Jun 07

Today’s News 7th June 2023

  • Luongo: There Never Was An Offramp In Ukraine
    Luongo: There Never Was An Offramp In Ukraine

    Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

    The long-awaited offensive from Ukraine has begun. So far the results have been mixed with both sides claiming victories per the normal flow of propaganda. None of that matters.

    What is not up for discussion is the tragedy, aimed squarely at civilians, of the Nova Kakhovka hydroelectric dam, attacked last night releasing the Dnieper river into the valley in Kherson oblast.

    This dam provided not only local electric power but also cooling water for the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP), the largest nuclear power plant in Europe.

    The ZNPP has been the subject of numerous incidents since this war began with battles being fought over it, and accusations flying wildly from the West as to how irresponsible Russia was. None of that turned out to be true as ZNPP was set up to be the site of a massive false flag involving UN inspectors which failed.

    It doesn’t matter who you back in this war or whose incentives you sympathize with. Acts like this serve many purposes, some of them military, some of them political.

    And they follow a particular pattern.

    Like the narrative from last year surrounding the attacks on the ZNPP, this attack on the dam begs very obvious questions.

    Why would Russia attack a nuclear power plant in an area under its control?

    Going back to Syria right after Donald Trump took office in early 2017, why would Assad gas civilians when he and Russia had the momentum and was clearly winning the war in Idlib province, invoking the wrath of the world?

    Why would Russia blow up Nordstream 1 and 2 as they were initially accused of?

    Why would Russia attack a dam in territory they control that provides local power to Kherson, cooling water to the ZNPP and fresh water to Crimea?

    The answers to all of these questions is simply, “They wouldn’t.”

    So now let’s do a little more historic digging into past behavior.

    Before the war officially started who blew up power stations denying Crimea power in the fall of 2015, creating blackouts and real civilian hardship?

    Who is on record saying that the Minsk Agreements were simply a time-buying exercise to arm Ukraine and freeze Russia for the war we have today?

    Who staged a terrorist attack on the Kerch Strait Bridge?

    Who has tested the waters on attacking the dam?

    Whose leadership continues to go around the world desperately trying to convince rational people that this irrational ethnic war between tribes of Slavs is a fight for the future of western civilization?

    Who intentionally helped stoke simmering hatred of all things Russian across the entirety of Eastern Europe to push the world to this moment?

    In short, who armed Ukraine while never once acting with one ounce of humility or basic human decency to find a solution that didn’t involve thousands of dead Slavs?

    The answer is the same people accusing Russia today of blowing up a dam that severely weakens their strategic position in southern Ukraine.

    The first person out the gate was EU Council President Charles Michel:

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

    The rest of the world will pile on for the next 72 hours or so until some footage or evidence makes its way into the information space. It’s the same pattern as Nordstream, the chemical attacks in Ghouta and Khan Sheykoun, MH-17 and a host of other attacks on civilians over the past decade since Putin helped thwart Obama’s “Coalition of the willing” to take out Assad in 2013 following Ghouta.

    Right on schedule: Perfidious Albion weighs in.

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

    Everything in Ukraine is downstream (all puns intended) of that. Everything. It’s all one big long policy decision after another. In this respect Ukraine has been a series of moves on a chess board leading to a particular outcome.

    And that outcome will be a full-fledged war between NATO and Russia over Ukraine. It’s what everyone in power actually wants, even when they mouth words to the contrary. EU officials like Michel, EU Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen and now presidential candidates in the US say the same thing.

    There can be no victory for Russia in Ukraine. It would be the end of the West.

    Waffle House Waitress Nikki Haley is out repeating the lie that Russia will take all of Poland and the Baltics if he wins on CNN. It doesn’t matter that she’ll get 1% of the primary vote, her job is to reinforce the narrative.

    We’ve all been waiting for the next big ‘disaster’ to up the ante in Ukraine. It’s been too quiet for too long. Now with the fighting intensifying along multiple fronts, this move is it.

    So, with it done what does it mean?

    The most obvious is that this materially weakens Russia’s position in Kherson and then Crimea. It follows that this is just the prelude to the long-expected full on attack on Crimea.

    It could be some weird statement by the Ukrainians that they are looking for an offramp by drawing an impassable barrier between their territory and Russia’s but I’ll need to see a lot more evidence of that before I can even contemplate it.

    Because Occam’s razor reminds us of the intense need to take not only Ukraine to the next level but the entire Davos Great Reset agenda there as well.

    For more than a year the West, primarily the US with a lot of British assistance, have tried to craft a humanitarian crisis narrative around Russia to justify a wider war.

    This is just the latest example of their handiwork.

    • The Ukrainians want this to elicit sympathy from gaslit morons with Ukraine flags in the Twitter name.

    • The Brits need this because their centuries-long feud with Russia simply cannot end with a whimper in Ukraine.

    • The US thinks they need this because of the ridiculous Great Powers mind virus unleashed on us by our colonial “betters.”

    • Davos needs this because you can’t roll the world up into your total control if there are any great nations left.

    When viewed through the lens of the power-mongers who unleashed this war I leave you with one last question.

    What do you call a hundred thousand dead Slavs fighting over swampland?

    A good start.

    *  *  *

    Join my Patreon if you want off this ride

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 06/07/2023 – 02:00

  • Andreesen: Why AI Will Save The World
    Andreesen: Why AI Will Save The World

    Authored by Marc Andreesen via a16x.com,

    The era of Artificial Intelligence is here, and boy are people freaking out.

    Fortunately, I am here to bring the good news: AI will not destroy the world, and in fact may save it.

    First, a short description of what AI is: The application of mathematics and software code to teach computers how to understand, synthesize, and generate knowledge in ways similar to how people do it. AI is a computer program like any other – it runs, takes input, processes, and generates output. AI’s output is useful across a wide range of fields, ranging from coding to medicine to law to the creative arts. It is owned by people and controlled by people, like any other technology.

    A shorter description of what AI isn’t: Killer software and robots that will spring to life and decide to murder the human race or otherwise ruin everything, like you see in the movies.

    An even shorter description of what AI could be: A way to make everything we care about better.

    Why AI Can Make Everything We Care About Better

    The most validated core conclusion of social science across many decades and thousands of studies is that human intelligence makes a very broad range of life outcomes better. Smarter people have better outcomes in almost every domain of activity: academic achievement, job performance, occupational status, income, creativity, physical health, longevity, learning new skills, managing complex tasks, leadership, entrepreneurial success, conflict resolution, reading comprehension, financial decision making, understanding others’ perspectives, creative arts, parenting outcomes, and life satisfaction.

    Further, human intelligence is the lever that we have used for millennia to create the world we live in today: science, technology, math, physics, chemistry, medicine, energy, construction, transportation, communication, art, music, culture, philosophy, ethics, morality. Without the application of intelligence on all these domains, we would all still be living in mud huts, scratching out a meager existence of subsistence farming. Instead we have used our intelligence to raise our standard of living on the order of 10,000X over the last 4,000 years.

    What AI offers us is the opportunity to profoundly augment human intelligence to make all of these outcomes of intelligence – and many others, from the creation of new medicines to ways to solve climate change to technologies to reach the stars – much, much better from here.

    AI augmentation of human intelligence has already started – AI is already around us in the form of computer control systems of many kinds, is now rapidly escalating with AI Large Language Models like ChatGPT, and will accelerate very quickly from here – if we let it.

    In our new era of AI:

    • Every child will have an AI tutor that is infinitely patient, infinitely compassionate, infinitely knowledgeable, infinitely helpful. The AI tutor will be by each child’s side every step of their development, helping them maximize their potential with the machine version of infinite love.

    • Every person will have an AI assistant/coach/mentor/trainer/advisor/therapist that is infinitely patient, infinitely compassionate, infinitely knowledgeable, and infinitely helpful. The AI assistant will be present through all of life’s opportunities and challenges, maximizing every person’s outcomes.

    • Every scientist will have an AI assistant/collaborator/partner that will greatly expand their scope of scientific research and achievement. Every artist, every engineer, every businessperson, every doctor, every caregiver will have the same in their worlds.

    • Every leader of people – CEO, government official, nonprofit president, athletic coach, teacher – will have the same. The magnification effects of better decisions by leaders across the people they lead are enormous, so this intelligence augmentation may be the most important of all.

    • Productivity growth throughout the economy will accelerate dramatically, driving economic growth, creation of new industries, creation of new jobs, and wage growth, and resulting in a new era of heightened material prosperity across the planet.

    • Scientific breakthroughs and new technologies and medicines will dramatically expand, as AI helps us further decode the laws of nature and harvest them for our benefit.

    • The creative arts will enter a golden age, as AI-augmented artists, musicians, writers, and filmmakers gain the ability to realize their visions far faster and at greater scale than ever before.

    • I even think AI is going to improve warfare, when it has to happen, by reducing wartime death rates dramatically. Every war is characterized by terrible decisions made under intense pressure and with sharply limited information by very limited human leaders. Now, military commanders and political leaders will have AI advisors that will help them make much better strategic and tactical decisions, minimizing risk, error, and unnecessary bloodshed.

    • In short, anything that people do with their natural intelligence today can be done much better with AI, and we will be able to take on new challenges that have been impossible to tackle without AI, from curing all diseases to achieving interstellar travel.

    • And this isn’t just about intelligence! Perhaps the most underestimated quality of AI is how humanizing it can be. AI art gives people who otherwise lack technical skills the freedom to create and share their artistic ideas. Talking to an empathetic AI friend really does improve their ability to handle adversity. And AI medical chatbots are already more empathetic than their human counterparts. Rather than making the world harsher and more mechanistic, infinitely patient and sympathetic AI will make the world warmer and nicer.

    The stakes here are high. The opportunities are profound. AI is quite possibly the most important – and best – thing our civilization has ever created, certainly on par with electricity and microchips, and probably beyond those.

    The development and proliferation of AI – far from a risk that we should fear – is a moral obligation that we have to ourselves, to our children, and to our future.

    We should be living in a much better world with AI, and now we can.

    So Why The Panic?

    In contrast to this positive view, the public conversation about AI is presently shot through with hysterical fear and paranoia.

    We hear claims that AI will variously kill us all, ruin our society, take all our jobs, cause crippling inequality, and enable bad people to do awful things.

    What explains this divergence in potential outcomes from near utopia to horrifying dystopia?

    Historically, every new technology that matters, from electric lighting to automobiles to radio to the Internet, has sparked a moral panic – a social contagion that convinces people the new technology is going to destroy the world, or society, or both. The fine folks at Pessimists Archive have documented these technology-driven moral panics over the decades; their history makes the pattern vividly clear. It turns out this present panic is not even the first for AI.

    Now, it is certainly the case that many new technologies have led to bad outcomes – often the same technologies that have been otherwise enormously beneficial to our welfare. So it’s not that the mere existence of a moral panic means there is nothing to be concerned about.

    But a moral panic is by its very nature irrational – it takes what may be a legitimate concern and inflates it into a level of hysteria that ironically makes it harder to confront actually serious concerns.

    And wow do we have a full-blown moral panic about AI right now.

    This moral panic is already being used as a motivating force by a variety of actors to demand policy action – new AI restrictions, regulations, and laws. These actors, who are making extremely dramatic public statements about the dangers of AI – feeding on and further inflaming moral panic – all present themselves as selfless champions of the public good.

    But are they?

    And are they right or wrong?

    The Baptists And Bootleggers Of AI

    Economists have observed a longstanding pattern in reform movements of this kind. The actors within movements like these fall into two categories – “Baptists” and “Bootleggers” – drawing on the historical example of the prohibition of alcohol in the United States in the 1920’s:

    • “Baptists” are the true believer social reformers who legitimately feel – deeply and emotionally, if not rationally – that new restrictions, regulations, and laws are required to prevent societal disaster. For alcohol prohibition, these actors were often literally devout Christians who felt that alcohol was destroying the moral fabric of society. For AI risk, these actors are true believers that AI presents one or another existential risks – strap them to a polygraph, they really mean it.

    • “Bootleggers” are the self-interested opportunists who stand to financially profit by the imposition of new restrictions, regulations, and laws that insulate them from competitors. For alcohol prohibition, these were the literal bootleggers who made a fortune selling illicit alcohol to Americans when legitimate alcohol sales were banned. For AI risk, these are CEOs who stand to make more money if regulatory barriers are erected that form a cartel of government-blessed AI vendors protected from new startup and open source competition – the software version of “too big to fail” banks.

    A cynic would suggest that some of the apparent Baptists are also Bootleggers – specifically the ones paid to attack AI by their universities, think tanks, activist groups, and media outlets. If you are paid a salary or receive grants to foster AI panic…you are probably a Bootlegger.

    The problem with the Bootleggers is that they win. The Baptists are naive ideologues, the Bootleggers are cynical operators, and so the result of reform movements like these is often that the Bootleggers get what they want – regulatory capture, insulation from competition, the formation of a cartel – and the Baptists are left wondering where their drive for social improvement went so wrong.

    We just lived through a stunning example of this – banking reform after the 2008 global financial crisis. The Baptists told us that we needed new laws and regulations to break up the “too big to fail” banks to prevent such a crisis from ever happening again. So Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, which was marketed as satisfying the Baptists’ goal, but in reality was coopted by the Bootleggers – the big banks. The result is that the same banks that were “too big to fail” in 2008 are much, much larger now.

    So in practice, even when the Baptists are genuine – and even when the Baptists are right – they are used as cover by manipulative and venal Bootleggers to benefit themselves. 

    And this is what is happening in the drive for AI regulation right now.

    However, it isn’t sufficient to simply identify the actors and impugn their motives. We should consider the arguments of both the Baptists and the Bootleggers on their merits.

    AI Risk #1: Will AI Kill Us All?

    The first and original AI doomer risk is that AI will decide to literally kill humanity.

    The fear that technology of our own creation will rise up and destroy us is deeply coded into our culture. The Greeks expressed this fear in the Prometheus Myth – Prometheus brought the destructive power of fire, and more generally technology (“techne”), to man, for which Prometheus was condemned to perpetual torture by the gods. Later, Mary Shelley gave us moderns our own version of this myth in her novel Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus, in which we develop the technology for eternal life, which then rises up and seeks to destroy us. And of course, no AI panic newspaper story is complete without a still image of a gleaming red-eyed killer robot from James Cameron’s Terminator films.

    The presumed evolutionary purpose of this mythology is to motivate us to seriously consider potential risks of new technologies – fire, after all, can indeed be used to burn down entire cities. But just as fire was also the foundation of modern civilization as used to keep us warm and safe in a cold and hostile world, this mythology ignores the far greater upside of most – all? – new technologies, and in practice inflames destructive emotion rather than reasoned analysis. Just because premodern man freaked out like this doesn’t mean we have to; we can apply rationality instead.

    My view is that the idea that AI will decide to literally kill humanity is a profound category error. AI is not a living being that has been primed by billions of years of evolution to participate in the battle for the survival of the fittest, as animals are, and as we are. It is math – code – computers, built by people, owned by people, used by people, controlled by people. The idea that it will at some point develop a mind of its own and decide that it has motivations that lead it to try to kill us is a superstitious handwave.

    In short, AI doesn’t want, it doesn’t have goals, it doesn’t want to kill you, because it’s not alive. And AI is a machine – is not going to come alive any more than your toaster will.

    Now, obviously, there are true believers in killer AI – Baptists – who are gaining a suddenly stratospheric amount of media coverage for their terrifying warnings, some of whom claim to have been studying the topic for decades and say they are now scared out of their minds by what they have learned. Some of these true believers are even actual innovators of the technology. These actors are arguing for a variety of bizarre and extreme restrictions on AI ranging from a ban on AI development, all the way up to military airstrikes on datacenters and nuclear war. They argue that because people like me cannot rule out future catastrophic consequences of AI, that we must assume a precautionary stance that may require large amounts of physical violence and death in order to prevent potential existential risk.

    My response is that their position is non-scientific – What is the testable hypothesis? What would falsify the hypothesis? How do we know when we are getting into a danger zone? These questions go mainly unanswered apart from “You can’t prove it won’t happen!” In fact, these Baptists’ position is so non-scientific and so extreme – a conspiracy theory about math and code – and is already calling for physical violence, that I will do something I would normally not do and question their motives as well.

    Specifically, I think three things are going on:

    First, recall that John Von Neumann responded to Robert Oppenheimer’s famous hand-wringing about his role creating nuclear weapons – which helped end World War II and prevent World War III – with, “Some people confess guilt to claim credit for the sin.” What is the most dramatic way one can claim credit for the importance of one’s work without sounding overtly boastful? This explains the mismatch between the words and actions of the Baptists who are actually building and funding AI – watch their actions, not their words. (Truman was harsher after meeting with Oppenheimer: “Don’t let that crybaby in here again.”)

    Second, some of the Baptists are actually Bootleggers. There is a whole profession of “AI safety expert”, “AI ethicist”, “AI risk researcher”. They are paid to be doomers, and their statements should be processed appropriately.

    Third, California is justifiably famous for our many thousands of cults, from EST to the Peoples Temple, from Heaven’s Gate to the Manson Family. Many, although not all, of these cults are harmless, and maybe even serve a purpose for alienated people who find homes in them. But some are very dangerous indeed, and cults have a notoriously hard time straddling the line that ultimately leads to violence and death.

    And the reality, which is obvious to everyone in the Bay Area but probably not outside of it, is that “AI risk” has developed into a cult, which has suddenly emerged into the daylight of global press attention and the public conversation. This cult has pulled in not just fringe characters, but also some actual industry experts and a not small number of wealthy donors – including, until recently, Sam Bankman-Fried. And it’s developed a full panoply of cult behaviors and beliefs.

    This cult is why there are a set of AI risk doomers who sound so extreme – it’s not that they actually have secret knowledge that make their extremism logical, it’s that they’ve whipped themselves into a frenzy and really are…extremely extreme.

    It turns out that this type of cult isn’t new – there is a longstanding Western tradition of millenarianism, which generates apocalypse cults. The AI risk cult has all the hallmarks of a millenarian apocalypse cult. From Wikipedia, with additions by me:

    “Millenarianism is the belief by a group or movement [AI risk doomers] in a coming fundamental transformation of society [the arrival of AI], after which all things will be changed [AI utopia, dystopia, and/or end of the world]. Only dramatic events [AI bans, airstrikes on datacenters, nuclear strikes on unregulated AI] are seen as able to change the world [prevent AI] and the change is anticipated to be brought about, or survived, by a group of the devout and dedicated. In most millenarian scenarios, the disaster or battle to come [AI apocalypse, or its prevention] will be followed by a new, purified world [AI bans] in which the believers will be rewarded [or at least acknowledged to have been correct all along].”

    This apocalypse cult pattern is so obvious that I am surprised more people don’t see it.

    Don’t get me wrong, cults are fun to hear about, their written material is often creative and fascinating, and their members are engaging at dinner parties and on TV. But their extreme beliefs should not determine the future of laws and society – obviously not.

    AI Risk #2: Will AI Ruin Our Society?

    The second widely mooted AI risk is that AI will ruin our society, by generating outputs that will be so “harmful”, to use the nomenclature of this kind of doomer, as to cause profound damage to humanity, even if we’re not literally killed.

    Short version: If the murder robots don’t get us, the hate speech and misinformation will.

    This is a relatively recent doomer concern that branched off from and somewhat took over the “AI risk” movement that I described above. In fact, the terminology of AI risk recently changed from “AI safety” – the term used by people who are worried that AI would literally kill us – to “AI alignment” – the term used by people who are worried about societal “harms”. The original AI safety people are frustrated by this shift, although they don’t know how to put it back in the box – they now advocate that the actual AI risk topic be renamed “AI notkilleveryoneism”, which has not yet been widely adopted but is at least clear.

    The tipoff to the nature of the AI societal risk claim is its own term, “AI alignment”. Alignment with what? Human values. Whose human values? Ah, that’s where things get tricky.

    As it happens, I have had a front row seat to an analogous situation – the social media “trust and safety” wars. As is now obvious, social media services have been under massive pressure from governments and activists to ban, restrict, censor, and otherwise suppress a wide range of content for many years. And the same concerns of “hate speech” (and its mathematical counterpart, “algorithmic bias”) and “misinformation” are being directly transferred from the social media context to the new frontier of “AI alignment”. 

    My big learnings from the social media wars are:

    On the one hand, there is no absolutist free speech position. First, every country, including the United States, makes at least some content illegal. Second, there are certain kinds of content, like child pornography and incitements to real world violence, that are nearly universally agreed to be off limits – legal or not – by virtually every society. So any technological platform that facilitates or generates content – speech – is going to have some restrictions.

    On the other hand, the slippery slope is not a fallacy, it’s an inevitability. Once a framework for restricting even egregiously terrible content is in place – for example, for hate speech, a specific hurtful word, or for misinformation, obviously false claims like “the Pope is dead” – a shockingly broad range of government agencies and activist pressure groups and nongovernmental entities will kick into gear and demand ever greater levels of censorship and suppression of whatever speech they view as threatening to society and/or their own personal preferences. They will do this up to and including in ways that are nakedly felony crimes. This cycle in practice can run apparently forever, with the enthusiastic support of authoritarian hall monitors installed throughout our elite power structures. This has been cascading for a decade in social media and with only certain exceptions continues to get more fervent all the time.

    And so this is the dynamic that has formed around “AI alignment” now. Its proponents claim the wisdom to engineer AI-generated speech and thought that are good for society, and to ban AI-generated speech and thoughts that are bad for society. Its opponents claim that the thought police are breathtakingly arrogant and presumptuous – and often outright criminal, at least in the US – and in fact are seeking to become a new kind of fused government-corporate-academic authoritarian speech dictatorship ripped straight from the pages of George Orwell’s 1984.

    As the proponents of both “trust and safety” and “AI alignment” are clustered into the very narrow slice of the global population that characterizes the American coastal elites – which includes many of the people who work in and write about the tech industry – many of my readers will find yourselves primed to argue that dramatic restrictions on AI output are required to avoid destroying society. I will not attempt to talk you out of this now, I will simply state that this is the nature of the demand, and that most people in the world neither agree with your ideology nor want to see you win.

    If you don’t agree with the prevailing niche morality that is being imposed on both social media and AI via ever-intensifying speech codes, you should also realize that the fight over what AI is allowed to say/generate will be even more important – by a lot – than the fight over social media censorship. AI is highly likely to be the control layer for everything in the world. How it is allowed to operate is going to matter perhaps more than anything else has ever mattered. You should be aware of how a small and isolated coterie of partisan social engineers are trying to determine that right now, under cover of the age-old claim that they are protecting you.

    In short, don’t let the thought police suppress AI.

    AI Risk #3: Will AI Take All Our Jobs?

    The fear of job loss due variously to mechanization, automation, computerization, or AI has been a recurring panic for hundreds of years, since the original onset of machinery such as the mechanical loom. Even though every new major technology has led to more jobs at higher wages throughout history, each wave of this panic is accompanied by claims that “this time is different” – this is the time it will finally happen, this is the technology that will finally deliver the hammer blow to human labor. And yet, it never happens. 

    We’ve been through two such technology-driven unemployment panic cycles in our recent past – the outsourcing panic of the 2000’s, and the automation panic of the 2010’s. Notwithstanding many talking heads, pundits, and even tech industry executives pounding the table throughout both decades that mass unemployment was near, by late 2019 – right before the onset of COVID – the world had more jobs at higher wages than ever in history.

    Nevertheless this mistaken idea will not die.

    And sure enough, it’s back.

    This time, we finally have the technology that’s going to take all the jobs and render human workers superfluous – real AI. Surely this time history won’t repeat, and AI will cause mass unemployment – and not rapid economic, job, and wage growth – right?

    No, that’s not going to happen – and in fact AI, if allowed to develop and proliferate throughout the economy, may cause the most dramatic and sustained economic boom of all time, with correspondingly record job and wage growth – the exact opposite of the fear. And here’s why.

    The core mistake the automation-kills-jobs doomers keep making is called the Lump Of Labor Fallacy. This fallacy is the incorrect notion that there is a fixed amount of labor to be done in the economy at any given time, and either machines do it or people do it – and if machines do it, there will be no work for people to do.

    The Lump Of Labor Fallacy flows naturally from naive intuition, but naive intuition here is wrong. When technology is applied to production, we get productivity growth – an increase in output generated by a reduction in inputs. The result is lower prices for goods and services. As prices for goods and services fall, we pay less for them, meaning that we now have extra spending power with which to buy other things. This increases demand in the economy, which drives the creation of new production – including new products and new industries – which then creates new jobs for the people who were replaced by machines in prior jobs. The result is a larger economy with higher material prosperity, more industries, more products, and more jobs.

    But the good news doesn’t stop there. We also get higher wages. This is because, at the level of the individual worker, the marketplace sets compensation as a function of the marginal productivity of the worker. A worker in a technology-infused business will be more productive than a worker in a traditional business. The employer will either pay that worker more money as he is now more productive, or another employer will, purely out of self interest. The result is that technology introduced into an industry generally not only increases the number of jobs in the industry but also raises wages.

    To summarize, technology empowers people to be more productive. This causes the prices for existing goods and services to fall, and for wages to rise. This in turn causes economic growth and job growth, while motivating the creation of new jobs and new industries. If a market economy is allowed to function normally and if technology is allowed to be introduced freely, this is a perpetual upward cycle that never ends. For, as Milton Friedman observed, “Human wants and needs are endless” – we always want more than we have. A technology-infused market economy is the way we get closer to delivering everything everyone could conceivably want, but never all the way there. And that is why technology doesn’t destroy jobs and never will.

    These are such mindblowing ideas for people who have not been exposed to them that it may take you some time to wrap your head around them. But I swear I’m not making them up – in fact you can read all about them in standard economics textbooks. I recommend the chapter The Curse of Machinery in Henry Hazlitt’s Economics In One Lesson, and Frederic Bastiat’s satirical Candlemaker’s Petition to blot out the sun due to its unfair competition with the lighting industry, here modernized for our times.

    But this time is different, you’re thinking. This time, with AI, we have the technology that can replace ALL human labor.

    But, using the principles I described above, think of what it would mean for literally all existing human labor to be replaced by machines.

    It would mean a takeoff rate of economic productivity growth that would be absolutely stratospheric, far beyond any historical precedent. Prices of existing goods and services would drop across the board to virtually zero. Consumer welfare would skyrocket. Consumer spending power would skyrocket. New demand in the economy would explode. Entrepreneurs would create dizzying arrays of new industries, products, and services, and employ as many people and AI as they could as fast as possible to meet all the new demand.

    Suppose AI once again replaces that labor? The cycle would repeat, driving consumer welfare, economic growth, and job and wage growth even higher. It would be a straight spiral up to a material utopia that neither Adam Smith or Karl Marx ever dared dream of. 

    We should be so lucky.

    AI Risk #4: Will AI Lead To Crippling Inequality?

    Speaking of Karl Marx, the concern about AI taking jobs segues directly into the next claimed AI risk, which is, OK, Marc, suppose AI does take all the jobs, either for bad or for good. Won’t that result in massive and crippling wealth inequality, as the owners of AI reap all the economic rewards and regular people get nothing?

    As it happens, this was a central claim of Marxism, that the owners of the means of production – the bourgeoisie – would inevitably steal all societal wealth from the people who do the actual  work – the proletariat. This is another fallacy that simply will not die no matter how often it’s disproved by reality. But let’s drive a stake through its heart anyway.

    The flaw in this theory is that, as the owner of a piece of technology, it’s not in your own interest to keep it to yourself – in fact the opposite, it’s in your own interest to sell it to as many customers as possible. The largest market in the world for any product is the entire world, all 8 billion of us. And so in reality, every new technology – even ones that start by selling to the rarefied air of high-paying big companies or wealthy consumers – rapidly proliferates until it’s in the hands of the largest possible mass market, ultimately everyone on the planet.

    The classic example of this was Elon Musk’s so-called “secret plan” – which he naturally published openly – for Tesla in 2006:

    Step 1, Build [expensive] sports car

    Step 2, Use that money to build an affordable car

    Step 3, Use that money to build an even more affordable car

    …which is of course exactly what he’s done, becoming the richest man in the world as a result.

    That last point is key. Would Elon be even richer if he only sold cars to rich people today? No. Would he be even richer than that if he only made cars for himself? Of course not. No, he maximizes his own profit by selling to the largest possible market, the world.

    In short, everyone gets the thing – as we saw in the past with not just cars but also electricity, radio, computers, the Internet, mobile phones, and search engines. The makers of such technologies are highly motivated to drive down their prices until everyone on the planet can afford them. This is precisely what is already happening in AI – it’s why you can use state of the art generative AI not just at low cost but even for free today in the form of Microsoft Bing and Google Bard – and it is what will continue to happen. Not because such vendors are foolish or generous but precisely because they are greedy – they want to maximize the size of their market, which maximizes their profits.

    So what happens is the opposite of technology driving centralization of wealth – individual customers of the technology, ultimately including everyone on the planet, are empowered instead, and capture most of the generated value. As with prior technologies, the companies that build AI – assuming they have to function in a free market – will compete furiously to make this happen.

    Marx was wrong then, and he’s wrong now.

    This is not to say that inequality is not an issue in our society. It is, it’s just not being driven by technology, it’s being driven by the reverse, by the sectors of the economy that are the most resistant to new technology, that have the most government intervention to prevent the adoption of new technology like AI – specifically housing, education, and health care. The actual risk of AI and inequality is not that AI will cause more inequality but rather that we will not allow AI to be used to reduce inequality.

    AI Risk #5: Will AI Lead To Bad People Doing Bad Things?

    So far I have explained why four of the five most often proposed risks of AI are not actually real – AI will not come to life and kill us, AI will not ruin our society, AI will not cause mass unemployment, and AI will not cause an ruinous increase in inequality. But now let’s address the fifth, the one I actually agree with: AI will make it easier for bad people to do bad things.

    In some sense this is a tautology. Technology is a tool. Tools, starting with fire and rocks, can be used to do good things – cook food and build houses – and bad things – burn people and bludgeon people. Any technology can be used for good or bad. Fair enough. And AI will make it easier for criminals, terrorists, and hostile governments to do bad things, no question.

    This causes some people to propose, well, in that case, let’s not take the risk, let’s ban AI now before this can happen. Unfortunately, AI is not some esoteric physical material that is hard to come by, like plutonium. It’s the opposite, it’s the easiest material in the world to come by – math and code.

    The AI cat is obviously already out of the bag. You can learn how to build AI from thousands of free online courses, books, papers, and videos, and there are outstanding open source implementations proliferating by the day. AI is like air – it will be everywhere. The level of totalitarian oppression that would be required to arrest that would be so draconian – a world government monitoring and controlling all computers? jackbooted thugs in black helicopters seizing rogue GPUs? – that we would not have a society left to protect.

    So instead, there are two very straightforward ways to address the risk of bad people doing bad things with AI, and these are precisely what we should focus on.

    First, we have laws on the books to criminalize most of the bad things that anyone is going to do with AI. Hack into the Pentagon? That’s a crime. Steal money from a bank? That’s a crime. Create a bioweapon? That’s a crime. Commit a terrorist act? That’s a crime. We can simply focus on preventing those crimes when we can, and prosecuting them when we cannot. We don’t even need new laws – I’m not aware of a single actual bad use for AI that’s been proposed that’s not already illegal. And if a new bad use is identified, we ban that use. QED.

    But you’ll notice what I slipped in there – I said we should focus first on preventing AI-assisted crimes before they happen – wouldn’t such prevention mean banning AI? Well, there’s another way to prevent such actions, and that’s by using AI as a defensive tool. The same capabilities that make AI dangerous in the hands of bad guys with bad goals make it powerful in the hands of good guys with good goals – specifically the good guys whose job it is to prevent bad things from happening.

    For example, if you are worried about AI generating fake people and fake videos, the answer is to build new systems where people can verify themselves and real content via cryptographic signatures. Digital creation and alteration of both real and fake content was already here before AI; the answer is not to ban word processors and Photoshop – or AI – but to use technology to build a system that actually solves the problem.

    And so, second, let’s mount major efforts to use AI for good, legitimate, defensive purposes. Let’s put AI to work in cyberdefense, in biological defense, in hunting terrorists, and in everything else that we do to keep ourselves, our communities, and our nation safe.

    There are already many smart people in and out of government doing exactly this, of course – but if we apply all of the effort and brainpower that’s currently fixated on the futile prospect of banning AI to using AI to protect against bad people doing bad things, I think there’s no question a world infused with AI will be much safer than the world we live in today.

    The Actual Risk Of Not Pursuing AI With Maximum Force And Speed

    There is one final, and real, AI risk that is probably the scariest at all:

    AI isn’t just being developed in the relatively free societies of the West, it is also being developed by the Communist Party of the People’s Republic of China.

    China has a vastly different vision for AI than we do – they view it as a mechanism for authoritarian population control, full stop. They are not even being secretive about this, they are very clear about it, and they are already pursuing their agenda. And they do not intend to limit their AI strategy to China – they intend to proliferate it all across the world, everywhere they are powering 5G networks, everywhere they are loaning Belt And Road money, everywhere they are providing friendly consumer apps like Tiktok that serve as front ends to their centralized command and control AI.

    The single greatest risk of AI is that China wins global AI dominance and we – the United States and the West – do not.

    I propose a simple strategy for what to do about this – in fact, the same strategy President Ronald Reagan used to win the first Cold War with the Soviet Union.

    “We win, they lose.”

    Rather than allowing ungrounded panics around killer AI, “harmful” AI, job-destroying AI, and inequality-generating AI to put us on our back feet, we in the United States and the West should lean into AI as hard as we possibly can.

    We should seek to win the race to global AI technological superiority and ensure that China does not.

    In the process, we should drive AI into our economy and society as fast and hard as we possibly can, in order to maximize its gains for economic productivity and human potential.

    This is the best way both to offset the real AI risks and to ensure that our way of life is not displaced by the much darker Chinese vision.

    What Is To Be Done?

    I propose a simple plan:

    • Big AI companies should be allowed to build AI as fast and aggressively as they can – but not allowed to achieve regulatory capture, not allowed to establish a government-protect cartel that is insulated from market competition due to incorrect claims of AI risk. This will maximize the technological and societal payoff from the amazing capabilities of these companies, which are jewels of modern capitalism.

    • Startup AI companies should be allowed to build AI as fast and aggressively as they can. They should neither confront government-granted protection of big companies, nor should they receive government assistance. They should simply be allowed to compete. If and as startups don’t succeed, their presence in the market will also continuously motivate big companies to be their best – our economies and societies win either way.

    • Open source AI should be allowed to freely proliferate and compete with both big AI companies and startups. There should be no regulatory barriers to open source whatsoever. Even when open source does not beat companies, its widespread availability is a boon to students all over the world who want to learn how to build and use AI to become part of the technological future, and will ensure that AI is available to everyone who can benefit from it no matter who they are or how much money they have.

    • To offset the risk of bad people doing bad things with AI, governments working in partnership with the private sector should vigorously engage in each area of potential risk to use AI to maximize society’s defensive capabilities. This shouldn’t be limited to AI-enabled risks but also more general problems such as malnutrition, disease, and climate. AI can be an incredibly powerful tool for solving problems, and we should embrace it as such.

    • To prevent the risk of China achieving global AI dominance, we should use the full power of our private sector, our scientific establishment, and our governments in concert to drive American and Western AI to absolute global dominance, including ultimately inside China itself. We win, they lose.

    And that is how we use AI to save the world.

    It’s time to build.

    Legends and Heroes

    I close with two simple statements.

    The development of AI started in the 1940’s, simultaneous with the invention of the computer. The first scientific paper on neural networks – the architecture of the AI we have today – was published in 1943. Entire generations of AI scientists over the last 80 years were born, went to school, worked, and in many cases passed away without seeing the payoff that we are receiving now. They are legends, every one.

    Today, growing legions of engineers – many of whom are young and may have had grandparents or even great-grandparents involved in the creation of the ideas behind AI – are working to make AI a reality, against a wall of fear-mongering and doomerism that is attempting to paint them as reckless villains. I do not believe they are reckless or villains. They are heroes, every one. My firm and I are thrilled to back as many of them as we can, and we will stand alongside them and their work 100%.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 06/07/2023 – 00:05

  • Supreme Court Overrules Local Governments For Seizing Homes
    Supreme Court Overrules Local Governments For Seizing Homes

    Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The U.S. Supreme Court reversed court rulings in which local governments seized two homes over unpaid tax debts and kept sale proceeds that far exceeded the tax owed.

    The Supreme Court held a special sitting on Sept. 30, 2022, for the formal investiture ceremony of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States/Getty Images)

    Critics call the practice “home equity theft.”

    The case came after Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), which represented the homeowners in both cases, released a report late last year saying that 12 states and the District of Columbia allow local governments and private investors to seize dramatically more than what is owed from homeowners who fall behind on property tax payments. PLF is a national nonprofit public interest law firm that takes on governmental overreach.

    The U.S. Supreme Court released unsigned orders (pdf) on June 5 summarily reversing two rulings of the Supreme Court of Nebraska.

    The nation’s highest court did not explain why it was issuing the orders. No justices dissented.

    The judgments of the Supreme Court of Nebraska were vacated and the cases remanded to that court “for further consideration in light” of the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in Tyler v. Hennepin County on May 25.

    In that decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a Minnesota county wronged a 94-year-old grandmother when it forced the sale of her condominium over an unpaid tax debt and kept the sale proceeds that far exceeded the tax she owed.

    Geraldine Tyler owned a modest one-bedroom condominium in Hennepin County, but after she was harassed and frightened near her home, she moved to a new apartment in a safer neighborhood. The rent on her new apartment stretched her resources and she fell into arrears on her condo’s property tax bills, accumulating about $2,300 in taxes owed, along with $12,700 in penalties, interest, and costs.

    The county seized Tyler’s condo, valued at $93,000, and sold it for just $40,000. Instead of keeping the $15,000 it was owed, the county retained the full $40,000, amounting to a windfall of $25,000.

    Tyler sued, arguing that the government violated the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment by seizing property in excess of the debt. Her lawsuit was rejected by the courts, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, which found that the legal forfeiture of the property extinguished the owner’s property interest.

    But the county went too far in keeping the windfall, the U.S. Supreme Court held.

    The principle that a government is not allowed to take from a taxpayer more than she owes is based in English law and goes back at least as far as the Magna Carta of 1215. And Supreme Court precedents have long recognized that a taxpayer is entitled to the surplus in excess of the debt owed, the court stated at the time.

    “The Takings Clause ‘was designed to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole,’” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court.

    “A taxpayer who loses her $40,000 house to the State to fulfill a $15,000 tax debt has made a far greater contribution to the public fisc than she owed.”

    On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court simultaneously granted the petitions of Kevin and Terry Fair and Sandra Nieveen seeking review while skipping over the oral argument phase when the merits of the case would have been considered.

    Some lawyers call this process GVR, which stands for grant, vacate, and remand.

    Critics say this process is part of the so-called shadow docket, which they say lacks transparency.

    In Fair v. Continental Resources (court file 22-160), Kevin and Terry Fair’s $60,000 home was taken by Scotts Bluff County, Nebraska, and Continental Resources for a $5,200 tax debt, according to the Fairs’ petition.

    Under the state’s tax foreclosure statute, the county extinguished the couple’s interest in the home by conveying full title to Continental without holding an auction and without any opportunity for the couple to recover their equity.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 23:25

  • San Fran's CRE Apocalypse: The City's Two Biggest Hotels Have Defaulted
    San Fran’s CRE Apocalypse: The City’s Two Biggest Hotels Have Defaulted

    The marxist shit(covered)show that is San Francisco is imploding before our very eyes in ways that are both terrifying, memorable wholly different each and every day.

    First, it was commercial real estate: at 30%, the city has the highest office vacancy rate in the US…

    … and amid an existential crisis for the city’s tech-focused tenants, finds that it can’t even sell office skyscrapers at a firesale price of 80% off  the purchase price, and even in the best case, a 71% discount is as good as it gets  (it got worse as we detailed in “There’s Poop Everywhere”: San Francisco’s Office District Not Only A Ghost Town, It’s Also Covered In Sh*t).

    Of course, it’s not just commercial real estate: residential is just as bad, with home prices in San Fran now tumbling double digits y/y, and just that other liberal disaster, Seattle, seeing home prices plunge faster.

    But while we expect the implosion in residential housing prices to accelerate, it’s really CRE where the ticking neutron bomb is to be found, and according to the latest horror story out of San Fran’s commercial real estate market, the owner of two of San Francisco’s biggest hotels — Hilton San Francisco Union Square and Parc 55 — has stopped mortgage payments and plans to give up the two properties.

    As the SF Chronicle reports, Park Hotels & Resorts said Monday that it stopped making payments on a $725 million loan due in November, handing over the keys to the property to the creditors and expects the “ultimate removal of these hotels” from its portfolio. The company said it would “work in good faith with the loan’s servicers to determine the most effective path forward.”

    “After much thought and consideration, we believe it is in the best interest for Park’s stockholders to materially reduce our current exposure to the San Francisco market. Now more than ever, we believe San Francisco’s path to recovery remains clouded and elongated by major challenges — both old and new,” said Thomas Baltimore Jr., CEO of Park Hotels, in a statement which could be applicable to every other liberal-controlled US metropolis.

    The 1,921-room Hilton is the city’s largest hotel and the 1,024-room Parc 55 is the fourth-largest, and together they account for around 9% of the city’s hotel stock. The hotels could potentially be taken over by lenders or sold to a new group as part of the foreclosure process, although it is unclear who would want to put even one dollar of equity into property that will more than likely redefault within a few years.

    That’s because there is no easy solution to San Fran’s long list of challenges which not only a record high office vacancy of around 30%, but also concerns over street conditions (and the amount of feces covering them), a lower rate of return to office compared with other cities (because woke snowflakes are naturally entitled to work from home of course) and “a weaker than expected citywide convention calendar through 2027 that will negatively impact business and leisure demand,” Baltimore  Jr., said.

    Park Hotels said San Francisco’s convention-driven demand is expected to be 40% lower between 2023 and 2027 compared with the pre-pandemic average.

    San Francisco Travel, the city’s convention bureau, expects Moscone Center conventions to account for over 670,000 hotel room nights this year, higher than 2018’s 660,868 room nights but far below 2019’s record-high 967,956. And weaker convention attendance is projected for each following year through 2030.

    Park Hotels & Resorts expects to save over $200 million in capital expenditures over the next five years after giving up the hotels, and to issue a special dividend to shareholders of $150 million to $175 million. The company’s exposure will shift away from San Francisco toward the higher-growth Hawaii market (good luck with that).

    Parc 55 is a block from Westfield San Francisco Centre (the mall where Nordstrom is also departing), and the block where Banko Brown, an alleged shoplifter, was killed in a shooting outside a Walgreens in April. Nearby blocks are also full of empty storefronts, as tourist and local foot traffic hasn’t fully recovered and probably never will.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 23:05

  • Maté: Russiagate Prober Durham Neglected DNC Hack Claim, Despite Evidence It Too Was A Democrat Sham
    Maté: Russiagate Prober Durham Neglected DNC Hack Claim, Despite Evidence It Too Was A Democrat Sham

    Authored by Aaron Maté via RealClear Wire,

    Special Counsel John Durham’s final report faults the FBI for opening the Trump-Russia collusion investigation on baseless grounds and relying on Hillary Clinton-funded material to pursue it, all while ignoring a warning that Clinton was plotting to frame Trump as a Russian asset. Yet Durham does not address the Clinton campaign’s equally central tie to Russiagate’s other foundational allegation: that Russia interfered in the 2016 election by hacking Democratic party servers and releasing the material through Wikileaks to help elect Trump.

    Durham’s silence on the Clinton team’s role in generating this unproven claim comes despite his unearthing of evidence that newly calls it into question.

    Material obtained by Durham’s team shows that the Clinton campaign and its contractor, the cyber-firm CrowdStrike, stonewalled the FBI’s requests for critical data about the alleged Russian hack. Two key Clinton associates who were integral to the Russian hacking claim also appear to have perjured themselves before Congress.

    RealClearInvestigations has pieced together these overlooked revelations through court documents connected to Durham’s probe, particularly his unsuccessful prosecution of Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann on a separate perjury charge.

    In April 2016, Sussmann hired CrowdStrike to investigate the alleged hack of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). In mid-June just as Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS were producing their first Clinton-funded dossier report alleging a Trump-Russia conspiracy Clinton-funded CrowdStrike came forward to publicly accuse Russia of hacking the Democrats’ computer networks. Sussmann, who worked closely with the firm, lobbied the FBI to endorse the allegation. The FBI initially declined, but reversed course months later despite failing to examine the DNC/DCCC servers. Instead, much like its use of Steele’s dossier for surveillance warrants and investigative leads when it came to collusion, the FBI relied on CrowdStrike’s forensics and redacted reports.

    The FBI’s dependency on CrowdStrike – and, indeed, the entire basis for the Russiagate probe was further called into question when it emerged that the firm’s president had admitted under oath that it “did not have concrete evidence” of Russian hacking. Shawn Henry, a former close FBI colleague of Directors Robert Mueller and James Comey, made the disclosure to Congress in December 2017. Yet his testimony was kept secret throughout the entirety of the FBI’s Comey- and Mueller-overseen Russia probes, and only became public in May 2020.

    Exhibits released by Durham in Sussmann’s case expose a new problem for CrowdStrike and its client the Clinton campaign: In recounting their roles in the FBI’s Russian hacking probe in congressional testimony, Sussmann and Henry gave identical false statements.

    FBI Officials Contradicted

    When they appeared before the House Intelligence Committee in December 2017, both Sussmann and Henry claimed that the FBI did not try to conduct its own independent, onsite investigation of the Democratic Party servers. The pair’s account contradicted FBI officials, including Comey, who have said that they requested access but were denied.

    Asked directly if the FBI sought access to the servers, Sussmann replied: “No, they did not.” He then added a caveat: “Excuse me, not to my knowledge.” The FBI, Sussmann added, “would have” had access “if they wanted it … But it wasn’t something that they were interested in at the time.”

    CrowdStrike’s Henry also told the committee that he was “not aware” of the FBI ever asking for access to the servers or being denied it. Asked directly if he was ever told that the FBI  “required access to the servers,” Henry said: “I have no recollection of them saying that to me or anybody on my team, no.”

    Henry and Sussmann’s accounts are not only at direct odds with the FBI, but with their own emails that Durham obtained.

    In October 2016, these emails show, the FBI directly asked Sussmann if the bureau could come onsite to inspect and copy the servers. Sussmann relayed that request to Henry and other CrowdStrike executives – who promptly stonewalled it.

    In an October 13, 2016 exchange, Elvis Chan, a special agent in the FBI’s San Francisco office, asked Sussmann if the “DNC/DCCC would be amenable to letting FBI computer forensics personnel onsite to conduct the imaging” of the servers. “In theory, sure,” Sussmann replied, adding that he would “put you directly in touch with CrowdStrike.”

    Contradicting what he would tell Congress the following year, Sussmann informed Henry and others at CrowdStrike that the FBI is “asking whether FBI computer forensics personnel can come ‘onsite’ to conduct the imaging.” Sussmann added that he was “connecting CrowdStrike and the Bureau to discuss directly on this email chain.”

    In response, CrowdStrike executive Justin Weissert did not address the FBI’s request for onsite access. Weissert instead introduced a new proposal: CrowdStrike would send the FBI a copy of the firm’s imaging of the servers.

    “As we just discussed under a separate email thread, CrowdStrike wants to assist with this effort and, given the nature of the past activities and our commitment to supporting our friends at the FBI, we’re going to move ahead with providing the information at no additional expense to anyone,” Weissert wrote.

    Rather than remind CrowdStrike that he had asked if FBI cyber experts could come “onsite to conduct the imaging,” Chan accepted the offer and provided a mailing address. “FBI San Francisco greatly appreciates your help,” he wrote.

    Given that Sussmann personally received the FBI’s request and relayed it to CrowdStrike, his erroneous recollection is especially suspect.

    Asked about their false statements to Congress, Sussmann and Henry did not respond to RCI’s questions by the time of publication. CrowdStrike also did not respond to a request for comment. 

    A Missed Opportunity

    In failing to address this episode, Durham missed an opportunity to press Sussmann and Henry on why they denied the FBI access to the DNC servers – and whether their false statements to Congress amounted to a criminal offense. By contrast, the Mueller team aggressively prosecuted four Trump associates for alleged false statements, including two cases – Roger Stone and Michael Cohen – for perjury before Congress.

    The Durham materials also reveal that the FBI’s failure to examine the DNC servers was not its only rebuffed request. Emails obtained by Durham show that CrowdStrike and the Clinton campaign ignored what the FBI listed as its number one “Priority Requests”: “Un-redacted copies of CrowdStrike reports” on both the DNC and DCCC “incidents.” That request, also made to Sussmann, came in a September 30, 2016, email from FBI Special Agent E. Adrian Hawkins.

    The FBI never got what it wanted. In a May 2019 court filing, the Justice Department disclosed that the U.S. government “does not possess” CrowdStrike’s unredacted originals, and that Sussmann only provided “three draft reports” in redacted form.

    In Senate testimony, James Trainor, then-assistant director of the FBI’s Cyber Division, recalled that he was “frustrated” with the CrowdStrike report he received in late August 2016 and “doubted its completeness” because Sussmann had “scrubbed” it. According to Trainor, the DNC’s cooperation in the hacking probe was “moderate” overall and “slow and laborious in many respects.”

    CrowdStrike’s redacted reports were provided to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, but have not been publicly released. The FBI has denied RCI’s Freedom of Information Act requests for the CrowdStrike reports, releasing only the documents’ cover pages.

    Changing the FBI’s Messaging

    Other emails released by Durham in Sussmann’s case show that the Clinton lawyer personally reviewed and edited an FBI public statement on the alleged hack of the DNC.

    On July 29, 2016 – just one week after WikiLeaks released a trove of embarrassing Democratic Party emails – the FBI drafted a press release on what it called “a possible cyber intrusion involving the DCCC.” Trainor contacted Sussmann for input.

    “A draft response is provided below,” Trainor wrote. “Wanted to get your thoughts on this prior to sending out.”

    In response, Sussmann took exception with the FBI’s mention of a “possible” hack. This qualifier, he noted, contradicted the Clinton campaign’s messaging on a Russian intrusion.

    “The draft you sent says only that the FBI is aware of media reports; it does not say that the FBI is aware of the intrusion that the DCCC reported,” Sussmann wrote. “Indeed, it refers only to a ‘possible’ cyber intrusion and in that way undermines what the DCCC said in its statement (or at least calls into question what the DCCC said).”

    Accordingly, Sussmann suggested new language that removed the FBI’s caveat of a “possible” hack. Trainor accepted the Clinton lawyer’s edit. “I am fine with the below suggestions,” he wrote.

    The FBI’s failure to obtain both direct access to the DNC servers and unredacted copies of the CrowdStrike reports further calls into question U.S. intelligence officials’ claim that Russia hacked the DNC.

    On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) issued a joint statement claiming, for the first time, that the “U.S. Intelligence Community is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails” from the Democratic Party. Jeh Johnson, who then served as DHS secretary, later testified that President Obama “approved the statement” and “wanted us to make [it].”

    Yet as Durham’s Sussmann-FBI emails confirm, this Obama-approved claim was released one week before CrowdStrike denied the FBI’s request for an “onsite” inspection. This timing means that when the intelligence community made its first public attribution of Russian hacking, it had not only failed to inspect the servers, but had not even received CrowdStrike’s copies of them.

    When the FBI and DHS released a more detailed report two months later, the document described the alleged Russian hacking effort as “likely leading to the exfiltration of information” from Democratic Party networks. (Emphasis added.)

    The Mueller probe, having also relied on CrowdStrike’s forensics, failed to add any more certainty. Mueller’s final report of April 2019 likewise stated that Russian intelligence “appear to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments” from Democratic Party servers. (Emphasis added.)

    Read in retrospect, these qualifiers – “likely” and “appear” signaled that U.S. intelligence lacked concrete evidence for their Russian hacking claims, given that CrowdStrike and the Clinton campaign had denied the FBI full access to the digital crime scene. The material emerging from Durham’s probe newly confirms this significant evidentiary hole.

    Durham’s decision to ignore the FBI’s deference to Clinton-funded CrowdStrike is all the more striking given his criticism of the FBI’s extensive use of Clinton-funded sources in its hunt for collusion.

    The FBI, the Durham report notes, relied on a “significant quantity of materials … that originated with and/or were funded by the Clinton campaign or affiliated persons.” Accordingly, Durham concluded, the FBI should have considered whether the Clinton camp was feeding it false claims as “part of a political effort to smear a political opponent” and exploit “the federal government’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies in support” of that goal.

    For unexplained reasons, Durham did not apply this critique to the FBI’s reliance on Clinton-funded sources to probe the theft of Democratic Party emails. As a result, seven years to the month after CrowdStrike triggered the Russiagate saga, the U.S. public remains in the dark about whether the Russian hacking allegation was yet one more deception funded by the Clinton campaign and parroted by the FBI.

    Aaron Maté has provided extensive coverage of corruption within federal intelligence agencies as a contributor to RealClearInvestigations. He is also a contributor to The Nation, and his work has appeared in Democracy Now!, Vice, Al Jazeera, Toronto Star, The Intercept, and Le Monde Diplomatique. Maté is the host of the news show Pushback with Aaron Maté.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 22:45

  • China Launches Domestically Built Cruise Mega-Ship
    China Launches Domestically Built Cruise Mega-Ship

    China, apparently not content with producing nearly all of the West’s goods and products in sum, is now adding “cruise ships” to its list of manufacturing feats.

    The country’s first ship, being called “Adora Magic City,” also known as “Mo Du” in Putonghua, left its docks at Shanghai at 1:30PM local time on Tuesday, according to reports from China Media Group and the Global Times. 

    The ship had been under construction for nearly 4 years, the report says. The report calls the ship “the world’s most complex single electronic product made up of over 25 million individual parts, five times the number of individual parts used in China’s first domestic aircraft”. 

    The ship sports 2,125 guest rooms and can accommodate 5,246 guests, the report says. It was built by Shanghai Waigaoqiao Shipbuilding Co (SWS) under the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC).

    With a 6 day floating process behind it, the ship is now being delivered for final testing and internal decoration. It is set to be delivered at the end of 2023, following two sea trials. Commercial operations will start shortly thereafter in 2024.

    The “Adora Magic City” is as tall as a 24-floor building, has 14 decks and offers 40,000 square meters of public areas, China-state owned media entity Global Times writes, calling it a “crown jewel” of global shipbuilding.

    China now joins Germany, France, Italy and Finland as a country with the ability to build large cruise ships. Global Times says that “Shanghai is being built into China’s global cruise ship hub”.

    A “sister ship” to the Adora started construction in 2022. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 22:25

  • J6 Defendant On Ray Epps: "They Are Protecting Him Like Crazy"
    J6 Defendant On Ray Epps: “They Are Protecting Him Like Crazy”

    Authored by Julie Kelly via American Greatness,

    Epps’ unusual defenders make less and less sense…

    He is one of the most consequential—and complicated—individuals involved in the events of January 6.

    Ryan Samsel, then a 37-year-old Pennsylvania barber, drove to Washington on the morning of January 6, 2021 with his girlfriend to watch Donald Trump’s speech. Unable to hear the president, they walked east towards Capitol Hill where a large group, including members of the Proud Boys, had assembled.

    Samsel soon found himself on the front lines of a protest the national media and Joe Biden immediately branded an “insurrection.” Video shows Samsel approaching a weak line of Capitol police officers and bike racks positioned on the west side of Capitol grounds shortly before 1 p.m., the time Congress convened a joint session to debate the results of the 2020 Electoral College vote certification.

    Wearing a white hoodie underneath a jean jacket and a red “Make America Great Again” cap, Samsel appears to engage one of the officers guarding the large outdoor area that leads to the building.

    Interactions between protesters and police got heated. The officer in front of Samsel shoved a bike rack with an “Area Closed” sign into a few protesters, including Samsel, who grabbed the fence. He then proceeded to remove his jacket and turn his hat backwards as if spoiling for a fight.

    At that point, someone can be heard behind Samsel yelling, “hey, hey, hey!” A large man, also donning a red cap, grabbed Samsel’s right shoulder and pulled him away from the officer. The man spoke directly to Samsel then cupped his hand to whisper in his ear. Samsel immediately returned to the barricades, where a shoving match ensued. The racks and police were overrun—the individual who spoke to Samsel remained right behind him.

    That man was Ray Epps.

    It would become a pivotal moment in the events of January 6. In fact, a snapshot of Epps whispering to Samsel remains on the Twitter page of the Washington field office of the FBI in a collage of photos of those “who committed violence” at the Capitol.

    What Epps—the still-uncharged agitator who first became a subject of public scrutiny after a 2021 exposé in Revolver News—said to Samsel in that iconic exchange has been the subject of speculation for more than two years.

    The New York Times reported Epps told the FBI tip line he attempted to de-escalate the situation between Samsel and police. Epps gave the same story to the January 6 Select Committee. “OK, you know, that’s not why we’re here,” Epps told the committee about his interaction with Samsel. “You’ve got to be peaceful, [I] pulled him back and told him, it’s not what we’re about.”

    Samsel’s initial FBI interview, according to Times reporter Alan Feuer, provided a similar account. “Samsel said much the same thing, telling investigators that a man he did not know came up to him at the barricades and suggested he relax, according to a recording of the interview obtained by The New York Times,” Feuer wrote in May 2022. “‘He came up to me and he said, ‘Dude’—his entire words were, ‘Relax, the cops are doing their job.’”

    But in a phone conversation with American Greatness last week, Samsel disputed Epps’ testimony and contradicted what he reportedly told the FBI a few weeks after the Capitol protest.

    “[Epps] said to me, ‘Don’t pull. I’ve got people. We have to push through.’”

    Arrested on January 30, 2021, Samsel has been behind bars ever since. Prosecutors argued Samsel’s history—unlike most January 6 defendants, Samsel has a criminal record that includes assaults against women—justified pretrial detention. (The government also maintains Samsel was on parole on January 6. Samsel told me he was on probation.)

    Samsel is in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, a treacherous facility that houses “extremely dangerous, violent, or escape-prone inmates.” (One defense lawyer described it to me as “one of the worst of the worst.”)

    Considering his record and public silence on the matter for the past few years, Samsel’s new claims about what Epps said to him warrant some skepticism. But a closer look at the court docket shows how the Justice Department is intentionally delaying Samsel’s trial, presumably to prevent the public from learning more about Epps’ involvement at that crucial juncture and his movements before, on, and after January 6. “[Prosecutors] are protecting him like crazy,” Samsel said of Epps.

    Samsel’s case file seems to support that view. Prosecutors did not indict Samsel until seven months after his arrest, a violation of federal law, which requires the government to file charges within 30 days of an arrest. Samsel said during that time the government tried to coerce him into saying Epps did not instigate any misconduct and that Joseph Biggs, a Proud Boys leader recently convicted of seditious conspiracy, was carrying a gun. (He was not.)

    Biden’s Justice Department finally charged Samsel in August 2021 on seven counts including assault of a police officer, civil disorder, and obstruction of an official proceeding, the most common felony associated with the January 6 prosecution. According to Samsel, he’s been transported to 16 different prisons; he was viciously attacked by guards in the D.C. gulag, sustaining injuries that still require medical attention.

    His trial date has been moved numerous times as the Justice Department added codefendants and new charges to his case, a tried-and-true delay tactic. And two days before both sides were expected to file a schedule in preparation for an April 24 trial, U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves filed a fourth superseding indictment against Samsel, forcing another postponement.

    Samsel’s new trial date is October 23—which means he will have been behind bars for nearly three years before he has an opportunity to defend himself before a jury. (Judge Jia M. Cobb, a Biden appointee, is overseeing Samsel’s case.)

    While Samsel now faces 12 charges and has languished in jail for more than 28 months, Epps remains a free man even though Graves’ office could easily indict Epps on many of the charges filed against Samsel, who, like Epps, never entered the building.

    Why isn’t Epps charged with the obstruction felony since he was among the first set of protesters that eventually forced Congress to suspend the joint session? Why is Epps not charged with impeding law enforcement and civil disorder? He, like Samsel, crossed police barricades and remained on restricted grounds for at least 90 minutes as officers fought with the crowd. (Samsel tended to one of the officers pushed down by the protesters as Epps ran past her.)

    Further, Epps was wearing military garb including a tactical vest and backpack, garb prosecutors cite as evidence of preplanning for violence.

    And what about Epps’ text boasting to his nephew at 2:12 p.m. on January 6 that “I was in the front with a few others. I also orchestrated it.” He told the January 6 committee that he “helped get people there.” 

    Individuals have been charged and convicted for conspiracy based on less. Why does Epps continue to evade prosecution?

    Not only is Epps seemingly protected by the Justice Department—after Epps showed up in yet another video in the Proud Boys trial, a prosecutor told jurors accusations that Epps worked at the behest of the government are “fantasies”—he is defended by the same news media and politicians insisting anyone involved in the events of January 6 is a criminal.

    None other than former U.S. Representative Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) recently brushed off questions as to why Epps hasn’t been charged. Cheney, vice chairman of the now-defunct January 6 committee, referred to claims Epps was a federal asset as a “conspiracy theory,” a favorite descriptor of those oddly eager to exonerate one of the most outspoken “insurrectionists.”

    For now, Samsel remains in the ruthless grip of Joe Biden’s Justice Department. (He has a GiveSendGo account to raise money for his defense.) So why is he speaking up now in seeming contradiction to what he told federal authorities shortly after his arrest? “I don’t want to look back in 10 years and say I was a coward,” he told me.

    Samsel is neither a coward nor a hero for now—but he is a human pawn in the Biden regime’s ongoing retaliation against Americans who protested the rigged 2020 presidential election on January 6. And while government agencies come under increased scrutiny as to the role of undercover officers and informants on January 6, Epps’ unlikely set of defenders make less and less sense.

    If Samsel gets the chance to take the stand and testify under oath, and before the American people, as to what Epps said to him that fateful afternoon, he might unravel one of the biggest mysteries of January 6. Which appears to be precisely what the Justice Department is desperate to prevent.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 22:05

  • Iran Joins Tiny Club Of Nations With Hypersonic Missiles: Raisi
    Iran Joins Tiny Club Of Nations With Hypersonic Missiles: Raisi

    Iran on Tuesday claimed it has joined the club of those very few nations which have hypersonic weapons in their arsenal. Currently, it’s believed only Russia, China, and the United States possess them.

    Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi attended a ceremony unveiling of the new Iranian-made “Fattah” (literally, “Conqueror”) hypersonic missile in Tehran, wherein he touted “Today we feel that the deterrent power has been formed.” He said: “This power is an anchor of lasting security and peace for the regional countries.”

    New hypersonic ballistic missile called “Fattah” unveiled by Iran. Handout: West Asia News Agency via Reuters

    “We build missiles so that we do not suffer from aggression by enemies, and so that…enemies would not even think of an act of aggression against the Islamic Republic,” Raisi said, which comes after repeated warnings from Israel that it reserves the ‘right’ of a preemptive strike on Iran’s alleged nuclear program.

    “Iran’s military, defense and missile power creates deterrence, of course, it creates deterrence not only from invasion but also from the thought of invasion,” Raisi added.

    At the same unveiling ceremony, the head of the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard’s aerospace program Gen. Amir-Ali Hajizadeh hailed that the new advanced weapon will “usher in a new generation of missiles in Iran,” according state-run IRNA.

    Hajizadeh described the Fattah as having a range of up to 870 miles and that “there exists no system that can rival or counter this missile” – as it can also reach speeds of up to Mach 15, according to Iran’s claims.

    While Iran released official video showing the alleged hypersonic rocket in flight, other statements suggested it is likely still in the development phase and is not yet be deployable as an active weapon in Iran’s arsenal. Russia, for example, spent years test-firing its hypersonics – but sometimes without success.

    Video released by Tehran was filled with a computer-generated graphics portion, raising doubts over whether the country has achieved hypersonic capability…

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

    Gen. Hajizadeh alluded Iranian rocket scientists’ work, saying it “will not end with the construction of this missile,” and further that Iran’s military “will continue on this path so that no enemy even imagines attacking Iran.”

    But again, some of the footage purporting to show the Fattah in a test launch and flight appears computer generated…

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

    Yet still, Israel is likely watching these developments very closely, and has long urged the West to act more forcefully not just against Iranian nuclear sites, but against its advanced and ballistic missile program as well.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 21:45

  • CDC Warns that Pride Events Could Spawn Massive Monkeypox Outbreak
    CDC Warns that Pride Events Could Spawn Massive Monkeypox Outbreak

    Submitted by Mark Pellin via Headline USA,

    Only weeks after approving revamped guidelines that allow gay men to donate blood without previously-required screening for AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases largely prevalent in the LGBT community, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sounded the alarm for a potential outbreak of monkeypox.

    In an ominous assessment issued late last month, the CDC warned that an “uptick in mpox cases in Chicago that began in mid-April underscores the risk of renewed mpox outbreaks, which we judge is substantial across the United States.”

    Mpox, the preferred moniker since monkeypox was cancelled as racist by Biden regime leftists, has remained relatively rare in the general population while persisting to cause concern for LGBT communities where transmission rates are highest.

    The concern gained added urgency last month with the looming onslaught of so-called Pride Month parades, festivals and protests.

    “CDC continues to assess that the risk of resurgent mpox outbreaks is substantial in the United States,” the agency wrote in its May update. “The risk of outbreaks could further increase as people gather this spring and summer for festivals and other events with high potential for skin-to-skin contact or increased sexual activity.”

    Adding to the potential crisis, the CDC also acknowledged that it was exploring a theory that the monkeypox virus “may have evolved mutations to evade the two-dose Jynneos vaccines that were rolled out last year to protect against it,” CBS News reported.

    The possible mutations were detected “in a cluster of cases” around Los Angeles, which officials said indicated that drug-resistant monkeypox could be transmitted person-to-person in at least “rare cases.”

    Those cases could spread rapidly in a tidal wave of LGBT Pride events scheduled across the country, including large cities that are hotspots for LGBT activists.

    “Cases of mpox in San Francisco remain low, however, we remain watchful, as several new cases have recently been reported in other parts of the country,” San Francisco Health official Dr. Susan Philip said in statement released by the agency “in advance of the summer season and Pride Celebrations.”

    “We want to make sure that everyone can enjoy a happy and healthy Pride,” Philip said.

    In response to the monkeypox cluster outbreak in Chicago, the Biden administration is weighing a recommendation for more mpox vaccine boosters. A shift in strategy might be needed, said the regime’s national monkeypox response deputy coordinator, Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, reportedly seen in April spreading the Biden doctrine in Las Vegas at the 2023 Biomedical HIV Prevention Summit.

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

    “We’ve already, really immediately after seeing the Chicago cluster, convened folks within the U.S. government to discuss what the data is that we have and if there needs to be any change,” Daskalakis said last month.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 21:25

  • NYC Targets Drug-Infested Areas With Vending Machines Full Of Free Crack Pipes, Narcan, Condoms
    NYC Targets Drug-Infested Areas With Vending Machines Full Of Free Crack Pipes, Narcan, Condoms

    The NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has introduced the first of four vending machines destined for drug-infested areas of the city. These machines provide free items like crack pipes, Narcan, and condoms, among other essentials. 

    The first public health vending machine operates at 1676 Broadway in Brooklyn. It’s a big blue box stocked with naloxone — a drug that can reverse overdoses, fentanyl test strips, hygiene kits, and safe sex kits. And it’s considered by health officials to be the first line of defense to combat the city’s out-of-control drug overdose crisis. 

    Anyone can use the vending machine. All someone has to do is enter their NYC zip code and pick if they want crack pipes, Narcan, and condoms (maybe this vending machine should be kept a secret from Hunter). 

    The city’s health commissioner said the machines would help fight the overdose crisis:

    “We are in the midst of an overdose crisis in our city, which is taking a fellow New Yorker from us every three hours and is a major cause of falling life expectancy in NYC.

    “But we will continue to fight to keep our neighbors and loved ones alive with care, compassion and action. Public health vending machines are an innovative way to meet people where they are and to put life-saving tools like naloxone in their hands. We’ll leave no stone unturned until we reverse the trends in opioid-related deaths in our city.”

    Overdose deaths across the metro area have hit record highs. In 2021, there were 2,668 overdose deaths in NYC, compared with 2,103 in 2020. In 2021, 84% of overdose deaths involved an opioid. Fentanyl, a highly potent opioid, was involved in 80% of all overdose deaths. There were 1,370 confirmed overdose death in the first half of 2022. Officials estimate 2022 could be the deadliest year for overdoses if that trend persists. 

    So what’s the strategy by Democrats to curb the drug and crime crisis? It revolves around vending machines full of crack pipes, Narcan, and condoms. Their approach to crime and drugs has been horrendous as NYC spirals into a crime-ridden hellhole. It’s not just NYC. Many other metro areas controlled by progressives are spiraling out of control. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 21:05

  • FBI Conduct Sparks Protest At Federal Building In Detroit
    FBI Conduct Sparks Protest At Federal Building In Detroit

    Authored by Steven Kovac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A small but vocal group of demonstrators gathered on June 3 outside the Detroit office of the FBI to demand the firing of Christopher Wray, the bureau’s director.

    Organizers of a protest against the politicization of the FBI in Detroit, Mich. on June 3, 2023. (Steven Kovac/Epoch Times)

    “Wray must be fired, and the FBI must be decentralized and moved out of Washington, D.C.,” protest organizer and Trump supporter Brian Pannebecker said. “As long as the FBI and DOJ [Department of Justice] continue to illegally withhold subpoenaed evidence from Congress, we will continue to fight.”

    Wray was nominated by then-President Donald Trump to succeed FBI Director James Comey, whom he fired in the summer of 2017.

    When asked about that by The Epoch Times, Pannebecker said: “Yeah, Trump made some really bad appointments. He’ll know better in his next term.”

    Suppressing Potential Evidence

    Pannebecker, a U.S. Army veteran with a son currently serving in the Army National Guard in the Middle East, said he’s outraged by what he sees as the FBI’s protecting President Joe Biden by suppressing potentially incriminating evidence that allegedly links Biden to an international influence peddling scheme.

    “We are here today in the hope of awakening the people of Detroit, who are the victims of so much crime and violence, to the need to be rid of Wray and replace him with someone who will work for them,” he said.

    “I’m here because our government is completely corrupted,” Dana Coyne told The Epoch Times. “We are not a government of the people anymore.

    “We are a country run by globalists who do not love America and who disrespect the sovereignty of the United States.”

    John Zupanc of Macomb County said he came to downtown Detroit on a Saturday because he believes the government “is crooked and corrupt and must be held accountable.”

    Wray’s Offer

    Facing a contempt of Congress citation, Wray announced on June 2 that he would permit a piece of evidence subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee to be viewed only by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) and Democratic Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).

    Wray’s move on the eve of the protest did nothing to appease the demonstrators.

    “At this point, does anybody trust Wray to follow through? He has a history of stonewalling and then finally producing documents requested by Congress that are near totally redacted,” Pannebecker said.

    “I feel there is a two-tiered system of justice in this country. There should not be one set of rules for the favored few and different rules for the rest of us. Government should do the right thing,” said demonstrator Angelic Johnson, of the group Faith, Education, and Commerce United of Michigan (FEC).

    Protester Elisa Wagner said: “Today, our government is doing exactly what our Founding Fathers warned us about. We are living in a tyrannical time.

    “All Americans must do their due diligence to protect our constitutional rights. That’s why I’m here.”

    Differing Opinions

    Trump flags and “Fire Wray” picket signs in the Federal Building Plaza provoked responses from passing cars, with some honking and shouting, “Go Trump!” while others yelled obscenities and “Lock him up!”

    The demonstration also caught the attention of passing pedestrians.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 20:45

  • Tucker's Back! In Triumphant Return, Demolishes Ukraine Dam Propaganda, Massacres MSM For Ignoring UFO 'Bombshell Of The Millennium'
    Tucker’s Back! In Triumphant Return, Demolishes Ukraine Dam Propaganda, Massacres MSM For Ignoring UFO ‘Bombshell Of The Millennium’

    Tucker Carlson unveiled Episode 1 of his ‘Tucker on Twitter’ adventure  – which gained 10 million views in just over two hours – and the topic du jour is simple; government propaganda and the lying liars that spew it.

    His jumping off point is the bombing of the Kakhova dam… by Putin himself, if you believe the western media because ‘he is evil and evil people do evil things… even to themselves’ (despite the detailed explanation below of why that is simply farcical).

    By way of background, and helping explain why it absolutely, positively, without doubt must have been Putin that blew up the dam Antiwar.com’s Kyle Anzalone notes that the dam was built by the USSR during the 1950s and, for over a year, has sat on the frontlines of the war in Ukraine. It is nearly 100 feet tall and over 10,000 feet wide. The dam was constructed as a hydroelectric power plant and created the Kakhovka Reservoir, which is over 2,000 sq km. Europe’s largest nuclear power plant – the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) and the Crimean Peninsula receive water from the reservoir.

    The attack on the dam will impact a core Russian concern in Ukraine. Through the 250-mile-long Northern Crimean Canal, the Kakhovka Reservoir feeds water to the peninsula that Moscow annexed in 2014. Before the invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin regularly issued demands to Kiev that irrigation systems supplying water to Crimea remain open.

    But you should believe it was Putin, as Carlson explains: 

    “You’ve got to be lied to over a period of years to reach conclusions like that…and of course, we have been…”

    Carlson then took the media to task for ignoring yesterday’s “bombshell of the millennium,’ in which a government whistleblower revealed that craft developed by non-human intelligence has been recovered by governments around the world in an 80-year race to reverse engineer materials for geopolitical advantages.

    Carlson’s concluding thoughts are a good reminder of reality: 

    “…if you are wondering why our country seems so dysfunctional, this is a big part of the reason – nobody knows what’s happening. A small group of people control access to all relevant information and the rest of us… don’t know. We’re allowed to yap all we like about something like racism… but dare to talk about something that really matters and go ahead and see what happens... you keep it up, they’ll make you be quiet – trust us… that’s how they maintain control.“

    Watch below:

    And the crowd goes wild…

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

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

    Elon Musk chimed in on Tucker’s episode as well, tweeting “Would be great to have shows from all parts of the political spectrum on this platform!” 

    Of course, propagandists like Brian Stelter would never take the risk, lest they crash and burn in spectacular fashion.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 20:25

  • ATF Report Reveals Mass Noncompliance With Pistol Brace Rule
    ATF Report Reveals Mass Noncompliance With Pistol Brace Rule

    Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

    As we previously predicted in an article prior to the rollout of ATF’s pistol brace rule, very few gun owners have complied with the regulation and registered their pistol braced firearm via the ATF’s registration scheme. 

    According to a report published by The Reload, as of June 1, 2023, ATF received 255,162 applications for registration. The Congressional Research Service estimates that the number of braces in circulation is anywhere from 10 million to 40 million. This would mean total compliance with the pistol brace rule is around 0.2 – 0.6 percent. 

    Comparatively, this statistic is similar to compliance with ATF’s 2019 bump stock regulations. About 0.1% of all bump stocks (around 546 out of 520,000) were turned in or destroyed in compliance with ATF’s ruling. 

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

    Although, it could be argued that the noncompliance with the pistol brace rule is more egregious to ATF, as there are 80 times as many braces in circulation compared to bump stocks.

    This statistic shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who’s been following the public outcry from gun owners about the pistol brace rule. 

    Who can blame them? ATF hasn’t exactly been forthcoming and consistent in its rulemaking process. Prior to the pistol brace rule, ATF stated in court that their recent “definition of frame or receiver” rule allows companies to sell pistol frame blanks without background checks, as long as those frames do not include jigs and tools to manufacture into firearms. Then, months later, ATF issued an open letter reversing their position and classifying these same frames as firearms.

    Fortunately, Gun Owners of America is fighting ATF’s unconstitutional overreach. We were recently issued an injunction in our case GOA/GOF/Texas v. ATF halting the enforcement of the pistol brace rule for our members. We’re currently trying to expand that ruling to cover ALL gun owners nationwide.

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

    We’re also working in Congress to pass a joint resolution of disapproval. The legislation is currently awaiting a vote in the House. 

    Using the Congressional Review Act, the ATF rule could be reversed and the agency could be prohibited from ever enacting a similar rule in the future. 

    Two joint resolutions of disapproval have already been introduced. H. J. Res. 44, introduced by Rep. Andrew Clyde, has 189 sponsors in the House of Representatives and S. J. Res. 20, introduced by Sen. Kennedy, has 47 sponsors in the Senate.  

    Public calls for Speaker McCarthy to hold a vote to block the pistol brace rule have only mounted in recent weeks, with several coalitions calling for immediate action—including 27 Attorneys General currently suing the Biden Administration, 2A influencers with over 30,000,000 combined followers, and numerous members of the gun industry. 

    That’s why GOA is also urging activists to contact Congress and urge them to provide oversight and protect all gun owners nationwide. 

    *   *   *

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 20:05

  • Media Smears Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. For "Conspiracy Theories" Even As Many Come True
    Media Smears Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. For “Conspiracy Theories” Even As Many Come True

    Authored by Michael Shellenberger and Leighton Woodhouse via Public Substack,

    Yesterday, Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. appeared on a Twitter Spaces panel co-hosted by Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, and venture capitalist David Sacks. He spoke for over two hours on a range of issues, including the war in Ukraine, energy policy, gun control, and the origin of SARS-CoV-2. And Kennedy deplored the corporate takeover of the Democratic Party, excoriated President Biden’s pro-war instincts, decried the domination of US foreign policy by neo-cons and promoted renewable energy.

    And yet, according to the New York Times and CNN, it was an orgy of right-wing conspiracy theorizing. “Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a scion of one of the country’s most famous Democratic families,” wrote three New York Times reporters, “dived into the full embrace of a host of conservative figures who eagerly promoted his long-shot primary challenge to President Biden….On Monday, he sounded like a candidate far more at ease in the mushrooming Republican presidential contest.”

    In pre-Trump America, Kennedy, an anti-war, pro-free speech environmentalist and fierce critic of corporate power, would have been universally regarded as a far-left candidate in the mold of Ralph Nader or his current campaign manager, Dennis Kucinich. He once called for the Koch Brothers to be criminally prosecuted. Kennedy believes that the war in Ukraine is being fueled by “the neo-cons in the White House” who want “regime change with the Russians.” In his campaign announcement speech, he described his mission as ending “the corrupt merger of state and corporate power” that is threatening “to impose a new kind of corporate feudalism in our country.”

    But a dizzying political realignment has scrambled all of the traditional categories and left in its wake just two sides: not left and right, but insider and outsider. And no matter the substance of one’s beliefs, to the media, “outsider” means, by default, “right-wing conspiracy theorist.”

    On yesterday’s Twitter spaces conversation, the shift was lost on nobody, including Kennedy. “The Democrats slowly became pro-corporate, pro-war, and pro-censorship,” said Kennedy, and “Republicans became anti-censorship, pro-civil liberties, and anti-war. There’s been this tremendous realignment.”

    Kennedy’s rising profile ignited a media backlash yesterday that felt almost orchestrated. Kennedy’s “crackpot claims” and “outlandish views” have won him “favor on the right,” Vanity Fair moaned. “Mr. Kennedy has found another benefactor who seems to enjoy deluging the press with excrement: Elon Musk,” snarled The Independent. “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Spends an Hour Sucking Up to Elon Musk in Twitter Space,” blared a New Republic headline.

    Business Insider called the conversation on Twitter “a bizarre Twitter Spaces conversation littered with falsehoods and conspiracy theories” and dismissed Kennedy’s “odd and occasionally incoherent policy positions.” Rolling Stone sneered at his “outlandish and pseudoscientific ideas” and labeled Kennedy a “fringe candidate” with “crank beliefs.” Esquire called him a “raving anti-vaxxer” and lambasted the very idea of having a contested Democratic primary.

    But none put it as plainly as The Washington Post. “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tests the conspiratorial appetite of Democrats,” wrote the Post’s Michael Scherer. Kennedy, Scherer alleged, “campaigns on the idea that powerful people have been working in secret to deceive you.”

    The Washington Post may believe that the public’s distrust of the elite is nothing more than a conspiracy theory. But if the last few years have taught us anything, it’s that powerful people have, indeed, been working in secret to deceive us.

    Consider how many suspicions that were dismissed as conspiracy theories turned out to be true: 

    1. Documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden showed that the U.S. government was indeed spying on millions of Americans without a warrant and without their knowledge and that such claims of widespread surveillance were neither paranoid nor conspiracy theories. Obama’s Director of National Intelligence had lied to Congress about NSA surveillance before Snowden revealed the truth.

    2. Jeffrey Epstein may have been running a honeypot blackmail operation with the knowledge of the CIA, whose director visited him frequently, according to his private emails.

    3. The evidence is today overwhelming that President Joe Biden’s son and brother sold access to Joe Biden, when he was Vice President, to foreign investors, including Chinese with close relationships to military intelligence.

    4. The Biden administration and media elites have aggressively pushed for bans and restrictions on natural gas stoves while claiming that those who claimed they were pushing for such bans and restrictions were spreading conspiracy theories.

    5. The U.S. really did manage bio-labs in Ukraine, despite propaganda from NPR and others dismissing this reality as a conspiracy theory.

    6. The Pentagon had indeed been covering up evidence of UFOs for decades.

    7. Emails show former NAID director Anthony Fauci and NIH Director Francis Collins conspired to spread the lie that the Covid lab leak hypothesis had been debunked. In truth, there is a long history of lab leaks in the US and around the world, and scientists had hotly debated whether coronavirus research should occur given the high risk of a leak.

    The New York Times wrote that “American intelligence agencies do not believe there is any evidence indicating that” COVID-19 was created as part of a bioweapons program. But Fauci’s NIH funding for gain-of-function research may indeed have originated as a biodefense effort.

    …

    Calling someone a “conspiracy theorist” is powerful and insidious. It does more than imply that a person is gullible or stupid. It suggests that they suffer from some kind of mental illness, and their opinions are not worth listening to.

    Calling someone a conspiracy theorist is an act of delegitimation, just as calling them a racist or climate denier is. The goal is to ostracize and stigmatize, to un-person one’s political adversaries, and to banish their arguments from public discourse instead of refuting them. This is what the media is doing to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

    …

    Kennedy’s zealous support for free speech runs counter to the media’s goal of “combating disinformation” by monitoring and censoring ordinary people online and thereby establishing themselves, once again, as the arbiters of truth and falsehood.

    This is another reason the media is so determined to destroy his candidacy.

    …

    That’s an existential threat to the mainstream media, so outlets like The Washington Post, The New York Times, and CNN are doing everything they can to discredit both the platform and Kennedy’s candidacy. That alone makes both worth fighting to defend.

    Subscribers to Public substack can read the full article here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 19:25

  • Kiev's Long-Term "Last Resort" Plan To Blow-Up The Kakhova Dam Exposed
    Kiev’s Long-Term “Last Resort” Plan To Blow-Up The Kakhova Dam Exposed

    A day after Ukraine’s much-heralded counter-offensive appears to have failed, almost before it had even begun, a major dam in the Russian-occupied region of Kherson is suddenly bombed, prompting mass evacuations as floods spread across the region.

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

    As we detailed earlier, both sides accuse each other of the attack that puts tens of thousands of homes at risk and might even threaten the safety of Europe’s largest nuclear power plant.

    However, as Raul Ilargi Meijer writes, twice last year (here and here), Ukrainian officials discussed Kiev’s plans to blow up the dam.

    Andrew Korybko lays out the real narrative here:

    The partial destruction of the Kakhovka Dam on early Tuesday morning saw Kiev and Moscow exchange accusations about who’s to blame, but a report from the Washington Post (WaPo) in late December extends credence to the Kremlin’s version of events.

    Titled “Inside the Ukrainian counteroffensive that shocked Putin and reshaped the war”, its journalists quoted former commander of November’s Kherson Counteroffensive Major General Andrey Kovalchuk who shockingly admitted to planning this war crime:

    “Kovalchuk considered flooding the river. The Ukrainians, he said, even conducted a test strike with a HIMARS launcher on one of the floodgates at the Nova Kakhovka dam, making three holes in the metal to see if the Dnieper’s water could be raised enough to stymie Russian crossings but not flood nearby villages. The test was a success, Kovalchuk said, but the step remained a last resort. He held off.”

    [ZH: This clip purports to show the “test” firing last year described by WaPo]

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

    His remark about how “the step remained a last resort” is pertinent to recall at present considering that the first phase of Kiev’s NATO–backed counteroffensive completely failed on Monday according to the Russian Ministry of Defense. Just like Ukraine launched its proxy invasion of Russia in late May to distract from its loss in the Battle of Artyomovsk, so too might does it seem to have gone through with Kovalchuk’s planned war crime to distract from this most recent embarrassment as well.

    The abovementioned explanation isn’t as far-fetched as some might initially think either. After all, one of complexity theory’s precepts is that initial conditions at the onset of non-linear processes can disproportionately shape the outcome. In this context, the first failed phase of Kiev’s counteroffensive risked ruining the entire campaign, which could have prompted its planners to employ Kovalchuk’s “last resort” in order to introduce an unexpected variable into the equation that might improve their odds.

    Russia had over 15 months to entrench itself in Ukraine’s former eastern and southern regions that Kiev still claims as its own through the construction of various defensive structures and associated contingency planning so as to maintain its control over those territories. It therefore follows that even the most properly supplied and thought-out counteroffensive wasn’t going to be a walk in the park contrary to the Western public’s expectations, thus explaining why the first phase just failed.

    This reality check shattered whatever wishful thinking expectations Kiev might have had since it showed that the original plan of swarming the Line of Contact (LOC) entails considerable costs that reduce the chances of it succeeding unless serious happens behind the front lines to distract the Russian defenders. Therein lies the strategic reason behind partially destroying the Kakhovka Dam on Tuesday morning exactly as Kovalchuk proved late last year is possible to pull off per his own admission to WaPo.

    • The first of Kiev’s goals that this terrorist attack served was to prompt global concern about the safety of the Russian-controlled Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, which relies on water from the now-rapidly-depleting Kakhovka Reservoir for cooling. The International Atomic Energy Agency said that there’s “no immediate nuclear safety risk”, but a latent one can’t be ruled out. Should a crisis transpire, then it could throw Russia’s defenses in northern Zaporozhye Region into chaos.

    • The second goal is that the downstream areas of Kherson Region, which are divided between Kiev and Moscow, have now been flooded. Although the water might eventually recede after some time, this could complicate Russia’s defensive plans along the left bank of the Dnieper River. Taken together with the consequences connected to the first scenario, this means that a significant part of the riparian front behind the LOC could soon soften up to facilitate the next phase of Kiev’s counteroffensive.

    • In fact, the geographic scope of Kiev’s “unconventional softening operation” might even expand to Crimea due to the threat that Tuesday morning’s terrorist attack could pose to the peninsula’s water supply via its eponymous canal. The regional governor said that sufficient supplies remain for now but that the coming days will reveal the level of risk. While Crimea still managed to survive Kiev’s blockade of the canal for eight years, there’s no doubt that this development is disadvantageous for Russia.

    • The fourth strategic goal builds upon the three that were already discussed and concerns the psychological warfare component of this attack. On the foreign front, Kiev’s gaslighting that Moscow is guilty of “ecocide” was amplified by the Mainstream Media in spite of Kovalchuk’s damning admission to WaPo last December in order to maximize global pressure on Russia, while the domestic front is aimed at sowing panic in Ukraine’s former regions with the intent of further softening Russia’s defenses there.

    • And finally, the last strategic goal that was served by partially destroying the Kakhovka Dam is that Russia might soon be thrown into a dilemma. Kiev’s “unconventional softening operation” along the Kherson-Zaporozhye LOC could divide the Kremlin’s focus from the Belgorod-Kharkov and Donbass fronts, which could weaken one of those three and thus risk a breakthrough. The defensive situation could become even more difficult for Russia if Kiev expands the conflict by attacking Belarus and/or Moldova too.

    To be absolutely clear, the military-strategic dynamics of the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine still favor Russia for the time being, though that’s precisely why Kiev carried out Tuesday morning’s terrorist attack in a desperate attempt to reshape them in its favor. This assessment is based on the observation that Russia’s victory in the Battle of Artyomovsk shows that it’s able to hold its own against NATO in the “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” that the bloc’s chief declared in mid-February.

    Furthermore, even the New York Times admitted that the West’s sanctions failed to collapse Russia’s economy and isolate it, while some of its top influencers also admitted that it’s impossible to deny the proliferation of multipolar processes in the 15 months since the special operation began. These include German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, former US National Security Council member Fiona Hill, and Goldman Sachs’ President of Global Affairs Jared Cohen.

    The military-strategic dynamics described in the preceding two paragraphs will inevitably doom the West to defeat in the New Cold War’s largest proxy conflict thus far unless something major unexpectedly happens to change them, which is exactly what Kiev was trying to achieve via its latest terrorist attack.

    The reason why few foresaw this is because Kovalchuk admitted to WaPo last December that his side had previously planned to blow up part of the Kakhovka Dam as part of its Kherson Counteroffensive.

