calling the Ukrainian government?”

  Clinton, in turn, responded, “I wouldn’t have to call if you guys would.”

  While the stunning violation of protocol is likely to go unpunished by the Biden administration, it is easy to imagine the many ways that Clinton’s outreach to Zelenskyy might have undermined delicate negotiations already in progress over the likelihood of what would soon be a full-scale Russian invasion.

  Sullivan had undoubtedly been deeply involved, at that point, in laying the scaffolding for the proxy war—an extension of the CIA-backed color-revolution that began in the country during Obama’s presidency.

  Apart from any unspoken obligations the U.S. may have to aid in the country’s defense, the Biden administration’s peculiar interest in Ukraine spans an array of possible motives—from money-laundering to child-trafficking to blackmail to helping globalist oligarchs like BlackRock and George Soros to use the country as their sandbox for the Great Reset.

  Notwithstanding, it is clear that Clinton was the last person they wanted in the middle of those diplomatic discussions.

  Clinton, meanwhile, joined her own successor as secretary of State, John Kerry, in having egregiously violated the 1799 law.

  Kerry controversially inserted himself into foreign policy negotiations with Iran during the Trump administration, even having the chutzpah to tell the rogue regime that it should wait out Trump’s presidential term before taking any rash steps.

  He was not prosecuted for his actions.

  Ironically, the person closest to being prosecuted under the Logan Act may have been Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

  Members of the Clinton campaign team and the Obama intelligence community collectively strategized on how to ensnare Flynn in a legal trap after having illegally unmasked him for unsolicited phone calls he had received from a Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

  After Obama imposed sanctions against Russia for its alleged interference in the 2016 election, Kislyak sought—and received—Flynn’s assurances that the Trump administration would not continue with his predecessor’s policy.

  On Jan. 5, 2017, top Obama team members, including his top spies, seditiously plotted to use the Logan Act as the pretense to open a secret investigation into the incoming administration, giving them the ability to wiretap Trump and his top deputies, based on the false pretense—which they knew to be false at the time—that Trump was colluding with Russia.

  Shortly thereafter, FBI agents, led by Peter Strzok, interviewed Flynn in his office and snared him in a perjury trap for failing to remember the exact details of his conversations with Kislyak—which, unbeknownst to Flynn, they had been given a transcript of.

  The transcript of the calls was later leaked to the Washington Post for the purpose of embarassing the new administration, and it ltimately was what triggered the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate the Russia-collusion hoax.

  Fittingly, Jake Sullivan was deeply involved in both Kerry’s operation as “lead negotiator” in Iran, and in Clinton cover-ups such as her e-mail scandal and Benghazi cover-up.

  He also testified against Flynn during a House Oversight investigation of the Russia hoax—which he, himself, had helped to concoct and spread.

  Sullivan claimed before Congress that Flynn had “absolutely” colluded with the Russians in violation of the Logan Act.

  “lf l went out right now and started telling foreign officials, ‘Don’t worry, we’ll avoid some action the current government is taking,’ that would be a violation of the Logan Act,” Sullivan testified in response to a question from then ranking minority member Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.

  “And I think what Flynn did here—I mean, I’m not an attorney, but just on the face of what the purpose of this act is, what he did ran directly contrary to it,” he added.

  Other highlights from Foer’s Biden biography:

  • Biden reportedly was angered when contronted by Chinese president Xi Jinping about the rumors of U.S.-backed bioweapons facilities in Ukraine, telling Xi: “You know better than that, this is crap. Stop mouthing nonsense Russian talking points: I know you know that, so give me a break,” the Daily Caller reported.

  • Despite having spent four decades as a political elite, Biden was resentful of Barack Obama’s Ivy League education and claimed he couldn’t even curse properly, the AP reported, saying Obama was unable to deliver a “f—- you” with “the right elongation of vowels and the necessary hardness of consonants; it was how they must curse in the ivory tower.”

  • Vice President Kamala Harris damaged her rapport with Biden by initially asking to be in charge of relations with Scandinavia because it was “away from the spotlight.” Biden, in turn, bestowed on her the “thankless” job of uncovering the “root cause” of immigration at the U.S. border.

  • Biden has privately admitted to feeling “tired” despite denying publicly that he is unfit to lead due to his advanced age.

  Ben Sellers is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/realbensellers.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 19:40

• Walmart Pay Cuts For New Hires Indicates Economic Downturn Has Arrived
  Walmart Pay Cuts For New Hires Indicates Economic Downturn Has Arrived

  The latest jobs reports (read: here & here) have revealed the US labor market, while still adding jobs, shows signs of cooling. Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, has noticed the slowdown and is cutting pay for new store hires. 

  According to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the retailer introduced a new payment structure for new employees that went into effect in mid-July. Anyone who is hired today receives less pay than someone who was hired three months ago. 

  The new payment structure means new hires who join the digital or stocking departments will make about a dollar an hour less than they would have if hired earlier this year. 

  

  “This will allow for better staffing throughout the store,” said one of the documents. Walmart has already raised hourly pay for 50,000 workers because their pay was below the new minimum. 

  On Thursday, a Walmart spokeswoman confirmed the pay structure change, adding it allows new workers to learn and improve on skills to climb the company ladder. 

  News of Walmart’s pay reduction for new hires comes as the labor market appears to be cracking:

  • Labor Market Implodes: Job Openings Crater, Prior Data “Unexpectedly” Revised Sharply Lower
  • Unemployment Rate Unexpectedly Surges As BLS Revises Payrolls For Every Month In 2023 Sharply Lower

  More importantly, David Bassuk, the global head of retail at AlixPartners consulting firm, noted that retailers are scrambling to cut costs ahead of a period of consumer weakness. 

  “This is one example of many where retailers are doing everything they can to try to head off increasing costs,” Bassuk said.

  Walmart’s moves “signal the industry where things are either headed or what they should be considering,” he said. “I think we are starting to see the pendulum start to swing back to a different set of priorities.”

  The retailer sees precisely what we’ve explained to readers in recent months: low/mid-tier consumers are tapped out after two years of negative real wages that forced them to deplete savings while boosting credit card spending to make ends meet. Now, student loan payments are kicking in and will serve as an even larger economic headwind. 

  Goldman’s take on all of this is that the wage-price spiral is over: 

  It is worth noting that the market ticked higher as soon as the WMT story hit about looking to lower labor costs. Keep in mind, they were among the very first large companies to make major wage investment announcements years ago so this does feel like a notable story. Even if not an immediate needle mover to numbers, it is likely to be a driver for sentiment given the market’s large focus on CPI. “Walmart is paying some new store workers less than it would have three months ago, a sign that employers are seeking to cut labor costs as the once-hot market for hourly staff cools.” This is the first story of this kind we have seen. Also, they are the keynote speaker on day 1 of our retail conference next Tuesday, the 12th.

  In a recent earnings call, Walmart’s CFO voiced concerns about “uncertainty in the economy during the rest of the year.” The decision to reduce pay suggests that America’s largest employer is already feeling downward pressure in the economy. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 19:20

• Power Vacuum: How The State Wants To Suck Electricity From The SUV You Are Required To Buy
  Power Vacuum: How The State Wants To Suck Electricity From The SUV You Are Required To Buy

  Authored by Thomas Buckley via The Mises Institute,

  A literal power vacuum – that’s what California Senate Bill 233 proposes.