    It therefore seemed unthinkable that Kiev would ultimately do just that over half a year later and then gaslight that Moscow was to blame when the Mainstream Media itself earlier reported the existence of Ukraine’s terrorist plans after quoting the same Major General who bragged about them at the time. Awareness of this fact doesn’t change what happened, but it can have a powerful impact on the Western public’s perceptions of this conflict, which is why WaPo’s report should be brought to their attention.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 19:16

  • Blinken Plans To Visit China In Coming Weeks, Follows "Candid" Dialogue
    Blinken Plans To Visit China In Coming Weeks, Follows “Candid” Dialogue

    Amid attempts to reset normal relations, given the two sides have been engaged in tit-for-tat accusations going back to at least February, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will travel to China in the coming weeks, Bloomberg was the first to report Tuesday.

    CNN is also reporting that the trip is expected, though a precise date hasn’t been specified, citing unnamed US officials. The trip was supposed to happen in February, but that was abruptly canceled (or perhaps just “postponed”), following the Chinese “spy balloon” shootdown incident early that month and ensuing war of words and Chinese denials of wrongdoing.

    Getty Images

    The State Department is keeping mum on the reports, however, with a spokesperson saying Tuesday, “We have no travel for the Secretary to announce; as we’ve said previously the visit to the People’s Republic of China will be rescheduled when conditions allow.”

    But Biden admin officials have been busy trying to rescue spiraling relations with Beijing. The State Department earlier described “candid” and “productive” meetings between US officials and their Chinese counterparts in Beijing Monday:

    Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink and NSC Senior Director for China and Taiwan Affairs Sarah Beran, accompanied by US Ambassador to China Nicholas Burns, met with Ministry of Foreign Affairs Executive Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu and Director General of the North American and Oceanian Affairs Department Yang Tao.

    “The two sides exchanged views on the bilateral relationship, cross-Strait issues, channels of communication, and other matters. U.S. officials made clear that the United States would compete vigorously and stand up for U.S. interests and values,” an official readout said.

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

    Over the weekend Chinese Defense Minister Li Shangfu told the Shangri-La Dialogue security summit that any potential future conflict between the United States and China would bring “unbearable disaster for the world”.

    But he said both rival powerful countries should be able to grow together and to avoid confrontation. His words came as the US condemned what it called unsafe and aggressive maneuvers by a Chinese PLA Navy warship in the Taiwan Strait as the American destroyer USS Chung-Hoon conducted a ‘freedom of navigation’ transit on Saturday.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 19:05

  • Santa Monica Residents Push Back Against Outdoor Needle Distribution Site For Homeless
    Santa Monica Residents Push Back Against Outdoor Needle Distribution Site For Homeless

    Authored by Rudy Blalock via The Epoch Times,

    Some residents in Santa Monica, an idyllic beach town in Southern California, are pushing for an outdoor county-operated program that distributes clean syringes weekly to homeless drug users near the city’s parks to be moved indoors to a county-owned facility.

    The “overdose prevention program”—which is overseen by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s Division of Substance Abuse Prevention and Control—currently distributes syringes, first aid kits, opioid overdose reversal medication, and hygiene kits every Friday at three city parks, according to a spokesperson for the department.

    Members of the Santa Monica Coalition, a group of retail and commercial tenants, residents, and property owners, are looking to put an end to the syringe distribution, which they say has been operating without public knowledge since 2019.

    According to John Alle, who owns property on the Third Street Promenade, some city officials weren’t even aware of the county-funded program until he brought it to their attention a year ago.

    “We raised it. We went to the local papers, and we wrote letters directly with photos to the city council and to downtown Santa Monica business owners and residents, so they had to address it,” said Alle, who also helped found the coalition.

    The recently closed Wetzel’s Pretzels of Santa Monica, Calif., on June 2, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

    City Councilman Oscar de la Torre confirmed that he only learned of the program after Alle first raised the issue.

    “There was never any discussion. We never really talked about it in city council meetings. It’s never been agendized, so it was kind of a shocker for me to just hear that that was going on,” he told The Epoch Times.

    The county’s health department works with the Venice Family Clinic, a community health center with several locations in the Los Angeles area to carry out the distribution of medical supplies, including needles. According to the coalition, Santa Monica is the only city in the country that currently has a publicly funded outdoor needle distribution program.

    “The City of Santa Monica and the County along with Venice Family Clinic have been operating the only open-air, publicly funded needle, condom, and synthetic distribution program in the country,” reads a petition created by the coalition in March that has since received 8,000 signatures.

    Petitioners are asking the city of Santa Monica to “force the County to move their distribution program indoors under medical supervision with supportive services.”

    Some residents say they’re concerned that outdoor giveaways could lead to an increase in homelessness, drug use, and crime.

    A Venice Family Clinic van is seen in a park in Santa Monica, Calif. (Courtesy of John Alle)

    City officials sent a letter to the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors in September 2022 asking for the program to be halted in and near parks, noting that a large majority of residents are renters and rely on parks for open space.

    “Because roughly 70 percent of Santa Monicans are renters, our community relies on the City’s parks and open spaces as they do not have access to private open space,” reads the letter, signed by then-Mayor Sue Himmelrich.

    The city asked for the program to be moved to a “service-rich environment,” instead, that was “preferably” indoors inside a county-owned facility, with services for substance abuse and mental health.

    De la Torre told The Epoch Times that county officials did respond, saying the distribution would instead be done from a van, parked near the parks.

    But Alle said that’s not the case.

    Recently, he posed as a homeless person at one of the parks and was almost given a syringe—until it became clear that he was testing the program—by one of the nonprofit’s social workers, when he told them he was unable to walk to the van to retrieve it for himself, he said.

    “They’re not only operating from inside the van. They were giving out supplies to people in the park,” Alle said.

    John Alle is seen in a recent photo disguised as a homeless person in Santa Monica, Calif. (Courtesy of John Alle)

    Alle said he and two colleagues observed three workers of the clinic passing out Narcan—an opioid reversal medication—condoms, and syringes to several homeless people in the parks that day.

    Officials from the Department of Public Health didn’t return a request for comment on the allegations.

    According to Alle, such programs have exacerbated the city’s homeless and crime crisis.

    He recounted how he leased one of his properties on the promenade to the NFL for a pop-up store this year in advance of the February Super Bowl. But the football league asked for its money back after less than a week, he said.

    “After six days [they] said ‘John, we’ve had three break-ins, two of our employees have been hit over the head going to their cars, and we have people pissing against our windows during the day,’” Alle said.

    According to Alle, the promenade is roughly 50 percent vacant now.

    The clinic began passing out items in the area in 2019 at six locations in the city, including along Third Street Promenade.

    The locations have now been reduced to three parks.

    Bryan Paarlberg, who receives free meth pipes from the Venice Family Clinic, sits near his collection of items in Santa Monica, Calif., on June 2, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

    “Los Angeles County is currently experiencing the worst overdose crisis in its history, and overdose prevention services are critical to save lives and protect public health and safety,” a public health department spokesperson said.

    Restricting access to such services will only lead to more overdoses and “exacerbate” the homelessness crisis, according to the spokesperson.

    “As part of our commitment to save lives and protect public health, we are in constant communication with Santa Monica officials to address community concerns and needs,” the spokesperson said.

    A family uses a playground near a homeless man in Santa Monica, Calif., on June 2, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

    According to the health department, the clinic distributes 200 syringes at the three Santa Monica locations every month to 100 people and disposes of the dirty needles.

    It also refers those interested in substance use treatment services and refers individuals for free HIV or hepatitis C testing.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 18:45

  • Journalists Are Asking Ukrainian Soldiers To Hide Their Nazi Patches, NYT Admits
    Journalists Are Asking Ukrainian Soldiers To Hide Their Nazi Patches, NYT Admits

    The New York Times has been forced to very, very belatedly deal with something which had long been obvious and known to many independent analysts and media outlets, but which has been carefully shielded from the mainstream masses in the West for obvious reasons. 

    The surprising Monday Times headline said that “Nazi Symbols on Ukraine’s Front Lines Highlight Thorny Issues of History.” This acknowledgement comes after literally years of primarily indy journalists and geopolitical commentators pointing out that yes indeed… Ukraine’s military and paramilitary groups, especially those operating in the east since at least 2014, have a serious Nazi ideology problem. This has been exhaustively documented, again, going back years. But the report, which merely tries to downplay it as a “thorny issue” of Ukraine’s “unique” “History” – suggests that the real problem for Western PR is fundamentally that it’s being displayed so openly. Ukrainian troops are being asked to cover those Nazi symbols please!–as Matt Taibbi sarcastically quipped in commenting on the report.

    NBC News report in 2014: “Germans were confronted with images of their country’s dark past on Monday night, when German public broadcaster ZDF showed video of Ukrainian soldiers with Nazi symbols on their helmets in its evening newscast.”

    The authors of the NYT report begin by expressing frustration over the optics of Nazi symbols being displayed so proudly on many Ukrainian soldiers’ uniforms. Suggesting that many journalistic photographs which have in some cases been featured in newspapers and media outlets worldwide (typically coupled with generally positive articles on Ukraine’s military) are merely ‘unfortunate’ or misleading, the NYT report says, “In each photograph, Ukrainians in uniform wore patches featuring symbols that were made notorious by Nazi Germany and have since become part of the iconography of far-right hate groups.”

    The report admits this has led to controversy wherein news rooms actually must delete some photos of Ukrainian soldiers and militants. “The photographs, and their deletions, highlight the Ukrainian military’s complicated relationship with Nazi imagery, a relationship forged under both Soviet and German occupation during World War II,” continues the report. 

    So it’s merely “thorny” and “complicated” we are told. Below is a small sampling of the kinds of patches that appear on Ukrainian military uniforms with “some regularity” – in the words of The New York Times:

    NATO itself has in the recent past been forced to delete images on its official social media accounts due to Nazi imagery being present among Ukrainian troops during photo shoots.

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

    The following line from the report says everything you need to know about the so-called “paper of record” and its one-sided and ultra-simplistic coverage of what many are finally waking up to realize is a war with a deeply complex reality (to say the least), and far from the MSM’s goodies vs. baddies Hollywoodesque narrative of Putler vs. the free world which is typical of networks from CNN to Fox to NBC…

    From the NY Times: 

    “In November, during a meeting with Times reporters near the front line, a Ukrainian press officer wore a Totenkopf variation made by a company called R3ICH (pronounced “Reich”). He said he did not believe the patch was affiliated with the Nazis. A second press officer present said other journalists had asked soldiers to remove the patch before taking photographs.”

    Oops!

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

    And now we might expect some significant efforts at damage control, or even perhaps we’re witnessing the beginnings of evolving definitions and the moving of goalposts. More from NY Times [emphasis ZH]:

    But some members of these groups have been fighting Russia since the Kremlin illegally annexed part of the Crimea region of Ukraine in 2014 and are now part of the broader military structure. Some are regarded as national heroes, even as the far-right remains marginalized politically.

    The iconography of these groups, including a skull-and-crossbones patch worn by concentration camp guards and a symbol known as the Black Sun, now appears with some regularity on the uniforms of soldiers fighting on the front line, including soldiers who say the imagery symbolizes Ukrainian sovereignty and pride, not Nazism.

    Some are writing more appropriate and apt headlines for the NYT story…

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

    Only very recently Ukraine’s Defense Ministry and even President Zelensky’s office was caught in the act: 

    In April, Ukraine’s Defense Ministry posted a photograph on its Twitter account of a soldier wearing a patch featuring a skull and crossbones known as the Totenkopf, or Death’s Head. The specific symbol in the picture was made notorious by a Nazi unit that committed war crimes and guarded concentration camps during World War II.

    The patch in the photograph sets the Totenkopf atop a Ukrainian flag with a small No. 6 below. That patch is the official merchandise of Death in June, a British neo-folk band that the Southern Poverty Law Center has said produces “hate speech” that “exploits themes and images of fascism and Nazism.”

    To be expected, the Times still tries to run cover while desperately seeking to ‘reassure’ its audience by writing that “In the short term, that threatens to reinforce Putin’s propaganda and giving fuel to his false claims that Ukraine must be ‘de-Nazified’ — a position that ignores the fact that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is Jewish.”

    New levels of cope indeed…

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

    But then still, the NYT concedes awkwardly, “More broadly, Ukraine’s ambivalence about these symbols, and sometimes even its acceptance of them, risks giving new, mainstream life to icons that the West has spent more than a half-century trying to eliminate.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 18:30

  • US Knew Ukraine Planned To Blow Up Nord Stream Pipeline 3 Months Before It Happened: WaPo
    US Knew Ukraine Planned To Blow Up Nord Stream Pipeline 3 Months Before It Happened: WaPo

    The Washington Post is reporting that an unnamed European intelligence service told the CIA that Ukraine’s military was planning an attack on the Nord Stream pipelines a full three months before the September 26, 2022 sabotage blasts which disabled them.

    The revelation is based on Pentagon and classified intelligence documents leaked by Air National Guard member Jack Teixeira, or part of the so-called Discord leaks. The intelligence report in question was drafted in June 2022 and shared with the Biden administration, which means the White House has known all along that the “Putin did it” narrative which the West rallied around was false from the start. According to the new report published Tuesday: 

    Details about the plan, which have not been previously reported, were collected by a European intelligence service and shared with the CIA in June 2022. They provide some of the most specific evidence to date linking the government of Ukraine to the eventual attack in the Baltic Sea, which U.S. and Western officials have called a brazen and dangerous act of sabotage on Europe’s energy infrastructure.

    Image: AFP

    Among the more interesting aspects to the intelligence leak is that it says the Ukrainians conducting the sabotage operation reported directly the country’s top military officer, Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, in order to avoid sharing it with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, likely for the sake of plausible deniability. 

    The US government reportedly saw the information as of enough importance or authenticity to share it with Germany and other European intelligence services. It appears to be based on a single source or asset in Ukraine: “The intelligence report was based on information obtained from an individual in Ukraine” – as the Post report indicates.

    The intelligence describes a plot which is very similar to a theory which recently came to prominence as German investigators spent months attempting to uncover a culprit, which claimed that six individuals under false identifies utilizing a small boat conducted a deep diving operation in the Baltic Sea to plant the explosives on the pipeline. 

    The Washington Post writes in its Tuesday report, “The highly specific details, which include numbers of operatives and methods of attack, show that for nearly a year Western allies had a basis to suspect Kyiv in the sabotage.”

    “That assessment has only strengthened in recent months as German law enforcement investigators uncovered evidence about the bombing that bears striking similarities to what the European service said Ukraine was planning.”

    And WaPo offers the following verification that European intel services were briefed by the US on the information in its possession: “Officials in multiple countries confirmed that the intelligence summary posted on Discord accurately stated what the European service told the CIA.”

    The paper noted: “The Post agreed to withhold the name of the European country as well as some aspects of the suspected plan at the request of government officials, who said exposing the information would threaten sources and operations.”

    The timing of this revelation is interesting, as the WaPo report was published the same day as the Kakhovka hydroelectric power plant dam was blown up. In fact, Russians are already seizing on the parallels…

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

    Many are now calling it the new Nord Stream sabotage mystery, as just like with the pipeline attack both the Russian and Ukrainian sides are quickly pointing the finger at the other.

    One thing is clear in the wake of Tuesday’s Washington Post Nord Stream reporting: the White House is lying about major, war-shaping events related to Ukraine. The US is lying about the conflict, and the US has been lying for a long time. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 18:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jun 06

Today’s News 6th June 2023

  • "Germany Needs New Elections!" – Right-Populist AfD Party's New Record Polling High Sparks National Political Debate
    “Germany Needs New Elections!” – Right-Populist AfD Party’s New Record Polling High Sparks National Political Debate

    Authored by John Cody via Remix News,

    The AfD is now tied for second place in the country, which has prompted a near meltdown of the country’s political and journalistic class…

    The Alternative for Germany (AfD) continues its steady march higher in the polls, now reaching an all-time high of 19 percent in the latest INSA poll conducted for the Bild newspaper.

    The results have sent yet another “shockwave” through the political and media establishment, with politicians from both the left and the moderate Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) fiercely debating what is behind the rise of the AfD. The party is known for its strict anti-immigration stance, opposition to sanctions on Russia as well as German weapons being sent to Ukraine, and criticism of green energy policies being promoted by the left-liberal ruling government.

    However, the term “shock” being used to describe the party’s rise in the polls is being rejected by the AfD’s Bundestag faction leader, Alice Weidel.

    “Every three days, the Bild has to announce an ‘AfD survey shock.’ That’s not a shock, that’s called democracy. And it shows that people have finally had enough of paternalism, cost increases and asylum chaos. Germany needs new elections!” wrote Weidel.

    Bild has routinely published headlines, along with other newspapers, documenting growing alarm in the German political establishment over what has been the steady rise of the AfD in the polls, especially in the east of Germany. Now, according to the latest INSA poll, nearly one out of five Germans would vote for the party that every major party has vowed never to form a coalition with. A poll from state broadcaster ARD showed, just a week before, that the AfD had reached 18 percent. The new raft of polls showing the AfD hitting new highs shows the party’s growth is no fluke.

    The party is not only at 19 percent, but is actually tied for second place in the country with the ruling SPD. Weidel is now repeatedly calling for new elections, pointing to an ARD poll showing that only 20 percent of Germans are satisfied with the federal government, while 79 percent are dissatisfied.

     “The dwindling approval of the traffic light government shows very clearly that the Germans are no longer willing to accept that their interests are disregarded by politicians,” said Weidel.

    Germany Hits Recession Under Left-Liberal Government

    Germany’s main political parties have now taken turns blaming each other for the continued rise of the AfD. Chancellor Olaf Scholz has labeled the AfD “the bad mood party” and says that when the situation improves in Germany, which he claims it will, AfD’s support will drop.

    Weidel responded that when Scholz describes the AfD as “the bad mood party,” it shows the “complete unworldliness and aloofness” of the SPD leader. She said the AfD has sustainable concepts in the areas of energy, social affairs and migration. 

    “The voters, who are not unsettled by clumsy defamation of the only opposition force, see that too,” she said.

    Meanwhile, the secretary of the SPD parliamentary group, Katja Mast, said: “The AfD was, is and will not be a ‘normal’ party. They want to undermine our democracy and tolerate right-wing extremism. It fights our democracy where it can.” She added: “We must not be driven crazy by the AfD agitators and certainly not allow ourselves to be distracted. All democrats have one task — to take a firm stand against these democracy-destroyers and not adopt their methods.”

    The CDU has offered what has been described as a “simplistic” message, claiming efforts to make the German language “gender-neutral” is driving support for the AfD.

    “With every gendered newscast, a few hundred more votes go to the AfD. Geographical language and identitarian ideology are no longer just quietly rejected by a large majority of the population. They are perceived as intrusive,” wrote CDU leader Friedrich Merz.

    However, the Welt newspaper, which is usually seen as pro-CDU, has rejected this assertion, writing that the country’s mass immigration problem is at the core of AfD’s growth.

    “CDU leader Merz received widespread criticism for his Twitter statement on gender language as driving votes for the AfD. Welt author Thorsten Jungholt does not see gender as the main cause, but migration policy,” wrote the publication.

    Merz has also reiterated that his party will continue to rule out all cooperation with the AfD.

    The CDU, however, is the party responsible for the era of mass immigration under Chancellor Angela Merkel. This reality may provide the party with an incentive to avoid the issue as much as possible, especially when addressing the AfD party, which takes a far more hardline position on immigration than the CDU.

    “A small tip for Merz, Lang, Scholz and company. It is not gender topics,” wrote one user. He then posted two links to articles involving knife crime.

    Merz also appeared on ZDF and ARD and labeled the AfD as “xenophobic” and “anti-Semitic,” with AfD’s Weidel responding that it is “encouraging to see that constant attacks on the AfD” cannot shake the party’s support among the population “and the continuously growing trust in our political work.”

    She added: “No political campaign by the old parties will keep us out of the political debate. We will continue to do everything we can to ensure a safe, prosperous and free Germany.”

    As Remix News reported last week, there are a number of key issues that are likely contributing to the growth of the AfD, and immigration is one of them:

    Germans are becoming increasingly receptive to the AfD’s positions on mass immigration as the left-wing government moves to liberalize immigration laws and naturalize millions of foreigners as German citizens, a move that would greatly benefit these left-wing parties at the polls. Germany has seen record population growth, with nearly 1.5 million migrants arriving in 2022. So far, this number shows no signs of slowing in 2023, as over 160,000 migrants arrived in the country in the first three months of the current year.

    The costs of mass immigration are also slowly becoming hard to ignore, as schools become chaotic and understaffed, housing prices soar due to more competition, and serious crime involving foreigners continues to plague the country. The German government argues that mass immigration is necessary to save the country’s budget and pay for pensions, but figures show that the government plans to spend €36 billion in 2023 alone on migrants for housing, integration, and social benefits, undercutting this argument significantly.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 06/06/2023 – 02:00

  • Twenty Grim Realities Unearthed By Lockdowns
    Twenty Grim Realities Unearthed By Lockdowns

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Brownstone Institute,

    It’s common now to speak of the before times in contrast to the after times. The turning point was of course March 16, 2020, the day of 15 Days to Flatten the Curve, though authoritarian trends predate that. Rights were suddenly broadly throttled, even religious rights. We were told to conduct every aspect of our lives in accordance with the priorities of the bio-medical security state. 

    Very few people anticipated such a shocking development. It was the onset of a new state-conducted war and the enemy was something we could not see and hence could be anywhere. No one has ever doubted the omnipresence of potentially dangerous pathogens but now we were being told that life itself depended entirely on avoidance of them and the only guide going forward would be public-health authorities. 

    Everything changed. Nothing is the same. The trauma is real and lasting. The claim of “15 Days” was revealed to be a ruse. The emergency lasted three years and then some. The people and machinery that did this are still in power. The pick to head the CDC has a long track record of enabling and cheering the lockdowns and all that followed. 

    It’s a helpful exercise to summarize the new things we’ve all discovered in these years. Together they account for why the world seems different and why we all feel and think differently now than we did just a few years ago. 

    Twenty terrible realities unearthed by lockdowns

    1. Surveillance and censorship by Big Tech. The resistance eventually found each other but it took months and years. A censorship regime descended on all major social platforms, technologies designed with the intention of keeping us more connected and expanding the range of opinion we could experience. We did not know it was happening, but we eventually learned of the crackdown, which is why so much of us felt so alone. Others could not hear us and we could not hear them. The regime faces a bold court challenge on many fronts but it still goes on today, with all but Twitter constantly policing their networks in ways that are unpredictably authoritarian. We have ironclad evidence now that they are all captured. 

    2. Power and influence of Big Pharma. It was April 2020 when someone asked me if the goal of the vaccine produced by the pharmaceutical cartel was really behind the lockdowns. The idea would be to terrify us and ruin our lives until we were begging for shots. I thought the whole idea was insane and that the corruption could not possibly reach this deep. I was wrong. Pharma had been at work on a vaccine since January of that year and called in every form of purchased influence to eventually make them mandatory. Now we know that the major regulators are wholly owned and controlled, to the point that necessity, safety, and efficacy don’t really matter. 

    3. Government propaganda by Big Media. It was relentless from day one: the major media proved hardcore partisans of Anthony Fauci. The powers that be could tap the New York Times, National Public Radio, Washington Post, and all the rest, whenever and however they wanted. Later the media was deployed to demonize those who violated lockdowns, refused masks, and resisted the shots. Gone was the idea that “democracy dies in darkness” and the “paper of record” replaced by darkness itself and constant propaganda. They showed no real curiosity of the other side. The Great Barrington Declaration itself began as an effort to educate journalists but only a few dared even show up. Now we get it: the mainstream media too is wholly owned and completely compromised. They already knew what to report and how to report it. Nothing else mattered. 

    4. Corruption of public health. Who in their right minds would have predicted that the CDC and NIH, not to mention the World Health Organization, would be deployed as frontline workers in the imposition of totalitarian control? Some observers perhaps predicted this but implausibly so. But in fact it was these agencies which were responsible for all the absurd protocols from closing hospitals to non-Covid cases, putting up Plexiglas everywhere, keeping schools closed, demonizing repurpose therapeutics, masking toddlers, and forcing shots. They knew no limits to their power. They revealed themselves to be faithful agents of the hegemon. 

    5. Consolidation of industry. Free enterprise is supposed to be free but when workers, industries, and brands were divided between essential and nonessential, where were the howls from Big Business? They weren’t there. They proved willing to put profit ahead of the system of competition. So long as they benefited from the system of consolidation, cartelization, and centralization, they were fine with it. The big-box stores got to wipe out the competition and gain a leg up in industrial standing. Same with remote learning platforms and digital technology. The biggest businesses proved to be the worst enemies of real capitalism and the biggest friends of corporatism. As for arts and music: we know now that the elites consider them dispensable. 

    6. Influence and power of administrative state. The Constitution established three branches of government but lockdowns were not managed by any of them. Instead it was a fourth branch that has grown up over the decades, the permanent class of bureaucrats that no one elected and no one from the public controls. These permanent “experts” were completely unleashed and unhinged with no check on their power, and they cranked out protocols by the hour and enforced them as legislatures, judges, and even presidents and governors stood by powerless and in awe. We know now that there was a coup d’etat on March 13, 2020 that transferred all power to the national security state but we certainly did not know it then. The edict was classified. The administrative state still rules the day. 

    7. Cowardice of intellectuals. The intellectuals are the most free to speak their minds of any group. Indeed that is their job. Instead, they stayed quiet for the most part. This was true of right and left. The pundits and scholars just went along with the most egregious attacks on human rights in this generation if not in all living memory. We employ these people to be independent but they proved themselves to be anything but that. We stood by in shock as even famed civil libertarians looked out at the suffering and said “This is fine.” A whole generation among them is today completely discredited. And by the way, the few who did stand up were called horrible names and often lost their jobs. Others took note of this reality and decided instead to behave by staying quiet or echoing the ruling-class line. 

    8. Pusillanimity of universities. The origin of modern academia is with the sanctuaries from war and pestilence so that great ideas could survive even the worst of times. Most universities – only a handful excepted – completely went along with the regime. They closed their doors. They locked students in their dormitories. They denied paying customers in-person education. Then came the shots. Millions were jabbed unnecessarily and could only refuse on pain of being kicked out of degree programs. They showed a complete lack of principle. Alumni should take note and so should parents who are considering where to send their high school seniors next year. 

    9. Spinelessness of think tanks. The job of these huge nonprofits is to test the boundaries of acceptable opinion and drive the policy and intellectual world in the direction of progress for everyone. They are also supposed to be independent. They don’t depend on tuition or political favor. They can be bold and principled. So where were they? Almost without exception they clammed up or became craven apologists for the lockdown regime. They waited and waited until the coast was clear and then eked out little opinions that had little impact. Were they just being shy? Not likely. The financials tell a different story. They are supported by the very industries that stood to benefit from the egregious policies. Donors who believe in freedom should take note! 

    10. Madness of crowds. We’ve all read the classic book Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds but we thought it was a chronicle of the past and probably impossible now. But within an instant, mobs of people fell into medieval-style panics, hunting down non-compliers and hiding from the invisible miasma. They had a mission. They were ferreting out dissidents and ratting out the non-compliers. None of this would have happened otherwise. Just like in the Cultural Revolution of China, these would-be members of the Red Guard became foot soldiers for the state. Mathias Desmet’s book on Mass Formation now stands as a classic explanation of how a population devoid of meaningful lives can turn these sorts of political frenzies into deluded crusades. Most of our friends and neighbors went along. 

    11. Lack of ideological conviction of both right and left. Both right and left betrayed their ideals. The right abandoned its affections for limited government, free enterprise, and the rule of law. And the left turned against its traditional stand for civil liberties, equal freedoms, and free speech. They all became compromised, and they all made up fake rationales for this pathetic situation. Had this all began under a Democrat, the Republicans would have been screaming. Instead they went quiet. Then the Covid regime passed to a Democrat and so they stayed quiet while the Republicans, embarrassed at their previous silence, stayed silent for far too long. Both sides proved ineffective and toothless throughout. 

    12. Sadism of the ruling class. The kids were denied a year or two of school in some locations. People missed medical diagnostics. Weddings and funerals were on Zoom. The aged were forced into desperate loneliness. The poor suffered. People turned to substance abuse and put on added pounds. The working classes were exploited. Small businesses were wrecked. Millions were forced to move and millions more were displaced from their jobs. The ruling class that advertised its wonderful altruism and public spiritedness became callous and completely disregarded all this suffering. Even when the data poured in about suicide ideation and mental illness from loneliness, it made no difference. They could not muster any concern. They changed nothing. The schools stayed closed and the travel restrictions stayed in place. Those who pointed this out were called terrible names. It was a form of grotesque sadism of which we did not know they were capable. 

    13. The real-life problem of massive class inequality. Would any of this have happened 20 years ago when a third of the workforce was not privileged enough to take their work home and pretend to produce from laptops? Doubtful. But by 2020, there had developed an overclass that was completely disconnected from the lives of those who work with their hands for a living. But the overclass didn’t care that they had to face the virus bravely and first. These workers and peasants did not have privileges and apparently they didn’t matter much. When it came time for the shots, the overclass wanted their health care workers, pilots, and delivery people to get them too, all in the interest of purifying society of germs. Huge wealth inequalities turn out to make a big difference in political outcomes, especially when one class is forced to serve the other in lockdowns. 

    14. The cravenness and corruption of public education. A universal education was the proudest achievement of progressives one hundred years ago. We all assumed it was the one thing that would be protected above all else. The kids would never be sacrificed. But then for no good reason, the schools were all closed. The labor unions representing the teachers rather liked their extended paid holiday and tried to make it last as long as possible, as the students got ever further behind in their studies. These are schools for which people paid for with their taxes for many years but no one promised a rebate or any compensation. Homeschooling went from existing under a legal cloud to being suddenly mandatory. And when they opened back up, the kids faced mass silencing with masks. 

    15. Enabling power of central banking to fund it all. From March 12, 2020, and onward, the Federal Reserve deployed every power to serve as a Congressional printing press. It slammed rates back to zero. It eliminated (eliminated!) reserve requirements for banks. It flooded the economy with fresh money, eventually reaching a peak of 26 percent expansion or $6.2 trillion in total. This of course later translated into price inflation that quickly ate away the actual purchasing power of all that free stimulus dispensed by government, thus harming on net both producers and consumers. It was a great head fake, all made possible by the central bank and its powers. Further damage came to the structure of production by a prolongation of low interest rates. 

    16. The shallowness of the faith communities. Where were the churches and synagogues? They closed their doors and kept out the people they had sworn to defend. They canceled holy days and holiday celebrations. They utterly and completely failed to protest. And why? Because they went along with the propaganda that ceasing their ministries was consistent with public health priorities. They went along with the state and media claim that their religions were deeply dangerous to the public. What this means is that they don’t really believe in what they claim to believe. When the opening finally came, they discovered that their congregations had dramatically shrunk. It’s no wonder. And who among them did not go along? It was the supposed crazy and odd ones: the Amish, the estranged Mormons, and the Orthodox Jews. How non-mainstream they are. How marginal! But apparently they were among the only ones whose faith was strong enough to resist the demands of princes. 

    17. The limitations on travel. We didn’t know the government had the power to limit our travel but they did it anyway. First it was internationally. But then it became domestic. For a few months there, it was hard to cross state lines because of the demands that everyone who did so had to quarantine for a fortnight. It was strange because we didn’t know what was and what was not legal nor did we know the enforcement mechanism. It turned out to be a training exercise for what we know now they really want, which is 15-minute cities. Apparently a people on the move are harder to control and corral. We were being acculturated toward a more medieval and tribal existence, staying put so that our masters can keep tabs on us. 

    18. The tolerance for segregation. Vaccine uptake was certainly disproportionate by race and income. Richer and whiter populations went along but some 40 percent of the non-white and poorer communities didn’t trust the jab and refused. That did not stop 5 major cities from imposing vaccine segregation and enforcing it with police power. For a time, major cities were segregated with disparate impact by race. I don’t recall a single article in a major newspaper that pointed this out, much less decried it. So much for public accommodations and so much for enlightenment! Segregation turns out to be just fine so long as it fits with government priorities – same now as it was in the bad old days.  

    19. The goal of a social credit system. It is not paranoia to speculate that all this segregation was really about the creation of a vaccine passport system running off a national base, the one they want very much to implement. And part of this is the real and long-term goal of creating a China-style social credit system that would make your participation in economic and social life contingent on political compliance. The CCP has mastered the art and imposed totalitarian control. We know for sure now that major aspects of the pandemic response were scripted in Beijing and imposed through the influence of China’s ruling class. It is completely reasonable to assume that this is the real goal of vaccine passports and even Central Bank Digital Currency. 

    20. Corporatism as the system under which we live, giving lie to existing ideological systems. For many generations, the great debate has been between capitalism and socialism. All the while, the real goal has passed us by: the institutionalization of an interwar-style corporatist state. This is where property is nominally private and concentrated in only top industries in major sectors but publicly controlled with an eye to political priorities. This is not traditional socialism and it certainly isn’t competitive capitalism. It is a social, economic, and political system designed by the ruling class to serve its interests above all else. Here is the main threat and the existing reality but it is not well understood by either right or left. Not even libertarians seem to get this: they are so attached to the public/private binary that they have blinded themselves to the merger of the two and the ways in which major corporate players are actually driving the advance of statism in their own interests. 

    If you haven’t changed your thinking over the last three years, you are a prophet, indifferent, or asleep. Much has been revealed and much has changed. To meet these challenges, we must do so with our eyes wide open. The greatest threats to human liberty today are not the ones of the past and they elude easy ideological categorization. Further, we have to admit that in many ways the plain human desire to live a fulfilling life in freedom has been subverted. If we want our freedoms back, we need to have a full understanding of the frightening challenges before us. 

    Brownstone’s work and influence in this regard is far beyond any that we’ve told publicly. You would be astonished at the extent of it. The times demand circumspection in overt institutional aggrandizement. 

    We are grateful to our donors for having faith in the power of ideas. We are daily amazed at the ability of passionate and scrupulous writers and intellectuals to make a real difference for the cause of freedom. Please, if you can, join our donor community to keep the momentum going, for the hill is perhaps the steepest we’ve climbed in our lives. We have no “development department” and no corporate or government benefactors: you can make a difference.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 23:40

  • 'Earth Overshoot' Day Is Coming Sooner And Sooner
    ‘Earth Overshoot’ Day Is Coming Sooner And Sooner

    If everyone lived like the inhabitants of the countries highlighted on our map, one Earth would suffice to meet the needs of humanity.

    Infographic: The Countries With No Earth Overshoot Day | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    But, as Statista’s Martin Armstrong points out, as for the lifestyles of the 140 or so remaining countries, the ecological footprint exceeds the planet’s biocapacity, i.e. all the natural resources the Earth can regenerate (and the waste it can absorb) in the space of a year.

    An observation that highlights the pressure exerted by human activities on ecosystems.

    According to calculations by the NGO Global Footprint Network, as of August 2, 2023, humanity will have already consumed all the resources the planet can replenish in one year. Earth Overshoot Day arriving earlier and earlier, moving from as late as December 30 in 1970.

    Infographic: Earth Overshoot Day Is Coming Sooner and Sooner | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Humanity is thus living “on credit”, and it would take 1.75 Earths to meet the needs of the world’s population in 2022. Compared to this global average, the inhabitants of a country like France or Germany have an ecological footprint almost twice as high.

    The concept of Earth Overshoot Day was first conceived by Andrew Simms of the UK think tank New Economics Foundation, which partnered with Global Footprint Network in 2006 to launch the first global Earth Overshoot Day campaign. WWF, the world’s largest conservation organization, has participated in Earth Overshoot Day since 2007.To find out more about the calculations behind Earth Overshoot Day, please click here.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 23:20

  • Ex-Target Executive Reveals The 'One Item' That Sparked Boycott Calls
    Ex-Target Executive Reveals The ‘One Item’ That Sparked Boycott Calls

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

    A former Target executive claimed that there was one item that sparked widespread boycott calls against the big box chain.

    A worker collects shopping carts in the parking lot of a Target store in Highlands Ranch, Colo., on June 9, 2021. (David Zalubowski/AP Photo)

    Former Target Vice Chairman Gerald Storch said in a Sunday interview with Fox News that a number of retailers, including Target, have sold pro-LGBT merchandise over the past several years and claimed that “everybody carries that stuff.”

    But he noted that Target appeared to go a step further this year by carrying a “tuck swimsuit” that targets transgender people. In mid-May, conservative commentators made note of the swimsuit and claimed that it was being marketed for children, but Target officials pushed back and said that the item was only sold for adults.

    “I’ve never seen a case where one item, that tuck swimsuit, that’s really what made the difference versus the competitors. That’s where the big mistake [was] made,” Storch told the outlet.

    Some pointed out that Target’s website sells a range of LGBT and pro-transgender merchandise, including “pride” clothing targeting infants and small children. Target is also selling children’s books that instruct them on how to use transgender pronouns.

    “I cannot state enough how important is for people to choose not to shop at Target. There has never been a company that has been more pro-transgenderism than Target,” Daily Wire commentator Candace Owens wrote last month.

    Former Fox News host Megyn Kelly, meanwhile, criticized the chain for selling the “tuck” swimwear. Target, she said, “decided to willingly partner with this clothing manufacturer to make Pride month gear that includes bathing suits that are quote ‘tuck-friendly’ that have extra material … which no woman needs.”

    In the midst of the backlash, the company last month confirmed that it pulled some items from shelves and moved displays.

    “Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and well-being while at work,” the firm said, without elaborating on the specific threats. “Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior,” it also said.

    Since the boycott against the Minneapolis retailer was launched in mid-May, the company’s stock has declined from nearly $161 per share to about $133.22 per share as of June 2.

    “Target stock has certainly been performing poorly, off 11 percent year to date. So that’s not good, and certainly, this boycott of the whole issue here isn’t helping. It’s very distracting to have that going on in the business. But there are more fundamental concerns with that, with the environment, with the consumer, and with the business here,” Storch noted.

    “The consumer is feeling very stressed, very stressed by the environment, by inflation, and Target is known as the upscale discounter. So it’s not good to be the upscale discounter at a time when the consumer doesn’t have a lot of money to spend. So they’re migrating more to Wal-Mart, and that’s a huge problem,” Storch added.

    The former executive then claimed that the “boycott is part of the problem” but claimed that investors are likely “more concerned with the fundamental business issues” at play. But he noted that Target’s executives “certainly didn’t handle this well, either going in or trying to deal with it on the way out. But I think over time, this is not going to be a big issue for them,” he said.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 23:00

  • No Surprise: FBI Director Playing For Team Biden
    No Surprise: FBI Director Playing For Team Biden

    Authored by Frank Miele via RealClear Wire,

    Some years ago Kenneth Anger wrote a book called “Hollywood Babylon” to expose the dark secrets of the nation’s debauched film capital. It’s about time for an ambitious insider with a strong stomach for deceit and hypocrisy to write a tome called “D.C. Babylon.” One whole chapter could be dedicated to the modern FBI and its labyrinth of corruption and calumny.

    Or perhaps it will take more than one chapter considering the record of the FBI under the direction of James Comey and Christopher Wray. Both men oversaw blatant exercises in election interference on behalf of Democrats, and then either lied about it or pretended it never happened. It’s almost as though they consider themselves to be above the law.

    The refusal of FBI Director Wray last week to honor a congressional subpoena and turn over an unclassified document to the House Oversight Committee should therefore come as no surprise to anyone, even more so since the document in question could potentially end the presidency of Joe Biden.

    The FD-1023 form submitted by a confidential informant contains allegations that Biden, while vice president, accepted bribes from a foreign national in exchange for favorable policy decisions. You would think that the FBI, which spent years chasing down imaginary pee tapes involving President Trump, would have a few minutes to confer with Congress about allegations that the sitting president had engaged in potentially treasonous behavior.

    But no.

    Since that 1023 form would redound significantly against the incumbent Democrat president’s re-election chances, it would be entirely out of character for the FBI to cooperate with the Republican-led investigation. Remember, this is the same FBI that sat on Hunter Biden’s laptop for nearly an entire year prior to the 2020 election, knowing full well that it contained evidence of wrongdoing. Just as the FBI under Wray protected Joe Biden’s son then, it now is working diligently to protect Joe Biden himself as we enter the 2024 election cycle.

    No surprise. After all, as Special Counsel John Durham’s report documented, the FBI under the direction of Comey used its police powers to damage the candidacy of Donald Trump in 2016, and then worked to cripple his presidency by giving weight to Democrat lies and leaking stories damaging to Trump and his family and friends.

    In other words, the modern FBI, under the direction of first Comey and now Wray, is a political weapon aimed at Republicans in the service of Democrats.

    Hopefully, that is becoming plainly apparent to the majority of Americans. Maybe it is. A Rasmussen Reports poll last month showed that 69% of U.S. voters consider the influence-peddling scandal a serious problem for Biden, and more than 50% consider it “very serious.”

    This latest standoff between Wray and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer exposes just how wide the gap is between the views of the American people and the Washington, D.C. elites. In D.C. Babylon, a corrupt FBI is merely business as usual, while for the rest of us, it is the poster child for a two-tiered system of justice. No one can honestly claim that Democrats receive the same level of scrutiny as Republicans by either the Department of Justice or the FBI.

    On the issue of double standards, a couple of points have not been adequately raised about the significance of Wray’s refusal to honor the congressional subpoena.

    First of all, we need to ask why Wray is not being vilified by the mainstream media in the same way that former Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro were when they refused to honor subpoenas from the sham House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot.

    In those cases, both men have faced not just contempt of Congress citations, but criminal prosecution. Bannon, the architect of Trump’s 2016 victory, has already been convicted of criminal contempt and faces four months in prison pending his appeal. Navarro has not yet been tried, but you can bet that the same heavily Democratic jury base in Washington, D.C. will be happy to send Navarro to prison until they can get their hands on their main target, Donald Trump.

    So what is the difference between Bannon and Chris Wray? They both refused to cooperate with a congressional subpoena, but even if Wray is held in contempt by the House, there is no chance he will be prosecuted by the Biden Justice Department, any more than Attorney General Eric Holder was by the Obama Justice Department. Two tiers. Double standard. Call it what you want.

    Secondly, we also should weigh Wray’s authoritarian rejection of congressional subpoena power against the current case being put together against Trump by special prosecutor Jack Smith in the Mar-a-Lago documents scandal. If Clark proceeds with an obstruction case against Trump because he didn’t act quickly enough in responding to the federal subpoena for classified documents, we have every right to ask why Wray gets to explicitly reject his subpoena, but Trump’s home was raided by the FBI while his lawyers were still in the process of negotiating with the Department of Justice.

    But there’s no need to ask when everyone already knows the answer. Election interference, anyone?

    Frank Miele, the retired editor of the Daily Inter Lake in Kalispell, Mont., is a columnist for RealClearPolitics. His newest book, “What Matters Most: God, Country, Family and Friends,” is available from his Amazon author page. Visit him at HeartlandDiaryUSA.com or follow him on Facebook @HeartlandDiaryUSA or on Twitter or Gettr @HeartlandDiary.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 22:20

  • "Derisking" With China Is Impossible When One Bloc Does Most Of The Producing And Another Most Of The Consuming
    “Derisking” With China Is Impossible When One Bloc Does Most Of The Producing And Another Most Of The Consuming

    By Benjamin Picton, Senior Macro Strategist at Rabobank

    And Now For Something Completely Different

    The debt ceiling fracas is mercifully behind us (at least until 2025), so today we turn our focus away from the USA’s dwindling treasury and towards the more immediate issue of its dwindling dominance of the Western Pacific. Over the weekend US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin urged China to re-engage with the United States to “help avoid misunderstandings or miscalculations that may lead to crisis or conflict.” The plea was timely, because there have been a few near-misses in recent days that might have caused more concern in markets in years gone by. The first was the interception of a US surveillance plane by a Chinese fighter jet over the South China Sea in late May. The Chinese jet crossed in front of the US plane, thereby forcing it to fly through the unstable jet wash (just like Maverick and Goose). A further incident occurred on Saturday when a Chinese warship cut directly in front of a US destroyer, passing within 140 meters of colliding with the US ship.

    Watch the moment a Chinese warship nearly hits US destroyer in Taiwan Strait 👇 pic.twitter.com/WBJkHUZaJG
    — Sky News (@SkyNews) June 5, 2023

    If you’re sensing a theme here, you’re not alone. Western leaders have been promising a “de-risking”, rather than a “de-coupling” of the China relationship in recent months, but the geopolitical risks seem to be increasing, rather than diminishing. When Christine Lagarde warned in April that “we are witnessing the fragmentation of the global economy into competing blocs” she was effectively articulating our long-held house view, which my colleague Michael Every has written about many times.

    So, when Western leaders talk about “de-risking”, what they mean is that they want to ensure that unfriendly powers don’t have them over an economic barrel in the same way that Vladimir Putin did with Europe in early 2022. The goal is to restructure trade and production so that it cannot be used as a weapon in this new era of Great Power competition. This is easier said than done. Especially when we are accustomed to a world where one bloc does most of the producing and another does most of the consuming.

    If the world really does split into competing blocs in the way that Lagarde has warned, we are going to have to see further economic restructuring to make it work. In the meantime, there will be a process of muddling-through, as we continue to sell and buy what we can, while doing our best to re-shore, on-shore and friend-shore, since we are un-sure about the reliability of supply for certain goods and commodities in the years ahead.

    Such a restructuring probably means inflation in the West (that is certainly our view) and deflation in the East. If the West is going to be making more of its own stuff, it is off to a slow start. The ISM manufacturing index last week showed further contraction, continuing a trend that started in November last year. New orders were down, inventories were down, prices paid were WELL down, but the employment index grew strongly. That’s an interesting result given the continued strength in non-farm payrolls, which again surprised to the upside on Friday by reporting that employment rose by 339,000 in May against a forecast of just 195,000. This coincided with a 3-tick increase in the unemployment rate to 3.7%, which meant that there was something for everyone in the numbers. Consequently, the stock market rallied, as did the Dollar, as did 10-year Treasury yields  (up 10 bps on the day), and the front end underperformed as the market awaits new issuance and a clearer signal on the path of the Fed Funds Rate.

    Despite a poor recent run for both the USA and Germany, it would be unfair of me to characterize the malaise in manufacturing as a purely Western phenomenon. China has had its troubles this year, too. Last week’s PMI data presented a mixed picture on this front, with the Federation of Logistics and Purchasing numbers showing a further contraction in May, while the Caixin manufacturing PMI showed an unexpected lift back into expansion. By contrast, the Caixin services index continues to show remarkable strength. The May data was released earlier today and showed a rise in the index to 57.1, which seems to imply that there is still some steam left in the China re-opening trade. There has been speculation for some weeks now that the Chinese government would soon step in to provide broad stimulus to the economy, but these latest Caixin numbers may cool those expectations for the time being.

    Signs of a pickup in China is always welcome in Australia, where the wealth of the nation is largely generated by digging things up to sell to Chinese steel mills before being redeployed into the local housing market. The sustainability of how that national wealth is shared was called into question on Friday when the Fair Work Commission delivered a 5.75% increase in award wages and an 8.6% bump in the national minimum wage. Industry awards cover somewhere between a fifth and a quarter of the Aussie labor market, so the FWC decision has a large bearing on aggregate wage outcomes. This is important, because RBA Governor Lowe had earlier in the week warned politicians that unit labor costs are rising too fast and that expected levels of wages growth were not consistent with meeting the inflation mandate unless sagging productivity growth picked up. Naturally, the implied path of the RBA cash rate is higher post-decision as traders intuited this to mean more inflation pressures and therefore a higher path for the policy rate, just for something completely different!

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 22:00

  • University Of Texas Students Behind Censorship Project Targeting Conservative News Outlets
    University Of Texas Students Behind Censorship Project Targeting Conservative News Outlets

    Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    People walk at the University of Texas campus in Austin, Texas, June 23, 2016. (Jon Herskovitz/Reuters)

    Students at the University of Texas at Austin were found to be responsible for a censorship project that targeted conservative news outlets.

    The Global Disinformation Index’s (GDI) report, which called for the blacklisting of conservative news organizations, was written up by students under the direction of academics working at the University of Texas at Austin’s Global Disinformation Lab (GDIL), The Federalist reported.

    In the disinformation index, the group labeled several conservative media companies as the riskiest.

    The academics in charge of the lab allegedly held an anti-conservative bias in readings of internal communications, along with several other accusations found in the over 1,000 pages of documents reviewed by The Federalist.

    Publicly Funded Organization Involved in News Blacklist

    The Washington Examiner investigative reporter, Gabe Kaminsky, published a Feb. 9 exclusive multi-part series: “Disinformation Inc.”

    Kaminsky revealed that “self-styled ‘disinformation’ tracking organizations,” such as the GDI’s review of the top ten “riskiest American news organizations, were heavily biased against conservative outlets.

    Conservative news outlets such as American Spectator, Newsmax, The Federalist, American Conservative, One America News, The Blaze, Daily Wire, RealClearPolitics, Reason, and the New York Post, generally had the lowest ratings.

    In contrast, left-leaning news publications like The New York Times and CNN were among the top 10 “least risky” in their rating system.

    GDI sold its lists to marketing organizations, which led to companies pulling advertisements from blacklisted outlets and thus starving them of funding.

    For example, Microsoft’s Xandr used GDI’s blacklist to limit advertising dollars, but has since reportedly dropped its use of the blacklist after the series was published, reported the Washington Examiner.

    The government-funded National Endowment for Democracy was also caught granting GDI over $500,000 between 2020 and 2021, while the State Department’s Global Engagement Center similarly awarded the GDI $100,000 in taxpayer funds in 2021, wrote Kaminsky.

    University of Texas Caught in Media Censorship Controversy

    Meanwhile, GDI released a report with help from researchers at the University of Texas at Austin on Dec. 16, 2022, called “Disinformation Risk Assessment: The Online News Market in the United States.”

    After the report admitting the targeting conservative outlets was published, The Federalist filed a public records request at UT Austin in February, demanding all communications related to GDIL’s work with the GDI on the news media review.

    Despite actions by UT Austin to withhold some of the details of its methodology and research over concerns regarding “confidentiality of trade secrets” and “certain commercial or financial information,” the internal documents that were released revealed many concerning details.

    The files showed that the GDI paid the university to have student researchers, with little training, apply the organization’s screening methodology to rate the various media outlets for its final report, which gave conservative news outlets low ratings.

    GDI sold the university project to GDIL with the goal of influencing the 2022 midterms, The Federalist reported.

    Student researchers were recruited by being informed that their work would be “immediately valuable” since GDI would release it early “to make waves ahead of the midterms” and affect reportage of the 2022 election.

    After the team was finished, UT Austin retained any surplus funds that GDI received for the work, leading critics to question how a state-funded university could profit from such a politically biased program.

    Biden Administration Continues to Fund Censorship Operations

    Additional documents from GDIL further revealed that GDI had an even larger role in censorship activities than had been previously known, according to The Federalist.

    It was revealed by these internal files that GDI and GDIL were also working with the Biden State Department and other prominent public and private organizations to censor conservatives.

    A top lab manager on the project at UT Austin wrote in an internal email communication that GDI worked “with governments, policymakers, social media platforms, and adtech companies to defund disinformation.”

    “They are instrumental in providing data to a bunch of people that I am not sure if I am allowed to talk about,” the lab manager continued, adding GDI had formal and informal relationships with “trust and safety teams at various big platforms, the most recently announced partnership is with Twitch.”

    In addition, an email GDIL received from the Global Engagement Center’s “Academic and Think-Tank Liaison” showed that the State Department had developed a close relationship with a growing number of universities and publicly funded think tanks to promote the censorship of anti-progressive views, according to The Federalist.

    The State Department was exposed for its dealings with the Centre for Information Resilience, whose vice president happens to be former Department of Homeland Security disinformation czar, Nina Jankowicz.

    Jankowicz was pushed out of DHS by the Biden administration last year after a massive backlash caused the termination of the much-criticized censorship program.

    The Epoch Times reached out to the University of Texas at Austin GSIL, GDI, and the State Department for comment.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 21:40

  • China's Military Chief Says Clash With US Would Be "Unbearable Disaster" For World
    China’s Military Chief Says Clash With US Would Be “Unbearable Disaster” For World

    Over the weekend Chinese Defense Minister Li Shangfu told the Shangri-La Dialogue security summit that any potential future conflict between the United States and China would bring “unbearable disaster for the world”.

    But he said both rival powerful countries should be able to grow together and to avoid confrontation. His words came as the US condemned what it called unsafe and aggressive maneuvers by a Chinese PLA Navy warship in the Taiwan Strait as the American destroyer USS Chung-Hoon conducted a ‘freedom of navigation’ transit on Saturday.

    Alamy Stock Photo

    “It is undeniable that a severe conflict or confrontation between China and the US would be an unbearable disaster for the world,” Li said. 

    While at the conference the top Chinese defense leader refused a sit-down bilateral meeting with his US counterpart Lloyd Austin, but there was at least a cordial handshake.  

    Li, who took up his posts in March, additionally said China “believes that a big power should behave like one, instead of provoking bloc confrontation for self-interest.”

    He urged that Washington “take concrete action” to find common ground with China and to reverse the trend of spiraling ties, which has been on display and intensified ever since the US Chinese ‘spy balloon’ shootdown in early February.

    While not naming the US, Li also said at the defense summit over the weekend that “some country” practices “exceptionalism and double standards and only serves the interests and follows the rules of a small number of countries.”

    He stressed that China remains “strongly opposed to imposing one’s own will on others, placing one’s own interests above those of others and pursuing one’s own security at the expense of others.”

    Currently Washington and Beijing are trading harsh words over the aforementioned Saturday ‘close-call’ between the US and Chinese warships off Taiwan. 

    Gen. Li upon taking his post in March told his country and military that “we must prevent attempts that try to use those freedom of navigation (patrols), that innocent passage, to exercise hegemony of navigation.”

    He remains under US sanctions – something which has served to thwart talks with US defense officials and the Biden administration. China has demanded that the White House first drop the sanctions on him before direct military dialogue can be restored.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 21:20

  • American Airlines Struggles With Pilot Deficit, Grounds 150 Aircraft
    American Airlines Struggles With Pilot Deficit, Grounds 150 Aircraft

    Authored by Enrico Trigoso via The Epooch Times (emphasis ours),

    American Airlines, a leading carrier based in Fort Worth, is currently grappling with a significant challenge. The airline is unable to operate approximately 150 of its regional aircraft due to a persistent shortage of pilots, as revealed by CEO Robert Isom.

    An American Airlines Airbus A319 airplane takes off past the terminal at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Arlington, Va., on Jan. 11, 2023. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

    Speaking at the Bernstein 39th Annual Strategic Decisions Conference, Isom stated, “We would deploy properly to markets that aren’t being served. We would do that today. It’s just we don’t have the pilots.”

    This issue arises at a time when the airline industry is witnessing a record demand for travel, particularly during the summer season. However, the capacity to meet this demand is constrained by the lack of pilots, leading to grounded planes and missed opportunities to capitalize on high ticket prices. Isom noted that the situation is more severe than the previous year when the pilot shortage began to significantly affect regional airlines as demand rebounded following the downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Looking ahead, Isom shared that American Airlines expects to acquire more pilots for its regional network over the next 18 to 24 months. Once these pilots are onboard, the grounded aircraft will be reintroduced into service in a manner that is expected to generate favorable unit revenues. He stated, “American anticipates getting more pilots over the next 18 to 24 months for the regional network, and those aircraft would be put back into service in a fashion that is going to produce unit revenues that are very favorable.”

    An American Airlines plane lands on a runway near a parked JetBlue plane at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on July 16, 2020. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

    However, the challenge of pilot shortage is not unique to American Airlines. The airline industry as a whole is projected to face a deficit of nearly 80,000 pilots by 2032, as per a report by Oliver Wyman.

    The report said the supply of pilots is being affected by a wave of early retirements that occurred during the pandemic, a mandatory age of retirement of 65, compounded by an older workforce, a “shrinking pool of potential pilots from the military, and a tough value proposition for perspective [sic] candidates outside the military.”

    In an effort to address this issue, American Airlines has recently reached a tentative agreement with its pilots union, the Allied Pilots Association, which represents over 15,000 pilots. The agreement includes a proposed pay raise of about 21 percent for this year, in addition to back-dated raises dating back to 2020. Isom believes that the airline has been efficient in its operations and has seen a significant number of pilots expressing interest in becoming first officers.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 21:00

  • Most Damaging Spy In FBI History, Robert Hanssen, Dies At Colorado Supermax
    Most Damaging Spy In FBI History, Robert Hanssen, Dies At Colorado Supermax

    Robert Hanssen, known as the most damaging spy in FBI history for handing state secrets to the Soviet Union and later the Russian government for more than a decade-and-a-half, was found dead in his prison cell Monday. 

    The 79-year-old died at the ADX Florence complex, the Colorado federal ‘supermax’ prison where he’d been held since pleading guilty to 15 counts of espionage in 2001. He was serving life in prison without the possibility of parole.

    Career FBI intelligence officer Robert Hanssen, via AP

    “Staff requested emergency medical services and life-saving efforts continued. The inmate was subsequently pronounced dead by outside emergency medical personnel,” a statement by the ADX Florence complex said.

    The press release did not indicate cause of death, but an unnamed source familiar with the matter told The Associated Press that it’s believed he died of natural causes. 

    According to background on the FBI’s website: 

    On February 18, 2001, Hanssen was arrested and charged with committing espionage on behalf of Russia and the former Soviet Union. Hanssen—using the alias “Ramon Garcia” with his Russian handlers—had provided highly classified national security information to the Russians in exchange for more than $1.4 million in cash, bank funds, and diamonds.

    Hanssen’s espionage activities began in 1985. Since he held key counterintelligence positions, he had authorized access to classified information. He used encrypted communications, “dead drops,” and other clandestine methods to provide information to the KGB and its successor agency, the SVR. The information he delivered compromised numerous human sources, counterintelligence techniques, investigations, dozens of classified U.S. government documents, and technical operations of extraordinary importance and value.

    He went undetected for so long given he had extensive training and experience in counterintelligence. The intelligence community knew it had a mole feeding information to the Russians but for years an internal search and investigation came up short, with in some cases innocent veteran intelligence officers coming under suspicion and investigation. 

    ADX Florence Prison

    At one point, Hanssen was even tasked by the FBI to lead an investigation to find the mole, which unbeknownst to the FBI was actually himself. A 2007 movie called “Breach” captured the story and his eventually being caught in a sting operation. 

    The FBI website details further of how the intelligence community began to figure out the mole was Hanssen:

    A turning point came in 2000, when the FBI and CIA were able to secure original Russian documentation of an American spy who appeared to be Hanssen. The ensuing investigation confirmed this suspicion.

    Hanssen was set to retire, so investigators had to move fast. Their goal was to catch Hanssen “red handed” in espionage.

    An FBI sting on February 18, 2001 caught Hanssen in the act of making a “dead drop” at Foxstone Park in Tysons Corner, Virginia.

    According to the FBI, “Hanssen parked on a residential street and walked down a wooded path to a footbridge with the classified materials wrapped in a plastic bag.” And then, “As Hanssen walked back to his car, the arrest team rushed up and took him into custody.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 20:40

  • Elon Musk Says Target Will Face Shareholder Lawsuits Amid Trans Controversy
    Elon Musk Says Target Will Face Shareholder Lawsuits Amid Trans Controversy

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

    As Target’s stock price has taken a beating amid conservative backlash over the company’s decision to sell LGBT-themed items and clothing, Twitter CEO Elon Musk said Friday that it’s just a matter of time before Target faces lawsuits for “destruction of shareholder value.”

    Elon Musk, founder and chief engineer of SpaceX, speaks at the 2020 Satellite Conference and Exhibition in Washington on March 9, 2020. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

    Musk made the remarks in response to a tweet by conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who posted about JPMorgan downgrading Target’s stock after suffering its longest losing streak in decades.

    Over the past month or so, Target’s stock dropped by double digits amid conservative calls for a boycott against the chain in connection to its decision to sell LGBT-themed apparel, including onesies for children and books instructing kids about the use of transgender pronouns.

    Several days ago, JPMorgan downgraded Target Corporation’s stock from overweight to neutral, with the Wall Street bank citing “too many concerns” with the retail giant.

    “We believe this share loss could accelerate into back to school and linger into holiday given consumer pressures and recent company controversies,” wrote JPMorgan analyst Christopher Horvers, per MarketWatch. “This could turn [Target’s] traffic negative after an impressive run of 12 consecutive positive quarters.”

    Musk responded to Kirk’s tweet about Target’s stock downgrade by predicting that the company would face shareholder lawsuits.

    “Won’t be long before there are class-action lawsuits by shareholders against the company and board of directors for destruction of shareholder value,” Musk wrote.

    Kirk replied by saying that shareholders should organize to get politics out of the “hyperpolitical” corporations of today.

    A Target spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    A worker collects shopping carts in the parking lot of a Target store in Highlands Ranch, Colo., on June 9, 2021. (David Zalubowski/AP Photo)

    ‘Continuing Commitment’

    While Target said a week ago that it had removed some items that sparked the greatest controversy, it did not go into detail about which ones. The company also reiterated its “continuing commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community and standing with them as we celebrate Pride Month and throughout the year.”

    “Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and well-being while at work,” Target said in a statement. “Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior.”

    Target is among major brands—including Bud Light—that are facing backlash for supporting LGBT causes.

    Several other companies, including PetSmart, Chick-fil-A, and Walmart, are also now facing boycott calls due to their endorsement of the LGBT agenda.

    Experts say a big factor encouraging brands to promote transgender ideologies is an attempt to score points on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards.

    ‘Just Good Business Decisions’?

    Target CEO Brian Cornell was asked about the backlash against “woke” companies during Fortune’s “Leadership Next” podcast several weeks ago.

    “I think those are just good business decisions, and it’s the right thing for society, and it’s the great thing for our brand,” Cornell said.

    “The things we’ve done from a DE&I [diversity, equity, and inclusion] standpoint, it’s adding value,” Cornell said, referring to policies that a number of prominent conservatives have panned as leftist and “woke.”

    “It’s helping us drive sales, it’s building greater engagement with both our teams and our guests, and those are just the right things for our business today,” Cornell continued.

    “When we think about purpose at Target, it’s really about helping all the families, and that ‘all’ word is really important,” he said.

    The Target chief added that the focus on “diversity and inclusion and equity has fueled much of our growth over the last nine years.”

    Target, which is one of the biggest retailers in the United States, has long faced boycott calls.

    In 2016, calls for a boycott were sparked when Target released a policy that allowed men who identify as women to use women’s bathrooms.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 20:20

  • Here Are Goldman's Top Takeaways From Its Semiconductor Conference As Tech Execs Focused On AI 
    Here Are Goldman’s Top Takeaways From Its Semiconductor Conference As Tech Execs Focused On AI 

    Last week, Goldman Sachs hosted the 2nd Annual Global Semiconductor Conference in New York, where they gained valuable insight into where the industry is headed from management and IR teams from the semiconductor device, equipment, and materials companies. Conversations were also held with Todd Fisher, the person the Biden-Harris Administration appointed to lead the CHIPS for America offices. 

    Goldman’s Toshiya Hari said there was a lot of focus on artificial intelligence from participants, including Intel, Marvell, Micron, Renesas, and Advantest. Management teams of these companies overwhelmingly believe AI will be ‘long-term’ growth drivers, though some said it might take time for the growth to be realized.  

    There were signs from Intel and Micron that the PC bust cycle might be stabilizing. As well as signs the memory industry is finally “bottoming.” 

    Fisher provided more clarity on the Biden administration’s long-term goals of building out America’s domestic chip production while pointing out there is “no bias either way in the treatment of a domestic or international applicant as the goal of the program is to encourage companies to invest in R&D and for IP to reside in the United States.” 

    Here’s Goldman’s Hari summary of the top ten takeaways from the chip conference: 

    1) Focus on AI: 

    There was an immense focus on AI throughout our conference with Intel, Marvell, Micron, Renesas, and Advantest, in particular, speaking to the near- and long-term opportunity set associated with this growing theme. Intel highlighted how Sapphire Rapids (i.e. 4th generation Xeon scalable processors based on Intel 7 technology) is well-suited for AI workloads (note Nvidia selected Sapphire Rapids as the standard server CPU in its DGX H100 system last year), while management also shared that its pipeline for Gaudi (i.e. Habana’s training and inference accelerator) had increased ~2.5x in the preceding 90-day period. Marvell reiterated what it had disclosed the prior week on its earnings call — namely, that optical DSPs and custom compute processors are expected to lead to a more than doubling of AI revenue in FY2024 and FY2025 from a base of ~$200mn in FY2023. Micron stated that although AI revenue is difficult to quantify and it currently makes up a small percentage of total revenue, they see AI as a significant long-term growth driver given the implications for content growth. While there is a range, Micron believes AI servers can embed 8x the amount of DRAM and 3x the amount of NAND compared to a traditional server. Renesas highlighted the medium- to long-term growth potential in MCUs, particularly at the edge (i.e. multi-billion dollar SAM), their recent acquisition of Reality AI, a predictive AI company, that will augment its MCU capabilities particularly across industrial applications (e.g. HVAC), as well as its ongoing investments in CXL memory accelerators. For Advantest, while HPC/AI-related demand is unlikely to move the needle on CY2023 tester demand, per management, the company sees HPC/AI as a medium- to long-term growth driver given a) the expected increase in transistor count, b) the potential increase in test intensity as the industry accelerates the adoption of advanced packaging, and c) the company’s confidence in defending its dominant share position in this market segment.

    2) Signs of stabilization in the PC market: 

    Signs of stabilization are emerging in the PC market with Intel raising the mid-point of its 2Q revenue outlook from $12.0bn to $12.25bn (+5% qoq, -20% yoy) based on strong linearity in Client Computing (i.e. PC) and Data Center and AI so far in the quarter and Micron reiterating its expectation for customer inventory in PCs (and smartphones) to be at or near normal levels exiting the CY2Q. While sell-in of components in CY2H and beyond will depend on PC sell-through, we expect, at a minimum, the under-shipping of components relative to end-demand that has persisted over the past ~9 months to subside soon.

    3) Memory fundamentals bottoming: 

    While Micron’s disclosure that the recent ruling by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) could have a high-single-digit (%) impact on total revenue, up from the low- to high-single-digit (%) range provided by management on 5/22, weighed on the stock last week, our constructive view on the Memory cycle predicated on demand stabilization and supply-side discipline (i.e. capex and production cuts) remains intact. Between DRAM and NAND, we continue to expect a sharper and more sustained recovery in DRAM given relative inventory levels (i.e. DRAM NAND). In NAND, we fear that suppliers with relatively weak balance sheets could re-accelerate bit production once pricing has recovered to above cash cost.

    4) Benign pricing in analog/MCU/power semis:

    In broad-based MCU, analog and power semis, Microchip and Infineon, in contrast to growing investor skepticism, pointed to stable industry trends. Microchip reaffirmed its June quarter (+2-3% qoq) and September quarter (unlikely to be down qoq) revenue outlook, while Infineon reiterated its confidence in its auto semis growth outlook with underlying unit demand still solid in Europe/US. On pricing, Infineon stated that pricing remains resilient across all divisions, and is even increasing in certain pockets where demand is strong. Similarly, Microchip spoke to stable near-term pricing and shared its view that industry pricing is likely to be less deflationary going forward than in the past given higher capital intensity across mature process nodes.

    5) TEL presents bullish CY2024 WFE market outlook: 

    While the majority of Wafer Fab Equipment (WFE) suppliers have yet to comment on CY2024, Tokyo Electron (TEL) reiterated its view that the WFE market in CY2024 could recover to a level similar to CY2022 (which implies a ~25% yoy increase), driven by a data center upgrade cycle and a recovery in Memory spending following this year’s sharp inventory adjustment. Note that our own expectations for the WFE market in CY2024 are more subdued at +7% yoy based on a double-digit yoy increase in Memory and a stable outlook in advanced Logic/Foundry, partially offset by a decline across mature/specialty nodes.

    6) Gate-All-Around to drive advanced Logic/Foundry spend: 

    Applied Materials, ASML, ASM International, and Tokyo Electron all highlighted Gate-All-Around (GAA) as a potential driver of higher spending in advanced Logic/Foundry over the coming several years. ASM International highlighted that it will begin to receive GAA orders in 4Q23 and that it expects growth in its Epitaxy business to be catalyzed by the transition to GAA. Applied Materials, on its recent earnings call, stated that the GAA inflection will create an incremental opportunity of ~$1bn for every 100k wafer starts of capacity and that it expects to gain 5% of transistor market share in the transition from FinFET to GAA, particularly in product areas including Epitaxy and Selective Removal, in our view.

    7) Constructive long-term outlook on mature node capital investments:

     Applied Materials reiterated that its ICAPS (IoT, Communications, Automotive, Power and Sensors) business is on track to grow in CY2023 at a faster pace than in CY2022 given strength across China, Japan, Europe, and the US While we expect capital spending across mature/specialty nodes to remain cyclical, we subscribe to the view that capital intensity in the trailing-edge will stay elevated vis-a-vis the past 5-10 years as the used equipment market the IDMs and foundry suppliers used to leverage has since declined in size. Note TEL stated that they expect WFE demand associated with mature process nodes could reach ~$50bn by CY2030, up from ~$30bn in CY2023, while ASML addressed skepticism surrounding spending on mature/specialty nodes in China by sharing that ordered lithography tools are being installed in cleanrooms (rather than only being ordered for strategic/geopolitical purposes and stored).

    8) Industry wafer starts to recover in 2H: 

    Entegris reaffirmed its CY2023 market outlook — specifically, a mid-teens (%) yoy decline in MSI and a ~20% yoy decline in industry capex. That said, the company expects a modest recovery in 2H23 driven by advanced Logic/Foundry on growth in AI and the introduction of new consumer electronics products. Management remains confident in its ability to deliver consistent outgrowth — 6-7% points this year — as customers’ execute to their respective technology transitions (e.g. Gate-All-Around) and in turn consume more of Entegris’ products on a per-wafer basis.

    9) Near-term caution on wafer volumes but ASP outlook intact: 

    SUMCO shared a relatively cautious outlook for its silicon wafer business as the ongoing inventory correction in Memory is likely to drive a hoh decline in shipments in 2H. On a positive note, management stated that wafer pricing continues to track largely in-line with what had been agreed in LTAs and that the current expectation is for wafer pricing to increase ~10% yoy in CY2024.

    10) CHIPS Act: 

    from the CHIPS for America program, we hosted Todd Fisher who had spent 30 years in the finance and investment industry, including nearly 25 years at KKR & Co. Inc., prior to joining the Department of Commerce in 2021. Related to the CHIPS Act, Mr. Fisher shared the US Government’s long-term goals, including a) at a high level, the pursuit of economic and national security, and at a micro level, b) the construction of at least two new leading-edge Logic/Foundry eco-systems in the US by the end of the decade, as well as c) the creation of a resilient supply chain as it pertains to mature process nodes and specialty technologies. Interestingly, Mr. Fisher noted that there is no bias either way in treatment of a domestic or international applicant as the goal of the program is to encourage companies to invest in R&D and for IP to reside in the United States. In his concluding remarks, Mr. Fisher summarized the six criteria under which applications are evaluated: 1) impact to economic and national security (the most significant), 2) financial viability, 3) commercial viability (including potential long-term implications for industry supply/demand), 4) technical feasibility, 5) workforce, and 6) broader impacts (with a significant discussion around R&D).

    The explosion of interest in AI might be a growth driver of the semiconductor sector in two ways: building demand for innovative technologies and increasing chip demand. 

    More details in the full Goldman note are available to pro subscribers in the usual place.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 20:00

  • When Your Own Government Confirms It Paid Censors To Silence You…
    When Your Own Government Confirms It Paid Censors To Silence You…

    Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

    If you’ve been around for very long, you know this website has suffered repeated hits for our content. We’ve been defunded, we’ve been hit by algorithmic changes that make it harder for people to find us, and we’ve been classified as a “disinformation” site. All of this has happened despite the fact we offer factual coverage and often use mainstream sources that are not targeted by censors.

    While I’ve had my suspicions since the attacks first began, imagine the sick feeling in the pit of my stomach when I recently read an expose by the Washington Examiner in which the United States government readily admitted giving funding to the very business that abruptly defunded my website back in 2021.

    The US State Department “stands by” grant to fund censorship

    It’s hard to believe that I’m writing this about the government of the United States of America, but here we are in 2023 with our own government striving to make at least half the country out to be terrorists and second-class citizens. An exclusive report by the Washington Examiner states:

    The State Department “stands by” its widely scrutinized grant to a group the Washington Examiner revealed is blacklisting conservative media outlets, according to a letter to Congress.

    Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) put the State Department’s Global Engagement Center on blast in a March letter to the agency and demanded an investigation into its $100,000 grant in 2021 to the Global Disinformation Index, which has fed conservative website blacklists to advertisers to defund disfavored speech. The agency issued a response to the congressman on Friday, telling him in a letter obtained by the Washington Examiner that it has no regrets over the taxpayer-backed award…

    …As the Washington Examiner has reported since February 2022, the GDI was awarded $100,000 through the government’s U.S.-Paris Tech Challenge, which sought to “advance the development of promising and innovative technologies against disinformation and propaganda across the European Economic Area and the United Kingdom,” according to the Atlantic Council, a think tank that partnered for the challenge.

    But it wasn’t just a grant of $100,000. At least $330,000 was received from US-State-Department-related entities, and it’s possible the price tag goes even higher. In another article, the Washington Examiner reported these ties:

    The first State Department-backed group that has supported GDI is the National Endowment for Democracy, a nonprofit group that receives nearly all of its funding from annual congressional appropriations.

    According to financial statements, the NED received over $300 million from the State Department in 2021. Critics have argued that the endowment, which Congress authorized in 1983, is essentially a government grantmaking body despite its legal status as a private entity.

    In 2020, the NED granted $230,000 to the AN Foundation, GDI’s group that also goes by the Disinformation Index Foundation, documents show.

    The grant was to “deepen understanding of the challenges to information integrity in the digital space” in Africa , Asia, and other foreign countries, to “assess disinformation risks of local online media ecosystems,” according to the NED, which noted that GDI would compile “risk ratings” for ad companies and others to assess “risks that arise from funding disinformation.”

    And that’s not all – further government funding of censorship entities is discussed in the article. Potentially there are millions of dollars granted to organizations that in turn fund censorship groups.

    Our own government is wiping its feet on the first amendment as it “stands by” grants that go after those who dissent.

    What is GDI?

    GDI (Global Disinformation Index) is the group that directly caused The Organic Prepper website to lose a valuable advertising partnership that had been in place for years with no complaints whatsoever. There was no notice – the partnership with AdThrive was severed, and we were offered no recourse to try and maintain the relationship.

    This was a loss of thousands of dollars of revenue monthly – revenue that allowed us to publish and offer our products at low or no cost to the readers.

    Again from the Examiner:

    GDI compiles a “dynamic exclusion list” that it feeds to corporate entities, such as the Microsoft -owned advertising company Xandr, emails show. Xandr and other companies are, in turn, declining to place ads on websites that GDI flags as peddling disinformation.

    The Washington Examinerrevealed on Thursday that it is on this exclusion list. The list includes at least 2,000 websites and has “had a significant impact on the advertising revenue that has gone to those sites,” said GDI’s CEO Clare Melford on a March 2022 podcast.

    We seem to be on the wrong side of GDI. To be honest, that’s not something that’s cause for shame. I’m glad that a group that believes in silencing anyone who doesn’t just meekly go with the status quo also believes that I’m not one of them.

    Here’s what we were told at the time we were defunded.

    When we were defunded, it wasn’t really a surprise. We’d received the following announcement two weeks before.

    The Global Disinformation Index (GDI) helps advertising companies assess a website’s risk of disinformation and provide a trusted and neutral assessment so brands and ad companies can make informed decisions and avoid funding this content.

    We recently became the first ad management service to partner with The Global Disinformation Index to introduce new vetting processes for all sites in the AdThrive community, so that advertisers can spend confidently and be assured they are NOT funding disinformation!

    This allows us to pinpoint potentially harmful topics on the site (for example, disinformation, hate speech, racism, derogatory content, and other topics or themes that are not brand safe) and research the content in a more thorough way than before.

    We’re also using this system to establish new brand safety processes to periodically review our existing partnerships to ensure our community remains as high-quality as possible. (source)

    It was the first time I’d heard of GDI, but I was instantly suspicious.

    Many of us ” voiced concern about this high-level censorship of our websites. After all, we’d been working together for years, and it was downright insulting to be “audited” for truthfulness from some outside entity. Our attempts to discuss this fell upon deaf ears. Their decision to align with censors had been made.

    Soon, I received the following email.

    And that was it.

    Just like that, I lost $56,000 of revenue per year, the revenue that had juuuuussst covered my then-operating expenses of $55,000 per year.

    The real-world effects of this

    It’s been a real struggle to keep afloat. A once-thriving business is now going month-to-month in an effort to pay the massive overhead required to keep us online. That overhead has only gone up with both inflation and attacks on the sites at a server level. Those attacks have been costly to repair and prevent with added security measures. And while suing them would be great, these costs and the halt to my flow of income mean that I could not afford to take legal action, despite clear evidence of defamatory and malicious behavior. I tried, initially, and I quickly went through my entire savings account and never even got to court.

    I’ve had to let long-time employees go, and we’re running on a skeleton crew now. We’ve had to dial back how often we post, and it’s a constant cycle of creating products and marketing them to keep things going.

    We cannot keep operating without your help. So this weekend, we’re offering two ways to support the site – a site that the Biden administration desperately wants to see go away.

    We will keep sharing the information we believe is important for as long as possible. We will keep offering our products on a sliding scale to help our readers who can’t afford to pay more. We are committed to exposing manipulation and corruption and to helping you get prepared and to recognize the threats.

    We won’t go down without a fight, and we sincerely appreciate your efforts to help us.

    What does it mean when you’re attacked by your own government?

    Being attacked and censored by my own government is a very difficult thing to stomach.  Not only is it painfully disappointing, it’s also scary.

    You look at other writers who have fun afoul of the administration and the attacks they are suffering, like Matt Taibbi’s run-in with the weaponized IRS or Tucker Carlson losing his job under mysterious circumstances (but most likely for exposing the events of January 6th using video footage.)

    Meanwhile, the United Nations talks about standing up to those who would silence journalists.

    On November 2, the United Nations observed its ninth annual International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists. The United Nations established this day in no small part because of the essential role journalists play in healthy and vibrant democracies. Independent reporters hold the powerful accountable for their conduct, their policies, and the results, and help their fellow citizens make informed choices that are untainted by propaganda or misinformation. When reporters are silenced, people are robbed of the information they need to make decisions that affect their lives.

    They also note that fifteen American reporters have been murdered since the 90s as a direct result of their investigations.

    While the United States may be considered a relatively safe place for journalists, it is not immune from such violence. Jeff German, a Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter covering politics and corruption, was found stabbed to death near his home on September 2. A local government official who was the subject of recent reporting by German was arrested and charged with murdering him days later. German was the 15th journalist to have been killed in the United States since 1992; some have died in particularly infamous incidents, like the four who were killed in a mass shooting at the Capital Gazette in Annapolis, Maryland, in 2018.

    But the journalists they have in mind aren’t alternative journalists and bloggers in America. These are legacy and local media who they discuss.

    We, however, know the risk we are taking.

    You have to wonder how much worse it will get now that the government admits without shame or remorse that it is funding the organizations which are going after us.

    *  *  *

    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

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 19:40

  • El Niño Fears Surge Among CEOs As Economy In Crosshairs Of Extreme Weather
    El Niño Fears Surge Among CEOs As Economy In Crosshairs Of Extreme Weather

    As we have highlighted, the global economic impact of El Niño could be in the trillions of dollars over the next several years. American business leaders are bracing for weather disruptions as their discussion on recent earnings calls about the damaging weather phenomenon surges to multi-year highs. 

    Bloomberg data shows executives speaking about El Niño has surged to the highest levels since 2019. There is growing concern among some corporate America that extreme weather will dent future earnings. 

    News stories referencing El Niño have surged to highs not seen since October 2015. 

    Christopher Callahan, an Earth system scientist at Dartmouth College, who co-authored the report “Persistent effect of El Niño on global economic growth,” recently warned: 

    “There’s an economic legacy of El Niño in GDP [gross domestic product] growth.” 

    Last month, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California identified a “potential precursor” of El Niño conditions after one of its satellites spotted a massive wave of warm water moving across the equatorial Pacific.

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

    As of May 11, NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center said the probability of El Niño forming is greater than 90% over the next few months. 

    Recall we wrote, “El Nino Watch Initiated As Ag-Industry In Crosshairs.” 

    And maybe CEOs have found the next scapegoat to blame when earnings take a dive… 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 19:20

  • 800 Years Of History In One Paragraph
    800 Years Of History In One Paragraph

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

    Perhaps you recall the immensely popular series Downton Abbey, depicting British aristocratic life in a mighty estate, robust at first but fading as the seasons progress.

    At one point, the dowager countess Violet Crawley summarizes 800 years of British history in a paragraph. It’s the kind of history that is routinely denied to students and has been for decades.

    But it’s a good lesson in political science. She says:

    For years I’ve watched governments take control of our lives, and their argument is always the same: fewer costs and greater efficiency. But the result is the same too: less control by the people and more control by the state, until the individual’s own wishes count for nothing. That is what I consider my duty to resist.

    “By wielding your unelected power?” asks Lady Rosamund Painswick.

    Ignoring the swipe, the dowager answers:

    “See, the point of a so-called great family is to protect our freedoms. That is why the barons made King John sign the Magna Carta.”

    Surprised, her distant cousin Isobel responds:

    “I do see that your argument was more honorable than I’d appreciated.”

    And her daughter-in-law Cora, an American who doesn’t understand what’s at stake, answers too: “Mama, we’re not living in 1215. The strengths of great families like ours is going. That’s just a fact.”

    The dowager continues:

    “Your great-grandchildren won’t thank you when the state is all-powerful because we didn’t fight.”

    Now we know why she cares so much about this one seemingly small issue.

    For her entire life, she has seen the state on the march, most especially during the Great War, and then the pressure of the state mounted against all the old estates, as they fall in status and wealth year after year, as if by some inexorable force of history.

    The dowager, on the other hand, sees not some invisible hand at work but a very visible hand, that of the state itself. In other words, she sees what nearly everyone else has missed.

    And whether she is right or wrong on the particular matter of this one hospital (and later history proves her correct), the larger point is precisely right.

    As the great fortunes of the nobility declined — the very structures that had not only carved out the rights of the people against the rulers and protected them for 800 years — the state was on the rise, threatening not only the nobles but the people too.

    What does all this have to do with the U.S. and the American Revolution? Read on.

    Corruption of the Great Families and the Future of Freedom

    New history likes to point out with great ire that the prime movers of rebels against the crown in 1776 were larger landowners and businessmen along with their families.

    They were the Founding families and the main influencers behind the Revolution, which Edmund Burke famously defended on grounds that it was not a real revolution but a revolt with a conservative intent. By this he meant that the Colonies were merely asserting rights forged in British political experience.

    And there is a point to that. The rights-based fervor that birthed the War of Independence gradually mutated into a Constitutional Convention 13 years later. The Articles of Confederation had no central government but the Constitution did. And the main controlling factions of the new government were indeed the landed families of the New World.

    The Bill of Rights, a thoroughly radical codification of the rights of the people and lower governments, was tacked on by the “Anti-Federalists” — again, a landed aristocracy — as a condition of ratification.

    The issue of slavery in the Colonies massively complicated the picture, of course, and became the main line of attack on the American system of federalism itself. The landed gentry of the South in particular always had grave doubts about Jefferson’s claims of universal and inviolable rights, fearing that eventually their ownership claims over human persons would be challenged, which indeed they were and less than a century after the Constitution was ratified.

    That aside, it remains true that the birth of American liberty rested with the U.S. version of the nobles, but also backed by the people at large. So the dowager’s history of British rights is not entirely inconsistent with the American story at least until recently.

    This has also been the prism with which to understand the broad outlines of the terms “left” and “right” in both the U.K. and the U.S. The “right” in a popular sense has represented mostly the established business interests (including the good parts and bad parts such as the munitions manufacturers) and tended to be the faction that defended the rights of commerce.

    The “left” has pushed the interests of labor unions, social welfare and minority populations, all of which happened also to be aligned with the interests of the state.

    Those categories seemed mostly settled as we entered the 21st century.

    But it was at this point that a titanic shift began to take place, especially after 9/11. The interests of the “great families” and the state began to align across the board (and not just on matters of war and peace). These family fortunes were no longer attached to Old World ideals but to technologies of control.

    The paradigmatic case is the Gates Foundation but the same holds true of Rockefeller, Koch, Johnson, Ford and Bezos. As the main funders of the World Health Organization and “scientific” research grants, they are the main forces behind the newest and largest threats to the freedom of the individual.

    These foundations built from capitalist wealth, and now fully controlled by bureaucrats loyal to statist causes, are on the wrong side of the crucial debates of our time. They fight not for the emancipation of the people but rather more control.

    With many sectors of the “left” naively signing up with the biomedical state and the interests of the pharmaceutical giants, and the “right” triangulated into going along, where is the party to defend the freedom of the individual? It is being squeezed out in an attack from both ends of the mainstream political spectrum.

    If the “great families” have fundamentally shifted their loyalties and interests, in both the U.S. and the U.K., and the mainline churches can no longer be relied upon to defend basic freedoms, we can and should expect a major realignment to take place.

    Marginalized groups drawn from the older versions of both right and left will need to mount a major and effective effort to reassert all the rights forged and earned over many centuries.

    These are completely new times and the COVID wars signal that turning point.

    Essentially, we need to revisit the Magna Carta itself to make it clear: Government has definite limits to its power. And by “government,” we cannot just mean the state but also its aligned interests, which are many but include the largest players in media, tech and corporate life.

    The groups that want to normalize the lockdowns and mandates — thinking of the COVID Crisis Group — can count on the financial support of the “great” families, and freely admit it. This is a problem completely unlike what freedom fighters have faced over the long course of modern history. It’s also why political alliances these days seem so fluid.

    This is ultimately what is behind the great political debates of our time. We are trying to make sense of who stands for what in times when nothing is as it seems.

    And there are some strange anomalies extant too. Elon Musk, for example, is among the richest Americans but seems to be a backer of free speech that the establishment hates. His social platform is the only one among the high-impact products that permit speech that contradicts regime priorities.

    Meanwhile his competitor in riches Jeff Bezos does not join him in this crusade.

    So too when Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — a scion of a “great family” — has broken with his clan to support the rights of the individual and a restoration of the freedoms we took for granted in the 20th century. His entry into the race for the Democratic nomination has disrupted our whole sense of where the “great families” stand on fundamental questions.

    The confusion even impacts political leaders like Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis. Is Trump really a populist who is willing to stand up to the administrative state or is his appointed role to absorb the energies of the pro-freedom movement and once again turn them toward authoritarian ends, as he did with the lockdowns of 2020?

    And is Ron DeSantis a genuine champion of freedom who will fight lockdowns or is his appointed role to divide and weaken the Republican Party in advance of the nomination fight?

    This is the current fight within the GOP. It is a fight over who is telling the truth.

    The reason conspiracy theory has been unleashed as never before in our lifetimes is because nothing truly is what it seems to be. This traces to the reversal of alliances that have characterized the struggle for liberty over 800 years.

    We no longer have the barons and lords and we no longer have the great fortunes: They have thrown their lots in with the technocrats. Meanwhile, the supposed champions of the little guy are now fully aligned with the most powerful sectors of society, yielding a fake version of the left.

    Where does this leave us? We only have the intelligent bourgeoisie — products of the middle class that is currently under assault — that is well-read, clear-thinking, attached to alternative sources of news and only now in our post-lockdown world aware of the existential nature of the struggle we face.

    And their rallying cry is the same which has inspired the freedom movements of the past: the rights of individuals and families over the hegemon.

    If the dowager countess were around today, let there be no doubt as to where she would stand. She would stand with the freedom of the people against the controls of the state and its managers.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 19:00

  • Park Hotels Makes "Difficult" Decision To Stop Paying San Fran CMBS Loan, Citing "Concerns Over Street Conditions"
    Park Hotels Makes “Difficult” Decision To Stop Paying San Fran CMBS Loan, Citing “Concerns Over Street Conditions”

    Park Hotels & Resorts Inc. announced Monday that it ceased making payments on a $725 million CMBS loan which is scheduled to mature in November 2023. The loan is secured by two of its San Francisco hotels that it plans to remove from its portfolio.

    The hotels in focus are the 1,921-room Hilton San Francisco Union Square and the 1,024-room Parc 55 San Francisco. 

    “The Company intends to work in good faith with the loan’s servicers to determine the most effective path forward, which is expected to result in ultimate removal of these hotels from its portfolio,” Park wrote in a statement. 

    You won’t be shocked by Park CEO Thomas Baltimore’s statement on why it’s a “necessary decision to stop debt service payments on our San Francisco CMBS loan”: 

    “After much thought and consideration, we believe it is in the best interest for Park’s stockholders to materially reduce our current exposure to the San Francisco market. Now more than ever, we believe San Francisco’s path to recovery remains clouded and elongated by major challenges – both old and new: record high office vacancy; concerns over street conditions; lower return to office than peer cities; and a weaker than expected citywide convention calendar through 2027 that will negatively impact business and leisure demand and will likely significantly reduce compression in the city for the foreseeable future.”

    Baltimore said removing the two hotels will “substantially improve our balance sheet and operating metrics.” 