  And what is to be sucked? Your electric car.

  The bill – which has passed the Senate and is now winding its way through the Assembly – states that all new electric vehicles to be sold in California after 2030 be “bidirectional.”

  

  Because the state has decided to essentially go all electric without having the ability to actually provide enough electricity, the climate warriors have gotten a bit creative and now see the millions of electric vehicles (EVs) in the state as tiny batteries to make up for their incompetence.

  Currently, not every EV can send power back to the grid (like home solar panels that ship excess power to their local utility.) The bill—almost certain to pass because this is California—would change that.

  The bill, however, is only the first step in the process of being able to drain your EV, as the technology to get the electricity back onto the grid does not actually exist. As with so many other Golden State climate-related projects, it is based on being able to do it someday . . . probably . . . maybe.

  While this approach allows solons and nabobs to tout their green-a-fides, set even more absurd future goals by assuming things will work eventually, increase state spending to fund such projects, and create an excuse to not actually do anything practical—like build natural gas generators—to shore up the state’s extremely wobbly grid, it does nothing to address California’s self-imposed “energy insecurity.”

  The idea becomes even more absurd when one considers that shortly after announcing all new vehicles sold in the state by 2035 must be electric, the state asked the public to not charge their EVs after work because the grid couldn’t handle it.

  In theory, this bill raises the specter of electricity being drained out of your full Tesla to power your neighbor’s empty Volt.

  Furthermore, the concept is extremely dangerous. Imagine an emergency situation in which you have to leave your home immediately but you cannot because the state drained your car. The implications for fire evacuations, earthquake response, etc. are terrifying.

  And its not terribly clear if you would get paid for your power and/or if you would have to buy it back.

  Beyond the impracticalities, the concept does shine a light, as it were, on how easily the electrical power supply can be controlled and—if the grid is your only power option (no gas cars, no gas stoves, no propane, etc.)—how easily the public can be controlled through it.

  From “The Psychology of Electricity”:

  Now, a person can go to a gas station, put solar panels on their roof, buy propane at the hardware store, use natural gas in their home, even cut down trees to burn for heat. In other words, there are options other than electricity; there are literally millions of ways to not need to use electricity.

  But imagine a literally all-electric world—you are reduced, confined, required to get the energy you need to live from one source, one centrally (by necessity) controlled source that everything you own runs on, one centrally controlled source that can cut the power to your specific home anytime it wants.

  Conceivably—see China/social credit systems/central bank digital currency/“you’ll own nothing and be happy” and smart city concepts—[the] reasons for the power being cut will move beyond just being bill-related but conduct-related.

  The power of energy as a social control lever is nearly limitless.

  And that’s another reason why this legislative initiative is a very bad idea.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 19:00

• Biden's New Campaign Ad Presents Him As Last Action Hero Entering Ukraine "Under The Cover Of Night"
  Biden’s New Campaign Ad Presents Him As Last Action Hero Entering Ukraine “Under The Cover Of Night”

  “He entered Ukraine under the cover of night. And in the morning, Joe Biden walked shoulder to shoulder with our allies in the war-torn streets,” the narrator of a new one-minute Biden campaign ad begins. “Standing up for democracy in a place where a tyrant is waging war to take it away.”

  Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, where he’ll likely face Trump as the Republican nominee, the Biden team is focusing the reelection campaign around his surprise visit to Ukraine which took place last February. It’s being touted as the first time in American history that a sitting president traveled to an allied nation at war. “In the middle of a war zone, Joe Biden showed the world what America is made of,” the narrator says. “That’s the quiet strength of a true leader, who doesn’t back down to a dictator.” Watch the one-minute ad below:

  So while his critics sarcastically refer to him as “sleepy Joe” – his supporters are envisioning him as some kind of last action hero being covertly whisked into a dangerous “war zone” in the dark of night. “Air raid sirens blared as the two men walked together,” the clip dramatically continues, showing Biden shoulder to shoulder with Zelensky.

  The video was timed to be released to coincide with Biden’s trip to the G20 summit in India, where he’ll likely have strong words for Putin, who will not be attendance. NBC writes of the spot entitled simply “War Zone”:

  The new, 60-second advertisement will air in battleground states this weekend during the prime-time broadcast of “60 Minutes” while Biden is due to attend the G-20 Summit here, a gathering of leaders of the world’s largest economies that won’t include two geopolitical rivals, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping.

  This comes as he’s set to pour yet billions more of American taxpayer dollars into Kiev’s coffers. Yet war observers and analysts have of late expressed intensifying concern over uncontrollable escalation in what’s now obviously a US-NATO proxy war against Russia. But Biden is doubling or tripling down, showing the world “what America is made of”, apparently.

  

  At a moment Congress is mulling Biden’s latest request for more than $24 billion for Ukraine, one independent commentator has compiled a list of the mammoth aid sent so far. Again, the below is all “courtesy” of the American taxpayer, many of them unwilling of course…

  • 2/20/2023 $500 Million
  • 2/23/2023 $10 Billion
  • 2/24/2023 $2 Billion
  • 3/3/2023 $400 Million
  • 3/20/2023 $350 Million
  • 4/04/2023 $2.6 Billion
  • 4/19/2023 $325 Million
  • 5/08/2023 $1.2 Billion
  • 5/18/2023 $3 Billion
  • 5/19/2023 $375 Million
  • 5/19/2023 $40 Billion
  • 5/31/2023 $300 Million
  • 6/09/2023 $2.1 Billion
  • 6/13/2023 $325 Million
  • 6/16/2023 $205 Million
  • 6/20/2023 $6.2 Billion
  • 6/26/2023 $500 Million
  • 07/07/2023 $800 Million
  • 07/18/2023 $1.3 Billion
  • 07/21/2023 $400 Million
  • 08/13/2023 $13 Billion
  • 08/15/2023 $200 Million
  • 08/29/2023 $250 Million
  • 09/05/2023 $125 Million
  • 09/06/2023 $1 Billion
  • 09/07/2023 $600 Million

  …and these are just the publicly disclosed funds spent – never mind what’s likely a massive CIA black budget for Ukraine.

  Meanwhile, look how Huffington Post and the “never Trump” MSM is already framing the “issues” going into 2024… the GOP is supposedly “appeasing Putin”. According to the far left outlet, “As GOP Argues About Whether To Appease Putin, Biden Leans In On Support To Ukraine”:

  A new TV ad to run on “60 Minutes” highlights Biden’s February trip to Kiev, making a clear contrast with Trump and other Republicans’ statements on the invasion. https://t.co/arOQihw8ob

  — HuffPost (@HuffPost) September 8, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 18:40

• Reinventing Democracy
  Reinventing Democracy

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  The whole point of democracy and free markets is to force competition on elites who are desperate to eliminate competition.

  What’s the point of discussing reforms that aren’t even possible in the current status quo? That’s a good question, as any discussion of major systemic changes can be dismissed as pointless (since they’ll never be adopted), and a distraction from the “real work” that can be managed within the current system.