    And there it is, a large real estate investment trust focused on hotel properties, with over 29,000 rooms in prime U.S. markets, abandoning San Francisco.

    Park’s announcement comes days after San Francisco’s Mayor, London Breed, makes major U-Turn to fund police after an explosion in crime has forced companies to leave the crime-ridden town.  

    Well done, Democrats. You’ve effectively transformed a once-thriving city into a hellhole. 

     

     

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 18:40

  • The US Desperately Needs A Political Brain Transplant
    The US Desperately Needs A Political Brain Transplant

    Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

    Euointelligence has an interesting take on why Biden Inflation Reduction Act will fail in its goal to re-industrialize the US.

    Don’t Re-Industrialize. Forge Alliances.

    Please consider Don’t Re-Industrialize. Forge Alliances, emphasis mine.

    There is an old saying in the world of manufacturing: once an industry leaves, it won’t come back. It’s the Humpty Dumpty of economics. This is why the Germans, who know a thing or two about industry, have been fighting deindustrialization so hard. The US and the UK gave up on industry decades ago, but the Biden administration wants it to return. The instrument of choice is last year’s Inflation Reduction Act, with its $370bn program of green subsidies. I fear the US underestimates the scale of the task.

    The intellectual force behind that strategy is Jake Sullivan, Joe Biden’s national security adviser. It is a sign of the times that foreign policy dictates the most important strategic economic policy shift in decades. Sullivan has cited the hollowing out of the US’s industrial base as one of the reasons behind the strategy. The other, of course, is China.

    The White House says the goal of the Inflation Reduction Act is to make “the nation more resilient to growing threats… and driving critical economic investments to historically underserved communities”. This describes the mélange of foreign and domestic policy goals quite well. It is rare in politics that one policy instrument achieves two policy goals. More often than not, it achieves neither.

    The scale of the problem is illustrated by the diminished role of industry. In the UK and the US, industry accounts for 17-18 per cent of the value added in the economy, according to the World Bank. In Germany and Japan, it is 27-29 per cent. In China it is almost 40 per cent.

    It takes years for an industrial company to build a production line and supply chains. This is why China is so good at it. Industry time-horizons correspond more closely to five-year plans than quarterly profit targets. Herein lies the first obstacle. The term of a US president, and their national security adviser, is short. Would an industrial firm be so reckless as to place a strategic bet on Donald Trump not getting back into office? Or that, if he did, he would continue Biden’s industrial policies? Or that even a future Democratic administration would?

    Sullivan is, of course, right in his diagnosis: the US industrial base has been hollowed out. Re-industrialization may be a laudable goal, but Sullivan’s strategy would require a political brain transplant. It would be a very long-term program. The way to start would be to build a bipartisan consensus. A subsidy program is not enough. And it should not be the start.

    I also fail to see how the US will achieve the second stated goal of the Inflation Reduction Act – to become more resilient and independent from China. China’s near monopoly in some rare earths and other raw materials remains. All the new US investment will do is reshuffle the higher nodes or points in the supply chains.

    A smarter policy response for the US would be to build strategic supply-chain and industrial partnerships in Africa and Latin America. This is what China has done, for example by taking a strategic stake in a Chilean lithium mine. Chile is the world’s second largest producer of lithium – a critical raw material in the production of electric batteries. China is also now Chile’s largest trading partner. As the US lost interest in Latin America, Chile has become increasingly dependent on China. 

    China is also diplomatically more active in Africa than the Europeans and the Americans. In building new strategic relationships for the benefit of Western economies, this is where I would start.

    What Sullivan’s comments tell me is that the US has lost more than just industry. It has lost its instinct for understanding what industry is all about.

    Trade Wars Fail

    Trump failed with Tariffs. Biden will fail with subsidies. Both are trade war tactics. 

    Biden may have better near-term results, but what will the next administration do? And the EU is hopping mad over Biden’s subsidies that are illegal under WTO.

    There is little long-term strategic thinking in the US with corporations looking only at beating the street on the next quarter, and politicians looking no further than the next election. 

    And whereas Biden weaponized the dollar, the rest of the world, including the EU, is not only resentful, but looking for ways of avoiding the long arm of US sanctions and mandates. 

    Dollar Weaponization In the Spotlight Again

    President Biden and the Fed crossed a line with dollar weaponization.

    For discussion, please see Dollar Weaponization Expands – FDIC Message to Foreign Depositors Is Don’t Trust the US

    Also see Central Banks Are Buying Gold at Record Pace, What Does That Mean for Inflation?

    Let’s return to a point that Eurointelligence made. “It is rare in politics that one policy instrument achieves two policy goals. More often than not, it achieves neither.”

    The Inflation Reduction Act is unlikely to make “the nation more resilient to growing threats” or “drive critical economic investments to historically underserved communities”.

    The IRA certainly failed to reduce inflation. If anything, it will increase inflation.

    Expect three policy failures because what we really need is a “political brain transplant.”

    Although the above is true, despite China’ ability to think long term. it still has not solved its dependence on massive property bubbles.

    There is a common denominator to all of these global woes: The fundamental problem everywhere is an unsound currency system that promotes bubbles as a means of growth. 

    For discussion, please see What’s the Fundamental Problem in China, the US, and the EU?

    *  *  *

    Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 18:20

  • Scheme By California Woman Costs USPS $60 Million In Revenue
    Scheme By California Woman Costs USPS $60 Million In Revenue

    A California woman faces up to 10 years in prison over a counterfeit postage scheme that cost the USPS an estimated $60 million.

    Lijuan “Angela” Chen was arrested on May 24 after postal inspectors say she shipped nine million parcels over the course of six months using shipping labels belonging to a meter number which had been phased out in 2020, despite indicating that it had been purchased in 2023.

    Chen faces one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States, and one count of use or possession of counterfeit postage per the filing, Insider reports.

    According to an inspector’s affidavit, the USPS would have lost $60 million in revenue due to the apparent scheme.

    He also carried out surveillance on a warehouse, watching a delivery truck travel to a USPS facility “where it unloaded twelve large cardboard boxes full of parcels containing counterfeit postage,” per the affidavit.

    Other inspectors saw one truck, which had been turned away from a distribution center for trying to ship mail with counterfeit postage, parked outside Chen’s house a day later, according to the court document. -Insider

    “The evidence obtained in the investigation shows that Chen is operating a business which provides shipping and postage services to businesses, including e-commerce vendors operating out of China, that seek discounted USPS rates for mailing their products within the United States,” reads the filing.

    “Multiple examinations conducted by USPS and USPIS staff have revealed that the vast majority of the postage used by Chen and her business to ship goods within the United States is counterfeit.”

    According to prosecutors, Chen’s husband first ran the scheme before traveling to China in 2019, after which she is believed to have continued it up to August 2022.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 18:00

  • The Strange Pandemic Of 'White' Disparagement
    The Strange Pandemic Of ‘White’ Disparagement

    Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

    All of a sudden, the obsession with whites as a Satanic collective has become a national fad…

    One of the tenets of the early civil rights movement some 65 years ago was ending racial stereotyping.

    When Martin Luther King, Jr. called for emphasizing the “content of our character” over “the color of our skin,” the subtext was “stop judging people as a faceless collective on the basis of their superficial appearance and instead look to them as individuals with unique characters.”

    It is tragic that King’s plea for an integrated, assimilated society, in which race became incidental, not essential to our personas, has mostly been abandoned by the Left in favor of racial stereotyping, collective guilting, and scapegoating by race and gender.

    Indeed, many of the old Confederate pathologies—fixation on racial essence, obsession with genealogy, nullification of federal laws, states’ rights, and segregated spaces and ceremonies—are now rehabilitated by woke activists.

    In that larger landscape, the collective adjective and noun “white” now has also been redefined and mainstreamed as a pejorative to the point of banality.

    “White” followed by a string of subsequent oppressive nouns—“rage,” “supremacy,” “privilege”—has become a twitch on campus. Diversity, equity, and inclusion deans and provosts cannot write a memo, issue a communique, or sign a directive without a reference to “white” something or other.

    Like the mysterious omnipresence of transgenderism in popular culture, all of a sudden, the obsession with whites as a Satanic collective has become a national fad—a pet-rock or hula-hoop-like collective madness.

    Yet such an addiction remains bizarre in a variety of ways. Millions in the present are now to be libeled as oppressors by the contemporary self-described oppressed—supposedly for what some whites who are mostly now dead once did to now mostly dead others.

    Yet what does “white” really mean anymore? Is it an adjective or noun indicating color? Culture? Race? Ethnicity? Is white defined as three-quarters, one-half, or one-quarter paleness? Is it an overarching state of mind that encompasses both “Duck Dynasty” and “The West Wing”?

    Certainly, in a multiracial, intermarried nation, with 50 million residents not even born in America, the term is a construct that can mean almost anything and thus nothing much at all.

    Hispanics are often lumped in with other “marginalized” peoples as part of the vast diversity coalition. Yet most Latinos are indistinguishable from Italian-, Arab-, Greek- or Portuguese-Americans, who, in turn, are all usually considered part of the “white” majority. Does a mere accent mark or trilled “R” transmogrify a blue-eyed Argentinian-American into the preferred nonwhite, diversity collective?

    In our crazy racially categorized society, had George Zimmerman just adopted his maternal surname Mesa and Hispanicized George to Jorge, then a “Jorge Mesa” might not have been so easily demonized as what the New York Times slurred as a “white” Hispanic following his deadly confrontation with Trayvon Martin in 2012. 

    The controversial City University of New York firebrand and graduation speaker Fatima Mousa Mohammed recently railed against capitalism, Zionism, Israel—and, of course, “white supremacy.” Yet she herself is whiter than white. She is now an elite with a law degree. Is she then a beneficiary of “white privilege”? Or do her radical politics trump skin color and earn her exemption?

    Is a snarly, divisive Joe Biden, barking at the moon about “ultra-MAGA” and “semi-fascist” white monsters, then, not a purveyor and beneficiary of white supremacy by virtue of his woke politics?

    I know a lot of white mechanics, forklift drivers, and assembly workers. I have never heard one employ one of Biden’s racial putdowns like “boy” or “junkie.” Do they enjoy white privilege in some way the Biden family consortium does not—despite Joe’s past fulsome praise of iconic segregationists or his Corn-Pop fables of black youth petting his golden hairs on his sun-tanned white legs, or Hunter’s taboos about dating Asian women?

    “The View’s” Sonny Hostin has created a mini-career in imaging all the ways in which she can smear “white” women as demonic (“White women, in particular, want to protect this patriarchy”) as she thinks up new Hitlerian gas metaphors of dehumanization, such as white women resembling “roaches voting for Raid.”

    When the media wishes to attack black conservatives like Larry Elder, it now can call them “white supremacists.” When it wishes to warp the news for its woke agendas, it assures us that a Latino mass-murderer was a “white supremacist” and then, in Pavlovian fashion, academics follow with essays assuring us that their “research” proves Hispanics too can be white supremacists.

    The creation of false racial identities is an accurate touchstone of perceived collective racialized privilege. “Passing” for white in the racist days of Jim Crow reflected a means of escaping racist segregation and discrimination for blacks.

    Now the increasing trend of whites seeking to pass for nonwhites—Elizabeth Warren, Ward Churchill, Rachel Dolezal—reflects a self-interested and careerist assessment that nonwhite status is advantageous.

    In college admissions, are applicants more likely to massage a non-white or white identity for perceived advantage? Is the racist ossified “one-drop rule” or “one-sixteenth” genealogy now rebooted as helpful proof of proving white or nonwhite heritage?

    Then we come to the absurdity of lumping together 330 million diverse Americans, with ancestries that are often quite antithetical—Serbians and Albanians, Turks and Armenians, Israelis and Syrians, Germans and French. Are all these ancient antagonists reduced now to white automatons of a sinister collective borg?

    Arrive as an immigrant from Hungary or Estonia, and—presto!—you are culpable for creating supposed monsters of the past like Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, whose statues must be toppled or defaced? Arrive the same day from Oaxaca and you are somehow exempt from such reparatory burdens?

    Immigration, at least, is immune from the academic perversion of research, and simply reflects realities on the ground. Millions of immigrants instinctively vote with their feet. We are told the U.S. current population is 67 percent to 70 percent “white” while yearly immigrants, legal and illegal, may total upwards of 90 percent nonwhite.

    But how is this paradox possible? Given the loud global warnings about “white rage” and “white supremacy,” why would millions of nonwhites risk their lives to reach a country where they would be assured of being subservient to “white privilege”?

    Can it instead be true that they simply do not believe what media and political elites tell them, given they have learned from prior immigrants that far from being at risk, they will have opportunities impossible in their native countries?

    Do not new arrivals risk their lives to enter the United States because they rightly assume that a so-called white majority country strangely, unlike their own tribal homelands in China or Mexico, does not fixate on race but instead encourages those who do not look like the majority to join their commonwealth—in a way the Mexican Constitution, for example, traditionally did not?

    Class apparently now means nothing. Does the white mechanic in Provo supposedly think like the Pelosi family—as a fellow “white” person?

    Are Barack Obama’s “clingers,” Hillary Clinton’s “deplorables” and “irredeemables,” and Joe Biden’s “semi-fascists,” “Ultra-MAGAs,” “dregs,” and “chumps” all of the same mentality? Do they share the same values as those embraced by Hunter Biden, Jane Fonda, and Adam Schiff, by virtue of some mystical bonds of whiteness?

    Where are the data to support the charge of imperious whiteness? Do so-called raging whites commit hate crimes in numbers greater than their demographics?

    In fact, they are underrepresented.

    Do purported whites hunt down people of color as if we are all living in 1920s rural Mississippi?

    In fact, in relatively rare interracial violent crime, whites are up to 10 times more likely to be victims of black- or Hispanic-perpetrated violence than agents themselves of interracial assault.

    Do white supremacists send poor people of color abroad, as often argued, to die in rich white men’s wars?

    In fact, white males died in Iraq and Afghanistan at twice their numbers in the general population. Is that asymmetry proof of what Mark Milley and Lloyd Austin pontificated about in fixating on white privilege?

    How do we adjudicate or define “proportionate representation”? What is disproportionate?

    Would it be the more than 70 percent of African Americans in many professional sports at six times their percentages of the population? Or perhaps the current admission statistics of the incoming class at Stanford University, where the university boasts that just 22 percent of its 2026 class is so-called white?

    Is it white privilege, rage, or supremacy that explains why seven of the current 25 cabinet and cabinet-level secretaries of the U.S. government are heterosexual white males? Does white privilege reveal why Asian Americans, on average, enjoy an annual median household income some $25,000 higher than their white counterparts?

    Are whites, by virtue of their supposed privileged caste, immune from suicide? In fact, the so-called white suicide rate is more than double the rate of blacks and Hispanics.

    Do supremacy and privilege explain why two-thirds of the annual opioid overdose deaths are among whites?

    Perhaps to substantiate the boilerplate of “white supremacy” and “white rage,” we might look to efforts at retro-segregation?

    Are privileged whites insisting on white-only college graduations? Perhaps they are demanding set-aside spaces on campuses, where they feel “safer” and can enjoy racial affinities and solidarity by excluding others? In fact, there are racially segregated spaces on campuses, but they tend to exclude whites.

    Perhaps the Left means white supremacy is a euphemism for a return to segregated housing and redlined neighborhoods. In fact, there are racially segregated dorms on campuses, the so-called “theme houses,” but again these were demanded by nonwhites.

    We are told that it is not safe for the diverse to be around white people, given their supposed violent proclivities. But that certainly seems not to be the case for our elites. The Obamas often lecture the country on housing discrimination and the historic efforts of whites to self-congregate and exclude. But the ex-president owns four expensive homes, in Kalorama D.C., Martha’s Vineyard, Hawaii, and Chicago. Yet he is least likely to reside in his richly diverse Chicago neighborhood and apparently feels more at home with the mostly white neighbors of his other three estates.

    Indeed, some of the most severe critics of “white privilege” and “white rage” are themselves ensconced in white neighborhoods, such as the Duchess of Sussex or LeBron James. When Oprah Winfrey damns white supremacy in graduation speeches, is her subtext a snarl at her fellow billionaire neighbors in Montecito?

    So what is going on with the contemporary fixation on white, white, white?

    Why are there so many Duke Lacrosse, Covington kids, Tawana Brawley, and Jussie Smollett cases, as if the dearth of white oppressors and the multitude of would-be oppressed requires the fabrication of so-called white hate crimes?

    Why does Joe Biden lecture the country on its supposedly greatest terrorist threat of “white supremacy”—this from the most racialist president of the modern era, who sets himself up as the judge of who is and who “ain’t black”?

    This rebooted white collective stereotype seems to be the obsession of two general groups. One cadre is the elite professional, left-wing whites. By any definition of income and status, its members are quite blessed and privileged. For them, voicing the new white pejorative is a sort of psychological mechanism that excuses their own guilt-ridden privilege, by fobbing purported toxic “whiteness” onto an amorphous “semi-fascist” other, while virtue signaling they are not like “them.”

    “Them,” of course, are those who live and work in places like East Palestine, Ohio, and who have zero privilege but, by the Obama-Clinton-Biden standards, are culturally and socially deplorable.

    Such “white rage” and “white supremacist” mantras are also careerist cues that signal, as with party membership of the old Soviet nomenklatura, that they are correct and now audited for raises, promotions, and rewards. 

    The second group is composed of the wealthy, left-wing minority elites in politics, media, entertainment, sports, and government service. For the Al Sharptons and “squad” members of the world, damning “white, white, white” bogeymen alleviates them of any painful analysis of inequality, such as the role of endemic illegitimacy and absent fathers in nearly ensuring a lack of parity. It is hard work to buck the teachers’ unions and set up K-12 charter schools in the inner city that focus on math, science, and languages to ensure parity. But it is easy and cheap—and far more lucrative—to blast the SAT test as “racist” and demand reparative admissions to Yale or Harvard.

    For the racialist careerist, the less racism there is to find, all the more essential it is to root it out somehow, somewhere. So, here arrives a new genre of manufactured hate crimes, whose logic is “even if it did not happen, it reminds us that it could have happened.”

    The dearth of actual racism also demands a new set of adjectives that serve as something like sophisticated detectors to discover otherwise invisible natural gas fumes. The adjective “systemic” means only the select can now spot racism. Like air, it is everywhere but invisible and thus requires battalions of diversity, equity, and inclusion inspectors to use their training to expose it in the common atmosphere.

    “Microaggressions” exist as a tacit admission there are no aggressions as we commonly define them. No matter—there are still hints that there might be some racial aggression, once experts redefine words and gestures to ferret out micro-racists in our midst.

    Where does this all lead?

    We are wasting trillions of dollars in capital, labor, and time in tribal cannibalism as our friends abroad watch in horror, and our enemies savor our decline into collective suicide—while we sink into debt, our cities turn medieval, our border disappears, our criminal justice system collapses, and our military chases its tail.

    We know from history the ultimate destination of tribal chauvinism, and it is not pretty. Once a society retribalizes, it descends into a Hobbesian war of all against all. Everyone eventually seeks out or manufactures a tribal identity for self-protection. Tribalism operates on the principles of proliferation: if a neighboring nation goes nuclear, then everyone in the neighborhood must too.

    Unless some passengers on our runaway train force our engineers to hit the brakes, we are headed over the cliff into Yugoslavia.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jun 05

Today’s News 5th June 2023

  • Ireland Mulls Over Plan To Kill 200,000 Cows To Fight Climate Change
    Ireland Mulls Over Plan To Kill 200,000 Cows To Fight Climate Change

    Livestock production — primarily cows — has apparently become such a problem for the climate that government officials in Ireland are mulling over a plan to kill hundreds of thousands of cows. 

    The Irish Mirror said a new Department of Agriculture report shows officials planned to kill 200,000 dairy cows over the next three years to combat climate change. 

    We told readers in late 2022, “Forget Oil. Now They Are Coming For The Cows.” And that’s apparently what the climate alarmists in Ireland are preparing to do.  

    Ag website Farming Independent said it recently obtained the report via a freedom of information request. 

    “Cuts to the dairy herd of 65,000 cows per year for the next three years will be needed to meet agriculture’s climate targets Department of Ag officals have estimated in an internal briefing paper seen by the Farming Independent,” the website said. 

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

    A spokesperson for the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine told the Irish Mirror, “The Paper referred to was part of a deliberative process – it is one of a number of modeling documents considered by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and is not a final policy decision.” 

    The ag agency added: “As part of the normal work of Government Departments, various options for policy implementation are regularly considered.” 

    Meanwhile, Pat McCormack, the president of the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, railed against the plan to cull dairy cows.

    McCormack said, “If there is to be a scheme, it needs to be a voluntary scheme. That’s absolutely critical because there’s no point in culling numbers from an individual who has borrowed on the back of a huge financial commitment on the back of achieving a certain target that’s taken from under him.”

    “We should be investing in an infrastructure that can deliver from a scientific perspective. And we know low emissions are better and we should be continuing to invest in further science and research because that’s absolutely critical as we move forward,” McCormack said, who was quoted by the Irish Times. 

    Ireland’s farming sector appears to be under attack by climate nuts. Remember what the end goal might be:

    … but who cares about: “Private jet use soaring in Ireland, new research shows.” 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 02:45

  • A Multipolar World Is Emerging
    A Multipolar World Is Emerging

    Authored by Natasha Wright,

    A new world order is evidently well underway with BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) nations offering ample alternatives to the hegemonic Collective West.

    ‘If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever.’

    This is one of the most famous quotations from George Orwell’s 1949 novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four. The words are spoken by O’Brien, the grand inquisitor of the totalitarian regime in Orwell’s novel. I don’t think there has been any other author more quoted as of recent than George Orwell and his 1984 and Animal Farm (add to the cauldron the quotes by Aldous Huxley in his Brave, new world).

    If we dwell a little more on the issue of the U.S. global dominance ever since the downfall of Berlin Wall, there follows a bewildering thought how the USA has managed to establish global hegemony for so long in such imperceptible shapes and forms? With a hindsight, an overwhelming number of nations and/or countries have retreated to a cosy solution to welcoming the U.S. (hegemony) with arms wide open. The ways how the U.S. has managed to imperceptibly spread its dominance are via all manner of cultural, educational, economic, financial and political influence of the U.S. seeping through the cracks and fault lines of any societal texture. They invariably have the same mechanisms to apply, the same tactics to deploy, the same strategies to reiterate endlessly which are easy to ‘read’ and ‘see through’ if repeated sufficient number of times. When the perpetrators behind the curtains are asked how is it possible that they always use the same tactics in their coloured revolutions and regime changes, they reply with dismissive frivolity: ‘Because it works. Why change it if it works every time?’

    When asked why the Global West doggedly insist on military solutions to the ongoing Ukrainian crisis, some commentators tend to think that most probably because their politics of hegemony and continual warmongering have mercifully started to die down. The politics of imperial dominance and U.S. monopoly is starting to be unsustainable. The U.S. allies from this side of the Atlantic have mostly been unswervingly loyal to and blindly obeyed the global sheriff up until the 2003 and the outright and resolute refusal by Germany and France to join their impending Iraq invasion. On that occasion, the countries which constitute the most powerful pillars of the EU have denied the hegemon its self-righteous arrogance to illegal interventionism. That historic moment can be viewed as the springboard for the creation of a multipolar world in the new millennium yet it did not put an end to unipolarity. The U.S. continued behaving the way it did before. It went on with more meddling in the internal affairs of an overwhelming number of countries, it continued its occupation of Afghanistan most obviously, coupled with the coloured revolutions and ‘Arab springs’ of all sorts and all enveloped into the inexorable NATO expansion.

    Then came the year 2018 and a critical moment when Vladimir Putin announced that Russia produced hypersonic weapons which meant that Russia overtook the U.S. for the first time. Russia gained strategic advantage in that respect. That may well have been the end of the unipolarity as we know it yet the issue has remained that the U.S. finds it hard to admit its imminent demise.

    In retrospect, there has been a multitude of brutal wars and the downfalls of empires historically due to their decadence and deterioration in any given society or civilization. Let us recall a Russian thinker, Nikolai Danilevsky, a biologist by profession, who adopted an organic view of the world. Human civilizations, he maintained, were organic beings that were born, matured, and died. None could be said to constitute the “End of History.” In his most famous work, titled Russia and Europe, he outlined a theory that Russia and Western Europe were entirely distinct “cultural historical types.” Different cultural historical types, he said, developed in their own separate ways. In opposition to theories of cultural convergence, he compared the world to a town square from which different roads (i.e. different civilizations) moved out in different directions. Each cultural historical type was inherently distinct, and consequently it made no sense to try to force it to develop along the path of another. Oswald Spengler also presented a world view based on the cyclical rise and decline of civilizations in which he argues that a culture blossoms from the soil of a definable landscape and dies when it has exhausted all of its possibilities.

    Today the matters seem to be vastly different given that there are two nuclear powers with a vast potential to destroy the world. The world power which is on the steep downward trend is drastically more dangerous in its crushing potential to shatter the world to pieces. The situation seems to be much more dangerous than it has ever been because the U.S. is only too willing to get stuck in the Thycidides Trap with China.

    In reality, a new world order is evidently well underway with BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) nations offering ample alternatives to the hegemonic Collective West. The budding silhouette of the multipolar world has long emerged and with time it will take a more astable shape. The West has not managed to make a more significant onward march to the Far East and the Global South in generic terms, if we exclude Japan and South Korea from the equation.

    One has to just consider for a moment a plethora of sophisticated statements as per the onward marching multipolar world given by Sergey Lavrov up to date:

    “Unfortunately, our American colleagues still want to operate only on the basis of dictating policy, issuing ultimatums, they do not want to hear the perspectives of other centres of world politics’

    The U.S. is refusing to “acknowledge the reality of the emerging multi-polar world,”

    ‘Amid the current, serious stage in the history of international relations, Russia and China will move to a multipolar, fair world order’

    ‘We are going through a very serious stage in the history of international relations. I am convinced that as a result of this stage, the international situation will become clearer significantly and we will move together with you, together with our other like-minded people, towards a multipolar, just, democratic world order’

    Some Western commentators argue that Russia is facing further isolation because ‘all’ the ‘democratic’ countries have launched an avalanche of sanctions onto it and condemned it publicly in the UN General Assembly since the onset of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine. All those countries who tend to arbitrarily attribute the ‘democratic’ badge to themselves mostly go on to wrongfully claim that Russia has the support of the countries which know of no liberal democracy in their autocratic regimes. Sadly, the proliferation of these unfounded myths has mostly been allocated to the corporate Western media propaganda

    First and foremost, this claim is based on flawed logic. The number of countries which have introduced sanctions on Russia is about 30 and the number of countries which did vote in the UN General Assembly is 140 out of which 110 countries do not plan to place sanctions on Russia and they do not want to gang up on any pressure on it either. If we do some basic mathematics, 6.5 billion people live in the countries which have not introduced sanctions on Russia and they are not planning to. Even these ongoing colossal changes apparently bring about the world dividing into two poles, the other one comprises 6.5 billion people which is in effect, if viewed from another perspective, the whole world without the Collective West

    The colossal changes have already happened globally. Now overt economic cooperation up to date has melded into regional and international geopolitical cooperation among BRICS, SOC and beyond. These countries further develop the cooperation with Russia and certainly China.

    To get back to the Western (flawed) views of the world divided into the arbitrarily attributed democracies on one hand and randomly ostracized autocracies on the other, the origins for these flawed views are certainly from the divide and conquer Western supremacy and Colonialism. That colonial world view is mirrored in the words of Josep Borrell and his rather arrogantly awkward metaphor ‘EU as a garden vs the rest of the world as a jungle’. No amount of profuse apologies will help this hapless unelected bureaucrat from Brussels with his gauche ‘witticisms’ in his overwhelmingly racist discourse.

    Obviously, that is an enormous effort to ‘smother’ the world with an artificial division, an effort of ‘all guns blazing’ ‘all-out war’ against the creation of multipolar world in the most brutal Machiavelli style, though sporting the 21st century ‘outfit’. And yes, lest we forget, the impending doom of the U.S. getting entangled in another Thycidides Trap with China.

    In case the ‘(un)democratic’ Europe with its utterly reckless moves loses its monumental market in China as well as abundant and affordable Russian resources and with the prospects of great many companies leaving for more arable pastures for the USA lured by Biden’s Build Back Better incentives, Borrell’s garden instead of letting a hundred flowers blossom will turn into a barren wasteland.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 02:00

  • Seymour Hersh: Russiagate's Missing Pieces
    Seymour Hersh: Russiagate’s Missing Pieces

    Via Scheerpost.com,

    This article is from Seymour Hersh’s Substack, subscribe to it here.

    What was not said in the Durham Report?

    The first thing to understand about John Durham is that he was a fearless prosecutor who went after organized crime and put in prison retired and active FBI agents who protected the mob for money or other enticements. One of the agents he stopped had enabled James “Whitey” Bulger Jr., once one of America’s most wanted men, the Winter Hill Gang boss who evaded arrest for sixteen years.

    In his forty-five years as a state and federal prosecutor in Connecticut and Virginia, Durham worked often and closely with FBI agents, especially on cases that involved violations of federal racketeering statutes.

    Durham also handled two inquiries into the CIA’s conduct in the War on Terror, and he did so without angering his superiors in the executive branch. In one case he was asked to investigate the alleged destruction of CIA videotapes of detainee interrogations, the so-called torture tapes. His final report on the matter remains secret, and he recommended that no charges be filed. He was later asked to lead a Justice Department inquiry into the legality of the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation techniques” that resulted in the death of two detainees. In that case, he was told that officers who were given and obeyed what were determined to be illegal orders—there were many of those after 9/11—could not be prosecuted. No charges were filed.

    Durham’s 306-page report was made public on May 15, and it pleased no one with its focus on the obvious. The journalist Susan Schmidt, whose byline was a must-read when she was a reporter for the Washington Post, pointed out on Racket News that Durham said the FBI would have done less damage to its reputation if it had scrutinized the questionable actions of the Clinton campaign in 2016: the Feds “might at least have cast a critical eye on the phony evidence they were gathering.”

    Schmidt was highlighting a moment in Durham’s report where he hints at the real story: Russiagate was a fraud initiated by the Clinton campaign and abetted by political reporters in Washington and senior FBI officials who chose to look the other way. Durham writes: “In late July 2016, US intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that US Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against US Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee.” 

    He continues: “this intelligence—taken at face value—was arguably highly relevant and exculpatory because it could be read in fuller context, and in combination with other facts, to suggest that materials such as the Steele Dossier reports and the Alfa Bank allegations . . . were part of a political effort to smear a political opponent and to use the resources of the federal government’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies in support of a political objective.” 

    Durham goes on to cite many instances of public statements and private communications of Clinton campaign staffers that were “consistent with the substance of the purported plan.” He finds evidence to suggest that “at least some officials within the campaign were seeking information about the FBI’s response to the DNC hack, which would be consistent with, and a means of furthering, the purported plan.” He adds that “the campaign’s funding of the Steele Reports and Alfa Bank allegations . . . provide some additional support for the credibility to the information set forth in the Clinton Plan intelligence.” 

    However, his report focuses on who knew about the Clinton Plan intelligence and when they knew of it, while “the details of the Clinton Plan intelligence,” “facts that heightened the potential relevance of this intelligence to” Durham’s inquiry, and his team’s “efforts to verify or refute the key claims found in this intelligence” are confined to a Classified Appendix.  

    It became evident to some members of Durham’s staff that the real story was not about whether or not Trump had pee parties in a Moscow hotel room—one of the headline-producing allegations in the Steele Dossier that consumed the Washington press corps in the aftermath of Trump’s victory in the 2016 election. The issue was whether the Clinton campaign, in its constant leaking of false accusations and false data, had crossed a line. 

    I was told that there was tension and frustration overDurham’s initial lack of interest, or reluctance, to go beyond his investigative mandate and look closely at the possibility that some senior FBI officials had openly joined ranks with the Clinton campaign, with its drumbeat of spurious allegations, because, in some cases, of a shared belief in the importance of a Clinton victory in the fall election. Another factor, I was told, was the possibility of promotions—even to high-level Justice Department offices—in a potential Clinton administration. 

    Durham, to his credit, did follow the leads that came to his office, but he left them in secrecy—perhaps in the Classified Appendix or perhaps completely off the record. He was seen by some as being mandated only to investigate FBI management shortcomings and believed the public needed a full accounting of the FBI bungling. It was not clear whether Durham, had he decided to expand the parameters of his inquiry to include the implications of the intelligence about the Clinton campaign, would have been allowed to do so. As Durham himself writes, “any attempted prosecution premised on the Clinton Plan intelligence would face what in all likelihood would be insurmountable classification issues given the highly sensitive nature of the information itself.”

    The issue with Durham may be that he was the wrong man in what could never be the right job. He had made his reputation with the help of others in the FBI and Justice Department. They had provided him with much of the evidence he used in his Mafia investigations—undercover agents, access to information, wiretaps and extra manpower for manpower for analysis and surveillance. He had made and kept friendships current over the years. But there are no shoulders to lean on when one is investigating colleagues in Washington.

    It was not clear to some who worked with him whether Durham understood the ease with which the FBI could game the FISA process and get their way with the special court; nor that he understood the extent to which the serious operators in the intelligence community thought themselves to be above the law. I will never forget a lunch I had in a Chinese restaurant down the highway from the CIA headquarters with a bunch of covert operators from the Middle East. They were making fun of what they depicted as bumbling FBI gumshoes—this was just after 9/11—and I angrily asked one of them how he could mock the FBI when they all had to work together to solve the crime. His answer: “Sy, the FBI? The FBI? They catch bank robbers. And we rob banks. And the NSA? You expect me to work with guys who carry protractors in their shirt pockets and are always looking down at their brown shoes?” 

    In the end, and to Durham’s credit, he stuck to his guns and said what he thought about those who wished him to expand his inquiry deeper into the actions of the Clinton campaign in this footnote:

    “To be clear, this Office did not and does not view the potential existence of a political plan by one campaign to spread negative claims about its opponent as illegal or criminal in any respect.”

    He added, however, that for a campaign to “knowingly provide false information to the government” would be another matter.

    How to distinguish the two is the crux of the issue. In his failure—if that’s the right word for it—to get the whole story, Durham resembles one of the blind men in the ancient Hindu parable about a group of blind men inspecting an elephant. Each of the inspectors describes a small part. The elephant is the campaign to link Trump to Russia. The mainstream press, running with the later discredited Russiagate narrative, portrays Trump as a puppet of Putin or even as a double agent of Moscow dating back to the Soviet era. And Durham sees himself merely as the lawyer who was ordered to investigate FBI managerial shortcomings. The public only sees parts of the picture. 

    There is more to know.

    *  *  *

    This article is from Seymour Hersh’s Substack, subscribe to it here.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 06/05/2023 – 00:00

  • 'Jews Against Soros' Group Says Criticizing Billionaire Activist 'Isn't Antisemitic'
    ‘Jews Against Soros’ Group Says Criticizing Billionaire Activist ‘Isn’t Antisemitic’

    A group called “Jews Against Soros,” launched by Senior Newsweek Editor Josh Hammer and Missouri AG candidate Will Scharf, has argued that criticism of the billionaire activist is not antisemitic.

    “Jews Against Soros will fight back against the common left-wing smear that opposition to Soros and his sprawling network of political organizations is antisemitic,” the group said in a launch statement.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js“Attacking Soros for his influence on American politics to say nothing of his nefarious agenda in Israel itself, isn’t antisemitic. It is simply a fact that Soros funds a huge proportion of the radical left in this country. And he must be stopped,” the group continued.

    Soros has been criticized by many Jews over his donations to groups such as J Street, an Israel lobbying organization whose leadership has met with Hamas, Just the News reports.

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

    The billionaire megadonor has also come under fire for funding political action committees which help elect soft-on-crime progressive prosecutors, such as Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, along with Commonwealth Attorney Buta Biberaj of Virginia, Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner and former St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner, who resigned last month following numerous scandals (via Just the News).

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 23:00

  • Govt. Nudge Units Find The "Best" Ways To Manipulate The Public
    Govt. Nudge Units Find The “Best” Ways To Manipulate The Public

    Authored by Marie Hawthorne via The Organic Prepper blog,

    Freedom of speech means a lot to us at the OP.  However, that’s been fading fast, as Daisy has documented, and as though speech restrictions aren’t bad enough, most of us have been lab rats for central planners’ behavioral experiments longer than we probably care to realize.  And now there are Nudge Units.

    Huge amounts of money have been poured into “nudge research,” determining the best ways to get populations to change their behaviors without passing laws or using force.

    What are Nudge Units?

    Let’s look at how these “Nudge Units” got started, what they’ve been used for most recently, and what they’re likely to focus on next.

    The concept of “nudging” people into making better choices became popular with the book Nudge—Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness, authored by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, and published in 2008. Their book defines a nudge as:

    . . .any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives.  To count as a mere nudge, the intervention must be easy and cheap to avoid.  Nudges are not mandates.  Putting fruit at eye level counts as a nudge.  Banning junk food does not.  (p.6) 

    (You may be interested to note that author Sunstein is married to Samantha Power, the administrator of Biden’s US Agency for International Development and previously Obama’s ambassador to the UN. Forbes listed Ms. Power as the 63rd most powerful woman in the world in 2014. Do you think she’s Nudging? ~ Daisy )

    Individuals in government and industry quickly realized that the authors’ insights into the decision-making process could be used to manipulate that process in the minds of the general public, many of whom don’t have the time or mental energy for NYT bestsellers.

    The British government established its first Behavioural Insights Team in 2010.  It began as a seven-person team within a Cabinet Office nicknamed the “Nudge Unit” then became an independent social purpose company in 2014 before being purchased by Nesta, a larger social purpose company, in 2021. 

    These social purpose companies employ experts in promoting desirable behaviors.  So in Britain, for example, they want to cut obesity rates in half and reduce household carbon emissions by 28% by 2030.

    I don’t know how successful they’ve been in cutting obesity rates, but the Nudge Unit did prove its effectiveness early on by helping the British government collect an extra £200 million (about $248 million) in taxes in 2017. Not surprisingly, the Nudge Unit has become so popular that they have worked with governments in over 50 countries and have opened subsidiary offices in the U.S., Singapore, Canada, Australia, Indonesia, Mexico, and France.

    What does a Nudge look like in the States?

    Within the U.S., Nudge Units have been employed by health care systems such as UPenn, and Blue Cross Blue Shield Massachusetts. In a way, this isn’t surprising; American and British citizens alike are known for high obesity rates and poor overall health.  

    Promoting good health within the general population seems like a good government goal, and I think most of us would have found this largely uncontroversial before 2020.  We may not always have agreed with the FDA’s exact dietary advice, but most of us would have probably agreed that we, as a nation, don’t need quite so many candy bars.  

    However, during 2020, this changed.  Public messaging around health care became far more intense, and some of the advice didn’t make sense.  At the very simplest level, what makes people healthy?  Exercise and proper diet.  Humans have known intuitively for a long time that sunshine is good for us. More recent research has shown that it kills viruses and bacteria. So why were people being forbidden to exercise and even, in some cases, to go outside?

    This article isn’t really about the many possible reasons the public was given so much nonsensical advice during 2020 and 2021.  I am just pointing out that, in some ways, the public health messaging campaign during Covid was seen by various governments (particularly the British) as an opportunity to see how far Nudging could influence actual behavior, even when the nudges didn’t make logical sense.

    Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), governmental Nudging didn’t influence people nearly as much as various government bodies had hoped. In fact, Nudge author Thaler himself said that, when it came to increasing vaccine uptake, it was time for “pushes and shoves” in the form of passports and more severe restrictions.

    But the pandemic is officially over, right? Does this really matter now?

    Yes, it still does. 

    As we discussed before, the World Health Organization is set to ratify a new pandemic treaty in 2024. As discussed in our previous article as well as in Jose’s more recent article, we have plenty of reasons to believe that more pandemics will come along, and that the WHO will be taking precedence over local and even national governments to address them.  

    The WHO has grown a lot since its inception in 1948.  It has had its own Behavioral Insights Team since 2017.  And some of their work, like their campaign to prevent the over-use of antibiotics, has been really important.  But just because they undertake some worthwhile projects doesn’t mean we can assume everything they do is benign.  

    It’s crucial to understand that there are no neutral Nudges. Richard Thaler points this out himself in an interview with Sydney Business Insights.  You will always be asked to choose between one thing and another.  Thaler also says in this interview that, within the original British Nudge Unit, their mantra was, “If you want people to do something, make it easy.”   Ask yourself, are people that constantly shoot for the lowest common denominator in a population the ones you want to take guidance from?

    Perhaps more significantly, the WHO’s new Chair of their Technical Advisory Group on Behavioral Insights (their Nudge Unit), Prof. Susan Michie, is an active member of Britain’s Communist Party.  Are you comfortable with an avowed communist being responsible for subliminal messaging regarding your health choices?  If you’re a communist yourself, that might be great, but what about the rest of us?  

    The people behind the Nudge messages matter. 

    Do you want to get your relationship advice from Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate?  It’ll make a difference.  

    And health care is only one area of interest in Nudging.  Right now, in the U.S., that has been the main area of focus.  However, since the first Nudge Unit developed in Britain and then expanded outward, it is reasonable to look to the British to see what may be coming next.  As speculated upon by Laura Dodsworth in her recent interview with Russell Brand, climate change rhetoric will likely ramp up.  

    We’ve already seen some examples of it.  The same tools they might have been using ten years ago to get people to choose fruit as opposed to candy bars are now being used to get us to choose insect products instead of meat.  This has had limited effect, as we’ve reported before.

    How do they work?

    Nudges work best for behaviors that people know they should pursue anyway.  It’s been difficult to Nudge people into doing things they find very unpleasant (like eating bugs) or may have moral qualms about (putting novel substances in their bodies).

    So far, the usefulness of Nudging has been limited, but that may change within the next few years simply because messaging of all kinds is about to get so much cheaper, thanks to AI.  ChatGPT and other similar programs will be able to churn out all kinds of little jingles useful not only for traditional companies but for social purpose companies and government programs, as well.  

    And as messages of all kinds become cheaper and cheaper to produce, the demands to change our behavior for public health, or the climate, or whatever, will become more and more constant.

    It’s going to take more individual effort on our part to sort out the real information from whatever convenient narratives are currently being promoted.  This will apply, not only to current-events type information but also to things like health and self-improvement.  

    I’ll say it again because it’s so important:  There are no neutral Nudges.  We are all constantly being Nudged in one direction or another.  We can’t escape Nudges, but we can choose which ones we give our attention to.  

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 22:30

  • Capitol Police Halt Christian Children's Choir Performance, Apologize
    Capitol Police Halt Christian Children’s Choir Performance, Apologize

    US Capitol Police issued an apology for halting a Christian children’s choir performance of the national anthem, which had been approved by the Speaker’s Office.

    Screenshot

    According to a person associated with the choir, “certain Capitol police said it might offend someone or cause issues.”

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

    “Although popup demonstrations and musical performances are not allowed in the U.S. Capitol without the proper approval, due to a miscommunication, the U.S Capitol Police were not aware that the Speaker’s Office had approved this performance,” said the US Capitol Police in a statement to the Epoch Times.

    “We apologize to the choir for this miscommunication that impacted their beautiful rendition of the ‘Star-Spangled Banner’ and their visit to Capitol Hill,” the statement continues.

    A viral clip shows the Rushingbrook Children’s Choir singing Francis Scott Key’s song, inspired by the persistence of American forces against the British during the War of 1812, in the building’s Statuary Hall—itself recently transformed by ideology after Virginia removed a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee in 2020.

    Suddenly, the conductor, David Rasbach, is approached by a man who whispers something to him. Rasbach cuts off the performance before the children can deliver the song’s final line: “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” -Epoch Times

    According to Rasbach, the group received permission from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), in coordination with the office of Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC).

    In a statement, Reps. William Timmons (R-SC), Russell Fry (R-SC) and McCarthy denounced the incident, and confirmed that permission had been granted.

    “We recently learned that schoolchildren from South Carolina were interrupted while singing our National Anthem at the Capitol. These children were welcomed by the Speaker’s office to joyfully express their love of this nation while visiting the Capitol, and we are all very disappointed to learn their celebration was cut short,” the lawmakers said.

    The Capitol Police deny telling the group that the performance could offend someone.

    “It is not accurate we told them the song could be offensive,” they told the Epoch Times.

    Rasbach says that a staffer for Wilson told him to silence the children, after which he walked over to three Capitol Police officers, one of whom said that the group “may not continue singing.”

    “This is considered to be a demonstration, and that is not allowed in the Capitol,” she added.

    “Do you mean to tell me that a choir of children may not sing the National Anthem in the capitol of the United States?” Rasbach said he asked.

    “No, they may not,” the officer responded, per Rasbach.

    “I left with a sense of utter disappointment, realizing that our country had certainly changed since the times when, as a child, my family visited the Capitol many times and could go up the grand front steps, unrestricted, roam the Capitol halls at will, ascend the grand, marble staircase and visit the balconies of the stately Senate and House chambers, all while feeling—even as a child—a deep sense of respect and pride that this great building and all that it represents is my birthright!.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 22:00

  • The Fraying Of The Liberal International Order
    The Fraying Of The Liberal International Order

    Authored by Ramesh Thakur via The Brownstone Institute,

    International politics is the struggle for the dominant normative architecture of world order based on the interplay of power, economic weight and ideas for imagining, designing and constructing the good international society. For several years now many analysts have commented on the looming demise of the liberal international order established at the end of the Second World War under US leadership.

    Over the last several decades, wealth and power have been shifting inexorably from the West to the East and has produced a rebalancing of the world order. As the centre of gravity of world affairs shifted to the Asia-Pacific with China’s dramatic climb up the ladder of great power status, many uncomfortable questions were raised about the capacity and willingness of Western powers to adapt to a Sinocentric order.

    For the first time in centuries, it seemed, the global hegemon would not be Western, would not be a free market economy, would not be liberal democratic, and would not be part of the Anglosphere.

    More recently, the Asia-Pacific conceptual framework has been reformulated into the Indo-Pacific as the Indian elephant finally joined the dance. Since 2014 and then again especially after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February last year, the question of European security, political and economic architecture has reemerged as a frontline topic of discussion.

    The return of the Russia question as a geopolitical priority has also been accompanied by the crumbling of almost all the main pillars of the global arms control complex of treaties, agreements, understandings and practices that had underpinned stability and brought predictability to major power relations in the nuclear age.

    The AUKUS security pact linking Australia, the UK, and the US in a new security alliance, with the planned development of AUKUS-class nuclear-powered attack submarines, is both a reflection of changed geopolitical realities and, some argue, itself a threat to the global nonproliferation regime and a stimulus to fresh tensions in relations with China. British Prime Minister (PM) Rishi Sunak said at the announcement of the submarines deal in San Diego on March 13 that the growing security challenges confronting the world—“Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, China’s growing assertiveness, the destabilising behaviour of Iran and North Korea”—“threaten to create a world codefined by danger, disorder and division.”

    For his part, President Xi Jinping accused the US of leading Western countries to engage in an “all-around containment, encirclement and suppression of China.”

    The Australian government described the AUKUS submarine project as “the single biggest investment in our defence capability in our history” that “represents a transformational moment for our nation.” However, it could yet be sunk by six minefields lurking underwater: China’s countermeasures, the time lag between the alleged imminence of the threat and the acquisition of the capability, the costs, the complexities of operating two different classes of submarines, the technological obsolescence of submarines that rely on undersea concealment, and domestic politics in the US and Australia.

    Regional and global governance institutions can never be quarantined from the underlying structure of international geopolitical and economic orders. Nor have they proven themselves to be fully fit for the purpose of managing pressing global challenges and crises like wars, and potentially existential threats from nuclear weapons, climate-related disasters and pandemics.

    To no one’s surprise, the rising and revisionist powers wish to redesign the international governance institutions to inject their own interests, governing philosophies, and preferences. They also wish to relocate the control mechanisms from the major Western capitals to some of their own capitals. China’s role in the Iran–Saudi rapprochement might be a harbinger of things to come.

    The ”Rest” Look for Their Place in the Emerging New Order

    The developments out there in “the real world,” testifying to an inflection point in history, pose profound challenges to institutions to rethink their agenda of research and policy advocacy over the coming decades.

    On 22–23 May, the Toda Peace Institute convened a brainstorming retreat at its Tokyo office with more than a dozen high-level international participants. One of the key themes was the changing global power structure and normative architecture and the resulting implications for world order, the Indo-Pacific and the three US regional allies Australia, Japan, and South Korea. The two background factors that dominated the conversation, not surprisingly, were China–US relations and the Ukraine war.

    The Ukraine war has shown the sharp limits of Russia as a military power. Both Russia and the US badly underestimated Ukraine’s determination and ability to resist (“I need ammunition, not a ride,” President Volodymyr Zelensky famously said when offered safe evacuation by the Americans early in the war), absorb the initial shock, and then reorganise to launch counter-offensives to regain lost territory. Russia is finished as a military threat in Europe. No Russian leader, including President Vladimir Putin, will think again for a very long time indeed of attacking an allied nation in Europe.

    That said, the war has also demonstrated the stark reality of the limits to US global influence in organising a coalition of countries willing to censure and sanction Russia. If anything, the US-led West finds itself more disconnected from the concerns and priorities of the rest of the world than at any other time since 1945. A study published in October from Cambridge University’s Bennett Institute for Public Policy provides details on the extent to which the West has become isolated from opinion in the rest of the world on perceptions of China and Russia. This was broadly replicated in a February 2023 study from the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). 

    The global South in particular has been vocal in saying firstly that Europe’s problems are no longer automatically the world’s problems, and secondly that while they condemn Russia’s aggression, they also sympathise quite heavily with the Russian complaint about NATO provocations in expanding to Russia’s borders. In the ECFR report, Timothy Garton-Ash, Ivan Krastev, and Mark Leonard cautioned Western decision-makers to recognise that “in an increasingly divided post-Western world,” emerging powers “will act on their own terms and resist being caught in a battle between America and China.”

    US global leadership is hobbled also by rampant domestic dysfunctionality. A bitterly divided and fractured America lacks the necessary common purpose and principle, and the requisite national pride and strategic direction to execute a robust foreign policy. Much of the world is bemused too that a great power could once again present a choice between Joe Biden and Donald Trump for president.

    The war has solidified NATO unity but also highlighted internal European divisions and European dependence on the US military for its security.

    The big strategic victor is China. Russia has become more dependent on it and the two have formed an effective axis to resist US hegemony. China’s meteoric rise continues apace. Having climbed past Germany last year, China has just overtaken Japan as the world’s top car exporter, 1.07 to 0.95 million vehicles. Its diplomatic footprint has also been seen in the honest brokerage of a rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia and in promotion of a peace plan for Ukraine. 

    Even more tellingly, according to data published by the UK-based economic research firm Acorn Macro Consulting in April, the BRICS grouping of emerging market economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) now accounts for a larger share of the world’s economic output in PPP dollars than the G7 group of industrialised countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, USA). Their respective shares of global output have fallen and risen between 1982 and 2022 from 50.4 percent and 10.7 percent, to 30.7 percent and 31.5 percent. No wonder another dozen countries are eager to join the BRICS, prompting Alec Russell to proclaim recently in The Financial Times: “This is the hour of the global south.”

    The Ukraine war might also mark India’s long overdue arrival on the global stage as a consequential power. For all the criticisms of fence-sitting levelled at India since the start of the war, this has arguably been the most successful exercise of an independent foreign policy on a major global crisis in decades by India. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar even neatly turned the fence-sitting criticism on its head by retorting a year ago that “I am sitting on my ground” and feeling quite comfortable there. His dexterity in explaining India’s policy firmly and unapologetically but without stridency and criticism of other countries has drawn widespread praise, even from Chinese netizens.

    On his return after the G7 summit in Hiroshima, the South Pacific and Australia, PM Narendra Modi commented on 25 May: “Today, the world wants to know what India is thinking.” In his 100th birthday interview with The Economist, Henry Kissinger said he is “very enthusiastic” about US close relations with India. He paid tribute to its pragmatism, basing foreign policy on non-permanent alliances built around issues rather than tying up the country in big multilateral alliances. He singled out Jaishankar as the current political leader who “is quite close to my views.”

    In a complementary interview with The Wall Street Journal, Kissinger also foresees, without necessarily recommending such a course of action, Japan acquiring its own nuclear weapons in 3-5 years.

    In a blog published on 18 May, Michael Klare argues that the emerging order is likely to be a G3 world with the US, China, and India as the three major nodes, based on attributes of population, economic weight and military power (with India heading into being a major military force to be reckoned with, even if not quite there yet). He is more optimistic about India than I am but still, it’s an interesting comment on the way the global winds are blowing. Few pressing world problems can be solved today without the active cooperation of all three.

    The changed balance of forces between China and the US also affects the three Pacific allies, namely Australia, Japan, and South Korea. If any of them starts with a presumption of permanent hostility with China, then of course it will fall into the security dilemma trap. That assumption will drive all its policies on every issue in contention, and will provoke and deepen the very hostility it is meant to be opposing.

    Rather than seeking world domination by overthrowing the present order, says Rohan Mukherjee in Foreign Affairs, China follows a three-pronged strategy. It works with institutions it considers both fair and open (UN Security Council, WTO, G20) and tries to reform others that are partly fair and open (IMF, World Bank), having derived many benefits from both these groups. But it is challenging a third group which, it believes, are closed and unfair: the human rights regime.

    In the process, China has come to the conclusion that being a great power like the US means never having to say you’re sorry for hypocrisy in world affairs: entrenching your privileges in a club like the UN Security Council that can be used to regulate the conduct of all others.

    Instead of self-fulfilling hostility, former Australian foreign secretary Peter Varghese recommends a China policy of constrainment-cum-engagement. Washington may have set itself the goal of maintaining global primacy and denying Indo-Pacific primacy to China, but this will only provoke a sullen and resentful Beijing into efforts to snatch regional primacy from the US. The challenge is not to thwart but to manage China’s rise—from which many other countries have gained enormous benefits, with China becoming their biggest trading partner—by imagining and constructing a regional balance in which US leadership is crucial to a strategic counterpoint.

    In his words, “The US will inevitably be at the centre of such an arrangement, but that does not mean that US primacy must sit at its fulcrum.” Wise words that should be heeded most of all in Washington but will likely be ignored.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 21:30

  • The Myth Of Systemic Racism
    The Myth Of Systemic Racism

    Authored by Ed Brodow via AmericanThinker.com,

    An isolated incidence of police brutality in Minneapolis gave the left an excuse to scream about systemic racism.  The death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police was a tragedy, but it cannot prove the existence of institutionalized racist activity.

    The Floyd incident raises two critical questions: (1) Is America plagued with systemic racism that justifies the dismantling of our social and political institutions?  (2) Do racist police and justice systems deliberately discriminate against black Americans?

    Systemic racism no longer exists in the United States.  Individual instances of racism are occurring and always will occur — against both blacks and whites — but to argue that racism is institutionalized ignores the changes that have occurred in the last 60 years.  “America is now the least racist white-majority society in the world,” said black Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson.

    “The false charge of systemic racism,” said author David Horowitz, “is a convenient cover for the Left’s inability to identify actual racists directly responsible for inequalities in American life.  It is unable to do so because America’s culture is so egalitarian and anti-racist that the numbers of actual racists are so few, and their impact so inconsequential, that they don’t amount to a national problem.”

    Systemic racism is a myth invented by the left to create division and political chaos.  

    When people say America is plagued by systemic racism, says black author Shelby Steele, they are simply expanding the territory of entitlement.  Black Americans are accorded special privileges in every nook and cranny of our society.  We elected a black president — twice.  

    “Blacks have never been less oppressed than they are today,” says Steele. 

     “If you are black and want to be a poet, or a doctor, or a corporate executive, or a movie star, there will surely be barriers to overcome, but white racism will be among the least of them.  You will be far more likely to receive racial preferences than to suffer racial discrimination.”

    The term “systemic racism” has “no meaning,” said black economist Thomas Sowell.  “It’s one of many words that I don’t think even the people who use it have any clear idea what they are saying.  Their purpose served is to have other people cave in.”

    “I don’t know what systemic racism is,” said black civil rights activist Bob Woodson. 

     “After 50 years of liberal Democrats running the inner cities, where we have all these inequities, race is being used as a ruse, as a means of deflecting attention away from critical questions such as, why are poor blacks failing in systems run by their own people?”

    To be truthful about the causes of social disruption in the U.S., we must point a finger not at white America, but rather at the black community.  What we are experiencing is not systemic racism from whites. It is systemic violence, mostly from black people, who “commit murder eight times more per capita than any other group,” in the words of former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani.  The leftist canard that racist police and the justice system deliberately discriminate against black Americans is a lie.

    In spite of a continuing history of violence, blacks are not being held responsible for their behavior.  Black men make up six percent of the U.S. population but account for a majority of all violent crime, said Heather Mac Donald in The War on Cops.  Ignoring the obvious connection between black criminality and black incarceration, the left continues to blame the police. 

     “Numerical disparities result from differences of offending,” said black talk show host Larry Elder, “not because of racism.”

    Blacks lag behind other groups in economic success, safe neighborhoods, and family cohesiveness.  Addressing the question of who or what is responsible, Heather Mac Donald contends that blacks must be held responsible for their own negative behaviors.  The notion that blacks are victims of a racist society may have been true prior to the 1960s, she says, but this is a half-century after the civil rights movement.

    “When Americans are viewed as individuals responsible for their decisions,” says David Horowitz, “it is apparent that disparities in income, education, and even susceptibility to diseases flow principally from poor choices made by individuals who fail to take advantage of the opportunities available to them in a country where discrimination by race or gender is illegal.”

    America has come a long way from my childhood on the issue of race.  I remember the separate drinking fountains labeled “white” and “colored.”  That is unthinkable today.  White bullies are no longer running around oppressing everyone else.  White institutional racism is an anachronism.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 20:30

  • Oil Surges After Saudis Make Additional 1 Million Bpd Voluntary Production Cut
    Oil Surges After Saudis Make Additional 1 Million Bpd Voluntary Production Cut

    Update (6:10pm ET): As expected oil has moved sharply higher upon reopening of trading, WTI was last up around 3% at just over $74 and likely to rise more now that Saudi Arabia has made it very clear that mid-$70s is a red line, and the price of oil will not be allowed top drop even if it means temporarily conceding Saudi market share to other OPEC members.

    While we expect a more powerful commodity squeeze in the coming hours, the real pain will be in energy stocks, where as Goldman’s Prime Brokerage showed, the net exposure is the lowest it has been in three years amid aggressive hedge fund selling and shorting which is about to reverse, to wit: “Hedge funds accelerated selling in US Energy amid price declines this week. This week’s notional net selling in US Energy was the largest in 10 weeks and ranks in the 97th percentile vs. the past five years.”


    And for those who missed the action earlier, here is a recap of what happened via Goldman’s commodities team:

    Today’s OPEC+ meeting was moderately bullish, on net, with three main developments.

    1. First, Saudi Arabia pledged to deliver an additional 1mb/d unilateral “extendible” output cut in July (bullish).
    2. Second, the voluntary cuts from the 9 OPEC+ countries are scheduled to extend until December 2024, from December 2023 previously (somewhat bullish).
    3. Third, output baselines will be redistributed in 2024 from countries struggling to reach their targets to those with ample spare capacity (somewhat bearish output effect, but bullish cohesion).

    It is important to put these decisions in the context of sentiment and positioning, which remain very weak and short. While the extra Saudi cut is worth +$1-6/bbl in terms of fundamentals, depending on whether the cut lasts 1-6 months, and strength in physical markets (borrowing a recession) should eventually boost positioning and prices, the delivery of Saudi’s first production cut within three months of a prior cut with stocks as low as today and the Saudi Energy Minister’s “whatever is necessary” (Draghi-like) quote signal the group’s commitment to continue to lean against the shorts and preemptively leverage its unusually high pricing power.

    Overall, today’s moderately bullish meeting partly offsets some bearish downside risks to our December 2023 price forecast of $95/bbl, including supply beats in Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, and downside risks to China demand. Our balances and price path are under review until our next Oil Analyst.

    * * *

    Earlier

    OPEC+ members in Vienna have agreed to extend crude production cuts into 2024. In a statement, the cartel said that it was acting “ to achieve and sustain a stable oil market,” and that it was continuing its recent approach of being “proactive, and pre-emptive.”

    Additionally, Saudi Arabia committed to an additional voluntary cut of 1 million barrels per day as part of this agreement, adding that they “will do whatever is necessary” to stabilize the oil market.

    Russia will extend its voluntary oil production cut of 500,000 barrels per day until the end of December 2024, Reuters reported, citing Russian Deputy Prime Minister.

    The main winner from the weekend’s talks is the United Arab Emirates, which gets a boost to its quota for next year. UAE Energy Minister Suhail Al Mazrouei thanked his colleagues for the hike to its quota and expressed the country’s loyalty to the cartel.

    “We will always support OPEC and will always stay together,” he said.

    That comes at the expense of African members who were asked to give up part of their unused quota.

    While they’ve been falling short of their targets, it’s still a bitter political pill for them to swallow. That’s why talks dragged on so long, including some late night sessions in Vienna hotels.

    Bloomberg, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal have been barred from attending the headquarters for the meeting. Reporters continue to interview delegates on the sidelines. 

    Secretary General Haitham Al Ghais said lots of journalists had been invited and defended the organization’s policy. 

    “This is our house,” he told reporters. “OPEC has always had an open policy, transparent.” 

    The next OPEC+ meeting will take place in Vienna on Nov. 26.

    *   *   * 

    Oil prices were trading up on Friday afternoon as shorts got a little nervous heading into the OPEC+ weekend, with new rumors circulating about the group’s discussions about another 1 million bpd in production cuts.

    The OPEC+ group is scheduled for three separate meetings beginning this weekend and concluding on June 4.

    While the general sentiment has been that the group will keep the status quo as far as production targets are concerned. But Saudi Arabia’s Energy Minister has made boisterous threats against oil’s speculators in the runup to the meeting, saying that shorts will be “ouching”.

    On Thursday, Reuters suggested that the OPEC+ group would be unlikely to deepen its production targets at the meeting this weekend.

    But late on Friday, Reuters suggested that OPEC+ was indeed discussing an additional output cut of around 1 million barrels “among possible options” for the meeting on June 4.

    “Everything is on the table,” Iran’s OPEC Governor Amir Zamaninia told reporters in the Austrian capital.

    Crude oil prices were already trading up ahead of the meeting, but increased even more in the afternoon hours, bringing Brent crude to $76.32 at 4:20 p.m., a $2.06 per barrel increase on the day. WTI was trading at $71.90 per barrel at that time.

    A supply reduction of as much as 1 million barrels a day is the most likely outcome, according to RBC’s Chief Commodities Strategist Helima Croft.

    “We think that the continued macro worries and soured sentiment will lead the group to make another downward adjustment,” she said in a note.

    But Saudi Arabia appears to still be in control of OPEC+, and The Kingdom could decide to make good on his threats to punish short sellers for their speculative trades that fly in the face of market fundamentals.

    “I keep advising them (referencing oil speculators) that they will be ouching, they did ouch in April, I don’t have to show my cards. I am not a poker player…but I would just tell them watch out,” Saudi’s energy minister said late last month in the runup to the meeting.

    As a reminder for why there could be some “ouching”. Bloomberg shows, the trading positions of hedge funds and other non-commercial traders are at the most bearish levels since at least 2011 across a combination of all major oil contracts…

    Finally, while hedge funds are betting that OPEC is quietly overproducing and exporting much more than their recent quota permits, a recent update by Goldman Sachs shows that bears may be in for a very rude awakening, as seaborne net exports by OPEC countries which announced a cut in April have finally tumbled by over 1mmb/d over the past 2 weeks.

    OPEC+ has suggested with its latest moves that its sweet price spot is around $80-90 per barrel, so it is trying to keep prices around that level.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 20:25

  • The Debt Ceiling "Crisis" Is Over And Now US Debt Will Rise From $31 Trillion To $50 Trillion By 2030
    The Debt Ceiling “Crisis” Is Over And Now US Debt Will Rise From $31 Trillion To $50 Trillion By 2030

    By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

    “No one got everything they wanted, but the American people got what they needed,” said Biden in his twelve-minute address to the nation.

    “We averted an economic crisis and an economic collapse,” continued the President, seated behind the Resolute Desk.

    “Nothing – nothing would have been more irresponsible. Nothing would have been more catastrophic.” And this whole notion of saving humanity by solving an imaginary crisis of our own creation is so preposterous to anyone not directly involved in the drama that I naturally searched for something more interesting.

    The Resolute was one of four British sailing ships, built with especially thick oak hulls, sent to the Arctic in 1854 to rescue a lost exploratory expedition. The four ships became locked in ice. Their crews fled on foot across the frozen ocean. They all survived, courageously, heroically, miraculously.

    American whalers recovered The Resolute 1,000 miles from where it had been abandoned. The US Navy repaired this sole surviving ship and returned it to England in 1856. After it was decommissioned in 1880, Queen Victoria crafted the Resolute Desk from its hull and gifted it as a symbol of goodwill.

    It is unlikely that in the decades ahead a head of state will send the White House a gift to commemorate the goodwill shown by America in rescuing our foreign creditors from the potentially catastrophic default they faced in 2023. No one will even remember it.

    What will hold their attention is the inexorable expansion of our extraordinary debt, which is set to rise from $31.4trln today to $50trln by 2030 and then really take off (assuming rather benign economic and market conditions which we know rarely persist uninterrupted).

    And we in the private sector are commissioned to somehow, in some way, chart a miraculous path out, through ingenuity and innovation. Sparking a historic productivity boom.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 20:00

  • When Bitcoin Meets Artificial Intelligence: Woke Madness Or Awakened Sanity?
    When Bitcoin Meets Artificial Intelligence: Woke Madness Or Awakened Sanity?

    Authored by Aleksandar Svetski via BitcoinMagazine.com,

    Ideological battle lines are being drawn around artificial intelligence, and Bitcoiners need to enter the fray…

    I know, I know. Your Twitter feed has probably been drowning in threads and tips from AI bros who have discovered 99 ways for you to save 99 hours every week using ChatGPT or some other list of 99 AI apps.

    I’m sick of it too. Trust me, especially considering that most of these AI “experts” were Web3 “experts” last year, NFT “experts” the year before and DeFi or crypto “experts” before that. Trend hopping at its finest.

    That’s not to say there’s no value here to be found here. Somewhere beneath or behind the almost-deafening noise coming from these influencooors there is a possible paradigm shift, and a genuine set of use cases. We’ve seen some already, of course.

    You can chat with these models to reason out a problem, you can summarize thoughts and ideas, find correlations between ideas, search for some information better than you could with Google and, of course, build more linguistically-functional chatbots. Perhaps the best use case thus far are the dev-assistant tools, but I get the sense that we’ve not yet seen the “Uber moment.”

    There is also — somewhere beneath and behind all of the scary talk of artificial general intelligence (AGI) and the idiocy being proposed by bureaucrats and would-be regulators — a more human-centric, human-enhancing use for these tools.

    The idea of a language user interface as the next step from the thumb tapping we’ve become used to over the past decade is fascinating, and what we should be thinking about is how to make these tools new “bicycles for the mind,” as Steve Jobs said about computers. It’s very important that we push back against doomer narratives that lean the world toward “approved AI” in order to avoid such tools becoming yet another appendage of the State.

    In this short article, I’d like to explore the ideological AI battlefield and its relationship to Bitcoin. Some pretty important battle lines have been drawn, and we must all be aware of them.

    BITCOIN REMAINS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE WORLD

    Energy is still the currency of the universe. That’s not changing, and will never change. At the risk of sounding like too much of a hippie: It’s all energy.

    People often forget that, and this recent AI hype cycle is a clear example. Most people you talk with, even otherwise smart people, think that AI is the biggest thing happening in the world today, and that it’s mankind’s most important innovation.

    I think they’re wrong, in a big way. They’re missing something more foundational.

    AI is a tool. When applied well, it’s a very effective tool. But however effective a tool it may be, it needs energy to run. Yes, it can and will enhance how we use and allocate energy, but ultimately, it is an amplifier. A tool. An “engine,” so to speak.

    What is Bitcoin?

    Well, Bitcoin is like energy. Before the Saylor-haters out there screech about that not being literally accurate: I know! It’s a metaphor, and in my opinion, a useful one. It’s useful because, in the same way we can essentially use energy to measure everything else, money is a measure that helps us (implicitly) account for energy, time and material resources.

    If we understand that Bitcoin, on a long enough time scale (generationally speaking, not civilizationally) becomes money, then here’s the truth that AI people are missing:

    Bitcoin benefits from all of it, because Bitcoin is the foundation. Everything that happens, every technology, every tool, every innovation, enlarges the total Bitcoin pie.

    So, don’t get it twisted: AI is big, but Bitcoin remains king.

    Of course, in terms of financial returns, VC money and the like, AI companies will probably outpace both bitcoin returns (in the short term) and also Bitcoin company returns, but that’s to be expected in a fiat world where hype prevails over sanity, and we experience abnormal cyclicality.

    AI is also undergoing a sort of renaissance, so there is lots of buzz. This will, in time, stabilize and as bitcoin becomes the unit of account, lo and behold, all of the real value generated from AI will ultimately accrue to bitcoin and bitcoin holders.

    So, don’t stress if you’re feeling FOMO on AI. Don’t worry about changing your entire life around because some ex-crypto-turned-AI-expert guy wrote a viral tweet telling you about some new, generative AI tool that will obsolete some and make others mega rich.

    Slow and steady continues to win the race. Bitcoin continues to be king.

    AI IS AN AMPLIFIER

    The second thing we need to realize is this: AI is like the computer or any other technology, for that matter.

    It’s an engine. It’s an amplifier.

    It will amplify madness, stupidity and lies, or it will amplify soundness, sanity and truth.

    It can be used as a tool of control and stupidification, or it can be used as a tool for liberating oneself from minutia and for enhancing one’s intelligence.

    The direction we wind up ultimately depends on you.

    Which tools are you using? Which do you demand? Which are you building? Which are you supporting?

    Companies like Snapchat are building AI tools to infect your mind with nonsense:

    Source

    OpenAI is busy guard-railing ChatGPT to such a degree that it spends more time apologizing and moralizing than it does answering actual questions.

    Bard is, likewise, regurgitating the same kind of garbage, likely because it’s been neutered by “bias-removal” tools and toxicity filters.

    These stupidities only serve to constrain people’s accepted thinking and speech, which results in a homogenization of thought. This can have two effects. In the worst case, so-called “safety concerns” lead to “approved AI” which ultimately leads to an internet that is accessed through chat filters with approved speech conditions. The alternative is if we push back and build alternatives. Their ignorance becomes our opportunity. While they focus on wokeness, we can build utility and authenticity.

    Which brings me to my final point:

    WE’RE IN A GLOBAL AI ARMS RACE

    The race is between two versions of the world:

    1. On the one hand, we have woke, generalist AIs that everyone is forced to use because newly-formed regulatory bodies deem them “safe” (see the ridiculously-moronic work being done by Gary Marcus to set up such a global committee).

    2. On the other, we have a future of distributed, more sovereign tools that people can choose from, that the user evaluates on merits they deem important.

    I know which future I want to see, and instead of sitting on the sidelines complaining, I’m working toward building alternative or parallel solutions.

    In a future article, I’ll lay out what myself and a few really talented individuals have been working on. A beautiful marriage of Bitcoin as the focal point and Ai as the engine.

    In the meantime, know this: The battle lines have been drawn.

    It’s iris-scanning, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) like World Coin on one end, conveniently run by the same leadership as OpenAI, versus Bitcoin and smaller, more accurate, specialized and open-source language models on the other.

    Source

    We all have to make a choice about the kind of world we want to live in. Woke madness, or awakened sanity? Mainstream and generalized, or local and specialized?

    In my next piece, I will present a potential solution, or at least a way forward. Until then, think deeply about what I have said. Don’t get flustered by all the hype. Remain steady in your conviction, remain vigilant with the narratives being pushed and be ready for the next battle — because it’s coming.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 19:30

  • Commodity Weakness Destroys Inflationist Narrative
    Commodity Weakness Destroys Inflationist Narrative

    Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

    Most politicians have used the “Ukraine invasion card” to justify the massive inflationary burst in 2021-2023.

    It does not matter if inflation was already elevated prior to the war.

    Supply chain disruptions, demand recovery, wage growth… Many excuses were used to justify inflation, except the only one that can make aggregate prices rise in unison, which is the creation of more units of currency well above demand.

    Inflationists will blame inflation on anything and everything except the only thing that makes all prices, which are measured in monetary units, rise at the same: Money supply growth rising faster than real economic output.

    Supply chain disruption and commodity inflation are caused by monetary expansion: More units of currency going to relatively scarce assets. Profits, wages, or commodities are not causes of inflation, but consequences. The unit used to measure prices is weakened by massive increase of its supply. It is as if I sell apples measured in glasses of milk, and suddenly the issuer of milk puts hundreds of gallons more in the market. My apples will cost more glasses of milk to adjust to the reality of the new unit of measure.

    Long-term inflation expectations have risen to 3%, the highest level in twelve years. Furthermore, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in April the Consumer Price Index increased 0.4 percent, seasonally adjusted (SA), and rose 4.9 percent over the past 12 months, not seasonally adjusted (NSA). The index for all items less food and energy increased 0.4 percent in April (SA); up 5.5 percent over the year (NSA). However, commodities have plummeted in the past year.

    Crude oil (WTI) is down 38% in the past year, trading below pre-Ukraine invasion level. Gasoil (-44%), gasoline (-40%), heating oil (-44%), natural gas (Henry Hub -74% and NBP -65%) have all plummeted to pre-war levels. Even wheat is down 30% from a year before June 4th, 2023. The FAO Food Price Index has also corrected to a two-year low in May.

    Why do commodities plummet in the middle of the China recovery and elevated demand growth and tight supply? Monetary factors again. The massive rate hikes and the subsequent monetary contraction have impacted the internationally quoted prices of goods all over the world. It is more expensive to purchase storage, finance margin calls, hire tankers and start long positions.

    If commodities and the Ukraine war were to blame for inflation, why is the consumer price index remain so elevated? Money supply growth is plummeting but not enough to revert the price expansion of 2020-2023 and, in fact, global money supply has not fallen lower than $101 trillion, according to Bloomberg. That is a significant drop in money supply from its highs, and one that justifies the rapid decline in headline inflation, but not enough to revert the price increases for consumers.

    Central banks engineered the massive inflationary burst, as proven in the BIS study by Claudio Borio et al (2023 https://www.bis.org/publ/bisbull67.htm) and now find that it is relatively easy to reduce annualized inflation to 4-5% but not that simple to bring it to 2%.

    What no central bank wants to tell you is that the only way in which inflation will be brought down significantly is a recession.

    That is why they talk of a “soft landing” that is impossible if they truly wanted inflation to fall permanently.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 18:30

  • The Lowest VIX Since The Pandemic Started Is Something That Deserves Attention
    The Lowest VIX Since The Pandemic Started Is Something That Deserves Attention

    By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

    It turns out the bulls had every right to be Dancing in the Street as stocks posted a very strong week (even the Russell 2000 and Regional Banks participated). Friday’s jobs data seemed to put the nail in the coffin on rate hike fears. The market has decided, rightfully so, that we are almost done with rate hikes and unless we get disastrous inflation data, any future hikes will be small enough not to act as a headwind.

    Could the Fed jawbone their way to more hikes? Possibly, but does anyone really think we need to get to 6%? Maybe, maybe we could get talked into 5.5%, but markets should be able to withstand that, probably quite easily. So, the fear of further rate hikes has been nullified as a bearish argument. It should mean that inflation data, will have reduced impact on markets, unless we get some extreme readings pointing to a rebound in inflation (which has not been the case, nor is it likely to be).

    That only leaves “recession” fears as a potential stumbling block. As discussed on Friday, markets ran with the strong headline jobs numbers and chose to ignore the much weaker household data (it does play second fiddle to the establishment data, yet it is what is used to determine the unemployment rate). Oil surged on Friday, signaling reduced recession fears (or some optimism on global growth). The 2s vs 10s spread became more inverted, closing the week at -81 bps. It has only closed at a more inverted level on 12 days in the past several years (in March 2023 when hard landing was handily beating soft landing in most forecasts). It is interesting that no one is talking about inverted yield curves anymore (thankfully, as it often attracts far more attention than it deserves), but this reversal to so much inversion (it was “only” -41 bps a month ago) is at least somewhat interesting.

    While markets traded as though positioning was very short, basic sentiment indicators, like AAII, CNN Fear and Greed, and simple RSI (Relative Strength Indicator) all point to neutral or even overbought conditions.

    As a bear, who is worried about the economy, I’m the most nervous about being wrong as I’ve been at any time in the past two months. The S&P had increased a “whopping” 1.3% from April 3rd to May 31st (a number that seems to surprise many as it feels as if we’ve been in a bull market during that time) and explains why VIX is all the way back to 14.6 the lowest since February 14th 2020!

    The lowest VIX since the pandemic started is also something that deserves attention, though it averaged 14.9 from February 2019 to February 2020, with a low of 11.5, so maybe, it is just finally normalizing after the traumatic experience of COVID and ZIRP.

    We get a lot of economic data this week, which away from the jobs data (excluding the nasty little household survey) was not strong last week. But I fully expect to be in a good news is good and bad news is bad mentality as the Fed should play the smallest role in markets that it has done for a long time. Really refreshing to write that and hope it is correct.

    Across the Globe

    With the U.S. and China we see the following:

    • Signs that possibly both sides, but certainly the U.S. want to make sure that the tension doesn’t derail the “necessary” trade and links between the two countries.
    • Some efforts to offer olive branches, or at least fig leaves to reduce tension (the handshake at the defense forum in Singapore, for example) can create the hope that things can improve.
    • What I struggle with most is how many conversations start with “well China needs us more than we need them, so it makes sense for them to want to normalize relationships”. Yet, that the “China needs us more..” is usually just an assertion, rather than a statement backed up by a litany of facts. Without a doubt, there was a time that China needed us as much or more than we needed them, but I continue to suspect that time has passed (the shift from Made In China to Made by China).
      • This article on the China Jet caught my attention. I’m not in a rush to step into a Comac (Commercial Aircraft Corp of China Ltd. – not the most adventurous of names), but the maiden flight with passengers seems like a noteworthy milestone. This story fits with the view that China is in various stages of shifting from just making things for us, to trying to sell their own brands.
      • The yuan has now become a topic of conversation with almost every one of our clients. Not just in terms of hedging it, but them seeing companies trying to use it to their advantage. While the dollar remains the reserve currency, we’ve seen a noticeable and serious increase in attention to they yuan as it develops into a currency used for trade.

    Remain cautious on China/US Relations.

    Japan continues to benefit from tensions in the Asia Pacific.

    It has been a year or more in the making, but Japan does seem to be a beneficiary of what is going on across the globe. The Nikkei is up 21% this year. We see continued interest from companies in Japan. Our theory has been that:

    • First tariffs and then COVID lockdowns had companies rethinking China as their manufacturing hub, with other countries in Southeast Asia gaining traction.
    • Since Putin invaded Ukraine and we’ve seen the ability to effectively blockade Taiwan, people have been casting their eye towards Japan as their presence on the global stage, powerful (and growing) military offer a degree of “safety” that might not be achievable in other smaller economies in the region.

    We continue to see interest in Japan and India growing. India remains the “inflation wildcard” in my “surprise” scenarios for inflation and rates.

    The one thing I think we can say for certain regarding Russia and Ukraine, is the world is growing weary of the war. Add Indonesia to the list of countries tossing out “peace” proposals. No obvious peace in sight, (see May’s Around the World for latest comprehensive update on the war). Weirdly or sadly or both, I’m not sure a peace deal does much for global markets as we seem to have accepted the status quo, and it is clear (at least from this seat) that trading relationships have permanently changed in the globe and won’t go back to where they were before the invasion.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 18:00

  • Japan's Birth Rate Plummets To Record Low For Seventh Straight Year
    Japan’s Birth Rate Plummets To Record Low For Seventh Straight Year

    Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

    Japan’s birth rate declined to a record low for the seventh consecutive year, with the number of babies born falling below 800,000 this year, health ministry data showed on June 2.

    The number of newborns in Japan fell to 770,747 this year, down 40,875 from the previous year and the lowest since the country began record-keeping in 1899, Kyodo News reported, citing health ministry data.

    Japan’s fertility rate—the average number of children born to a woman in her lifetime—fell from 1.30 in 2021 to 1.26 last year, equivalent to the previous low recorded in 2005. The number is far below the 2.07 rate necessary to sustain a stable population.

    The decline in Japan’s birth rate is attributed to people delaying parenthood due to the economic impact brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the prevailing trend among couples to delay marriage, according to the report.

    The data was released after Prime Minister Fumio Kishida unveiled a draft plan to increase child-rearing support as he listed addressing the country’s declining birth rates as one of his top policy goals.

    “A last chance for us to reverse the declining births is before the young population is expected to decline drastically in 2030,” Kishida said at a meeting on Thursday.

    Kishida’s government said it would come up with specific measures and secure funding by the end of the year.

    The government plans to secure annual funding of about 3.5 trillion yen ($25.2 billion) over the next three years for a new childcare package, which includes childbirth and rearing allowances as well as increased subsidies for higher education.

    Earlier in January, Kishida urged his government to create a “children-first economic society” and warned that Japan would cease to function as a society if its birth rate continued to decline.

    “Japan is at a critical point of whether we can continue to function as a society. Focusing on policies regarding children and child-rearing is an issue that cannot be postponed,” he told parliament on Jan. 23.

    Japan’s population of more than 125 million has been declining for 16 years and is projected to fall to 87 million by 2070. A shrinking and aging population has huge implications for the economy and for national security as Japan fortifies its military to counter China’s increasingly assertive territorial ambitions.

    According to Japan Meteorological Agency (pdf), the country’s population is expected to fall below 100 million by 2050. Data released by the Cabinet Office showed the aging population is also a prominent issue. As of October 2019, the country’s total population was 126.17 million, where people over the age of 65 accounted for 28.4 percent.

    Upon taking serious note of the issue, the country introduced a series of policies to remedy its declining births. Japan has, in recent years, offered cash bonuses and childcare incentives to encourage people to have more children, but these efforts have had little impact.

    According to Yomiuri Shimbun’s report, for more than 30 years, the government has introduced various policies that focus on balancing work and childcare. However, those policies were considered inconsistent with the actual needs of families, leaving those wanting to marry and have children without strong prospects.

    The report cited Yamada Masahiro, a professor at Chuo University in Tokyo, who spent over 30 years studying Japan’s population problem and wrote a book titled “Why Japan’s Countermeasures Against Declining Births Failed?”

    The book claimed that one of the problems is that “the government’s support measures are biased toward women who have graduated from colleges and regular workers in urban areas while ignoring the needs of informal workers and women living in non-urban areas.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 17:30

  • UBS Makes Five Generative AI Predictions
    UBS Makes Five Generative AI Predictions

    Generative AI (i.e., AI that can create text, video, etc.) has the potential to drive innovation across a wide swath of sectors.

    In the next several years, generative AI will have huge impacts on the “pharmaceutical, manufacturing, media, architecture, interior design, engineering, automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, electronics, and energy industries,” according to UBS analyst Michael Briest, who cited a report from Gartner.  

    Briest said the Gartner report stated, “Generative AI will impact marketing, design, corporate communications, training, and software engineering by augmenting these supporting processes that span many organizations.” 

    He also said Gartner made five bold predictions about how AI will accelerate innovation at companies from now until 2027. Those predictions include the following: 

    1. By 2025, more than 30% of new drugs and materials will be systematically discovered using generative AI techniques;

    2. By 2025, the use of synthetic data will reduce the volume of real data needed for machine learning by 70%;

    3. By 2025, 30% of outbound marketing messages from large organizations will be synthetically generated, up from less than 2% in 2022. We note that Salesforce recently announced the release of its Einstein PT to generate personalized emails to customers on behalf of salespeople, specific query responses on behalf of customer service professionals, and targeted content for marketers;

    4. By 2027, nearly 15% of new applications will be automatically generated by AI without a human in the loop, up from 0% today; and

    5. By 2026, over 100 million humans will engage robo-colleagues (synthetic virtual co-workers) to contribute to enterprise work.

    Briest said in UBS’ view, “The breadth of effects that Gartner expects almost confers general purpose technology (GPT) status on generative AI, akin to printing, electricity or railroads. As with these earlier innovations, generative AI is likely to have a significant effect on the labor market.” 

    With all this innovation expected to unfold this decade, it requires fewer workers. Goldman told clients last month that hundreds of millions of jobs are expected to be displaced by AI across the US and Europe. Another advisory firm wrote in a separate note, “We think there is a more than 50/50 chance AI will wipe out all of humanity by the middle of the century.” 

    Could this be why?: AI-Controlled Drone Goes Rogue, “Kills” Human Operator In Simulated US Air Force Test

    Briest has provided a peek into a future driven by AI. However, this accelerated innovation may bring about significant job loss and increasing dominance by machines. 

    More details in the full UBS note are available to pro subscribers in the usual place.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 17:00

  • Is The United States Losing Its Control Of Ukraine?
    Is The United States Losing Its Control Of Ukraine?

    Authored by Ted Snider via The Libertarian Institute,

    In the very early days of the war in Ukraine, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was open to negotiating a peace. A proposed peace could have ended the war before tens of thousands of Ukrainians died and Ukraine’s infrastructure was devastated, on terms that satisfied Kiev’s goals. But the United States pressured Ukraine to go on fighting in pursuit, not of Ukraine’s goals, but of larger American ones.

    Putting an end to Ukraine’s negotiations with Russia, State Department spokesperson Ned Price remarkably said, “This is a war that is in many ways bigger than Russia, it’s bigger than Ukraine,” and insisted that Ukrainians go on fighting and dying for “core principles.”

    Screen capture from video purportedy showing Ukrainian forces inside Russian territory, March 2, 2023. Via Times of Israel/Twitter

    The United States got its way. Now a year later, with the war not going well for Ukraine and the country getting more and more desperate, Ukraine is forced to retreat to pursuing its own goals. Ironically, that is increasingly taking the form of escalating the war in a way that now endangers American goals.

    Ukraine is now pursing its own security interests in a way that is extraordinarily dangerous to U.S. security interests. And they seem to be disregarding U.S. restrictions in pursuing them. Months of American permissiveness and failure to say no to Ukraine at each crossing of a red line has seemingly emboldened Ukraine to ignore U.S. limits and conditions on the use of American-supplied weapons.

    One of the key goals of the Biden administration is to stand by Ukraine for as long as it takes to defend their sovereignty and territorial integrity. That is Joe Biden’s promise to Ukraine. But a second key goal is to avoid being drawn into a direct war between NATO and Russia. That is Joe Biden’s promise to Americans. A recent wave of Ukrainian attacks on the territory of Russia—not Donbas or Crimea, but the internationally recognized territory of Russia—threatens that promise and threatens the security of Americans.

    Ukraine has long promised “not to target Russian territory with weapons provided by the West.” They recently reiterated that promise, saying British supplied long range Storm Shadow cruise missiles “will be used only within Ukrainian sovereign territory and not inside Russia,” and when they provided the United States “flat assurances” that F-16 fighter-bombers won’t be used inside Russian territory.

    But Ukraine did not keep those promises. In pursuit of their goals—understandably, since the U.S. insisted they postpone those goals and go on fighting the Russian military in pursuit of American goals—they have crossed the red line of U.S. limits and conditions on the use of American-supplied weapons and struck inside Russian territory. This defiantly independent military strategy is increasing the danger that the United States and NATO could get drawn into a war with Russia.

    On May 3, two drones were disabled over the Kremlin in what Russia views as an attack on Russia and an attempt to assassinate President Vladimir Putin. Ukraine denied involvement, insisting, “Ukraine wages an exclusively defensive war and does not attack targets on the territory of the Russian Federation.” Zelensky said categorically, “We don’t attack Putin or Moscow. We fight on our territory. We are defending our villages and cities.”

    But Kiev’s insistence that it kept its promise not to strike inside “the territory of the Russian Federation” was disingenuous. The New York Times has reported that U.S. intelligence agencies now believe that the drone attack was carried out by “one of Ukraine’s special military or intelligence units.”

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

    And that strike was only the boldest in a series of recent strikes inside Russia’s borders. In the same month, Ukraine has struck a military training ground and an oil refinery in Russian territory. In December, Ukraine carried out two attacks on Russia’s Engels air base.

    On May 23, a raid was carried out from Ukrainian territory into the Russian region of Belgorod. For two days, the Russian military fought them back across the border. Pictures of the attack suggest that U.S. armored vehicles were used in the raid.

    Ukraine has denied any involvement in the attack. Denis Nikitin, who also goes by the name Denis Kapustin, is the head of the group that claims responsibility for the raid. His group carried out an earlier excursion on two towns in the Bryansk region of Russia on the Ukrainian border on March 2. At that time, he said, despite similar Ukrainian denials of support or involvement, that the “cross-border raid he’d conducted from Ukraine into Russia had the endorsement of Kyiv.” He told The Financial Times that Ukrainian authorities signed off on the attack. “Yes, of course, this action was agreed,” he said, “otherwise it couldn’t have happened.” He went on to say, “If I did not co-ordinate it with anyone [in Ukraine’s military]…I think we would simply be destroyed.”

    Despite the public disavowal, a Ukrainian military official has privately acknowledged “co-operating” with the attackers.

    Washington seems to be expressing frustration with its apparent loss of control over Kiev. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley said that while he “can’t say with definitive accuracy…whether that’s U.S. supplied equipment or not…I can say that we have asked the Ukrainians not to use U.S.-supplied equipment for direct attacks into Russia.” The State Department complained that “We have made very clear to the Ukrainians that we don’t enable or encourage attacks outside Ukrainians’ borders.” And U.S. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby “hinted at frustration in Washington,” saying, “We’ve been pretty darn clear: We don’t support the use of U.S.-made equipment for attacks inside Russia…we’ve been clear about that with the Ukrainians.”

    Nonetheless, the Associated Press reports that on May 27, despite the multiple very public reminders from Washington, Ukrainian attacks inside Russia’s went on. Several drones were reportedly shot down en route to the Ilsky oil refinery in Russia’s southern Krasnodar region. Two people were reportedly killed by Ukrainian shelling of the town of Almaznaya. And local officials said that, once again, Belgorad “came under attack from Ukrainian forces on Saturday.”

    At the beginning of the war, the United States pushed aside Ukrainian interests and insisted that Ukrainians fight and die in pursuit of American goals. The ironic blowback from that is, fourteen months later, Ukraine is pursuing security concerns created by that insistence in a way that is in direct contradiction to U.S. security concerns. The United States seems to have lost control of Kiev, and Ukraine is now pursuing its own goals in a way that ignores American goals by increasing the danger that NATO could get drawn into a war with Russia.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 16:30

  • Qatar Airways Plans To Cut World's Fanciest Cabin Seats As 'Economics Don't Make Sense'
    Qatar Airways Plans To Cut World’s Fanciest Cabin Seats As ‘Economics Don’t Make Sense’

    The economics of operating a first-class cabin on the next-generation long-haul aircraft no longer makes sense to Qatar Airways, according to Chief Executive Officer Akbar Al Baker, who Bloomberg quoted during an interview in Istanbul on Saturday. 

    First-Class

    Al Baker said there would be no first-class section in its future Boeing Co. 777X fleet. He said the future is business class:

    “Why should you invest in a subclass of an aeroplane that already gives you all the amenities that first class gives you… I don’t see the necessity.”

    Qatar’s fleet of 777X with only business (branded as “Q-suite” product) and economy class is set to replace the airline’s Airbus SE A380s as it eventually retires all ten. 

    Q-suite

    The move to phase out first class on long hauls comes counter to Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Qantas Airways Ltd, and Air France, who are beefing up high-end offerings. 

    What’s behind the downshift? Al Baker said the first-class section “doesn’t justify the returns.” 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 16:00

  • Biden's Green Rules Mean Appliances Will Soon Cost More And Do Less, Experts Say
    Biden’s Green Rules Mean Appliances Will Soon Cost More And Do Less, Experts Say

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

    A pledge by the Biden administration in December 2022 to take “more than 100 actions” to impose significantly tighter environmental standards on consumer goods is now becoming reality, and consumer groups are predicting a future in which Americans pay more for products that do less, while manufacturers warn of shortages and supply chain breakdowns.

    “You’re seeing, just in the last few months, new rules from the Biden administration about clothes washers, dishwashers, and other kinds of kitchen appliances, and in every case, you’re talking about a tightening of already very, very tight standards,” O.H. Skinner, executive director of the Alliance for Consumers, told The Epoch Times.

    “That will make it so that nearly the majority of the current products on the market don’t meet the standards and have to be redesigned or removed from the market,” Skinner said. “Everyday things that people actually want are going to get more expensive or disappear, and the products that will be available will be more expensive but not better. People are going to wonder why life is worse.”

    An Energy Star rated appliance at a Best Buy store in Marin City, Calif., on March 26, 2010. (Justin Sullivan/file/Getty Images)

    These new regulations (pdf) from the Department of Energy (DOE) come on top of new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emissions regulations on cars and electric utilities, and efforts to ban gas stoves, which critics say will have similar consequences in those industries. Many of these new regulations will be finalized by next year and would give manufacturers several years to comply.

    In December 2022, the White House announced that “the Biden-Harris Administration has surpassed its goal to take 100 actions in 2022 to strengthen energy efficiency standards for a range of appliances and equipment to lower costs for American families.” The announcement touted 110 new regulations enacted by federal agencies on “everything from air conditioners and furnaces, to clothes washers and dryers, to kitchen appliances and water heaters—as well as commercial and industrial equipment.”

    According to the Biden administration: “Once finalized, these standards will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 2.4 billion metric tons, equivalent to the carbon emissions from 10 million homes, 17 million gas cars, or 21 coal-fired power plants over 30 years. The projected consumer savings from these standards would be $570 billion cumulatively, and for an average household this will mean at least $100 in annual savings.”

    These actions follow a familiar pattern: rumors of new directives, followed by official denials, followed by draconian diktats. For example, reports that the Consumer Product Safety Commission would ban gas stoves over alleged safety concerns sparked a public outcry in January, which was met with denials by the Commission, together with media ridicule, that any such thing was being contemplated. This was then followed by new environmental standards from the DOE that would ban the manufacturing of 50 percent of the gas stoves available on the market today.

    The DOE rules elicited criticism from House Republicans, who in a March 21 letter to Granholm called the regulations “a blatant back door attempt to ban gas appliances enjoyed by millions of Americans.

    “Your attempt to ban gas appliances has no basis in law or within your jurisdiction,” GOP representatives charged. “The Department of Energy has enjoyed bipartisan support, your actions to appease the Biden Administration’s radical climate agenda does not reflect well upon the Department.”

    While consumer advocates doubt that these new measures will save Americans money, appliance makers say consumers will not be happy with the products that are left to buy.

    New Appliances Will Be ‘Closer to 1950s’ Than to 2020

    Instead of allowing appliance manufacturers to innovate products for features that consumers want, “they are literally going to have to redesign products that will look closer to the 1950s than they do to 2020,” Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers spokesperson Jill Notini said.

    Manufacturers say they have been trying to work with the DOE to moderate the new rules, citing a tradition of cooperation between agencies and industry when developing new standards, but they say they are hitting a wall with the Biden administration.

    Among what one industry executive called “an avalanche” of new rules are regulations that force dishwasher and washing machine manufacturers to cut water use and energy consumption by one-third. In addition, new DOE rules would effectively eliminate 98 percent of all top-loading washing machines on the market today, would mandate that the machines be larger, and remove the central agitator that increases cleaning performance.

    Manufacturers say these rules would add $200 to the cost of a washing machine, and would also halt the production of less expensive clothes dryers that don’t meet strict federal Energy Star efficiency standards. Microwave ovens are also on the list of targeted appliances.

    Led by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, 21 state attorneys general wrote to DOE Secretary Jennifer Granholm on May 2 to “register their concern with the Department of Energy’s new attempt to control what appliances Americans can buy.”

    “The administration’s plan to micromanage people’s choices of everyday kitchen appliances will result in fewer choices, less functionality, and higher costs for consumers,” Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti told The Epoch Times.

    “The regulations are legally faulty because they rest on poor reasoning and shaky facts,” Skrmetti said. “This kind of bureaucratic overreach lies far outside the scope of the federal government envisioned by the Constitution.”

    The AGs’ letter criticizes, among other things, the DOE’s “blind reliance” on estimates by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Costs of Greenhouse Gasses that are “fundamentally flawed and are an unreliable metric on which to base administrative action.” In addition, the AGs charge that the DOE orders violate Constitutional principles of federalism, “ignores consumers’ reactions and preferences,” and “dismisses the costs manufacturers will incur to comply with the proposed standards.”

    Liberal States Join in Pushing Green Agenda

    Regulations are not only coming down from federal agencies; left-leaning states are also instituting bans on internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, gas stoves, gas heating, and other fossil-fuel-powered products. In response to state auto emissions mandates, Stellantis, which owns the Dodge, Chrysler, and Jeep brands, said it will reduce shipments of gas-powered cars to states including California, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Pennsylvania Connecticut, Rhode Island, Washington, Oregon, New Jersey, Maryland, Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, Virginia, and New Mexico in order to comply with new emissions rules in those states that seek to force consumers to switch to EVs over the next decade.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 15:30

  • Ukraine Officials Openly Taunting Russia As Zelensky Says 'Ready' For Counteroffensive
    Ukraine Officials Openly Taunting Russia As Zelensky Says ‘Ready’ For Counteroffensive

    Ukrainian leadership continues touting that it will “get back what’s ours” – in the recent words of the country’s chief military officer, Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi. President Volodymyr Zelensky is additionally telling Western press and officials that “we strongly believe that we will succeed.”

    Zelensky recently spoke to The Wall Street Journal about the much anticipated counter-offensive, but which comes after the significant loss of Bakhmut last month. “I don’t know how long it will take,” Zelensky told the newspaper. “To be honest, it can go a variety of ways, completely different. But we are going to do it, and we are ready.”

    Ukrainian Presidential Press Office via AP

    But the longer and greater delay before it is actually launched, which will be sure to feature ample Western weaponry, the more doubt is likely to build. Kiev and its allies have been touting it with much bravado, and yet nothing has materialized in terms of a major advance or gains. Zelensky cautioned in the interview that “the time will soon come when we will move to active offensive actions.”

    He also stressed that “we can’t wait for months” on further much-needed advanced weapons from the West, which has recently included approval of Abrams tanks and F-16 jets from European partners, but for which Ukrainian operators must undergo extensive training. Zelensky’s impatience has been on continual display despite the West having already spent tens of billions in defense funding and weaponry for Kiev.

    Admitting the persistent difficulty of superior Russian airpower, Zelensky conceded that “a large number of soldiers will die” in the counteroffensive but still emphasized that his troops are “stronger and more motivated” than Russia’s.

    As of three weeks ago, Zelensky was still saying his country “needs more time” to prepare for the counteroffensive. It begs some questions: is he waiting on approval or coordination from the West? Is the Ukrainian side desperate at this point to maintain morale simply by touting a future offensive? Is Kiev indeed waiting for heavier weaponry to come through from the West?

    Meanwhile, Ukrainian government official accounts are openly taunting Moscow…

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

    Currently, the Ukrainian president is applying the pressure more than ever for his Western backers to see Ukraine enter NATO, or at least to provide immediate and firm security guarantees. 

    “Our future is in the European Union. Ukraine is also ready to be part of NATO. We are waiting for NATO to be ready to accept Ukraine,” he said Thursday to journalists just ahead of a summit of the European Political Community in Chisinau, Moldova. He additionally demanded that Ukraine receive security guarantees “now” and emphasized the best way to ensure this is acceptance into NATO.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/04/2023 – 15:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jun 04

Today’s News 4th June 2023

  • Steps To World Rule: First, Destroy Humanity
    Steps To World Rule: First, Destroy Humanity

    Authored by Todd Hayen via Off-Guardoan.org,

    It has always been astounding to me that people think for even a second that their government makes decisions to help the people—that has never been the case.

    If a government’s decision helps anyone it is always an after effect…or an afterthought or a collateral unintended benefit.

    The primary intent is for power, control, and money…to satisfy individual pursuits and goals of the global narcissistic/god-complex elite.

    Anyone (which turns out to be most everyone) who supports this and thinks their government, or their nation, is operating in the people’s interest is signing their own death warrant.

    “Don’t be so negative, Dr. Todd, there are good things in life too!”

    Oh my yes, there are: newborn babies, sunsets, oceans, art, music, forests, waterfalls, sex with your lover, dogs…millions of things. But that is not what I am writing about right now. I am writing about the thing, and group of things, that will wipe all of that good stuff off the face of the earth. Sure, sure, sure, it won’t be forever. Good will prevail, but it could be a million years before it all comes back if we let it go now. And I think it is worth the fight to preserve what we’ve got.

    Needless to say, people have always followed leaders. I am not an anthropologist, but I would take a guess that even in primitive times there were leaders of tribes, chiefs, kings, queens, or whatever. I would also guess that this arrangement probably worked well more often than not. Societies were close knit; if a leader went bonkers it was probably easier to just push him or her off a cliff somewhere. And considering how different things were back then, there probably was not as much incentive to be selfish, power hungry, wampum hungry, or weird in other ways. I also would guess this complacent sort of culture, if there ever was such a thing, did not last very long.

    I’m sure adjacent tribes had some things the neighbors wanted, and sure the all too human trait of wanting power over others did not take too long to appear. Being the Grand Poobah of many people had to have the same allure it has today. Wars broke out, discrimination certainly reared its ugly head (“that tribe over there has longer necks than we do, let’s kill them!”), and of course truly important issues caused conflicts, like need for food, water, etc.

    Things were a lot worse back in history than today in a lot of ways. But things along these lines did actually get better, in my humble opinion, during a brief period in the West. The establishment of a new country with fresh ideals was a sight for sore eyes back in the late 1700’s. I don’t think anything like it, on that particular scale, had been attempted in the human experience post antiquity (which we, regardless of what we have been told, know very little about). It indeed was a grand experiment—the new colonies in North America shedding the shackles of the tyranny of King George III of England.

    The new fledgling country created a Constitution that was truly inspiring at the time. The checks and balances incorporated in that government was also inspiring, and did hold itself together fairly well for quite some time. Of course there are always problems, as there would be with anything brave and novel. But it all hung together fairly well for a bit of time.

    I’ll stop there with the history lesson, which may not be all that accurate anyway, but I think you get the picture. Even if you disagree that the new United States of America was an exciting bit of work, you probably can agree that putting one man, or woman, in charge of a lot of people, has never gone all that well. Before the presidency of the United States, there were of course Kings and Queens. Even the US was concerned about having a single person at the head of the executive branch of government, lest it be too much like a monarchy. Some continue (many actually) to believe that the US form of government is still the best, and if certain things are readjusted, the US will continue to be the greatest country in the world.

    I digress.

    Wherever you are on that fence, you must agree that things are rather different now than what the founding fathers envisioned. Why? That would take a book, or several, to address. Point here is that we can no longer trust this system to be objective, compassionate, fair, benevolent, and not self-serving and destructive. In fact, it seems that the system itself is selling out to foreign interests, and the actual sovereignty of the nation is threatened, and this threat is largely coming from within.

    We see this with other nations as well, basically handing over their sovereign rights as a nation to the likes of the WHO, or the UN, or even the WEF. What we see is much like watching a Sci-Fi motion picture where the bad guys are stripping a nation of everything that makes it the “representation of the people” into a personal self-serving slave to unelected powers.

    What does this mean? Well, when you really think about it, there is no way this sort of global take over could ever be in the best interests of other human beings living on the planet. Even if you could have a benevolent world power (which is an oxymoron, in my opinion) you would, just by its nature, have to rule in very broad strokes, i.e., everything you implemented would have to be implemented for the good of the majority. That leaves quite a few people out. The hundreds of diverse cultures and the billions of humans that make them up would have to be reduced down to manageable attributes—becoming more and more like each other.

    What does this sound like? If you thought “prison” you win the prize. Look at cultures like North Korea, and you will get some idea of what would be happening. And it is worse than that, because North Korea did not start out as a diverse culture—unlike the diversity of the entire globe.

    And all that assuming this world system is benevolent, which it most certainly is not. Of course they present themselves as benevolent, and much like all fictional evil leaders (as well as the real ones throughout history), they may even believe they are benevolent. But any world leader(s) will have to focus on the destruction of humanity before they can accomplish any sort of world control over its inhabitants. That is simply the nature of the beast. I’ll say it again: any world leader(s) will have to focus on the destruction of humanity before they can accomplish any sort of world control over its inhabitants. No two ways about it.

    And of course, in our modern age, this destruction of humanity is quite a bit more complex than literally whipping people into compliance like they did in the old days. Right now (and this will probably change) most of the psyop is accomplished either through the carrot enticement and then ruling with the stick, or through fear (stick first, carrot as a reward for compliance.)

    It is the same game.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 23:30

  • What Did The World Look Like In The Last Ice Age?
    What Did The World Look Like In The Last Ice Age?

    What did the world look like during the last ice age?

    Was it all endless glaciers and frozen ice? The answer is a partial yes—with some interesting caveats.

    The Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), colloquially called the last ice age, was a period in Earth’s history that occurred roughly 26,000 to 19,000 years ago.

    This map by cartographer Perrin Remonté offers a snapshot of the Earth from that time, using data of past sea levels and glaciers from research published in 2009, 2014, and 2021, alongside modern-day topographical data.

    Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao dives into the differences between the two Earths below.

    The Last Ice Age: Low Seas, Exposed Landmasses

    During an ice age, sea levels fall as ocean water that evaporates is stored on land on a large scale (ice sheets, ice caps, glaciers) instead of returning to the ocean.

    At the time of the LGM, the climate was cold and dry with temperatures that were 6 °C (11 °F) lower on average. Water levels in the ocean were more than 400 feet below what they are now, exposing large areas of the continental shelf.

    In the map above, these areas are represented as the gray, dry land most noticeable in a few big patches in Southeast Asia and between Russia and Alaska. Here are a few examples of regions of dry land from 20,000 years ago that are now under water:

    • A “lost continent” called Sundaland, a southeastern extension of Asia which forms the island regions of Indonesia today. Some scholars see a connection with this location and the mythical site of Atlantis, though there are many other theories.

    • The Bering land bridge, now a strait, connecting Asia and North America. It is central to the theory explaining how ancient humans crossed between the two continents.

    • Another land bridge connected the island of Great Britain with the rest of continental Europe. The island of Ireland is in turn connected to Great Britain by a giant ice sheet.

    • In Japan, the low water level made the Sea of Japan a lake, and a land bridge connected the region to the Asian mainland. The Yellow Sea—famous as a modern-day fishing location—was completely dry.

    The cold temperatures also caused the polar parts of continents to be covered by massive ice sheets, with glaciers forming in mountainous areas.

    Flora and Fauna in the Last Ice Age

    The dry climate during the last ice age brought about the expansion of deserts and the disappearance of rivers, but some areas saw increased precipitation from falling temperatures.

    Most of Canada and Northern Europe was covered with large ice sheets. The U.S. was a mix of ice sheets, alpine deserts, snow forests, semi-arid scrubland and temperate grasslands. Areas that are deserts today—like the Mojave—were filled with lakes. The Great Salt Lake in Utah is a remnant from this time.

    Africa had a mix of grasslands in its southern half and deserts in the north—the Sahara Desert existed then as well—and Asia was a mix of tropical deserts in the west, alpine deserts in China, and grasslands in the Indian subcontinent.

    Several large animals like the woolly mammoth, the mastodon, the giant beaver, and the saber-toothed tiger roamed the world in extremely harsh conditions, but sadly all are extinct today.

    However, not all megafauna from the LGM disappeared forever; many species are still alive, including the Bactrian camel, the tapir, the musk ox, and the white rhinoceros—though the latter is now an endangered species.

    Will There Be Another Ice Age?

    In a technical sense, we’re still in an “ice age” called the Quaternary Glaciation, which began about 2.6 million years ago. That’s because a permanent ice sheet has existed for the entire time, the Antarctic, which makes geologists call this entire period an ice age.

    We are currently in a relatively warmer part of that ice age, described as an interglacial period, which began 11,700 years ago. This geological epoch is known as the Holocene.

    Over billions of years, the Earth has experienced numerous glacial and interglacial periods and has had five major ice ages:

    It is predicted that temperatures will fall again in a few thousand years, leading to expansion of ice sheets. However there are a dizzying array of factors that are still not understood well enough to say comprehensively what causes (or ends) ice ages.

    A popular explanation says the degree of the Earth’s axial tilt, its wobble, and its orbital shape, are the main factors heralding the start and end of this phenomenon.

    The variations in all three lead to a change in how much prolonged sunlight parts of the world receive, which in turn can cause the creation or melting of ice sheets. But these take thousands of years to coincide and cause a significant change in climate.

    Furthermore, current industrial activities have warmed the climate considerably and may in fact delay the next ice age by 50,000-100,000 years.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 23:00

  • Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination Weakens Immune System: Study
    Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination Weakens Immune System: Study

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

    Repeated COVID-19 vaccination weakens the immune system, potentially making people susceptible to life-threatening conditions such as cancer, according to a new study.

    A man is given a COVID-19 vaccine in Chelsea, Mass., on Feb. 16, 2021. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

    Multiple doses of the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines lead to higher levels of antibodies called IgG4, which can provide a protective effect. But a growing body of evidence indicates that the “abnormally high levels” of the immunoglobulin subclass actually make the immune system more susceptible to the COVID-19 spike protein in the vaccines, researchers said in the paper.

    They pointed to experiments performed on mice that found multiple boosters on top of the initial COVID-19 vaccination “significantly decreased” protection against both the Delta and Omicron virus variants and testing that found a spike in IgG4 levels after repeat Pfizer vaccination, suggesting immune exhaustion.

    Studies have detected higher levels of IgG4 in people who died with COVID-19 when compared to those who recovered and linked the levels with another known determinant of COVID-19-related mortality, the researchers also noted.

    A review of the literature also showed that vaccines against HIV, malaria, and pertussis also induce the production of IgG4.

    “In sum, COVID-19 epidemiological studies cited in our work plus the failure of HIV, Malaria, and Pertussis vaccines constitute irrefutable evidence demonstrating that an increase in IgG4 levels impairs immune responses,” Alberto Rubio Casillas, a researcher with the biology laboratory at the University of Guadalajara in Mexico and one of the authors of the new paper, told The Epoch Times via email.

    The paper was published by the journal Vaccines in May.

    Pfizer and Moderna officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

    Both companies utilize messenger RNA (mRNA) technology in their vaccines.

    Dr. Robert Malone, who helped invent the technology, said the paper illustrates why he’s been warning about the negative effects of repeated vaccination.

    “I warned that more jabs can result in what’s called high zone tolerance, of which the switch to IgG4 is one of the mechanisms. And now we have data that clearly demonstrate that’s occurring in the case of this as well as some other vaccines,” Malone, who wasn’t involved with the study, told The Epoch Times.

    “So it’s basically validating that this rush to administer and re-administer without having solid data to back those decisions was highly counterproductive and appears to have resulted in a cohort of people that are actually more susceptible to the disease.”

    Possible Problems

    The weakened immune systems brought about by repeated vaccination could lead to serious problems, including cancer, the researchers said.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 22:30

  • Glamour Magazine Features Pregnant "Man" Cover Model For Pride Month
    Glamour Magazine Features Pregnant “Man” Cover Model For Pride Month

    Authored by Cardinal Pritchard via NotTheBee.com,

    You guys, this is getting a little ridiculous. Since when is a pregnant man something we celebrate during pride month? Like, this stuff is straight out of the circus but somehow — and I don’t know when it happened — here we are celebrating a chick who cut off her boobs and made herself look like a man and then got herself pregnant.

    Why?

    [Warning: Post-Mastectomy Photos]

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

    Why are we celebrating this?

    What makes this progressive?

    I’m genuinely curious, because I don’t think everyday liberals, progressives — whatever they want to call themselves — I don’t think they’re really into supporting this kind of stuff when it comes down to it.

    I think they realize how strange it is but they don’t want to say anything because they might be rejected by their peers.

    Yet this is what they’re supporting with their silence:

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

    From the story:

    A topless pregnant transgender man featured on the cover of Glamour U.K.’s June issue ignited a fierce reaction from online critics Thursday.

    Author Logan Brown, a 27-year-old who was born female but now identifies as a transgender man, posed as the cover star of British Glamour Magazine’s digital issue celebrating Pride Month in a painted-on suit, showcasing a large baby bump.

    Brown unexpectedly became pregnant with partner Bailey J Mills, a non-binary drag performer in the U.K., while taking a break from testosterone treatments due to health reasons, the fashion magazine said.

    “A topless pregnant transgender man.”

    Try saying that ten times fast.

    Doesn’t really roll off the tongue very well, now does it?

    And that last paragraph there is just a doozy, I tell ya…

    I can’t even do it.

    Look, I know we’re supposed to be outraged by this stuff or whatever, but I’ve grown accustomed to it when it comes to the far left. They’re weird, man, and everybody knows it.

    These are crazy times, and while everybody loves a little science fiction, this is anything but that. It’s real, and it’s right there at the top of the page. It may look like something out of a Ray Bradbury story, but it’s the truth, and when people see the truth — in this case, a mainstream magazine featuring a “pregnant transgender man” on the cover — it hits them differently.

    So stop arguing with people on Twitter and have some real conversations, why don’t ya?

    Cuz that’s the only way to get the word out as to how strange these people really are.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 21:30

  • 27 Kids Missing In Last Two Weeks – What The Hell Is Happening In Cleveland?
    27 Kids Missing In Last Two Weeks – What The Hell Is Happening In Cleveland?

    In the span of just two weeks, nearly 30 children have vanished in Cleveland, sparking huge concern from a local police chief who said he hasn’t seen anything like this in his 33-year career.

    Newburgh Heights police chief John Majoy told reporters that as many as 27 children have been reported missing in the greater Cleveland area.

    “It’s a silent crime that happens right under our noses,” he said.

    “The problem is where are they? Where do they go? They can be in a drug house or farmed to prostitution or caught up in drug trafficking or gangs.”

    He called the number of missing children, whose ages range from 12 to 17, unprecedented when speaking to reporters.

    “There’s always peaks and valleys with missing persons, but this year it seems like an extraordinary year,” he told Fox News Digital.

    “For some reason, in 2023, we’ve seen a lot more than we normally see, which is troubling in part because we don’t know what’s going on with some of these kids, whether they’re being trafficked or whether they’re involved in gang activity or drugs.”

    Cleveland police recorded that the kids were reported missing between May 2 and May 16.

    As The Sun reports, more than 15,000 children were reported missing in Ohio last year, and four of them were found dead.

    In more than 8,500 of the cases, abduction played a role, with 34 cases being the result of abductions by a noncustodial parent.

    According to a report by Ohio Attorney General, Dave Yost, only five of the cases stemmed from children being kidnapped by a stranger.

    Police were able to find 36 percent of the children but 615 were still missing when 2023 began.

    Shockingly, Cleveland Police records show another 25 youths on its missing persons roster who disappeared between May 17 and May 31.

    What the hell is happening in Cleveland?

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 21:00

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Banned By Major Social Media Site, Campaign Pages Blocked
    Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Banned By Major Social Media Site, Campaign Pages Blocked

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

    Twitter owner Elon Musk invited Democrat presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for a discussion on his Twitter Spaces after Kennedy said his campaign was suspended by Meta-owned Instagram.

    “Interesting… when we use our TeamKennedy email address to set up @instagram accounts we get an automatic 180-day ban. Can anyone guess why that’s happening?” he wrote on Twitter.

    An accompanying image shows that Instagram said it “suspended” his “Team Kennedy” account and that there “are 180 days remaining to disagree” with the company’s decision.

    Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. attends Keep it Clean to benefit Waterkeeper Alliance in Los Angeles, Calif., on March 1, 2018. (John Sciulli/Getty Images for Waterkeeper Alliance)

    In response to his post, Musk wrote: “Would you like to do a Spaces discussion with me next week?” Kennedy agreed, saying he would do it Monday at 2 p.m. ET.

    Hours later, Kennedy wrote that Instagram “still hasn’t reinstated my account, which was banned years ago with more than 900k followers.” He argued that “to silence a major political candidate is profoundly undemocratic.”

    “Social media is the modern equivalent of the town square,” the candidate, who is the nephew of former President John F. Kennedy, wrote. “How can democracy function if only some candidates have access to it?”

    The Epoch Times approached Instagram for comment.

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

    It’s not the first time that either Facebook or Instagram has taken action against Kennedy. In 2021, Instagram banned him from posting claims about vaccine safety and COVID-19.

    After he was banned by the platform, Kennedy said that his Instagram posts raised legitimate concerns about vaccines and were backed by research. His account was banned just days after Facebook and Instagram announced they would block the spread of what they described as misinformation about vaccines, including research saying the shots cause autism, are dangerous, or are ineffective.

    “This kind of censorship is counterproductive if our objective is a safe and effective vaccine supply,” he said at the time.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 20:30

  • Biden Wants Sanctions Against Uganda Because Its Government Passed Anti-LGBT Laws
    Biden Wants Sanctions Against Uganda Because Its Government Passed Anti-LGBT Laws

    Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

    In an excellent display of how US foreign policy can be used as a means of pandering to domestic interest groups, the Biden administration has threatened to impose sanctions on Uganda as punishment for that regime’s adoption of new laws criminalizing some types of homosexual behavior. 

    While it is abundantly clear that this move from the Ugandan state presents absolutely no threat to any vital US interest, the Biden administration apparently believes the situation requires immediate action by the US regime.

    According to Axios, the Biden Administration’s proposed actions

    includ[e] whether the U.S. will continue to safely deliver services under the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and other forms of assistance and investments. … Biden administration officials will also review Uganda’s eligibility for the African Growth and Opportunity Act, which provides eligible sub-Saharan African countries with duty-free access to the U.S. market for hundreds of products.

    What exactly are these new laws that require the State Department to get involved in the internal affairs of a country 8,000 miles away? According to The Hill, 

    The new anti-gay law would impose the death penalty in cases of “aggravated homosexuality” and would impose a life sentence for engaging in gay sex. The state defines “aggravated homosexuality” as homosexual acts carried out by those infected with H.I.V. or homosexual acts that involve children, disabled people, or those drugged against their will. 

    Or put another way, the death penalty will be imposed in many cases on those found guilty of engaging in sex with children and with people unable to consent. Even in those cases, these are pretty harsh penalties, and certainly few Americans—from any part of the political spectrum—would support such measures. 

    The proposed method of punishing Ugandans is rather curious, however. Note that the sanctions being discussed include—ironically—cutting off AIDS relief dollars, plus dollars that the regime has long insisted are absolutely vital to economic development and poverty relief in the developing world. If that’s true, then the US regime proposes trying to impoverish ordinary Ugandans as punishment for acts of the Ugandan regime. 

    It is also notable that the US regime appears to now be fixated on such laws in Uganda when similar laws already exist on the books of several US allies. For example, the death penalty can be imposed for various homosexual acts in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. “Death by stoning” is also inflicted on alleged homosexuals in US ally Pakistan. Moreover, after 20-years of US occupation, Afghanistan imposes similar punishments. Those are just the places where the death penalty is potentially imposed. Homosexual acts are criminalized in a variety of countries that retain friendly relations with the US including Egypt—the top recipient of US foreign aid—plus Iraq, Jordan, South Sudan, and Nigeria. Homosexual sex between males can bring life imprisonment in Tanzania. 

    So why is Uganda now so much in the crosshairs while Saudi Arabia escapes notice? 

    The fact is the US regime is threatening sanctions on ordinary Ugandans because it can.  Given that there is no sizable or electorally powerful Ugandan population in the US, it costs the administration nothing to denounce Uganda while also virtue signaling to extremely powerful and well-funded domestic LGBT interest groups. Denouncing the Saudis or the Qataris, on the other, hand might bring geopolitical “complications” and thus you won’t hear much about Saudi or Qatari punishment of homosexual acts in the US media or in Washington. 

    The US’s Moralistic and Imperialist Impulses 

    Moreover, Washington’s willingness to immediately begin threatening sanctions against some faraway country has been part of the overall imperialist impulse that has prevailed in Washington since the end of the Cold War. This was when the US shifted toward become an ever-more-aggressive world morality police that would attempt to globally “protect right” in vague mimicry of how the federal government—via the federal courts and threats of cutting off federal funding—dictates to the states what counts as acceptable law.

    This new scheme was apparent by 1994 when Murray Rothbard wrote a sarcastic article suggesting that the US be prepared to invade any foreign country where the local regime has not sufficiently embraced the American regime’s cultural ideals. The key, Rothbard contends, was to define every foreign “deviation” as a threat to US national security. Rothbard noted that even by the mid 1990s, American interventionists such as the neoconservatives had already “cunningly redefined ‘national interest’ to cover every ill, every grievance, under the sun.”

    This naturally would lead, Rothbard suggested, to the need to intervene in nearly every foreign country on earth:

    Is someone starving somewhere, however remote from our borders? That’s a problem for our national interest. Is someone or some group killing some other group anywhere in the world? That’s our national interest. Is some government not a “democracy” as defined by our liberal-neocon elites? That challenges our national interest. Is someone committing Hate Thought anywhere on the globe? That has to be solved in our national interest. …And so every grievance everywhere constitutes our national interest, and it becomes the obligation of good old Uncle Sam, as the Only Remaining Superpower and the world’s designated Mr. Fixit, to solve each and every one of these problems. For “we cannot stand idly by” while anyone anywhere starves, hits someone over the head, is undemocratic, or commits a Hate Crime.

    And so, since no other countries shape up to U.S. standards in a world of Sole Superpower they must be severely chastised by the U.S., I make a Modest Proposal for the only possible consistent and coherent foreign policy: the U.S. must, very soon, Invade the Entire World! Sanctions are peanuts; we must invade every country in the world, perhaps softening them up beforehand with a wonderful high-tech missile bombing show courtesy of CNN. 

    The good news in the Uganda case is that at least we’re not hearing any calls for actual regime change or “boots on the ground” in Uganda (so far). 

    Fortunately, many Americans haven’t yet bought into the idea that every objectionable act by foreign regimes can be defined as a threat to US national interests. This is why even today, when Washington targets some foreign regime for “regime change” or economic sanctions or a volley of cruise missiles, the American interventionists usually try to at least suggest that the target regime is some kind of threat to US “national interests.” 

    Experience suggests that if the regime really wants to get the American public riled up about a new war, Washington has to make the case for something beyond mere “humanitarian” intervention. This is why the Bush administration felt it had to trump up accusations of “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq. It’s why President Obama claimed the US has a “national security interest in … ensuring that we’ve got a stable Syria.” It’s why those who wanted a US war with Bosnia insisted that conflict in the Balkans in the mid 1990s provided a threat to “vital” US interests such as “European stability” and NATO unity. 

    Sometimes, though, some foreign countries are so obviously not a threat to the US that “humanitarian” meddling through military action isn’t politically viable. In those cases, the regime usually falls back on “sanctions.” 

    This strategy has been around a long time. Murray Rothbard noticed this trend in 1994 as well, and he listed just some of the real-life suggested sanctions that could be employed to whip foreign regimes into line:

    In recent weeks, in addition to humanitarian troops, there had been escalating talk of American “sanctions”: against North Korea of course, but also against Japan (for not buying more U.S. exports), against Haiti, against the Bosnian Serbs… Jesse Jackson wants the U.S. to invade Nigeria pronto, and now we have Senato[r] Kerry (D., Mass.) calling for sanctions against our ancient foe, Canada, for not welcoming New England fishermen in its waters.

    Uganda is just one of a great many regimes targeted in this fashion in recent decades. 

    Yet the landscape has changed considerably since 1994. In 2023, the US obsession with sanctioning dozens of countries has backfired and begun to isolate the US more and more from the developing world and from any regime that doesn’t enjoy taking orders from Washington. This includes the regimes in some of the world largest economies, including China, India, and Brazil. The US’s tendency to incessantly turn to sanctions to make a political point—and the apparent capriciousness with which the US regime is willing to do so—only motivates the world’s regimes to insulate themselves from the US, whether through minimizing dollar transactions or forming tighter alliances with potential allies outside the US orbit. We may soon find Uganda looking for a similar way out. 

    Read More:

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 19:30

  • Wagner Ready To Defend Russia's Border Region After Whole Towns Evacuated 
    Wagner Ready To Defend Russia’s Border Region After Whole Towns Evacuated 

    The war from across the border has impacted citizens in the Belgorod region of Russia to the point that many towns and villages have been evacuated, with some looking like ghost towns–this after armed groups mounted multiple raids since the war’s start–as well as increased shelling and rocket fire. Just two days ago the anti-Moscow “Russian Volunteer Corps” said they launched another attack out of Ukraine, after a bigger one nearly two weeks ago left multiple casualties and many saboteurs killed. 

    The New York Times wrote on Saturday that “Shebekino, a town of 40,000 six miles from the border, has effectively become a new part of the front line as Ukraine has intensified attacks inside Russia, including on residential areas near its own borders.” This is all upending the lives of residents in the border region, akin to what already happened long ago on the Ukrainian side of the border. “The spate of assaults, most recently by militia groups aligned against Moscow, has sparked the largest military evacuation effort in Russia in decades,” the report underscored. The past days have witnessed area residents move into temporary shelters, including the large Belgorod arena in the oblast capital.

    Line outside a temporary shelter set up at the Belgorod Arena in the regional capital of Belgorod on Friday, AFP

    On Saturday the controversial founder and leader of Russia’s Wagner mercenary group has offered in a message to the public that he stands ready to send his fighters to protect the border region. 

    But as part of the ongoing public spat with the regular military chain of command, Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin blamed the army for failing in its duties, given all the latest Ukrainian attacks on Belgorod. 

    “If the defense ministry, in the near future, does not stop what is happening in the Belgorod region.. then of course we will come to defend Russian land,” Prigozhin said on Telegram. 

    “The civilian population is dying in Belgorod,” he added, and warned that he would not wait for an “invitation” to deploy his forces there. Earlier in the week Prigozhin went so far as to say some top Russian military commanders should be investigated for crimes related to failure of duty.

    Already the Russian military has been active in the region, particularly after the May 21-22 ground incursion by a militia group sent from Ukraine, which saw armed groups take over multiple villages for a short period of time. 

    On Saturday two more civilians were killed in cross-border fire from Ukraine. This brings the overall death toll from the area to seven killed just this week. “Since this morning, the district of Shebekino has been under shelling of the Ukrainian armed forces,” Belgorod governor Vyacheslav Gladkov said in a statement. One victim was described as an elderly woman, while another woman died from her wounds in the village of Bezlyudovka. 

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

    A couple of others were wounded in the shelling. Prigozhin’s message of potentially sending his fighters to defend the area comes amid rising frustration over the ramped-up attacks. Governor Gladkov has as of the end of this week counted 500 total attacks throughout the conflict, which has included instances of rocket and mortar fire. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 19:00

  • Apple Customers Say It's Hard To Get Money Out Of Goldman Sachs Savings Accounts
    Apple Customers Say It’s Hard To Get Money Out Of Goldman Sachs Savings Accounts

    Authored by Bryan Jung via The Epoch Times,

    Some Apple customers have found it difficult to access their savings from a new account program in partnership with Goldman Sachs.

    After the new Apple savings account was launched in April to great fanfare, the system has been facing serious teething problems, according to customers.

    The annual yield on an Apple savings account offers a generous 4.15 percent interest rate, dwarfing the current savings account yield of 0.39 percent, according to Bankrate.

    The account’s interest rate is about ten times the average yield offered by mainstream banks, making it attractive to new customers and falls well below the Federal Reserve’s borrowing rate of between 5 percent and 5.25 percent.

    This allows users to earn a sizeable amount in interest over the course of a year.

    Some reports suggest that the launch had already attracted as many as $1 billion in deposits within four days of launch.

    Goldman is the primary issuer of Apple’s new credit card, which is the only way a customer can open a savings account with the tech giant.

    Apple views its new account program as a way to expand iPhone usage into its customer’s daily financial interactions and keep them linked to its networks, while Goldman benefits from additional depositors.

    After signing up for the credit card, Apple users can open an account in less than a minute from their iPhones, with no minimum balance requirement.

    The accounts have zero deposit fees and offer a maximum balance of $250,000.

    Depositors are free to access their money at any time, unlike many normal bank accounts, which limit customers to six major cash withdrawals a year.

    New Apple Accounts Face Severe Teething Issues

    However, some customers have faced delayed money transfers, while others reported having trouble transferring money from their new Apple accounts, according to the Wall Street Journal.

    A few are even reported having trouble accessing their funds or even seeing them vanish during transfers from Apple to another bank.

    Nathan Thacker, a resident of Georgia, told The Wall Street Journal he had trouble transferring $1,700 from his Apple account to JPMorgan Chase since May 15.

    After contacting Goldman Sachs’ customer service department multiple times, he was told to wait a few days.

    The money only arrived in Thacker’s account after The Wall Street Journal contacted the bank about his problem and similar experiences from other customers.

    Stories on social media are filled with similar experiences from customers unable to access their Apple savings accounts.

    Large transfers from new account programs like Apple’s have been triggering anti-money laundering red flags or other security concerns that require additional reviews by the banks, according to experts in the AML field.

    The experts said that anti-money laundering alerts tend to cause delays that last, on average, about five or so days.

    Kevin Smyth, from Minnesota, wrote in a May 25 post on Twitter directed at Apple CEO Tim Cook: “Was your plan to partner with a bank that holds people’s life savings hostage?”

    Smyth claimed he had been trying to transfer $10,000 from his Apple account to U.S. Bank on May 16.

    The following morning, he was forced to sell about $12,000 of stock in order to have cash on hand.

    Smyth has since decided to pull $200,000 savings from his Apple account, move it back to American Express and close it, despite Goldman having resolved the issue.

    Goldman Sachs Defends Partnership With Apple

    Goldman Sachs said the difficulties were being faced by a “limited” number of customers and that the delays were often added due to rigorous processes designed to protect user identity.

    A spokesman for Goldman Sachs told The Daily Mail in regard to consumer complaints, “The customer response to the new Savings account for Apple Card users has been excellent and beyond our expectations.”

    “While the vast majority of customers see no delays in transferring their funds, in a limited number of cases, a user may experience a delayed transfer due to processes in place designed to help protect their accounts,” he added.

    “While we would not comment on specific customer interactions, we take our obligation to protect our customers’ deposits very seriously and work to create a balance between a seamless customer experience and that protection,” the spokesman said.

    Meanwhile, Goldman has announced cutbacks on its consumer lending and announced in February that it was “considering strategic alternatives” for the unit that operates its credit-card partnership with Apple.

    The investment bank has also faced recent controversies over problems such as regulatory probes, particularly when dealing with lower net-worth clients.

    The Epoch Times reached out to Apple for comment.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 18:30

  • India Train Disaster Death Toll Jumps To 288, Another 900 Injured
    India Train Disaster Death Toll Jumps To 288, Another 900 Injured

    Recovery efforts are underway, with large excavators trying to untangle the wreckage, after India’s worst train disaster in decades happened in the eastern state of Odisha on Friday.

    At least 288 people have been confirmed killed with more than 900 injured, many seriously, in what’s being described as a “three-way accident”. Two passenger trains collided, with the massive wreck then impacting a nearby idled freight train. 

    Via AP

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi traveled to the site on Saturday, seeking to console the families of the deceased. “The people we have lost, we will not be able to bring them back. But the government is with their families in their grief,” Modi said. “This is a very serious incident for the government. We have given directions for all lines of inquiry, and whoever is found responsible will be given the strongest punishment. They will not be spared.”

    International correspondents from the site are describing gut-wrenching, horrific scenes. “In humid air filled with the odor of human flesh, relatives went through the harrowing exercise of identifying their loved ones from about 120 dead bodies lined up on the ground after the crash on Friday night,” a New York Times report describes. 

    “Among those searching was Miyah Jan Mullah, who had come from neighboring West Bengal to look for his son, Musavir, who had been on his way to his tailoring job in Chennai,” the tragic account continues. “When Mr. Mullah finally found Musavir’s body, most of it was burned, but his face was largely intact.”

    Footage shows a huge area of mangled wreckage stretching dozens of cars…

    Amid rising frustration and anger directed at authorities among families searching for answers, a preliminary government reports has said the derailment was possibly the result of a signal error.

    A consensus sequence of events and timeline has emerged as follows: 

    The high-speed passenger train traveling from Kolkata, the Coromandel Express, slammed into a freight train that had been idling at a small-town station, Bahanaga Bazar, around 7 p.m. local time Friday. The passenger train was “going at full speed across the station as it was not supposed to stop” there, the report said, according to The New York Times.

    After hitting the freight train, the passenger train, which was carrying 1,257 passengers, derailed. Twenty-one of its coaches bounced off the track, with three more cars landing onto another track.

     “Simultaneously” the Yesvantpur-Howrah Express, a passenger train with 1,039 aboard heading in the opposite direction from Bengaluru to Kolkata, was on the track that the three dislocated coaches lay. This second collision knocked the two coaches of the third train off its tracks.

    Emergency services with rescue dogs have reportedly halted the search for live victims and have now turned to body recovery and identification. One survivor and eyewitness told Reuters he saw “Families crushed away, limbless bodies and a bloodbath on the tracks.” 

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

    Given the still rising death toll this could in the end surpass the country’s biggest disaster in its history, which occurred in August 1995. The Firozabad Train Collision near New Delhi killed 358 people.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 18:00

  • Study Falsely Linking Hydroxychloroquine To Increased Deaths Frequently Cited Even After Retraction
    Study Falsely Linking Hydroxychloroquine To Increased Deaths Frequently Cited Even After Retraction

    Authored by Jessie Zhang via Thje Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    An Australian and Swedish investigation has found that among the hundreds of COVID-19 research papers that have been withdrawn, a retracted study linking the drug hydroxychloroquine to increased mortality was the most cited paper.

    Hydroxychloroquine sulphate tablets. (Memories Over Mocha/Shutterstock)

    With 1,360 citations at the time of data extraction, researchers in the field were still referring to the paper “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis” long after it was retracted.

    Authors of the analysis involving the University of Wollongong, Linköping University, and Western Sydney Local Health District wrote (pdf) that “most researchers who cite retracted research do not identify that the paper is retracted, even when submitting long after the paper has been withdrawn.”

    “This has serious implications for the reliability of published research and the academic literature, which need to be addressed,” they said.

    “Retraction is the final safeguard against academic error and misconduct, and thus a cornerstone of the entire process of knowledge generation.”

    Scientists Question Findings

    Over 100 medical professionals wrote an open letter, raising ten major issues with the paper.

    These included the fact that there was “no ethics review” and “unusually small reported variances in baseline variables, interventions and outcomes,” as well as “no mention of the countries or hospitals that contributed to the data source and no acknowledgments to their contributions.”

    A bottle of Hydroxychloroquine at the Medicine Shoppe in Wilkes-Barre, Pa on March 31, 2020. Some politicians and doctors were sparring over whether to use hydroxychloroquine against the new coronavirus, with many scientists saying the evidence is too thin to recommend it yet. (Mark Moran/The Citizens’ Voice via AP)

    Other concerns were that the average daily doses of hydroxychloroquine were higher than the FDA-recommended amounts, which would present skewed results.

    They also found that the data that was reportedly from Australian patients did not seem to match data from the Australian government.

    Eventually, the study led the World Health Organization to temporarily suspend the trial of hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19 patients and to the UK regulatory body, MHRA, requesting the temporary pause of recruitment into all hydroxychloroquine trials in the UK.

    France also changed its national recommendation of the drug in COVID-19 treatments and halted all trials.

    Currently, a total of 337 research papers on COVID-19 have been retracted, according to Retraction Watch.

    Further retractions are expected as the investigation of proceeds.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 17:30

  • Comparing Population Pyramids Around The World
    Comparing Population Pyramids Around The World

    Demographic data can reveal all kinds of insights about a population, from the country’s fertility and mortality rates to how certain events and policies have shaped the makeup of a population.

    As Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte and Bhabna Banerjee detail below, population pyramids are one of the best ways to visualize population data, and comparing the pyramids of various countries and regions side-by-side can reveal unexpected insights and differences between groups.

    This graphic uses population data from the United Nations to compare the demographics of some select nations and regions of the world, showcasing how much age distributions can vary.

    Three Types of Population Pyramids

    Although population pyramids can come in all shapes and sizes, most generally fall into three distinct categories:

    • Expansive Pyramids: Recognized by their traditional “pyramid-like” shape with a broad base and narrow top, expansive pyramids reflect a population with a high birth rate along with a high mortality rate which is most common in developing countries.

    • Constrictive Pyramids: With a narrow base and thicker middle and top sections of the pyramid, constrictive pyramids often occur in developed economies whose populations have low birth rates and long life expectancies.

    • Stationary Pyramids: These pyramids showcase an evenly distributed population across age groups, often found in newly-developed countries which have stable birth and mortality rates.

    Each population pyramid is essentially a visual snapshot of a nation’s current demographic breakdown, shaped by fluctuating birth and mortality rates as well as changes to immigration and social policies.

    Understanding the inherent risks associated with different pyramid types can help give insight into the challenges these populations face.

    The Risks of Different Population Pyramid Types

    Each type of population pyramid structure has unique challenges and advantages often characterized by the country or region’s current stage of economic development.

    Populations with expansive pyramids, such as the one representing the continent of Africa, have the advantage of a larger youth and working-aged population, however this advantage can be rendered null if job growth, education, and health care aren’t prioritized.

    Countries with constrictive pyramids like Japan face the challenge of supporting their outsized aging population with a diminishing working-aged population. While immigration and increasing birth rates can help in both the short and long term, due to the working population being outnumbered, countries with constrictive pyramids must find ways to increase their productivity to avoid potential declines in economic growth.

    China and India’s Demographics Compared

    After the world’s population reached eight billion people last year, 2023 brought a new population milestone as India overtook China as the world’s most populous country.

    When you compare the two nations’ population pyramids, you can see how India’s population has a strong base of young and working-aged people compared to China’s more constrictive population pyramid that also features a higher median age.

    This demographic difference is largely shaped by China’s one-child policy which since 2021 was loosened to be a three-child policy. As a result, China’s total fertility rate is around 1.2 today, in contrast to India’s total fertility rate of 2.0.

    While India is set to ride the productivity boom of its large working-age population, the country will have to ensure it can keep its population pyramid stable as the majority of the population ages and total fertility rates continue to decline.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 17:00

  • Minors Banned From Attending Orlando Furry Convention Under New Florida Law
    Minors Banned From Attending Orlando Furry Convention Under New Florida Law

    Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    An upcoming Furry convention in Florida will ban children from attending this year’s event due to a new state law.

    The Megaplex 2023 convention, scheduled for Sept. 15–17 in Orlando, caters to a subculture of people interested in anthropomorphic characters—animals with human characteristics.

    A furry allows himself or herself to be brushed at Eurofurence in Berlin, Germany, on Aug. 17, 2016. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

    Furry enthusiasts dress in animal costumes that reflect human characteristics or personas.

    But sexual predators have taken advantage of the Furry craze because they know the fun-looking costumes and play-acting helps attract children, an expert told The Epoch Times.

    And in 2021, a woman said she reported to Megaplex organizers that she was assaulted by a “convicted pedophile” at the event. Convention organizers later responded with an apology.

    A person dressed as a Furry sits under blooming cherry trees along the Tidal Basin in Washington on April 5, 2021. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

    This year, children won’t be allowed, the organizer announced with regret on Twitter. The May 24 post explained that attendance this year would be limited to participants 18 or older in order to comply with Florida’s new “The Protection of Children Act.”

    The bill, signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis in May, responded to parental concerns over live drag performances in front of children. The law prohibits minors from attending any “adult live performance.”

    The state can pull the license of any establishment that allows a child to attend a prohibited performance. Or it can issue a $5,000 fine for a first offense, and a $10,000 fine for a second offense and beyond.

    Laws Protecting Children in Florida

    Since signing the legislation, DeSantis has announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president in the 2024 race.

    In his campaign, DeSantis frequently calls attention to his actions to strengthen parental rights laws in his state.

    Those same laws, such as the Parental Rights in Education Act that he signed in 2022, have made him a target of the political Left.

    That legislation, misleadingly dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” law, prevents teachers from initiating class discussions on sexual orientation and gender ideology with students in 3rd grade and younger.

    The law doesn’t prevent teachers from answering children’s questions about LGBT topics and doesn’t prevent children from talking about their LGBT loved ones.

    Yet media misinformation has swirled about the measure, with many pundits and reporters claiming that saying the word “gay” has been outlawed in Florida, and can draw penalties.

    The law was amended in 2023, to be expanded through 8th grade.

    A participant not yet in his animal suit gets a furry greeting at Eurofurence in Berlin, Germany, on August 17, 2016. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

    Though the Furry trend has become popular in schools, adults have been participating in “Furry fandom” for years, attending conferences and congregating online and in person.

    Megaplex issued a statement saying restricting minors from the event may only be temporary.

    “Megaplex has welcomed younger fandom members and their families since its inception, and making this change was very difficult,” an organizer wrote on Twitter.

    “While this change impacts the 2023 convention, it is unsure if this will have to continue for future years. It is our hope that this change is temporary and that we can welcome members of all ages back next year,” the statement continued.

    Megaplex made no mention of the alleged 2021 assault on Twitter.

    But the incident led the organization to issue an online apology and revise its convention rules to prohibit registered sex offenders from attending conventions.

    Furry enthusiasts attend the Eurofurence 2015 in Berlin, Germany, on Aug. 21, 2015. (Adam Berry/Getty Images)

    “Our apology for yesterdays [sic] post and our commitment to do better” was posted to the organization’s website on Aug. 12, 2021, saying the initial response “was insensitive, hurt the survivor, and it didn’t address the concerns of our community. We downplayed the severity of the affected attendee’s experiences.”

    That was followed by another Megaplex update promising to improve safety.

    The alleged female victim said she reported to Megaplex that a man attending the Furry event came into her convention hotel room she was sharing with friends. He held her arms and tried to force her onto the bed while others were present.

    According to her Aug. 10 posts, the man continued to stalk and grab her after she told him to leave her alone.

    Her posts the next day expressed her disappointment that convention organizers didn’t get involved, telling her it was a police matter. She also posted information alleging the man who assaulted her was a “convicted pedo.”

    Her account appeared in an article on Sankaku Complex, an adult website dedicated to anime and Furry fandom discussion.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 16:30

  • Over $1.3 Billion Of U.S. Tax Dollars Sent To China And Russia
    Over $1.3 Billion Of U.S. Tax Dollars Sent To China And Russia

    More than $1.3 billion U.S. tax dollars were sent to Russia and China over the past five years (since 2017), according to a new analysis released today by Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and OpenTheBooks.com auditors. This amount likely doesn’t reflect the total amount because federal agencies do not follow the trail of tax dollars to their final destination.

    Senator Ernst and Congressman Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.) are leading the charge to create transparency and accountability for the taxpayer dollars that are being handed out in China and Russia. Today, they are introducing the Tracking Receipts to Adversarial Countries for Knowledge of Spending (TRACKS) Act that would require every penny from a government grant paid to any organization in China and Russia to be tracked and publicly disclosed.

    Senator Ernst and OpenTheBooks determined more than $490 million from U.S. grants and contracts were paid to organizations in China over the past five years and another $870 million were paid to entities in Russia.

    “Holding firms responsible to publicly report where and how they use their grants and contract awards can deputize private citizens and make them part of the solution. Radical transparency is revolutionizing U.S. public policy and is the information machine for democracy. Everyone has a stake in a more transparent, effective government.”

    Some of these projects in Russia and China funded by taxpayer dollars already tracked down include:

    • $58.7 million from Department of State, including $96,875 for gender equality through exhibition of New Yorker magazine cartoons

    • $51.6 million from Department of Defense, including $6 million for tech support of the military “deployment and distribution command” software – delivering equipment and supplies anywhere our military is deployed, even though the DOD Inspector General warned the Pentagon about using Chinese IT companies on DOD projects

    • $4.7 million to a Russian company for health insurance that was sanctioned by the U.S. in 2022

    • $4.2 million from Health and Human Services, including $770,466 to a state-run lab in Russia to put cats on treadmills

    • $2.4 million on Russian alcohol and addiction research

    • $2 million funneled to China’s state-run Wuhan Institute of Virology to conduct dangerous experiments on bat coronaviruses and transgenic mice

    • $1.6 million to Chinese companies from National School Lunch Program, which means taxpayer dollars from the CARES Act meant for American farmers went to Chinese ag exporters

    • $1.45 million for pandemic virus tracking in Russia

    • Subsidies for the Russian space program by funding the Russia Space Agency and vendors

    * * *

    And while it’s great that the US is tracking “every penny” paid to adversarial countries, why doesn’t the government also track every penny spent to friendly countries – what little is left of them – not to mention domestic recipients? Last time we checked, the Pentagon – the biggest money laundering machine in the world, far greater than bitcoin ever could be – which can only account for 39% of its $3.5 trillion in assets and racked up $35 trillion in accounting changes in just one year, and has never passed a full audit. Maybe instead of worrying so much about the few billions going to the Wuhan lab – what’s done is done – someone can rein in the trillions in untracable spending and money laundering that takes place right under the noses of America’s elected bureaucrats.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 16:00

  • Biden Signs Debt Ceiling Bill, Ending Monthslong Political Battle
    Biden Signs Debt Ceiling Bill, Ending Monthslong Political Battle

    Authored by Lawrence Wilson via The Epoch Times,

    President Joe Biden signed the Fiscal Responsibility Act on Saturday, suspending the debt ceiling for 19 months and bringing a monthslong political battle to a close.

    The compromise legislation negotiated by Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) passed both houses of Congress with bipartisan support this week, averting a potential default on the nation’s financial obligations.

    “Passing this budget agreement was critical. The stakes could not have been higher,” Biden said in a Friday evening address to the nation from the Oval Office.

    Congressional leaders in both parties, eager to avoid financial disaster, endorsed the bill.

    McCarthy referred to the legislation in historic terms, calling it the biggest spending cut ever enacted by Congress. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said, “We’ve saved the country from the scourge of default,” after the bill passed the Senate on June 1.

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) both supported the bill.

    Biden vs. McCarthy

    The president’s signature ends a monthslong cold war with McCarthy over terms for raising the nation’s $31.4 trillion debt ceiling.

    The Financial Responsibility Act suspends the debt ceiling until Jan. 1, 2025, cuts non-defense discretionary spending slightly in 2024, and limits discretionary spending growth to 1 percent in 2025.

    The agreement also contains permitting reforms for oil and gas drilling, changes to work requirements for some social welfare programs, and clawbacks of $20 billion in IRS funding and $30 billion in unspent COVID-19 relief funds, among other provisions.

    President Joe Biden hosts debt limit talks with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and other congressional leaders in the Oval Office at the White House on May 9, 2023. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

    In the absence of congressional action to allow additional borrowing, the United States would have lacked the ready cash to pay all of its bills on June 5, according to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen.

    Yellen announced in January that the country was in danger of reaching its limit.

    McCarthy then said Congress would not increase the limit without an agreement from the White House to cut spending. Biden said he would not negotiate over lifting the limit because that would put the full faith and credit of the United States at risk.

    The impasse was broken in late April when the House passed the Limit, Save, Grow Act, authorizing a $1.5 trillion increase in borrowing along with spending cuts and other measures favored by Republicans.

    Biden then agreed to negotiate with McCarthy, resulting in the Fiscal Responsibility Act.

    Opposition

    A vocal minority of lawmakers in both parties opposed the bill.

    Some Republicans believed the agreement conceded too much to Democrats. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) nearly blocked the bill in committee, but it cleared by a single vote.

    Some Democrats opposed the agreement because it cuts discretionary spending and changes work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). They said those provisions would hurt working Americans and those in need.

    ​​House Rules Committee member Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) speaks at the Capitol on Jan. 30. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

    A group of Senate Republicans led by Lindsey Graham (R-N.C.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) initially opposed the bill due to concerns about the level of defense spending. They were brought on board by assurances from Schumer and McConnell that emergency defense appropriations could be added later if needed.

    The bill passed the House by a vote of 314 to 117 on May 31. Forty-six Democrats and 71 Republicans voted no.

    The Senate passed the measure 63 to 36 the next day. Four Democrats, one Independent, and 41 Republicans voted no.

    Mixed Reactions

    Outside the Capitol, some observers applauded the bipartisan effort while others echoed the complaints of congressional dissenters.

    “This kind of compromise is exactly how divided government should work,” Kelly Veney Darnell, interim CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center, said in a June 2 statement.

    EJ Antoni, a research fellow at The Heritage Institute, said “conservatives have little to celebrate with this deal, and much about which to complain.” According to Antoni, the bill doesn’t actually cut spending. He called it “left-wing legislation” in a statement published June 1.

    Navin Nayak, counselor at the Center for American Progress, endorsed the legislation unenthusiastically, saying it was imperfect but necessary in a May 31 statement. Nayak said the Mountain Valley Pipeline, green-lighted by the bill, puts the safety of thousands at risk and the added work requirements will increase hunger in America.

    Congress must now work the provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act into a federal budget and the dozen appropriations bills required to fund the government in the coming year.

    The 2024 fiscal year begins on Oct. 1.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 15:30

  • Washington 'Equity Director' Fired; Investigation Finds Racism, Sexism And Messages From God
    Washington ‘Equity Director’ Fired; Investigation Finds Racism, Sexism And Messages From God

    Washing State has fired their anti-racist ‘director of the Office of Equity’ for being a huge racist, according to findings from an internal investigation obtained by The Center Square.

    Karen A. Johnson (Courtesy of the Washington Office of Equity)

    Hired in 2021, Dr. Karen Johnson was fired on May 17 by Gov. Jay Inslee after an internal investigation launched in November – and published nine days later – found that she engaged in “inappropriate conduct,” which included “inappropriate or insensitive comments,” including ethnic remarks.

    For example, Johnson, pictured above, told one female employee that she couldn’t wear her hair in braids because it was “cultural appropriation.” (Oh?)

    More specific allegations via The Center Square;

    • Dr. Johnson accusing certain OFM employees of being paternalistic during a meeting, then getting “infuriated” and telling her staff to log off the meeting when Chief Financial Officer David Schumacher indicated that she did not know what the term meant and the dictionary definition was read.
    • Dr. Johnson “alluding” to employees that she received messages from God and telling specific people that “God had instructed her to hire them and that they would be disappointing God by not accepting the role.”
    • Dr. Johnson, who is Black, telling a Mexican employee that “this may take some time for me because I generally distrust Mexican people. Mexican people have the option of being White when it is convenient for them.”

    The investigation, which involved more than a dozen witnesses and 2.649 pages of documentation, also found that Johnson “was disorganized and lacked adequate structure and process,” and publicly criticized employees.

    In a letter to the law firm which conducted the investigation, Johnson said: “If this decision means that, by default, what has been said about me without me stands as fact, so be it,” adding “I must keep a clear conscious by not participating in this triangulating behavior, one of my non-negotiables. My truth is that I am more than willing to make myself available to meet with you and the person(s) bringing the allegation(s)/concern(s), as is my custom. Seeking reconciliation is more important to me than seeking to prove who is right. My destiny depends on this decision and destiny demands that I move forward.”

    Investigators also found that since the office was set up in 2021, five out of 17 employees resigned. “Each of the individuals who resigned attributed their decision to leave, at least in part, to a chaotic, overburdened, and disrespectful workplace culture created by Dr. Johnson.”

    Employees raised several concerns, including a lack of organizational process and procedures, micromanagement, and a lack of work-life balance, as well as “inappropriate or insensitive comments.”

    One employee was “publicly chastised” for attending a meeting they had been invited to at the governor’s office without getting permission or notifying Johnson, and another reported being “shamed” by Johnson in a private meeting and in public.

    Investigators said several people raised concerns of “biased and insensitive conduct,” including stereotyping and bias based on gender, bias against Mexicans, and tokenism related to military veteran status. –Seattle Times

    Two employees “were told to wear makeup, specifically lipstick,” according to the report – a claim denied by Johnson.

    According to Johnson, “the staff she was given did not have the skill set needed to operate with emotional maturity. Her staff operated like they needed a boss to tell them what to do. They could not operate at the speed of trust with character and competence.”

    Also, at least two of them were Mexican – so Johnson would “generally distrust” them.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 15:00

  • Blinken Dismisses Calls For A Ceasefire, Says US Must Build Up Ukraine's Military
    Blinken Dismisses Calls For A Ceasefire, Says US Must Build Up Ukraine’s Military

    Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com,

    The Secretary of State called for Washington to continue to put militarism before diplomacy…

    The US will focus its efforts on arming Ukraine and not attempting to bring the war to a negotiated settlement, America’s top diplomat said. Secretary of State Antony Blinken laid out a plan to massively expand Kiev’s military before talks begin.

    In a speech delivered in Finland on Friday, Blinken stated, “The United States – together with our allies and partners – is firmly committed to supporting Ukraine’s defense today, tomorrow, for as long as it takes.” He continued, “We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression.”

    Blinken dismissed the idea of even a temporary pause in the fighting. “Some countries will call for a ceasefire. And on the surface, that sounds sensible – attractive, even. After all, who doesn’t want warring parties to lay down their arms? Who doesn’t want the killing to stop?” He said. “But a ceasefire that simply freezes current lines in place and enables Putin to consolidate control over the territory he’s seized…It would legitimize Russia’s land grab. It would reward the aggressor and punish the victim.”

    The Secretary of State offered an ambitious vision of Kiev’s future military capabilities. “America and our allies are helping meet Ukraine’s needs on the current battlefield while developing a force that can deter and defend against aggression for years to come.” He added, “That means helping build a Ukrainian military of the future, with long-term funding, a strong air force centered on modern combat aircraft, an integrated air and missile defense network, advanced tanks and armored vehicles, national capacity to produce ammunition, and the training and support to keep forces and equipment combat-ready.”

    It is unclear how long it would take to build the deterrence force envisioned by Blinken. American arms stockpiles are dwindling as Washington attempts to transfer Kiev enough military equipment to keep its army fighting. The US additionally has plans to significantly increase arms transfers to Taiwan.

    Blinken claimed, “Our support for Ukraine hasn’t weakened our capabilities to meet potential threats from China or anywhere else – it’s strengthened them.” In November, the Wall Street Journal reported, “US government and congressional officials fear the conflict in Ukraine is exacerbating a nearly $19 billion backlog of weapons bound for Taiwan, further delaying efforts to arm the island.”

    Additionally, the White House may not have the support it needs in the Capitol for such a massive military buildup in Ukraine. Blinken asserted that “in America, this support is bipartisan.” However, at the beginning of May, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said future support for Ukraine would be contingent on success in Kiev’s long-planned counteroffensive.

    Since McCaul’s statement, Ukraine has slowly lost more territory to Russian forces, including Bakhmut. Zelensky committed endless resources to the city in a months-long battle despite the advice from his Western backers. The White House is now preparing for the counteroffensive to fail.

    Washington’s strategy, as laid out by Blinken, calls for arming Ukraine and weakening Russia. “Russia is significantly worse off today than it was before its full-scale invasion of Ukraine – militarily, economically, geopolitically,” he stated, adding, “President Putin has diminished Russian influence on every continent.”

    However, Gen. Christopher Cavoli, the commander of US European Command, told Congress in April that Moscow’s ground forces are “bigger today” than before Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine last year.

    While the White House has attempted to isolate the Kremlin, Moscow has weathered Western sanctions by developing relationships in the global south. On Friday, Russian officials met with prospective members of the BRICS coalition, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and the UAE. In September, Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi said in a meeting with Putin, “The relationship between countries that are sanctioned by the US, such as Iran, Russia or other countries, can overcome many problems and issues and make them stronger.”

    Blinken justified the Biden administration’s commitment to a militaristic approach by claiming the White House attempted to engage the Kremlin in meaningful diplomacy before the invasion of Ukraine. “President Biden told President Putin that we were prepared to discuss our mutual security concerns – a message that I reaffirmed repeatedly – including in person, with Foreign Minister Lavrov.” The Secretary of State continued, “We offered written proposals to reduce tensions. Together with our allies and partners, we used every forum to try to prevent war, from the NATO-Russia Council to the OSCE, from the UN to our direct channels.”

    In April 2022, Biden administration official Derek Chollet admitted that the White House refused to negotiate with the Kremlin on Putin’s core concern, Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. “We made clear to the Russians that we were willing to talk to them on issues that we thought were genuine concerns,” Chollet said, adding that the administration didn’t think that “the future of Ukraine” was one of those issues and that its potential NATO membership was a “non-issue.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 14:30

  • YouTube Stops Censoring Content Alleging 2020 Election Misconduct
    YouTube Stops Censoring Content Alleging 2020 Election Misconduct

    In an interesting plot twist as we wade deeper into the 2024 election cycle, YouTube on Friday announced it will stop deleting content arguing that “widespread fraud, errors or glitches” affected the 2020 or other past presidential elections. 

    “In the current environment, we find that while removing this content does curb some misinformation, it could also have the unintended effect of curtailing political speech without meaningfully reducing the risk of violence or other real-world harm,” the platform said in a blog post.  

    The policy change elicited howls from the left, including an Orwell-flavored protest from an advocacy group called “Free Press.” The group’s Nora Benavidez told AFP that YouTube’s “dangerous decision to immediately stop removing content… which continues to sow hate and disinformation that threatens our democracy must be reversed immediately.”   

    In its announcement, YouTube said it had removed “tens of thousands” of election-related videos but that, effective immediately, the 2020 election is fair game for anyone who wants to take a shot at it. The company’s policing of election discussions began in December 2020, after the safe harbor date for state vote certifications had passed.

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

    YouTube’s ham-handed censorship regime clobbered those who merely reported about claims of 2024 election misdeeds. “Their efforts were so aggressive that at one point YouTube actually censored a video released by the January 6 committee,” notes Robby Soave at Reason.  

    “We recognized it was time to reevaluate the effects of this policy in today’s changed landscape,” said YouTube, the San Bruno, California-based social media titan and subsidiary of Alphabet’s Google. In March, YouTube restored Donald Trump’s account, which had been blocked from adding new content in the wake of the Jan. 6 riot.

    Don’t think for a second YouTube is turning into a free speech utopia: People searching for information about elections will continue to be steered toward “content from authoritative sources,” with dissident voices nudged from search results and suggestions.  

    What’s more, YouTube will curiously keep banning election-fraud claims relating to the 2021 German federal election, and the 2014, 2018, and 2022 Brazilian Presidential elections. 

    In Oct. 2021, protestors in Lansing, Michigan demand a forensic audit of the 2020 election (Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images File and NBC News) 

    YouTube said certain election content is still forbidden: 

    “Content aiming to mislead voters about the time, place, means, or eligibility requirements for voting; false claims that could materially discourage voting, including those disputing the validity of voting by mail; and content that encourages others to interfere with democratic processes”

    As we wrote in May, YouTube has been removing videos about Russia’s Wagner mercenary group, with the the Google-owned video platform then explaining that its policies prohibit videos about “criminal and terrorist organizations.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 14:00

  • FDA Warns Consumers Not To Use Certain Versions Of Popular Drug
    FDA Warns Consumers Not To Use Certain Versions Of Popular Drug

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

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned consumers not to use off-brand versions of weight-loss drugs Ozempic, Rybelsus, and Wegovy because they may not have the same ingredients.

    Those off-brand versions of the drugs are possibly unsafe or ineffective, the federal regulator said in a notice this week. Officials said they received reports of problems linked to “compounded” versions of semaglutide, the drug’s active ingredient.

    “Drug compounding is the process of combining, mixing, or altering ingredients to create a medication tailored to the needs of an individual patient,” the agency said. “Compounding includes the combining of two or more drugs. Compounded drugs are not FDA-approved, and the agency does not verify the safety or effectiveness of compounded drugs.”

    Compounding is sometimes allowed in pharmacies during drug shortages, according to the FDA. However, those drugs have not met certain standards under the U.S. Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, said the agency.

    Compounded semaglutide can contain a version of the ingredient that is not approved for human use, said the FDA. It also warned that reports have indicated some versions of compounded semaglutide contain salt, which changes the drug.

    “The agency is not aware of any basis for compounding using the salt forms that would meet the [Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act] requirements for types of active ingredients that can be compounded,” the FDA said.

    “Patients should be aware that some products sold as ‘semaglutide’ may not contain the same active ingredient as FDA-approved semaglutide products and may be the salt formulations,” said the notice, adding that drugs “containing these salts, such as semaglutide sodium and semaglutide acetate, have not been shown to be safe and effective.”

    Boxes of the diabetes drug Ozempic rest on a counter at a pharmacy in Los Angeles, Calif., on April 17, 2023. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

    Sales of semaglutide products—particularly Ozempic—have soared in the past few years after the drug was shown to spur fast and significant weight loss. The drugs manufactured by Novo Nordisk include the brands Ozempic and Rybelsus, which are approved to treat diabetes, and Wegovy, which is approved by the FDA to treat obesity.

    Several weeks ago, Novo Nordisk promised to boost its supply of Wegovy. However, in the company’s first-quarter earnings report, the firm said that it would “temporarily” reduce U.S. supply.

    Demand for the medications has outstripped supply. As of May, Ozempic and Wegovy remain on the FDA’s list of drug shortages. When drugs are in short supply, compounding pharmacies are permitted to produce versions of those medications.

    Consumers should only use drugs containing semaglutide with a prescription from a licensed health care provider and obtained from a state-licensed pharmacy or other facilities registered with the FDA, the agency said.

    The FDA said it has received “adverse event reports” after patients received compounded versions of semaglutide. It then warned that “patients should not use a compounded drug if an approved drug is available to treat a patients” and that “patients and health care professionals should understand that the agency does not review compounded versions of these drugs for safety, effectiveness, or quality.”

    Furthermore, “Purchasing medicine online from unregulated, unlicensed sources can expose patients to potentially unsafe products that have not undergone appropriate evaluation or approval, or do not meet quality standards,” said the notice.

    Officials in states like Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and West Virginia have threatened to take action against pharmacies that make compounded, unauthorized versions of Ozempic and Wegovy, according to reports.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 06/03/2023 – 13:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jun 03

Today’s News 3rd June 2023

  • How To Solve Violence In The US? End Democrat-Run Cities And Bring Back Asylums
    How To Solve Violence In The US? End Democrat-Run Cities And Bring Back Asylums

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

    One of the most common strategies used by the political left to attack 2nd Amendment supporters is to ramp up the anti-gun hype every time a crime involving a gun is committed. They don’t care much about the tragedy itself, they only care about how they can use it for political gain. However, it’s very important to understand that this is not only about removing gun rights for leftists – It’s also about creating a false association in the public consciousness that guns = crime.

    That is to say, they want to condition people to believe that once guns are gone, crime and murder will be gone also. But, firearms have been an integral part of American society for hundreds of years, and gun ownership has been present through times of relative peace as well as times of increased violence.

    In the case of countries like the UK with incredibly strict gun laws, muggings, rape and homicides have been rising with knife attacks in particular increasing by 80%. While it is technically more difficult to murder a person with a knife, it’s also a lot easier for larger, stronger assailants and gangs to succeed in harming people when those people have no equalizer. Disarmament makes life EASIER for criminals, not harder.

    So, if guns are not the catalyst for rising violence, then what is?  In reality, the very people who want guns taken from the hands of law abiding Americans are the same people largely responsible for the spike in homicide rates. Imagine that…

    In the US, violent crimes and murders are exponentially higher in Democrat run cities, many of them with increased gun control measures. In fact, of the top 30 most violent cities in the US, 27 of them are Democrat controlled. Wherever leftists dominate politically, violence, theft, rape and murder are sure to follow. Anti-gun proponents often try to cite high homicide numbers in certain conservative states like Texas, but the majority of those crimes are actually committed in cities run by leftists.

    The truth is, blue cities are dragging red states and the rest of the country down. According to the statistics, in theory, if the public was to replace all Democrat city politicians with conservative leadership murder rates would immediately plunge across the US by virtue of policy.

    But what is it specifically about Democrat leadership that leads to far higher crime? There are other trends to consider, such as incarceration rates in any given state or county, severity of punishment for violent crimes and repeat offenders, and let’s not forget a subject a lot of people don’t want to talk about – The separation of the mentally ill from the rest of society. Leftists often support revolving door policies for criminals, reduced sentences for violent crime (if the perpetrator is a minority) and they are adamantly opposed to incarceration for those with dangerous mental illness.

    They’re happy to take away the 2nd Amendment rights of innocent Americans, but they have no interest in keeping criminals in prison or keeping mentally unstable people away from normal society. Perhaps because their goal is NOT to reduce violence, but to use exponential violence in society as a reason to erode the constitution.

    Incarceration does in fact work, far better that gun control does. But in order to understand the incarceration rate and its effectiveness in stopping violence, we have to look at two systems simultaneously – Prison incarceration and mental asylum incarceration. The following data shows US incarceration per capita in various prison systems for the past century:

    The next graph shows homicide rates per capita for between 1900 to around 2010

    And this graph shows homicide rates from the 1960’s up to the 2020s.

    One issue that is immediately noticeable is that prison numbers spiked massively starting in the mid-1980s, after which homicide rates began to plunge. Also note that less incarceration in the early 1900s coincides with much higher murder rates across the nation. But what about that dip in murders from the 1930s to the 1960s? What caused that?

    Well, it’s not necessarily an economic problem as many progressive might suggest. The country was hitting peak prosperity in the 1920s and murder rates were still sky high. On the opposite end, the system was still in depression turmoil in the 1930s to 1940s, but homicide rates plunged. So, what caused violent crime to fall in that era?

    The only factor that seems to coincide with this period of relative peace is the sudden increase in psychiatric incarceration from around the 1930s onward.

    While prison rates remained low and mostly static between the mid-1930s to the mid-1960s, the number of mental asylums holding dangerous patients was growing. And, like magic, violence in the US dropped off a cliff.

    By extension, as asylums began to shut down in the 1970s, murders jumped back once again to record highs. Without asylums and with low prison incarceration, homicides spread like wildfire and it did not stop until the mid-1980s when prison rates spiked. In other words, the prison system and the legal system had to finally pick up the slack left behind as the mental asylums disappeared.

    Finally, take note of the recent jump in homicides and violence in the past few years in graph #3 – It matches almost exactly with falling incarceration trends in Graph #1.  This has been mostly encouraged by Democrat policies in blue cities and blue states. Also keep in mind that the Democrats of today are part of a new woke cultism – They are not necessarily the same Democrats from 30 years ago. Woke Democrats want all barriers to criminal activity removed, including incarceration.

    Furthermore, mental illness in the US is on the rise. Over 42% of Gen Z has been diagnosed with at least one mental health condition and psychiatric drugs are doing little to help. We have minimal mental illness facilities in place to deal with the influx of unstable people permeating society. We are about to REPEAT the pattern of the early 1900s, with a lower prison population and no asylums, violence will likely continue to spiral out of control.

    To be sure, in the past there were some terrible practices involving mental health establishments and it doesn’t do anyone any good to repeat those mistakes. In the early days of psychiatry they caste a wide net that caught a lot of dangerous people, but they also locked up anyone with marginal mental problems as well. This led to abuses.

    That said, it’s foolish to dismiss the numbers; asylums worked. They helped to reduce murders dramatically. At least 1% of the human population has psychopathic traits (including lack of empathy) and these people cause at least 30% of all crime in the US. At least 3% of the human population exhibits psychotic tendencies, which means they are prone to abrupt violence without treatment.  Something has to be done to address the mentally unstable in our nation. Their odds of recidivism are extremely high, and they will keep committing the same crimes over and over again until they are stopped.

    This is the elephant in the room that the political left doesn’t want to talk about. They try to hide it with social justice platitudes and feel-good welfare programs, but these things are clearly useless. Separating dangerous and insane people from the rest of the population is the only sure method for saving lives in the long run and keeping civilization intact.

    The solution is simple and two-fold: Get rid of leftist leaders in major cities that set violent repeat offenders free, and bring back mental health facilities to lock up the crazies if necessary. This is the ONLY WAY to stop the avalanche of violent crime that awaits Americans as the next few years unfold.

    *  *  *

    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
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 23:40

  • Hong Kong Set To Become Crypto Trading Hub, Opens Exchange Licensing Ahead Of Retail Trading
    Hong Kong Set To Become Crypto Trading Hub, Opens Exchange Licensing Ahead Of Retail Trading

    After years of brutal crackdowns, crypto trading is coming back to China… or at least Hong Kong for now.

    On Thursday, Hong Kong took a step toward becoming a cryptocurrency hub with the start of applications for licenses to run trading platforms and exchanges, Nikkei reported. Trading of cryptocurrencies in the Chinese territory has been restricted to institutional investors and other professionals since 2018, but Hong Kong’s new regulations will allow retail trading as soon as the second half of 2023, which means that HK will soon emerge as the conduit by which billions in Chinese retail savings mysteriously disappear into the outside world, a function that until not too long ago was served by Macau.

    Officials said the city’s move to welcome crypto, which comes amid global regulatory headwinds for the industry, is backed by safeguards for investors.

    “Hong Kong’s comprehensive virtual assets regulatory framework follows the principle of ‘same business, same risks, same rules’ and aims to provide robust investor protection and manage key risks,” said Julia Leung, CEO of the Securities and Futures Commission. “This will enable the industry to develop sustainably and support innovation.”

    Requirements for obtaining a license include capital of at least 5 million Hong Kong dollars ($638,000), measures to combat money laundering and the appointment of experienced managers.

    “Operators of virtual asset trading platforms who are prepared to comply with the SFC’s standards are welcome to apply for a licence,” the commission said in a May 23 notice. “Those who do not plan to do so should proceed to an orderly closure of their business in Hong Kong.”

    More than 80 companies have expressed interest in obtaining a license, authorities say. Mainland Chinese companies are particularly eager to enter the Hong Kong market, because they face a total ban on providing cryptocurrency-related services at home.

    A subsidiary of Chinese state-owned property developer Greenland Group plans to apply for a license, local media report. Online lender ZA Bank said on May 24 that it would partner with licensed companies to offer trading services for individuals.

    “We welcome the licensing guidelines issued yesterday by the Hong Kong SFC, and we are excited to offer the new investment opportunities brought by virtual assets to our users,” ZA Bank CEO Ronald Iu said.

    In Asia, South Korea and Singapore have taken the lead in regulating the crypto market, attracting some businesses that fled the U.S. and other countries. Hong Kong was regarded as being tough on the industry after China’s move to ban related services in 2021, but the city has reversed its stance.

    In October, Hong Kong announced a policy of promoting virtual currencies. An exchange-traded fund (ETF) tracking bitcoin listed on the Hong Kong exchange in December.

    “The fact that an international finance hub like Hong Kong is setting out to create and support a crypto trading environment means a boost of investor confidence in the industry,” said Eddie Chou, a blockchain lecturer and fintech consultant.

    A cloud has hung over Hong Kong’s status as an international financial hub since China imposed a national security law in 2020 that critics say erodes the city’s autonomy.

    “Without Beijing’s approval and backing, there can be no policy change in Hong Kong,” an asset management executive here said. “They may intend to treat it as an exception like Macao, the only place in China where casinos are allowed, and use it as a testing ground” for crypto.

    That is precisely what Beijing is doing, because even in China the local elite understands that as a result of the massive Chinese capital account monetary firewall, the country needs some way to transfer some of those trillions in savings offshore.

    For now, Hong Kong regulators are promising a firm hand.

    “Our regulations will be tight,” Eddie Yue, chief executive of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, said at the Bloomberg Wealth Asia Summit in May. “We will let the industry develop and innovate. We will let them create the ecosystem here, and that actually brings a lot of excitement. But that doesn’t mean light-touch regulation.”

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 23:20

  • Family Of College Student Who Died From COVID-19 Vaccine Sues Biden Administration
    Family Of College Student Who Died From COVID-19 Vaccine Sues Biden Administration

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

    The family of a college student who died from heart inflammation caused by Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has sued President Joe Biden’s administration, alleging officials engaged in “willful misconduct.”

    George Watts Jr. in a file image. (Courtesy of the Watts family)

    U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) officials wrongly promoted COVID-19 vaccination by repeatedly claiming the available vaccines were “safe and effective,” relatives of George Watts Jr., the college student, said in the new lawsuit.

    That promotion “duped millions of Americans, including Mr. Watts, into being DOD’s human subjects in its medical experiment, the largest in modern history,” the suit states.

    The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act allows lawsuits against certain people if they have engaged in “willful misconduct” and if that misconduct caused death or serious injury.

    COVID-19 vaccines are covered by the act due to a declaration entered during the Trump administration in 2020 after COVID-19 began circulating.

    “DOD’s conduct and the harm caused as alleged within the four corners of the lawsuit speaks for itself,” Ray Flores, a lawyer representing the Watts family, told The Epoch Times via email. “I have no further comment other than to say: My only duty is to advocate for my client. If the DOD conveys a settlement offer, I will see that it’s considered.”

    The suit was filed in U.S. court in Washington.

    The Pentagon and the Department of Justice did not respond to requests for comment.

    Watts Suddenly Died

    Watts was a student at Corning Community College when the school mandated COVID-19 vaccination for in-person classes in 2021. He received one Pfizer dose on Aug. 27, 2021, and a second dose approximately three weeks later.

    Watts soon began experiencing a range of symptoms, including tingling in the feet, pain in the heels, numbness in the hands and fingers, blood in his sperm and urine, and sinus pressure, according to family members and health records.

    Watts went to the Robert Packer Hospital emergency room on Oct. 12, 2021, due to the symptoms. X-rays showed clear lungs and a normal heart outline.

    Watts was sent home with suggestions to follow up with specialists but returned to the emergency room on Oct. 19, 2021, with worsening symptoms despite a week of the antibiotic Augmentin. He was diagnosed with sinusitis and bronchitis.

    While speaking to his mother at home on Oct. 27, 2021, Watts suddenly collapsed. Emergency medical personnel rushed to the home but found him unresponsive. He was rushed to the same hospital in an ambulance. He was pronounced deceased at age 24.

    According to a doctor at the hospital, citing hospital records and family members, Watts had no past medical history on file that would explain his sudden death, with no known history of substance abuse or obvious signs of substance abuse. His mother described her son as a “healthy young male.”

    Dr. Robert Stoppacher, a pathologist who performed an autopsy on the body, said that the death was due to “COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis.” The death certificate listed no other causes. A COVID-19 test returned negative. Dr. Sanjay Verma, based in California, reviewed the documents in the Watts case and said that he believed the death was caused by the COVID-19 vaccination.

    Pfizer did not respond to a request for comment.

    Watts Took Vaccine Under Pressure

    The community college mandate included a 35-day grace period following approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of a COVID-19 vaccine.

    The Moderna, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines were given emergency use authorization early in the pandemic. The FDA approved the Pfizer shot on Aug. 23, 2021. It was the first COVID-19 vaccine approval. But doses of the approved version of the shot, branded Comirnaty, were not available for months after the approval.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 23:00

  • Tanks, F-16 Jets Won't Be Ready For Ukraine Counteroffensive: Pentagon
    Tanks, F-16 Jets Won’t Be Ready For Ukraine Counteroffensive: Pentagon

    Ukraine continues to tout that its planned major counteroffensive is coming and is imminent, event after Russia’s significant victory over the strategic Donetsk oblast city of Bakhmut. 

    But Joint Chiefs chairman Gen. Mark Milley has been quoted in The Associated Press this week as confirming that US Abrams tanks and F-16 fighter jets which the US and Western countries have previously promised Ukraine will not be ready in time for the counteroffensive. He said the approved training on these sophisticated and advanced weapons systems for Ukrainians has begun, but that it will take “considerable time”.

    “Everyone recognizes Ukraine needs a modernized Air Force,” Milley said. “It’s going to take a considerable amount of time.” 

    President Biden had last month belatedly approved giving European countries the ability to transfer F-16s to Ukraine, but Ukrainian pilots – long experienced only on Soviet and Russian-made aircraft, must be trained extensively on the US-designed and produced aircraft. This could take six months to a year or more.

    According to the AP, “Milley said detailed planning on class sizes, the types of flying tactics and locations for training was underway now between the U.S. and allies such as the Netherlands and the U.K. that have already pledged to provide F-16s.”

    It’s as yet unclear whether the US itself is going to eventually provide the jets directly to Ukraine forces, or if simply it will support third party countries giving them. 

    The U.S. has not said yet whether or not it will provide jets, but President Joe Biden has said the U.S. will support F-16 training.

    As for Abrams tank training, which has already been underway, “About 200 Ukrainian soldiers began an approximately 12-week training course in Germany on the U.S. tanks over the weekend to teach them how to maneuver, fire and conduct combined arms operations with the advanced armored system,” the AP details. Support crew for tank fueling and fuel truck maintenance are also undergoing instruction, and that makes up another 200 troops. 

    In total about 300 tanks have been pledged by the Western allies, including German-made Leopard 2 tanks and UK Challenger main battle tanks. Washington is expected to deliver 31 seventy-ton Abrams tanks to Kiev by the fall.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 22:40

  • The $200 Billion Electric School Bus Bust
    The $200 Billion Electric School Bus Bust

    Authored by Duggan Flanakin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The Beatles once sang, “All you need is love.” But will Kamala Harris’ professed LOVE for electric school buses – plus the $1 billion in taxpayer subsidies she announced last October – be enough to usher in the new paradise?

    Hmm. Let’s do the math.  The $1 billion in rebates pledged is to help purchase 2,500 electric school buses in some 391 school districts around the nation.  But there are in fact about 500,000 school buses transporting children to and from school, to and from ball games and other events, nearly every school day. 

    By simple calculation, this suggests it will take a $200 billion investment just to replace existing school buses – which must be done, Kamala tells us, by the 2030 deadline or else CHILDREN WILL DIE.

    Do factories, batteries, and other raw materials exist to build (or retrofit) 500,000 school buses – and every other vehicle in America today – by 2030? By 2050? Does that much money exist? Does that much electricity exist?

    To be sure, the demand (from mostly leftist school boards) is out there. Nearly 2,000 school districts applied for the free money last year, pushing the demand SO HIGH “that the EPA had to double the amount of funding” from the initial pledge of $500 million.” Should Kamala keep her job in 2024, the EPA’s Clean School Bus Program is committed to handing out another $4 billion over the next five years.

    Nearly 2,000 school districts applied for the first round of rebates from all 50 states, including Washington, D.C., U.S. territories, and federally recognized tribes. The demand was so high “that the EPA had to double the amount of funding” from its initial pledge of $500 million, a White House official tells Parents on background.