  On the other hand, we might ask: what’s the point of discussing what is do-able in the status quo, i.e. superficial feel-good policy tweaks that change nothing in the power structure? In other words, everything is ultimately a superficial feel-good policy tweak if it doesn’t change how power, “money,” credit and resources are amassed and distributed.

  

  The argument for discussing “impossible” systemic changes is this: we must ponder other ways to structure who has power for two reasons: 1) to validate how far we descended into neofeudalism and neocolonialism, and thus how desperately we need to re-arrange the power structure, and 2) to explore different models of governance and economic incentives, with an eye on the value of competition between ideas and systems.

  Richard Bonugli and I discuss ways to restore or reinvent democracy in our recent podcast, The Roundtable Insight Vision Series: Democracy (29:36).

  Although this sounds cynical, it isn’t: democracy is not really about self-rule, it’s about keeping an elite-run system stable by institutionalizing a safety valve and a governor on elite greed, corruption and mismanagement.

  Democracy gives the rabble a restricted voice as a means of limiting elite misrule, which is the natural path taken by elites everywhere, in all eras. The elite echo-chamber is: we’re entitled (by birth, rights granted by the gods, superior intelligence, merit, etc.) to rule, and therefore whatever we decide is wise–even if it is self-serving and delusional.

  Other models of governance rely on competition between elites to keep whichever elite is currently dominant from destroying the whole arrangement via their hubris, narcissism, greed, corruption, stupidity, delusions of grandeur and all the other pathologies of power.

  These models tend to fail because the dominant elite tends to see eliminating competitors as a very good strategy for consolidating power–just like corporations always seek monopolies or cartel arrangements to eliminate the pesky risks of open competition–which as we all know, introduces the possibility of losing, which a bad thing. To eliminate the possibility of losing, eliminate competition: what an excellent solution!

  This is why “capitalism” isn’t really about free markets, any more than colonialism is about “civilizing the natives;” it’s all about eliminating competition and rigging markets. In this way, “capitalism” and democracy are a perfect partnership, as each claims a noble cloak to obscure the actual machinery of elite self-service.

  The strength of democracy in system terms is it introduces a feedback loop that serves to limit systemically dangerous extremes, for example, a dictatorship that requires everyone to wear their underwear on the outside of their clothing, or (ahem) a system like ours that has boiled away social mobility and financial security, leaving a rapaciously exploitive machine that feeds off persuading poor people to borrow even more money to convince themselves that they’re not poor and powerless.

  The wealthy own the income-producing capital, the poor “own” debt: the wealthy own the mortgage / auto loan / student loan, the poor owe the mortgage / auto loan / student loan. Funny how neofeudalism works: the financial aristocracy is in the castle, protected by the Central State, and the debt-serfs are toiling away down there, protected by, well, no one. But by all means, vote for your favorite actor on the tawdry side-stage erected to amuse the public: what flourishes, what emotion, what comedy.

  (Please pardon the outburst of “truthiness.” I’ll try not to let it happen again.)

  If democracy is boiled away, the only pressure-relief valve and governor-on-greed left is messy uprising or a messy uprising plus the wholesale abandonment of the status quo by the technocrat class that keeps the whole thing glued together (what I call opting out).

  

  The prime directive in governance is to always, always, always centralize power to extend the reach of the elite currently at the wheel, and to limit the number of grubby hands trying to reach the wheel. Centralizing political power makes life considerably easier for elites, as they only need to bribe, blackmail or persuade a handful of folks at the top to cement their power / monopoly /cartel.

  I discuss this in my book Resistance, Revolution, Liberation.

  Consider the difficulties of cementing a quasi-monopoly on banking if banking were restricted to the county level. The would-be cartel grifters would have to bribe, blackmail or persuade 3,000+ county councils, all of whom are far closer to voters and far more exposed to competition than federal regulators or the Federal Reserve or Congress-critters, who as we all know, are re-elected like clockwork except in a few cases that are basically signal noise.

  This illustrates the value of Subsidiarity in a democracy, with Subsidiarity defined as “the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level.”

  The Subsidiarity principle only works in a democracy if capital is also democratized. What’s conveniently forgotten or left unsaid is: capital always “votes” three times.

  1) Capital’s beneficiaries, allies and employees will vote to keep their gravy train running;

  2) Capital influences the public with ad campaigns and public relations, all of which are quite affordable;

  3) Capital influences the political / regulatory power players in private, a.k.a. lobbying, revolving doors between corporations and the political/regulatory agencies, junkets, farcically bloated speaking fees, etc.

  The only possible conclusion: if we don’t democratize capital, democracy is boiled away. I wish this could be sugarcoated, but it’s much like my other aphorism: if we don’t change the way money is created and distributed, we’ve change nothing.

  In other words, if we don’t change the money/credit system and democratize capital, then all we’ll ever have is more superficial feel-good policy tweaks: all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  There are ways to re-structure the system to restore / reinvent democracy. Ellen Brown has made a persuasive case for public / community banking for many years, and the same idea can be applied to private-sector companies: How Community Companies Can Smash Monopolies (via Sadie).

  It seems impossible at this point to decentralize power and capital, but with the pressure-relief valve and governor-on-greed of democracy both disabled, the system is starting to shake apart at the seams. I’ve often discussed the various classes and elites jostling for power in the U.S., and it’s possible some elite might awaken to the necessity to restore the possibility that those with the vast majority of wealth and power might actually lose, i.e. restore real competition in the economy and our system of governance.

  This competition starts with the competition of ideas. That’s the point of our discussion on Democracy (29:36), which covers many other interesting ideas for decentralizing / reinventing democracy.

  Where to start? Here: the whole point of democracy and free markets is to force competition on elites who are desperate to eliminate competition.

  

  (via K.K.)

  *  *  *

  My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century. Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

  Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 18:20

• BofA Warns Clients Detroit Auto "Strike Almost Guaranteed"
  BofA Warns Clients Detroit Auto “Strike Almost Guaranteed”

  The United Auto Workers are nearing the end of their negotiations with Detroit’s “Big Three” automakers – General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis, the producer of Chrysler – concerning a new four-year labor agreement for approximately 146,000 workers. The current labor contract expires next Thursday as the union has made demands that even the UAW’s own president calls “audacious.” 

  General Motors and Ford have already sent their proposal contracts to UAW earlier this week and last — only to get quickly rejected. On Friday, Stellantis made its first proposal on wages of around 14.5% — still well under UAW President Shawn Fain’s demand of 46% over four years. 

  The automakers’ underwhelming offers put President Biden in a tough spot ahead of next week. “Union Joe,” while relaxing at his beach house in liberal white-elitest Rehoboth Beach last week, said he ‘wasn’t too worried about potential strikes.’ 

  

  Fain has described the labor talk discussions with Detroit’s Big Three as a battle between billionaires and the working class. As the deadline looms, none of the proposals have met the union’s demands, which has led John Murphy, a senior auto analyst at Bank of America Securities, to warn clients on Friday: “Strike almost guaranteed” next week. 