    A total of 391 rebates were awarded, and the Vice President anticipates thousands more applications as the EPA’s Clean School Bus Program awards a total of $5 billion over the next five years. That’s 12,500 down, just 487,500 to go!

    School districts NOT getting the federal free money are faced with a much different scenario. Even the smaller electric school buses today cost about $250,000 compared with just $50,000 to 465,000 for a diesel-powered bus of the same size. The larger battery-electric buses can run from $320,000 to $440,000 versus just $100,000 for a diesel bus.

    Take the Dallas (TX) Independent School District, which has about 860 buses. To replace the entire fleet with large diesel buses would cost, therefore, about $86 million.  But those 860 buses, if battery-electric, would cost a minimum of $275 million. And that does not include the cost of charging stations and retraining mechanics. That’s over three times as many taxpayer dollars the school district would have to extract from voters.

    All this, of course, has been under the assumption that electric school buses are just as reliable as diesel-powered buses – and that they can keep children warm in winter and cool on hot days as well as buses with diesel engines.

    The Ann Arbor (MI) Public Schools Board of Education learned recently from its environmental sustainability director, that the electric school buses they bought have “a lot of downtime and performance issues” and “aren’t fully on the road.” Moreover, the infrastructure upgrades needed to use these buses, which were estimated at just $50,000, “ended up being more like $200,000.”

    To the surprise of many educators, electric school buses may break down and require towing. As with any electric vehicle, this poses risks not common to gasoline- or diesel-powered vehicles. One is that they are heavier – and thus require larger tow trucks (remember, tow trucks only tow the cabs of 18-wheelers, not the trailers). Towing capacity should be about half the weight of the towing vehicle, and the typical electric school bus weighs 36,000 pounds.

    Another thing the electric bussers ignore is the wear and tear on bus tires, which cost about $3,000 per set (likely higher by now, with inflation). Goodyear notes that electric school bus operators have to consider the extra weight of the buses, which makes balancing the tires for load capacity and durability even more important – and more frequently done. The extra weight also means that the tires do not last as long as on lighter weight diesel buses.

    Electric bus enthusiasts like Kamala Harris will tell you that spending an extra $150 billion or so is worth the price to theoretically save children from diesel exhaust (despite the major improvements in diesel technology and much cleaner diesel fuel mandated in recent years). But they are silent about the number of actual lives lost by children mining the raw materials for electric vehicle batteries.

    Using data supplied by Pacific Gas & Electric, Colorado journalist Cory Gaines noted that the $260,000 cost differential between diesel and electric school buses means that any school district wanting to take advantage of the predicted much lower operating costs will need major help with the huge upfront capital costs. Which means both federal and state subsidies – and higher taxes to pay for the subsidies.

    Noting that electric buses have longer downtimes and higher towing costs, plus require (again upfront) costs for installing and maintaining charging stations – and other hidden costs, the payback on the electric school bus (at an average of 16,000 miles per year, a high-end estimate) comes out to about 20 years – longer than the lifespan of the bus. And that’s if nobody dies or is injured by a school bus fire.

    Gaines, who runs the Colorado Accountability Project on Facebook, gives an additional caveat for buses operating in cold climates (like the Colorado mountains, the Great Lakes region, and Alaska, where today there is but one electric school bus).

    Unlike diesel buses that scavenge waste engine heat for passengers, electric buses have to divert battery energy into heat. On very cold days, the amount of energy needed to keep children warm could exceed the amount used to travel the route. That may not matter on short trips to and from school — but imagine a basketball or hockey team on a bus trip to a game across the state.

    Charging the battery for an electric school bus takes up to eight hours using AC power, but with a diminished range in cold weather taking children on long bus trips for any purpose might require an extra day on the road in each direction. That means an extra day each way of feeding and housing the children (and keeping watch over them).

    Or school districts could just say, Sorry, kids, no more school travel. We can’t afford it!

    Duggan Flanakin is a senior policy analyst at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow who writes on a wide variety of public policy issues.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 22:20

  • AR & VR Adoption Is Still in Its Infancy
    AR & VR Adoption Is Still in Its Infancy

    In its quest to making the metaverse the next big thing in tech, Facebook’s parent company Meta unveiled a new virtual and mixed reality headset on Thursday.

    Starting at $499.99, the Quest 3 is much more affordable than the Quest Pro that was launched last fall, while offering performance that is far superior to its predecessor, the Meta Quest 2.

    “Quest 3 is our first mass-market offering to deliver both cutting-edge VR and MR experiences in a single device, setting a new benchmark for future headsets,” Meta said in its announcement, clearly nodding towards Apple, which is expected to unveil its own long-in-the-making VR/AR headset at its Worldwide Developers Conference next week.

    “Ultimately, our vision is to enable you to move through all realities in a way that’s intuitive and delightful,” Mark Rabkin, vice president of VR at Meta said.

    “Going beyond the rigid classifications of ‘virtual reality’ and ‘mixed reality’ to deliver truly next-gen experiences that let you effortlessly blend the physical and virtual worlds.”

    But, as Statista’s Felix Richter notes, while Meta has already invested billions in that vision, so far it remains just that: a vision that has yet to come to life.

    According to estimates from Statista Market Insights, users of AR and VR devices are still few and far between, with growth projections until 2027 nowhere near the scale that would make mixed reality “the next computing platform”, at least for now.

    Infographic: AR & VR Adoption Is Still in Its Infancy | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Statista estimates that 98 million people will be using VR hardware this year, while 23 million will be dabbling with more advanced AR technology. By 2027, both AR and VR are expected to have surpassed 100 million users worldwide, but that’s still a longshot from the billions of smartphone users across the planet.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 22:00

  • Authoritarianism Keeps Surging In Western "Free Democracies"
    Authoritarianism Keeps Surging In Western “Free Democracies”

    Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

    Today in tyranny we’ve got three stories on the rapidly increasing authoritarian abuses in western “free democracies”.

    Let’s dig in.

    1. Grayzone reporter detained by British counter-terrorism police for doing journalism.

    The Grayzone’s Kit Klarenberg was detained by “six anonymous plainclothes counter-terror officers” who “grilled him for over five hours about his reporting” upon returning to Britain on the 17th of May, according to a new report by Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal.

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

    Blumenthal reports that Klarenberg was asked many questions about The Grayzone and his work with the independent outlet, saying police “seized the journalist’s electronic devices and SD cards, fingerprinted him, took DNA swabs, and photographed him intensively,” threatening him with arrest if he didn’t comply.

    Blumenthal writes that the police action was likely a retaliation for Klarenberg’s reporting for the outlet, which has angered British officials and establishment media figures with the inconvenient information it has reported about their behavior:

    Klarenberg’s interrogation appears to be London’s way of retaliating for the journalist’s blockbuster reports exposing major British and US intelligence intrigues. In the past year alone, Klarenberg revealed how a cabal of Tory national security hardliners violated the Official Secrets Act to exploit Brexit and install Boris Johnson as prime minister. In October 2022, he earned international headlines with his exposé of British plans to bomb the Kerch Bridge connecting Crimea to the Russian Federation. Then came his report on the CIA’s recruitment of two 9/11 hijackers this April, a viral sensation that generated massive social media attention.

    Among Klarenberg’s most consequential exposés was his June 2022 report unmasking British journalist Paul Mason as a UK security state collaborator hellbent on destroying The Grayzone and other media outlets, academics, and activists critical of NATO’s role in Ukraine.

    Asserting that Klarenberg did nothing more nefarious than engaging in “the same journalistic practice that the West’s most prominent legacy newspapers, from The New York Times to The Washington Post, depend on to break news themselves,” Blumenthal says it appears that “British authorities did not detain Klarenberg for any legal breaches, but because he reported factual stories that exposed the national security state’s own violations of both domestic and international law, as well as the malign plots of its media lackeys.”

    Blumenthal himself was subjected to legal harassment and intimidation in the United States a few years back, arrested and charged with having committed “assault” while reporting on imperial efforts to drive the Venezuelan government out of its embassy in Washington DC. The charges were later dropped.

    The Grayzone has been doing some of the best independent reporting in alternative media over the last few years, and should wear its now-evident status as a thorn in the empire’s side with pride.

    2. South Australia passes draconian anti-protest law.

    Reacting to recent inconvenient demonstrations by environmental activists, the state of South Australia has just rapidly shoved through legislation — without consulting the public — to exponentially increase the penalties for unauthorized protesting. Demonstrators will now face up to three months in jail and fines of $50,000 if they are deemed guilty of the extremely vague offense of “obstructing a public place” with their protesting.

    The Human Rights Law Center expresses the following:

    South Australia is the latest jurisdiction to impose severe penalties on people for engaging in peaceful protest, joining New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and Queensland who have passed anti-protest laws in the last five years. South Australia’s anti-protest laws carry the harshest financial penalties in Australia.

    The Bill is excessive and will have a chilling effect on the right to protest in South Australia. The Bill is also potentially unconstitutional and in clear breach of well-established principles of international human rights law.

    South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas acted shocked and offended that anyone could possibly think life-altering penalties for vaguely-defined protest activities might have some effect on protest activities, saying, “One of the things that I have found rather disconcerting around some of the commentary on this piece of legislation is that somehow, it curtails or diminishes people’s right to protest, which is simply not true.”

    Hilarious.

    Now would probably be a good time to repeat my periodic reminder that Australia is the only so-called democracy in the world which has no national charter or bill of rights of any kind. A lot of attention went into the Australian government’s authoritarianism when its strict Covid measures were in place, but the fact of the matter is that this country has been diving headlong into tyranny since long before Covid, and continues to do so now that the lockdowns are long over. There simply aren’t enough checks and balances in place to prevent this from happening, and not enough will from the public to fight for them while fighting is still possible.

    3. State Department dismisses questions about Ukrainian imprisonment of US citizen for speech crimes.

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

    At a press conference last week the State Department’s new spokesman Matthew Miller flatly brushed off questions about whether the US government was doing anything about the fact that commentator Gonzalo Lira has been arrested and charged with what amount to speech crimes by the Ukrainian government.

    Here’s the State Department’s transcript of the exchange:

    QUESTION: Thanks. Liam Cosgrove with Epoch Times. So this was a couple weeks ago, but I haven’t seen an official statement on it. A U.S. citizen who is residing in Ukraine has been arrested and that he was a California-born man; he was in the past like a Business Insider contributor, and he had a YouTube channel. He was an outspoken critic of Zelenskyy’s regime. The Ukrainian SBU released a press release saying he was arrested for justifying Putin’s invasion. So ultimately, it added up to speech. And I spoke with Congressman Ted Lieu, a Democrat, and he said he urges the State Department to engage its authorities to work out some sort of negotiation to get him released. So are you guys aware of this? How do we feel about our allies detaining U.S. citizens for speech abroad?

    MR MILLER: So I will say in general that we’re aware of the report. We obviously support the exercise of freedom of speech anywhere in the world, and I’ll leave it at that.

    QUESTION: So you guys aren’t working to get him released?

    MR MILLER: I’m going to leave my comments where I just left them.

    It’s not every day a US spokesperson gets asked a question that’s so inconvenient that they just overtly refuse to answer it without even pretending to provide an explanation for doing so.

    Lira, a US citizen, is reportedly facing five to eight years in prison for having “publicly justified the armed aggression of the Russian Federation” and “publicly justified the armed aggression of the Russian Federation,” per the SBU.

    Are Americans okay with their government risking a very fast, very radioactive third world war to defend the freedom and democracy of a nation that imprisons US citizens for speech crimes? I guess we’ll never know, because nobody’s asking them.

    If western governments need to keep ramping up censorship, propaganda and the persecution of journalists in order to defend western freedom and democracy, is it really freedom and democracy? And, is it worth defending?

    *  *  *

    My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon, Paypal, or Substack, buying an issue of my monthly zine, and following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    Liked it? Take a second to support Caitlin Johnstone on Patreon!

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 21:40

  • US Ditches More New START Treaty Obligations After Tactical Nukes Transferred To Belarus
    US Ditches More New START Treaty Obligations After Tactical Nukes Transferred To Belarus

    The New START Treaty, which is the final nuclear arms treaty between the United States and Russia, continues to fall apart after on Thursday the Biden administration said it would walk away from multiple key obligations stipulated under the agreement, after Moscow already effectively ended its participation earlier this year.

    The State Department announced in a Thursday fact sheet that the US will initiate “Four lawful countermeasures in response to the Russian Federation’s ongoing violations of the New START Treaty” which it deemed “proportionate” and “reversible.” Further, Russia has been notified in advance of the move.

    But the fact sheet underscored that “The United States continues to abide by the treaty’s central limits, and to fulfill all of its New START obligations that have not been included within these countermeasures.”

    Crucially, the most important of the countermeasures bans all Russian inspectors from visiting US territories. This was the most important aspect to the agreement, given that among the nuclear reduction treaty’s chief aims is to ensure inspection and monitoring of each side’s nuclear arsenal by the other. However, it had already been on pause since 2020 in relation to Covid restrictions and lockdowns.

    Related to central monitoring protocols, the US is also backing away from basic information-sharing with the Kremlin. Washington will now withhold “notifications required under the treaty, including updates on the status or location of treaty-accountable items such as missiles and launchers.”

    Additionally, data will no longer be shared about future missile tests, including “telemetric information on launches of US ICBMs and SLBMs,” according to the State Department.

    All of this comes very dangerously as nuclear saber-rattling continues in relation to the Ukraine war. Russia has recently ordered tactical nukes to be hosted on Belarusian territory – a move the West has condemned.

    Russian officials have long explained that the country’s nuclear doctrine has not changed, warning that nuclear weapons can be deployed only if sovereign Russian territory and the population comes under existential threat. And yet, cross-border attacks from Ukraine have only intensified, including increasing incidents of ground troop incursions, with the use of military hardware, some it provided by NATO allies.

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

    Russia has at the same time accused the West of backing these brazen attacks, and has warned of continued escalation. Putin’s “red lines” continue to be crossed, almost daily at this point.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 21:20

  • Federal Judge Blocks ATF Pistol Brace Rule For Major Gun Group
    Federal Judge Blocks ATF Pistol Brace Rule For Major Gun Group

    Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

    On Thursday, Joe Biden planned to enact the largest gun ban in U.S. history—a ban on up to 40,000,000 pistols.  

    But at the eleventh hour, the executive order gun ban was gutted by three federal courts. 

    After a months-long legal battle with the federal government, Gun Owners of America secured one such preliminary injunction in Texas v. Garland, preventing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) from prosecuting any GOA members under this new rule.  

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

    Similar rulings were issued by two other federal courts to members of two other advocacy organizations as well—the plaintiffs in Mock v. Garland and SAF v. ATF.  

    In effect, the Biden Pistol Ban crumbled before it even got off the ground. 

    Without the injunction, ATF could have already begun kicking in doors and confiscating “illegal” unregistered pistols. 

    But even though the injunctions are not nationwide, it is now nearly impossible for ATF to differentiate the pistol owners they can prosecute from the Gun Owners of America members and other protected persons. 

    Notably, Gun Owners of America isn’t satisfied with this limited injunction. In fact, GOA had argued for a nationwide injunction, but the courts refused and only granted limited relief to its members. 

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

    That’s why GOA is also urging activists to contact Congress and urge them to provide oversight and to protect all gun owners nationwide. 

    Using the Congressional Review Act, the ATF rule could be reversed, and the agency could be prohibited from ever enacting a similar rule in the future. 

    Two joint resolutions of disapproval have already been introduced. H. J. Res. 44, introduced by Rep. Andrew Clyde, has 189 sponsors in the House of Representatives and S. J. Res. 20, introduced by Sen. Kennedy, has 47 sponsors in the Senate.  

    Public calls for Speaker McCarthy to hold a vote to block the pistol brace rule have only mounted in recent weeks, with several coalitions calling for immediate action—including 27 Attorneys General currently suing the Biden Administration, 2A influencers with over 30,000,000 combined followers, and numerous members of the gun industry. 

    *   *   *

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

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 21:00

  • Russia Says US Hacked 'Thousands' Of iPhones In Espionage Operation
    Russia Says US Hacked ‘Thousands’ Of iPhones In Espionage Operation

    Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) on Thursday accused the United States of conducting an espionage operation that compromised thousands of iPhones using sophisticated surveillance software.

    A customer tests a smartphone during the launch of the new iPhone XS and XS Max sales at “re:Store” Apple reseller shop in Moscow on Sept. 28, 2018. (Tatyana Makeyeva/Reuters)

    Moscow-based Kaspersky Lab says that dozens of their employees’ devices were compromised as part of the operation.

    In a statement, the FSB said that the targets included domestic Russian subscribers, as well as foreign diplomats based in Russia and the former Soviet Union, Reuters reports.

    “The FSB has uncovered an intelligence action of the American special services using Apple mobile devices,” said the FSB in a statement, adding that the plot revealed “close cooperation” between Apple and the National Security Agency (NSA). The FSB did not provide any evidence of Apple’s cooperation.

    Kaspersky CEO Eugene Kaspersky said on Twitter that dozens of his employees’ phones were compromised in the operation, which his company described as “an extremely complex, professionally targeted cyberattack” that had targeted workers in “top and middle-management.”

    Kaspersky researcher Igor Kuznetsov told Reuters that his company had independently discovered anomalous traffic on its corporate Wi-Fi network around the start of the year. He said Kaspersky did not circulate its findings to Russia’s Computer Emergency Response Team until earlier on Thursday. -Reuters

    More from Kaspersky via Twitter;

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

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

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsKaspersky says that disabling iMessage will defeat the hack.

    According to the FSB, the Americans had compromised diplomats from China, Syria, Israel and NATO members. 

    “The hidden data collection was carried out through software vulnerabilities in U.S.-made mobile phones,” said Russia’s foreign ministry in a statement. “The U.S. intelligence services have been using IT corporations for decades in order to collect large-scale data of Internet users without their knowledge.”

    Reuters notes that “The United States is the world’s top cyber power in terms of intent and capability, according to Harvard University’s Belfer Center Cyber 2022 Power Index, followed by China, Russia, the United Kingdom and Australia.”

    Russian officials said the plot had been uncovered as part of a joint effort by FSB officers and those of the Federal Guards Service (FSO), a powerful agency that runs the Kremlin bodyguard and was also once the KGB’s Ninth Directorate.

    Officials in Russia, which Western spies say has constructed a very sophisticated domestic surveillance structure, have long questioned the security of U.S. technology. -Reuters

    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that all officials in the Putin government knew that gadgets such as iPhones were “absolutely transparent.”

    “Using them for official purposes is unacceptable and prohibited,” he said, adding that they were free to use iPhones for private communications.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 20:40

  • California State Assembly Votes To Ban Driverless Trucks
    California State Assembly Votes To Ban Driverless Trucks

    By Alan Adler of FreightWaves,

    The California State Assembly voted Wednesday to ban driverless trucks from the state’s roadways, requiring a safety driver be present. If passed by the Senate, it would leave the state where most autonomous trucking companies are based as an outlier in adopting the technology.

    The 54-3 vote banning autonomous vehicles over 10,000 pounds from operating without a safety driver followed similar majority committee votes on Assembly Bill 316. The measure received support from the Teamsters and other labor groups. They claim driverless trucks would eliminate thousands of good-paying jobs for human drivers.

    “The public should not be treated as a lab rat for big corporations to test their technology. Californians deserve a safety-first approach. And this bill would do just that,” Randy Cammack, president of Teamsters Joint Council 42, said in March.

    California 2024 Senate candidates U.S. Reps. Katie Porter, Adam Schiff and Barbara Lee have voiced support for the legislation. San Francisco Mayor London Breed also has expressed support.

    Autonomous vehicle industry wants governor’s support

    “AB 316 is a preemptive technology ban that will put California even further behind other states and lock in the devastating safety status quo on California’s roads, which saw more than 4,400 people die last year,” the Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association (AVIA) said in a statement after the vote.

    “AB 316 undermines California’s law enforcement and safety officials as they seek to regulate and conduct oversight over life-saving autonomous trucks,” said Jeff Farrah, AVIA executive director. “We encourage Governor Newsom and the State Senate to reject AB 316 so Californians will benefit from the safety and supply chain benefits of autonomous trucks.”

    In an April 20 editorial, the Orange County Register said opposition to driverless trucking is “classic union featherbedding.”

    Dozens of autonomous trucking and technology founders, CEOs, and others wrote to Newsom in June 2022. California in late August released “Driving the Future: Autonomous Vehicles Strategic Framework Vision and Guiding Principles.”

    The nine-page document concludes that “AVs hold the promise to be an important part of our mobility future.” But its added that “they are just one part of a broader set of solutions.”

    The California Department of Motor Vehicles is considering the framework that could allow autonomous vehicles over 10,000 pounds to hit the road, without consent from the State Legislature.

    Self-driving trucking software companies Kodiak Robotics, Plus, Waymo and TuSimple are all based in California. But they only operate their trucks in the state with safety drivers. That is the current practice in other states. Several states have shown willingness to eventually allow the driver to be removed from the truck.

    TuSimple is aiming to commercialize a driverless route in Arizona between Tucson and Phoenix as soon as 2024. Pittsburgh-based Aurora is planning to run driverless trucks in Texas by the end of next year.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 20:20

  • Phoenix Area Restricts Construction As Groundwater Evaporates
    Phoenix Area Restricts Construction As Groundwater Evaporates

    With a surge in population growth, soaring urban development, and, of course, desert conditions, it comes as no surprise the Phoenix metropolitan area could one day run out of groundwater. On Thursday, local authorities declared the state would no longer issue building permits for new developments across the metro area unless alternative water sources can be found. 

    Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs said a newly released study of the Phoenix metropolitan area’s groundwater showed a potential shortage looms. To safeguard supplies, current developments that have been approved can be constructed, but ones that have yet to be approved will have to show alternate water sources. Developers must show state officials they have an alternative “assured water supply” for 100 years from non-local groundwater. 

    The study found that 4% of the metro area’s demand for groundwater, nearly 4.9 million acre-feet, cannot be met over the next century. If the projections are correct, a massive water shortage could be nearing and have widespread implications for the post-Covid development boom. 

    Thursday’s announcement is a sign the water-scarce metro area, situated in a desert, has limitations in terms of the number of homes it can support. 

    “It’s going to make it harder for developments to spring up on raw desert in the far-flung parts of town where developers like to develop,” Sarah Porter, the director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy, told CNN. 

    The former Phoenix mayor, Terry Goddard, said the study indicates residents are “living on borrowed water.” He added:

    “You need to be conscious of every drop. You can’t build unless you know exactly where the water is coming from.”

    Last year, Arizona’s Water Infrastructure Finance Authority began reviewing a proposal for a multibillion-dollar project to construct a water desalination plant in Mexico that would pump water through a 200-mile pipeline to the border state to counter its drought-driven water uncertainty.

    Instead of blaming climate change, Phoenix should remember they’re situated in the middle of the desert, and the explosive population growth in the last several years draws down on finite resources much quicker. If the metro area wants to continue to expand, it might have to consider the 200-mile pipeline from Mexico. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 20:00

  • US Sent Billions in Funding to China, Russia For Cat Experiments, Wuhan Lab Research: Ernst
    US Sent Billions in Funding to China, Russia For Cat Experiments, Wuhan Lab Research: Ernst

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

    Hundreds of millions of U.S. tax dollars went to recipients in China and Russia in recent years without being properly tracked by the federal government, including a grant that enabled a state-run Russian lab to test cats on treadmills, according to Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa).

    Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) speaks at a Senate Republican news conference in the U.S. Capitol on March 9, 2022. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

    Ernst and her staff investigators, working with auditors at the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Congressional Research Service, as well as two nonprofit Washington watchdogs—Open The Books (OTB) and the White Coat Waste Project (WCWP)—discovered dozens of other grants that weren’t counted on the federal government’s USASpending.gov internet database.

    While the total value of the uncounted grants found by the Ernst team is $1.3 billion, that amount is just the tip of the iceberg, the GAO reported.

    Among the newly discovered grants is $4.2 million to China’s infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) “to conduct dangerous experiments on bat coronaviruses and transgenic mice,” according to a May 31 Ernst statement provided to The Epoch Times.

    The $4.2 million exposed by Ernst is in addition to previously reported funding to the WIV for extensive gain-of-function research by Chinese scientists, much of it funded in whole or part prior to the COVID-19 pandemic by National Institutes for Health (NIH) grants channeled through the EcoHealth Alliance medical research nonprofit.

    The NIH has awarded seven grants totaling more than $4.1 million to EcoHealth to study various aspects of SARS, MERS, and other coronavirus diseases.

    Buying Chinese Puppy Parts

    As part of another U.S.-funded grant, hearts and other organs from 425 dogs in China were purchased for medical research.

    “These countryside dogs in China are part of the farmer’s household; they were mainly used for guarding. Their diet includes boiled rice, discarded raw food animal tissues, and whatever dogs can forage. These dogs were sold for food,” an NIH study uncovered by the Ernst researchers reads.

    Other previously unreported grants exposed by the Ernst team include $1.6 million to Chinese companies from the federal government’s National School Lunch Program and $4.7 million for health insurance from a Russian company that was sanctioned by the United States in 2022 as a result of the invasion of Ukraine.

    “It’s gravely concerning that Washington’s reckless spending has reached the point where nobody really knows where all tax dollars are going,” Ernst separately told The Epoch Times. “But I have the receipts, and I’m shining a light on this, so bureaucrats can no longer cover up their tracks, and taxpayers can know exactly what their hard-earned dollars are funding.”

    The problem is that federal officials don’t rigorously track sub-awards made by initial grant recipients, according to the Iowa Republican. Such sub-awards are covered by a multitude of federal regulations that stipulate many conditions to ensure that the tax dollars are appropriately spent.

    The GAO said in an April report that “limitations in sub-award data is a government-wide issue and not unique to U.S. funding to entities in China.”

    “GAO is currently examining the state of federal government-wide sub-award data as part of a separate review,” the report reads.

    Peter Daszak, right, the president of the EcoHealth Alliance, is seen in Wuhan, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

    The Eco-Health sub-awards to WIV illustrate the problem.

    “Despite being required by law to make these receipts available to the public on the USAspending.gov website, EcoHealth tried to cover its tracks by intentionally not disclosing the amounts of taxpayer money being paid to WIV, which went unnoticed for years,” Ernst said in the statement.

    “I was able to determine that more than $490 million of taxpayer money was paid to organizations in China [in] the last five years. That’s ten times more than GAO’s estimate! Over $870 million was paid to entities in Russia during the same period!

    “Together that adds up to more than $1.3 billion paid to our adversaries. But again, these numbers still do not represent the total dollar amounts paid to institutions in China or Russia since those numbers are not tracked and the information that is being collected is incomplete.”

    Adam Andrzejewski, founder and chairman of OTB, told The Epoch Times, “When following the money at the state and local level, the real corruption exists in the subcontractor payments. At the federal level, the existing system doesn’t even track many of those recipients.

    “Without better reporting, agencies and appropriators don’t truly understand how tax dollars were used. We now know that taxpayer dollars are traded further downstream than originally realized with third- and fourth-tier recipients. These transactions need scrutiny. Requiring recipients to account for where and how they actually spend each dollar creates a record far better than agencies are capable of generating.”

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 19:40

  • Trove Of Nearly 10K Hunter Biden Laptop Photos, Docs Appear On Organized Website
    Trove Of Nearly 10K Hunter Biden Laptop Photos, Docs Appear On Organized Website

    Nearly 10,000 photos from Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop were uploaded to a new website – BidenLaptopMedia.com, which has been intermittently unavailable since launch due to overwhelming traffic.

    Hunter Biden records crack-smoking session on iPhone, 2018

    The site, which took months to complete, is the brainchild of former Trump White House aide, Garrett Ziegler, who worked as an aide to economic adviser Peter Navarro.

    “It’s taken us a couple of months to, one, go through the photos, about 10,000 of them, and redact the genitalia on the photos,” said Ziegler, adding “The number one thing we’re about… is truth and transparency.”

    “If the American people want to know what their first family is like, they’re going to get it. And we’re not going to be taking out photos that paint the Bidens in a good light.”

    The site includes;

    Pictures (with location metadata)

    Emails

    Suspicious Activity Reports

    Influence peddling

    Ashley Biden’s diary

    And lots of personal details;

    Screenshot, https://marcopolousa.org/bidenlaptopreport/

    According to Ziegler, several photos including private data were redacted, including those containing Social Security numbers, banking information and credit card numbers – as well as multiple nude photos of Hallie Biden, the widow of Beau Biden.

    Of the many photos found on the laptop, Ziegler provided Fox News Digital with two never-before-seen photos from the laptop. One photo showed Hunter Biden cozied up to his then-lover Zoe Kestan in 2018. The other image — featuring an array of drugs and a condom wrapper sitting on a table — was from a text message conversation Hunter had with Hallie Biden — the widow of Beau Biden and former lover of Hunter Biden — the same year.

    Providing further insight on the type of content viewers can expect on the website, Ziegler said some content that does not carry “news value” will not be featured. –Fox News

    “There are, for example, screenshots of Candy Crush games where we are fairly confident in saying there’s absolutely no news value to those,” he said. “So it’s going to be, I would say, 98% of the photos on the device, around 10,000 in total, although it’ll be slightly less than that.”

    “It’s going to be a completely authentic recounting of the photos on the device,” he continued.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 19:20

  • Launch Of New Acela Trains Delayed By Three Years
    Launch Of New Acela Trains Delayed By Three Years

    By Trains.com

    Launch of service for Amtrak’s next-generation Acela trainsets has been pushed back into 2024, the Washington Post reports, as testing and computer simulations continue to find problems, most recently with the train’s wheelsets

    A new Acela trainset passes the Amtrak/Shore Line East station at Old Saybrook, Conn., on April 5, 2021. Testing issues have further delayed the equipment’s debut

    That means the new trains will enter service at least three years late, placing increasing pressure on the existing Acela fleet that dates to 2000. Trains News Wire has learned that four of the 20 first-generation Acela sets have been withdrawn from service. Two New York-Washington Acela round trips were dropped from the schedule as of May 8; an Amtrak spokesman said this was “due to a need to perform additional maintenance on Acela equipment.”

    Alstom, which is building the 28 new high-speed trainsets, said in a statement to the Post that “modeling of the wheel-to-track interface is particularly complex due to age, condition, and specific characteristics of Amtrak infrastructure on the Northeast Corridor, and especially the existing tracks.” The company said it has been “conducting extensive investigations” to ensure the trains will operate safely and is “confident that this extensive process will demonstrate compatibility of the latest generation of high-speed technology with existing [Amtrak] infrastructure.”

    Sources tell News Wire that the computer modeling designed to predict the trainsets’ operating characteristics and enable them to reach maximum speeds over 150 mph were confirmed on the test track at Pueblo, Colo., but could not be verified on some Northeast Corridor sections. Track quality has been upgraded on New Jersey tracks between Trenton and New Brunswick, and Amtrak already hosts legacy Acela trainsets at 150 mph over portions of right-of-way upgraded in the 1990s in Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, but track quality varies widely elsewhere.

    Amtrak and Alstom announced a $2.45 billion deal to build the new equipment in 2016, with a 2021 target to begin service [see “Amtrak, Alstom reach $2.45 billion deal,” News Wire, Aug. 26, 2016]. But modifications to the trains’ catenary systems — which would lose contact with the catenary wire at top speed — pushed the debut back [see “News report says debut of new Acelas will be delayed by a year,” News Wire, June 3, 2021]. A delay to 2023 was attributed to further testing and modifications [see “Alstom explains latest delay …,” News Wire, April 8, 2022].

    Amtrak told the Post last week that “further refinement of analysis, simulations and testing” are needed. Alstom said it has delivered six trainsets to the passenger operator and is preparing to deliver the seventh.

    “We want our customers to experience these new trains as soon as possible, but Amtrak cannot operate them for passenger service until Alstom has completed testing and meets all safety requirements,” Amtrak said in a statement to the Post.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 19:00

  • US Asks Japan To Sell TNT For Ukraine Artillery Shells
    US Asks Japan To Sell TNT For Ukraine Artillery Shells

    In a drive to reinforce Ukraine’s arsenal ahead of a long-anticipated counteroffensive against Russia, the US government is working to buy explosive material from Japan for use in 155mm artillery shells, Reuters reported Thursday night. 

    The request is a test of Japan’s post-World War II philosophy against militarism, as well as the country’s specific restrictions on arms exports. Nonetheless, the Japanese government has assured US representatives the deal will get done. 

    Ukrainian soldiers firing artillery in the Donetsk region on Dec. 5 (Justin Yau/Sipa USA via AP and NBC News)

    “There is a way for the United States to buy explosives from Japan,” an unnamed person with knowledge of the negotiations told Reuters. The sale of industrial TNT will clear export hurdles thanks to the fact that it’s considered a “dual-use” product, that isn’t explicitly military in nature — as opposed to, for example, an assembled artillery shell.

    At the same time, Japan’s Ministry of Trade, Industry and Economy said its export rules require an assessment of the buyer’s intent for the product, including whether the intended use would undermine international security.  

    Artillery has figured heavily in the Ukraine war, with both sides firing several thousand rounds every day, and manufacturers scrambling to the guns firing. In December, Army Secretary Christine Wormuth said the US weapons industry would ramp up 155mm artillery shell production from 14,000 rounds per month to 20,000 in this spring and 40,000 by 2025. 

    News of a Japanese TNT deal comes on the heels of Secretary of Defense LLoyd Austin’s visit to Japan this week. If the deal closes, the explosives will be used by American ammunition manufacturers.  

    Defense Secretary LLoyd Austin in Tokyo on Thursday (Frank Robichon/Pool via Reuters)

    Echoing the sentiments of Western hawks, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has previously warned that a Russian triumph in Ukraine could encourage a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Japan has furnished nonlethal aid to Ukraine, including rations, helmets and flak jackets, and in April committed to supplying trucks.  

    With the pending TNT deal, Japan is putting its toes on the line of non-militarism. The move is bound to cause controversy. “The fact that Japan has decided to give trucks to Ukraine shows that things are changing. However, there doesn’t yet appear to be any political consensus around the issue of sending lethal aid,” the Sasakawa Peace Foundation’s Tsuneo Watanabe told Reuters. 

    In December, Japan announced its biggest military build-up since World War II. The $320 billion shopping list includes missiles with sufficient range to hit targets in China. Kishida and the ruling Liberal Democratic Party have also made clear their desire to relax export restrictions or eliminate them altogether.  

    While the proposed Japanese TNT supplier hasn’t been identified, a Reuters review of the country’s manufacturers points to closely-held, Chugoku Kayaku as the most likely firm. In a darkly ironic twist, the company that may advance Japan’s departure from the principles of peace is headquartered in Hiroshima. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 18:40

  • Fed Engages In Shocking Seasonal Adjustments To Convert $28BN Bank Deposit Outflow Into $102BN Inflow
    Fed Engages In Shocking Seasonal Adjustments To Convert $28BN Bank Deposit Outflow Into $102BN Inflow

    Tl; dr: The Fed reportts that domestic (large and small) commercial banks saw NSA flows of -$28.4 billion, while SA flows were +$102.5 billion!

    As if it needs to be said, non-seasonally-adjusted deposit flows are ‘actual flows’? And why do we care about ‘seasonally-adjusted’ deposits – they aren’t real assets?

    For some more context, the deposit delta (between real outflows and SA outflows) since March 1 is now $150BN+

    It seems The Fed is using the ‘fog of banking crisis war’ – knowing this data drops late on a Friday night – to pull the wool over depositors and investors eyes.

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

    *  *  *

    Following yesterday’s ugly money-market fund (accelerating inflows) and Fed balance sheet (another jump to a record usage of the Fed’s Bank Term Funding Program emergency bailout cash), expectations are that bank deposits continued to leave US commercial banks (despite last week’s unexpected rise in deposits and loans by small bank to real estate borrowers – hhmm).

    Regional bank shares have risen for three straight weeks – but the context for where they are is key…

    And if you wondered what’s driving that – take a look at bank exec’s insider buying (hint).

    And if everything’s so awesome, why are banks still using The Fed’s emergency bank bailout facilities so much?

    Source: Bloomberg

    And so, according to the latest H8 report from The Fed, on a seasonally-adjusted basis, total US Commercial Bank deposits (including large time deposits) increased by $86.5 billion during the week ended 5/24…

    Source: Bloomberg

    That is the biggest (seasonally adjusted) weekly inflow since June 2021 (and $116 billion of deposit inflows in 2 weeks).

    One can’t help but wonder if this giant surge is ‘seasonal-only’ given the timing of the prior jump.

    And this inflow occurred as money-market fund inflows hit a new record high (note that deposit data is one-week lagged to MM flows). So where is all this ‘cash’ coming from..

    Source: Bloomberg

    Under the hood, Large Banks saw a massive $85.6 billion seasonally-adjusted inflow (biggest weekly inflow since May 2020) as Foreign Banks saw outflows (-$159 billion) which were offset by $16.9 billion in inflows to Small Banks…

    Source: Bloomberg

    So – money flowed into bank deposits, money-market funds, and tech stocks…

    Sure!

    On a non-seasonally-adjusted basis, all bank cohorts saw OUTFLOWS

    Source: Bloomberg

    Here’s the direct comparison of real NSA flows and ‘fake’ SA flows…

    On the other side of the ledger, despite MASSIVE INFLOWS, large banks pulled back on credit extension (loans -$4.405 billion) while Small bank loans rose 7.9 billion…

    Source: Bloomberg

    As we noted last week, despite this ‘fake’ inflow data, this is far from over as former Dallas Fed head Robert Kaplan dropped some uncomfortable truth bombs on the US banking system:

    Phase one was an asset/liability mismatch at several banks

    Phase two began with the stock market deciding to do its own supervisory scrubbing

    We are now heading into the third phase.

    Bank leadership at small and midsize banks are considering how to shrink their loan books in order to address the mark-to-market loss of capital, as well as to guard against potential deposit instability in the future.

    Bank leadership is very aware that the economy is slowing, and that we are likely about to enter a challenging credit environment.

    While asset/liability mismatches are relatively easy to spot, assessing the quality of loan portfolios is much more complicated.

    CEOs of many small and midsize banks are in a tough position.

    They can’t easily raise equity because their stock prices are down.

    As a result, they are turning to shrinking their loan books, finding places to pull back on existing loans and future loan commitments.

    This is making it much harder for small and midsize businesses to get and keep their bank loans.

    It is a quiet phase that won’t make headlines but is nevertheless relentlessly going on beneath the surface.

    Read the full interview here…

    Free to speak his mind, Kaplan concludes rather ominously, “the recent banking turmoil has highlighted the disparity between too-big-to-fail banks and smaller and midsize banks. I worry that increasing the Fed funds rate from here may create further strains on the deposit base for those smaller banks. I’m concerned that, as the Fed raises rates, it is tightening the vice on small and midsize banks and the small and midsize businesses that rely on those banks for funding.”

    So, believe what you want America – did deposits soar last week or did they continue their trend of outflows (as evidenced by money-market fund inflows)?

    Source: Bloomberg

    And finally, the piece de resistance of Fed fuckery – for domestic (large and small) commercial banks, NSA (actual) flows were -$28.4 billion, while SA (magic) flows were +$102.5 billion!

    Are non-seasonally-adjusted deposit flows ‘actual flows’? And why do we care about ‘seasonally-adjusted’ deposits – they aren’t real assets?

    For some more context, the deposit delta (between real outflows and SA outflows) since March 1 is now $150BN+

    It seems The Fed is using the ‘fog of banking crisis war’ – knowing this data drops late on a Friday night – to pull the wool over depositors and investors eyes.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 18:40

  • Judge Considers Tossing Clinton Foundation Whistleblower Case After Durham Report Revelations
    Judge Considers Tossing Clinton Foundation Whistleblower Case After Durham Report Revelations

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

    A federal judge is weighing whether to throw out a case against the IRS that alleges the Clinton Foundation violated federal law and should have its tax-exempt status revoked.

    Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during a panel at the Vital Voices Global Festival in Washington on May 5, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

    U.S. Tax Court Judge David Gustafson on May 30 asked the government and experts who brought a whistleblower claim to the IRS based on a years-long investigation of the foundation to submit additional filings in light of recent developments in other cases.

    Rulings in those cases “may affect the parties’ positions as to the pending motions,” Gustafson wrote in a brief order (pdf), which was first reported by Just the News. “We will order further filings so that the parties may address those recent opinions,” he added.

    Those opinions include an appeals court ruling (pdf) in favor of the government in a case brought by a whistleblower who offered what he said was evidence a company was not paying enough taxes.

    John Moynihan, a former federal agent, and Lawrence Doyle, a tax expert, brought evidence to the IRS in 2017 that they say shows the Clinton Foundation violated U.S. law by acting as a foreign agent without registering as one.

    The IRS denied the claims after interviewing one of the people cited and determining the evidence “was not credible” due to the person’s denials. An appeal of the determination was turned down, prompting Moynihan and Doyle to take the matter to U.S. Tax Court.

    The government tried convincing Gustafson to toss the case, but in a 2020 ruling, he rejected the bid, finding that the IRS’s whistleblower’s office had “abused its discretion” by making unsupported statements in its determination.

    A new motion to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction was lodged in 2022 and is currently under consideration. The motion and an opposition filing from Moynihan and Doyle were not available on the court docket.

    In addition to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit opinion in Villa-Arce v. Commissioner, Gustafson referenced two other rulings:

    • A ruling (pdf) by the same court found that the tax court had jurisdiction to consider a whistleblower claim but that the court correctly threw out a case brought by a whistleblower.
    • A ruling (pdf) by the tax court found that the IRS appeared to correctly deny a whistleblower award to a man who was interviewed during an investigation.

    Moynihan and Doyle did not return requests for comment. The IRS and the U.S. Department of Justice did not respond to inquiries.

    Earlier Testimony

    Appearing before Congress in 2018, Moynihan and Doyle said they uncovered evidence indicating the Clinton Foundation violated the law.

    “The foundation began acting as an agent of foreign governments throughout its life and continues to do so. As such, they should have registered under FARA,” or the Foreign Agents Registration Act, Doyle said.

    The foundation also intentionally misused funds from donors, Moynihan said.

    “The investigation clearly demonstrates the foundation was not a charitable organization, per se, but, point of fact, was a closely held family partnership. As such, it was governed in a fashion in which it sought in large measure to advance the personal interests of its principals,” he said.

    The violations mean the foundation should no longer be entitled to its tax-exempt privileges, the experts said.

    The Clinton Foundation did not respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson told The Hill when the claim was first sent to the IRS that the foundation has been “subjected to outrageous, politically motivated allegations that have been proven false time and time again.”

    WikiLeaks

    Files obtained and published by WikiLeaks revealed that the foundation was audited multiple times.

    One of the auditor reports said the foundation was “missing several policies/procedures that are required by law” and that “there is no established mechanism for catching problems and mistakes.”

    Another (pdf) said that some employees were unaware of policies on conflicts of interest and outside employment and recommended implementing “a clear gift acceptance policy and procedures to ensure that all donors are properly vetted.”

    Former President Bill Clinton’s top aide, Douglas Band, wrote in one email that the ex-president received income and “many expensive gifts” from some of the foundation’s donors. Some of the foundation’s employees told auditors that donors “may have an expectation of quid pro quo benefits in return for [a] gift.”

    Recent Developments

    The new order came after special counsel John Durham’s report revealed that FBI agents launched three probes ahead of the 2016 election into the Clinton Foundation, acting on allegations the foundation had carried out criminal activities.

    Top officials tried to shut down the probes but relented after receiving pushback. They still ordered agents to get approval before taking any overt investigative steps.

    The investigations were ultimately consolidated in Arkansas and ended after U.S. prosecutors there declined to file charges, according to another set of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

    The Department of Justice declined to comment on the revelations.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 18:20

  • Failing Forward: Recalled San Francisco DA Lands At Berkeley Law, While Lori Lightfoot Brings 'Big D*ck' To Harvard
    Failing Forward: Recalled San Francisco DA Lands At Berkeley Law, While Lori Lightfoot Brings ‘Big D*ck’ To Harvard

    After failing so hard as San Francisco district attorney that a Democrat-led coalition of residents led a recall effort, Chesa Boudin, the soft-on-crime former ‘Soros DA’ has landed on his feet at UC Berkeley, where he’ll lead the college’s new Criminal Law & Justice Center.

    “A lifetime of visiting my biological parents in prison and my work as a public defender and district attorney have made clear that our system fails to keep communities safe and fails to treat them equitably,” Boudin – the child of two cop-killing communists, said regarding the announcement.

    Boudin’s adopted father, Bill Ayers, is an Obama family friend and an admitted terrorist who only regretted ‘not planting enough bombs.‘ Ayers’ Weather Underground group took credit for 25 bombings – including at the US Capitol, the Pentagon, the US State Department, the CA Attorney General’s office and a NYC police station, in an attempt to overthrow the US government.

    Boudin has also been accused of botching a response to hate crimes against Asians.

    And in today’s second case of failing forward – disgraced Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot (D), who once bragged about having the “biggest dick” in the city, has landed a teaching gig at Harvard less than a month after leaving office.

    According to Fox News, “Beginning this fall, Lightfoot will teach a course at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health tentatively titled “Health Policy and Leadership,” according to an announcement from the school.”

    The Menschel program, according to the school, “offers a rare opportunity for those who have recently served in top-level positions in government, multilateral institutions, nonprofit organizations and journalism to spend time at the school mentoring and teaching students who aspire to similar roles. Lightfoot will hold regular office hours to meet with students, faculty and staff during her time on campus.” -Fox News

    “As mayor, she showed strong leadership in advocating for health, equity, and dignity for every resident of Chicago, from her declaration of structural racism as a public health crisis to her innovative initiative to bring mental health services to libraries and shelters. And of course, she led the city through the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Michelle A. Williams, dean of faculty at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, according to CBS News.

    This is what parents are getting for $55,000 per year?

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

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jun 02

Today’s News 2nd June 2023

  • These Are The Most 'Over-Touristed' Cities In Europe
    These Are The Most ‘Over-Touristed’ Cities In Europe

    With the travel industry having bounced back in full force after the peak Covid-19 pandemic years, residents of favorite city-break locations are feeling the impacts of overtourism.

    As Statista’s Anna Fleck reports, the picturesque town of Hallstatt in Austria is one such place, having captured headlines in recent weeks after the local government put up barriers to stop tourists from taking selfies and introduced daily limits on the number of buses and cars.

    The following chart gives an idea of just how busy some of Europe’s most popular cities can be, using annual tourism figures from 2019 (the last pre-pandemic year) to calculate an estimation of the number of vacationers to local residents.

    Infographic: The Most ‘Over-Touristed’ Cities in Europe | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Dubrovnik, Croatia comes first on the list with 36 tourists for every local resident. According to Holidu, the vacation home rental agency that created the ranking, the city is particularly popular in July and August. Dubrovnik, like many of the cities ranking high on the list, has a small population. That is in comparison to cities such as London, which ranks 29th out of the 35 cities analyzed, which has a population of nearly 9 million people.

    Tied in second place comes the Italian city of Venice, the Belgian city of Bruges and the Greek city of Rhodes, all with 21 tourists per inhabitant. In Venice, overtourism has been largely attributed to cruise ships in recent years, leading to the authorities eventually banning the liners from coming into the city center as of August 2021. The final two cities to round off the top 10 are Dublin, Ireland with 11 tourists per inhabitant and Tallinn, Estonia with 10 toursis per inhabitant.

    Holidu drew a shortlist of 35 cities based on The Savvy Backpacker and Air Mundo’s most visited cities lists.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 02:45

  • "Migrants Will Soon Be The Powerful" – German Broadsheet Causes Uproar With Immigration Article
    “Migrants Will Soon Be The Powerful” – German Broadsheet Causes Uproar With Immigration Article

    Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

    Die Zeit deleted the social media post linking to the article after a number of users expressed their outrage at the rhetoric, although many others praised the publication…

    The German broadsheet Die Zeit has caused a storm on social media after publishing an article in which it claims Germany will soon be “a country in which migrants will no longer be a minority.”

    Die Zeit, the Hamburg-based newspaper widely considered to be a more highbrow read than the tabloids, posted the article highlighting Germany’s irreparable demographic change to its socials on Tuesday with the caption:

    Integration was yesterday: Germany is the second-largest immigration country in the world, and the original Germans are likely to become a numerical minority among many in the foreseeable future. And now?

    The accompanying photo showed a group of four young immigrants in a top-down flash convertible smiling at the camera with the headline: “They will be the powerful.”

    The article recounted a time when there used to be a “familiar homeland” before “the others” came, explaining that Germany used to have just 500,000 foreign nationals residing in the Federal Republic and the country “belonged to the Germans.”

    You knew the neighbors. One understood what they said, what they believed, what they served up in the evening. There was peace. The economy grew miraculously.

    Despite the article portraying a more peaceful era before mass immigration, the article itself is not anti-immigrant. It later attempts to persuade the reader to consider that Germany has almost always been a country of immigration, citing the Prussians who imported foreign workers — despite nearly all of these workers being European and Christian.

    The article also claimed that Germany is “now safer than ever.” Despite statistics showing crime falling overall over the last decade, murders and gang rapes are increasing, and a disproportionate share of them are committed by Germany’s foreign population. In fact, gang rapes reached a record high in 2022, with half of the suspects being foreigners.

    However, the article’s posting on social media caused a stir across the German political landscape as campaigners on both sides of the immigration debate commented on the story.

    “Please what?” Green MEP Erik Marquardt wrote on Twitter in response to the Die Zeit post.

    The social media post was later deleted and replaced with a new photo, depicting two white females and the caption, “In recent years, Germany has become the world’s second-largest immigration country without really wanting to admit it.”

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

    “This teaser is almost even worse than the old one,” commented Marius Mestermann, a journalist with Der Spiegel, a sentiment shared by a number of other self-proclaimed liberals.

    Others, however, praised the publication for drawing attention to the demographic changes in the country, an indisputable fact materialized through record levels of mass immigration under years of liberal governance.

    This trend shows no signs of slowing down, with the German government prepared to spend €36 billion on its open borders policies this year, despite growing resentment among the electorate. This public resistance is evidenced by a rise in support for the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.

    Germany continues to experience record population growth, with nearly 1.5 million migrants arriving in 2022, and 163,000 new arrivals in the first three months of 2023.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 06/02/2023 – 02:00

  • Senate Rubber Stamps Debt Ceiling Band-Aid; Biden To Sign Into Law 'As Soon As Possible'
    Senate Rubber Stamps Debt Ceiling Band-Aid; Biden To Sign Into Law ‘As Soon As Possible’

    As expected, Chuck Schumer’s Senate was a lock for approving the deal to raise the debt ceiling, which will be suspended until January 1, 2025 while spending will remain ‘roughly flat’ for the same period of time “when factoring in agreed upon appropriations adjustments” (oh?), and virtually none of what actual conservatives wanted came to pass.

    The 63-36 bipartisan vote means that the legislation will now go to President Joe Biden’s desk – who ‘looks forward to signing the bill into law as soon as possible,’ according to a White House statement.

    The Fiscal Responsibility Act suspends the debt ceiling until just after the 2024 elections, in exchange for a 3% cap on increases in military spending, and cuts to undetermined domestic programs. It will leave Medicare and Social Security intact.

    The deal largely protects Biden’s legislative achievements of last year, with Republicans having little success in using the debt ceiling to dismantle his climate, tax and health law, the Inflation Reduction Act. But it also allows Republicans to point to spending cuts, given that spending caps are enforceable for fiscal years 2024 and 2025, and the party succeeded in clawing back some funding for the Internal Revenue Service and unspent Covid-19 money. WSJ

    Passage of the bill averts a technical default, which was slated to happen as soon as June 5, when the Treasury department warned that the government would run out of money to pay its bills.

    “America can breathe a sigh of relief, because in this process, we are avoiding default,” said Schumer (D-NY) in announcing the planned vote. “The consequences of default would be catastrophic. It would almost certainly cause another recession. It would be a nightmare for our economy and millions of American families.”

    As the Wall Street Journal reports;

    The bill’s passage closed out a relatively smooth final chapter in Congress’s efforts to tackle the debt ceiling after months of finger-pointing. Democrats accused Republicans of irresponsibly using the prospect of default to extort concessions, while Republicans countered that the nation’s growing debt called for decisive action, while also ruling out new taxes proposed by Biden.

    The Treasury Department said in January that the nation had bumped up against the debt limit and started using extraordinary measures to keep the government solvent. Biden initially vowed that he wouldn’t negotiate on the debt ceiling, insisting that it be raised with no conditions attached. But talks between McCarthy, a California Republican, and the Democratic president kicked off in earnest last month, after House Republicans surprised many Democrats by staying largely united to pass a bill proposing deep spending cuts and rolling back parts of Biden’s climate and tax agenda. -WSJ

    Passage by the Senate came less than 24 hours after the House finally approved the measure after weeks of negotiations which left conservatives livid over the fact that they got completely schooled out of meaningful spending cuts and other demands.

    Under an agreement which allowed the Senate to fast-track the vote, the Senate agreed to entertain 11 amendments – all of which were rejected, as any of them would have required the legislation to be sent back to the House – which has already left town, for a re-vote.

    More via Reuters;

    Getting it through the Senate Thursday night took hours of negotiations between the two parties, with independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema shuttling in designer sneakers between Republicans lunching on the second floor of the Capitol and Democrats on and off the Senate floor.

    Ultimately, they settled on allowing uncharacteristically speedy votes on 11 amendments — all of which failed — and a pair of statements from Schumer aimed at soothing concerns about defense spending levels and other potential cuts.

    Schumer made it clear that the Senate could bypass the spending caps in the bill for Ukraine, defense and domestic priorities using emergency funding, though the Rpublican-controlled House would have to concur. 

    “I am pleased that, under President Biden’s leadership, Congress has passed bipartisan legislation to suspend the debt limit and prevent a first-ever default by the United States,” reads a Thursday night statement from Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. “This legislation protects the full faith and credit of the United States and preserves our financial leadership, which is critical to our economic growth and stability.”

    “A default would have caused severe hardship for American families, potentially leading to the loss of millions of jobs and trillions in household wealth, and higher financing costs for American taxpayers for years to come. The bipartisan agreement also protects against efforts to roll back the President’s core economic agenda – one that has contributed to a historically strong and resilient economic recovery. Congress has a duty to ensure that the United States can pay its bills on time, and I continue to strongly believe that the full faith and credit of the United States must never be used as a bargaining chip.”

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 23:48

  • Escobar: The Sultan 2.0 Will Heavily Tilt East
    Escobar: The Sultan 2.0 Will Heavily Tilt East

    Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

    It’s not that Erdogan has a scheme to head east at the west’s expense. It’s just that the world’s grandest infrastructure, development, and geopolitical projects are all in the east today…

    The collective west was dying to bury him – yet another strategic mistake that did not take into account the mood of Turkish voters in deep Anatolia.

    In the end, Recep Tayyip Erdogan did it – again. Against all his shortcomings, like an aging neo-Ottoman Sinatra, he did it “my way,” comfortably retaining Turkiye’s presidency after naysayers had all but buried him.

    The first order of geopolitical priority is who will be named Minister of Foreign Affairs. The prime candidate is Ibrahim Kalin – the current all-powerful Erdogan press secretary cum top adviser.

    Compared to incumbent Cavusoglu, Kalin, in theory, may be qualified as more pro-west. Yet it’s the Sultan who calls the shots. It will be fascinating to watch how Turkiye under Erdogan 2.0 will navigate the strengthening of ties with West Asia and the accelerating process of Eurasia integration.

    The first immediate priority, from Erdogan’s point of view, is to get rid of the “terrorist corridor” in Syria. This means, in practice, reigning in the US-backed Kurdish YPG/PYD, who are effectively Syrian affiliates of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) – which is also the issue at the heart of a possible normalization of relations with Damascus.

    Now that Syria has been enthusiastically welcomed back to the Arab League after a 12-year freeze, a Moscow-brokered entente between the Turkish and Syrian presidents, already in progress, may represent the ultimate win-win for Erdogan: allowing control of Kurds in north Syria while facilitating the repatriation of roughly 4 million refugees (tens of thousands will stay, as a source of cheap labor).

    The Sultan is at his prime when it comes to hedging his bets between east and west. He knows well how to profit from Turkiye’s status as a key NATO member – complete with one of its largest armies, veto power, and control of the entry to the uber-strategic Black Sea.

    And all that while exercising real foreign policy independence, from West Asia to the Eastern Mediterranean.

    So expect Erdogan 2.0 to remain an inextinguishable source of irritation for the neocons and neoliberals in charge of US foreign policy, along with their EU vassals, who will never refrain from trying to subdue Ankara to fight the Russia-China-Iran Eurasia integration entente. The Sultan, though, knows how to play this game beautifully.

    How to manage Russia and China

    Whatever happens next, Erdogan will not hop on board the sanctions-against-Russia sinking ship. The Kremlin bought Turkish bonds tied to the development of the Russian-built Akkuyu nuclear power plant, Turkiye’s first nuclear reactor. Moscow allowed Ankara to postpone nearly $4 billion in energy payments until 2024. Best of all, Ankara pays for Russian gas in rubles.

    So an array of deals related to the supply of Russian energy trump possible secondary sanctions that might target the steady rise in Turkiye’s exports. Still, it’s a given the US will revert to its one and only “diplomatic” policy – sanctions. The 2018 sanctions did push Turkiye into recession after all.

    But Erdogan can easily count on popular support across the Turkish realm. Early this year, a Gezici poll revealed that 72.8 percent of Turkish citizens privilege good relations with Russia while nearly 90 percent rate the US as a “hostile” nation. That’s what allows Interior Minister Soylu to remark, bluntly, “we will wipe out whoever is causing trouble, including American troops.”

    China-Turkiye strategic cooperation falls under what Erdogan defines as “turning to the East” – and is mostly about China’s multi-continent infrastructure behemoth, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The Turk Silk Road branch of the BRI focuses on what Beijing defines as the “Middle Corridor,” a prime cost-effective/secure trade route that connects Asia to Europe.

    The driver is the China Railway Express, which turned the Middle Corridor arguably into BRI’s backbone. For instance, electronics parts and an array of household items routinely arriving via cargo planes from Osaka, Japan are loaded onto freight trains going to Duisburg and Hamburg in Germany, via the China Railway Express departing from Shenzhen, Wuhan, and Changsha – and crossing from Xinjiang to Kazakhstan and beyond via the Alataw Pass. Shipments from Chongqing to Germany take a maximum of 13 days.

    It’s no wonder that nearly 10 years ago, when he first unveiled his ambitious, multi-trillion dollar BRI in Astana, Kazakhstan, Chinese President Xi Jinping placed the China Railway Express as a core BRI component.

    Direct freight trains from Xian to Istanbul are plying the route since December 2020, using the Baku-Tblisi-Kars (BTK) railway with less than two weeks travel time – and plans afoot to increase their frequency. Beijing is well aware of Turkiye’s asset as a transportation hub and crossroads for markets in the Balkans, the Caucasus, Central Asia, West Asia, and North Africa, not to mention a customs union with the EU that allows direct access to European markets.

    Moreover, Baku’s victory in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war came with a ceasefire deal bonus: the Zangezur corridor, which will eventually facilitate Turkiye’s direct access to neighbors from the  Caucasus to Central Asia.

    A pan-Turkic offensive?

    And here we enter a fascinating territory: the possible incoming interpolations between the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the BRICS+ – and all that also linked to a boost in Saudi and Emirati investments in the Turkish economy.

    Sultan 2.0 wants to become a full member of both the Chinese-led SCO and multipolar BRICS+.

    This means a much closer entente with the Russia-China strategic partnership as well as with the Arab powerhouses, which are also hopping on the BRICS+ high-speed train.

    Erdogan 2.0 is already focusing on two key players in Central Asia and South Asia: Uzbekistan and Pakistan. Both happen to be SCO members.

    Ankara and Islamabad are very much in sync. They express the same judgment on the extremely delicate Kashmir question, and both backed Azerbaijan against Armenia.

    But the key developments may lie in Central Asia. Ankara and Tashkent have a strategic defense agreement – including intel sharing and logistics cooperation.

    The Organization of Turkic States (OTS), with a HQ in Istanbul, is the prime energizer of pan-Turkism or pan-Turanism. Turkiye, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan are full members, with Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Hungary, and Ukraine cultivated as observers. The Turk-Azeri relationship is billed as “one nation, two states” in pan-Turkic terms.

    The basic idea is a still hazy “cooperation platform” between Central Asia and the Southern Caucasus. Yet some serious proposals have already been floated. The OTS summit in Samarkand late last year advanced the idea of a TURANCEZ free trade bloc, comprising Turkiye, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, and as observers, Hungary (representing the EU) and Northern Cyprus.

    Meanwhile, hard business prevails. To fully profit from the status of the energy transit hub, Turkiye needs not only Russian gas but also gas from Turkmenistan feeding the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) as well as Kazakh oil coming via the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline.

    The Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TIKA) is heavy on economic cooperation, active in a series of projects in transportation, construction, mining, and oil and gas. Ankara has already invested a whopping $85 billion across Central Asia, with nearly 4,000 companies scattered across all the “stans.”

    Of course, when compared to Russia and China, Turkiye is not a major player in Central Asia. Moreover, the bridge to Central Asia goes via Iran. So far, rivalry between Ankara and Tehran seems to be the norm, but everything may change, lightning fast, with the simultaneous development of the Russia-Iran-India-led International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), which will profit both – and the fact that the Iranians and Turks may soon become full BRICS+ members.

    Sultan 2.0 is bound to boost investment in Central Asia as a new geoeconomic frontier. That in itself encapsulates the possibility of Turkiye soon joining the SCO.

    We will then have a “turning to the East” in full effect, in parallel to closer ties with the Russia-China strategic partnership. Take note that Turkiye’s ties with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan are also strategic partnerships.

    Not bad for a neo-Ottoman who, until a few days ago, was dismissed as a has-been.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 23:40

  • How The FBI Lost, Found, And Rewarded The Alleged Russian Spy Pivotal To Surveilling Trump
    How The FBI Lost, Found, And Rewarded The Alleged Russian Spy Pivotal To Surveilling Trump

    Authored by Paul Sperry via RealClear Wire,

    Twelve years ago, FBI agents in Baltimore sought to wiretap former Brookings Institution analyst Igor Danchenko on suspicions he was spying for Russia. But the counterintelligence analyst they were assigned to work with Brian Auten told them he could not find their target and assumed the Russian national had fled back to Moscow. 

    But Danchenko had not left the U.S., court documents show. He was living in the Washington area. In fact, he had been arrested in Maryland in 2013 by federal Park Police for being drunk and disorderly, something the FBI analyst could have easily discovered by searching federal law enforcement databases. Clueless, the FBI closed its espionage case on Danchenko. 
     
    Auten would quickly rise to become the FBI’s top Russian analyst. In 2016 and 2017, he failed to properly vet the Steele dossier, a collection of salacious allegations created for Hillary Clinton’s campaign which sought to tie Donald Trump to the Kremlin, before clearing it as the central piece of evidence used by the FBI to obtain warrants to spy on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. 

    Working out of headquarters as a supervisor, Auten knew Danchenko helped Christopher Steele compile the dossier while living in the area. But instead of contacting the Baltimore agents, Auten secretly groomed him as an informant, arranging payments of $220,000 to target Donald Trump and his former aide Page.  

    One result: Danchenko, the suspected Russian spy, falsely accused Page, a former U.S. Navy office who had previously helped the FBI, of being a Russian spy in the dossier. 

    Igor Danchenko

    Auten also never informed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about the FBI’s longstanding concerns about Danchenko.  

    Like the Baltimore agents, investigators at FBI headquarters relied on Auten to build their counterintelligence cases on Page and three other Trump advisers. Auten provided the reports and memos they used to establish probable cause in each case. Auten also supported investigators working on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe. 
     
    Auten’s conduct was first singled out for rebuke by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who in 2019 issued a report detailing how Auten cut corners in the dossier verification process. Horowitz referred Auten to the FBI for discipline, which does not appear to have been administered.

    His earlier and deeper connections to Danchenko have only been more recently revealed in the report issued by Special Counsel John Durham. His findings suggest that if Auten had done his job over a decade ago, chances are the now-discredited dossier never would have been created and used by the FBI to eavesdrop on Page and help launch the Russiagate probe. It’s likely that Danchenko, the main source of the dossier’s allegations, would have been deported years earlier and flagged in the system, according to the recently released Durham Report. 

    The embattled analyst was recommended for suspension from the bureau last year, and his case has been under disciplinary review for several months. Contacted by RealClearInvestigations, an FBI spokeswoman declined to say if Auten has been suspended. “In keeping with our usual practice,” she said, “we have no comment on personnel matters.” 

    According to the Durham Report, Danchenko came onto the radar of agents working out of the Baltimore field office in 2010 after two former Brookings colleagues entering the government told the FBI that he had solicited classified information.  

    The agents subsequently opened an espionage case after discovering Danchenko had previous contacts with the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers.  
     
    “In particular, the FBI learned that in September 2006, Danchenko informed one Russian intelligence officer that he had an interest in entering the Russian diplomatic service,” the report stated. “Four days later, the intelligence officer contacted Danchenko and informed him that they could meet that day to work ‘on the documents and then think about future plans.’” 
     
    The next month, Danchenko contacted the intelligence officer “so the documents can be placed in [the following day’s] diplomatic mail pouch,” according to the report. 
     
    In addition, Danchenko had been identified as an associate of two other espionage suspects, Durham learned from a review of his case file. 

    In July 2010, the FBI initiated a request to obtain a FISA warrant to conduct surveillance on Danchenko. Auten helped research Danchenko and provided information for wiretap applications. However, the investigation was soon closed after the FBI incorrectly concluded Danchenko had left the country in September 2010. Danchenko and his wife continued to reside openly in the Washington area. 

    But the probe wasn’t completely dead. In 2012, Auten exchanged emails with one of the Baltimore agents in which they speculated whether Danchenko had actually left the country. Then in 2013, the U.S. Park Police arrested Danchenko in Greenbelt, Md., on drunk-and-disorderly charges, court records first obtained by RCI show.  
     
    Danchenko’s case was visible in the federal law enforcement database and prosecuted by then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein, who years later, as acting attorney general, would sign one of the 2017 applications to renew a wiretap targeting Page and authorize an expansion of the FBI’s Trump-Russia investigation. 
     
    The Russian-born Danchenko, who was living in the U.S. on a work visa, was released from jail on the condition he undergo drug testing and “participate in a program of substance abuse therapy and counseling,” as well as “mental health counseling,” the records show. His lawyer asked the court to postpone his trial and let him travel to Moscow “as a condition of his employment.” The Russian trips were granted without objection from Rosenstein. Danchenko ended up several months later entering into a plea agreement and paying fines. 
     
    Despite the flurry of legal records generated on Danchenko in the federal system, it is not clear why the FBI failed to take note of his presence in the country. What the record does show is that the bureau did not reopen the espionage case against him. 
     
    Danchenko reappeared on Auten’s radar in late 2016 as he and the FBI were using the Steele dossier he helped create on Trump to seek warrants to spy on Page. 

    Auten identified his old espionage target in December 2016 as the “primary subsource” of the document. Instead of wiretapping Danchenko, the FBI recruited him as an informant and paid him $220,000 to help the bureau continue wiretapping the former Trump aide. FBI headquarters proposed paying Danchenko an additional $300,000 even as Durham was actively investigating him as the “linchpin to the uncorroborated allegations contained in the Steele Reports.” After asking officials at FBI headquarters about the bureau’s relationship with Danchenko, Durham determined that they were unable to justify keeping him open as a confidential source, “much less making hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to him.” 
     
    After examining FBI documents, Durham discovered that Auten interviewed Danchenko over three days in January 2017 as part of a plan to recruit him as a paid informant, despite the unresolved counterespionage investigation. Working with then-DOJ official David Laufman, the FBI offered immunity from prosecution to the longtime spy suspect and invited his lawyer to sit with him during the interviews. 

    “If this recruitment was successful, the FBI planned to mine Danchenko for information that was corroborative of the damaging allegations about President-elect Trump in the Steele Reports,” Durham said in his report. 
     
    Auten confessed to Durham that Danchenko “was not able to provide any corroborative evidence related to any substantive allegation contained in the Steele Reports and critically was unable to corroborate any of the FBI’s assertions contained in the Carter Page FISA applications,” according to the Durham report (emphasis in the original). 
     
    Danchenko was kept on the FBI payroll for more than three years. 
     
    In internal FBI documents, Danchenko’s handling agent Kevin Helson incorrectly stated that there was no “derogatory” information associated with Danchenko and that he had not been a prior subject of an FBI investigation. 
     
    “This was clearly not true as there had previously been the unresolved Baltimore FBI counterespionage investigation of Danchenko that was only closed because it was believed he had left the country and returned to Russia,” Durham pointed out. 
     
    Agent Helson later learned that the informant he was assigned to handle had been investigated as a suspected spy. However, Auten advised Helson that the espionage case against Danchenko was “interesting, but was not a significant” matter, according to the Durham report. 
     
    “Notably,” the report added, “Auten did not inform Helson that he had previously assisted in the Baltimore investigation.” 

     A Suspected Kremlin Agent ‘Hiding in Plain Sight’

    The Baltimore agents were shocked to learn from Durham’s office that Danchenko had been signed up as a confidential FBI source. One of them interviewed by Durham’s investigators believed Danchenko was a Kremlin agent “hiding in plain sight” in the U.S., while frequently traveling overseas to be debriefed by Russian intelligence. The other Baltimore agent said the counterintelligence case on Danchenko remained unresolved and, in her opinion, “certainly a lot more investigation” should have been conducted on Danchenko. 
     
    “It is extremely concerning that the FBI failed to deal with the prior unresolved counterespionage case on Danchenko,” Durham concluded in his report. 
     
    “Given Danchenko’s known contacts with Russian intelligence officers and his documented prior pitch [to colleagues at Democratic think tank Brookings] for classified information, the Crossfire Hurricane team’s failure to properly consider and address the espionage case prior to opening Danchenko as a CHS [confidential human source] is difficult to explain, particularly given their awareness that Danchenko was the linchpin to the uncorroborated allegations contained in the Steele Reports,” the special prosecutor added. Crossfire Hurricane was the code name for the FBI’s Russia investigation. 
     
    In an RCI interview, Danchenko’s lawyer denied his client ever spied for the Russian government. He said Danchenko feared Russian President Vladimir Putin and was concerned for his personal safety. However, Durham examined immigration records which revealed that Danchenko lived in the U.S. but traveled frequently to Russia, casting doubts about his security concerns. 
     
    Yet in sworn affidavits to obtain the FISA warrants targeting Page, FBI agents led judges on the secret surveillance court to believe Danchenko was “Russian-based” – and therefore presumably more credible as a source of the allegations that Page was a Russian agent. By 2017, Auten knew the “Russian-based” claim was untrue. Even so, he let case agents slip it into two FISA renewal requests targeting Page. And so the “Russian-based” fraud lived on through 2017. 
     
    Auten assured the court that Danchenko was “truthful and cooperative,” never telling the judges about unresolved questions that made him a suspected Russian agent.  

    And Auten’s imprimatur carried great weight. In Durham’s telling, Auten was known internally as one of the “Triumvirate of Control” in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, along with senior counterintelligence official Peter Strzok and intelligence section chief Jonathan Moffa. Some case agents working under them believed the surveillance of Page was a “dry hole,” but the “triumvirate” insisted they continue secretly intercepting his emails, text messages, and other communications, according to Durham. 

    On Sept. 19, 2016, the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team formally received a dossier report alleging that Page had held secret meetings with sanctioned Kremlin officials in Moscow earlier that summer in which they allegedly discussed lifting U.S. sanctions on Russia. That same day, an anxious Auten urged department lawyers to consider including the dossier report as part of the initial FISA application targeting Page. 

    In an email to attorneys, Auten forwarded an excerpt from the dossier report and asked, “Does this put us at least *that* much closer to a full FISA on [Page]?”  
     
    The attorneys thought it was a “close call” when they first discussed a FISA targeting Page in early August, but the dossier report in September “pushed it over” the line in terms of establishing probable cause. 
     
    Except that the dossier allegation about secret Kremlin meetings was bunk. Auten knew there were serious doubts about it yet withheld those concerns from FISA judges. 
     
    On Oct. 17, 2016, Auten received an email alerting him to a conversation an informant covertly recorded with Page that day in which Page “outright denied” meeting with the Russian officials or even knowing them. 
     
    “Nevertheless,” Durham noted, “Page’s exculpatory statements were not included in the initial FISA application signed just four days later.” 
     
    Before the application was submitted, Auten also was aware that the dossier was being funded and promoted by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

    On Sept. 2, 2016, CIA personnel briefed Auten at FBI headquarters about credible foreign intelligence they received about the Clinton campaign’s machinations. Yet Auten took no steps to analyze the intelligence and how it might impact the Trump campaign investigation and surveillance requests. Nor did he inform the FISA court about it. Asked why he failed to disclose the “Clinton plan” intelligence, Auten told Durham’s office that it was “just one data point.” 
     
    As the FBI made requests to renew its spy warrants throughout 2017, Auten continued to gloss over major holes in the dossier. He even pressured agents and analysts to back off looking into a questionable source of key allegations, according to the Durham report. It turns out that source, Charles Dolan, was also tied to the Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party. 
     
    Agent Helson told Durham that Auten told him to “hold off” on interviewing Dolan, who was never interviewed. 

    Auten also told a female FBI analyst working for Mueller “to cease all research and analysis related to Dolan,” according to the Durham report. She wrote a memo in September 2017 documenting Dolan’s ties to the dossier, but said that “Auten had made edits to her memorandum, some of which removed information regarding Dolan.” She said she was frustrated by the censorship and wondered if there was “a political motive” behind it. The analyst told Durham she prepared a contemporaneous timeline in case she was ever questioned about her role in the Mueller investigation. 
     
    Perhaps most concerning was Auten’s reluctance to corroborate even the existence of a ghost-like source Danchenko claimed had provided him a stream of bombshell allegations that were essential to the FBI’s case for probable cause against Page. The alleged source, Belarus-born businessman and Trump booster named Sergei Millian, actually had no connection of any kind to Danchenko. There is no evidence the two men ever met or spoke. Yet Danchenko attributed to Millian the dossier’s core allegation: that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election in a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation.” This claim, which Durham found to be completely conjured up by Danchenko, formed the backbone of all four of the FBI’s applications to the FISA court to spy on Trump. 
     
    Auten knew there were serious problems with the attribution. While debriefing Danchenko in January 2017, Danchenko was dodgy about his supposed conversations with Millian. Still, Auten made no effort to validate Millian as a source. He never examined either Danchenko’s or Millian’s phone records, for starters. 
     
    Durham did pull the call records, however, and easily determined that Danchenko never actually spoke with Millian. He also learned from Danchenko’s email records that he fabricated his conversations with Millian, which means he also made up the dossier allegation that Carter Page masterminded the Democratic National Committee email leak, a claim the FBI also vouchsafed to the FISA court to attain the Page wiretaps. 
     
    “Nevertheless, the information allegedly provided by Millian remained in the Page FISA applications,” Durham stated in his report.  
     
    Auten told Durham that he did, however, check with the FBI’s partners at the CIA to see if they had anything on file to corroborate Danchenko’s reporting in the dossier. 

    “They received no corroborating information back,” Durham said. 
     
    Durham interviewed a career counterintelligence analyst at Langley who said the dossier was transparent fiction. “Indeed, after the dossier was leaked and became public,” Durham relayed in his report, “that [CIA] expert’s reaction was to ask the FBI, ‘You didn’t use that, right?’” 

    For several years, Auten moonlighted teaching law enforcement, intelligence, and surveillance courses at Patrick Henry College in North Virginia. He was removed from the Patrick Henry website soon after RealClearInvestigations published a July 2020 story first identifying him as the anonymous “Supervisory Intelligence Analyst” singled out in 2019 by DOJ Inspector General Horowitz for cutting corners verifying the dossier. 
     
    Auten also is no longer listed as a member of the college’s Strategic Intelligence Board of Advisors. Patrick Henry’s communications director did not reply to requests for an explanation for Auten’s removal from the website. But a faculty spokesman confirmed over the phone that he is no longer teaching there. 

    He is, however, apparently, still employed by the FBI. Auten’s most recent activities that have come to light? Possibly using false information to undermine allegations of criminal activity on the part of Hunter Biden. According to a July 25, 2022, letter from Sen. Chuck Grassley to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Auten’s “scheme” entailed using deceptive and derogatory information to derail the FBI’s investigation. 

    “First, it’s been alleged that the FBI developed information in 2020 about Hunter Biden’s criminal financial and related activity,” Grassley wrote. “It is further alleged that in August 2020, FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten opened an assessment which was used by an FBI Headquarters (“FBI HQ”) team to improperly discredit negative Hunter Biden information as disinformation and caused investigative activity to cease.”

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 23:00

  • Jaguar Recalls Thousands Of I-Pace EVs Over Fire Risk, Tells Owners To Park Outside
    Jaguar Recalls Thousands Of I-Pace EVs Over Fire Risk, Tells Owners To Park Outside

    Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) is recalling 6,400 I-Pace electric SUVs delivered to the US because the high-voltage electric battery may overheat and catch fire. 

    The documents posted Wednesday by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said the recall covers I-Pace vehicles delivered between 2019 and 2024. 

    The problem is centered around the EV batteries produced by LG Energy Solutions. The NHTSA is investigating LG because its batteries have forced five other automakers to issue similar recalls due to fire risk. Most notable has been the fire risk around Ford F-150 Lightnings. 

    According to an NHTSA filing, JLR said eight I-Pace vehicles had caught fire, but no accidents or injuries were reported. 

    Fortune said JLR sent an email to US I-Pace owners to park vehicles away from building structures until repairs have been completed. 

    South Korea-based LG said Jaguar is updating the battery-managing software on the vehicles while NHTSA investigates the fires.

    “LG Energy Solution continues to closely work with our client Jaguar Land Rover to ensure that the investigation is concluded,” it said in a statement Thursday.

    One of the consequences the automotive industry is facing as it rushes toward EVs to meet decarbonization targets is defective tech. Ford and BMW also have recalled batteries in recent years over fires. 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 22:40

  • Michigan Economics Professor: Boycotting Target Is "Literal Terrorism"
    Michigan Economics Professor: Boycotting Target Is “Literal Terrorism”

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    In New York, a pro-life display was declared by a professor to be an act of “violence.”

    In Colorado, a university site warned that misgendering is violence.

    It is part of a national pattern on universities where opposing views are declared “harmful” or “violent” as a justification for censorship or even violence.

    Now, University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers has declared boycotting the store Target over its line of LGBTQ+ “Pride” clothing is “literal terrorism.”

    Target is the latest example of a corporation that is being “Bud Lighted” over its linked with LGBTQ+ efforts. While experts on MSNBC and CNN assured viewers that these boycotts fade quickly, these companies have now lost billions. Target has reportedly lost over $10 billion. Miller Lite is also being hammered over its “Bad $#!T to Good $#!T,” ad slamming male-oriented beer campaigns.

    With these boycotts picking up steam, the coverage has turned from dismissive to alarmist.

    Wolfers told MSNBC:

    “[If] Target caves into this, then it says that the moment you threaten the employees of even a very large corporation, you get to control its policies. This is economic terrorism, literally terrorism, creating fear among the workers and forcing the corporations to sell the things you want, not sell the things you don’t.”

    Wolfers did not object to past boycotts of companies like Twitter after Elon Musk sought to dismantle its censorship bureaucracy. He did not object to boycotts of Republican states over their laws concerning abortion, election integrity, or gender transitioning.

    Most notably, Wolfers was one of the figures leading the mob against UChicago economist Harald Uhlig, who was discussed earlier.  I quoted Wolfers as one of those seeking the removal of Uhlig from a leading economics journals because he criticized Black Lives Matters and the movement to Defund The Police.

    Yet, Wolfers now claims that boycotts are “literal terrorism” because they are “forcing the corporations to sell the things you want, not sell the things you don’t.”

    Boycotts have long been an important form of political speech extending back to the colonial protests against the British stamp and tea taxes. Indeed, the left has used targeted advertisers and boycotted companies to pressure corporate officials to change their policies. Twitter was targeted when Elon Musk sought to dismantle the company’s massive censorship operation. Now, however, boycotts are acts of terrorism when used against some of those policies.

    The problem is that the media and these commentators cannot force customers to buy beer or other products. Consumers have found a way to express their views through the invisible hand of the markets. These advertising and public campaigns were designed to closely associate the brands with particular causes. That association has triggered a market response, including consumers who object to campaigns that seem more political than commercial.

    Alissa Heinerscheid, vice president of marketing for Bud Light, pledged to drop Bud Light’s “fratty reputation and embrace inclusivity.” She certainly succeeded in changing the entire view of the brand in less than a year on the job. Heinerscheid knew that the brand image sells the beer. That image is now unpalatable for some consumers. The social value of these campaigns is lost if consumers reject beer with the branding message.

    Even Adam Schiff creating his own public endorsement of Bud Lite appeared to backfire. It is not clear that Anheser Busch was eager to have one of its labels pegged as the beer of choice by Adam Schiff as more than Dylan Mulvaney. Indeed, the company now appears to be in a death spiral. After it tried to distance itself form the Mulvaney association, it then Dylan Mulvaney for not staying the course with its earlier campaign. Those boycotts, however, are not being denounced as terrorism by Wolfers.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 22:20

  • Here's How OpenAI Plans To Cleanse ChatGPT Of False Information
    Here’s How OpenAI Plans To Cleanse ChatGPT Of False Information

    Authored by Amaka Nwaokocha via CoinTelegraph.com,

    OpenAI aims to reduce AI hallucinations in ChatGPT by enhancing math skills, as process supervision shows promise in improving accuracy…

    On May 31, OpenAI announced its efforts to enhance ChatGPT’s mathematical problem-solving capabilities, aiming to reduce instances of artificial intelligence (AI) hallucinations. OpenAI emphasized mitigating hallucinations as a crucial step toward developing aligned AI.

    In March, the introduction of the latest version of ChatGPT – ChatGPT-4 – further propelled AI into the mainstream. However, generative AI chatbots have long grappled with factual accuracy, occasionally generating false information, commonly referred to as “hallucinations.“ The efforts to reduce these AI hallucinations were announced through a post on OpenAI’s website.

    AI hallucinations refer to instances where artificial intelligence systems generate factually incorrect outputs, misleading or unsupported by real-world data. These hallucinations can manifest in various forms, such as generating false information, making up nonexistent events or people, or providing inaccurate details about certain topics.

    OpenAI conducted research to examine the effectiveness of two types of feedback: “outcome supervision” and “process supervision.“ Outcome supervision involves feedback based on the final result, while process supervision provides input for each step in a chain of thought. OpenAI evaluated these models using math problems, generating multiple solutions and selecting the highest-ranked solution according to each feedback model.

    After thorough analysis, the research team found that process supervision yielded a superior performance as it encouraged the model to adhere to a human-approved process. In contrast, outcome supervision proved more challenging to scrutinize consistently.

    OpenAI recognized that the implications of process supervision extend beyond mathematics, with further investigation necessary to understand its effects in different domains. It expressed the possibility that if the observed outcomes hold in broader contexts, process supervision could offer a favorable combination of performance and alignment compared with outcome supervision. To facilitate research, the company publicly released the complete data set of process supervision, inviting exploration and study in this area.

    Although OpenAI did not provide explicit instances that prompted its investigation into hallucinations, two recent occurrences exemplified the problem in real-life scenarios.

    In a recent incident, lawyer Steven Schwartz in the Mata vs. Avianca Airlines case acknowledged relying on the chatbot as a research resource. However, the information provided by ChatGPT turned out to be entirely fabricated, highlighting the issue at hand.

    OpenAI’s ChatGPT is not the only example of artificial intelligence systems encountering hallucinations. During a demonstration of its chatbot technology in March, Microsoft’s Bing AI chatbot examined earnings reports and generated inaccurate figures for companies like Gap and Lululemon.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 22:00

  • Virginia, West Virginia Governors Sending National Guard Troops To Texas Border
    Virginia, West Virginia Governors Sending National Guard Troops To Texas Border

    Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Texas Army National Guard look on as illegal immigrants board a bus after surrendering to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Border Patrol agents for immigration and asylum claim processing following the end of Title 42 on the U.S.-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, on May 12, 2023. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)

    The governors of Virginia and West Virginia are the latest Republican state leaders to announce deployments of National Guard troops to assist Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s border security efforts.

    On Wednesday morning, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin announced he would deploy 100 of his state’s National Guard troops to Texas.

    “The ongoing border crisis facing our nation has turned every state into a border state,” Youngkin said. “As leadership solutions at the federal level fall short, states are answering the call to secure our southern border, reduce the flow of fentanyl, combat human trafficking and address the humanitarian crisis. Following a briefing from Governor Abbott last week, Virginia is joining other states to deliver on his request for additional assistance.”

    In a Wednesday morning press conference, West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice also announced he would deploy 50 of his state’s National Guard troops to Texas.

    “I know our National Guard will do incredible work, and we’ll wish them Godspeed to get home safe and sound,” Justice said. “I thank them all for their incredible bravery and for stepping up yet again to answer the call.”

    Abbott has been using Texas state resources in recent months in a mission to stem the flow of illegal border crossings into the country. In recent weeks, Texas National Guard troops and Department of Public Safety officers have been seen setting up razor fences and turning back people attempting to cross from Mexico into Texas illegally.

    Abbott has stepped up this border security effort after President Joe Biden’s administration ended the federal Title 42 immigration policy on May 11. Following the outbreak of COVID-19, U.S. officials had used Title 42 authorities to rapidly turn away and expel illegal immigrants under public health justifications.

    On May 16, 24 Republican governors signed a letter pledging to support Abbott’s border security effort, including Youngkin and Justice. Since then, several Republican governors have deployed their state National Guard troops and state police resources to assist border control efforts.

    Other States Sending Troops

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was among the first Republican governors to pledge specific resources to Abbott’s border security mission. On May 16, DeSantis announced his state would send 800 Florida National Guard soldiers, 200 Florida Department of Law Enforcement officers, 20 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officers, and 20 Emergency Management personnel to Texas. DeSantis also pledged five fixed-wing aircraft, two mobile command vehicles, 17 unmanned aerial vehicles (drones), and 10 watercraft.

    On May 17, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves announced an unspecified number of troops from the Mississippi National Guard’s 112th Military Police Battalion would deploy to assist U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers and agents along the southwest border.

    On May 24, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee announced he had authorized the deployment of 100 Tennessee National Guard troops to the border. Lee said these troops would patrol and provide an added security presence at the border, help staff outposts, and assist in road and route clearance, barrier placement, and debris removal.

    “America continues to face an unprecedented border crisis that threatens our nation’s security and the safety of Tennesseans,” Lee said of the deployment.

    “The federal government owes Americans a plan to secure our country, and in the meantime, states continue to answer this important call to service,” Lee added. “I am again authorizing the Tennessee National Guard to help secure the Southern border, and I commend these troops for providing critical support.”

    On May 24, Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen also announced he would send 10 Nebraska state troopers to Texas to assist Abbott’s border security mission.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 21:40

  • All New US Jobs Since The Covid Crash Have Gone To Foreign-Born Workers
    All New US Jobs Since The Covid Crash Have Gone To Foreign-Born Workers

    We live in a strange time, one where the formerly unthinkable – skepticism among the “very serious people” about government data veracity – has become mundane. And yet even though numerous bank analysts and strategists, and this site of course, have repeatedly raised questions and concerns about the credibility of the most important US economic data – the monthly jobs report – nothing ever changes and if it does, it comes in the form of periodic “seasonal adjustment” resets where we “learn” that all the data that guided markets and central banks, had been fake, manipulated wrong for years.

    But even if one ignores the blatant manipulation of economic data by self-serving administrations, who hope to generate political brownie points by casting the economy in a far stronger light than is merited in reality, there are still various bizarre offshoots within the data which few notice yet which are instrumental to maintaining the fake narrative.

    Such as this: readers are probably aware that according to the BLS, there are now roughly 3.3 million more jobs (155.7 million) than there were at the peak just before the covid crash (152.4 million).

    On the surface, this is an impressive accomplishment, as a deficit of some 22 million jobs has been erased in under three years.

    But then, if one starts digging, some peculiarities emerge, like for example that much of jobs created in recent years have gone to “multiple jobholders“, meaning that not every “payroll” has been assigned to a unique individual, but instead there are now people who hold two, three or more jobs to make ends meet.

    Or that much of the recent job creation has gone to low-paying part-time workers while full time jobs have stagnated.

    Or that according to the household survey there was virtually no new jobs created for much of 2022 even as the establishment survey indicated that over 2 million new jobs had been added over the same period.

    To be sure, it didn’t take long after we pointed out these glaring narrative “glitches” and discrepancies for the BLS to notice and to make the appropriate adjustments and historical revisions to the data to make it coherent. After all, bureaucrats are not very diligent and attention oriented, and manipulating bureaucrats are even worse.

    Yet one place where the BLS has allowed a glaring data deficiency to persist, is in what will soon be a very politically charged and sensitive data series: where have all the new workers come from.

    As noted above, if one believes the BLS, US payrolls are now a record high 155.7 million, or 161 million employed workers according to the Household survey. But if one digs a little deeper, one finds something rather peculiar: all of the jobs created since the covid crash have gone to foreign-born workers!

    That’s right: as shown in the chart below, there are currently 131.1 million native-born US workers, which is down more than half a million from the pre-covid peak of 131.7 million reached in October 2019 (data source: Federal Reserve). Meanwhile, if only looks at the number of foreign-born workers, here the data paints a very different picture: having peaked at 27.8 million in Feb 2019, the number of foreign-born workers has not only recovered its covid crash losses, but has increased by an additional 2.2 million to a record 30.0 million as of April 2023!

    Source: Federal Reserve FRED (native-born and foreign-born workers)

    This means that all the new job creation since the covid crash has gone to foreign workers, with native-born workers stagnating and still unable to break above pre-covid highs, even though if one merely extends the pre-covid trendline, native-born workers should have long ago surpassed their 2019 highs. Said otherwise, millions of native jobs have quietly gone to (lower paid) foreigners.

    But what if the data shown above is merely a product of uneven distribution of hiring while the labor force growth has been similar. Good question, and to answer that we have looked not at the change in absolute jobs/workers but the change in labor forces, native-born and foreign-born, indexed at 100 as of Oct 2019. The result, shown below, speaks for itself.

    Source: Federal Reserve FRED (native-born and foreign-born labor force)

    And there you have it: both the number of native-born workers and the actual native-born labor force have stagnated, while foreign-born workers have flourished and captured market share or rather employment and wage share from native Americans.

    To be sure, there is much to analyze: unfortunately the BLS does not break down the “foreign-born” data set into legally and illegally-immigrated foreign-born workers, although considering that it was virtually impossible for legal foreigners to enter the US – let along work in it – for nearly two years after the covid pandemic broke out, it is rather safe to assume that much of the foreign-born work has gone to illegal immigrants.

    Which then begs the question: how does this impact inflation? We already know that wage inflation is supposedly off the charts, but if the bulk of new hiring has gone to foreign-born workers who, for the most part, represent a cheaper labor option for employers, does that mean that wage inflation would be that much higher if most new workers had been native-born? What will happen to inflation if, say, Trump or DeSantis makes it a campaign pledge to focus on hiring native-born workers?

    And another question: what does this track record mean for the coming presidential mudslinging campaigns – what impact will it have on the reputation of, say, Joe Biden, when he is asked why all new jobs under his administration have gone to foreign-born workers while native-born Americans have been left to stagnate?

    We hope to have the answers soon enough; for now, however, we have another jobs report to focus on in just a few hours. And if the recent track record of the BLS “accuracy and integrity” is any indication of what to expect, tomorrow’s numbers should push what are already ridiculous job numbers well into the realm of peak absurdity.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 21:16

  • Here’s What Trump Has Promised If He Wins In 2024
    Here’s What Trump Has Promised If He Wins In 2024

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

    Former president Donald Trump said Wednesday that he’s eying a “most spectacular” 250th birthday celebration of the United States if he is elected, coming days after he promised to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. But the former president, a leading GOP candidate, has made a range of other new policy proposals.

    Former president Donald Trump arrives at Trump Tower in New York City, on Aug. 9, 2022. (David ‘Dee’ Delgado/Reuters)

    US Celebration

    “Three years from now, the United States will celebrate the biggest and most important milestone in our country’s history—250 years of American independence,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “That’s why as a nation we should be preparing for the most spectacular birthday party. We want to make it the best of all time.”

    And Trump’s campaign said in a news release that the former commander-in-chief will hold a  White House task force known as the “Salute to America 250” to hold anniversary celebrations across the United States between Memorial Day 2025 and July 4, 2026.

    “I will work with all 50 governors, Republican and Democrat alike, to create the Great American State Fair, a unique one-year exhibition featuring pavilions from all 50 states,” he said in a video, proposing a “legendary,” special “one-time festival” in Iowa.

    “And finally, and most importantly, I will ask America’s great religious communities to pray for our nation and our people as we prepare for this momentous occasion,” Trump also remarked. “America has been a country sustained and strengthened by prayer and by our communities of faith as we chart a course toward the next 250 years. Let us come together and rededicate ourselves as one nation under God.”

    Other initiatives include the Patriot Games, an Olympic-style event for high school athletes, and the re-issuance of an executive order to restore the Trump-era National Garden of American Heroes that was ultimately blocked by President Joe Biden. That park would have honored great Americans and historical figures, Trump has said.

    The timing of Trump’s statement is no coincidence. The former president is traveling to Iowa for a tour of the state, which is important launching point during the 2024 Republican Party primary.

    “Together we will build it, and they will come,” Trump said of the proposed Iowa Fairgrounds event, using a quote from the movie Field of Dreams, which was filmed in Iowa.

    100 New US Attorneys

    Wednesday’s proposal from Trump builds on the patriotic themes that he used during his 2016 campaign and administration. Trump in 2020 established the 1776 Commission dedicated to patriotic education and history lessons, countering the New York Times’s “1619 Project” that attempts to reframe the founding of America around slavery.

    Months before that, Trump also vowed in a campaign video to fight against who he described as “Marxist” left-wing district attorneys and “overhaul” the Department of Justice in the wake of Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg’s indictment of Trump for allegedly falsifying business records. If elected, his administration would also appoint 100 U.S. attorneys who are the “polar opposite” of district attorneys who received campaign cash from controversial left-wing billionaire George Soros.

    “As we completely overhaul the federal Department of Justice and FBI, we will also launch sweeping civil rights investigations into Marxist local district attorneys,” Trump said  in a video posted to his YouTube page, which was restored earlier this year after a two-year suspension. “And that’s what we have—they are Marxist in many cases.”

    The end of the Obama-era border wall gives way to the taller, 30-foot Trump-era wall on the U.S.–Mexico border near Naco, Ariz., on Dec. 6, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

    End Birthright Citizenship

    This week, Trump also again vowed to issue an executive order to end birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrant parents. Several years ago, Trump signaled that he would issue the executive order, but some legal analysts have said that it would likely face significant legal challenges as birthright citizenship is essentially protected under the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment.

    Trump’s website says that he “will again end catch-and-release, restore Remain in Mexico, and eliminate asylum fraud,” while “in cooperative states, President Trump will deputize the National Guard and local law enforcement to assist with rapidly removing illegal alien gang members and criminals. He will also deliver a merit-based immigration system that protects American labor and promotes American values.”

    Death Penalty for Drug Offenders

    During his post-midterm announcement for president, Trump also proposed handing down the death penalty for some drug dealers and traffickers, arguing that such individuals are causing death and destruction

    “We’re going to be asking everyone who sells drugs, gets caught selling drugs, to receive the death penalty for their heinous acts,” Trump said at the time. “Because it’s the only way.”

    Critical Race Theory

    Trump in January also pledged to cut federal funding to schools that teach the controversial critical race theory along with curriculum around gender identity. While speaking in Davenport, Iowa, Trump promised to keep male transgender athletes out of girls’ sports and “bring back parental rights into our schools.”

    A policy plan also calls for opening new “civil rights investigations into any school district that has engaged in race-based discrimination.”

    “As the saying goes, personnel is policy, and at the end of the day if we have pink-haired communists teaching our kids we have a major problem,” Trump said earlier this year. “We’re at the end of the list on education, and yet we spend the most, but we’re going to be tops in education no matter where you go anywhere in the world.”

    Jan. 6 Pardons

    More than two years after the Capitol breach on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump said last month that he would pardon a range of individuals who were convicted and sentenced in connection to the incident. Those pardons, he said, will “be very early on” in his presidency.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 21:00

  • Biden Speech Hailing NATO Strength Overshadowed By Serious Fall On Stage
    Biden Speech Hailing NATO Strength Overshadowed By Serious Fall On Stage

    President Joe Biden on Thursday ratcheted up the pressure on holdout nations Turkey and Hungary by saying that Sweden will join NATO “as soon as possible”. The former two countries have blocked Sweden’s entry, but recently approved Finland. 

    Biden hailed NATO unity in a speech before the US Air Force Academy graduation ceremony in Colorado Springs. “NATO is more energized and more united than it’s been in decades. It’s now even stronger with the accession of our newest ally, Finland – and soon Sweden – to the alliance, as soon as possible. It will happen. I promise you,” President Biden said. 

    Image: AP

    Biden’s strong words came immediately on the heels of Blinken’s trip to Sweden wherein he said that “the perspective of the United States” is that “the time is now to finalize Sweden’s accession.”

    Especially since Finland’s formal membership acceptance in April, European and US officials have been pushing for Sweden’s entry as well – but again, Turkey has been adamant in maintaining its rejection, based on accusations that Swedish authorities allow ‘terrorist’ and Kurdish ‘dissident’ groups and individuals in its country.

    “Welcome to NATO, Finland! I hope we will welcome our Swedish friends very soon, too,” French President Emmanuel Macron said soon after Finland’s accession.

    As for Biden’s Air Force graduation speech, his important remarks on NATO or really any of the speech content for that matter were immediately overshadowed by what happened the moment he began to walk off stage…

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

    The fall looked like a hard one, in a dangerous moment for the 80-year old Commander-in-Chief.

    Below is another angle:

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

    Below is how The New York Times described the significant fall: 

    President Biden tripped and fell after delivering a speech and handing out diplomas to graduates of the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs on Thursday. Mr. Biden, who is 80 years old, was helped up and appeared to recover quickly.

    Mr. Biden’s fall was captured on video and spread on social media. He appears to trip, fall to his knees and catch himself with his hands on the floor of the stage. He was helped up by several Air Force officials and Secret Service agents, and he walked back to his seat.

    Mr. Biden had just delivered an energetic speech to the Air Force graduates before helping to hand out the diplomas. He fell after he distributed the final diploma and was headed back to his seat.

    The White House issued an official statement via its communications director Ben LaBolt, who said in a tweet quickly after the incident, “He’s fine, there was a sandbag on stage while he was shaking hands.”

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

    Just as Biden declined to speak about the matter, mainstream media also shied away from commenting. Things were a little different a few years ago when President Trump walked slowly down a ramp (without falling)…

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

    At a moment there’s a war in Ukraine and dangerous showdown between nuclear armed superpowers the United States and Russia, certainly Moscow is going to see Biden’s serious fall on stage as a sign of weakness and frailness from an ageing president. 

    * * *

    Meanwhile, this is likely to have significant impact on the domestic front as well, as the Democrats decide whether to go all in on Biden in 2024…

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

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 20:54

  • The Atlantic Hurricane Season Starts Today
    The Atlantic Hurricane Season Starts Today

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicts near-normal conditions for the 2023 Atlantic hurricane season which starts today.

    NOAA is forecasting five to nine hurricanes to occur in 2023, out of which one to four could turn into major hurricanes.

    As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, one of the factors that could suppress the 2023 hurricane season is the likely start of an El Niño phase after three years with the La Niña phenomenon, which shifts colder temperatures and stronger trade winds to the Pacific, therefore exposing the Atlantic to warmer and less linear wind pattern more favorable for hurricane formation. If an El Niño phase were to start this year, it would shift cooler and windier conditions over to the Atlantic. However, above-normal ocean temperatures in the Central Atlantic band and the Caribbean have the power to strengthen hurricanes this season. NOAA concludes the two factors could offset each other, but if El Niño failed to form despite favorable conditions, the high ocean temperatures could make for an intense 2023 season.

    While the 2022 season and its eight hurricanes – including Hurricane Ian and Hurricane Julia – was somewhat above average compared with recent years, 2020 was an extremely busy year for hurricanes. A total of 14 formed over the Atlantic basin – the most since 2005, the year of Hurricane Katrina. Six of those were major hurricanes, including Hurricane Laura, Hurricane Eta and Hurricane Iota. In 2022, only two out of eight hurricanes in the Atlantic basin were of category 3 or above on the Saffir-Simpson scale, which is in contrast with the recent trend of 40-50 percent of all Atlantic hurricanes being classified as major ones.

    Infographic: Number of Major Hurricanes Over Atlantic Rises | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    While in the 1970s and 1980s, the share of major hurricanes stood at an average of around 30-33 percent of all Atlantic hurricanes, this had increased to an average of 40-50 percent per year in the 2000s and 2010s. The change translates to an average of 1.6 major hurricanes occurring per year in the 1970s and 1980s and 3-4 occurring annually today. Climate change has been identified as a reason why stronger hurricanes occur.

    More evidence that hurricane seasons are changing can be deferred from the timing of named storms. 2021’s first storm – Ana – was named on May 22 after forming near the Bahamas. This made 2021 the seventh consecutive year a named storm formed before the start of the official season on June 1. The first named storm of 2022 occurred on June 5 and none was named as of June 1 in 2023.

    2005, when Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, was the worst hurricane seasons since 1851, records from the National Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory at NOAA show. Hurricane Katrina was just one of seven major hurricanes observed in the Atlantic basin that year. 2005 was the year with most hurricanes in the Atlantic (15), followed by 2020 (14), 2010 (12, including Hurricane Sandy) and 1969 (also 12).

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 20:40

  • A Debt Jubilee Of Biblical Proportions Is Coming Soon… What You Need To Know
    A Debt Jubilee Of Biblical Proportions Is Coming Soon… What You Need To Know

    Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

    Four thousand years ago, the rulers of ancient Babylon discovered a technique to stave off violent revolts.

    In ancient times, there was a tendency for people to become hopelessly in debt to their creditors. Eventually, they would rise up and cause instability that could threaten the entire ruling system.

    The rulers of the ancient world recognized this dynamic.

    Their solution was to enact widespread debt cancellation—a debt jubilee.

    Debt jubilees acted as a societal pressure release valve when there were no other options.

    The practice spread in the ancient world and became codified in different civilizations.

    For example, the Book of Leviticus recognizes debt jubilees as the end of a 49-year biblical cycle—seven cycles of seven years.

    I think this ancient practice will make a big comeback soon as government, corporate, and personal debt have all reached unbearable levels today.

    In fact, the debt jubilees have already started… and the investment consequences will be profound.

    The Biggest Wealth Transfer in History

    It’s important to note that debt jubilees do not magically create new wealth.

    They simply redistribute it.

    Debt jubilees are government decrees that amount to a massive wealth transfer with big winners and losers.

    The PPP loan forgiveness during the Covid hysteria was the prelude.

    President Biden’s student loan forgiveness took it to the next level.

    The student loan forgiveness was unprecedented. Unilateral executive action of this size has never occurred during a time of peace. Moreover, Congress, not the president, is supposed to make spending decisions of this magnitude.

    It is estimated that the immediate and deferred costs of the student loan forgiveness to be at least $590 billion.

    Biden’s student loan debt jubilee went too far for even Obama’s former chief economic advisor, Jason Furman, who described it as:

    “Pouring roughly half trillion dollars of gasoline on the inflationary fire that is already burning is reckless.”

    Aside from the inflationary effects—which I’ll get to in a moment—the student loan jubilee also set a precedent that I think will be impossible to reverse.

    Consider how the people who behaved prudently feel.

    These people took different career paths to avoid student loans, cut back on their spending so they could afford college without borrowing, or paid off their student debt.

    These people are probably feeling like suckers now.

    Not only do they not get any debt relief, but they will have to foot the bill in one way or another to pay for those who had their student loans forgiven.

    I imagine these people will be angry and probably have considerable car, mortgage, and credit card debt, as many Americans do. So they will want debt relief too… and I bet they will get it.

    Amid rising prices, consumer debt is skyrocketing. It is at an all-time high of over $16 trillion, as seen in the chart below.

    With interest rates rising, the cost of servicing this record debt is becoming unbearable for many. As a result, many Americans have reached their maximum debt saturation and are hitting a financial breaking point.

    As Biden demonstrated, all it takes is a President’s pen stroke to wipe out hundreds of billions in debt.

    I think the political pressure to do this again will be irresistible—especially before elections—as a way to court voters.

    The student loan jubilee set a precedent.

    I don’t think it will be long before we see a credit card jubilee, a car loan jubilee, or a mortgage jubilee.

    How will the government pay for all these jubilees?

    It’s improbable they could raise taxes enough to pay for them.

    It also wouldn’t make sense to issue more debt to cancel other debts.

    That leaves money printing as the only way they can finance these jubilees. So my guess is that’s what they’ll do.

    That’s why the coming debt jubilees will pour “gasoline on the inflationary fire that is already burning.”

    But it’s not just consumer debt that has become unbearable. The big enchilada is the US government’s federal debt.

    The Coming Federal Debt Jubilee

    The US federal government has the biggest debt in the history of the world. And it’s continuing to grow at a rapid, unstoppable pace.

    In short, the US government is fast approaching the financial endgame.

    Here’s why…

    Today, the US federal debt has gone parabolic and is scores of trillions.

    To put it in perspective, if you earned $1 a second 24/7/365—about $31 million per year—it would take you over 1,008,378 YEARS to pay off the US federal debt.

    And that’s with the unrealistic assumption that it would stop growing.

    The truth is, the debt will keep piling up unless Congress makes some politically impossible decisions to cut spending. But don’t count on that happening. In fact, they’re racing in the opposite direction now that they’ve normalized multitrillion-dollar deficits.

    The amount of debt is so extreme that even a return of interest rates to their historical average would mean paying the interest expense on the debt would consume more than half of current tax revenues. Interest expense would eclipse Social Security and defense spending and become the largest item in the federal budget.

    Second, a return to the historical average interest rate will not be enough to reign in inflation—not even close. A drastic rise in interest rates is needed. If that happened, it could mean that the US government is paying more for the interest expense than it takes in from taxes.

    In short, the Federal Reserve is trapped.

    Raising interest rates high enough to dent inflation would bankrupt the US government.

    In other words, it’s game over. They have no choice but to “reset” the system—that’s what governments do when they are trapped.

    How are they going to reset the system?

    Nobody knows for sure. But I’d bet a debt jubilee of biblical proportions will be a big part of it.

    So then, how will the US government repudiate its impossible federal debt burden?

    My guess is that they won’t be explicit. That would look too much like a default. It would destroy the role of the US as the center of the world’s financial system.

    Given a choice, I don’t think the US government would choose immediate self-destruction. Since power does not relinquish itself voluntarily, we should presume they’ll decide to stealthily implement their federal debt jubilee through inflation.

    Inflation is a big bonus to debtors. It allows you to borrow in dollars and repay in dimes.

    And since the US government is the biggest debtor in the history of the world, it is the single largest beneficiary of inflation.

    That’s why I think the federal debt jubilee will come in the form of a massive wave of inflation.

    Here’s the bottom line.

    The coming debt jubilees could have the effect of wiping out many trillions worth of liabilities and creating previously unfathomable inflation.

    That could trigger the largest wealth transfer in history.

    Remember, debt doesn’t exist within a vacuum. It is a liability to the borrower and an asset to lender.

    Those storing their wealth in government currencies, bondholders, and creditors will be the big losers.

    Debtors and those who own unencumbered scarce assets will be the big winners.

    It’s certainly not a just outcome.

    Prudent savers shouldn’t be made to pay for the excesses of the debtors.

    But notions of what is just or not did not impede Biden’s student loan jubilee—and they certainly won’t for the coming jubilees.

    Although that will be unfortunate for many people, there is simply nothing anyone can do now.

    The debt levels have already reached a point of saturation, and the government could soon see jubilees as a politically attractive option.

    That’s why it is best to recognize the reality of this Big Picture and get positioned accordingly.

    That means owning scarce and valuable assets that are not simultaneously someone else’s liability.

    Crucially, this excludes fiat currency in bank accounts.

    Remember, fiat currency is the unbacked liability of a bankrupt government.

    Further, once you deposit currency into a bank, it is no longer yours. Technically and legally, it is the bank’s property, and what you own instead is an unsecured liability of the bank.

    In an era of jubilees in which debts are wiped clean, you won’t want to be on the other end of unsecured liabilities or IOUs of any kind.

    I suspect it could all go down soon… and it will not be pretty for many.

    Most people have no idea how bad things can get… let alone how to prepare.

    That’s why I’ve recently published a how-to guide detailing the best ways to protect your savings. It’s called The Most Dangerous Economic Crisis in 100 Years… the Top 3 Strategies You Need Right Now.

    Click here to download the free PDF.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 20:20

  • Investor Home Purchases Collapse Most On Record
    Investor Home Purchases Collapse Most On Record

    Residential real estate brokerage firm Redfin released new data that revealed a record-breaking drop in homes purchased by investors in the first quarter. This sharp decline is due to a combination of elevated interest rates and sliding home prices, which impacts potential future returns. With investors retreating to the sidelines, buyers in the market have dramatically shrunk, and price wars have eased. 

    Redfin data shows investors purchased 48.6% fewer homes in the first quarter compared with the same period last year. This was the most significant plunge on record. 

    To illustrate just how the Federal Reserve’s 14 months of aggressive interest hikes have chilled a major buyer of the residential real estate market, Redfin shows the record-breaking pullback in the chart below: 

    The brokerage said the investors still in the market have shifted to buying or flipping more affordable properties due to tightening credit conditions. Getting financing for lower-priced homes is easier, and there’s more demand. Low-priced home purchases surged to a two-year high, and a record 41.1% of investor purchases in the quarter were starter homes. 

    Redfin Senior Economist Sheharyar Bokhari said overall, investors have “pumped the brakes on home purchases.” However, he said, “They’re still scooping up a bigger share of homes than they were before the pandemic, which can create challenges for individual buyers at a time when there are so few homes for sale.” 

    Investors made up 17.6% of the market in the first quarter, down from 20.4% a year earlier. Still, the investor share of purchased homes is near record levels. 

    The rapid increase in the 30-year fixed mortgage rate to over 7%, not seen since the Dot Com bust, has been the main driver in cooling demand. 

    In a separate report, Lotfi Karoui, chief credit strategist at Goldman Sachs, offered some good news to clients that mortgage rates are expected to top around these levels and fall to under 6% in 2024. 

    Karoui pointed out that housing affordability has slightly improved but remains at decade lows. 

    And the inventory of existing homes remains extraordinarily tight. 

    “Beyond 2023, we expect a rebound in home prices as the impact of policy tightening subsides. While our economists think another policy rate hike this year is a possibility, their baseline expectation is that the Fed has ceased policy tightening. History indicates that home prices tend to grow after the conclusion of a hiking cycle, using 1995, 2000, and 2018 as a guide,” the Goldman analyst noted. 

    The silver lining is that investors are no longer saturating the market and sparking price wars as they did before and during the Covid era. Financing deals is becoming more challenging due to the increased cost of money, which is expected to continue to weigh on home purchases. 

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 20:00

  • US Lacks 'Effective Tool' To Stop China’s Tech Theft: Treasury Official
    US Lacks ‘Effective Tool’ To Stop China’s Tech Theft: Treasury Official

    Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The United States lacks an effective tool to adequately combat widespread espionage and intellectual property theft being perpetrated by China’s communist regime, according to a U.S. Treasury Department official.

    Chinese Communist Party leader Xi Jinping (center) and Chinese and foreign naval officials applaud after a group photo during an event to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy in Qingdao, in eastern China’s Shandong province, on April 23, 2019. (Mark Schiefelbein/AFP via Getty Images)

    Despite years of competition and ongoing IP theft, the United States has not developed the tools required to target and prevent the continued transfer of sensitive U.S. technologies to China, according to Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Rosen.

    “We currently assess we don’t have an effective tool to target the money and sophistication with know-how that goes into these sensitive and most critical technologies into countries of concern,” Rosen said during a May 31 hearing of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

    “We risk leaving a gap in terms of some of our national security concerns,” he said.

    Rosen added that the Biden administration was committed to “zealously” defending U.S. security interests, and would prioritize those interests over economic development if necessary, but required more tools to do so.

    “The United States will secure our interests and those of our allies and partners,” Rosen said.

    “We will not compromise on national security concerns, even when they force trade-offs with economic interests.”

    Rosen’s remarks confirm expert testimony delivered to Congress last year, which stated that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is engaged in anti-competitive and anti-free market practices on a global scale, and that the United States lacks adequate non-security tools to defend its interests.

    Policies That Benefited Corporate Profits

    Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), the committee chair, said that the United States had fostered a system of policies over the course of several decades that had strengthened China at the expense of the American people. The nation’s current struggles to counter China, he said, are owed to policies that benefited corporate profits instead of American well-being.

    “For far too long, our policy around China catered to multinational corporations and failed working families. It destroyed local communities, it eroded our manufacturing base and international competitiveness,” Brown said.

    Brown added that U.S. policymakers “knew” corporations would terminate millions of U.S. jobs in favor of dirt cheap labor in China, but still granted the regime permanent most-favored trade status in the 1990s. Since then, he said, consecutive administrations had failed to correct the imbalance in China’s favor.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 19:40

  • Pentagon Chiefs Cancel "Family Friendly" Drag Show At Air Force Base After Rep. Gaetz Pressure
    Pentagon Chiefs Cancel “Family Friendly” Drag Show At Air Force Base After Rep. Gaetz Pressure

    At a House Armed Services Committee hearing on March 29, Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., pointedly demanded Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley why drag queen story hours were still taking place on US bases around the world, including in Montana, Nevada, Virginia and Germany.

    “Drag queen story hours is not something that the department funds,” Austin told the committee.

    Milley chimed in, asking to see the flyers for the events Gaetz was referring to:

    “I’d like to take a look at those, because I don’t agree with those,” Milley said.

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

    And as NBC News reports, when Milley was informed about the event this week, he was visibly angry about the decision to host the event on base, a U.S. official and a defense official said.

    Sure enough, just days later, the DoD canceled a planned drag show at Nellis Air Force base in Las Vegas, Nevada, according to a statement provided to the Daily Caller on Thursday.

    The Nellis LGBTQ+ Pride Council was set to offer a free “family friendly” drag show Thursday, June 1, to kick off pride month

    “Per DoD Joint Ethics Regulation (JER), certain criteria must be met for persons or organizations acting in non-Federal capacity to use DoD facilities and equipment,” Sabrina Singh, deputy press secretary for the Department of Defense, told the Caller.

    “As Secretary Austin has said, the DOD will not host drag events at U.S. military installations or facilities. Hosting these types of events in federally funded facilities is not a suitable use of DOD resources. Our Service members are diverse and are allowed to have personal outlets. We are proud to serve alongside any and every young American who takes the oath that puts their life on the line in defense of our country.”

    Nellis AFB hosted a Pride Month drag show in June 2021, named “Drag-u-Nellis.”

    A spokesperson for the base said in a statement that it was intended to promote inclusivity and diversity.

    Rightly so, Rep. Matt Gaetz took a victory lap on the news…“HUGE VICTORY: The Department of Defense has CANCELED a scheduled ‘child-friendly’ drag show after I demanded answers from @SecDef Austin and General Milley!”

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

    The question is – how many of these shows are being funded by the DoD that Rep. Gaetz is not aware of (and why?).

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 19:20

  • The Suffering Is Off The Charts
    The Suffering Is Off The Charts

    Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

    Things have taken a turn for the worse.  In recent months, economic activity has been dropping all over the nation, and that decline appears to be accelerating.  We just learned that gross domestic income has now fallen for two quarters in a row, and the Conference Board’s index of leading economic indicators has now been plummeting for 13 consecutive months.  Unfortunately, when economic conditions deteriorate it is the people at the low end of the economic pyramid that get hit the hardest.

    Thanks to our rapidly rising cost of living, we are seeing a dramatic explosion in the number of “working homeless” that are living out of their vehicles on a daily basis even though they are currently employed.

    In particular, the RV “communities” that are springing up from coast to coast are starting to get quite a bit of attention…

    The owner of a party bus company, Rikers Island prison guards and an Amazon worker are just some of the eclectic bunch who have formed a community of ‘working homeless’ people living out of RVs in the Astoria section of Queens, New York.

    Similar communities have formed across the US from New England to California where people have chosen a nomadic lifestyle amid a national cost of living crisis.

    Most of these people get up and go to work in the morning.

    In fact, the Daily Mail spoke to one man that actually “works for a New York City hospital”…

    Resident Paul Reevers described himself as ‘working homeless.’ He said that he has a job but the rent went up too high and he could not longer to afford a an apartment.

    Reevers, who works for a New York City hospital, said that he took out a loan and bought his RV.

    If you work at a hospital, you should be able to afford a place to live.

    But this is our country now.

    We are absolutely destroying the middle class, and as a result we now have a massive homelessness crisis on our hands…

    Insider Monkey, a finance website, revealed a list of the top 30 cities worldwide with the highest homeless population. Notably, a handful of the US cities on the list are governed by progressive leadership, which may not surprise readers. While it is evident that some unfortunate individuals are facing homelessness, a trend exacerbated by recent inflationary pressures and a drug addiction crisis, some liberal policies have enabled others to sustain their nomadic lifestyles with taxpayer funds.

    Insider Monkey found New York City is number 5 on the list, with a homeless population of about 69,000. Next is Chicago, at number 7 with 65,611. Washington, DC, is number 8 with 57,416, Los Angeles number 13 with 41,980, and San Fransisco number 14 with 38,000.

    No matter what you or I are facing right now, at least we aren’t sleeping in the streets.

    So we should count our blessings.

    Hunger is also rapidly growing all over America.  Right now, record numbers of people are coming for help at one food bank in the Seattle area…

    Since March, the food bank has broken its record three times for the highest number of people served in a day since 2019, when the organization started allowing three visits a month. More and more, people like Jones who haven’t been to the food bank in years, are showing up, Christian said.

    “That’s hard on them; they felt they had moved above the poverty line, got some stability but, ‘Here it is 2023 and here I am back in the food line asking strangers for help,’” Christian said.

    And in Boston, the line for food on one recent weekend morning “stretched the length of two football fields”…

    The line outside Boston’s American Red Cross Food Pantry on a recent Saturday morning stretched the length of two football fields.

    The number of people filing into the red-brick industrial-zone warehouse on some days now exceeds the worst periods of the pandemic economic crisis and in April it had the second highest monthly traffic since it opened in 1982, according to David Andre, the director.

    We are witnessing so much suffering all over the country right now.

    And there are so many more people that are living right on the edge of disaster.

    According to one recent survey, approximately 38.5 percent of U.S. adults experienced “some form of difficulty in covering expenses between April 26 and May 8”…

    A large swath of American consumers are facing financial hardship as they grapple with elevated living costs, record-high credit card use, and two years of negative real wage growth. This perfect storm could decimate financially fragile households in the next downturn.

    As many as 89.1 million American adults (or about 38.5%) were found to experience some form of difficulty in covering expenses between April 26 and May 8, according to Bloomberg, citing new data from the Household Pulse Survey. This is up from 34.4% in 2022 and 26.7% during the same period in 2021.

    Of course this is just the beginning.

    As I keep warning my readers, things will eventually get much worse.

    And finally, whatever happens in Washington is not going to fundamentally alter our long-term trajectory, and that means that much more suffering is coming in the days ahead.

    *  *  *

    Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 19:00

  • Shellenberger: Why The Media Is Attacking Free Speech
    Shellenberger: Why The Media Is Attacking Free Speech

    Authored by Michael Shellenberger via ‘Public’ substack,

    Governments around the world are cracking down on free speech. What they are demanding includes the ability to read private encrypted text messages and invade homes in search of wrongspeech. Their demands thus go far beyond what the Censorship Industrial Complex was able to get away with over the last six years.

    And things are getting worse. Last week, the European Union announced it would punish Twitter for withdrawing from its supposedly “voluntary” censorship laws. “Twitter leaves EU voluntary code of practice against disinformation,” said the EU’s top censor, Thierry Breton, “You can run, but you can’t hide. Beyond voluntary commitments, fighting disinformation will be a legal obligation under [the Digital Services Act] DSA as of August 25. Our teams will be ready for enforcement.”

    Politico begs to differ. The Censorship Industrial Complex, it wrote last week, is an “unproven conspiracy theory that a group of left-leaning academics, think tanks, tech workers and government employees coordinated to silence right-wing voters ahead of nationwide votes. To be clear (looking at you, Twitter Files), none of this has been proved, and there’s evidence that right-leaning voices have a larger, not smaller, presence online compared with those on the left.”

    But it’s not unproven. In fact, the existence, funding, and actions of the Censorship Industrial Complex are extremely well-documented at this point. Across thousands of pages of Attorneys’ General lawsuits, thousands of pages of Congressional reports and testimony, and hundreds of pages of Twitter and Facebook files themselves, it’s clear that here was a highly coordinated campaign by top White House officials, government agencies, and government-funded contractors to demand Twitter, Facebook, and other social media companies censor, in their own words, “often-true” content, including about drug side effects, both to prevent the public from seeing it but also to spread misinformation on behalf of a political agenda.

    Politico did not, notably, provide any source or link to support its claim that “there’s evidence that right-leaning voices have a larger, not smaller, presence online compared with those on the left.” The reason might be that such “evidence” is a single highly selective study attempting to generalize about the whole of the social media experience through the lens of an outdated and simplistic Left-Right framework.

    Emails from pro-censorship journalists to Twitter demanding the de-plaforming of another reporter, Alex Berenson.

    The picture many of us have of journalists is Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman in “All The President’s Men,” or the journalists in “Spotlight,” “She Said,” and “The Post.” They are dogged seekers of the truth, determined to overcome any obstacle in their way of discovering it and reporting it to the world. They advocate giving voice to the voiceless and uncovering secretive and dangerous abuses of power by everyone from senior government officials to powerful corporate executives to religious leaders.

    But the real-world behavior of many journalists today at top news media companies is the exact opposite. They plot secretly with the Aspen Institute, each other, and social media executives about how to kill stories damaging to the president. And they help former CIA Directors and “Fellows” spread ridiculous conspiracy theories, including that Russians stole the 2016 election, controlled Donald Trump through a video of prostitutes urinating on him, and had somehow stolen Hunter Biden’s laptop.

    Rather than quote from different sides, these journalists denounce their enemies. They dismissed as “racist” and as a “debunked conspiracy theory” that COVID-19 might have escaped from a Chinese lab while insisting that it was somehow less racist and far-fetched to believe the virus traveled 1,000 miles from the countryside before sickening someone at a “live wet market.”  And they demanded that Twitter de-platform disfavored voices like Twitter Files reporter Alex Berenson. 

    Why do so many journalists participate in the war on free speech, including the freest social media platform, Twitter? Last summer, Berenson released documents showing reporters from CNN and Axios, urging Twitter to suspend Berenson for criticizing vaccines. “It’s like librarians burning books,” he told Public yesterday. “Why are journalists attacking journalists?”

    …

    The picture we had of mainstream news reporters speaking truth to power is no longer accurate. More frequently than not, reporters from those same institutions speak power against the truth. The evidence for the Censorship Industrial Complex is abundant, and they know it because they are part of it. The media’s problem is not that the censorship conspiracy is unproven. It’s that we proved it.

    As such, Public is happy to announce a gathering of free speech leaders, journalists, and attorneys from around the world in London on July 22 – 23. At 7 pm on July 22, Matt Taibbi, Russell Brand, and I will speak on stage at Central Hall Westminster in London.

    The next day, a small group of free speech leaders from around the world will gather to form an anti-censorship alliance aimed at defunding and dismantling the Censorship Industrial Complex, fighting new government censorship efforts, and pushing for First Amendment-level free speech protections worldwide. Email us to find out more information and get involved.

    It’s time for freedom lovers to go on the offense. The problem isn’t that America is too free with its First Amendment free speech protections. It’s that other countries are too censorious. People around the world would love to enjoy the freedoms we take for granted in America, which is a big reason so many people want to live here. We are confident that when the peoples of the world, or their representatives, are forced to vote on free speech, they will tend toward the First Amendment, away from the totalitarian speech restrictions being pushed globally.

    Governments are cracking down, but we are fighting back. The regime media won’t cover the news, so we will. After all the Congressional histrionics and media denials have passed, a worldwide grassroots citizen’s free speech and anti-censorship resistance movement will be left in their wake. It is notable that the main U.S. censorship groups, which are now being sued, are trying to deny that they were, in fact, censoring anyone.

    But such lies are belied by their allies in the EU and elsewhere in the world trying to expand their censorship powers. In cracking down on speech, governments display their own lack of trust in the people, an attitude that will be increasingly reciprocated.

    …

    Subscribers can read Shellenberger’s full note here…

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 06/01/2023 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Jun 01

Today’s News 1st June 2023

  • Conspirators For The Constitution: When Anti-Government Speech Becomes Sedition
    Conspirators For The Constitution: When Anti-Government Speech Becomes Sedition

    Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    “In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

    – George Orwell

    Let’s be clear about one thing: seditious conspiracy isn’t a real crime to anyone but the U.S. government.

    To be convicted of seditious conspiracy, the charge levied against Stewart Rhodes who was sentenced to 18 years in prison for being the driving force behind the January 6 Capitol riots, one doesn’t have to engage in violence against the government, vandalize government property, or even trespass on property that the government has declared off-limits to the general public.

    To be convicted of seditious conspiracy, one need only foment a revolution.

    This is not about whether Rhodes deserves such a hefty sentence.

    This is about the long-term ramifications of empowering the government to wage war on individuals whose political ideas and expression challenge the government’s power, reveal the government’s corruption, expose the government’s lies, and encourage the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices.

    This is about criminalizing political expression in thoughts, words and deeds.

    This is about how the government has used the events of Jan. 6 in order to justify further power grabs and acquire more authoritarian emergency powers.    

    This was never about so-called threats to democracy.

    In fact, the history of this nation is populated by individuals whose rhetoric was aimed at fomenting civil unrest and revolution.

    Indeed, by the government’s own definition, America’s founders were seditious conspirators based on the heavily charged rhetoric they used to birth the nation.

    Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Marquis De Lafayette, and John Adams would certainly have been charged for suggesting that Americans should not only take up arms but be prepared to protect their liberties and defend themselves against the government should it violate their rights.

    “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms,” declared Jefferson. He also concluded that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

    “It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government,” insisted Paine.

    “When the government violates the people’s rights,” Lafayette warned, “insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of the rights and the most indispensable of duties.”

    Adams cautioned, “A settled plan to deprive the people of all the benefits, blessings and ends of the contract, to subvert the fundamentals of the constitution, to deprive them of all share in making and executing laws, will justify a revolution.”

    Had America’s founders feared revolutionary words and ideas, there would have been no First Amendment, which protects the right to political expression, even if that expression is anti-government.

    No matter what one’s political persuasion might be, every American has a First Amendment right to protest government programs or policies with which they might disagree.

    The right to disagree with and speak out against the government is the quintessential freedom.

    Every individual has a right to speak truth to power—and foment change—using every nonviolent means available.

    Unfortunately, the government is increasingly losing its tolerance for anyone whose political views could be perceived as critical or “anti-government.”

    All of us are in danger.

    In recent years, the government has used the phrase “domestic terrorist” interchangeably with “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” to describe anyone who might fall somewhere on a very broad spectrum of viewpoints that could be considered “dangerous.”

    The ramifications are so far-reaching as to render almost every American with an opinion about the government or who knows someone with an opinion about the government an extremist in word, deed, thought or by association.

    You see, the government doesn’t care if you or someone you know has a legitimate grievance. It doesn’t care if your criticisms are well-founded. And it certainly doesn’t care if you have a First Amendment right to speak truth to power.

    What the government cares about is whether what you’re thinking or speaking or sharing or consuming as information has the potential to challenge its stranglehold on power.

    Why else would the FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies be investing in corporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram?

    Why else would the Biden Administration be likening those who share “false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information” to terrorists?

    Why else would the government be waging war against those who engage in thought crimes?

    Get ready for the next phase of the government’s war on thought crimes and truth-tellers.

    For years now, the government has used all of the weapons in its vast arsenal—surveillance, threat assessments, fusion centers, pre-crime programs, hate crime laws, militarized police, lockdowns, martial law, etc.—to target potential enemies of the state based on their ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that might be deemed suspicious or dangerous.

    For instance, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.

    Moreover, as a New York Times editorial warns, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police if you are afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms, if you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law, or if you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car.

    According to one FBI report, you might also be classified as a domestic terrorism threat if you espouse conspiracy theories, especially if you “attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others” and are “usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”

    In other words, if you dare to subscribe to any views that are contrary to the government’s, you may well be suspected of being a domestic terrorist and treated accordingly.

    There’s a whole spectrum of behaviors ranging from thought crimes and hate speech to whistleblowing that qualifies for persecution (and prosecution) by the Deep State.

    Simply liking or sharing this article on Facebook, retweeting it on Twitter, or merely reading it or any other articles related to government wrongdoing, surveillance, police misconduct or civil liberties might be enough to get you categorized as a particular kind of person with particular kinds of interests that reflect a particular kind of mindset that might just lead you to engage in a particular kinds of activities and, therefore, puts you in the crosshairs of a government investigation as a potential troublemaker a.k.a. domestic extremist.

    Chances are, as the Washington Post reports, you have already been assigned a color-coded threat score—green, yellow or red—so police are forewarned about your potential inclination to be a troublemaker depending on whether you’ve had a career in the military, posted a comment perceived as threatening on Facebook, suffer from a particular medical condition, or know someone who knows someone who might have committed a crime.

    In other words, you might already be flagged as potentially anti-government in a government database somewhere—Main Core, for example—that identifies and tracks individuals who aren’t inclined to march in lockstep to the police state’s dictates.

    As The Intercept reported, the FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies have increasingly invested in corporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to identify potential extremists and predict who might engage in future acts of anti-government behavior.

    Where many Americans go wrong is in naively assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or harmful in order to be flagged and targeted for some form of intervention or detention.

    In fact, all you need to do these days to end up on a government watch list or be subjected to heightened scrutiny is use certain trigger words (like cloud, pork and pirates), surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, limp or stutter, drive a car, stay at a hotel, attend a political rally, express yourself on social media, appear mentally ill, serve in the military, disagree with a law enforcement official, call in sick to work, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, appear confused or nervous, fidget or whistle or smell bad, be seen in public waving a toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun (such as a water nozzle or a remote control or a walking cane), stare at a police officer, question government authority, or appear to be pro-gun or pro-freedom.

    And then at the other end of the spectrum there are those such as Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning, for example, who blow the whistle on government misconduct that is within the public’s right to know.

    In true Orwellian fashion, the government would have us believe that it is Assange and Manning who are the real criminals for daring to expose the war machine’s seedy underbelly.

    Since his April 2019 arrest, Assange has been locked up in a maximum-security British prison—in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day—pending extradition to the U.S., where if convicted, he could be sentenced to 175 years in prison.

    This is how the police state deals with those who challenge its chokehold on power.

    This is also why the government fears a citizenry that thinks for itself: because a citizenry that thinks for itself is a citizenry that is informed, engaged and prepared to hold the government accountable to abiding by the rule of law, which translates to government transparency and accountability.

    After all, we’re citizens, not subjects.

    For those who don’t fully understand the distinction between the two and why transparency is so vital to a healthy constitutional government, Manning explains it well:

    When freedom of information and transparency are stifled, then bad decisions are often made and heartbreaking tragedies occur – too often on a breathtaking scale that can leave societies wondering: how did this happen? … I believe that when the public lacks even the most fundamental access to what its governments and militaries are doing in their names, then they cease to be involved in the act of citizenship. There is a bright distinction between citizens, who have rights and privileges protected by the state, and subjects, who are under the complete control and authority of the state.

    This is why the First Amendment is so critical. It gives the citizenry the right to speak freely, protest peacefully, expose government wrongdoing, and criticize the government without fear of arrest, isolation or any of the other punishments that have been meted out to whistleblowers such as Edwards Snowden, Assange and Manning.

    The challenge is holding the government accountable to obeying the law.

    A little over 50 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in United States v. Washington Post Co. to block the Nixon Administration’s attempts to use claims of national security to prevent The Washington Post and The New York Times from publishing secret Pentagon papers on how America went to war in Vietnam.

    As Justice William O. Douglas remarked on the ruling, “The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.”

    Fast forward to the present day, and we’re witnessing yet another showdown, this time between Assange and the Deep State, which pits the people’s right to know about government misconduct against the might of the military industrial complex.

    Yet this isn’t merely about whether whistleblowers and journalists are part of a protected class under the Constitution. It’s a debate over how long “we the people” will remain a protected class under the Constitution.

    Following the current trajectory, it won’t be long before anyone who believes in holding the government accountable is labeled an “extremist,” relegated to an underclass that doesn’t fit in, watched all the time, and rounded up when the government deems it necessary.

    We’re almost at that point now.

    Eventually, 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 will all be seditious conspirators in the eyes of the government.

    We would do better to be conspirators for the Constitution starting right now.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 23:45

  • Where The Most Money Is Burned On Cigars
    Where The Most Money Is Burned On Cigars

    When it comes to buying cigars, U.S. adults are among the biggest spenders.

    However, as Statista’s Anna Fleck notes, while Americans of age to buy tobacco spend around $36 per year on cigars, they are only topped by the Lebanese who spent almost $37 per capita last year on the vice.

    Infographic: Where the Most Money is Burend on Cigars | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Other high rollers who like to spend big on expensive cigars are Qataris, Luxembourgers, Icelanders, the Swiss and the Brits – likely aided by the fact that these countries all have high price levels and/or high taxes on tobacco.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 23:25

  • Wanted: Corrupt Stooge For High Political Office. Must Have Pulse
    Wanted: Corrupt Stooge For High Political Office. Must Have Pulse

    Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

    With only days to go before the federal government of the Land of the Free defaults on its debt, it appears that a compromise may finally be on the horizon.

    As part of the bargain, both sides have agreed to slash part of the $80 billion in new funding that the IRS was awarded last year.

    This is quite a blow to the President, who sold his plan to beef up the IRS last year by saying that the agency would capture up to “a trillion 300 million billion dollars if we hire more IRS agents.”

    A trillion 300 million billion? That sure does sound like a lot of money.

    Mr. Biden, of course, never seems to have much of a handle of arithmetic (nor anything else).

    At one point he explained that Covid-19 had taken “200 billion lives”, and then further commented that “just the outbreak, has taken more than one hundred year, look, here, the lives, it’s just, just think about it.”

    Quite sadly he even recently claimed that his son Beau died during a military deployment to in Iraq. In reality, Beau returned from Iraq in 2009, but died of brain cancer in 2015. You’d think his dad would know that.

    And this is on top of the countless videos out there of the President shaking hands with thin air, wandering aimlessly at official functions, reading instructions from teleprompters such as “repeat for emphasis”, and stopping mid-sentence with a thousand-yard stare.

    Now, Biden isn’t the first leader in history who showed signs of dementia.

    King George the III of England famously thought a tree was the king of Prussia. Margaret Thatcher, and Ronald Reagan showed signs of dementia towards the end of their terms in office.

    But there is a key difference.

    President Biden has deliberately surrounded himself with incompetent lunatics.

    For example, his Vice President’s latest inspiring quote is, “It’s very important… for us at every moment in time, and certainly this one, to seize the moment in time in which we exist in our present, and to be able to contextualize it, to understand where we exist in the history and in the moment as it relates not only to the past, but to the future.”

    Profound. A college freshman smoking his first joint couldn’t have said it better.

    What’s crazy is that this sort of verbal incontinence is pervasive across the rest of government.

    After a three month absence in the Senate due to shingles, 89-year-old Senator Dianne Feinstein returned to Washington and informed a reporter, “I haven’t been gone. I’ve been working.”

    The reporter asked for clarification if the Senator meant she had been working from home.

    “No, I’ve been here [at the capitol]. I’ve been voting,” she responded, before adding cryptically, “Please, you either know or don’t know.”

    And here’s a direct quote from Senator John Fetterman questioning banking CEOs in a recent Senate hearing:

    “That’s like if you have I mean like an-and they also realize that that now they have it’s an in a guaranteed, a guaranteed way to be saved by noma again, no matter, by-by-by how?”

    After an awkward silence from the men he was interrogating, Fetterman continued, “shouldn’t you have a working requirement after we sail your bank bills-in your bank? Because they seem me-more preoccupied than when snap requirement for works for hungry people but not about protecting the tax papers that will bail no matter whatever does about the bank, the crash.”

    Now, I don’t want to poke fun of someone’s legitimate medical condition. Dementia is a devastating condition. And in Fetterman’s case, he suffered a terrible stroke during his senate campaign. It’s certainly not his fault— it could happen to anyone.

    But America has become such a touchy, hypersensitive culture, that it’s considered gauche to even question whether someone who suffered a stroke, or suffers from dementia, is still fit for office.

    So if you think you’re entitled to an elected representative who actually knows where she is… well then the entire establishment closes ranks around the politician to defend them and labels you a bad person.

    The most we can possibly expect of elected leaders right now is that they have a pulse.

    Full control of their mental faculties? Not relevant. Backbone and integrity? Laughable.

    This is a pretty terrible trend given that the US is riddled with so many serious, malignant problems. This debt ceiling crisis is only the latest one… and they haven’t solved it. Even if their bargain is successful, they’re only punting the problem into the future by little more than two years.

    Social Security’s insolvency is looming. America’s military readiness is falling. More bank crises are looming. The dollar is in danger of losing its global dominance. Geopolitical threats are growing.

    You’d think that voters would want the best possible leaders who are at the absolute top of their game.

    But no. Instead, you just need a pulse.

    PS: If you can see what is happening, and where this is all going, you understand why it is so important to have a Plan B. That’s why we published our 31-page, fully updated Perfect Plan B Guide, which you can download here.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 23:05

  • McCarthy Reportedly Gave Democrats Secret Concessions In Exchange For Debt Ceiling Votes
    McCarthy Reportedly Gave Democrats Secret Concessions In Exchange For Debt Ceiling Votes

    Update (2300ET): Hours after the House passed the debt ceiling bill, Axios reports that House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) gave Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) secret concessions to boost spending on Democratic districts in the form of “community project funding” in exchange for their votes earlier this evening, according to two senior lawmakers.

    One lawmaker said the deal boosts earmarks to Democrats to bring them “closer to parity” with what Republicans receive in such funds in the GOP-led House. -Axios

    McCarthy has told reporters that he didn’t cut any deals to supply the Democratic votes.

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

    When asked if he cut a deal, Jeffries said “House Democrats to the rescue to avoid a dangerous default and help House Republicans get legislation over the finish line that they negotiated themselves.”

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

    More via Axios;

    The backdrop: Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, previously had told Democrats that they would receive significantly reduced funding for projects in their districts this year, according to Politico.

    What we’re watching: The deal could further inflame far-right lawmakers already incensed about the compromise bill that McCarthy cut with Biden. They’ve accused the speaker of caving to most of Democrats’ demands and not cutting enough government spending.

    • Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), reacting to news that Democrats might have squeezed McCarthy on earmarks, tweeted derisively: “Earmarks! Sell! Sell! Sell! #NoDeal[.]”

    *  *  *

    Update (2115ET): The House has successfully voted to raise the debt limit. The legislation now heads to the Senate, where it will need (and undoubtedly receive) at least 60 votes to proceed to President Biden’s desk for his signature ahead of a June 5 deadline to avert a national default.

    71 Republicans opposed the measure, as did 46 Democrats, while 149 Republicans and 165 Democrats voted to back the plan.

    As we noted earlier, the bill – which as discussed here does not cut real Federal spending even in year one despite widespread propaganda that In exchange for Republican votes for the suspension, Democrats agreed to cap federal spending for the next two years – would set the course for federal spending for the next two years and suspend the debt ceiling until Jan. 1, 2025 — postponing another clash over borrowing until after the presidential election. By then total US debt will be $35 trillion and well on its way to unsustainability.

    Of note, in order to try and convince hardline conservatives to vote yes, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy had proposed a bipartisan commission, at an expected cost upwards of $100 million, to outline future budget cuts.

    “After today, I’m going to put a commission together to look at the entire budget. This debt is too large,” said McCarthy. “We can be very serious about looking long term to solve this problem.”

    *  *  *

    Update (2115ET): The full House vote has started on the debt ceiling deal.

    Watch live:

    *  *  *

    Shortly after 4pm ET, the debt-limit deal cleared a major hurdle in the House despite growing opposition, setting up the legislation for a vote around 8:15pm on Wednesday night, a vote which despite vocal showboating opposition from various republicans appears destined to pass.

    While the House voted 241-187 to take a procedural step needed to consider the measure, McCarthy needed votes from Democrats to offset 29 Republican “no” votes, underscoring the divide within his own party over the legislation as such votes setting the rules for debate are nearly always decided along party lines.  The final vote tally suggests that the Speaker’s position is becoming increasingly vulnerable… if only there was someone willing to submit a motion to vacate.

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

    Here are the 29 Republicans that voted no on the rule for the debt ceiling:

    A) 29 GOPers voted no on rule for debt ceiling.

    1. Biggs
    2. Bishop
    3. Boebert
    4. Brecheen
    5. Burlison
    6. Buck
    7. Cline
    8. Burchett
    9. Cloud
    10. Clyde
    11. Crane
    12. Gaetz
    13. Gosar
    14. Good
    15. Griffith
    16. Higgins
    17. Harris
    18. Harshberger
    19. Luna
    20. Miller
    21. Moore
    22. Norman
    23. Perry
    24. Posey
    25. Rosendale
    26. Roy
    27. Self
    28. Spartz
    29. Tiffany

    “I think things are going as planned,” Biden told reporters at the White House, before he was due to leave for Colorado. “God willing, by the time I land, Congress will have acted, the House will have acted, and we’ll be one step closer.”

    House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, a Minnesota Republican, said early Wednesday that he’s sure the votes are in hand. “It’s going to pass,” he said even though he will need Democrat vote for the final passage.

    If it passes, the bill will next go to the Senate, where objections from conservatives could force days of debate. But John Thune, the Senate’s No. 2 Republican, said Wednesday that there could be a deal to pass the bill by Friday night, days ahead of the June 5 default deadline.

    The bill – which as discussed here does not cut real Federal spending even in year one despite widespread propaganda that In exchange for Republican votes for the suspension, Democrats agreed to cap federal spending for the next two years – would set the course for federal spending for the next two years and suspend the debt ceiling until Jan. 1, 2025 — postponing another clash over borrowing until after the presidential election. By then total US debt will be $35 trillion and well on its way to unsustainability.

    * * *

    As the deal to raise the debt ceiling works its way through the House, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (KY) is preparing for battle with Senate conservatives who are calling for amendments to the bill and threatening to delay the legislation until changes are made.

    As The Hill reports, the bill is likely to get over 40 Senate Democratic votes, meaning it will likely need at least 10-20 “yes” votes from Senate Republicans in order for it to move to President Biden’s desk before the June 5 “X-date” deadline set by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen for the US to run out of funds.

    On Sunday, McConnell came out in favor of the deal negotiated between House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and President Biden’s team, however he faces strong opposition from actual conservatives. Chief among them, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who has threatened to use “every procedural tool at my disposal” to slow down the bill. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has similarly thrown a wrench in the gears – demanding a vote on his “conservative alternative” that would cut total federal spending by $545 billion over two years.

    “It’s time to go back to the drawing board or, even better, go back to what the House already passed,” said Lee on Tuesday – referring to the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which would cut $4.8 trillion from the future deficit. According to Lee, the current bill “simply does not do what its proponents claim it does — not even close.”

    Last week, Lee said that if the bill doesn’t include substantial budgetary and spending reforms, it “will not face smooth sailing in the Senate.”

    McConnell has pledged the nation will not default on its debts but he also has a responsibility as leader to help Republican colleagues who want to amend the legislation, which could delay it past the June 5 “X-date.”   

    “The Senate must act swiftly and pass this agreement without unnecessary delay,” he said in a statement Sunday. -The Hill

    Rand Paul, meanwhile, says he won’t vote for any bill to raise the debt ceiling that doesn’t balance the federal budget in five years – which would require over $500 billion in future cuts.

    “To us, it doesn’t look like cuts at all. In fact, spending will go up every year under that debt plan,” he said of the Biden-McCarthy deal, adding “Mandatory spending is enormous; it’s over half of the spending every year. It’s going up at five percent a year.”

    That said, Paul says he won’t use procedural amendments to slow down passage of the debt bill, which caps federal spending for two years, and allows Congress to decide how to meet those targets at a later date.

    Also opposing the current deal are Sens. Rick Scott (R-FL) and Mike Braun (R-IN).

    “This bill leaves us with trillions more in debt & no clear path to less inflation or a balanced budget. I appreciate the work @SpeakerMcCarthy did to try & negotiate a good deal when @JoeBiden refused to engage, but I cannot support this bill,” Scott tweeted Tuesday.

    Braun, meanwhile, told reporters that he wouldn’t vote for the bill unless it similarly contains major changes and amendments, adding that he won’t object to speeding up the debate on the legislation if he and his GOP colleagues can submit amendments – even if they’re unlikely to pass.

    “You want amendments because you know they’re not going to pass, let’s be real here. The Democrats and the neo-cons in our party are going to get this thing across the finish line, but I want the process of being able to amend it. To me, that is a step in the right direction, because this all gives information to the public in terms of what could be done, even though it doesn’t get incorporated,” said Braun.

    Other GOP Senators on the fence include John Cornyn, John Kennedy and Mike Rounds.

    “From my perspective, there’s not really anything to support until the House passes the bill. I’m waiting to see what the House sends us,” said Cornyn.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 23:01

  • Female Athlete Retires After Competing Against Biological Men, Says Girls "No Longer Have A Fair Chance"
    Female Athlete Retires After Competing Against Biological Men, Says Girls “No Longer Have A Fair Chance”

    Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times,

    Hannah Arensman, a 35-time national cyclocross winner, decided to retire at the age of 25 following a loss to a transgender competitor. She shared her decision along with 67 female athletes and supporters in a recent Supreme Court amicus brief filing (pdf) in support of a West Virginia law that would keep biological men out of women’s sports.

    “I have decided to end my cycling career,” Arensman declared last Wednesday.

    In her statement, Arensman recalled her final race in the elite women’s division of the UCI Cyclocross National Championships in late December, where she finished in the 4th place, flanked on either side by competitors she identifies as male riders. “I came in 4th place, flanked on either side by male riders awarded 3rd and 5th places,” she stated.

    She recounted the emotional toll this had on her and her family: “My sister and family sobbed as they watched a man finish in front of me, having witnessed several physical interactions with him throughout the race.”

    Furthermore, Arensman expressed her frustration over the possibility that she might have been overlooked for international selection on the U.S. team at the Cyclocross Worlds in February 2023 due to a male competitor. “It is difficult for me to think about the very real possibility I was overlooked because of a male competitor,” she shared.

    In her detailed account, Arensman voiced her discontent over what she perceives as an unequal playing field, stating: “It has become increasingly discouraging to train as hard as I do only to have to lose to a man with the unfair advantage of an androgenized body that intrinsically gives him an obvious advantage over me, no matter how hard I train.”

    In her statement, she also expressed concern for the young girls entering the field of competitive sports: “I feel for young girls learning to compete and who are growing up in a day when they no longer have a fair chance at being the new record holders and champions in cycling.”

    Expressing her frustration and disappointment, Arensman criticized the authorities for not ensuring fair competition in women’s sports: “I have felt deeply angered, disappointed, overlooked, and humiliated that the rule makers of women’s sports do not feel it is necessary to protect women’s sports to ensure fair competition for women anymore.”

    Her statement and those from other disenfranchised female athletes were disseminated by the Independent Council on Women’s Sports.

    Legal Battle

    Selina Soule, a track and field champion, has emerged as a pivotal figure in pushing for the restoration of fairness in women’s sports. With a legal battle on the horizon, Soule is rallying support from those affected by this contentious issue.

    Soule described the situation as “devastating,” expressing concern over the future of women’s sports. “It’s devastating that there are women out there who are retiring or changing their events because they are being forced to compete against biological males where those males, if they were competing in the men’s category, they would be barely mediocre. But in the women, they are dominating the field, and it’s a very, extremely frustrating situation,” she told Fox News on May 24. “It should not be happening. Women’s sports should be preserved as just women’s sports.”

    Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) joins Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-Va.), track and field athlete Selina Soule (in pink suit) and other Republicans for an event to celebrate the House passing The Protection Of Women And Girls In Sports Act outside the U.S. Capitol on April 20, 2023 in Washington. (Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    Soule’s experiences competing against biological males during her high school career have fueled her call for action. “Everybody who has encountered this issue needs to speak up and ask for fairness,” Soule said.

    In 2020, Soule, alongside other student-athletes, initiated a lawsuit against the Connecticut Association of Schools. The suit challenged a state ruling that allowed transgender students to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity. Despite the judge dismissing the lawsuit on procedural grounds, Soule, backed by the Alliance Defending Freedom, is preparing to appeal the ruling​.

    The repercussions of the current policy are far-reaching, according to Soule’s attorney Christiana Kiefer. “Girls deserve to compete on a level playing field, and what Selena experienced … was being sidelined in her own sport and that’s a clear violation of Title IX,” Kiefer argued during the Fox News​​ show.

    On April 6, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) released a notice of proposed rule-making on athletic eligibility for transgender students who participate in school sports. Some states recently have banned these students from participating on teams different from their biological sex.

    The Biden administration proposal, as explained in the Federal Register, “would govern a recipient’s adoption or application of sex-related criteria that would limit or deny a student’s eligibility to participate on a male or female athletic team consistent with their gender identity.”

    Former high school athlete Selina Soule, who competed within the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference. (Alliance Defending Freedom)

    Officially, the rule-change proposal is listed as “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance: Sex-Related Eligibility Criteria for Male or Female Athletic Teams.”

    A national conservative watchdog group, Citizens Defending Freedom, has been encouraging people to flood the online page of the Federal Register with comments about the proposed rule change to Title IX.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 22:45

  • Russian Ambassador Claims Maidan-Style Coup Attempt Unfolding In Belgrade
    Russian Ambassador Claims Maidan-Style Coup Attempt Unfolding In Belgrade

    Russian Ambassador to Serbia Alexander Botsan-Kharchenko has leveled some dramatic allegations against the West in relation to both the Ukraine war and ongoing tensions and clashes in northern Kosovo, which has been focus of international media attention. 

    The Russian ambassador claimed that Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic’s opponents are plotting and attempting to stage a “Maidan-style coup” in the Serbian capital of Belgrade. His word choice implied he things the West is involved on some level.

    Using terminology which has been familiar in Kremlin descriptions of what NATO is doing in Ukraine, Amb. Botsan-Kharchenko said, “This is part of the hybrid war. I would like to stress that anti-Belgrade forces acted almost synchronously; they operate on two fronts – this is the situation in Kosovo and attempts at a Maidan coup here, in Belgrade.”

    Large Serbian protests against gun violence and government mismanagement in May. AFP/Getty Images

    The Russian official’s words also referenced recent large-scale anti-government protests inside Serbia, some which gathered in front of the building of Serbia’s national broadcaster in Belgrade on Sunday.

    These have been billed as ‘peace protests’ but according to regional media have progressively taken on an anti-government character and anti-government slogans. Some of them have happened with slogans such as “Serbia Against Violence” – and have been focused on gun violence in the wake of recent mass casualty school shootings in Serbia – a rarity for the country’s recent history.

    The protests have been going strong since mid-May, and people are angry over what they see as government mishandling of recent crises:

    Tens of thousands of people have marched through Belgrade, blocking a key bridge in the second large protest since two mass shootings that rattled Serbia and left 17 people dead, including many children.

    Protesters gathered in front of the parliament building on Friday before filing by the government’s HQ and on to a highway bridge spanning the Sava River, where evening commuters had to turn their vehicles around to avoid getting stuck. At the head of the column was a black banner reading “Serbia against violence.”

    As the demonstrators passed the government buildings, many chanted slogans decrying Serbia’s populist president, Aleksandar Vučić, whom they blame for creating an atmosphere of hopelessness and division in the country that they say indirectly led to the mass shootings.

    Additionally Russia’s TASS has described the following of recent protests in Serbia: 

    The first rally was quite peaceful, with practically no anti-government slogans. People were simply congregating in silence in front of the parliamentary building. During the second rally, protesters blocked a bridge across the Sava River and chanted anti-government slogans. The third demonstration had an anti-government character too. According to the Serbian interior ministry, more than 11,000 people took part in these rallies.

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

    Serbia has long been a staunch ally of Russia, however, there’s been recent distance and tensions due to the war in Ukraine. Still, Belgrade is generally seen in the West as more oriented toward Russia. It remains that both Slavic countries have long condemned what they see as NATO aggression and expansion, particularly following the 1999 US-NATO bombing campaign over Belgrade.

    The Serbian population itself also tends to engage in large demonstrations against NATO and US policies from time to time. In particular the Serb people reject US and international recognition of Kosovo as a sovereign nation, given it historically was an ethnic Serb and Orthodox Christian heartland. This week, President Vucic has ordered Serbian troops to the Kosovo border amid unrest and an unpredictable situation, also as he’s condemned the Kosovo government for cracking down on the Serb minority there.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 22:25

  • Republicans Call For Action As China Turns US Into 'Hunting Ground' For Dissidents
    Republicans Call For Action As China Turns US Into ‘Hunting Ground’ For Dissidents

    Authored by Frank Fang, Eva Fu and Joshua Philipp via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The recent indictments of two suspected Chinese agents in California are examples of how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is trying to turn the United States into a “hunting ground” for dissidents, according to Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.).

    Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) questions Matt Albence, who was then-acting director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, on July 25, 2019. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    The two individuals attempted to bribe an undercover officer posing as an IRS agent, in a plot to revoke the tax-exempt status of an entity run and maintained by Falun Gong practitioners, according to the Department of Justice. They were arrested at their residences on May 26 and face charges of conspiracy, bribery, and money laundering.

    “This is another example of just how the CCP, the Communist Chinese Party, is doing all they can to undermine our sovereignty [and] silence all dissent even in our country,” Newhouse told EpochTV’s “Crossroads” on May 30.

    While U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has characterized the case as part of China’s “campaign of transnational repression” in the United States, Newhouse gave a blunt assessment of the situation.

    “I want to be clear about what I think this really means. This is a foreign government that is committing crimes against those that it deems to be a threat, right here on American soil,” Newhouse said.

    The two suspected Chinese agents—John Chen from California’s Chino City and Lin Feng from Los Angeles—​​carried out their bribery campaign from January to May this year, according to prosecutors.

    According to a court document, Chen characterized one of the Chinese officials the two received “direction” from as someone “that is always in charge of these matters,” during an intercepted phone call. In other words, the unidentified Chinese official could be directly involved in China’s ongoing persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China, possibly once having a position within the regime’s extralegal body known as the “610 Office.”

    The United States “should be a haven from persecution, not what they’re trying to turn it into—a hunting ground for an authoritarian government,” Newhouse added.

    610 Office

    Falun Gong, also known as Falun Dafa, is a spiritual discipline with slow meditative exercises and moral teachings. In 1999, the Chinese regime launched a persecution campaign against the group, throwing practitioners into prisons, labor camps, and brainwashing centers.

    Hundreds of thousands of practitioners have been subjected to torture while incarcerated, according to the Falun Dafa Information Center, while thousands have been killed as a result of torture and abuse in police custody. Owing to strict censorship in China, the actual death toll is likely to be many times higher.

    The 610 Office was set up in 1999 for the sole purpose of persecuting Falun Gong practitioners. It was disbanded between 2018 and 2019 and its functions were merged into other CCP organs, according to internal documents obtained by The Epoch Times.

    Falun Gong practitioners march in Manhattan to celebrate World Falun Dafa Day, in New York, on May 12, 2023. (Larry Dye/The Epoch Times)

    In June 2021, the State Department announced sanctions against Yu Hui, a former director of a regional 610 Office, for his involvement in “gross violations of human rights, namely the arbitrary detention of Falun Gong practitioners for their spiritual beliefs.”

    The Chinese regime’s presence inside the United States was exposed last month, when the FBI arrested two individuals on charges of operating a secret police station in New York City on behalf of the CCP. They allegedly took orders from the regime in order to track down and silence Chinese dissidents living in the United States, prosecutors said.

    Newhouse said more and more American people, as well as members of Congress, are “seeing China for what it is” because of the “aggressive actions” that China has undertaken.

    “I’m glad that the DOJ and the FBI have been on their toes on this doing the right thing, holding them accountable,” he added. “Who knows what else is going on, that maybe the American people and members of Congress even aren’t aware of. So we’ve got to be vigilant.”

    ‘Confront China’s Repression Head-On’

    In response to the alleged bribery scheme against Falun Gong, two Republican lawmakers are calling for the government to confront China’s actions in the United States.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 22:05

  • The U.S. Government's Over-Classification Epidemic: Ratcliffe
    The U.S. Government’s Over-Classification Epidemic: Ratcliffe

    Authored by John Ratcliffe via RealClear Wire,

    Classified information is a mainstay in the news these days and rarely for positive reasons. On the one hand, classified documents seem to be leaking at an unprecedented rate, often revealing not only sensitive national security information but also government impropriety. While in office, I saw this firsthand in Crossfire Hurricane, the bogus counterintelligence investigation into non-existent links between President Trump and Russia. Much of that information should never have been classified and was only tightly controlled to obscure government wrongdoing. On the other hand, overclassification of information that does not meet appropriate classification thresholds is an epidemic inside the national security apparatus. As a result, it is estimated that some 50 million documents are classified each year across the federal government.

    Overclassification—or unreasonable resistance to declassification—is sometimes a result of the desire to conceal embarrassing or inappropriate actions, but it’s more often done out of convenience, laziness or good old-fashioned CYA. After all, I’m not aware of any government employee getting in trouble for classifying something that didn’t really need to be classified, but there are serious ramifications for not classifying something that should be.

    In part because the executive branch has been so slow to address this issue, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in Congress has filed bills to address over-classification and declassification issues. Perhaps they are hoping to force the White House to take action, but any President should be wary of the legislative branch encroaching on their Constitutional authority to classify and control access to national security information.

    However, if we are going to tackle the pervasive overclassification problem, we must also ensure that the government has a reasonable process for handling “controlled unclassified information” (CUI)—information that is not classified but is nonetheless not widely shared by the U.S. government. This is the gray area between highly sensitive national security information and widely available or non-sensitive information that’s suitable for public disclosure.

    In a 2020 memo to the President’s National Security Advisor, I laid out how the current system came into effect: 

    For decades, agencies often employed ad hoc, agency-specific policies, procedures, and markings to handle unclassified information that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls. This patchwork approach apparently resulted in agencies’ marking and handling information inconsistently, implementing allegedly unclear or unnecessarily restrictive dissemination policies, and creating potential obstacles to information sharing.”

    This dynamic led to the Obama Administration in 2010 to issue an Executive order (EO 13556) retiring many of the various, inconsistent unclassified dissemination control markings used for this “gray area” information and replacing them all with a single marking: CUI.

    This simplified approach sounded like a good idea at the time. But like many other well-intentioned government policies, it broke down in its implementation. 

    In spite of the mandate to simplify the unclassified markings system, the National Archives and Records Administration’s Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) expanded the potential new marking system to include, as I wrote in my memo to the National Security Advisor, “over 124 categories in 20 groupings, with 60 Specified and 60+ Basic categories.”

    As a result, the new system is so complex and cumbersome that it has still not been fully implemented 13 years later. And it’s not only because it would be a complicated mess; it would also cost a fortune, requiring an estimated $1 billion or more to implement just in the Intelligence Community alone. What critical mission areas, I wonder, will be cut to build this new bureaucratic regime? Perhaps we’ll stop collecting intelligence on some of our hard targets or adversarial nations and divert that money to fund this latest iteration of government gone wild.

    Critics called my memo a “bureaucratic bombshell” in 2020, but it is nothing compared to the bureaucratic nuclear bomb of the new CUI methodology that is already wreaking havoc and driving exasperation across the government, particularly within the national security community.

    There is no question that the current marking system for both classified information and CUI has gotten way too complicated. We spend an inordinate amount of money and an outrageous amount of time training people on it—with mixed results. But it makes no sense to spend billions to create new problems rather than fix the existing ones. We need simplification. Unfortunately, the result of President Obama’s 2010 Executive order has been the exact opposite of that. And now we are just days away from a deadline, set by the Biden White House, to either revise or replace the Executive Orders dealing with both classified national security information and controlled unclassified information.

    No proponent of good government could justify spending good money and wasting more time attempting to implement a clearly broken system. As a former member of Congress, I can tell you that is why some of my savvy former colleagues on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) are already considering not authorizing funds for the Intelligence Community to implement the unwieldy CUI program come September when the next budget bill arrives. They know we need reform, from cracking down on overclassification to streamlining the handling of CUI. And pushing forward with the current plan doesn’t deliver either.

    John Ratcliffe served as the 6th U.S. Director of National Intelligence from 2020-2021. A Republican, he represented Texas’ Fourth Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives from 2015-2020.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 21:45

  • Bad News Is Now Good News In China As Market Awaits Stimulus
    Bad News Is Now Good News In China As Market Awaits Stimulus

    By George Lei, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

    China’s May PMI survey flashed the latest warning of mounting economic trouble, prompting investors to eagerly weigh the odds of more stimulus out of Beijing. Onshore equities have already relinquished the vast majority of their post-reopening gains, adding pressure on policymakers to move fast and aggressively to promote growth.

    The yuan, stocks and commodity prices have fallen since late April, a reflection of China’s pessimistic economic prospects, Shao Xiang and Tao Chuan at Soochow Securities wrote in their WeChat public account on Wednesday. History suggests monetary policy rarely “stands idly by” once manufacturing PMI stays below the 50 threshold for two or more straight months, they pointed out.

    The PBOC took actions in 2019, 2021 and 2022 when the factory gauge worsened — including reductions to the Required Reserve Ratio (RRR), the Medium-term Lending Facilities (MLF) rate and Loan Prime Rate (LPR). These actions occurred either during the same month or one to two months after the data was out, the Soochow analysts noted.

    The PMI data confirmed China’s post-Covid recovery is “far from a self-sustained one, due to a lack of confidence among corporates and households,” according to Macquarie analysts Larry Hu and Yuxiao Zhang. “Now policy is the only game changer,” they said in a research report on Wednesday.

    Beijing will either need to get its stimulus package in shape in the coming weeks or risk a sharp year-over-year downturn in the next quarter, according to Evercore ISI. The lockdown of Shanghai, which took place between April and May of 2022, weighed heavily on the Chinese economy and the low base of comparison suggests 2Q GDP will “look great” in year-over-year terms despite ongoing headwinds, analysts Neo Wang and Gin Wang noted.

    Consensus forecast puts the pace of expansion at 7.8% year-over-year in 2Q and 5.1% in 3Q, according to a Bloomberg survey. Evercore ISI believes “it makes more sense to announce stimulus taking effects when 3Q arrives,” while Macquarie sees an “RRR cut, acceleration in infrastructure spending and more relaxation in property policy” in the weeks ahead.

    Still, whether PBOC will cut MLF or LPR remains a close call given the expectations for another Fed hike in June, Macquarie cautions. More data deterioration may be needed before Beijing makes up its mind.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 21:25

  • Randi Weingarten Has Zero Credibility
    Randi Weingarten Has Zero Credibility

    Authored by Stan Greer via RealClear Wire,

    In March 2020, a little more than three years ago, state and local politicians across America halted in-person classes for K-12 government schools with the purported aim of slowing the spread of the COVID-19 virus. When the school shutdowns began, few ordinary citizens had any idea how long they would last. It ultimately turned out that many school districts would remain closed until well into 2021. It’s been estimated that roughly half of America’s public schoolchildren lost a year or more of full-time, face-to-face instruction in the classroom.

    Not coincidentally, both parents’ willingness to make huge financial and other sacrifices to get their kids out of the government education system and public apprehensions about the viability of public schools as institutions have soared since early 2020.

    Over the course of the first two years of the pandemic, nationwide enrollment in K-12 public schools plummeted by roughly 1.2 million. The enrollment decline was typically far more severe in states where government school employees are overwhelmingly unionized, and where union bosses’ monopoly-bargaining power over teachers’ compensation and work conditions is most extensive. 

    For example, 27.1% of the entire enrollment drop occurred in just two states, forced-unionism California and New York, that were home to only 17.7% of the nation’s school-aged population (that is, 5-17 year olds) in 2020. Meanwhile, a fall 2022 Gallup poll recently cited by Wall Street Journal columnist William McGurn found that nationwide public satisfaction with government schools “had dropped to 42%, a 20-year low.”

    As parental and public confidence in Big Labor-dominated government schools falls, Randi Weingarten, the camera-hogging president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT/AFL-CIO) union, personifies the problem for many concerned citizens. In the words of former Congressman and Trump Cabinet member Mike Pompeo, a particularly harsh critic: “It’s not just about Ms. Weingarten, but she has become the most visible face of the destruction of American education.”

    Many Americans understandably blame union bosses like Weingarten for the fact that most American school districts within jurisdictions where Big Labor is most powerful remained shuttered long after it had become apparent that they could operate safely. School children were suffering grave educational and psychological harm as a consequence of the lockdowns.

    But Weingarten pleads not guilty. Brushing aside countless well-documented examples of her viciously attacking supporters of reopening schools in 2020 and 2021, such as her July 2020 denunciation of then-U.S. Education Sec. Betsy DeVos’s pro-in person instruction stance as “reckless,” “callous,” and “cruel,” the AFT czar insists she was never against reopening per se.

    At an April 26 congressional hearing on the role top union bosses played in perpetuating school shutdowns, she repeated again and again that she had always wanted schools to reopen, as long as it could be done “safely.”

    This attempt at self-exoneration is laughable. Just for starters, Weingarten’s recent testimony ignored the fact that, in July 2021, nearly a year after school districts in Right to Work Florida had reopened while “avoid[ing] major outbreaks of COVID-19 and maintain[ing] case rates lower than those in the wider community,” she claimed hysterically that “millions of Floridians” were “going to die” because the state’s elected officials had refused to follow Big Labor orders to keep schools closed.

    This prediction was so absurd that Weingarten subsequently decided she had no choice but to apologize for her “hyperbole.”  But she continues to invent facts to justify her COVID-19 record.

    For example, in her congressional testimony late last month, Weingarten repeatedly cited a January 2021 study co-authored by epidemiologist Tracy Hoeg to justify the AFT hierarchy’s insistence that federal taxpayers had to fork over vast sums of money, putatively for costly new school ventilation systems and other mitigations, before safe reopenings could happen.  But as Hoeg, the study’s lead author, publicly pointed out within hours after the hearing’s conclusion, it actually showed rates of COVID-19 transmission were low in schools regardless of whether their ventilation systems were old or new.

    In the era of COVID-19 and its aftermath, the fork-tongued Weingarten has become the personification of why state laws handing union bosses monopoly-bargaining power over K-12 public school employees, which are now on the books in well over 30 states, never should have been enacted and ought now to be repealed.

    Stan Greer is senior research associate for the National Institute for Labor Relations Research.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 21:05

  • Combating The Censorship Industrial Complex
    Combating The Censorship Industrial Complex

    Authored by Charlie Tidmarsh via RealClear Wire,

    It’s been nearly six months since the first installment of the Twitter Files—the journalistic effort by Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, Bari Weiss, Lee Fang, and many others to expose the myriad channels by which the U.S government cooperated with Twitter on content moderation and censorship—was first published. Twitter Files One, perhaps the mildest of more than 20 unique reports, details the social media company’s internal deliberations in the days before the New York Post’s story about Hunter Biden’s laptop was removed from the site. Later reports have exposed the tendrils of a governmental apparatus that influenced some of the most significant media distortions in recent American history, from the fraudulent Hamilton 68 misinformation tracking dashboard to the FBI’s intimate involvement with Twitter’s content-moderation practices.  

    For six months, not much of consequence has happened, either in Washington or the mainstream media, in response. Those who owe us mea culpas have not provided them, tending instead to attack the individual reporters or ignore their findings. Meanwhile, some concerning developments have emerged: Congress formed the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in order to conduct its own investigation, which would have been encouraging had it not culminated in representative Stacey Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands threatening Taibbi with imprisonment for his testimony; Mark Warner’s RESTRICT Act, which would yield the federal government an enormous media-censorship leeway, was introduced in the Senate in March; Montana banned TikTok statewide; special counsel John Durham’s report on Russian interference was released and received with a profound lack of interest in the FBI’s dubious and error-laden investigation; and the Global Disinformation Index, a British NGO that ranks news outlets on a scale of “risky” to “least risky” (this website is one of the GDI’s ten “riskiest”), was shown to have received funding from the State Department (via the National Endowment for Democracy), which it subsequently lost.  

    As shocking and foreboding as these anti-democratic actions are, not many commentators are treating them as interconnected expressions of a single censorship apparatus. Michael Shellenberger and his colleagues Alex Gutentag and Matt Taibbi are now undertaking a monumental attempt at defining that apparatus: they call it the Censorship Industrial Complex. Shellenberger and Gutentag are two of the few journalists who not only take the reality of increased government censorship efforts seriously but also consider it a systemic, unified, and global threat, as opposed to a few discreet but regrettable extensions of U.S. political power.  

    The complex is founded on euphemistic, Astro-turfed neologisms—“misinformation,” “disinformation,” “infodemic,” and, absurdly, “malinformation,” which is defined by The Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency as information “which is based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate” (my emphasis)—and prosecuted by a coterie of journalists, academics, NGOs and nonprofits who claim neutral expertise in adjudicating what is true and what is false. World governments have eerily aligned their definitions of these terms and then cooperated with non-state actors to censor online speech in accordance, all with the stated and ostensibly noble aim of “reducing harm.”  

    Their reporting, which takes place almost exclusively on Substack and Twitter (Gutentag is also a columnist at Tablet), has called attention to the ways in which major democratic governments in Europe, Canada, the UK, and Ireland are replicating the American tactic: define certain types of speech as harmful and then empower a bureaucratic network of think tanks, research agencies, and nonprofits to enforce strict Internet censorship practices that ensure that so-called harmful speech is repressed.  

    The most thorough history of how this bureaucracy came into power was provided by Jacob Siegel, a former U.S Army intelligence officer in both Iraq and Afghanistan, writing in Tablet. Strikingly, Siegel compares the emergence of this new complex to its closest analog in American history: McCarthyism. And he locates its legislative origin on December 23, 2016, the date that Barack Obama signed into law the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act. What began as a campaign against foreign information warfare morphed into a domestic censorship apparatus in the aftermath of Donald Trump taking office. In this way, it echoes the Military Industrial Complex by leveraging wartime expansions of government authority towards domestic goals. While the primary agents are certain federal intelligence and security agencies and their cooperating NGOs1, Siegel sees the media as playing a remarkably complicit role in the last seven years. “The American press, he writes, “once the guardian of democracy, was hollowed out to the point that it could be worn like a hand puppet by the U.S security agencies and party operatives.” 

    Shellenberger and Gutentag have provided the first invaluable step in a massive project: they’ve defined the problem. “The Twitter Files gave us a window,” Shellenberger writes, “into how government agencies, civil society, and tech companies work together to censor social media users. Now, key nations are attempting to enshrine this coordination into law explicitly.”  

    In November 2022, the E.U. passed the Digital Services Act, which legally compels large online media platforms to remove hate speech and disinformation from their platforms under threat of fines as large as six percent of annual global revenue. If passed in the U.S., RESTRICT, with its loopholes and vague jargon, threatens to give the federal government unprecedented ability to spy on the online activity of its citizens. The Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022, which passed the lower house of the Irish Parliament, could soon render the possession of “hateful” digital material illegal in that country. Canadian Bill C-11 has passed in the Senate, amending the former Broadcasting Act to allow the government to filter and promote streamed media. Brazil’s proposed Bill 2630, the so-called Fake News Law, will compel social media platforms to regulate “fake news” and misinformation on their platforms more strictly or face severe fines. An early draft of this bill included a provision that would allow the imprisonment for up to five years of anyone spreading content that “threatened social peace and economic order.”  

    According to Shellenberger, Gutentag, and their colleagues at the Substack Public, what tends to unify these efforts is a reliance on identical, porous definitions of what counts as bad or hateful information, as well as an emphasis on words such as “safety,” “harm reduction,” and “protection.” This is precisely what makes the Censorship Industrial Complex so insidious. No one wants truly false information to dominate our important discussion spaces, or genuine hate to crowd out constructive public discourse. But the verbiage these governments operate with grants tremendous leeway in how such speech is defined and censored. This slippage has already played out in the case of Hunter Biden’s laptop, the contents of which were almost immediately deemed “disinformation” as a justification for Twitter to remove the story from its platform in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election; we now know the material was not only legitimate but in the FBI’s possession in December of 2019. 

    Shellenberger and Gutentag are calling on any whistleblowers, journalists, or individuals with first-hand experience with this censorship regime to contact them immediately. The first official meeting of this growing anti-censorship movement will be held in London next month. Anyone with information or experience to share is encouraged to reach out on their website, censorshipindustrialcomplex.org, and support Public’s reporting on Substack. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 20:45

  • These Five Niche Commodities Signal China's Recovery Faltering
    These Five Niche Commodities Signal China’s Recovery Faltering

    China’s economic recovery from draconian zero-Covid controls is faltering. Investors had very high hopes earlier this year that the world’s second-largest economy would roar back to life and help offset weakness in the global economy. However, six months later, those same hopes have faded into disappointment. 

    One of the most immediate warning signs investors are losing faith in the recovery narrative is the Hang Seng China Enterprises Index fell into bear market territory Tuesday, down about 20% from its Jan. 27 peak. 

    While equities are important to track, we shift attention to sliding commodity prices that might give further input about China’s economic growth miracle seen over the last several decades, which has yet to reemerge and ignite a spark. Maybe that’s because of an aging population or declining workforce or supply chain reset, or enormous debt loads — whatever is hobbling China’s recovery effort might indicate the days of expanding at 6% to 8% a year are over and only 2% or 3% is the new normal. 

    On the commodity front, two of the most important commodities to China’s economy, copper and iron ore, have been moving lower over the last several months. But five often overlooked commodities essential for economic growth send chilling signs of economic alarm.

    “Futures markets for items as diverse as glass, styrene and corn starch are piling on the evidence that China isn’t recovering as fast as many people had hoped, after Beijing abandoned the pandemic restrictions late last year that were crushing its economy,” Bloomberg said. 

    Glass 

    China accounts for more than half of the world’s plate glass production thanks to the rapid growth of high-rise buildings and vehicle sales in recent decades. Similar to other industries, low margins and supply gluts have troubled producers for years, forcing them to cut output in recent months.

    The situation this year looks even more challenging. Glass futures on the Zhengzhou Commodity Exchange have plunged nearly 20% in the past month, a period when demand usually picks up. The reasons include China’s teetering property market and weaker-than-expected vehicle output in April. 

    Trucked LNG

    China has a vast requirement for natural gas, carried by sea from mega-projects in far-flung places like Qatar and Australia, or over pipelines that stretch across continental Asia. But the last few miles to consumers is often via trucks that criss-cross China’s cities, a barometer of the immediate needs of industries from glass-makers to ceramic factories.

    That price has fallen to its lowest level in almost two years. Demand is so weak that the nation’s top importers of seaborne liquefied natural gas are even offering to resell their shipments abroad. 

    Styrene 

    Fewer home buyers also means less demand for the purchases that often accompany a new place to live. The price of styrene monomer, a material used for the plastics and rubber that go into appliances like fridges, has declined. China has been the world’s fastest growing market in the past decade with capacity climbing to over 40% of the global total.

    Dalian futures fell last week to their lowest since February 2021, after a near-5% drop in home appliance sales in the first quarter, according to the National Appliance Information Center. The problems are slower growth in personal incomes and a “low-frequency sales cycle” for white goods, according to Wu Haitao, a director at the center.

    Corn Starch 

    Corn starch has a wide variety of uses, in soft drinks, as a thickening agent for sauces and in the paper and textiles industries. China produces almost 50 million tons a year. 

    Although retail sales have outperformed other economic measurements in the months since China’s Covid Zero restrictions were lifted, they grew at a slower pace than expected in April. China’s falling population is another headwind: corn starch is a key ingredient in baby formula.

    Paper Pulp 

    Shanghai pulp futures went into free-fall in February after a sudden recovery in production at paper mills after the Lunar New Year holiday was augmented by resurgent imports. Domestic demand, which was also supposed to rise after China’s reopening, couldn’t keep up.

    As with many commodities, China is the biggest producer and consumer of pulp, used for packaging, publishing and household goods. But the market is so vast that a lot of pulp and paper also needs to be sourced from abroad.

    Meanwhile, China’s macro data has failed to show the reopening narrative coming to life. 

    The faltering recovery led to China’s central bank announcing an unexpected cut in mid-May to the amount banks set aside for deposits by 25 basis points, vowing to keep ample liquidity in the interbank system and better fund the real economy.

    So the question remains: What’s next for the global economy if China’s highly anticipated economic rebound doesn’t materialize?

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 20:25

  • Taliban Deploys Heavy Reinforcements To Iran Border After Clashes
    Taliban Deploys Heavy Reinforcements To Iran Border After Clashes

    Via The Canary,

    Videos circulating social media on Wednesday show Taliban forces heavily reinforcing the Afghan border with Iran, after significant escalation regarding a water dispute between the two countries, which resulted in heavy border clashes between the two sides over the weekend.

    The clashes broke out on Saturday between Taliban troops and Iranian border guards, resulting in the death of two Iranian border guards and a Taliban militant, despite unconfirmed reports of further Taliban casualties.

    The outbreak of fighting came a week after Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi warned the Taliban to respect Iran’s rights to water from the Helmand River shared between the two countries, under the 1973 Afghan-Iranian Helmand River Treaty. Iran has long accused Afghanistan of restricting the flow of its water to Iran and causing droughts or dry spells.

    Via AFP

    Each side claimed that the other had initiated the clashes. On May 29, Iran’s Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi said that calm had prevailed on the border but that Tehran would respond with force if the Taliban resumed provocation.