  Murphy expects negotiations will result in a 25-30% increase in labor costs over the next four years with “sizable cash signing bonuses and adjustments to other benefits” once contracts are finalized. 

  He said the word on the street is “UAW may offer a counter-proposal to the OEM offers shortly” but warned, “We continue to believe a strike is very likely after the Master Agreement expires next Thursday, September 14.” 

  Murphy explained if a strike was to occur next Thur., then negative headlines could weigh down automaker stocks: 

  Should this occur, it could drive some headline-related downwards movement to the stocks, but our discussions with investors and the valuations for GM and Ford (with the stocks down – 15% and – 9%, respectively since 7/31 vs. – 3% for S&P 500) suggest the stocks largely reflect the risks of a material strike. The UAW’s strike with GM in 2019 lasted 6 weeks and a one – to two-month strike appears to be the likely outcome here, in our view.

  When BofA’s note was published, Stellantis had not disclosed their proposal to the union. Below is a comprehensive overview of the offers from Ford and GM and how they match up with UAW’s demands.

  

  Everyone is eagerly awaiting UAW’s counter-offer before the deadline next Thursday. Union Joe may care a little more this weekend. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 18:00

• The Rise Of Unapologetically Partisan News Reporting
  The Rise Of Unapologetically Partisan News Reporting

  Authored by Carl M. Cannon via RealClear Wire,

  The Huffington Post was envisioned from its inception as a progressive answer to conservative talk radio and various right-leaning voices being amplified by new technology. Most specifically, it was designed as a counterpoint to the Drudge Report, a widely read and highly profitable website with populist sensibilities. The players involved in planning the new venture belonged to a select clique of Hollywood liberals and political activists in Arianna Huffington’s orbit.

  

  Among the cast of characters were film mogul David Geffen, a prodigious Democratic Party donor, along with Democratic political consultants Peter Daou and James Boyce. Jonah Peretti, a 30-year-old marketing whiz kid (and future BuzzFeed founder), was present at HuffPo’s inception, as was Kenneth Lerer, a New York investor who secured most of the money for the new venture.

  The least likely member of the core group was Andrew Breitbart, a creative and energetic conservative blogger in his mid-30s who had worked on the Drudge Report himself. Although he passed muster with the group because he was relatively liberal on social issues, Breitbart’s real connection to the enterprise was that he had known Arianna Huffington since the 1990s — when she was still an outspoken conservative. The most charismatic collaborator, of course, was the eponymous founder herself.

  “Arianna,” as everyone called her, first attained prominence in California politics as the wife of one-term Republican Congressman Michael Huffington, heir to a family fortune made in oil and gas exploration. Michael Huffington lost his 1994 Senate campaign, and the couple divorced in 1997. By 1998, Arianna was rejecting party labels and asserting that conventional “left-right divisions are so outdated.” Her evolution was just beginning. In 2001 she joined forces with environmental activist Laurie David in an endeavor dubbed the Detroit Project, which sought to shame automakers (and the Bush administration) into phasing out gas-guzzling cars and trucks.

  By April 2004, Arianna was endorsing Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry on Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show.” In July of that year, when asked during an interview in her stylish Brentwood home what she wanted out of life, Arianna replied, “I want George Bush defeated.”

  Although this answer struck Los Angeles magazine writer Steve Oney as glib, it turned out to be sincere. When her wish didn’t come true — when Bush won reelection by defeating Kerry — Huffington pursued the online journalism venture that still bears her name. Meeting in that same house in the weeks after the 2004 presidential election, a new and overtly partisan outlet was fast-tracked. It launched on May 9, 2005.

  Many traditional reporters and editors were troubled by the new direction journalism seemed to be taking. It wasn’t only the creation of the Huffington Post. Veteran political writers at venerable news organizations complained privately how sneering at Republicans, President Bush in particular, had become commonplace in their newsrooms. The legacy media had been considered left-of-center for decades, but something was changing. Conservatives had long complained about their treatment in the press (while progressives simply denied the existence of “liberal bias”), but open partisanship in newsrooms had long been discouraged.

  The Huffington Post didn’t engage in any such charades. As it gained traction in the first decade of the new millennium, its editors made no pretense about which side of the ideological spectrum it occupied. Arianna certainly didn’t.

  “We are opposed to the war in Iraq,” she told Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz in 2007. “We think the troops should come home. [Huffington Post] headlines are going to reflect what is in the best interests of the country.”

  A handful of media critics considered this trend not just refreshing for its candor, but an improvement over the old journalism model. For starters, they found it more intellectually honest. Also, at a time when the old advertising foundation was cracking, Huffington Post’s ability to quickly attract a huge readership showed that the Fox News business model might translate to the Internet. “Attitude is a huge positive, not a negative,” Ken Lerer told Kurtz. “People don’t have to love you. Maybe people come to you because they don’t love you.”

  “Attitude” was only part of the Huffington Post formula. Initially, celebrity journalism was an ingredient of its secret sauce. Well-known Hollywood liberals such as Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, Robert Redford and Julia Louis-Dreyfus graced its pages with their (typically liberal) takes. HuffPo gave space to prominent progressives ranging from Dennis Kucinich and Melinda Gates to Alec Baldwin and Bernie Sanders. Lefty activists Ralph Nader and Michael Moore were contributors, as were more traditional Democrats Gary Hart and John Conyers.

  Their work was supplemented by the hiring of respected journalists such as Thomas B. Edsall and Mickey Kaus. The success of the enterprise also depended on the sheer volume of the site’s content. This was accomplished by several additional strategies. One was aggressively appropriating other outlets’ work, a practice that gave way to the slightly more kosher ploy of doing quick rewrites of other journalists’ work. (“Lynn Sweet: Obama Reorganizing Campaign, Reinforcing Leadership Ranks”). Finally, traffic was also driven by an army of “citizen journalists” who reported and wrote for HuffPo without remuneration.

  All these efforts were overseen by a cadre of editors who carefully monitored readership traffic and changed headlines or swapped out stories that weren’t doing well. The site’s success inspired copycats, some of them on the right. Just as HuffPost was a response to Drudge, conservative properties such as the Daily Caller were launched as antidotes to what their founders considered a mostly liberal landscape, including Arianna Huffington’s new online powerhouse. (Once again, the ubiquitous Andrew Breitbart was in the middle of it.)

  For the most part, these imitators mimicked the ideological imbalance of HuffPo. This view of the press — as a weapon for political advocacy — has only gained traction in the ensuing years, among partisans on both sides of the political divide.

  “One reason conservatives hate the ‘mainstream media’ is that it pretends to be something it isn’t,” British columnist Nathan Robinson wrote in The Guardian. The editor of Current Affairs, an online socialist publication, Robinson suggested in his 2019 essay that readers are alienated by hypocrisy more than ideology. “The best course of action is to acknowledge where we’re coming from,” he wrote. “If we show an awareness of our own political leanings, it actually makes us more trustworthy than if we’re in denial about them.”

  Some conservatives arrived at the same conclusion. Amid the feeding frenzy accompanying the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation process, a headline in The Federalist gave voice to this view: “The Entire Media Is Biased: They Should Just Embrace It.”

  It’s a provocative point of view, but it raises other questions. Let’s start with one point raised by Nathan Robinson: “more trustworthy” to whom? Ideologues who agree with you already? Partisans who despise you, but give you credit for being honest? Perhaps. But what about moderates or political independents — or fair-minded partisans who crave a more fact-based diet of political news without the relentless spin? This cohort, which ranges from a significant minority to a plurality of the voting public depending on the issue, seems vastly underrepresented in the new landscape of political journalism.

  Yes, it’s true that Fox News’ regular viewers generally find the network credible. Ditto for devotees of MSNBC. But these audiences are, by design, self-selecting peer review panels. Fox News’ motto since 2017 has been “Most Watched. Most Trusted.” The logic here is circular. Fox is trusted by those who watch it precisely because they know they’ll see what they want, which is bashing of Democrats and liberal elites and reflexively defending conservative personalities, politicians, policies, and culture. MSNBC and an increasing bloc of legacy media companies are Fox’s mirror image.

  The original slogan at Fox News, coined by Roger Ailes when he and Rupert Murdoch launched the network in 1996, was “Fair and Balanced.” This claim, which has resurfaced recently, induced apoplexy among liberals, which was partly Ailes’ intent. But that’s not all it was meant to signify. Inside the network, the mantra was understood to represent an intention that wasn’t cynical at all. Operating in a predominately liberal media landscape, Fox was promising to be “fair” to Republicans and their voters by providing the “balance” conservatives found missing in the rest of the press.

  One prominent Fox News journalist told me that those who dismissed Fox programming as being targeted to “a niche” market revealed the problem — and the key to Fox’s success. “Quite a niche,” he quipped. “Half the country.”

  Profitability of a Partisan Press

  Modern journalism — or, at least, modern American journalism education — dates to 1908 at the founding of the journalism school at the University of Missouri. The “J-school” is situated in the heart of the sprawling campus, which is fitting because the program has long been a source of pride for Mizzou graduates as well as journalists who’ve never even visited the college.

  Walter Williams, the visionary who started the program and later became president of the university, wrote a “journalist’s creed” that has been etched in bronze at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., since 1958, the 50^th anniversary of the founding of Missouri’s journalism school. Some of its language sounds stilted today, but the larger question is whether the values of the creed are considered outdated in the 21^st century.

  Let’s consider three items memorialized by Williams’ creed:

  • A media property is “a public trust … and acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.”
  • “Clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.”
  • “Suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.”

  Powerful forces in contemporary America are working to undermine those tenets. Financial considerations are one of them. In 2008, Fox News surpassed $500 million in annual profits. This was nearly as much as CNN ($410 million) and MSNBC ($148 million) netted combined — and a $200 million increase over 2007.

  What happened in the centennial year of America’s first journalism school that made a television network with a readily identifiable point of view so profitable? Here’s part of the answer: A national political campaign took place featuring two Democratic presidential candidates whom Bill O’Reilly and other Fox News commentators pilloried relentlessly. These attacks appealed to conservatives, who flocked to Fox for the nightly skewering of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Higher ratings translated into higher advertising revenues.

  Executives at rival networks noticed. Progressive commentators, too. One anchorman in particular had been seething over Fox’s influence for years. As Howard Kurtz noted, MSNBC anchorman Keith Olbermann had already consciously positioned his nightly program as “a liberal alternative” to O’Reilly’s show. Years before Donald Trump arrived on the political scene, Keith Olbermann conducted public discourse like a New York insult comic.

  Once, at a television award show, Olbermann gave O’Reilly a Nazi salute. When he wasn’t saying George W. Bush and Dick Cheney had committed impeachable offenses and should resign, Olbermann was accusing the president and vice president of being stupid, dishonest, cowardly, and hypocritical. Olbermann framed one segment on Bush thusly: “Pathological presidential liar or an idiot-in-chief?” On Valentine’s Day in 2008, he called Bush “a fascist,” and later that year urged John McCain to “suspend” his campaign. Most incongruously — and in an eerie foreshadowing of Trump’s own slurs against McCain — Olbermann declared that the acclaimed Vietnam War hero displayed a “disturbing lack of faith in America.”

  Periodically, the suits at NBC would give lip service to reining Olbermann in, but their hearts weren’t in it. For one thing, the feud he initiated with Bill O’Reilly led to skyrocketing ratings. Liberal audiences loved it, and his show was one of the few MSNBC ever aired that made money. And after his contract was not renewed in 2011, it was clear that MSNBC had found its own niche. Olbermann’s place was taken by Rachel Maddow, a colleague he had mentored. The new anchor was brainy and hard-working, but just as liberal in her commentary. MSNBC had moved on from Keith Olbermann’s style, but not his substance. By August 2012, New York Times media critic Alessandra Stanley wrote a story titled “How MSNBC Became Fox’s Liberal Evil Twin.”

  The context for Stanley’s essay was MSNBC’s coverage of the Republican National Convention that nominated Mitt Romney. Stanley wrote that the network’s “hyped up panelists” routinely dismissed Republican assertions as “lies,” while taking various cheap shots (Chris Matthews claimed that the GOP looks upon welfare recipients as “looters”). Stanley noted that in “recasting itself as a left-leaning riposte to Fox News,” MSNBC drew significantly more GOP convention viewers than CNN.

  “That’s because,” she added, “MSNBC offers counterprogramming, not coverage.”

  Four years later, Donald Trump’s victory pushed CNN into the MSNBC camp. The New York Times followed suit. What had once been known as the “mainstream media” began to feature entire platoons of Keith Olbermanns not only among commentators and anchors, but even among supposedly nonpartisan White House correspondents tasked with covering the news.

  In the runup to Trump’s reelection campaign, journalist Matt Taibbi wrote a book about this development called “Hate, Inc.” In it, Taibbi attributed much of the press partisanship to bottom-line concerns. I initially thought his book title was too strong and that what openly partisan journalists were selling was indignation and outrage — and fear, maybe — but not hate. The events of Jan. 6, 2021, and their aftermath revealed that this may be a distinction without a difference.

  Whatever one calls it, this much can be said: In contrast to New York Times owner Adolph Ochs’ 1896 vow that his newspaper would “give the news impartially without fear or favor, regardless of party, sect, or interest” (and unlike Walter Williams’ creed calling suppression of the news “indefensible”), 21^st century media outlets have a habit of hyping and inventing negative information harmful to the political faction they disapprove of, while downplaying or censoring facts detrimental to the side they favor. For much of the 20^th century, this wouldn’t have been considered journalism at all.