    The Taliban defense minister said on the day that the fighting broke out that the Afghan government views dialogue and negotiation as the best way to resolve issues. Other Afghan officials echoed the defense minister’s words and called for the prevention of escalation.

    Other officials and Afghan figures were seen in videos on social media making inflammatory statements. The most notable of these figures is Taliban leader Abdul Hamid Khorosani, who was seen in a video on Twitter May 28 threatening that “if the [religious authorities] allow us, we will seize Tehran.”

    “Do not test our strength. You are behind the scenes with the Westerners,” Khorosani added, addressing the Islamic Republic. Reports suggest that Khorosani had been dismissed earlier this month over differences with Taliban leadership.

    The Iranian Interior Ministry claimed on Wednesday, following the release of the footage on the Afghan-Iranian border, that those who made statements against Iran were “low-ranking” members of the Taliban who have since been “dismissed” by the organization.

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

    Iranian media outlets have also claimed that border-crossings between the two countries are now open, despite having been closed following the outbreak of clashes. “Clashes happened based on a mistake made by the Afghan border guards. We have had several incidents like this so far. We advise Afghan authorities to justify the actions of their border guards,” the Iranian Interior Ministry added.

    Despite videos showing reinforcements on the border, Iranian media reports suggested that some “elements are trying to provoke the parties involved with rumors and fake news.”

    One Iranian report said that there is complete calm on the border. However, conflicting reports continue to emerge, with some suggesting that the reinforcements are ongoing.

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

    In December 2021, brief clashes broke out on the Afghan-Iranian border between Iran’s border guards and Taliban fighters. In June of the following year, an Iranian border guard was killed by the Taliban. Iran urged the Afghan government at the time to “punish the perpetrators” and take action to prevent a repeat of such occurrences.

    Footage from the weekend border clashes…

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

    Following Washington’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, the US army left behind $7.12 billion in military equipment in the country, which immediately fell into the hands of the Taliban.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 20:05

  • Carbon Footprint Of Lab-Grown Beef "Orders Of Magnitude" Worse Than Traditionally Raised: Study
    Carbon Footprint Of Lab-Grown Beef “Orders Of Magnitude” Worse Than Traditionally Raised: Study

    A new study from the University of California, Davis, has found that lab-grown, or “cultivated” meat’s environmental impact is likely to be “orders of magnitude” higher than retail beef based on current and near-term production methods.

    UC Davis researchers find cultivated meat is likely worse for the climate than retail beef under current production methods. (Credit/ Mosa Meat CC-BY- 4)

    The preprint study, which has yet to undergo peer review, concludes that the energy needed and greenhouse gasses emitted during all stages of production of lab-grown meat is far greater than traditionally raised beef.

    Researchers conducted a life-cycle assessment of the energy needed and greenhouse gases emitted in all stages of production and compared that with beef. One of the current challenges with lab-grown meat is the use of highly refined or purified growth media, the ingredients needed to help animal cells multiply. Currently, this method is similar to the biotechnology used to make pharmaceuticals. This sets up a critical question for cultured meat production: Is it a pharmaceutical product or a food product? –UC Davis

    “If companies are having to purify growth media to pharmaceutical levels, it uses more resources, which then increases global warming potential,” according to lead author and doctoral graduate Derrick Risner, of the US Davis Department of Food Science and Technology. “If this product continues to be produced using the “pharma” approach, it’s going to be worse for the environment and more expensive than conventional beef production.”

    The scientists considered the ‘global warming potential’ to be the carbon dioxide equivalents emitted for each kilogram of meat produced – and found that the global warming potential of lab-based meat using these purified media is up to 25 times greater than the average for retail beef.

    More from UC Davis on the eventual goals of lab-grown (cultured) meat;

    One of the goals of the industry is to eventually create lab-grown meat using primarily food-grade ingredients or cultures without the use of expensive and energy-intensive pharmaceutical grade ingredients and processes.

    Under that scenario, researchers found cultured meat is much more environmentally competitive, but with a wide range. Cultured meat’s global warming potential could be between 80% lower to 26% above that of conventional beef production, they calculate. While these results are more promising, the leap from “pharma to food” still represents a significant technical challenge for system scale-up.

    “Our findings suggest that cultured meat is not inherently better for the environment than conventional beef. It’s not a panacea,” said corresponding author Edward Spang, an associate professor in the Department of Food Science and Technology. “It’s possible we could reduce its environmental impact in the future, but it will require significant technical advancement to simultaneously increase the performance and decrease the cost of the cell culture media.”

    Even the most efficient beef production systems reviewed in the study outperform cultured meat across all scenarios (both food and pharma), suggesting that investments to advance more climate-friendly beef production may yield greater reductions in emissions more quickly than investments in cultured meat.

    Developing the technology that would allow the leap from “pharma to food” is among the goals of the UC Davis Cultivated Meat Consortium, a cross-disciplinary group of scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs and educators researching cultivated meat. Other goals are to establish and evaluate cell lines that could be used to grow meat and find ways to create more structure in cultured meat.

    Risner said even if lab-based meat doesn’t result in a more climate-friendly burger, there is still valuable science to be learned from the endeavor.

    “It may not lead to environmentally friendly commodity meat, but it could lead to less expensive pharmaceuticals, for example,” said Risner. “My concern would just be scaling this up too quickly and doing something harmful for the environment.”

    Other authors include Yoonbin Kim and Justin Siegel of UC Davis and Cuong Nguyen of the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

    The research was funded by the UC Davis Innovation Institute for Food and Health and the National Science Foundation Growing Convergence Research grant.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 19:45

  • Chick-fil-A Faces Growing Backlash Over 'Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion' Efforts
    Chick-fil-A Faces Growing Backlash Over ‘Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion’ Efforts

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

    Some conservatives have suggested a boycott of Chick-fil-A after the fast-food chain was discovered to have a vice president of “diversity, equity, [and] inclusion,” or DEI.

    A view of Chick-fil-A on Austell Road as customers pull around for their drive-thru orders on March 18, 2020 in Austell, Georgia. (Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

    In a previously issued Chick-fil-A news release, the company said that Erick McReynolds serves as its vice president of DEI, saying: “Chick-fil-A restaurants have long been recognized as a place where people know they will be treated well. Modeling care for others starts in the restaurant, and we are committed to ensuring mutual respect, understanding, and dignity everywhere we do business.”

    DEI is a set of principles that large corporations, government agencies, and schools have increasingly incorporated into their work environments, often mandating employees receive such training. However, these principles are rooted in Marxism, according to prominent critics including Christopher Rufo and James Lindsay, that are essentially vehicles for “left-wing racialist ideology and partisan political activism.”

    “They are designed to replace the system of academic merit with a system of race-based preferences and discrimination—which, in many cases, explicitly violates federal civil rights law,” wrote Rufo for his Substack page earlier this year.

    The Chick-fil-A announcement was highlighted this week by several prominent conservative accounts. According to McReynolds’s LinkedIn page, he was hired as Chick-fil-A’s vice president for “Diversity, Equity [and] Inclusion” in late 2021.

    “We have a problem,” wrote Joey Mannarino, a conservative host in highlighting Chick-fil-A’s prior announcement, on Twitter Tuesday morning. “Chick-Fil-A just hired a VP of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. This is bad. Very bad. I don’t want to have to boycott. Are we going to have to boycott?”

    He also wrote: “The Left is going crazy again over the Chick-fil-A boycott that conservatives are considering. They’re mad because we’ve FINALLY gotten effective at boycotts. Any company that is pushing the trans stuff on our kids or the DEI stuff, we are going to pick the worst offenders.”

    “So Chick-fil-A has a diversity, equity and inclusion division,” added columnist Todd Starnes on Tuesday. “Well, that explains the fried cauliflower sandwiches and kale salad.”

    By Tuesday afternoon, Lindsay wrote on Twitter that he agreed with the boycott calls and made demands. “We must demand that Chick-fil-A fire their entire ESG and Sustainability staff and partners (including DEI), referring to the left-wing environmental, social, and governance framework.

    “Ideally we get them to confess how they got caught up in the racket, and then we return support,” he added. “Conservatives might actually be able to pull this one off.”

    The chicken-based fast-food chain has been generally well respected among conservatives due to the company’s religious values and its prior support for religious groups. In the McReynolds DEI announcement, Chick-fil-A makes reference to its corporate purpose, which is “to glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us” and “to have a positive influence on all who come into contact with Chick-fil-A.”

    The Epoch Times has contacted Chick-fil-A for comment.

    Backlash Growing

    In recent weeks, a number of companies have faced backlash for embracing what critics say are left-wing values or a pro-LGBT agenda. Since early April, Bud Light has seen a significant backlash after it produced a beer can with transgender activist and influencer Dylan Mulvaney’s face and as Mulvaney suggested a partnership with the brand.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 19:25

  • "See You In The Hague!": Lindsey Graham Snarks Back After Russia Issues Arrest Warrant
    “See You In The Hague!”: Lindsey Graham Snarks Back After Russia Issues Arrest Warrant

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has hit back after Russia issued a warrant for his arrest – calling it a “badge of honor.”

    “Here’s an offer to my Russian ‘friends’ who want to arrest and try me for calling out the Putin regime as being war criminals: “I will submit to [the] jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court if you do,” Graham said in a May 29 press release.

    “Come and make your best case. See you in The Hague!” he continued, adding “To know that my commitment to Ukraine has drawn the ire of Putin’s regime brings me immense joy.”

    “I will continue to stand with and for Ukraine’s freedom until every Russian soldier is expelled from Ukrainian territory.”

    Graham, a massive proponent of the Ukraine war, stated in a video of his meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that “the Russians are dying,” adding that the US military aid provided to Ukraine was “the best money we’ve ever spent.“

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

    While Graham appeared to have made the comments at separate points in the conversation, the brief video produced by Ukraine’s presidential office juxtaposed them, sparking outrage in Russia.

    Dmitry Peskov, the spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin, said on Sunday that it was hard to imagine a greater shame for the United States than having individuals like Graham as senators. –Epoch Times

    In February, Graham said that the US shouldn’t be worried about provoking Russia by helping Ukraine.

    “The British are training Ukrainian pilots. I believe a decision will be imminent here when we get back to Washington that the administration will start training Ukrainian pilots on the F-16. They need the weapons system,” he told ABC‘s “This Week” on Feb. 19.

    Graham has urged his fellow politicians to declare Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, and has advocated for the US to begin training Ukrainian pilots on F-16s. 

    “They need the weapons system,” said Graham in the above interview, which echoed VP Kamala Harris’ claim that Russia was guilt of “crimes against humanity.”

    “So, we need to do two things quickly,” said Graham. “Make Russia a state sponsor of terrorism under U.S. law, which would make it harder for China to give weapons to Russia, and we need to start training Ukrainian pilots on the F-16 now.”

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 19:05

  • University Of Colorado Declares Misgendering An "Act Of Violence"
    University Of Colorado Declares Misgendering An “Act Of Violence”

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    The University of Colorado Boulder (Boulder) is under fire this week for a statement on the “Pride Office” website stating that misgendering people can be considered an “act of violence.”

    The guide on pronouns is reportedly the work of students associated with the office and states that “choosing to ignore or disrespect someone’s pronouns is not only an act of oppression but can also be considered an act of violence.”

    It is a familiar position for many in higher education.

    Opposing viewpoints are now routinely declared to be violence. That allows professors and students to rationalize their own act of violence or censorship.

    The most vivid example was recently seen at Hunter College, which is part of the CUNY system. Professor Shellyne Rodríguez recently was fired after holding a machete to the neck of a New York Post reporter and threatened to “chop you up.” However, Hunter College decided not to fire her over a prior incident in which she trashed a pro-life table run by students.

    Rodríguez spotted students with pro-life material at the college. She was captured on a videotape telling the students that “you’re not educating s–t […] This is f–king propaganda. What are you going to do, like, anti-trans next? This is bulls–t. This is violent. You’re triggering my students.” Even after a remarkably polite student said that he was “sorry,” Rodríguez would have nothing of it. After all, espousing pro-life views is now “violence.” Rodríguez rejected the apology and declared “No you’re not — because you can’t even have a f–king baby. So you don’t even know what that is. Get this s–t the f–k out of here.”

    Just a week earlier, a professor stopped another “violent” display of pro-life views in New York. Professor Renee Overdyke of the State University of New York at Albany shut down a pro-life display and then resisted arrest.

    At the University of California at Santa Barbara, feminist studies associate professor Mireille Miller Young criminally assaulted pro-life advocates on campus, and later pleaded guilty to the crime. She was defended by faculty and students, including many who said she was “triggered” by a pro-life display and that pro-life advocates were “terrorists” who did not deserve free speech.

    It is that easy. You simply declare opposing views “violent” and then you can justify your own violence as a matter of self-defense.

    The Colorado controversy does not involve acts of violence over misgendering. Moreover, the guide reflects a deep-felt concern that using someone’s pronouns incorrectly, even unintentionally, leads to “dysphoria, exclusion and alienation.” There are also some positive recommendations in dealing with these difficult situations.

    However, this is a university site and there are countervailing free speech costs to characterizing of opposing views on pronouns as violence. As have previously discussed how other countries are prosecuting those who “misgender.” Schools in the United States have promised disciplinary action against any misgendering despite some court cases ruling for faculty with opposing views on pronouns. Even passing out “he/his” candies can result in a university investigation.

    Conservative sites like Campus Reform have reported on the Colorado controversy and sought clarification.

    Universities are often presented with difficult countervailing interests. On one hand, it must maintain a welcoming and tolerant environment. On the other hand, it must protect free speech values, including the right to express unpopular views or values.

    Colorado students have every right to declare misgendering as violence in their eyes, even if many of us disagree. However, the university has an obligation to clearly establish that such views are not the policy or approach of the university itself.  The site states “This information was created by students, for students. The university supports an inclusive environment.” It should state that “while the university supports an inclusive environment, the statements on this site are not official statements or policies of the university.” Otherwise, the university should address the free speech implications of declaring misgendering as a violent act.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 18:45

  • Major Grocery Chain Struggles To Survive Amid Wave Of Thefts
    Major Grocery Chain Struggles To Survive Amid Wave Of Thefts

    A grocery chain which operates primary on the East Coast says it’s taking measures to stay in business amid rampant retail theft and crime across the US.

    Giant Food, which operates over 160 locations across DC, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, has begun restricting entry and exit points, beefing up store security (some armed), displaying fewer high-dollar items on shelves, and reducing the number of self-checkout items, company CEO Ira Kress told the Washington Post.

    Ira Kress, president of Giant Food, says his company has taken some actions in an attempt to deter shoplifting. (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post)

    According to Kress, retail theft has increased “tenfold in the last five years,” which is not “an understatement,” while violence has “increased exponentially.”

    “The last thing I want to do is close stores,” Kress continued. “But I’ve got to be able to run them safely and profitably.”

    According to Kress, the nature of shoplifting has changed such that more and more retailers are simply allowing it – like Lulu Lemon, which recently fired two employees for calling the police on repeat looters.

    “We used to chase shoplifters,” said Kress. “And you’d get the product back, and nobody would ever fight you.”

    “I didn’t worry about somebody pulling a knife or gun on me [40] years ago,” he said.

    The trend, which industry experts say is in its beginning stages, could foreshadow a further emptying of downtowns already wounded by the pandemic. Although retail vacancy rates for dense urban centers have been declining over the past decade, figures from real estate data firm CoStar show the numbers inching up in some cities. -WaPo

    “For the big box and the grocery [stores], which are trying to optimize a single-digit margin, it is very difficult to operate, and you will see more and more exits happening,” said Lakshman Lakshmanan, senior director in Alvarez & Marsal’s consumer and retail group. “We’re seeing the highest level of organized retail crime and theft ever.“

    According to Kres, thieves have moved from swiping cigarettes to other goods.

    “It’s continued to escalate,” he said. “So now it’s Tide and Dove and razor blades and Olay, or roasts or shrimp or crab legs.“

    According to the retail federation, incidents of organized retail crime increased in 2021 by an average of 26.5% – with store owners blaming organized retail crime for around half of the $94.5 billion lost that year due to retail shrink (stolen merchandise).

    Other retailers taking similar measures

    According to the report, REI – which will close its Portland, OR location next year after nearly two decades, spent over $800,000 in 2022 on additional security at that location alone. This included new windows with security glass, around-the-clock patrols, better outdoor lighting and a new security camera system, per the Post.

    While Foods has gone so far as to place fliers on shelves instructing customers to find an employee to retrieve alcohol and expensive supplements and other high-value merchandise from the back.

    A shopping cart in a supermarket as inflation affected consumer prices in Manhattan, New York, on June 10, 2022. (Andrew Kelly/Reuters)

    “I was kind of surprised at the amount of effort that went into trying to mitigate the situation,” said Chris Torossian, former manager in the bakery department at the company’s San Francisco location.

    Theft occurred “pretty much daily,” Torossian added, and he frequently heard from co-workers who felt unsafe. Team members were instructed not to chase or accuse shoplifters. In one instance, someone threw a cup of hot coffee on an employee’s face after they confronted the individual for stealing the drink, Torossian said. He also heard of instances where thieves brandished knives.

    In April, the company said it was closing the location “for the time being” to “ensure the safety of our Team Members.” -WaPo

    “We have the police come to our stores … they’ll take the information, they’ll record it,” said Torossian. “But there’s really nothing being done with that, because they had two homicides that were a bank robbery and two shootings. So it’s like, where are they going to focus their time and attention?”

    In May, Target CEO Brian Cornell told investors and analysts; “Beyond macroeconomic challenges, we continue to contend with significant headwinds caused by inventory shrink, building on a worsening trend that emerged last year. While shrink can be driven by multiple factors, theft and organized retail crime are increasingly urgent issues, impacting the team, and our guests and other retailers.”

    “The problem affects all of us, limiting product availability, creating a less convenient shopping experience, and put[s] our team and guests in harm’s way. The unfortunate fact is, violent incidents are increasing at our stores and across the entire retail industry. And when products are stolen, simply put, they’re no longer available for guests who depend on them. And left unchecked, theft, and organized retail crime to grade the communities we call home,” he continued.

    Maybe stop voting for those soft-on-crime Soros DAs?

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 18:25

  • How Flipping Colorado Blue Has Become Democrats' Blueprint For The Rest Of America
    How Flipping Colorado Blue Has Become Democrats’ Blueprint For The Rest Of America

    Authored by Katie Spence via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Colorado’s legislative session is 120 consecutive days long and during the 2023 session lawmakers introduced 617 bills. Of those, 218 passed and have been signed into law by Democratic Gov. Jared Polis. More are waiting to be signed.

    Members of the Communist Party USA and other anti-fascist groups burn an American flag on the steps of the Colorado State Capitol in Denver, Colo., on Jan. 20, 2021. (Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images)

    Democrats have a historic majority in the Colorado House, a supermajority in the Senate, and control the governorship. As such, all bills passed with Democrat support—and more often than not, over Republican’s vehement objections. It’s a marked change from 2002 when the GOP dominated politics in Colorado.

    Colorado Republican Rep. Stephanie Luck is one of a handful of Colorado Representatives fighting back and trying to expose what she describes as Democrats’ Marxist agenda, where individual rights don’t matter, and the government controls every aspect of life.

    “When I first got elected and sworn into office in 2021, Governor Polis gave his State-of-the-State Address shortly thereafter and stated that it was his goal and the goal of his Democratic majority to fundamentally transform Colorado,” Luck told The Epoch Times.

    “So, the question becomes, what was the initial foundation they want to transform? And I would point us to the mission statement of the United States, which is the Declaration of Independence.

    “And basically, we could go word by word in that most famous phrase starting with ‘We hold these truths.’ We can start with the word ‘We’ and demonstrate how they want not a ‘We,’ not a unified whole, not one nation, but different tribes, different groupings, different identities, and then just go every single word and recognize that they really are advancing the opposite of that mission statement.

    “And that is what Governor Polis and the Democrats have been doing in Colorado.”

    “The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776,” circa 1792, by John Trumbull. (Public Domain)

    The Blueprint

    Luck refers to the book, “The Blueprint: How the Democrats Won Colorado (and Why Republicans Everywhere Should Care),” by Adam Schrager and Rob Witwer.

    It details how, in the summer of 2004, progressive organizations and a group of multimillionaires—including Colorado’s now governor Polis—devised a plan to elect a Democratic majority. The group called themselves the Roundtable.

    “Everyone had a common goal and it wasn’t to win friends. It was to win elections. That was the measure by which they would succeed or fail,” writes Schrager. He adds that the group’s main avenues to flip Colorado blue were extensive organization, a deep understanding of data, and, arguably the most impactful, taking advantage of campaign finance reform laws.

    Dr. Joshua Dunn, a professor of political science at the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs, agrees.

    “There was a well-orchestrated democratic plan to take control of the state. … [The Roundtable] was smart,” Dunn told The Epoch Times. “They were smarter than the Republicans. I think the Republicans will tell you that they were outsmarted by them. I don’t think there’s any doubt about it.

    “They were well organized, disciplined, and they imposed discipline on people who wanted their support. They had requirements for people—particularly in local races if you wanted to get support from them—you had to go and knock on a certain number of doors.”

    In addition to organization and discipline, Schrager notes that the group understood that swaying state politics could have an outsized impact on politics at the federal level.

    “In hindsight, it’s remarkable how quickly members of the Roundtable adapted to the new campaign finance reality. While national political groups were beginning to use 527s [527 concerns a section of the Internal Revenue Code governing a type of tax-exempt political organization] … in 2004 it was unusual for state-based organizations to understand these exotic organizations and complex rules that governed them—much less master them to the point that they could be used effectively.”

    By taking advantage of 527s, the Roundtable raised $3.6 million. In contrast, Republicans raised $845,000. With a significant war chest for state-level elections established, the group targeted Republican politicians. And they did so through targeted ads, leaflets, boots on the ground, automated calls, and a unified message that a Democratic majority was better for Colorado.

    Schrager quotes Polis saying in The Blueprint: “We really didn’t truly know how big this would become. Clearly, when we started, we had no idea. I didn’t know this would have great historical significance, nor did anybody there that we would transform Colorado.”

    But transform the Colorado political landscape they did.

    Colorado Gov. Jared Polis speaks in Highlands Ranch, Colo., on May 8, 2019. (Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images)

    From 1978 to 2002, Republicans controlled both the state House and state Senate. But in 2006, Democrats took control of both chambers.

    Then, the 2010 election was the nail in the coffin, according to Dunn, and it came down to candidate quality, “This was an enormous lost opportunity for the Republican Party, and I think it’s very difficult to overstate the significance of that election or the decline of the Republican Party in Colorado.

    “That was the Tea Party election. By all rights, the Republican Party should have won both the governor’s office and what’s now Senator Michael Bennett’s Senate seat in that election, but they made two catastrophic mistakes. They nominated a Tea Party candidate for governor who was so ill-prepared that Tom Tancredo ran as a third-party candidate.

    “Then on the Senate side with Michael Bennett, again, Republicans should have won that, but they nominated Ken Buck, and he was not prepared for primetime in that race and made several significant mistakes, but he almost won.

    “If the Republicans had another good option, they easily would have won that race. So, there you have two statewide elections that Republicans should have won easily, and it was money that they just left on the table,” Dunn said.

    A ‘Marxist’ Agenda

    Colorado has since shifted to the left.

    “We’ve obviously moved to the left. There’s no doubt because there’s been nothing to put the brakes on for [Democrats],” Dunn said.

    “You saw that with this past legislative session. … There were a lot of really controversial pieces of legislation. … Even the stuff that didn’t make it through, the fact that it was being considered kind of tells you where they’re trying to go.”

    “I wouldn’t be surprised if Polis wouldn’t have minded Republicans controlling one house of the state legislature just to limit the bills that made it to him where he had to make a difficult choice. Either support his own party, which would require him to sign some legislation that might undermine a general election campaign for president, or veto and anger his own caucus,” said Dunn.

    Luck sees the Democrats as pushing a Marxist agenda.

    “Let’s just take the right to contract and the right to property,” she said. “These are alienable rights [meaning transferable] that our founders understood were necessary to a free people. So, the right to property is a derivative of our self.

    “And unfortunately, many of my colleagues don’t understand that property is inherent to oneself. They see property and wealth building almost through a lens of evil. Those who have are somehow inherently bad because they ‘have.’

    “So, what we have seen this last session is a pitting of employees against employers, tenants against landlords, any category of people that my colleagues think at some point have been oppressed or have been wronged, are now—through law—given extra rights and afforded extra protections that I believe are largely unjust.”

    In the 2023 legislative session, Democrats passed Senate Bill 23-184, “Protections For Residential Tenants,” that, among other provisions, prohibits landlords from considering “certain information relating to a prospective tenant’s income or rental history.” That “information” includes income and credit scores. The new law also puts a cap on how much income a landlord can require to qualify a prospective tenant.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 05/31/2023 – 18:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest

May 31

Today’s News 31st May 2023

  • China Critics Ramp Up Push To Limit Lobbying
    China Critics Ramp Up Push To Limit Lobbying

    Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClear Wire,

    After Russia invaded Ukraine early last year, the Biden administration decided to hit Moscow where it hurts the most — in the pocketbook.

    The U.S. Treasury imposed sweeping sanctions on nearly 80% of all banking assets in Russia, a move designed to have a “deep and long-lasting effect on the Russian economy and financial system.”

    Though the sanctions haven’t prevented Russian President Vladimir Putin from financing the war, they have tightened the screws on Russia’s financial transactions and disrupted supply chains throughout the global economy, reverberating even on Washington’s K Street with its lucrative foreign lobbying contracts.

    Former Sen. David Vitter, a Louisiana Republican, and his team at Mercury Public Affairs, a big D.C. lobbying firm, were forced to terminate a contract with Russian bank Sovcombank to comply with the new U.S. sanctions. Vitter had begun working for Sovcombank just the month before, and the bank had agreed to pay Mercury $90,000 a month for its services, according to required Foreign Agent Registration Act, or FARA, disclosures filed with the Justice Department.

    In his role as co-chairman of Mercury, Vitter since 2018 has maintained another far more lucrative FARA contract with Hikvision, the U.S.-sanctioned Chinese surveillance tech firm. Over the last several years, the United States has found Hikvision responsible for assisting the Chinese government’s genocide against the Uyghur Muslims through the Chinese Communist Party’s broad use of its cameras to track and surveil Uyghur populations and monitor an estimated 1 million Uyghurs forced into detention camps.

    The United States also has deemed Hikvision a national security risk and imposed wide-ranging restrictions on using, buying and selling Hikvision video surveillance products in the U.S. Yet Hikvision and other Chinese companies under U.S. sanctions can still lawfully hire D.C. lobbyists and lawyers – at least for now, though there’s a growing movement to impose new restrictions on the practice.

    Vitter and former Rep. Toby Moffett, a Democrat who represented Connecticut in the House for eight years from the mid-1970s to the early 1980s, both lobby their former Capitol Hill colleagues on behalf of Hikvision. The Chinese-controlled camera and surveillance company has paid Mercury a total of $6.35 million for the service since 2018, according to an analysis of required Justice Department filings by IPVM, a U.S. security and surveillance research group.

    Mercury is just one of five lobbying firms representing Hikvision’s interests in Washington. Since 2018, Hikvision has spent a combined $25.23 million on D.C. lobbying, more than double that of Huawei, China’s biggest telecommunications firm, in the same period, IPVM found. Huawei faces nearly identical U.S. sanctions as Hikvision.

    “These former members and top staffers are all being highly paid — it’s a second career for them,” said Donald Maye, head of operations for IPVM. 

    “It’s just confounding to me that people who speak so highly of their public service are helping a Chinese company navigate sanctions designed to limit exposure of this spying technology on the American people, and the U.S. government is allowing it,” he added.

    Vitter and Moffett are hardly alone. China has vastly expanded its U.S. lobbying efforts in recent years, hiring bipartisan teams of former members of Congress and key Capitol Hill and administrative staff even as Washington has increasingly grown far more critical of China, its stepped-up military power, and growing financial influence around the world.

    Former members of Congress who have lobbied for Chinese businesses include Senate Republican leader Trent Lott, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Joe Crowley, and Rep. Jeff Denham, a California Republican and former U.S. Air Force veteran, to name just a few.

    Since 2016, China has spent nearly $334 million on its lobbying efforts and propaganda outlets in the United States, more than any other nation and twice as much as Russia, according to an opensecrets.org analysis of lobbying registration and disclosure reports.

    Those figures, however, don’t tell the whole story. Some Chinese businesses, such as TikTok, have U.S. operations and are only required to file lobbying disclosure forms with the U.S. Senate, not the more stringent FARA disclosure required by Justice Department.

    Human rights advocates and national security experts urging a tougher line on China are outraged by the revolving door of former members willing to cash in on their public service to help a U.S. adversary. During the height of the Cold War, they argue, no reputable Washington law or lobbying firm would have taken on a Soviet client.

    “It’s unconscionable that any government official would shop their connections and expertise to a foreign adversary, let alone the Chinese Communist Party,” Rep. Mike Gallagher, who chairs the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, told RealClearPolitics in an emailed statement. “If you’ve had the privilege of serving the American people at the highest levels of government, you should not be able to sell out the country when you retire.”

    Gallagher, a Wisconsin Republican, and Rep. Jared Golden, a Maine Democrat, plan to re-introduce a bill they co-authored in 2021 that would prevent members of Congress and high-ranking government officials from lobbying on behalf of U.S. adversaries.

    In 2021, the measure died after being referred to a House Judiciary subcommittee. Gallagher and other proponents of stricter foreign lobbying laws believe there is far greater momentum for it now with growing concern over Beijing’s greater military power and spying threats, as well as increased worldwide recognition of China’s human rights abuses.

    Gallagher released his first set of policy recommendations earlier this week following the select committee’s three hearings laying out the threat posed by China and detailing the ongoing abuses against Uyghur Muslims. One report calls on Congress to pass additional sanctions to hold China accountable for its crimes against the minority group. Another report stresses the need to enhance U.S. military capabilities to help deter a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

    Other critics of China lobbying want to ban the practice altogether. For the first time, the U.S. Commission on Religious Freedom, a bipartisan federal agency that monitors religious freedom violations around the world, officially called for a federal prohibition of all lobbying groups and law firms representing the Chinese government and Chinese entities.

    The commissioners in early May called on Congress to reintroduce the Stop Helping Adversaries Manipulate Everything, or SHAME Act. The bill, which would prohibit any U.S. individual from accepting compensation for serving as an agent of or a lobbyist for a foreign adversary, is sponsored by GOP Reps. Joe Wilson, Jim Banks, Chris Smith, and Democrats Elissa Slotkin and Steve Cohen.

    “Untold profits are being raked in by lobbyists willing to whitewash the record and aims of the Chinese Community Party and government,” all nine USCIRF commissioners wrote in a statement in its annual report. “It’s time to make this activity illegal.”

    “As the commission’s report documents, the Chinese government is an equal opportunity persecutor of people of faith — Christians, Tibetan Buddhists, Uyghur Muslims, and Falun Gong practitioners,” the commissioners added.

    Frank Wolf, a USCIRF commissioner and a longtime human rights champion who served 3½ decades in Congress, argues that nothing but a total ban will prevent the Chinese influence operation funds from seeping into Washington.

    “If you believe in the Reagan Doctrine, no one should represent China in the U.S. today,” he said in an interview. Placing piecemeal restrictions on lobbying for China won’t be effective, Wolf argued, because the big firms with foreign clients, such as Squire Patton Boggs and Mercury Public Affairs, will still hold fundraisers for members of Congress and get the access they need even if they abide by some new restrictions.

    In 1998, then-Rep. Wolf authored the International Religious Freedom Act, which made faith-based liberty a greater priority in U.S. foreign policy. While serving in Congress, Vitter also was known for standing up to China on human rights. In 2015, the Louisiana Republican co-sponsored an amendment requiring the Obama administration to consider countries’ religious freedom when negotiating trade agreements.

    Those bills didn’t prevent Congress from continuing permanent normal trade relations status for China, as it has done since 2000 after a years-long push by free traders and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Advocates for granting China easy access to U.S. markets and vice versa argued that it would help democratize China as its citizens gained more access to U.S. goods and technology.

    “They kept saying this will change China, and they will become just like us, but that has not worked out,” Wolf recalled. The Virginia Republican cited the genocide against the Uyghurs, a crackdown in Hong Kong, and a series of repressive CCP campaigns against Christians and Catholic churches and their leaders, Tibetans, Falun Gong practitioners, and dissidents of any kind.

    So far, at least, lawmakers have shown little shame over their lucrative contracts with Chinese entities, and the harsher Washington rhetoric and actions against Beijing have only increased the flow of Chinese money to the nation’s capital.

    Over the past two years, tensions have repeatedly flared between Washington and Beijing over China’s lack of transparency about the COVID pandemic’s origins, its new ties to Russia after the Ukraine invasion, its aggression against Taiwan, and conflict over a visit to the U.S. by Taiwan’s president. In February, Secretary of State Antony Blinken canceled a planned trip after a Chinese surveillance balloon traversed the United States.

    As the G-7 summit in Japan came to a close last week, President Biden said he predicted a coming “thaw” with China even though the meeting between top U.S. allies took several steps to tackle Beijing’s economic intimidation tactics. Afterward, China retaliated by announcing that it had warned its telecommunications companies and state-owned banks against purchasing products from Micron Technology, a U.S. semiconductor manufacturer that China said poses national security risks, a charge the Biden administration vehemently disputes.  

    Denham and Crowley, who was the No. 4 House Democrat before losing a 2018 primary election challenge from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are lobbying on behalf of TikTok as lawmakers weigh banning the popular social media platform.

    Other former lawmakers and prominent U.S. dignitaries, including former Sen. Max Baucus, who served as Obama’s ambassador to China, and former Speaker John Boehner, aren’t required to register as lobbyists but still can accept lucrative contracts advising Chinese entities in Washington.

    Even before Obama tapped him to be the chief U.S. diplomat in Beijing, Baucus had advised the U.S.-China Policy Foundation, which was funded by U.S. branches of Chinese banks and Huawei.

    The rules governing disclosure are loose, with obvious loopholes. For instance, individuals advising a company that is technically not considered subsidized or controlled by a foreign government, such as TikTok, don’t have to register as lobbyists if their lobbying activities constitute less than 20% of their services for that client over a three-month period. The law allows the lobbyists themselves to determine the 20% filing threshold.

    In addition to TikTok, Hikvision has hired several former members of Congress and top U.S. officials to help it fight increasingly severe U.S. sanctions. 

    In 2018, Congress banned the use of Hikvision and Dahua (another Chinese video-surveillance company) products throughout the U.S. government and for U.S.-funded contracts. The following year, the two companies were two of 28 entities added to a sanctioned blacklist of firms implicated in human rights violations and abuses in implementing China’s campaign of repression against the Uyghurs, Kazakhs and other Muslim minority groups in China’s Xinjiang region.

    The Federal Communications Commission has layered on more sanctions over the last two years, while U.S. intelligence agencies have warned of Hikvision’s attempts to circumvent the ban on sales to the U.S. government by disguising it as the source of the products.

    In early March, Mike McCaul and Gregory Meeks, the top Republican and Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, respectively, called on the Biden administration to impose harsher human rights sanctions on Hikvision.

    A warning about Hikvision’s deceptive U.S. sales practices, which cited a Defense Intelligence Agency finding, also was part of last month’s massive trove of classified documents leaked by 21-year-old National Guardsman Jack Teixeira.

    In addition to Vitter and Moffett, Mercury hired Peter Kucik, a former senior sanctions policy adviser at the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, which administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions, and added him to the Hikvision account. Kucik’s 2021 hiring was announced just days after the Wall Street Journal reported on new research on Hikvision’s ties to the Chinese military. More recently, Hikvision added Pierre-Richard Prosper, an attorney for ArentFox Schiff, a D.C. law and lobbying firm, to its U.S. advocacy and legal team, although he has not registered as a lobbyist for Hikvision and may not have to according to complicated disclosure rules. Prosper served as the U.S. State Department’s ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues in the mid-2000s and previously as a war crimes prosecutor at the United Nations in the late 1990s.

    At least one former lawmaker-turned-Hikvision lobbyist cut ties to the company after a public intra-party backlash. Sen. Barbara Boxer signed on with Mercury and registered as a foreign agent for Hikvision in early 2021 but quickly de-registered after Biden’s Inauguration Committee returned her donation of $500, citing her work for the massive Chinese tech company.

    Vitter and Moffett, however, have continued their lobbying roles, with Vitter proclaiming himself as a “proud member of the Hikvision team” and disparaging Sen. Marco Rubio as “anti-China” in an audio recording of a Hikvision USA employee conference call, obtained by IPVM in 2019. 

    Vitter’s political donations also have continued to flow to several GOP members, including now-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who has made investigating China a top priority of his House leadership this year. Vitter sent a $1,500 check to McCarthy’s re-election committee in 2022 and another $2,500 in 2020.

    After RCP asked about the Vitter donations, a McCarthy campaign spokesman said it plans to donate the funds to charity at the end of the quarter, a sign of the growing unease about foreign influence-peddling especially by sanctioned Chinese companies.

    After becoming speaker earlier this year, McCarthy created several select committees to investigate the threat China poses to the U.S. and called the CCP “the greatest geopolitical threat of our lifetime.”

    “We need a whole-of-government approach that will build on the efforts of the Republican-led China Task Force and ensure America is prepared to tackle the economic and security challenges posed by the CCP,” he said, previewing his plans in late December.

    Aside from national security concerns, Wolf and others also say China’s egregious human rights abuses should be enough to stop the revolving door from Capitol Hill to K Street. 

    Wolf points to new well-documented evidence of CCP-directed organ harvesting from detained Uyghurs and other prisoners of conscience while they remained alive or before they were declared brain-dead, a severe violation of international ethical norms.

    Louisa Greve, the director of global advocacy for the Uyghur Human Rights Project, said every U.S. law and lobbying firm faces a clear choice on whether to help support companies involved or directly implicated in egregious human rights violations.

    “It is un-American and unconscionable for anyone — and certainly public servants who in their time promised their voters they would serve the public good and who retain the title of honorable after they serve — to immediately go and help a genocidal regime,” she said in an interview.

    In the case of Russia, it took the Ukraine invasion to force U.S. lobbyists to end their lucrative contracts and comply with the sweeping new laws.

    Does Greve think only an invasion of Taiwan will force similar U.S. prohibitions on China lobbying?

    “The red line should be genocide,” she said, “and a recognition of our strategic interest to preserve the basic framework of freedom for ourselves and our allies and anyone else who wants to join a world governed by the rule of law and peaceful trade.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 23:40

  • Visualizing The World's Aging Population From 1950 To 2100
    Visualizing The World’s Aging Population From 1950 To 2100

    As demographics continue to shift in the 21st century, the world’s aging population will continue to be a focal point for many global decision makers.

    Visual Capitalist’s Freny Fernandes notes that most countries around the world have experienced population explosions, or are about to. Combine this with declining birth rates and falling mortality rates, and it’s clear that the global senior population will continue to reach new heights.

    These graphics by Pablo Alvarez use data from the 2022 UN World Population Prospects to visualize this increasing aging population across countries.

    The World’s Aging Population from 1950 to 2100

    In 2022, there were 771 million people aged 65+ years globally, accounting for almost 10% of the world’s population.

    This segment has been growing at an increasing rate, and it’s expected to hit 16% in 2050, and eventually 24% by 2100. Here’s what that’s projected to look like, for every country and territory.

    Country by Population Aged +65 Years 1950 2022 2100
    🇦🇫 Afghanistan 2.85% 2.39% 16.03%
    🇦🇱 Albania 6.04% 16.66% 49.08%
    🇩🇿 Algeria 3.49% 6.39% 28.83%
    🇦🇸 American Samoa 2.38% 7.27% 45.41%
    🇦🇩 Andorra 10.02% 14.98% 37.04%
    🇦🇴 Angola 2.93% 2.6% 12.07%
    🇦🇮 Anguilla 3.69% 10.71% 37.49%
    🇦🇬 Antigua and Barbuda 4.14% 10.63% 35.4%
    🇦🇷 Argentina 4.13% 11.92% 31.79%
    🇦🇲 Armenia 8.17% 13.15% 36.13%
    🇦🇼 Aruba 1.77% 16.15% 36.51%
    🇦🇺 Australia 8.17% 16.9% 31.38%
    🇦🇹 Austria 10.42% 19.81% 33.93%
    🇦🇿 Azerbaijan 6.89% 7.11% 30.5%
    🇧🇸 Bahamas 4.76% 8.89% 29.58%
    🇧🇭 Bahrain 2.88% 3.76% 21.89%
    🇧🇩 Bangladesh 3.9% 6.04% 32.56%
    🇧🇧 Barbados 5.24% 16.28% 33.19%
    🇧🇾 Belarus 8.24% 17.18% 30.45%
    🇧🇪 Belgium 11.03% 19.73% 32.83%
    🇧🇿 Belize 3.57% 5.09% 29.21%
    🇧🇯 Benin 7.85% 3.06% 11.03%
    🇧🇲 Bermuda 5.71% 20.41% 37.73%
    🇧🇹 Bhutan 2.53% 6.25% 33.35%
    🇧🇴 Bolivia 6.11% 4.85% 21.75%
    🇧🇶 Bonaire Sint Eustatius and Saba 14.22% 13.84% 28.94%
    🇧🇦 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3.95% 18.4% 36.4%
    🇧🇼 Botswana 4.32% 3.65% 17.96%
    🇧🇷 Brazil 2.39% 9.88% 33.52%
    🇻🇬 British Virgin Islands 8.63% 9.95% 32.47%
    🇧🇳 Brunei 4.85% 6.17% 30.93%
    🇧🇬 Bulgaria 6.66% 22.38% 37.13%
    🇧🇫 Burkina Faso 2.01% 2.53% 13.07%
    🇧🇮 Burundi 3.22% 2.48% 13.23%
    🇰🇭 Cambodia 2.67% 5.81% 26.43%
    🇨🇲 Cameroon 3.47% 2.67% 11.89%
    🇨🇦 Canada 7.7% 19.03% 31.55%
    🇨🇻 Cape Verde 3.67% 5.55% 32.63%
    🇰🇾 Cayman Islands 6.05% 8.17% 28.75%
    🇨🇫 Central African Republic 5.% 2.51% 11.43%
    🇹🇩 Chad 4.33% 2.01% 9.64%
    🇨🇱 Chile 3.3% 13.03% 36.61%
    🇨🇳 China 5.04% 13.72% 40.93%
    🇨🇴 Colombia 3.22% 9.% 34.49%
    🇰🇲 Comoros 3.8% 4.28% 17.81%
    🇨🇬 Congo 3.36% 2.72% 11.99%
    🇨🇰 Cook Islands 2.94% 11.73% 29.75%
    🇨🇷 Costa Rica 2.97% 10.83% 36.99%
    🇨🇮 Cote d’Ivoire 2.21% 2.4% 10.86%
    🇭🇷 Croatia 7.82% 22.36% 37.03%
    🇨🇺 Cuba 4.36% 15.81% 36.31%
    🇨🇼 Curacao 5.82% 14.95% 30.46%
    🇨🇾 Cyprus 5.95% 14.83% 33.36%
    🇨🇿 Czechia 8.29% 20.64% 26.94%
    🇨🇩 Democratic Republic of Congo 3.77% 2.92% 10.62%
    🇩🇰 Denmark 9.04% 20.49% 30.45%
    🇩🇯 Djibouti 1.99% 4.54% 19.68%
    🇩🇲 Dominica 7.67% 9.53% 34.28%
    🇩🇴 Dominican Republic 2.72% 7.4% 30.47%
    🇪🇨 Ecuador 5.2% 7.83% 31.97%
    🇪🇬 Egypt 2.95% 4.83% 21.77%
    🇸🇻 El Salvador 3.93% 8.22% 36.02%
    🇬🇶 Equatorial Guinea 5.53% 3.12% 15.13%
    🇪🇷 Eritrea 3.2% 4.01% 19.86%
    🇪🇪 Estonia 10.56% 20.58% 34.15%
    🇸🇿 Eswatini 2.68% 4.% 16.26%
    🇪🇹 Ethiopia 3.01% 3.14% 18.6%
    🇫🇴 Faeroe Islands 7.59% 17.92% 26.91%
    🇫🇰 Falkland Islands 8.27% 11.08% 35.86%
    🇫🇯 Fiji 5.99% 5.9% 20.6%
    🇫🇮 Finland 6.63% 23.27% 34.04%
    🇫🇷 France 11.39% 21.66% 34.23%
    🇬🇫 French Guiana 7.96% 5.98% 21.13%
    🇵🇫 French Polynesia 3.% 10.07% 37.85%
    🇬🇦 Gabon 7.21% 3.89% 16.25%
    🇬🇲 Gambia 2.5% 2.43% 16.06%
    🇬🇪 Georgia 9.35% 14.61% 31.19%
    🇩🇪 Germany 9.46% 22.41% 33.72%
    🇬🇭 Ghana 4.62% 3.55% 15.91%
    🇬🇮 Gibraltar 6.94% 20.84% 37.63%
    🇬🇷 Greece 6.8% 22.82% 37.52%
    🇬🇱 Greenland 3.06% 10.02% 29.16%
    🇬🇩 Grenada 5.12% 10.07% 30.54%
    🇬🇵 Guadeloupe 5.51% 20.04% 34.45%
    🇬🇺 Guam 1.11% 11.84% 31.19%
    🇬🇹 Guatemala 2.31% 4.91% 28.05%
    🇬🇬 Guernsey 11.96% 16.64% 35.4%
    🇬🇳 Guinea 5.39% 3.32% 14.%
    🇬🇼 Guinea-Bissau 3.45% 2.82% 14.34%
    🇬🇾 Guyana 3.89% 6.28% 28.94%
    🇭🇹 Haiti 3.64% 4.54% 19.07%
    🇭🇳 Honduras 3.96% 4.27% 26.5%
    🇭🇰 Hong Kong 2.48% 20.47% 41.64%
    🇭🇺 Hungary 7.81% 20.01% 31.85%
    🇮🇸 Iceland 7.52% 15.33% 34.25%
    🇮🇳 India 3.1% 6.9% 29.81%
    🇮🇩 Indonesia 1.74% 6.86% 25.28%
    🇮🇷 Iran 5.22% 7.62% 33.72%
    🇮🇶 Iraq 2.79% 3.41% 18.44%
    🇮🇪 Ireland 10.99% 15.14% 32.48%
    🇮🇲 Isle of Man 13.9% 22.29% 31.8%
    🇮🇱 Israel 4.% 12.04% 25.97%
    🇮🇹 Italy 8.09% 24.05% 38.19%
    🇯🇲 Jamaica 3.83% 7.45% 44.05%
    🇯🇵 Japan 4.89% 29.92% 38.7%
    🇯🇪 Jersey 12.34% 16.22% 30.52%
    🇯🇴 Jordan 5.03% 3.84% 27.3%
    🇰🇿 Kazakhstan 6.47% 8.04% 19.58%
    🇰🇪 Kenya 5.28% 2.87% 16.98%
    🇰🇮 Kiribati 7.13% 3.81% 17.33%
    🇽🇰 Kosovo 5.33% 10.19% 43.35%
    🇰🇼 Kuwait 2.88% 4.93% 31.56%
    🇰🇬 Kyrgyzstan 7.91% 4.54% 21.08%
    🇱🇦 Laos 2.13% 4.45% 25.24%
    🇱🇻 Latvia 10.12% 21.86% 32.86%
    🇱🇧 Lebanon 7.24% 9.89% 32.11%
    🇱🇸 Lesotho 6.34% 4.2% 13.44%
    🇱🇷 Liberia 2.97% 3.31% 13.88%
    🇱🇾 Libya 5.21% 4.86% 27.77%
    🇱🇮 Liechtenstein 7.89% 19.37% 34.79%
    🇱🇹 Lithuania 8.65% 20.8% 32.79%
    🇱🇺 Luxembourg 9.71% 15.03% 31.55%
    🇲🇴 Macao 3.11% 13.% 32.39%
    🇲🇬 Madagascar 3.25% 3.35% 16.21%
    🇲🇼 Malawi 3.06% 2.61% 15.61%
    🇲🇾 Malaysia 4.91% 7.5% 30.78%
    🇲🇻 Maldives 3.14% 4.78% 35.61%
    🇲🇱 Mali 2.78% 2.38% 11.%
    🇲🇹 Malta 7.42% 19.13% 38.26%
    🇲🇭 Marshall Islands 5.68% 4.56% 17.8%
    🇲🇶 Martinique 5.85% 22.77% 37.31%
    🇲🇷 Mauritania 1.44% 3.22% 15.03%
    🇲🇺 Mauritius 3.18% 12.79% 33.76%
    🇾🇹 Mayotte 6.61% 2.88% 18.15%
    🇲🇽 Mexico 2.99% 8.32% 34.88%
    🇫🇲 Micronesia (country) 4.11% 6.16% 27.59%
    🇲🇩 Moldova 7.56% 12.98% 26.36%
    🇲🇨 Monaco 15.64% 35.92% 30.16%
    🇲🇳 Mongolia 3.87% 4.61% 26.18%
    🇲🇪 Montenegro 7.85% 16.55% 34.16%
    🇲🇸 Montserrat 7.92% 17.7% 33.05%
    🇲🇦 Morocco 2.86% 7.72% 29.97%
    🇲🇿 Mozambique 3.13% 2.57% 13.43%
    🇲🇲 Myanmar 3.21% 6.82% 23.69%
    🇳🇦 Namibia 4.1% 3.97% 15.38%
    🇳🇷 Nauru 8.98% 2.5% 15.87%
    🇳🇵 Nepal 2.74% 6.09% 29.51%
    🇳🇱 Netherlands 7.76% 20.31% 32.89%
    🇳🇨 New Caledonia 5.% 11.02% 31.61%
    🇳🇿 New Zealand 9.09% 16.31% 33.2%
    🇳🇮 Nicaragua 2.71% 5.29% 28.92%
    🇳🇪 Niger .92% 2.4% 9.76%
    🇳🇬 Nigeria 3.% 2.97% 12.31%
    🇳🇺 Niue 4.79% 15.16% 22.55%
    🇰🇵 North Korea 2.72% 11.71% 30.49%
    🇲🇰 North Macedonia 5.87% 14.91% 36.56%
    🇲🇵 Northern Mariana Islands 2.95% 10.81% 32.09%
    🇳🇴 Norway 9.52% 18.44% 31.65%
    🇴🇲 Oman 3.05% 2.76% 23.96%
    🇵🇰 Pakistan 5.48% 4.27% 17.23%
    🇵🇼 Palau 8.59% 9.93% 21.48%
    🇵🇸 Palestine 4.77% 3.53% 23.44%
    🇵🇦 Panama 3.57% 8.77% 30.03%
    🇵🇬 Papua New Guinea 1.09% 3.19% 16.81%
    🇵🇾 Paraguay 3.73% 6.26% 26.51%
    🇵🇪 Peru 3.43% 8.41% 30.33%
    🇵🇭 Philippines 3.56% 5.44% 23.38%
    🇵🇱 Poland 5.22% 18.55% 35.69%
    🇵🇹 Portugal 7.% 22.9% 36.28%
    🇵🇷 Puerto Rico 3.63% 22.93% 48.9%
    🇶🇦 Qatar 3.5% 1.52% 15.01%
    🇷🇪 Reunion 3.81% 13.28% 32.4%
    🇷🇴 Romania 7.16% 18.64% 32.22%
    🇷🇺 Russia 4.8% 15.8% 27.86%
    🇷🇼 Rwanda 2.76% 3.2% 17.36%
    🇧🇱 Saint Barthlemy 7.3% 10.61% 43.89%
    🇸🇭 Saint Helena 8.63% 28.66% 32.61%
    🇰🇳 Saint Kitts and Nevis 5.36% 10.13% 29.79%
    🇱🇨 Saint Lucia 3.59% 9.23% 33.39%
    🇲🇫 Saint Martin (French part) 4.47% 11.14% 30.08%
    🇵🇲 Saint Pierre and Miquelon 6.34% 17.32% 33.4%
    🇻🇨 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 7.71% 10.86% 32.34%
    🇼🇸 Samoa 2.52% 5.22% 18.75%
    🇸🇲 San Marino 10.15% 20.47% 35.73%
    🇸🇹 Sao Tome and Principe 3.92% 3.76% 15.6%
    🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia 3.32% 2.81% 30.28%
    🇸🇳 Senegal 3.42% 3.14% 16.54%
    🇷🇸 Serbia 6.15% 20.56% 37.55%
    🇸🇨 Seychelles 10.68% 8.16% 28.84%
    🇸🇱 Sierra Leone 3.02% 3.14% 15.52%
    🇸🇬 Singapore 2.29% 15.12% 36.51%
    🇸🇽 Sint Maarten (Dutch part) 12.03% 10.57% 34.51%
    🇸🇰 Slovakia 6.63% 16.98% 33.4%
    🇸🇮 Slovenia 7.52% 20.96% 33.59%
    🇸🇧 Solomon Islands 4.03% 3.47% 15.29%
    🇸🇴 Somalia 2.6% 2.57% 10.75%
    🇿🇦 South Africa 4.06% 5.89% 20.55%
    🇰🇷 South Korea 2.74% 17.49% 44.44%
    🇸🇸 South Sudan 3.48% 2.89% 13.11%
    🇪🇸 Spain 7.23% 20.27% 38.72%
    🇱🇰 Sri Lanka 8.76% 11.54% 35.73%
    🇸🇩 Sudan 3.03% 3.5% 13.28%
    🇸🇷 Suriname 4.09% 7.39% 25.8%
    🇸🇪 Sweden 10.19% 20.25% 31.83%
    🇨🇭 Switzerland 9.49% 19.31% 32.61%
    🇸🇾 Syria 7.66% 4.68% 24.62%
    🇹🇼 Taiwan 2.11% 16.71% 37.32%
    🇹🇯 Tajikistan 4.34% 3.47% 19.43%
    🇹🇿 Tanzania 2.2% 3.1% 14.97%
    🇹🇭 Thailand 3.21% 15.21% 39.17%
    🇹🇱 Timor 3.14% 5.21% 25.42%
    🇹🇬 Togo 4.29% 3.13% 11.77%
    🇹🇰 Tokelau 4.7% 8.66% 25.03%
    🇹🇴 Tonga 4.6% 6.22% 21.65%
    🇹🇹 Trinidad and Tobago 3.93% 11.52% 32.67%
    🇹🇳 Tunisia 4.4% 9.02% 31.24%
    🇹🇷 Turkey 3.77% 8.64% 33.9%
    🇹🇲 Turkmenistan 5.84% 5.15% 21.55%
    🇹🇨 Turks and Caicos Islands 5.79% 10.34% 28.25%
    🇹🇻 Tuvalu 4.98% 6.48% 16.15%
    🇺🇬 Uganda 2.87% 1.69% 14.33%
    🇺🇦 Ukraine 7.54% 18.81% 33.2%
    🇦🇪 United Arab Emirates 3.35% 1.83% 15.77%
    🇬🇧 United Kingdom 10.84% 19.17% 32.56%
    🇺🇸 United States 8.18% 17.13% 30.47%
    🇻🇮 United States Virgin Islands 7.54% 20.42% 39.11%
    🇺🇾 Uruguay 8.23% 15.58% 35.98%
    🇺🇿 Uzbekistan 5.87% 5.14% 22.24%
    🇻🇺 Vanuatu 5.65% 3.74% 16.29%
    🇻🇪 Venezuela 2.29% 8.61% 27.71%
    🇻🇳 Vietnam 4.13% 9.12% 30.02%
    🇼🇫 Wallis and Futuna 1.76% 13.47% 32.98%
    🇪🇭 Western Sahara 2.82% 5.84% 23.73%
    🇾🇪 Yemen 3.98% 2.66% 18.25%
    🇿🇲 Zambia 2.76% 1.75% 12.66%
    🇿🇼 Zimbabwe 3.18% 3.32% 14.22%
    🌐 World 5.13% 9.82% 24.03%

    Some of the places with high elderly shares today include high-income countries like Japan (30%), Italy (24%), and Finland (23%).

    The lowest shares are concentrated in the Middle East and Africa. Many countries have just 2% of their population aged 65 years and older, such as Qatar, Uganda, and Afghanistan.

    But over time, almost all countries are expected to see their older population segments grow. In just three decades, it is estimated that one-in-four European, North American, and Asian residents will be over 65 years of age.

    By 2100, a variety of Asian countries and island nations facing low population growth are expected to see more than one-third of their populations aged 65 years or older, including South Korea and Jamaica at 44%. However, it’s actually Albania that’s the biggest outlier overall, with a projected 49% of its population to be aged 65 and older by 2100.

    Passing the Generational Torch

    The challenge of an aging population is set to impact all sectors of society, including labor and financial markets, demand for housing and transportation, and especially family structures and intergenerational ties.

    One way to help grasp the nature of transition is to note the changing ratio between seniors and young children in the world population, as seen in the below crossover diagram:

    Dropping fertility rates, in addition to improved child and infant mortality rates, are known to have played a major role in the plateauing population of children.

    However, not all countries have witnessed this crossover yet, as it usually coincides with higher levels of economic development.

    As countries such as India, Brazil, and South Africa reach higher levels of per capita income, they will be likely to follow down the paths of more advanced economies, eventually experiencing similar demographic fates and challenges.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 23:20

  • 11 Signs That Global Conflict Could Soon Spiral Completely Out Of Control
    11 Signs That Global Conflict Could Soon Spiral Completely Out Of Control

    Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

    The world seems to be gripped by a really bad case of war fever.  National leaders all over the globe are rattling their sabers, and that should deeply alarm all of us.  The last time that there was a “world war”, tens of millions of people died.  This time around, it could be hundreds of millions or even billions of people.  Today, we literally possess the ability to destroy all of humanity.  So a worldwide conflict in which nuclear weapons are used should be avoided at all costs, but unfortunately those that are running things seem absolutely determined to push us toward such a conflict anyway.

    Over the past couple of weeks, there have been so many alarming developments.  The following are 11 signs that global conflict could soon spiral completely out of control…

    #1 Russia just signed a deal to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus…

    The defense ministers of Russia and Belarus on Thursday signed a document on the deployment of Russian tactical nuclear weapons on Belarusian territory, the state-run TASS news agency reported, citing the Defense Ministry of Belarus.

    Russia will retain control over its non-strategic nuclear weapons stationed in neighboring Belarus, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said at a document-signing event with his Belarusian counterpart Viktor Khrenin in Minsk.

    “Russia will not transfer nuclear weapons to the Republic of Belarus: control over them and the decision to use them remains with the Russian side,” he said.

    #2 U.S. and Taiwanese officials have reportedly been talking about bringing Taiwan under the “nuclear umbrella” of the United States.  Needless to say, such a move would make war with China much more likely…

    There seems to be a growing demand for a US ‘nuclear umbrella’ in Taiwan amid increasing belligerence by China in the Asia Pacific region.

    The desire for such a ‘nuclear umbrella’ against a potential invasion by China – which is already provided to Japan and South Korea by the United States (US) – has reportedly received support from defence experts in Taiwan.

    The US ‘nuclear umbrella’ will not see the deployment of atomic weapons in Taiwan, but will see the world’s ‘sole superpower’ respond in kind to a nuclear attack by China during an invasion of the island nation.

    #3 The Russians have just issued an arrest warrant for U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham…

    Russia’s Interior Ministry on Monday issued an arrest warrant for U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham following his comments related to the fighting in Ukraine.

    In an edited video of his meeting on Friday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that was released by Zelenskyy’s office, Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, noted that “the Russians are dying” and described the U.S. military assistance to the country as “the best money we’ve ever spent.”

    #4 A senior Taliban commander is boasting that “we will conquer Iran soon”…

    The Taliban threatened on Sunday that it could conquer Iran as tensions increase over water disputes between Afghanistan and Iran, leaving at least three people dead.

    In a video released by the Taliban, a senior commander in the terrorist organization running Afghanistan warned that the Taliban would fight the Islamic Republic’s Revolutionary Guard “with more passion” than they fought the US forces. He added that the Taliban “will conquer Iran soon if the Taliban’s leaders give the green light.

    #5 Israel has doubled the number of attacks on Iranian targets inside Syrian territory in recent months…

    Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on Monday said that he has “doubled the attacks on Iran in Syria” during his several months in office.

    Gallant also revealed Tehran’s secret sea war against Israel, presenting new photographic evidence of five different ships it is using to establish another front against the Jewish state.

    #6 Hezbollah just conducted major military exercises very close to the border with Israel…

    The military exercise was unusual not only because it was made public — nearly 400 people attended, including Hezbollah supporters and several journalists — but also because it was conducted only 12 miles north of the Israeli border, just outside an area where militias are not allowed to operate under a UN Security Council resolution adopted in 2006.

    #7 Most Americans don’t realize this, but U.S. troops will soon be deployed in Peru…

    Unbeknown, it seems, to most people in Peru and the US (considering the paucity of media coverage in both countries), US military personnel will soon be landing in Peru. The plenary session of Peru’s Congress last Thursday (May 18) authorised the entry of US troops onto Peruvian soil with the ostensible purpose of carrying out “cooperation activities” with Peru’s armed forces and national police.

    #8 Violent clashes in Kosovo have resulted in more than two dozen NATO troops being injured…

    NATO-led troops and police clashed with protesters in Northern Kosovo Monday amid an ongoing standoff between ethnic Albanian authorities and local ethnic Serbs who ignored warnings not to seize municipality buildings.

    The violence comes after Kosovo’s police raided Serb-dominated areas in the region’s north and seized local municipality buildings over the weekend. The demonstrations have led to injuries on both sides, which more than two dozen NATO troops injured.

    #9 The U.S. military is building a brand new base in northern Syria.  Apparently the U.S. occupation of large portions of Syrian territory is not going to end any time soon…

    The US-led anti-ISIS coalition is building a new military base in Syria’s northern province of Raqqa, The New Arab reported, citing a source close to the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

    The US backs the SDF and keeps about 900 troops (officially at least) in eastern Syria, allowing the US to control about one-third of Syria’s territory. The report said there are currently about 24 US-led military sites spread throughout eastern Syria.

    #10 North Korea is claiming that the U.S. and South Korea have just conducted an “invasion rehearsal”…

    The South Korean and U.S. militaries conducted large live-fire drills near the border with North Korea on Thursday, despite the North’s warning that it won’t tolerate what it calls an invasion rehearsal on its doorstep.

    The drills, the first of five rounds of live-fire exercises through mid-June, mark 70 years since the establishment of the military alliance between Seoul and Washington. North Korea typically reacts to such major South Korean-U.S. exercises with missile and other weapons tests.

    #11 Due to “security concerns”, dozens of “satellite phones for emergency communication” are being issued to members of the U.S. Senate…

    Amid growing concerns of security risks to members of Congress, over 50 senators have been issued satellite phones for emergency communication, people familiar with the measures told CBS News. The devices are part of a series of new security measures being offered to senators by the Senate Sergeant at Arms, who took over shortly after the assault on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

    The satellite phone technology has been offered to all 100 senators. CBS News has learned at least 50 have accepted the phones, which Senate administrative staff recommend senators keep in close proximity during their travels.

    We have never seen such a dramatic measure ever be taken before.

    Are they preparing for something?

    I wish that I knew.

    But what I do know is that we are certainly living during a time of “wars and rumors of wars”, and it definitely isn’t going to take much to push us over a line that will never be able to be uncrossed.

    But for now, most people in the western world simply are not paying attention to what is going on.

    Most of them just assume that our leaders are wise, competent and will be able to keep us out of any sort of nuclear conflict.

    *  *  *

    Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 23:00

  • China Sends Fresh Crew To 'T-Shaped' Space Station, Plans Moon Mission Before 2030
    China Sends Fresh Crew To ‘T-Shaped’ Space Station, Plans Moon Mission Before 2030

    China launched the Shenzhou-16 spacecraft with a crew of three astronauts to its newly built space station for the second in-orbit crew rotation, marking yet another advancement for the country’s space program — comes at a time when the US is waging a technology war against Beijing.

    Bloomberg reported a Long March 2F rocket propelled three astronauts to the Tiangong space station on Tuesday morning from Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in the Gobi Desert. 

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

    The crew – Gui Haichao, Jing Haipeng, and Zhu Yangzhu will relieve Shenzhou-15 astronauts who have been orbiting the Earth in the Tiangong space station since November. State media said Shenzhou-16 astronauts are expected to arrive at the station later today.

    Tuesday marks China’s fifth crewed mission to its T-shaped space station since 2021. The new station is a three-module structure and was constructed in orbit. 

    China had a series of achievements in space, including being the first country to land a spacecraft on the far side of the moon in 2019, landing a rover on Mars in 2021, and constructing the Tiangong space station over the last few years. 

    In its press conference Monday, China Manned Space Agency official Lin Xiqiang told reporters the country plans to send astronauts to the moon by 2030.  

    China has said it will open the Tiangong space station to all UN member states for “science experiments.” It hopes its station will outlast the International Space Station, which is set to be decommissioned in the early 2030s. Chinese astronauts are currently banned from the ISS. 

    The US and China are locked in another race, this time in space. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 22:40

  • 5 Things I Truly Don't Understand About The "Inevitable Energy Transition"
    5 Things I Truly Don’t Understand About The “Inevitable Energy Transition”

    Authored by Jude Clemente via RealClear Wire,

    Please note: this article was pulled down offline from Forbes. I will let you draw your own conclusions as to why. Factually, there was no justification for it. 

    This list could be closer to 50 but let’s just stick to a handful of them. I literally live in this business every day, and I’m just so confused. 

    1. In a world that is apparently getting both warmer and colder because of global warming, how is it that we can increasingly rely on non-dispatchable (i.e., intermittent, usually unavailable), weather-dependent electricity from wind and solar plants to displace, not just supplement, dispatchable (i.e., baseload, almost always available) coal, gas, and nuclear power? In other words, if our weather is becoming less predictable, how is it that a consuming economy like ours can, or should even try, predictably rely on weather-dependent resources? ERCOT exemplifies this: the Texas grid operator has around 31,000 MW of wind capacity but goes into winter expecting only 6,000 MW (just 20%) of wind farms to be available to generate electricity. Again, in the marketplace, the “alternatives” you keep hearing about are proving to be far more supplemental than alternative.

    Further, good wind and solar spots are finite, based on geography, so new builds, naturally, will be forced into areas that are less windy and less sunny, lowering their already very low 35% capacity factors. And because they devour immense swaths of land, interrupting a whole host of things, that Renewable Rejection Database is mounting very quickly. If wind, solar, and electric cars too are as effective and low-cost as so many keep promising us, there would obviously be no need for government subsidies for broad adoption. Yet, there is, gigantically so. Huge amounts of taxpayer money going into this, what I call “the holy climate panacea triad,” are vulnerable to changing politics and bound to become politically untenable at some point: “Ford Is Losing $66,446 On Every EV It Sells.” Our limited financial resources are obviously very precious, so these NEVER CONSIDERED and wasted opportunity costs forcing wind, solar, and electric cars into the energy complex are truly catastrophic. Schools investing in electric buses over STEM? The $200 Billion Electric School Bus Bust. How can any of this be justified?  I’m so utterly confused. 

    2. Climate change is a global issue, so how is it that we can claim climate benefits for unilateral climate policy. For example, U.S. gasoline cars constitute just 3% of global CO2 emissions, so how will getting rid of them impact climate change? But this dose of real science doesn’t stop California leaders, a state responsible for just 1% of global CO2 emissions, from telling us that energy policy in the nine-county region of Northern California alone is “responsible for protecting air quality and the global climate in the nine-county Bay Area.” No wonder then that a Biden administration official was incoherent when asked how $50 trillion in climate spending in the U.S. will lower any global temperature rise. Indeed, despite the Sierra Club in 2014 promising us that “China’s Thirst for Coal Is Drying Up,” the Chinese Communist Party approved two coal plants a week in 2022. But, don’t worry guys, China promises to be net-zero by 2060. On climate, you don’t matter nearly as much as some want you to think.

    So, it becomes very obvious very quickly that no energy policy in northern California has any relevance in terms of changing the climate. The region could literally disappear and there would be no discernable impact on climate change. Even our climate czar John Kerry, loving the CO2-devouring life in a private jet and $250 million, has been forced to admit that the U.S. could even go to zero emissions and it would make no material impact on climate change. Talk about all pain, no gain. The real science is that incremental global emissions are “not here but over there” U.S. CO2 emissions are in structural decline regardless of what policies we pass (save 2021 and the rebound from Covid-19’s devastation in 2020). So, where is the climate benefit for Americans when it comes to U.S. climate policy? Because we’re continuously told to “believe science,” any positive answer to that question can only be deemed as anti-science. In fact, common sense and science itself tell us that unilateral climate policy can actually be really bad for climate change because it encourages carbon leakage (e.g., climate policy in the U.S. increases costs and just pushes a manufacturing firm to re-locate to coal-devouring China).

    3. Back to electric vehicles. Even green-tinted but surely practical Bloomberg admits that more than 85% of Americans can’t afford an electric car, since they are well more than double the price of oil-based cars. How can a product bring racial justice for Black Americans when the vast majority of them can’t afford it? Worse then, huge and growing subsidies for electric cars are a “reverse Robin Hood,” taking money from poor taxpayers to give to the rich ones that are, actually, in the market to buy an electric car. Forcing electric equipment over natural gas? Sorry but “gas is four to six times cheaper than electricity.” Battery costs might be much higher than expected: 1) rising global demand, 2) rising costs and unavailability of their raw materials, 3) mining complications and environmental damage, and 4) China flexing its muscles since it controls the supply chains and uses hoarding as political leverage (see Covid-19 and medical supplies). Reality check, unlike what we keep hearing about “green energy,” no technology continues to decline in cost in perpetuity: “EV battery costs could spike 22% by 2026 as raw material shortages drag on.” 

    And this one I’m really confused on. President Biden promotes his climate agenda as a way to create jobs. Besides lacking in economic literacy (i.e., jobs are costs not benefits), the truth is that electric cars, for instance, entail far less jobs because they, for one thing, have far less moving parts. And there’s all kinds of evidence that electric car life-cycle emissions could be way worse than advertised, mostly because of the massive amounts of mining required to make them. We all know about child labor and your electric car, but even pro-EV outlets are being forced to report on the mounting problems from mining, the latest on how bauxite for the aluminum needed is destroying the Amazon. And about our President’s we’ll need oil for “another decade” claim? The U.S. Department of Energy just modeled that our oil demand will actually slightly INCREASE, not decline, to over 21.1 million b/d by 2050. Reality check: planes, industry (petrochemicals), heavy trucking, and sheer Energy Inertia will have oil dominating way longer than you’re being told. 

    4. How on Earth could anybody expect those in Africa and the other horrifically poor nations to “get off fossil fuels” when the rich countries haven’t come close to doing it. Germany and California, the world’s two greenest governments, are still overwhelming fossil fuel-based and overwhelmingly dependent on imports (dangerously so in Germany’s case). This comes despite decades of huge subsidies, scores of mandates, deploying the best engineering expertise, and having low population growth and thus low incremental energy needs, all giving them a huge advantage in “going green.” The energy stat to remember most? No U.S. state will ever “try to go green” like California has over the past 20 years, yet oil and gas still supply 70% of the state’s energy, even above the national average of 65%. 

    Germany and California have shown us what these climate policies bring: Germany has the highest electricity prices in the world; and California’s are the highest in the continental U.S. and soaring out of control (Figure). How the heck can we push for “deep electrification” to fight climate change if we are going to follow policies that surge the price of electricity, while also lowering grid reliability? And rich Westerners, spare us the judgments, demands, and hypocrisy on climate change: Germany thrives on a GDP per capita per year of $51,200, compared to a horrifically sad $2,260 for India.

    5. But, perhaps I’m most confused about the whole air quality thing. The obsession over it gets attached to all energy policies. But there’s clearly a strawman to the “we need cleaner air now” demand. First, the air quality conversation in the U.S. reminds me of Voltaire’s “the perfect is the enemy of good.” Americans seem completely unaware how drastically our air quality has improved. Check data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), our criteria pollutants have been plummeting over the past many decades. The risks seem exaggerated. Let’s just take Los Angeles, which for a big city notoriously has the worst air quality in the country. Tell me, please, if air quality is such a problem and such a health concern for Americans, why is it that Angelinos have a life expectancy of 82 years, a hearty three years above the national average. Just think of all the coal that China has devoured since 2000 (I figure around 70 billion tonnes), yet the country’s life expectancy, apparently shockingly to so many, is up a very impressive six years to nearly 78 since then. Maybe it’s because Chinese GDP per capita per year has skyrocketed nearly 9-fold to over $18,500. Even for rising asthma rates in the U.S., smoking is way down, coal usage is way down, and criteria pollutants are way down. So what gives? 

    “Better air quality and environment” are not free, as attaining government standards cost businesses hundreds of billions of dollars per year. These costs are ultimately paid by Americans in the form of higher prices, lower wages, and less choices. And at some point, the cost of the regulation to achieve better air outweighs its benefit. We’ve won on water too: the water in your toilet is cleaner than what the vast majority of humans on Earth drink. For every time that we hear “environmental justice” we need to say “economic justice” 100 times. In this country for all Americans, Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos make 30% less money than Whites and Asians. Too many politicians focus on the endless pursuit of “better air quality” and other abstract, seemingly impossible to measure benefits because they have no clue on the real ways to help communities of color and other low-income Americans: help them get a better education, help them get a better job, and help them make more money. Career politicians love bottomless, money-devouring pits the most: “America’s $100 billion climate change flop.” And although its entire existence is based on never being able to declare victory (imagine a football game with no time and no keeping score), EPA should consider that it’s wealth that matters most for health equity. 

    But, that’s not its business, is it?

    Jude Clemente is the editor at RealClearEnergy. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 22:20

  • 'Don't Rule Out Lab Leak': China's Former CDC Director
    ‘Don’t Rule Out Lab Leak’: China’s Former CDC Director

    The former head of China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention says the chance Covid-19 originated from a laboratory can’t be ruled out.

    That said, George Gao – who headed China’s CDC during the pandemic – also said that Chinese officials have investigated the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and found no “wrongdoing” in the lab.

    Gao told BBC Radio 4: “You can always suspect anything,” adding “That’s science. Don’t rule out anything.”

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

    When asked about the WIV, where US-funded scientists were genetically manipulating Covid strains to be more transmissible to humans, Gao said the lab was “double-checked by the experts in the field,” (who would never lie, we’re sure).

    “I think their conclusion is that they are following all the protocols. They haven’t found [any] wrongdoing,” Gao continued in what marks the first public confirmation from a Chinese official that an investigation was conducted at the lab.

    Last month, Gao told a London pandemic summit that there’s been “no evidence which animals [were] where the virus comes [from],” after an international group of scientists posited a laughable theory about raccoon dogs and Covid-19 in Wuhan.

    The alleged investigation was carried out by a “government” department, and didn’t involve China’s CDC, he continued, without naming said department.

    More than three years have passed since SARS-CoV-2 caused a global pandemic that resulted in some 7 million deaths, but the world is still none the wiser regarding the origin of the virus.

    One theory is that the virus originated from bats, but views differ on how it became transmissible among humans.

    Some believe the virus was passed on to humans by some sort of intermediary animal hosts, while others believe it more likely leaked from a lab, particularly the WIV, which has been researching bat viruses and is located in the centre of Wuhan, where the pandemic began.

    The Chinese regime has repeatedly dismissed the theory that the virus was leaked from the WIV, but its lack of transparency has fuelled more suspicion. –Epoch Times

    The US House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic wants to question Gao and other officials regarding the origin of the virus. The committee has also asked to speak with Dr. Shi Zhengli, director of WIV’s Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases; Drs. Ben Hu and Huang Yanling, researchers at the institute; and Dr. Chen Wei, a general in the Chinese Communist Party’s People’s Liberation Army who took over the lab in February 2020.

    In February, FBI Director Christopher Wray announced that the bureau believes Covid-19 most likely came from a lab – a conclusion also reached by the US Department of Energy.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 22:00

  • Nearly Half Of All Americans Now Have A Chronic Disease
    Nearly Half Of All Americans Now Have A Chronic Disease

    Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    It can strike at any time and at any age. When someone develops a chronic disease, it can cause debilitating, life-altering changes that penetrate every aspect of daily life.

    A three-year-old who was born with a rare immune system disorder in Virginia, on Dec. 26, 2019. (EVA HAMBACH/AFP via Getty Images)

    The prevalence of these conditions has surged over the past decade, creating a twofold health care and economic crisis affecting nearly half of Americans. By 2030, the number of U.S. residents struggling with at least one chronic illness is expected to surpass 170 million.

    That’s more than half of the entire country, for perspective.

    The expanding elderly population and adults aren’t the only age groups seeing an uptick. More than 40 percent of children and adolescents currently have at least one chronic illness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    There’s also a tremendous cost burden. The spectrum of chronic diseases comprises a disproportionately large segment of U.S. health care costs. Of the nation’s $4.1 trillion annual health care expenditures, chronic diseases account for 90 percent.

    That’s more than $3 trillion dollars of annual direct costs alone.

    At an individual level, the price tag doesn’t look any better. Estimates for the treatment and management of chronic conditions—on average—tally more than $6,000 annually per patient.

    Some chronic disease specialists and health practitioners say that figure is spot on, depending on the condition.

    Beyond the Numbers

    “For example, if you have type 2 diabetes, you are often checking in with your provider every three months. Four visits a year, times $300 a visit, plus the amount spent for medications per month … quickly adds up,” nurse practitioner Lola MacLean told The Epoch Times.

    MacLean has worked in family and internal medicine for the past five years. In that time, she’s noticed a spike in the number of patients suffering from chronic conditions walk through the door.

    “I have seen an uptick in chronic conditions, especially those related to metabolic disorders, [like] type 2 diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression,” she said.

    Many chronic diseases require specialist care for management. Providers in these fields have also witnessed a surge in patients.

    “Indeed, I have noticed an uptick in the number of patients with chronic diseases, particularly those with respiratory diseases such as asthma and COPD [Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease],” John Landry told The Epoch Times.

    Landry is a licensed, registered respiratory therapist and founder of the education platform Respiratory Therapy Zone. He noted chronic respiratory diseases often require expensive medications, frequent doctor visits, and hospitalizations.

    “I find the estimate of $6,000 USD for the annual cost of treating chronic diseases to be plausible … This doesn’t even take into account indirect costs such as time off work for the patient and their caregivers.”

    Landry says it’s important to remember that doctor’s visits and prescriptions aren’t the only factors in the final bill.

    “Chronic illnesses often result in loss of work productivity which indirectly increases the financial burden.”

    Conditions with some of the highest direct health care costs in the United States are diabetes at $189.6 billion in annual expenses, Alzheimer’s disease at $185.9 billion, and osteoarthritis at $115.5 billion.

    But the price of living with a chronic disease goes beyond dollars and cents. For many, it’s a daily battle that demands vigilance, patience, and emotional support.

    Uphill Battle

    For Deb Borchert, a trip to the hospital is almost as routine as folding laundry. The 47-year-old Wisconsin mother of two knows most of the emergency room staff at her local hospital by their first names.

    On March 10,  she arrived at the emergency room with her miniature medical assistance dog, Molly. Her specialist’s phone number was already on file, and she was promptly admitted for treatment without delay.

    There was no red tape or extra paperwork. Borchert was put in a bed and hooked up to IVs and machines that would help save her life.

    Because despite her outwardly calm demeanor, she was on the threshold of cardiac arrest. Again.

    “Your pulse oxygen drops, and your entire body just collapses. It can’t even function,” Borchert told The Epoch Times.

    She suffers from a condition known as hypokalemic periodic paralysis, which causes consistently low and dangerous potassium levels. It’s an illness that has landed her in the hospital more times than she can count over the past 20 years.

    For most people, healthy potassium levels are between 3.5 and 5.2. Anything below 2.5 is considered a life-threatening condition.

    Borchert was admitted on March 10 with a potassium level of 2.2.

    “I’ve had it since my 20s, but they’ve never known how to really treat it. Every time, they try different drugs, but I’m allergic to a lot of those,” she said.

    It’s a tune heard often among those suffering from chronic diseases. Lengthy, exhausting, and a sometimes dangerous trial-and-error process with treatment. Some conditions can also be difficult to manage with traditional Western medicine.

    This is the case for Julie Walters, whose 14-year-old daughter suffers from a rare form of epilepsy called PCDH19, which is caused by a gene mutation. It’s also challenging to manage with medication.

    Moreover, it causes intense clusters of seizures that can stop someone’s breathing. It’s a side effect her daughter has endured many times and, as a result, Walters’ daughter sleeps with a pulse oximeter and supplemental oxygen nearby.

    “It’s changed our entire lives,” Walters told The Epoch Times.

    Walters is co-founder of the PCDH19 Alliance, an online support network promoting early diagnosis and supporting families struggling with the condition. She also runs The Connected Parent, which is a free platform for families and caregivers that also reviews resources.

    Walters is acutely aware of how important resources are for parents who have children struggling with PCDH19 and other chronic diseases.

    Her daughter’s illness requires constant monitoring and vigilance. Family vacations, attending school, or just going out to dinner must be planned carefully since her daughter might have a seizure at any moment.

    Things like sharp corners on furniture, balcony seating, and other details most people don’t give much thought to are an act of strategy and planning in Walters’ household.

    But it’s absolutely worth it to watch her daughter grow and enjoy as good a quality of life as possible.

    Many PCDH19 patients can go years without a seizure. Yet when they return, it can be harrowing. She recalled a nightmare episode when her daughter suffered a seizure that lasted for over an hour, requiring hospitalization.

    “It’s something you’re always thinking about,” Walters admits.

    Cause and Effect

    Borchert and Walters battle conditions beyond their control, but health care professionals say some chronic diseases are the byproduct of unhealthy lifestyle choices, diet, and excessive stress.

    One study asserts that non-communicable diseases that are chronic account for 70 percent of all global deaths annually. That includes various ailments and severity, from food allergies to heart disease.

    Some of these conditions are called “lifestyle diseases,” many of which have an established cause-effect relationship with daily choices.

    Heart disease and obesity fall under this heading. And while certain illnesses may not stem directly from unhealthy life choices, they’re made significantly worse by them. Diseases like diabetes, certain cancers, inflammatory conditions, and asthma are all under this umbrella.

    “The vast majority of chronic diseases in the United States are related to lifestyle choices, and contributing factors include dietary choices, lack of regular physical activity, [and] mental-emotional stress,” MacLean said.

    The CDC says the main factors contributing to this subset of “lifestyle diseases” include tobacco use, poor nutrition, being overly sedentary, and excessive alcohol usage.

    But beyond the price tags and life hurdles, chronic diseases remain the biggest killers in the United States. They claim the lives of 7 out of 10 Americans every year.

    Further, the tidal wave of chronic diseases has occurred in lockstep with a sharp rise in ultra-processed food consumption over the past two decades.

    An 18-year study published by New York University showed that consumption of ultra-processed food climbed steadily during this period and comprised 57 percent of America’s daily calories by 2018.

    During that study period, an additional 15 million people developed chronic diseases. Medical professionals say this is no coincidence.

    Yet a more subtle shift from acute to chronic illnesses as the dominant U.S. health concern began in the 1950s. Some researchers place the blame for the current health crisis squarely on the shoulders of a lethargic medical industry.

    A 2020 study published in the National Library of Medicine summarized, “The medical profession and its leadership did not recognize or respond appropriately to the rising prevalence of chronic disease. As a consequence, a health care crisis emerged, with inadequate access to care and quality of care, together with excessive costs.”

    Finding Hope

    “It’s taken away my ability to do whatever I want and enjoy the best of what life has to offer,” Borchert said.

    Though her condition has also given her a different perspective on life. She says you’d never know how sick she was at a glance or even during a normal conversation on her good days.

    This is the case for many, including Walters’ daughter. Chronic illness is a constant battle with an invisible enemy that, for some, has no end in sight.

    But this is where Borchert found a surprising and important new mission: spreading kindness.

    “What’s most important is kindness and giving back. If I see someone struggling or having a rough day, I’ll do something nice. I’ll pay for their groceries if I’m ahead of them in line or buy their coffee,” she said.

    Over the past two decades, Borchert watched her son and daughter grow into responsible adults, which inspired her to be a better person. The loss of so many little freedoms through the veil of her disease has given her an appreciation for the little things.

    “When I was younger, I used to take those things for granted. I don’t want to be like that anymore. It’s made me more kind, more empathetic. There are so many chronic illnesses you can’t see.”

    For Walters, her fellow “medical moms” have been a critical lifeline in her family’s journey. Because it takes a proverbial “village” to tackle chronic disease, especially when there’s no cure.

    “Community, friendships, and the alliance. My daughter has friends with the same mutation, and they chat every weekend,” she said.

    “A lot of the families have created these friendships … because they get it.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 21:40

  • Asia's Astonishing Gender Gap In Tobacco Use
    Asia’s Astonishing Gender Gap In Tobacco Use

    As the world prepares to observe World No Tobacco Day tomorrow (May 31), Statista’s Felix Richter looks at smoking prevalence in selected countries around the world, with a special focus on Asia and its astonishing gender gap in tobacco use.

    Infographic: Asia's Astonishing Gender Gap in Tobacco Use | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    While Indonesia and China for example, are among the countries with the highest prevalence of tobacco smoking among the male population at 63 percent and 44.5 percent, respectively, the smoking rate among women in both countries is among the lowest in the world at 2.2 and 1.5 percent.

    While there is a significant gender gap in tobacco use at the global level – the WHO reported a global prevalence of 36.7 percent among males and of 7.8 percent among females in 2020 – nowhere is the difference as pronounced as it is in Asia and the Pacific.

    While smoking among men is often associated with masculinity or social status in the region, it is stigmatized or frowned-upon for women to smoke.

    Meanwhile countries with less traditional gender roles, like France, Germany and the United States see significantly higher smoking rates among women, while smoking among men is often much less common than it is in many parts of Asia.

    World No Tobacco Day is a global initiative aimed at raising awareness about the risks associated with tobacco use and advocating for effective policies to reduce tobacco consumption. The day serves as a reminder of the devastating health effects of tobacco use, including various types of cancers, cardiovascular diseases and respiratory ailments. It also highlights the socioeconomic impact of tobacco use on individuals, families, and communities.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 21:20

  • Native American Tribe Demands Justice For Man Shot 38 Times By US Border Patrol Agents
    Native American Tribe Demands Justice For Man Shot 38 Times By US Border Patrol Agents

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

    Yvonne Nevarez remembers her late uncle Raymond Mattia as a proud Tohono O’odham Nation member who always took a stand against injustice.

    Mattias family spokeswoman Ofelia Rivas stands while propping a sign with a picture of Ray Mattia, who was shot and killed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents on May 18, 2023. The photo was taken during a protest in front of the Ajo Border Patrol Station in Why, Ariz., on May 27, 2023. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)

    He was a kind, respectful, peace-loving man, she said, making his shooting death by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents even harder to accept.

    “I’m angry. I can’t believe it. I don’t want to believe it. Our lives will never be the same,” Nevarez said, struggling through tears.

    “He was like a dad to me. And now, he’s gone.”

    Family members say that on May 18, Mattia contacted tribal police to report illegal migrants trespassing on his property in Meneger’s Dam Village, a remote southern border community of the Tohono O’odham Nation reservation about 52 miles from Ajo by car.

    During a brief encounter with CBP agents, family members say Mattia was shot approximately 38 times for reasons as yet unknown.

    “It was literally at his doorstep,” Nevarez told The Epoch Times at a protest gathering near the Ajo Border Patrol Station in Why, Arizona, on May 27.

    Protesters at a rally for Raymond Mattia flash placards at a passing Border Patrol vehicle in Why, Ariz., on May 27, 2023. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)

    Tribal members and supporters held another demonstration in Tucson on the same day.

    “We feel that how they took his life was unjust. There’s no justification for it,” Nevarez said.

    The family released a statement calling the shooting a “grievous” incident as “it is apparent what happened.”

    “Raymond called for help and, in turn, was shot down on his doorstep. Raymond’s rights were violated by the authorities whom we trust to protect our Nation. Improper and unprofessional actions of the agencies involved were witnessed by family members present near the crime scene.

    “Loved ones sat in agony, not knowing of Raymond’s condition until they were told that he had passed away hours later. Raymond lay in front of his home for seven hours before a coroner from Tucson arrived.

    The statement added, “In our eyes and hearts, we believe Raymond was approached with excessive and deadly force that took his life. He was a father, brother, uncle, friend, and an involved community member. Raymond always fought for what was right, and he will continue to fight even after his death. This is not an isolated incident, but it should bring awareness of the oppression our people live through.”

    A nephew of Raymond Mattia holds a sign during a protest in Why, Ariz., on May 27, 2023. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)

    The family has launched a GoFundMe page to raise $10,000 in legal defense fees.

    So far, the effort has garnered $2,954.

    CBP Responds

    On May 22, CBP issued a statement detailing the events leading to Mattia’s death.

    The statement said that at 9:04 p.m., the U.S. Border Patrol Tuscon Sector Tactical Operations Center notified the Ajo station that the Tohono O’odham Nation Police Department had requested assistance responding to a report of shots fired near Mattia’s property.

    At least 10 CBP agents met with tribal police at the local recreation center to coordinate a joint response.

    At 9:32 p.m., a tribal police officer and several CBP agents arrived near Mattia’s residence and “spread out while searching for the man.”