  Rationalizing Regression

  It’s not a cop-out to concede that the arrival of the digital age posed historic challenges to the economic model and cherished assumptions of traditional media. Amid the chaos, novel arguments were proffered. Many were simply acknowledgements of new realities. Some were conscious challenges to the status quo, while others sought to rationalize problematic behavior on the part of the media. Here are four such arguments:

  • Defenders of the new free-wheeling style of journalism point out, not inaccurately, that for much of America’s history the press was unabashedly partisan. Objective, non-biased reporting aimed at a mass audience was a post-World War I development that is no longer relevant to modern audiences, or even economically viable.
  • In an unfettered media landscape, news consumers can find a multitude of views and choose from among them. What could be more egalitarian? If you dislike Rachel Maddow, switch to Tucker Carlson. The old model was staid and boring, these advocates say — and elitist. If one disparages television or radio shows or podcasts with high ratings, isn’t one denigrating the American people?
  • Reprising a theme from the 1960s, another critique of the traditional model comes from those who attack the very concept of objectivity. Arguing from the standpoint of identity politics, these critics dismiss the term as a standard “that was dictated by male editors in predominately white newsrooms and reinforced their own view of the world.” In this school of thought, the exigencies of covering race, sexual identity — and even climate change — necessitate going beyond what’s disparagingly called “bothsidesism.”
  • The trend of conflating opinion and news was a defense mechanism to cope with a presidential candidate who arrived on the scene with no experience and no desire to tell the truth — and who used social media to circumvent the media’s traditional gatekeeper role. This point of view was notably offered in an influential August 2016 column by New York Times media critic Jim Rutenberg, who framed the dilemma this way: “If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?” Although he posed the dilemma as a question — and pointed out the pitfalls of appearing partisan — Rutenberg suggested that reporters who found the idea of a Trump presidency a danger would naturally “move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional.” Many did just that.

  For purposes of this essay, let’s stipulate that those reasons are offered in good faith by people who care about the civic life of this nation. That does not make them right.

  Back to the Future

  Whatever one thinks of partisan journalism, those who say that it’s not a new phenomenon are correct. The first newspaper to cover politics on these shores, the New York Weekly Journal, is not only the publication that inspired the name of this series. A partisan organ, it helped foster the idea of a free press on this continent in 1735.

  It’s also true that a partisan press helped bring America into existence. In 1776, the American Colonies had 50 newspapers, many of them agitating openly for revolution. By the time George Washington completed two terms as president, this number had quintupled. The Colonial-era press took sides in the nation’s most fractious disputes: The Federalist Party we associate with Alexander Hamilton and John Adams (and the Democrat-Republicans of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison) were identifiable by the newspapers that supported them. Six decades later, partisan newspapers stoked the passions that led to civil war.

  “Editors unabashedly shaped the news and their editorial comment to partisan purposes,” Harvard historian William E. Gienapp noted in a study of 1850s American newspapers. “They sought to convert the doubters, recover the wavering, and hold the committed.”

  “Partisanship was extreme on both sides,” Lincoln scholar Richard Allen Heckman wrote a century after the Civil War ended. In what seems like a contemporary description, Allen added, “Republican and Democratic papers often arrived at opposite conclusions after witnessing the same event.”

  Does this sound familiar? It should. After Hunter Biden’s business partner Devon Archer testified before the House Oversight Committee, most of the legacy media issued a verdict: Nothing to see here. Echoing Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman, The New Republic put this headline on its story: “New Transcript: Star Hunter Biden Witness Refuted Every GOP Talking Point. Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devon Archer, undermined all of Republicans’ claims in his testimony.”

  Meanwhile, Fox News had an entirely different take: The headline of its online story was “Devon Archer Transcript Shows How Democrat Rep. Goldman Spun ‘Illusion of Access’ Narrative.” Mind you, these are competing stories reporting on the very same transcript.

  Not everyone sees this as a problem. But the events of Jan. 6, 2021, show what happens in a hyper-partisan political environment when “red” America and “blue” America have fundamental differences of opinion on something as basic as whether a presidential election was honest or a sham.

  Americans of different races, creeds, generations, religions, geography, and political affiliation have always differed in their perceptions of politics and culture. But having a baseline set of shared facts turns out to be important. Political parties deliberately skew those facts for their own purposes. However, when journalists repeat those partisan narratives word for word — or, worse, amplify them — they are interfering with the prime directive.

  Earlier this year, political scientists David Broockman and Joshua Kalla released a study showing how many Americans dwell in media “echo chambers” that not only bolster their existing political biases, but deepen their level of partisanship.

  “Most people who tune in to Fox News lean to the right, but Fox draws them further to the right,” Broockman explained. “Likewise, MSNBC is pulling those to the left further left. And neither side almost ever watches the other.”

  This is the succinct rebuttal to those with laissez-faire attitudes about partisan news coverage. Americans can get the other side of the story, if they try, but don’t often do so. Ken Lerer’s expressed hope that conservatives might read the Huffington Post to know what the other side is thinking is not how most people consume media.

  It was always thus. In “The Press Gang: Newspapers and Politics, 1865-1878,” scholar Mark Wahlgren Summers wrote how common it was for publishers to knowingly print lies or simply ignore newsworthy events that reflected poorly on their party. “The truth was not suppressed,” Summers wrote. “It was simply hard to get in any one place.”

  Readers who wanted to know what was really happening in local as well as national politics had to read several newspapers, not just one. The problem is that this is not how most citizens consume news, and it never was. My point here is that journalists in this country haven’t always even attempted to provide their readers, listeners, and viewers with the complete story. They haven’t always tried to tell the truth. But this elusive quest is the implied promise that helped create the idea of a free press in the first place.

  ‘The Best Cause’

  Although rarely invoked today, the name John Peter Zenger still lingers in the recesses of American journalism’s institutional memory. The University of Arizona gives an annual award in his name. The National Press Club has a room named after him. A bronze plaque in New York City signifies the site of a local election, in 1733, covered by Zenger’s newspaper, The New York Weekly Journal.

  For the better part of three centuries, Zenger’s sacrifice was praised whenever freedom of the press was mentioned. Arrested in November 1734 on charges of “seditious libel” after his newspaper criticized the royal governor of New York, Zenger persisted in publishing from jail with help from his wife and sons — and the political provocateurs who wrote the offending material. Nine months later, Zenger was acquitted in a sensational jury trial. Fifty years after that, Gouverneur Morris, a signer of the U.S. Constitution, wrote: “The trial of Zenger in 1735 was the germ of American freedom, the morning star of that liberty which subsequently revolutionized America.”

  Although there is truth in this characterization, the story is not that tidy.

  Peter Zenger, as he preferred to be called, arrived in New York harbor in 1709 speaking little English and facing daunting prospects. The Zenger family — Peter, his parents and two younger siblings — were among the 2,200 German refugees from the Palatinate region who sailed in a 10-ship flotilla to America in search of religious freedom. The crossing was harrowing: Some 470 of the migrants perished, among them Peter’s father. At 13, the oldest Zenger child needed to find a trade to help support his family.

  The boy landed an apprenticeship with a publisher named William Bradford, a kindly Quaker who had followed his own father’s footsteps. In the early days of manual typesetting, publishing was an exacting, highly technical craft. There were other obstacles, too, including the scarcity of ink and paper. The biggest danger was running afoul of the authorities.

  “To understate the matter, the printing trade was not much encouraged in colonial America,” Pulitzer Prize-winning author Richard Kluger noted wryly in his authoritative 2016 book, “Indelible Ink: The Trials of John Peter Zenger and the Birth of America’s Free Press.”

  William Bradford knew this lesson well. He’d essentially been chased out of Pennsylvania for running afoul of William Penn and the Quaker elders who controlled every aspect of life in the colony. Bradford’s sins — for which he was fined, briefly imprisoned, and had his printing presses confiscated — included the mere mention of Penn’s name in an annual almanac and daring to reprint the colony’s official charter.

  But on both sides of the Atlantic, the most dreaded accusation was “seditious libel,” a felony. The American Colonies were ruled by Britain, where libel simply meant defaming or criticizing another person, especially someone associated with government. Under British common law dating to the notorious Star Chamber proceedings, truth was not a mitigating factor to the crime. “It is not material whether the libel be true or false,” the Star Chamber judges had ruled.

  That’s because the aim of libel law wasn’t to regulate civic discourse in a way that made it more honest. The law’s intent was to preserve order and prevent rabblerousers from riling up the populace. The controlling legal authority in British common law, and by extension in the Colonies, was titled “A Treatise of the Pleas of the Crown.” Written by an English barrister named William Hawkins, it held that printers and authors were guilty of defamation if they wrote or printed words that exposed any person, alive or dead, “to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.”

  It did not matter if the defamed person already had a bad reputation. Taking Star Chamber logic to its ultimate, and ultimately perverse, conclusion, Hawkins explained “that it is far from being a justification of a libel that the contents thereof are true … since the greater the appearance of truth in any malicious invective, so much the more provoking it is.”

  Political factions were just getting started in New York, then a city of 10,000 souls. Newspapers were a rarity as well. The only two printers in the colony were Willam Bradford and his former apprentice, Zenger. Neither man was much interested in the news business. Mostly they reprinted religious tracts and government-approved legal notices and texts, much of Zenger’s in Dutch and German. Eight decades before the dawn of the great New York publishing houses, all books in New York were imported from London.

  This somnolent arrangement was disturbed by King George II’s 1732 appointment of a minor aristocrat and British military officer of little distinction named William Cosby to be the governor of New York and New Jersey. It was not an inspired appointment and Cosby’s preening nature and obvious greed immediately alienated the locals.

  His initial grift, which ignited the political fires in New York, was his insistence that the previous acting governor turn over the portion of his salary from the time Cosby was named to the job — even though he didn’t arrive in New York for many months. His predecessor, a well-connected Dutchman named Rip Van Dam, sued Cosby. When the colony’s chief justice, Lewis Morris, ruled against the new governor, Cosby simply replaced Judge Morris. A powerful and formidable lawyer with a habit of holding grudges, Morris used numerous machinations to fight back. One of them was teaming with his friend and ally James Alexander, another powerful lawyer, to persuade John Peter Zenger to publish a new newspaper.

  Appearing on Nov. 5, 1733 — 272 years before The Huffington Post — the first issue of the New York Weekly Journal carried the account of Lewis Morris’ political comeback: his election to the Assembly. For the next 10 months, in articles almost exclusively ghostwritten by James Alexander, the Journal published satire, limericks, and opinion pieces critical of Cosby, though never by name.

  Nobody was fooled, however, least of all Cosby, who variously ordered the newspapers burned, pressured the colony’s other printer to respond in kind, and finally had Zenger arrested and charged with a crime. In preparation for trial, Cosby tried to pack the jury with his allies and installed a crony named James De Lancey as chief justice in the colony. When lawyer William Smith and his co-counsel James Alexander (the anonymous author of the anti-Cosby material in Zenger’s broadsheet) made a pre-trial motion for De Lancey to recuse himself, the judge instead kicked them off the case — and disbarred them on the spot.

  This heavy-handed move backfired. Alexander sought the services of a Philadelphia lawyer named Andrew Hamilton. A native of Scotland, and not high-born, Hamilton had arrived in Virginia in his early 20s. He married into a Quaker family in Virginia, then moved to Maryland, where he helped write that colony’s laws and served in the legislature. After relocating to Pennsylvania in his 40s, Hamilton came to represent the family of William Penn, served as a member of the Pennsylvania Assembly, and supervised the construction of Philadelphia’s Independence Hall. Hamilton’s career signified the possibility of upward mobility in the New World. He was also considered the best trial lawyer on these shores. He would need to be.

  As expected, the prosecutor argued that the libel laws of England were the de facto libel laws of New York and that any defamation against the crown — or its agents — was merely a matter of proving the identity of the author. In other words, insofar as the jury was concerned, there was no real defense at all.

  Without exactly explaining why, Hamilton challenged this logic. He posited that the laws of England should not necessarily apply to New York. Judge De Lancey was utterly unpersuaded. “The jury may find that Zenger printed and published those papers and leave to the Court to judge whether they are libelous,” he responded. But the defense strategy was to talk past the judge — straight to the jury and, by implication, the wider court of American public opinion. Addressing his argument to Zenger’s peers, Hamilton was going for jury nullification: “I know that [the jurors] have the right beyond all dispute to determine both the law and the fact,” he intoned.

  In his summation, Hamilton went further: “The question before the court and you, gentlemen of the jury, is not of small or private concern. It is not the cause of the poor printer, nor of New York alone,” he said. “No! It may in its consequence affect every free man that lives under a British government on the main of America. It is the best cause. It is the cause of liberty.”

  The jury agreed with defense counsel. It returned quickly from its deliberations, and foreman Thomas Hunt called out the verdict: “Not guilty!” Hurrahs rang out through the courtroom, drowning out the demands of the judge for order. Something had been started that would be hard to quell.

  Skeptics

  As early broadcaster Westbrook Van Voorhis liked to say, time marches on. In the 1960s, a questioning era like our own, a slew of revisionist historians tossed cold water on the John Peter Zenger legend. For starters, he didn’t even write the material he was jailed for, they noted. And Gouverneur Morris, the Founding Father who eulogized the Zenger trial as “the germ of American freedom” and “the morning star” of liberty on these shores, was hardly an impartial chronicler: Lewis Morris was his grandfather.

  Pulitzer Prize-winning constitutional scholar Leonard Levy characterized the image of Colonial America as a society that cherished freedom of expression as “a sentimental hallucination.” Stanley Katz, a star Princeton historian, wrote that libel laws were reformed, in due time, but not because of anything James Alexander wrote, Peter Zenger printed, or Andrew Hamilton argued to a New York jury in 1735. It was, Katz claimed, “as if Peter Zenger had never existed.”

  Today, a more subtle kind of rethinking is taking place. Richard Kluger, who persuasively debunks the 1960s-era Zenger debunkers, gets to the heart of the matter. “William Cosby was almost surely an ignoble character during his 3½-year tenure in New York, but if he was in fact half the villain his colonial critics claimed, they failed to marshal firm evidence of it.”

  Moreover, after its inaugural issue, the New York Weekly Journal never covered another election after Lewis Morris’ return to the Assembly. Instead, its pages were used to compare Cosby to Nero, refer to the governor as “our affliction from London,” and accuse him of cluelessly escorting a French naval officer around the town so he could see the city’s defenses. Consorting with the enemy was a serious charge then, as it is today, but Zenger’s paper wasn’t calling Cosby a traitor. It was accusing him of being “but one degree removed from an idiot.”

  It was this kind of thing that prompted veteran newsman Bill Keller, in his New York Times review of Kluger’s book, to compare the New York Weekly Journal to the now-defunct gossip website Gawker. It was not intended as a compliment. More generally, ideologues on both sides invoke the style of America’s earliest newspapers to question the legacy, and even the virtue, of nonpartisan journalism and the striving for objectively.

  In an interview with “Frontline” in the early days of online journalism, Scott Johnson, co-founder of the conservative online outlet Power Line, put it this way: “The fact that the press was partisan and wild and outrageous during the Revolutionary era, during the era in which the Constitution was ratified, was not only true then; it really is the tradition of the American press up until the Progressive Era, essentially yesterday. The press was always partisan.”

  He’s not entirely wrong, but using this historic fact as an excuse to cover the news in a one-sided way today — trying to shape outcomes instead of merely to inform — misses the point of the jury’s verdict in the 1735 trial of Peter Zenger. His lawyer didn’t merely argue that government shouldn’t muzzle a free people. Andrew Hamilton compared a libel case in which a defendant couldn’t argue the truth of his statements to a murder trial in which the defendant couldn’t offer evidence that the victim was actually still alive.

  This gambit was a bluff. No witnesses could prove the truth of the contention that Gov. Cosby was “but one degree removed from an idiot” any more than Keith Olbermann could prove the same about George W. Bush. In the Zenger trial, Judge De Lancey didn’t buy it anyway. Nonetheless, Hamilton risked contempt of court by pivoting directly toward the jury and saying, “Then, gentlemen of the jury, it is to you we must now appeal for witnesses to the truth of the facts we have offered and are denied the liberty to prove.”

  Actually, neither side called any witnesses in that trial, but the jury took Hamilton’s point. Their verdict wasn’t an endorsement of defamation. It was a recognition that if a people are to be free, they have the right to pursue the truth and tell it as best they can — and that neither government nor any political faction has a monopoly on veracity. Pursuing truth, not partisanship, was the principle that carried the day in a New York City courtroom on Aug. 4, 1735.

  Citizen Journalists

  The Zenger saga has an instructive postscript. It occurred 273 years later, just three years after the launch of The Huffington Post.

  As it turned out, Arianna Huffington’s interests went far beyond creating an online media counterweight to George W. Bush’s presidency. Focusing on the future of journalism at a time when the old media’s business model was already under financial stress, Huffington joined forces with well-known New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen to create an army of “citizen journalists.”

  Launched in early 2007, the venture was named “OffTheBus,” a sly reference to Timothy Crouse’s classic 1973 book on presidential campaign reporting. This endeavor was a subversive response to the good-old-boy reporting network Crouse immortalized. OTB’s tag line was “Campaign coverage by people who are not in the club.”

  Ultimately, it engaged some 1,700 unpaid writers to cover the 2007-2008 presidential cycle. This all-volunteer army was overseen by a tiny staff of professionals. One was Marc Cooper, a progressive political writer and University of Southern California journalism professor. Another was Amanda Michel, who today is director of global engagement at The Guardian but in 2007 was a 29-year-old wunderkind with no formal journalism training. Her talent was harnessing online communities, which she’d learned while working on the Howard Dean and John Kerry presidential campaigns.

  Their team would produce thousands of stories and countless page views and attracted some 5 million unique visitors to Huffington Post’s website in October 2008 alone. Its best-remembered story, by far, was an account of an April 6, 2008, political fundraiser in Pacific Heights, a toney San Francisco neighborhood. The candidate was Barack Obama. The HuffPo citizen journalist in attendance was Mayhill Fowler, a 61-year-old native Tennessean who lived across the bay in Oakland.

  In the decades since she’d graduated from Vassar and moved to the Bay Area to study at the University of California at Berkeley, Fowler had wed and worked sporadically, by her own account, as “a teacher, editor and writer, but mostly raised two daughters.” An uncommonly thoughtful person, she had quickly emerged as a favorite among OTB’s editors — and readers. In an October 2007 piece on OTB, New York Times political writer Katharine Seelye singled Fowler out as one of the site’s “emerging star correspondents.”

  Fowler took a particular interest in Obama. She contributed the maximum $2,300 to his campaign, which was not only normal for OTB citizen journalists, but was encouraged, as it granted them increased access to campaigns they were covering. Fowler had previously traveled at her own expense to see Obama campaign in the Midwest and in Texas, but the San Francisco event was close to home so she wrangled an invite to the fundraiser, which was closed to the mainstream press. With Obama leading Hillary Clinton in pledged delegates, the conversation that night turned to the looming Pennsylvania primary. From the audience, some of whom were preparing to go east for the faceoff, came a question: What could they expect when they went to campaign in the Rust Belt?

  “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them,” Obama replied. “And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not.”

  So far, so good. Then Obama added: “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

  Fowler had covered Obama when he campaigned across Pennsylvania and that’s not what he had said to the faces of those voters, and she was “taken aback” by his judgmental tone.

  “I’m a religious person, and I grew up poor in a very wealthy family — sometimes we didn’t have enough to eat, but my larger family was rich,” she told Seelye in an April 2008 story, adding that her father was a hunter. “Immediately, the remarks just really bothered me,” Fowler added. “For the first time, I realized he is an elitist.”

  Fowler had a dilemma. She was smart enough to know the sneering remarks about rural Americans might hurt the candidate whom she still wanted to win. She confided in her husband, who didn’t see anything particularly wrong with what Obama had said. But it nagged at her and she called Amanda Michel. To Michel’s credit, she advised Fowler, “If you’re going to cover the campaign, you have to not be partial or your coverage isn’t worth as much as it could be.”

  So, following her gut feeling and her editor’s supportive advice, Fowler blogged about the incident. Hillary Clinton’s campaign pounced, and the mainstream media jumped on the story (often omitting Fowler’s name). Some Obama fanboys attacked her for being disloyal, but Team Huffington rallied behind her. Arianna defended her reporter in a blog post while vacationing on a yacht, lambasting Clinton’s campaign. Jay Rosen, one of the most level-headed advocates of the proposition that disclosure of bias is preferable to feigned objectivity, examined the ethical questions thoroughly on his blog. After the campaign was over, Michel did something similar for Columbia Journalism Review.

  Almost two years later, Fowler published an e-book on the election, “Notes From a Clueless Journalist: Media, Bias and the Great Election of 2008.” It’s a nuanced and informative book, as anyone who read Fowler’s blog would expect. In the preface, she explains her motives, not just for writing about the Pacific Heights fundraiser, but also chronicling the inspiring saga of Barack Obama himself. “All I cared about,” she wrote, “was getting the election story.”

  Notwithstanding the title of her book, traditional reporters who read it or followed her writing found Fowler anything but clueless. She came across as committed, empathetic, curious, intellectually honest, and highly ethical. It gave many of us hope for the future.

  But here’s the rub, the postscript to the postscript, if you will: If something like that happened today, would an online media outlet with a clear point of view deign to report it? For that matter, would the legacy media? The treatment of the Hunter Biden laptop story suggests an answer, and it is not an encouraging one.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 17:40