    “The officer and agents encountered an individual approximately 103 meters (about 337 feet) northwest of their parked vehicles, outside a residence, at approximately 9:03 p.m.”

    At that point, Mattia allegedly “threw an object” at the police officer as they approached.

    The object landed “a few feet” from the officer.

    “Shortly after the individual threw the object, he abruptly extended his right arm away from his body, and three agents fired their service weapons, striking the individual several times.”

    “The individual fell to the ground, and the officer and agents slowly approached the man,” according to the statement.

    The statement made no mention of whether Mattia was armed or whether warnings were given before he was shot down.

    An unattended sign with the image of Raymond Mattia in Why, Ariz., on May 27, 2023. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)

    Resuscitation Efforts Fail

    Agents began administering CPR after they could not detect a pulse and requested emergency medical services.

    However, there was no air life evacuation available due to bad weather. The agents continued administering CPR without success.

    Mattia was pronounced dead at a Pima County hospital at 10:06 p.m. The medical examiner’s office took custody of the body pending an autopsy on May 19, the statement added.

    The agents involved in the shooting will remain on administrative leave according to standard practice while authorities investigate the “use of deadly force.”

    “All three agents who discharged their weapons and seven additional agents activated their body-worn cameras during the incident.”

    The statement added the CBP is “committed to the expeditious release of the body-worn camera footage of this incident as soon as is appropriate to do so without impacting the ongoing law enforcement investigation.”

    The Tohono O’odham Police Department and FBI are currently investigating. CBP said the agency’s National Use of Force Review Board would review the incident following the investigation.

    Tohono O’odham police referred the matter to the department’s public information officer Matt Smith, who did not return a phone call or text requesting comment from The Epoch Times.

    At the May 27 protest in Why, family spokeswoman Ofelia Rivas said tribal members have reported many negative encounters with an “aggressive” Border Patrol in the past.

    “This has been going on for quite a while,” Rivas told The Epoch Times. “The Border Patrol claims to have supreme authority on the reservation.”

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 21:00

  • These Are All The Renewable Energy And Battery Installations In The US In 2023
    These Are All The Renewable Energy And Battery Installations In The US In 2023

    Renewable energy, in particular solar power, is set to shine in 2023. This year, the U.S. plans to get over 80% of its new energy installations from sources like battery, solar, and wind.

    Visual Capitalist’s Alan Kennedy created the map below, using data from EIA, to highlight planned U.S. renewable energy and battery storage installations by state for 2023.

    Texas and California Leading in Renewable Energy

    Nearly every state in the U.S. has plans to produce new clean energy in 2023, but it’s not a surprise to see the two most populous states in the lead of the pack.

    Even though the majority of its power comes from natural gas, Texas currently leads the U.S. in planned renewable energy installations. The state also has plans to power nearly 900,000 homes using new wind energy.

    California is second, which could be partially attributable to the passing of Title 24, an energy code that makes it compulsory for new buildings to have the equipment necessary to allow the easy installation of solar panels, battery storage, and EV charging.

    New solar power in the U.S. isn’t just coming from places like Texas and California. In 2023, Ohio will add 1,917 MW of new nameplate solar capacity, with Nevada and Colorado not far behind.

    The state of New York is also looking to become one of the nation’s leading renewable energy providers. The New York State Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA) is making real strides towards this objective with 11% of the nation’s new wind power projects expected to come online in 2023.

    According to the data, New Hampshire is the only state in the U.S. that has no new utility-scale renewable energy installations planned for 2023. However, the state does have plans for a massive hydroelectric plant that should come online in 2024.

    Decarbonizing Energy

    Renewable energy is considered essential to reduce global warming and CO2 emissions.

    In line with the efforts by each state to build new renewable installations, the Biden administration has set a goal of achieving a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035 and a net zero emissions economy by no later than 2050.

    The EIA forecasts the share of U.S. electricity generation from renewable sources rising from 22% in 2022 to 23% in 2023 and to 26% in 2024.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 20:40

  • Canadian Oil And Gas Producers Restart Production As Wildfires Abate
    Canadian Oil And Gas Producers Restart Production As Wildfires Abate

    By Michael Kern of Oilprice.com

    Canadian oil and gas producer Crescent Point Energy Corp on Monday said it had brought back online full production volumes at its operations in the Kaybob Duvernay play that were shut in due to the wildfires in Alberta in the past few weeks.

    Several other operators in Alberta have also resumed partial production after rainfalls helped stop some of the wildfires in recent days.

    Following a brief respite in the middle of May, the wildfires in Alberta began raging again last week as temperatures rose, threatening the oil sands operations in the province and forcing operators to shut in oil and gas production.  

    Earlier this month, the wildfires in Canada resulted in the shut-in of 319,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boepd) from the country’s oil and natural gas production or 3.7% of all output.

    Most of those shut-ins and subsequent resumption of production concerned gas output early this month, but as the situation with wildfires in Northern Alberta deteriorated, the oil sands production was threatened.

    Rystad Energy has warned that nearly 2.7 million barrels per day of Alberta oil sands production is in “very high” or “extreme” wildfire danger rating zones in the month of May.

    But at the end of last week, heavy rains helped the situation, and operators started restoring part of the previously shut-in production.

    Crescent Point Energy said today it had brought back on stream the full 45,000 boe/d of Kaybob Duvernay production previously shut-in due to the Alberta wildfires.

    Last week, Chevron Canada said it had safely resumed partial operations in the Kaybob Duvernay outside the active fire area, although it continues to monitor the evolving wildfire situation in Northern Alberta.

    Obsidian Energy said it had restored 5,650 boe/d of operated and non-operated production that was temporarily shut in due to wildfires, evacuation orders, and third-party constraints in Peace River and Pembina.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 20:20

  • US Flexes With Low B-1 Bomber Flyover As Balkan Tensions Boil
    US Flexes With Low B-1 Bomber Flyover As Balkan Tensions Boil

    At a moment tensions are on edge in the Balkans over a fresh crisis between the Serbian minority of northern Kosovo and ethnic Albanians, which over the weekend saw dozens of NATO peacekeeping forces injured while trying to quell fierce protests, the United States decided it was time for some muscle-flexing.

    Two US Air Force B-1B Lancer bomber aircraft conducted a low flyover of Sarajevo and other cities in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) on Tuesday. It had been pre-announced at the start of this week and described as “a sign of the strong partnership between the United States and the Armed Forces of BiH, according to a statement in the English language news portal Sarajevo Times. A US Air Forces statement cited in the publication said it would serve further as a sign of the “permanent dedication of the US to the sovereignty, territorial integrity and multi-ethnic nature of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”

    While the US has chastised Kosovo authorities for making brash, unilateral moves which have inflamed ethnic tensions with Serbs, and resulted in Belgrade sending Serbian national troops to the Kosovo border, it seems Washington still wants to remind Serbia of US military power in the region.

    On the same day Russia, which has long been a staunch supporter of Serbian interests, called on the West to silence its “false propaganda” regarding ethnic Serbian issues and Kosovo taking away their rights.

    Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova blamed NATO forces for exacerbating the past days of violence which started when Albanian mayors were installed over Serb-dominant communities in Kosovo. “Not only have they shown their incompetence… [they] themselves became a source of unnecessary violence, an escalation factor,” she said in reference to peacekeeping forces that clashed with Serbian protesters.

    She said that instead of protecting Serbs from the crackdown of a suppressive state, they “supported Pristina’s xenophobic aspirations, basically turning into terror accomplices” by defending local authorities.

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

    Zakharova then in the briefing told the West to “silence its false propaganda” and to stop alleging that its Serbs provoking the clashes.

    “While looking for the guilty, mediators from the US and the EU should muster up some courage and look in the mirror,” the FM spokesperson continued. “To de-escalate, decisive steps are needed, and not half-measures like an idea proposed by the US to temporarily ‘move’ the newly-minted ‘mayors’ from municipal buildings to other facilities,” Zakharova stressed.

    Behind the latest violence is a long-running demand that Kosovo establish Serbian municipalities for Serbian strongholds in Kosovo. Pristina authorities, however, worry that this would be precursor for a breakaway statelet. Multiple dozens of NATO troops KFOR troops have been injured in the clashes.

    An official NATO statement on Tuesday said, “NATO strongly condemns the unprovoked attacks against KFOR troops in northern Kosovo, which have led to a number of them being injured. Such attacks are totally unacceptable. Violence must stop immediately. We call on all sides to refrain from actions that further inflame tensions, and to engage in dialogue.” NATO also plans to send hundreds more troops.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 20:00

  • US Won't Discuss American Detained In Ukraine
    US Won’t Discuss American Detained In Ukraine

    Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

    The State Department has refused to say if it’s engaging with the Ukrainian government over American citizen Gonzalo Lira, who was detained by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) due to his political views on the conflict with Russia.

    Lira has a popular YouTube channel and a large following on Twitter and Telegram. He is also a writer who has contributed to several media outlets, including Business Insider. Lira was born in California and is a dual citizen of the US and Chile and had been living in Kharkiv, Ukraine, throughout the war.

    Gonzalo Lira, still frame via YouTube

    Lira is a critic of the Ukrainian government and was arrested by the SBU on charges of justifying the Russian invasion. “After the start of the full-scale invasion, the blogger was one of the first to support the Russian invaders and glorify their war crimes,” the SBU said in a press release referring to Lira.

    The SBU also accused Lira of “discrediting the top military and political leadership and the Defense Forces of our state.” He was charged under sections 2 and 3 of Article 436-2 of Ukraine’s criminal code, which outlaws the “distribution of materials” that justify Russia’s actions going back to 2014.

    Epoch Times reporter Liam Cosgrove asked State Department spokesman Matthew Miller if the administration was aware of Lira’s detainment and how the US feels about Ukraine arresting an American for speech.

    “So I will say in general that we’re aware of the report. We obviously support the exercise of freedom of speech anywhere in the world, and I’ll leave it at that,” Miller said.

    When asked if the administration was working to secure Lira’s release, Miller said, “I’m going to leave my comments where I just left them.”

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

    Cosgrove also asked Reps. Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) about Lira’s detainment. Lieu said that he wasn’t aware of the case but said US citizens should “have the ability to express their thoughts and views” and that he would look into the arrest.

    Responding to the news, Greene told Cosgrove: “America is providing weapons, equipment for the defense of their country, but the Ukrainian government is not going to defend any American’s freedom of speech, and that’s a real problem.”

    Lira’s arrest received virtually no attention in Western media. One of the few outlets to cover it was the Daily Beast, which smeared the American instead of questioning the charges. According to the Beast, Lira is facing five to eight years in prison.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 19:40

  • Watch: Chinese Fighter In 'Aggressive' Intercept Of US Spy Plane Over South China Sea
    Watch: Chinese Fighter In ‘Aggressive’ Intercept Of US Spy Plane Over South China Sea

    At a moment the US and Chinese militaries have halted all communications, a dangerous incident between the rival powers has occurred over the South China Sea.

    It happened last Friday, but the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) only on Tuesday revealed the incident, alleging that a Chinese fighter jet engaged in an “unprofessional intercept” of an American spy plane flying in international airspace.

    The US statement described that a Chinese PLA J-16 fighter flew just in front of the nose of a US RC-135 Rivet Joint reconnaissance aircraft, and INDOPACOM further published video of what it called an “unnecessarily aggressive maneuver”. 

    Based on video of the intercept, the J-16 passes so close to the RC-135 that the US aircraft’s cockpit appears to shake from the turbulence of the PLA plane’s wake.

    “The RC-135 was conducting safe and routine operations over the South China Sea in international airspace, in accordance with international law,” INDOPACOM said. “The United States will continue to fly, sale and operate – safely and responsibly – wherever international law allows.”

    “We expect all countries in the Indo-Pacific region to use international airspace safely and in accordance with international law,” the US military statement emphasized. 

    But China is disputing this interpretation, given it regularly attempts to claim both maritime territory and airspace based on an expanse of manmade and other militarized islands in the South China Sea. Washington has rejected this interpretation of the contested territory, calling it international airspace.

    Watch the Pentagon-released footage unveiled late Tuesday…

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

    There have been several of these ‘close call’ incidents in recent years, including a February intercept where a Chinese J-11 fighter approached about 500 feet off the wing of an American P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. The Chinese jet shadowed the US patrol plane for more than an hour.

    US planes have also received messages from nearby PLA jets of late such as “No approaching any more or you will pay full responsibility” – but so far there’s been no live fire or warning shot incidents, and yet these episodes remain highly dangerous for the potential of a direct clash.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 19:20

  • Faced With New Round Of Demonetization Indians Turn To Gold
    Faced With New Round Of Demonetization Indians Turn To Gold

    Authored by Michael Maharrey via SchiffGold.com,

    The Indian central bank has announced another round of demonetization with a plan to withdraw 2,000-rupee notes from circulation.

    The announcement led to a big jump in gold bullion sales.

    The 2,000-rupee note will remain legal tender, but they will have to be deposited or exchanged for smaller denominations by Sept. 30.

    The 2,000 rupee note ($24.19) is the largest currency denomination in India. According to Reuters, they make up about 10.8% of the currency in circulation.

    T.V Somanathan, the top official at the Indian Finance Ministry, said confiscation of the 2,000 rupee notes wouldn’t cause any disruptions “either in normal life or in the economy.”

    His assurances fall flat given history.

    We’ve seen this play before. The Indian government announced a surprise demonetization policy in the fall of 2016 meant to drive so-called black money out of the shadows and declared that all of the 1,000 and 500-rupee notes then in circulation would no longer be valid. The suddenly worthless notes made up 86% of the currency in circulation in the country at the time. The move made virtually all of the cash in India valueless.

    The government produced new 500 and 2,000-rupee notes to replace the old currency.

    Now the government is pulling those 2,000-rupee notes out of circulation.

    The government policy announced in 2016 was meant to force Indians to trade in the old notes for new ones. But there was a catch. The government placed limits on the amount of currency Indians could exchange, but no limits on bank deposits until the end of the year. The idea was to push Indians into putting their hoarded cash in the bank – thus bringing it “out of the shadows.” The demonetization policy resulted in severe cash shortages. As many as 90% of ATMs in some regions of the country completely ran out of currency.

    With more time to exchange notes this time around, the latest round of demonetization is not expected to be as disruptive.

    War on Cash

    The Indian government’s move was part of the broader war on cash. The goal was to bring “black money” out of the shadows so it can be tracked and taxed. The vast majority of transactions in India are in cash. It is an overwhelmingly cash economy and virtually every Indian has currency stashed away in their home.

    Transactions using black money mean no taxes are collected. Government estimates show that only 1% of the Indian population pays any taxes at all. By making the 1,000 and 500 rupee notes valueless, government officials hoped to force the black money into the light so they could get their cut.

    Reserve Bank of India (RBI) justified eliminating the 2,000-rupee note, saying they are at the end of their useful life and citing evidence showing 2,000 rupee notes aren’t typically used in transactions. But the real motivation for this latest round of demonetization is likely the same as the first – to better track and tax transactions.

    This war on cash isn’t isolated to India. The European Central Bank stopped producing and issuing 500-euro notes in 2018, and officials in the US have floated the idea of eliminating the $100 bill.

    More recently, governments have experimented with central bank digital currency (CBDC) as a cash replacement.

    There are also political motives for getting the 2,000-rupee notes out of circulation now.

    The move comes ahead of elections in four Indian states and a national election next spring. According to Reuters, “Most of India’s political parties are believed to hoard cash in high denomination bills to fund election campaign expenses to get around tough spending limits imposed by the Election Commission.”

    Forcing people to deposit the notes will also help boost bank deposits. Indian banks have struggled to maintain deposit levels large enough to support the country’s massive credit expansion.

    Gold to the Rescue

    When the government pulled 1,000 and 500-rupee notes out of circulation in 2016, Indians turned their “black money” into gold.

    Tax officials attempting to track black money say gold jewelry sales spiked the night of Nov. 8, 2016, after the government announced the demonetization policy.

    “Jewelers offered a platform to convert unreported cash into gold,” one official said.

    To avoid reporting the transactions, sellers simply split single transactions into multiple sales in order to keep them below the Rs 2 lakh threshold that triggers reporting requirements in India.

    After the RBI announced the elimination of 2,000-rupee notes earlier this month, local newspapers reported a similar rush to jewelry shops to exchange the notes for gold. The Hindustan Times reported a 10 to 20% increase in gold sales after the announcement.

    People scrambled to buy gold and silver in bulk in bullion markets, leading to increase in prices, dealers in several states said.”

    Gold was also a lifeline for Indians pummeled by the economic storm caused by the government response to the coronavirus pandemic.

    Indians understand that gold tends to store value and that in the end gold is money. If they have gold, they know they will be able to get the goods and services they need – even in the event of an economic meltdown or a cash crunch.

    Gold is not just a luxury in India. Even poor people buy gold in the Asian nation. According to an ICE 360 survey in 2018, one in every two households in India purchased gold within the last five years. Overall, 87% of households in the country own some amount of the yellow metal. Even households at the lowest income levels in India own some gold. According to the survey, more than 75% of families in the bottom 10% had managed to buy gold.

    It’s no surprise that when faced with the possibility of another disruption to the cash system, Indians have turned to gold.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 19:00

  • Chicago Sees Deadliest Memorial Day Weekend In 8 Years Despite Hundreds Of Yellow-Vested 'Peacekeepers' In Streets
    Chicago Sees Deadliest Memorial Day Weekend In 8 Years Despite Hundreds Of Yellow-Vested ‘Peacekeepers’ In Streets

    This Memorial Day weekend in Chicago was the deadliest the Democrat-run and crime-plagued city has seen in eight years, the Chicago Sun-Times has reported Tuesday.

    One killing even happened close to Mayor Brandon Johnson’s own residence. Going back to Friday evening, “at least 11 people had been killed and another 46 wounded since early Friday evening” resulting in a death toll that was the “highest since 2015, when 12 people were killed,” according to the report. This marks 57 total casualties across the city from either shootings or knifings.

    Image: Fox61

    The newspaper records that the prior high came in 2016: “The total number shot, however, was still far below the 71 people wounded by gunfire over the 2016 holiday weekend,” it notes.

    Last year’s Memorial Day weekend had marked a 5-year high. For the 2022 holiday weekend, 51 people total had ben reported shot, including 9 killed.

    The eight-year high in deaths occurred despite that ahead of the weekend community activists had planned peace marches. The idea was that yellow-vested ‘peacekeepers’ would fan out and have a prominent presence in “hot spots” where violence is frequent in the south and west sides of the city. The marches and activism appeared to have little effect.

     Illinois’ Peacekeepers program, via Sun-Times

    The initial Friday homicides reportedly happened within a few hours of each other, and included shootings and stabbings.

    As for violent incidents which happened near the mayor’s home, the Sun-Times details: 

    The homicide near the mayor’s Austin neighborhood home was discovered just after midnight Saturday in the 5700 block of West Chicago Avenue. A female, whose age was unknown, was stabbed to death and left in a nearby alley. And Monday evening, a shooting was reported about five blocks from the mayor’s home. A man, 36, was shot near the street around 7 p.m. in the 700 block of North Pine Avenue. He was hospitalized in good condition.

    As for the peacekeeping initiative, it is actually part of a formal initiative which has state funding, and has included 500 people having been hired and undergone training in conflict de-escalation. Last week into the weekend they had a presence in 102 “hot spots” in 14 Chicago communities.

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

    However, judging by the tragic weekend statistics – which not only matched but surpassed similar deadly weekends – there appears to have been a somewhat fruitless exercise in optics, at least for the warm holiday weekend. But other metrics suggest and the program leaders themselves say that in some locales the program has been effective.

    Below: Total Chicago Homicides per year, via heyjackass.com

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 18:40

  • "Safe Harbor": New Evidence Offers Insight Into Hunter Biden & His Collapsing World Of Corruption
    “Safe Harbor”: New Evidence Offers Insight Into Hunter Biden & His Collapsing World Of Corruption

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    Below is my column in the New York Post on newly discovered exchanges within the Biden family over the collapsing fortunes of Hunter Biden in 2018.

    As one of the primary conduits for influence peddling in the Biden family, Hunter appeared to be in a free fall and his Uncle Jim appeared to offer him a “safe harbor” and to guarantee “all the deals are still alive.”

    Here is the column:

    In 2018, Hunter Biden’s world was collapsing.

    The New York Times had run a story on one of his shady deals with the Chinese and his father, then vice president, was pulled into the vortex.

    It appears that Hunter was in a free fall and his uncle Jim Biden reached out in newly discovered messages to offer him a “safe harbor.”

    The exchange is an insight into a train wreck of a life of the scion of one of the most powerful families in the country.

    However, it is also insight into a world of influence peddling where millions simply evaporated in the coffers of the Biden family.

    On their face, the messages seem to contradict public statements from President Biden on the foreign-influence peddling that used to fund Hunter’s drug-infused, self-destructive lifestyle.

    The Times story caused a panic in the Biden family.

    Despite a largely supportive media, the Bidens have long been known for influence peddling.

    Jim Biden has been repeatedly criticized for marketing his access to his brother in pitches to clients.

    Hunter knew that the Times story was only the tip of an iceberg.

    There were deals all over the world with foreign figures worth millions and some of these figures had close ties to foreign intelligence or regimes.

    As revealed recently by the House Oversight Committee, the Bidens constructed a labyrinth of corporations and accounts to transfer millions from these deals to a variety of Biden family members, including grandchildren.

    Free fall

    Nevertheless, Joe Biden repeatedly claimed as a presidential candidate and as president that he had no knowledge of any foreign dealings of his son.

    Those denials now appear patently false.

    The laptop includes pictures and appointments of Hunter’s foreign business associates with Joe Biden.

    It also includes a recording concerning a Times report on Dec. 12, 2018, detailing Hunter’s dealings with Ye Jianming, the head of CEFC China Energy Company.

    Ye would later be arrested for corruption.

    As Biden associates pushed the Times to change aspects of the story, Joe Biden called to report on the results.

    In his message, Biden ends his call to Hunter with the statement “I think you’re clear. And anyway if you get a chance, give me a call, I love you.”

    The new messages indicate that the Bidens were worried that Hunter was in a free fall as these dealings were becoming known and revenue was declining.

    Jim Biden appears to be rushing to get Hunter to work the problem with the family.

    He assures him that they can find him “a safe harbor” and that “I can work with you[r] father alone!”

    The messages may refer to the fact that Hunter’s past complaint that he was giving as much as half of his proceeds to his father and was now facing towering financial demands.

    He appears to have cut off the family.

    That is a dangerous development for a man who had a long struggle with drugs and alcohol.

    Hunter blew through a fortune on narcotics and women, including allegations that he may have used a shared credit card with his father to pay off prostitutes.

    Both Joe and Jim Biden were reaching out to Hunter to assure him that he was in the “clear” and that there is a “safe harbor.”

    However, Jim pushed him to remain in contact and in the fold: “I cannot find you, believe it or not I have been looking. I [have] driven by Hallie’s, you fathers. Called texted you. . . . I want to help all the deals are still alive.”

    Putting aside the genuine desire to protect a family member with a history of drug abuse, the unpredictable Hunter also represented a threat to the entire family.

    A panicked Hunter threatened more than family harmony. There were millions that were being generated in countries like Ukraine, Romania, Russia and China.

    The messages show that the Hunter was spinning out of control and needed money fast — a lot of money. He told Jim Biden that he could not even afford “food and gas,” including his monthly alimony to his ex-wife Kathleen Buhle.

    He relays how President Biden was told that he “was in a real danger zone.”

    Classic corruption

    These messages highlight another inconvenient fact: Hunter was hardly a figure who generated confidence or cash.

    In 2018, he was an utter mess at the very time that foreign figures were funneling money to him.

    He was clearly noncommunicative with his family and still gushing money.

    He had previously complained that the Russians had blackmail material on him. He was a danger not just to himself.

    In his later book, Hunter admits that he was a crack addict and alcoholic: “drinking a quart of vodka a day by yourself in a room is absolutely, completely debilitating” as well as “smoking crack around the clock.”

    Given these admissions, why were so many foreign figures rushing to give this human wrecking ball millions?

    He not only lacked expertise in areas like energy or mining, but he was barely able to function, according to his own account.

    The answer seems abundantly clear.

    This was classic corruption. Indeed, influence peddling has long been the favorite form of corruption in Washington.

    Yet, these latest messages add a particularly sad element to this scandal.

    Joe and Jim Biden were propping up a man who was barely able to function.

    However, Hunter was still the conduit for allegedly millions in foreign money.

    He was the firebreak between the money and any scandal.This was made evident in a recent and rare sit-down interview; MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle delicately broached the scandals involving Hunter by emphasizing that it is a “personal” matter and assuring the president (and the viewers) that the still unknown charges involve “no ties to you.”

    Hunter increasingly looks like the designated defendant of the Bidens; the sin-eater who may have to take one for the team in the form of a couple tax charges.

    Yet, even now, to use Jim Biden’s words, “This can work.”

    Hunter’s new “safe harbor” may be a limited indictment that conspicuously avoided charges as an unregistered agent.

    Likewise, Attorney General Merrick Garland has seen to that by steadfastly refusing to appoint a special counsel despite references to the president getting a proposed cut of these deals and instructions to use code names for him like the “Big Guy” to conceal his role.

    Most recently, an IRS whistleblower came forward to accuse the Justice Department of interfering with the tax investigation of Hunter by “slow walking” the investigation and making a series of decisions that worked to his advantage.

    As made clear by Jim Biden, there is always a plan in the Biden family. Back in 2018, he assured his nephew that “as usual just need several months of [your father’s] help for this to work. Let’s talk about it. It makes perfect sense to me.” In the meantime, the message from Uncle Jim likely remains “stay calm and carry on.”

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 18:20

  • The Great Student Loan Nonpayment Boondoggle Is Over And Household Spending Is About To Collapse
    The Great Student Loan Nonpayment Boondoggle Is Over And Household Spending Is About To Collapse

    In the small print detailing the end of the debt ceiling melodrama which, as we explained, is a farce as it boosts inflation-adjusted spending contrary to Republican promises, there was some actual news: the great student loan boondoggle is about to come to a screeching halt, after a three year “emergency pause” which redirected tens of billions in dollars away from mandatory student loan repayment to other forms of discretionary spending.

    According to Goldman, the agreement announced on Saturday between uniparty leaders Joe Biden and Kevin McCarthy titled hilariously the “Fiscal Responsibility Act”, prohibits the Biden Administration from extending the pause on student loan repayments in place since March 2020, even if it does not block the Administration’s student loan forgiveness plan, which would wipe out up to $20,000 in federal loans per borrower and is currently being weighed by the Supreme Court (the plan was announced last year but has not yet implemented).

    Here are the details: late last year, Biden extended the repayment pause, which postpones roughly $5bn per month in student loan repayments, until 60 days after the Supreme Court ruled on the separate $400bn loan forgiveness plan the – the Supreme Court is likely to rule on loan forgiveness in June, so this likely would mean a restart of payments after August 2023.

    And now, the debt limit agreement prohibits further extension of the payment pause, but remains silent on the student loan forgiveness plan which however will be nixed by SCOTUS much to the chagrin of screaming libs and lifelong members of the “free $hit” army. Prior to the announced debt limit deal Goldman had already assumed the repayment pause would end on schedule, though there was clearly a chance the White House might have extended it once again. The debt limit agreement eliminates that possibility (“except as expressly authorized by an act of Congress”) and should result in a restart of student loan payments in September 2023.

    What happens then?

    Well, according to Jefferies, the return of monthly loan payments presents risks similar to the effects of the 2013 fiscal cliff, when tax increases led to reduced consumer spending. And in a note released Monday (available to pro subscribers), JPMorgan’s chief US economist Michael Feroli said that the end of the payment moratorium will reduce annual disposable personal income by $38 billion, which will reduce consumer spending.

    Separately, a March analysis by FreightWaves found that federal government programs boosted personal income by an estimated $2.3 trillion from March 2020 to December 2022. According to The Motley Fool, consumers received an average of $3,450 in stimulus during the COVID economy. This included direct payments into bank accounts, an expanded Child Tax Credit and an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit. But one of the biggest COVID-related stimulus programs was not factored into the s numbers: student loan forbearance.

    As noted above, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said the student loan deferment program will end no later than June 30, 2023, and payments are expected to resume by Sept. 1, 2023: “The amount of money we are talking about, in excess of a trillion dollars, is staggering. Student loans represent 7% of U.S. GDP” according to FrightWaves.

    Putting these numbers in context, 64% of the $1.7 trillion in student loan debt have been in forbearance for the past three years, amounting to $1.1 trillion. Many of the 25 million Americans who have deferred payments for student debt are aged 18-44 years old, one of the most important demographic groups that drive consumer spending. 

    Some more math: according to a New York Fed study, the average student loan payment is $393 per month.

    For consumers taking advantage of the program, they have deferred 39 months worth of payments, resulting in more than $15,327 in additional discretionary income during the period, much larger than the amount most consumers received from other COVID stimulus programs. 

    The forbearance program, when originally conceived, was intended to be a short-term program to protect consumers from the COVID black swan event. But many consumers made financial decisions based on this short-term cash flow boost, treating the cash as permanent. In fact, as the latest NY Fed household debt study showed, delinquency on student loans – until 2020 the highest among all types of credit – collapsed to near zero courtesy of the repayment moratorium. Expect the red line to soar higher in coming quarters.

    A sudden increase of $393 per month in “new” – but really old – loan repayments will force prime-age consumers (those aged 18-44 years) old to cut back on discretionary spending. Since portions of this demographic have a tendency to prioritize experiences over goods consumption, we can expect this will have a much bigger impact on services demand and spending, which as discussed previously, has been the only pillar supporting the US economy now that  goods spending has fallen off a cliff.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 18:00

  • Three Years Later, No Justice For BLM Insurrection In D.C.
    Three Years Later, No Justice For BLM Insurrection In D.C.

    Authored by Julie Kelly via American Greatness,

    D.C.’s lead prosecutor has turned a blind eye to a six-month campaign of terror in the nation’s capital in 2020 so he could keep his sights on the mostly nonviolent protesters of January 6, 2021…

    “Our office prosecutes all acts of violence, regardless of political motivation, the same.”

    So said U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves—under oath, mind you, and with a straight face – during a hearing of the House Oversight Committee earlier this month. 

    Representative Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) questioned Graves’ disparate treatment of Black Lives Matters rioters who terrorized Washington, D.C., in 2020 versus Trump supporters involved in the events of January 6, 2021.

    Although the start of both incidents was a mere seven months apart, they are a world away in terms of accountability.

    In what Graves calls the “Capitol Siege” investigation, more than 1,000 Trump supporters have been criminally charged.

    Graves, a Biden appointee, has promised to double that caseload before he’s finished. His office announces new arrests every week.

    That, however, is not the case for rioters who caused far more violence and inflicted far more damage in the nation’s capital in 2020. The rioting that began on May 29, 2020 at Lafayette Square prompted the lockdown of the White House; Donald Trump, his wife, and teenage son were ushered to an underground bunker for their safety as looters and arsonists repeatedly tried to scale the fence and break through police barricades erected outside the White House.

    And what started that night in 2020 didn’t just last a few hours, as was the case with the Capitol protest. On June 1, rioters burned part of St. John’s Church, an historical landmark across from the White House, and set ablaze other areas of the public park.

    Chaos continued throughout the summer with the president, his family, and White House staff under constant threat. Police arrested 11 people at Lafayette Square in July 2020 for various offenses including assault of a police officer. “The Tuesday night incidents that stretched over hours are the latest confrontations to transpire near the White House, where protesters have been gathering daily for more than a month to protest for racial justice after the killing of George Floyd in the custody of Minneapolis police,” the Washington Post reported on July 8, 2020.

    After Trump accepted the GOP nomination for president on White House grounds in August 2020, rioters chased Republican lawmakers, including Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his wife, leaving the event. Some assaulted police in an attempt to get near members of Congress; Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), who lost both legs and a finger in Afghanistan, was surrounded and shouted down by Black Lives Matter protesters as he tried to get home.

    Elected officials weren’t the only targets of rage-filled activists occupying the heart of the nation’s capital that year. Trump supporters, including young families with children, were attacked by BLM and Antifa rioters during pro-Trump rallies in November and December 2020.

    But the violent demonstrations at Lafayette Square represent the closest comparison to January 6: clashes between federal police and protesters on federal property. An Interior Department inspector general report detailed the turbulent situation at Lafayette Square that endangered police and the president for days 

    [The] Treasury Annex building was vandalized; officers were assaulted with projectiles, such as bottles and bricks; and a brick struck a [U.S. Park Police] officer in the head, resulting in the officer’s hospitalization. USPP officers reported that some protesters threw projectiles, such as bricks, rocks, caustic liquids, frozen water bottles, glass bottles, lit flares, rental scooters, and fireworks, at law enforcement officials. Overall, 49 USPP officers were injured during the protests from May 29 to May 31, including one who underwent surgery for his injuries. The Secret Service—also reported injuries to their personnel during this time. On the evening of May 30, individuals at the protests threw projectiles at the officers and ultimately breached the first row of bike-rack fencing, thereby eliminating the buffer between the protesters and law enforcement officers.

    Dozens of people were arrested, including a man who jumped over two barriers in an attempt to enter the White House. Yet only a handful of protesters faced federal charges—in sharp contrast to January 6 protesters who all face federal counts even for low-level offenses such as “parading” in the Capitol. Nearly all the charges initially filed by the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s office were dropped. (Graves did not take over the office until November 2021.)Despite his claim his office is “prosecuting a number of individuals in connection with the incidents of the summer of 2020,” that simply does not appear to be the case, particularly since Graves further confirmed to Gosar that the office “declined a number of arrests presented to it under the leadership of the prior administration.”

    But a change in political leadership does not absolve Graves from failing to bring federal charges against violent criminals who tried to destroy the nation’s capital in 2020. If Graves can indict nonviolent individuals for “seditious conspiracy” who did little more than make travel plans to attend political rallies on January 6, he could easily find more damning evidence against deep-pocketed organizers who encouraged thousands of rioters to occupy D.C. for months, threaten the president, traumatize residents and businesses, assault federal police, and intimidate Republican lawmakers and voters in the seat of American government—a legitimate “insurrection.”

    Not only has Graves not charged any suspects involved in the 2020 riots under his watch, but his office also helped negotiate a settlement between the Justice Department and Lafayette Square rioters, who sued the government for violating their civil rights during what Graves called “racial justice demonstrations in Lafayette Square.” The settlement with Black Lives Matter D.C. required Park Police and Secret Service to update their policies to protect those who “peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights.”

    First Amendment rights these days are in the eye of the beholder—or in this case, the lead government prosecutor who decided to turn a blind eye to a six-month campaign of terror in the nation’s capital in 2020 so he could keep his sights on people who participated in a mostly nonviolent, comparatively brief protest on January 6.

    Clearly, all “sieges” are not created equal.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 05/30/2023 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

May 30

Today’s News 30th May 2023

  • China To Put Humans On The Moon By 2030
    China To Put Humans On The Moon By 2030

    Weeks after Russia’s former head of the Roscomsmos space agency cast doubt on the US moon landing in 1969, China announced plans to put a person on the moon by 2030.

    Moon Base Alpha by digital painter Jon Hrubesch

    In a Monday announcement, Lin Xiqiang, the deputy director of China’s Manned Space Agency, said that the CCP’s moon landing project – part of the country’s broader Lunar Exploration Project (Chang’e Project, named after the Chinese moon goddess) – had only “recently” been kick started. The project seeks to eventually enable short-term stays on the lunar surface, as along with the collection of samples and other research, The NY Times reports.

    Chinese scientists have previously nodded at a 2030 goal in a less formal capacity; for example, the chief designer of China’s lunar exploration program said last month that a 2030 landing would be “no problem.”

    The Monday announcement came at a news conference to mark the liftoff of three new astronauts on Tuesday to China’s new space station, which was completed late last year.

    A manned lunar landing would be a major milestone for China’s, and the world’s, space exploration: No human has been on the moon since the United States’ Apollo missions in the 1960s and ’70s. And it could mark a significant achievement for China in its burgeoning competition with the United States in space. China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, has said that the country should become a “great space power.”

    The announcement follows one by NASA, which announced a plan to put a team on the moon by 2025 as part of the (repeatedly delayed) Artemis program.

    A painting of a prospective future lunar colony by artist Rick Guidice for NASA

    Both Beijing and Washington want to build research stations on the moon, and to land people on Mars.

    The Times frames the announcement as a point of contention between the US and China, echoing the space race between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War.

    NASA’s administrator, Bill Nelson, has said that the United States should “watch out” for Chinese attempts to dominate the lunar surface and keep Americans out. A Pentagon report last year warned that China could overtake American capabilities in space by 2045. -NY Times

    China has accelerated its space program in recent years, and is currently the only country (known) to have landed anything on the moon in the 21st century. The CCP also landed a lunar probe on the moon’s far side for the first time in history in 2019.

    If the moon is next for humans, it might be a good time to bone up on your Heinlein.

    Careful, China. You never know what’s up there!

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 23:30

  • Remember The Fallen… And Those They Left Behind
    Remember The Fallen… And Those They Left Behind

    Authored by Brooke Rollins via RealClearPolitics.com,

    The Christmas season of 1942 was clouded by war in the small town of Waterloo, Iowa, but for Mrs. Alleta Sullivan, it was especially dreadful. A rumor was going about town, and it was about her sons. Or rather, it was about all five sons, each of whom had volunteered for the Navy — and elected to serve together aboard the same ship. The brothers meant to fight as they lived, as a team, as a family, each helping the other out — on the vast and distant Pacific as much as in idyllic Iowa. 

    The rumor that reached their mother was that their ship, the light cruiser Juneau, had sunk off Guadalcanal. But Mrs. Alleta Sullivan had received no news. 

    So, she did something very American. She wrote to the Navy. “Dear Sirs,” she began, “I am writing you in regards to a rumor going around that my five sons were killed in action in November. A mother from here came and told me she got a letter from her son and he heard my five sons were killed.”

    The next line, even softened by 80 years, still breaks the heart in its simplicity and directness: “It is all over town now, and I am so worried.”

    Mrs. Sullivan would have been entirely justified in demanding news of her boys. She would have been justified in demanding that the Navy account for them, that she did not have to endure the quiet hell of rumors of her sons. Instead, she does something remarkable, and reading it now is a window into a different — and better — America. She writes that even if her five sons are gone, she will still do her own duty. 

    “[P]lease let me know the truth. I am to christen the U.S.S. TAWASA, Feb. 12th, at Portland, Oregon. If anything has happened to my five sons, I will still christen the ship as it was their wish that I do so.”

    Stop there for a moment and re-read that. Even in the shadow of the most terrible prospect a mother can face, Mrs. Alleta Sullivan tells the Navy it can count on her to keep her commitments. She would never have said it, but here you can see from whom her five sons inherited their own sense of sacrificial devotion. 

    “I hated to bother you,” she continued as if she had anything at all to apologize for, “but it has worried me so that I wanted to know if it was true. So please tell me. It was hard to give five sons all at once to the Navy, but I am proud of my boys that they can serve and help protect their country.”

    Mrs. Sullivan did not have to wait long for her answer. Her letter went to the Navy and crossed paths with the inbound casualty notification. Her letter went out in early January 1943. On the early morning of January 11, three Navy officers arrived at the little house on 98 Adams St. in Waterloo. Mr. and Mrs. Sullivan knew why they had come. The officer in charge knew he could not soften the blow.

    “I’m sorry,” he said, “All five.”

    The story of the Fighting Sullivans is a famous one, notable for its contrast of great virtue — five brothers, on fire with duty imparted by their parents — and great tragedy, in their death together on a black day off the Solomon Islands. We have an obligation to remember. We should also remember that it is not the only tale of its kind. We today are as far from World War II as it was from the Civil War. In that war, there was the heartbreaking episode of Mrs. Bixby and her five sons, all fallen in battle, of whom President Lincoln wrote that they were “so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of Freedom.” In his 2013 “The Guns at Last Light,” Rick Atkinson tells a lesser-known tale of an elderly widower in Missouri, one Henry A. Wright, who waits at his small-town train station for the casket bearing his son, killed on Christmas Eve 1944 in the Ardennes.

    He also received the remains of another son, who died in a German prison camp. He also received the remains of still another son, who died in combat in Germany, 10 days before war’s end.

    Atkinson writes that the three brothers were buried “side by side by side beneath an iron sky.”

    These stories of the grievous loss of the young, strong, brave, and parents burying their children, hit us hard. They should. If they do not, then we are undeserving of the fallen. The five Sullivans, the five Bixbys, and the three Wrights seize our attention and hearts because of the numbers. But make no mistake: the mother, the father, the brother, and the sister who lose a single son at war, do not grieve less because it is just one. 

    For them, there is the consolation in the grace that is only God’s to give.

    On this Memorial Day, we remember all the fallen — and we remember those whom they left behind. We have a sacred obligation “to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan” — and that obligation increases a hundredfold because the battle was borne, and the wife was widowed, and the child was orphaned, for us. “Freedom is not free” is an overused phrase, almost cliche, which does not mean it should not be said. But this Memorial Day, when you say it, think of what it means on the most human level. You live in the greatest nation, among the greatest people, in the history of the world.

    You have that privilege because, across three centuries, unnumbered Americans laid down everything for it.  

    A young man died in battle on a sunny morning on the road to Concord.

    A loving father fell in the wheatfield at Gettysburg. 

    A draftee determined to make his father proud died on the Imjin.

    A bright and eager student breathed his last at Khe Sanh.

    A young woman took her final flight over Fallujah. 

    Remember them. Let the memory steel you – to deserve them.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 23:00

  • Total Farce: Real Spending Under Debt Ceiling Deal Actually Goes Up Next Year
    Total Farce: Real Spending Under Debt Ceiling Deal Actually Goes Up Next Year

    Late last week, we were the first to correctly summarize what the bottom line of the so-called “debt ceiling deal” meant for the US, for future generations of Americans, and for the ridiculous melodrama gripping Washington: a -0.2% of GDP cut in nominal spending.

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

    That’s right: that 0.2% cut in spending is what all the brewhaha was over, a cut which will not only push total debt to $35 trillion by the end of Biden’s term, but will not even put a dent in the long-term US debt trajectory which even the CBO has no problem as showing in its full, hyperinflationary glory.

    Still, to Kevin McCarthy who “negotiated” on behalf of America’s conservatives, that paltry, laughable nominal “spending reduction” was apparently something to be very proud of, as he repeatedly pointed out on his twitter feed…

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

    … if only a closer look reveals that not all is as it seems.

    In its post-mortem of the debt ceiling deal published this evening, Goldman summarizes the outcome as follows: “the spending deal looks likely to reduce spending by 0.1-0.2% of GDP yoy in 2024 and 2025, compared with a baseline in which funding grows with inflation. That said, the boost to funding Congress approved late last year for FY23 was so large (nearly 10% yoy) that overall discretionary spending is likely to be slightly higher in real terms next year despite the new caps.”

    Translation: the “deal” may result in a nominal 0.1% drop in spending (just for next year, after that it ramps up again), but adjusted for inflation, spending in 2024 will be higher yet again!

    Below we excerpt several highlights from the Goldman note, first focusing on the probability of the deal becoming enacted; according to Goldman, the deal is “very likely to pass both chambers of Congress in the coming week” although there are two points of uncertainty in the House.

    • First, the Rules Committee will meet to vote Tuesday (May 30) afternoon/evening on the rule for debate on the debt limit bill, a necessary step before the vote on the House floor. The committee has 9 Republicans and 4 Democrats, but 2 of those Republicans (Reps. Roy and Norman) appear to oppose the bill, with the position of a third (Rep. Massie) unclear. If all three vote against and no Democrat votes in favor, the bill will fail. (Goldman thinks the Rules Committee is very likely to send the bill on to the House Floor, as a majority of the committee will vote for the package even if it takes Democratic support  – it is uncommon but not unheard-of for the minority party to support the majority party’s efforts in the Rules Committee).
    • Assuming Rules Committee passage on Tuesday, the House is likely to vote late on Wednesday (May 31). While it is not entirely clear how Republican and Democratic lawmakers will divide the responsibility for passing this legislation–most lawmakers likely want it to pass but few want to vote for it. As such Goldman is confident that a failed vote in the House is very unlikely. Assuming the House clears the bill Wednesday, the Senate is unlikely to vote on final passage before Friday (June 2) and procedural delays could easily push the vote into the weekend. That said, there is less uncertainty regarding support in the Senate than there is in the House, so this is more a question of timing than outcome.

    … and second, why the so-called spending cuts are a joke:

    The main source of budgetary savings in the deal is a two-year cap on federal discretionary spending. Congress appropriates this segment of spending annually and it accounts for around 25% of total federal spending, with slightly more than half dedicated to defense and the remainder to other “non-defense” spending (generally domestic programs outside of the major benefit programs). The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) will estimate that the spending caps in the deal will reduce discretionary spending by $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years and reduce interest expense by around $160-170bn over that period. On paper, this would reduce projected deficits over the next decade by an average of 0.4-0.5% of GDP.

    That said, the actual spending cut will be much smaller, for two reasons.

    • First, the caps apply for only two years, so most of the projected savings will depend on policy decisions made after the next election. (The description of the deal states that caps apply for 6 years, but they are only enforceable via sequestration for 2024 and 2025 and should have little effect thereafter.)
    • Second, the deal included other details that lessen the effect of the cuts, particularly in 2024. This includes counting the bill’s rescissions of unused COVID funding against spending for the coming year, pre-funding certain items so the spending is excluded from the caps, and a side agreement that $20bn in IRS enforcement funding that would have been spent later in the decade will be redirected toward domestic spending without counting toward the cap. With these adjustments, the White House has indicated it believes non-defense spending will be roughly flat in nominal terms in FY24 compared with this year.

    The chart below provides a rough estimates of the effect of the spending caps with and without the adjustments just described, compared with the White House’s initial reported offer (a freeze in discretionary spending for FY24, and a 1% increase for FY25) and the Republican bill the House passed in April.

    Other things equal, the adjusted caps look likely to reduce spending by 0.1-0.2% of GDP yoy in 2024 and 2025 (lower left chart).

    And here is the punchline: because the increase in funding for FY23 that Congress approved late last year was so large (nearly 10% yoy) some of that spending boost will spill over into FY24 and overall spending is likely to be higher in real terms next year despite the new caps (lower right chart).

    And just like that the uniparty has sold America down the river yet again.

    * * *

    More in the full Goldman note available to professional subscribers in the usual place.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 22:39

  • "Trans Rights" Means Trans Entitlements And The End Of Civil Society
    “Trans Rights” Means Trans Entitlements And The End Of Civil Society

    Authored by Wendy McElroy via The Mises Institute,

    A “civil society” is a community of individuals who are linked together by common interests and activities. Common interests include being able to walk the streets safely (peace) and to exercise such rights as freedom of speech (individual freedom). These shared interests allow common activities to flourish, including commerce and the education of children.

    Civil society is possible only because most people want to live securely, protect their loved ones, and prosper. This laissez-faire attitude used to be a defining characteristic of Americans, but an engineered and well-financed cultural war is destroying America’s renowned tolerance. If the common interests of society break down and peace and freedom are replaced by violence and privilege, then common activities like free-market commerce and education cannot function.

    One movement captures the raw destruction of this culture war against civil society – a demand for “Trans rights!” blasts across America. But a sharp backlash against it has also developed, epitomized by the boycott of Bud Light beer over the company’s use of trans activist Dylan Mulvaney as a new “woman” ambassador for its brand.

    The media characterizes this backlash as antitrans hatred by conservatives, Christians, and other troglodytes. But few people care about the sexual or gender orientation of their neighbors. Critics of the trans movement are rebelling against the forced redefinition of biology, the destruction of women’s sports by trans athletes, the hijacking of children’s education, the medical experiment of gender-transitioning children, and the intrusion of penises in women-only spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, prisons, and shelters. Critics don’t want to oppress anyone; they want a return to civil society of peace and individual rights.

    To understand why the “trans rights” movement has caused such damage, it is necessary to ask three questions.

    1. What is a “transgendered” person?

    2. What are “rights”?

    3. What is produced by the actions the movement takes?

    What is a transgendered person? Already we’re in trouble. Many prominent intellectuals today can’t even answer the simpler question, What is a woman? This article uses a common definition: “Transgender describes people whose gender identity does not match their assigned gender at birth.” It is one of many gender categories being advanced by social justice. There are as many as eighty-one distinct categories, all of which are said to be fluid or constructed over time.

    Politically speaking, transgenderism and the other gender categories are a continuation of identity politics. This is a fairly standard definition of identity politics: “The politics of group-based movements claiming to represent the interests and identity of a particular group, rather than policy issues relating to all members of the community. The group identity may be based on ethnicity, class, religion, sex, sexuality, or other criteria” (emphasis added). It is an attempt to splinter society into groups and categories, all of which are at war with each other because their interests are said to conflict. What does this war look like?

    Consider a controversial example: gender transitioning. This is when a person uses reassignment therapy, hormone replacement, and sex reassignment surgery to change their birth sex. Few argue against the gender transition of adults who pay for the process themselves. But the trans movement demands the gender transitioning of children, often at taxpayer expense; that is, a tomboy might become a “boy” through methods that include irreversible surgery.

    There are at least two flash points here. One is the minimum age at which a person should transition. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health claims hormones can start at age fourteen and some surgeries at fifteen—in other words, at the height of a teenager’s sexual confusion. Recently, a licensed social worker at a children’s medical center in Austin, Texas, was reportedly recorded as saying the center provided gender modification to children as young as eight. On April 25, Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Chip Roy submitted a formal request to the center for information on how gender dysphoria is diagnosed, how federal dollars are spent in the process, and whether patients under eighteen underwent “experimental medical procedures.”

    The group war here is between a child’s right against physical abuse and trans activists’ demands for children’s access to transition. The other flash point is that transitions are often performed without parental consent or despite parental objections. The rights war here—trans activists are usurping traditional parental rights, and parents are outraged.

    The idea that the rights of one group conflict with those of another is perverse because it destroys the very basis of human rights. Human rights are universal because they are rooted in human nature. All human beings possess the same rights to the same degree. Rights are not based on secondary characteristics such as gender; they rest on a shared humanity. In other words, a trans person has the same rights to the same degree as every other person in society. No more, no less.

    The “rights” demanded by trans activists are actually entitlements or group privileges. This is made clear by the claim of historical oppression, which is used to justify many demands. What is really being claimed is victimhood, upon which their entitlements are based. For trans activists to sustain their victimhood status, however, those who oppose them must be cast as oppressors and endless haters. Conveniently, this characterization removes the need to deal with any argument the “haters” present, such as the need for real human rights.

    Again, this trans stance is a perversion. If the trans movement has been historically oppressed—and I do not argue against this—then the movement should value individual rights more than the average person. These freedoms are how an aggrieved individual rises to his or her feet. But trans activists do not want to be treated as equal individuals; they want to be a privileged group that imposes huge costs on the majority of society to their great benefit. Individual rights are an obstacle.

    Gender transition is one area in which civil society is being replaced with civil warfare, but there are many others:

    • Trans “women” housed in women-only venues, like prisons and shelters, put biological women there at risk of sexual assault. Rapes are already happening.

    • Trans curricula in American public schools indoctrinate children at the expense of teaching basic life skills, like math and literacy.

    • A prominent doctor on Fox News warned, “First-year medical students [are] exposed to woke ‘sex and gender primer’ lesson.” This shifts the focus away from medical problems; it could also damage relationships with patients who do not share woke ideology or are not in a privileged group. The same is happening in law schools.

    • The trans agenda violates constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech in myriad ways, from forcing schools to use pronouns like “xe” and “hir” to shouting down speakers or violently attacking them.

    • Draconian hate speech laws are destroying meaningful public discourse. A new bill passing through the Irish parliament, for example, outlaws communication or the possession of material that might incite hatred against “protected” classes, including gender. This is punishable by up to five years in prison.

    • The demand to include trans athletes in women’s sports is destroying the entire field.

    • Transitioned children who deeply regret transitioning are generally silenced or dismissed.

    One way detransitioners are dismissed is through studies and statistics into which little trust can be invested. An article in the Associated Press claims, “In a review of 27 studies” of transgender surgeries, “1 percent on average expressed regret.” If this is true, it is good news. But is it true? The incessant ideology pumped through academia and the airwaves is yet another cost to civil society. Academics, journalists, and so-called experts have earned the public’s scorn. Studies and research have become just one more front in this war of all against all.

    The media and authorities richly deserve this summary judgment from the public. Consider how they handle acts of violence. Every act of violence against a trans person seems to be widely reported and condemned, as it should be. But trans violence against biological women or other outsiders seems to be ignored or excused. Even the trans shooter in Nashville who killed three nine-year-old school children and three adults is protected by authorities who refuse to release the shooter’s manifesto. And media reports often expressed more concern about a backlash against trans people than about the dead children. SAVE Services, an agency that works to assure due process and fairness in schools, has an interesting page called “Stop the Wave of Transgender Violence” where many cases of trans violence are documented. In this environment, it is simply not possible to know what’s true about the levels of violence and against whom.

    I would end by asking, can a more general violence—a savage civil unrest—be far behind? I believe it is already here.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 21:50

  • More Than 50,000 US Stores Will Close By 2027 According To UBS
    More Than 50,000 US Stores Will Close By 2027 According To UBS

    Over 2,000 stores across all retail sectors have closed in the past 12 months according to a recent report from UBS retail analyst Michael Lasser (available to pro subs in the usual place), and that is just the beginning. “As of 3Q’22 (latest available data), retailers shed -1,500 net stores. This number is already up significantly in ‘23 with the likes of Bed Bath & Beyond, Foot Locker, Tuesday Morning and others closing stores recently” the UBS economists wrote.

    “We believe this trend should continue in the years to come, with consumers consolidating their trips and shifting towards online channels. As underperforming retail stores are shuttered, it should help the store productivity of surviving locations,” the report authors said, and predicted that over the next 5 years, “another 50,000 stores will close on the current store base of ~940K stores in the US (ex. gas and food service).”

    “This simply implies that there will be -5% fewer stores by the end of ’27. As this happens, we believe this trend will benefit the large, well-capitalized retailers HD, LOW, WMT, TGT, COST) and those with unique differentiations (FND, ASO, EYE) who stand to capture a disproportionate amount of market share.” In other words, just like with US banks, the big players will only get bigger while the small ones disappear.

    To put this in perspective, UBS calculates that assuming 50k stores close over the next five years and that the average sales per store is $5.7mm, it would translate to $285b of retail sales that are “up for grabs”. Assuming that 26% of these sales go online (the bank’s ’27 estimate for penetration), it would mean that retailers like WMT, HD and COST have the potential to attract $210b in sales. This translates to $1,600 annual spend per household that has the potential to shift to the leading retailers.

    The good news for big retailers is bad news for the small ones:

    In our view, these smaller chains and mom & pops are most at risk of closures given these firms typically have less access to capital needed to invest in developing a robust omni-channel offering. As of 2020, 57% of retail stores are operated by firms with less than 20 employees and 68% of stores are operated by chains with less than 500 employees. These smaller chains shed -40K stores in the past 10 years while chains with 500+ employees added 17K stores.

    It could get even worse: the base case scenario assumes that retail sales growth continues at 4% annually which is inline with the long-term trend. However, in a downside case, the protracted US recession would put downward pressure on the UBS store closure forecast where if retail sales only grow 3.0-3.5% it would result in 70K-90K closures

    UBS highlighted several factors that are driving retail store closures. They include higher costs, which raise the bar for keeping stores open; a decline in units per store in most retail sectors; and the likelihood that store closures will disproportionately affect smaller chains.

    From 2007 to 2019, firms with less than 500 employees closed about 40,000 stores, or 5% of their base, while retailers with more than 500 employees added 17,000 stores. The overall cost of doing business rose significantly in the last 12 months, due in part to higher wages. Retail hourly wages, which are typically the largest cost component of running a store, increased about 5% over the last years, the analysts said.

    On top of that, retailers will need to increase store productivity by 4.5% annually as retail rents per square foot increase for neighborhood and community centers. “These costs will likely continue to move higher, increasing the hurdle rate to keep stores open,” UBS said.

    As RetailDive notes, about 14,000 of the estimated closings will be in the softlines sector. UBS forecasts that department stores and specialty retailers will remain net store closers. And while retailers with a heavy mall presence will continue store closings, there is a faint silver lining for off-price retailers who should grow units.

    The report also singles out consumer electronics and home furnishings as retail sectors that also need to shrink their store footprint. Consumer electronics retailers should close about 9,000 stores, while home furniture stores should shrink by about 4,000 locations.

    One change that’s become essential versus discretionary for retailers is an increasing embrace of digital investments like buy online, pay in store; ship from store; same-day delivery; and buy online, return in store. UBS says online retail spending per household was $9,900 in 2022, up from $8,900 a year ago and up from $4,000 in 2015. Companies with a strong DTC focus combined with high brand loyalty, like Nike and Levi’s, are best positioned for the ongoing shift to digital fulfillment.

    Finally, while there is much more in the full report, here are the 9 main takeaways:

    • Takeaway #1: We estimate 50K+ stores will close by ‘27 if online penetration goes to 26% & retail sales grow 4%
    • Takeaway #2: Store closures will vary by subsector
    • Takeaway #3: In 2022, there were net store closings, a reversal from strong store openings in 2021
    • Takeaway #4: We assume 4% retail sales growth until 2027, in-line with its long-term average
    • Takeaway #5: A step change in banks willingness to lend tends to be a leading indicator of an acceleration in store closures
    • Takeaway #6: Higher costs raises the hurdle rate on keeping stores open
    • Takeaway #7: Store closures will likely impact smaller chains disproportionately
    • Takeaway #8: Several sectors are at or near peak store productivity
    • Takeaway #9: Units per store declined for most sub-sectors in 2022 (trends vary by sub-sector)

    Much more in the full report and slideshows available to pro subs in the usual place.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 21:15

  • There Are 99 Pages Of Details In The Debt-Ceiling Deal, And A Big Trap On Republicans
    There Are 99 Pages Of Details In The Debt-Ceiling Deal, And A Big Trap On Republicans

    By Mish Shedlock of Mish Talk

    Semifinal Details 

    If you wish to wade through 99 pages of details, here’s the full text of the Allegedly Final Debt-Ceiling Deal.

    The Wall Street Journal has a synopsis in Biden, McCarthy Agree to Final Details of Debt-Ceiling Deal

    With some conservative Republicans in both chambers signaling initial opposition to the deal, Biden urged both chambers of Congress to approve the agreement and said McCarthy would have sufficient votes in the Republican-led House to secure passage.

    He also sought to quell concerns among Democrats over some of the deal’s provisions, such as additional work requirements for certain government safety-net programs, and rejected criticism from some progressive lawmakers that the agreement would let vulnerable people go hungry. “That’s a ridiculous assertion,” Biden said.

    Republican Dissent

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

    Essentially What the Democrats Wanted

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

    Trojan Horse View

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

    Democrats Got Everything They Wanted

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

    Deal is Insanity

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

    “A $4T debt ceiling increase with virtually no cuts is not what we agreed to.”

    Democrats Oddly Calm

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

    “Notice how oddly calm Democrats are for a change? This is why…”

    Framework for a Deal

    Despite the WSJ headline, this will not be the final deal. First, the bill has to clear the House. I suspect some House revisions. 

    Even if not, the Senate is also highly likely to make changes which will then have to be approved by the House.

    Complete Surrender

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

    What’s Currently Inside?

    1. A small cut in nonmilitary spending for the 2024 fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1, and a 1% cap on spending increases for the 2025 fiscal year. Veterans’ health programs would be exempt.
    2. Military spending in fiscal 2024 would be roughly at the level of Biden’s fiscal 2024 budget request, according to two people familiar with the matter, which would amount to about a 3% increase.
    3. A $21.4 billion reduction in funds that Congress approved last year for the IRS to boost tax enforcement and modernize its technology. [The original funding was $80 billion].
    4. A provision aimed at pushing Congress to give up its practice of funding the government through a single, omnibus bill, as it has done in recent years, and to return to the tradition of passing 12 appropriations bills that cover the various parts of the federal budget. The measure has potential to win conservative support for the deal and was pushed by an influential Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie (R., Ky.), who believes that Congress should follow regular order when conducting its business.
    5. The provision would call for the U.S. government to operate under a so-called continuing resolution at 99% of the prior year’s spending levels until the spending bills were enacted. Lawmakers were awaiting text to see the date at which the cuts would be triggered.
    6. An expansion through 2030 of the requirement that some able-bodied people without dependents hold a job or be enrolled in a job training program to receive food stamps, which is a Republican priority. [This unfortunately excludes Medicaid. And it only applies to low-income adults without dependents between the ages of 49 and 54. It will be phased in over three years. All of these are far less than the original deal passed by McCarthy] 
    7. Imposition of a one- or two-year time limit to complete environmental reviews for energy and infrastructure projects. The bill allows a project’s developer to sue if the review isn’t completed in time. [I suspect this is a huge trap, more comments below]
    8. Currently, reviews required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 take an average 4.5 years to complete and can involve multiple agencies. The deal calls for a single agency to assume responsibility for the study. Speeding up the reviews has been a priority for Republicans. [This too is a huge trap]
    9. Expediting the remaining permits necessary to complete the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a 303-mile natural-gas pipeline between West Virginia and Virginia. 

    Understanding the Trap

    The above points are quotes from the WSJ plus my comments in brackets[].

    Points seven, eight, and nine are part of the trap. Point nine will be debated in the Senate. Expect fireworks. 

    Both sides seem to be in favor of points seven and eight. But one side is sure to be wrong.

    With Biden as President, it’s easy to see who fell into the trap. Democrats will speed up and approve every clean energy boondoggle imaginable at great speed. 

    Republicans will have every project rejected at great speed.

    This situation will reverse if Republicans win the White House in 2024. But a lot of boondoggles will be approved in the interim.

    Best Part of the Deal and Overall Analysis

    The best part of the deal are points four and five. A no earmark provision needs to be added to those points.

    But Democrats get far more out of this than Republicans.

    Hold the Line

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

    35 GOP House Representatives will likely vote against this deal.  Republicans only have four votes to spare. 

    Expect More Boondoggles Like These

    Question and Answer of the Day

    Q: Will This Pass?
    A: Yes, easily.

    Don’t be surprised if more Democrats vote for this version than Republicans. Look no further than trap points seven and eight above to understand why.

    In return for minor cutbacks in spending, and a token roll-in work requirement for food stamps, Democrats will get to rubber stamp every pet clean energy boondoggle they seek. 

    I mentioned this in a previous post and still have not seen it mentioned elsewhere. Don’t be surprised if this deal costs McCarthy his job as Speaker of the House.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 20:40

  • No Laughing Matter: John Cleese Holds Line Against Calls To Cancel Scene In 'Life Of Brian'
    No Laughing Matter: John Cleese Holds Line Against Calls To Cancel Scene In ‘Life Of Brian’

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    We have previously discussed how comedians have been objecting that woke activists are killing comedy. The complaint is that a group of perpetually pissed off, humorless people are remaking the world in their own image.

    It began with college campuses where comedians are now saying are dead as venues since you cannot safely make any joke that insults any group other than white straight males or Christians or conservatives. Others have objected to hate speech laws limiting comedians, particularly after some comedians have been prosecuted for “malicious communications” or insulting groups or religious figures. Six out of ten students view offensive jokes as hate speech. This week, however, activists appear to have met their match in a legend of comedy who has opposed the cutting of  a scene from the movie The Life of Brian. 

    No, activists are not upset with the endless jokes about Italians, Christians, and Jews. It is the scene involving a man who wants to become a women and have a child. 

    John Cleese is refusing to yield.

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

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

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

    In The Life of Brian, the scene involves “Stan” who announces that he wants to be a woman named Loretta and have babies. 

    Activists objected that it made fun of transgender people and demanded that it be cut from the film.

    The scene shows Stan declaring “I want to be a woman… It’s my right as a man. I want to have babies… It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.” After Cleese’s protest, the character snaps, “Don’t you oppress me!”

    Some reported that Cleese had agreed to cut the scene. However, Cleese tweeted out a correction of the “misreporting.”

    What is interesting is that Rob Reiner is reportedly working on the reboot. Reiner is known as someone who is a champion of the left in Hollywood. This may be an inauspicious start for the reboot effort.

    Cleese is not alone in raising this alarm. Comedians including Chris Rock blamed the range of “unfunny TV shows” on the fact that “everybody’s scared to make a move”. Ricky Gervais objected that the BBC is now paralyzed in fear of offending anyone.  Jennifer Saunders that people now “talk themselves out of stuff now because everything is sensitive.”

    The same complaint has been made in the age of woke advertising that funny commercials seem increasingly rare as oppose to corporate virtue signaling.

    The director of the classic comedy Airplane! observed that humor is being squeezed out of Hollywood and the movie today would have virtually every joke removed. David Zucker called it the “death of creativity.”

    They are now set upon by a legion of humorless people who seek to reduce the world to their own narrow range of acceptable levity or irony.  These comedy giants are set upon by an Army of Lilliputians who have contributed little to culture beyond chilling artists and writers into obedient silence or compulsive comedy criteria.

    Of course, Cleese could always use the line from Bryan’s mother: “He’s a very naughty boy! Now, piss off!”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 20:25

  • Philadelphia Crime Wave Of Burglary, Larceny And Auto Theft Spills Into Nearby Suburbs
    Philadelphia Crime Wave Of Burglary, Larceny And Auto Theft Spills Into Nearby Suburbs

    The crime wave that has been actively taking place in Philadelphia (among many other U.S. cities) is now starting to spread to the suburbs. 

    Crime statistics were up “double-digit percentages” in Delaware, Montgomery, and Bucks counties – three major suburban counties that border Philadelphia county – from 2021 to 2022, according to the Delaware Valley Journal. 

    The Pennsylvania Uniform Crime Reporting System shows that increasing crimes include burglary, larceny, and motor vehicle theft. Oddly, the report notes that Chester County, usually seen as a hotbed of crime near Philadelphia, saw its numbers decrease in almost ever statistical category. 

    In other words, the crime wave that started near the middle of 2020 appears to be moving out of the city and into the nearby suburbs. Larceny and auto thefts are seeing two of the biggest increases, the report wrote:

    Taking the four counties combined, auto thefts climbed from 2,302 in 2021 to 2,834 in 2022, an increase of 23 percent. Those figures compare to a dramatic spike in auto thefts in Philadelphia. In 2022, the city reached a two-decade-long high of 14,533 car thefts, up from 11,341 in 2021. This year, however, the city is set to blow past both of those figures, as the current trend shows Philadelphia will likely surpass 20,000 car thefts in 2023.

    In the four counties, larceny counts went from 23,690 in 2021 to 30,496 in 2022. Burglaries are up 32%, 24% and 17% in Bucks, Delaware and Montgomery counties, the report notes. 

    Montgomery County DA Kevin Steele’s website has focused instead on gun crimes, which don’t show in the above categories. His office’s website says he is “strategically focused on: A) homicides; B) illegal guns on our streets: ghost guns and gun traffickers putting deadly weapons in the hands of criminals; C) drug traffickers who are killing people by peddling their deadly poisons like fentanyl and other drugs; and D) those who cause harm to women and children.”

    In Bucks County, DA Weintraub commented: “One trend we’re seeing across the state is younger and younger people, especially minors, are the population rising the quickest [for] carrying firearms.”

    And Delco DA Jack Stollsteimer wrote an op-ed in January which stated: “We have reduced the gun violence homicide rate in the City of Chester by 60 percent and the overall number of gun violence incidents by 46 percent,” Stollsteimer wrote. The only other measurement he provided in the piece was to say, “Through collaboration and innovation, my team has spearheaded a 30 percent reduction in the prison population here in Delaware County.”

    The city is already starting to implement changes, electing former state representative and city councilor Cherelle Parker as the Democratic nominee for mayor, which nearly assures her win in November. Parker was seen as the most pro-law enforcement candidate of the left, running on bolstering the police’s ranks and supporting policies like stop and frisk.

    Now the only question is whether the suburbs will have to be next in addressing the issue…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 20:05

  • VDH: It Was Always Only About Power With The Left
    VDH: It Was Always Only About Power With The Left

    Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

    Why do so many liberal climate-activist grandees fly on private jets? Or why do those who profited from Black Lives Matter have a propensity for estate living? Or why do the community-activist Obamas prefer to live in not one, but three mansions? 

    The answer is that calls for radical equity, “power for the people,” and mandated equality are usually mostly sloganeering for those who enjoy power and the lucre it brings, and their wish is to augment both for themselves. The result is that the issue du jour of mandated equality often becomes secondary if not irrelevant. There is neither fear of inconstancy nor hypocrisy, given the central theme that governs a leftist party line is political utility—or the ends of power always more than justify the hypocritical means used to obtain it. 

    Spout racialist nonsense for 40 years? Harass women and young girls by blowing in their hair and squeezing them too tightly? Create a family grifting syndicate to leverage foreign cash in quid pro quo fashion? Praise racial segregationists?  

    Joe Biden did all those things and more. But he also did them in service to a supposed noble cause, sort of like the current board president of the NAACP promoting a black travel ban on Florida, while he lives—in Florida!

    Keep political utility in mind and the baffling hypocrisy of the Left makes all too perfect sense. 

    January 6 vs. the “Summer of Love” 

    From all the tens of thousands of January 6 Capitol protesters a small percentage entered the Capitol itself. Of that group, an even smaller number committed violent acts. Most of those seriously injured that day were among the protesters themselves. Despite official propaganda, there were not five police officers killed on January 6 as alleged by the Left. 

    Instead, the only likely death at the hand of another was the diminutive, 5’2’’, 14-year-military veteran and unarmed Ashli Babbitt. She was lethally shot by a Capitol officer Michael Byrd for the likely misdemeanor of trespassing and—illegally entering a broken window to the Capitol. 

    Yet over a thousand protesters were arrested, tried, and mostly convicted of various charges from parading without a permit to insurrection. Many of them were sentenced to long prison sentences. Some may spend most of their remaining lives in prison.  

    The Left has justified long sentences on three grounds: One, the protesters targeted iconic government buildings as the object of their attacks. Two, the protesters were ideologically motivated and seemed bent on insurrection to warp the political process. Three, the protesters were attempting to nullify an election by their massing at the Capitol and therefore questioned the very integrity of the 2020 election.  

    In theory these were legitimate reasons to treat harshly any convicted of such insurrectionary crimes. But in reality, the Left cared little about its pretexts justifying harsh responses, much less proving their charges. What mattered were the political opportunities offered by January 6, and the chance to leverage the occasion to consolidate power.  

    Why and how can one assume that? 

    In 2020, for 120 days, left-wing mobs led by Antifa and Black Lives Matter wrought far greater destruction in nonstop rioting, arson, looting, and assault. Over 35 people died. Two billion dollars in property damage followed. Some 1,500 officers were assaulted and injured. Over 14,000 protesters were arrested. 

    Yet few were convicted of any serious crimes; fewer were sentenced to long sentences—given prosecutors, state and federal, claimed the violence was merely a result of protesters exercising their “constitutional right” of dissent.  

    Left-wing politicians and activists from then-vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris (“They’re not going to let up, and they should not, and we should not.”) to Nikole Hannah Jones (“Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.”) either excused the often violent protests or urged that they continue.  

    Far from sending in 20,000 federal troops, as occurred after January 6, the Left demanded that then President Trump not resort to such Draconian measures.  

    Note that there were lots of government properties deliberately targeted in iconic fashion. A Seattle police precinct (with officers inside ) was set afire. A mob in Washington, D.C. tried to storm the White House grounds in a fashion that sent the president and secret service agents into a subterranean bunker. A historic Washington, D.C. church was torched. Violent mobs set federal and state courthouses on fire in Las Vegas, Minneapolis, and Portland. 

    Second, note these riots and violence were not random. They were coordinated and seemed to wax and wane with some sort of precise coordination—a fact deemed useful in an election year by the Democratic Left.  

    In her now notorious self-confessional Time essay, Molly Ball bragged that, “There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs.”  “The conversation that followed was a difficult one,” Ball explained, “led by the activists charged with the protest strategy . . . We wanted to be mindful of when was the right time to call for moving masses of people into the street.” 

    Third, had Trump won the 2020 election, the Left was gearing up for yet another round of violence under the pretense that the election had been stolen, in the fashion of its coordinated Washington, D.C. violence on the day of Trump’s 2017 inauguration. 

    Left-wing election denialism—and real efforts to overturn a presidential election—were certainly not new. After the 2016 election, wealthy leftists and celebrities ran television ads begging electors to reject their constitutional fidelity and the popular vote counts in their states, and instead, in insurrectionary style, cast electoral ballots for Hillary Clinton. 

    Prominent leftists from Jimmy Carter to Hillary Clinton also had been on record following the 2016 election claiming that Trump was an illegitimate president and the 2016 election had been rigged in Trump’s favor due to the hoax of Russian collusion.  

    Hillary Clinton—who paid Christopher Steele to use Clinton-related fake sources to compile fabrications and destroy her 2016 rival—later even bragged she was joining “La Résistance.” The chairman of the January 6 committee that damned Trump’s supposed election denialism, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), himself was an election denialist par excellence, who absurdly voted in the Congress to reject George Bush’s popular vote victory in Ohio that decided the 2004 election. 

    By any fair measure the violence of 2020 was a far greater and more deadly threat to the republic than anything occurring on January 6, 2021. But most of the 14,000 arrested perpetrators who were responsible for that incredible summer of violence were exempted because their mayhem was deemed politically useful—in the same fashion it was advantageous to turn the buffoonish Capitol protesters into seasoned revolutionaries. The common denominator was only the Left’s efforts to warp events to achieve power. 

    Liberalism That Loses Utility is Left Behind 

    California has been building massive solar farms in pristine deserts and rural areas. Many spread over thousands of acres and require disruptive supporting infrastructure. In the American Midwest, these new generations of solar farms are unlike anything in our recent past. Often in size larger than Manhattan, they take out of production tens of thousands of acres of prime farmland.

    What is curious about all these next-generation projects is the relative silence of environmentalists to the radical disruptions and dangers they pose to fragile and pristine natural landscapes, rare species of flora and fauna, and quality of life for surrounding rural communities.  

    In the case of hundreds of thousands of lost farm acres, prior liberal advocacy for preserving America’s heartland, and its precious family farm acreage and those who work it, likewise go out the window. 

    Yet if any clean-burning natural gas plant, affordable housing development, a border wall, retirement community, or farming operation caused as much havoc to the environment as solar—and often wind—farms, there would arise leftist outrage replete with environmentalist-driven court injunctions. In other words, left-wing environmentalism is calibrated only by whether the Left or the Right is reengineering the landscape.  

    Irina and Tamara Press, c1960s. Schirner/ullstein bild via Getty Images

    Title IX was an addendum to the 1964 Civil Rights Act that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sex. Through liberal lawsuits and the intervention of activist courts, the statute soon was transmogrified into a sports equity act. Title IX then began to revolutionize high school and college sports programs by demanding equity—in the sense of mandating equal budgets and facilities for women’s and men’s sports.  

    The rationale was that women’s athletics could only achieve parity with male sports if they were gifted the same sorts of budgets, infrastructure, and institutional support. Whatever the intent of the original statute, whatever the effects of activist court intervention, the result was that women’s sports did achieve a much higher social and cultural profile.  

    So how ironic, then, that a half-century of athletic transformation has been completely undermined by the current ritual takeover of the sport by biological men declaring themselves transgendered women. The transgendered have done more damage in three years to women’s sports than a century of chauvinist pigs. 

    In almost every category of competition—track and field, swimming, team sports—prior women’s records have been shattered by athletes who enjoy huge advantages in natural musculoskeletal mass, body size and weight, and innate strength. In the Cold War past, males competing as females were largely a Soviet or Eastern European phenomenon—most notably the Ukrainian sisters, Tamara and Irina Press. The communist bloc, as the Third Reich had earlier in the case of Heinrich Ratjen, scored propaganda points by using males to win “women’s” events. 

    Soon in reaction, hormonal testing and eventually DNA tests were used to ensure an equal playing field for biological women. No matter. What was once a feminist issue is now considered a right-wing hate crime of insisting that biological males not be allowed simply to redefine an entire segment of American life and culture.  

    Note that the Left has sided against feminism in its near hysterical promotion of its newest cause célèbre, transgenderism. Note further that biological women do not win many, if any, events as transgendered males, despite the shibboleth that one can construct one’s own sexual identity that will be equivalent to a biological one. 

    Finally, note that there is no transgendered effort to create a separate category of transgendered sports. Apparently a transgendered Olympics or NCAA event would not offer transgendered contestants and champions the attention and lucre they now achieve by dominating women’s sports. Again, “equity” and feminism were never left-wing positions, but simply useful malleable issues to embrace or reject depending on where and how contemporary political advantage was calibrated. 

    From Reining in Government Abuse to Cheering It 

    Read the contemporary news accounts of the 1975-76 so-called “Church Committee,” a select Senate committee formed to expose and rectify dangerous abuses of civil rights and constitutional norms by the CIA, NSA, and at times the FBI.  

    Most Democrats cheered the post-Watergate committee on, eager to virtue signal as civil libertarians and to stop the rogue and often politically weaponized antics of our investigatory and intelligence agencies.  

    But while there were true civil libertarians, Left and Right, who weighed in on the committee, the general left-wing giddiness over the investigations was predicated on the post-Watergate Democratic revival—one that ensued from ridding the nation of Richard Nixon and using his disgrace to discredit what were considered conservative institutions.  

    Fast forward to 2015-23. Over the last eight years it is hard to imagine any illegal act that the CIA, NSA, or FBI would not commit. Their directors—James Clapper, John Brennan, and Andrew McCabe—have all confessed to lying under oath. A more insidious Robert Mueller, James Comey, and Christopher Wray simply invoke amnesiac excuses or plead ignorance when asked directly about the wrongdoing of their agencies or investigations.  

    The U.S. government, along with the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, paid a foreign national to spy on a rival campaign, compile lies about a rival candidate, and then spread them through government and the media. The FBI arguably sought to alter both the 2016 and 2020 elections. 

    In this same eight-year period, a FISA court was deluded, and an FBI lawyer altered court documents. Phone records were wiped clean. Subpoenaed devices were destroyed. Key evidence that affected a current campaign was put under FBI wraps. Agents openly texted their intent to ensure a predetermined presidential election result. Americans in general were routinely spied upon. Many were framed by FBI skullduggery and had their lives ruined.  

    The extent of the lawbreaking and the warping of elections dwarfs anything discovered during Watergate. And yet the Left never objected to these violations of civil rights or the illegal freelancing of intelligence agencies. Far from it—the Left cheered on the illegality.  

    Why? Because for them hating or worshiping the CIA, NSA, and FBI—or for that matter the Pentagon, IRS, and Justice Department—was never a matter of consistent principle. Instead these bureaucracies were deemed pathological when associated with conservatism and traditionalism, and angelic when their extralegal efforts were put to use for the progressive agenda. 

    There are some grassroots leftists who are deluded into sincerely believing “equity” can be achieved by government confiscation and redistribution. But for most of the elite, the cause is a means to personal and professional power, a fact that explains why one day walking only on four leftist legs is alone correct, the next day just two.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 19:30

  • 64% Of Americans Don't Work-Out At All
    64% Of Americans Don’t Work-Out At All

    How do Americans work out?

    While hitting the gym is something that around a third of those who practice sports do at least occasionally, Statista’s Katharina Buchholz notes below that the Great Outdoors is also a major pull for people looking for some (light) physical exercise.

    According to a survey by Statista Consumer Insights, hiking is the most popular form of exercise in America, with 35 percent of those who do sports engaging in it at least from time to time.

    Other popular outdoorsy pursuits are hunting and fishing (26 percent of sporty Americans do this) and cycling (25 percent). Running is slightly less popular at just 21 percent of respondents naming it as an exercise of choice.

    Infographic: Hitting the Gym or the Great Outdoors? | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    At 29 percent, basketball is the most popular ball game or team sport on the list, followed by (flag) football (25 percent) and baseball/softball (20 percent). Another quarter of the survey’s respondents said they liked to get a workout in by boogieing down on the dancefloor (or maybe just in their living room).

    Responses picked less frequently include soccer (13 percent), cricket (11 percent), table tennis (10 percent) and rugby (6 percent).

    However, 64 percent of Americans do not work out at all according to the survey.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 18:55

  • Gaslighting: The American People Are Trapped In A Textbook Abusive Relationship
    Gaslighting: The American People Are Trapped In A Textbook Abusive Relationship

    Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

    Imagine this.

    A woman, for the sake of my story, is in a marriage with a partner who does not respect her. He insults her regularly, belittles her efforts to improve herself or her situation, and minimizes her feelings.

    In fact, when she tries to stand up for herself, things get even worse. The partner calls into question her memories of the event. He dismisses the way things made her feel, calling the emotions “ridiculous” or “stupid.” He convinces her she’s overreacting and that he was only trying to do what was best for her. When she brings something up, he completely rewrites the event, causing her to doubt what actually happened because she’s in a vulnerable state due to the constant abuse.

    In a situation like this, the abused partner often feels powerless, confused, and unable to leave the situation. They are at a disadvantage because they’ve been influenced to doubt their own reality. This leaves them trapped deeper and deeper in the abusive scenario. They feel unable to escape because they’re really not sure what actually happened. Were they blowing things out of proportion? Are they, in fact, stupid, forgetful, and inept?

    Abusive relationships follow a pattern. There’s a period of breaking the victim down, isolating them from their support systems, and making them dependent on the abuser. Then, the abused partner is maneuvered into the belief that she can’t get by on her own.

    This master manipulation is how people become trapped in abusive relationships.

    And, as I’m about to show, not all abusive relationships are one-on-one romantic relationships.

    What is gaslighting?

    Medical News Today defines gaslighting.

    Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse in which a person or group causes someone to question their own sanity, memories, or perception of reality. People who experience gaslighting may feel confused, anxious, or as though they cannot trust themselves.

    The term “gaslighting” comes from the 1944 classic film (and before that, the play), Gaslight. In the story, a husband tries to make his wife believe she is suffering from a mental illness. Starring Ingrid Bergman and Charles Boyer, it’s well worth a watch.

    Gaslighting is a form of narcissistic abuse. For a quick refresher on the definition of a narcissist and the techniques they use, go here.

    Forbes offers the following signs you are being gaslit:

    Signs to watch for include:

    The “Twilight Zone” effect. Victims of gaslighting often report feeling like a situation is surreal—like it’s happening on a different plane from the rest of their life.

    Language describing you or your behavior as crazy, irrational or overemotional. “When I asked women about their partners’ abusive tactics, they often described being called a ‘crazy bitch,’” Sweet writes in “The Sociology of Gaslighting” in American Sociological Review. “This phrase came up so frequently, I began to think of it as the literal discourse of gaslighting.”

    Being told you’re exaggerating.

    Feeling confused and powerless after leaving an interaction.

    Isolation. Many gaslighters make efforts to isolate victims from friends, family and other support networks.

    Tone policing. A gaslighter may criticize your tone of voice if you challenge them on something. This is a tactic used to flip the script and make you feel that you’re the one to blame, rather than your abuser.

    A cycle of warm-cold behavior. To throw a victim off balance, a gaslighter may alternate between verbal abuse and praise, often even in the same conversation.

    Gaslighting is a deliberate attempt to provoke self-doubt, confusion, and dependence.

    How does someone gaslight another person?

    Again, let’s look to the experts. Medical News Today provides these examples of how gaslighting might take place:

    • Countering: This is when someone questions a person’s memory. They may say things such as, “Are you sure about that? You have a bad memory,” or “I think you are forgetting what really happened.”
    • Withholding: This involves someone pretending they do not understand the conversation, or refusing to listen, to make a person doubt themselves. For example, they might say, “Now you are just confusing me,” or “I do not know what you are talking about.”
    • Trivializing: This occurs when a person belittles or disregards how someone else feels. They may accuse them of being “too sensitive” or overreacting in response to valid and reasonable concerns.
    • Denial: Denial involves a person refusing to take responsibility for their actions. They may do this by pretending to forget what happened, saying they did not do it, or blaming their behavior on someone else.
    • Diverting: With this technique, a person changes the focus of a discussion by questioning the other person’s credibility. For example, they might say, “That is just nonsense you read on the internet. It is not real.”
    • Stereotyping: An article in the American Sociological Review says that a person may intentionally use negative stereotypes about someone’s gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, nationality, or age to gaslight them. For example, they may say that no one will believe a woman if she reports abuse.

    After a period of time, this emotional barrage results in the target of the gaslighting suffering from confusion, doubt, and self-blame.

    • feeling uncertain of their perceptions
    • frequently questioning if they are remembering things correctly
    • believing they are irrational or “crazy”
    • feeling incompetent, unconfident, or worthless
    • constantly apologizing to the abusive person
    • defending the abusive person’s behavior to others
    • becoming withdrawn or isolated from others

    The Forbes article offered these specific examples of gaslighting in romantic relationships.

    “Ebony’s partner would steal her money and then tell her she was ‘careless’ about finances and had lost it herself.”

    “Adriana’s boyfriend hid her phone and then told her she had lost it, in a dual effort to confuse her and prevent her from communicating with others.”

    “Jenn described her ex-boyfriend as a ‘chameleon’ who made up small stories to confuse her, like lying about what color shirt he had worn the day before to make her feel disoriented.”

    “Emily described her ex-husband stealing her keys so she could not leave the house and then insisting she had lost them ‘again.’”

    But if you think this phenomenon is limited to women being abused by their husbands or boyfriends, you’d be wrong.

    Gaslighting doesn’t just happen in romantic relationships.

    Gaslighting is a complicated thing. While it’s common in abusive romantic relationships, it can also occur in unhealthy parent-child relationships, sibling relationships, or even workplaces. But that’s not all. It can also occur on a much broader scale.

    Racial gaslighting

    According to an article in Politics, Group, and Identities, racial gaslighting is when people apply gaslighting techniques to an entire racial or ethnic group in order to discredit them. For example, a person or institution may say that an activist campaigning for change is irrational or “crazy.”

    Political gaslighting

    Political gaslighting occurs when a political group or figure lies or manipulates information to control people, according to an article in the Buffalo Law Review.

    For example, the person or political party may downplay things their administration has done, discredit their opponents, imply that critics are mentally unstable, or use controversy to deflect attention away from their mistakes.

    Institutional gaslighting

    Institutional gaslighting occurs within a company, organization, or institution, such as a hospital. For example, they may portray whistleblowers who report problems as irrational or incompetent, or deceive employees about their rights.

    This often occurs to cover up a mistake that could result in the person who erred facing punitive consequences or to keep people “in their place.” It’s a control mechanism, pure and simple.

    Have we been gaslit by our own government?

    I don’t think it’s farfetched to say that we, the people of the United States of America, have been gaslit.

    Does this sound familiar? Lockdowns that keep you away from friends and loved ones? Losing your income and becoming dependent on handouts doled out by the government? Being censored and mocked when you say anything that is not in line with the official narrative? Being treated like a crazy conspiracy theorist who should be punished because of the harm you’re causing to others if you refuse to go along?

    When you look at it this way, it feels like the entire US government and media have colluded to abuse the people. Many of the Covid-related “truths” that were promoted by the government and the media that we were not allowed to dispute have now been proven to be false. Stories we couldn’t question about the origins of the pandemic have been proven false. In another incident of broad-scale gaslighting unrelated to the pandemic, a lot of evidence has been produced that shows the Biden family may have received money from influence-peddling, but the media tells us not to believe it.

    And like good little victims, it seems like a hefty portion of the country is refusing to believe the evidence, instead believing in the good intentions of their abusers. They’ve been gaslit, brainwashed, and are unable to break free of the manipulation.

    And it’s still going on.

    Recently Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a scathing opinion of the US government’s handling of the Covid pandemic, saying that we “have experienced the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.”

    “Executive officials across the country issued emergency decrees on a breathtaking scale. Governors and local leaders imposed lockdown orders forcing people to remain in their homes. They shuttered businesses and schools, public and private. They closed churches even as they allowed casinos and other favored businesses to carry on. They threatened violators not just with civil penalties but with criminal sanctions too. They surveilled church parking lots, recorded license plates, and issued notices warning that attendance at even outdoor services satisfying all state social-distancing and hygiene requirements could amount to criminal conduct. They divided cities and neighborhoods into color-coded zones, forced individuals to fight for their freedoms in court on emergency timetables, and then changed their color-coded schemes when defeat in court seemed imminent,” he said.

    At the federal level, he highlighted not only immigration decrees but vaccine mandates, the regulation of landlord-tenant relations and pressure on social media companies to suppress “misinformation.”

    The gaslighting blowback was immediate, with breathlessly outraged headlines.

    Slate eloquently opined, “Neil Gorsuch’s List of “Civil Liberties Intrusions” Is, Uh, Missing a Few Things.” making sure to throw plenty of insulting talking points into their introductory paragraph in their attempt to liken a Supreme Court Justice who was educated at Harvard Law, Oxford, Georgetown, and Columbia, to an ignorant relative one merely tolerates. And they insinuated he was a racist.

    Gorsuch has long railed against such policies, and his opinions have taken on an increasingly shrill tone, like the Fox News–poisoned uncle who hectors you about the plandemic in 3,000-word Facebook comments. The justice’s rant in Arizona v. Mayorkas, however, hits a new low, moving beyond the usual yada-yada grievance parade to issue a thesis statement of sorts…

    …As Vox’s Ian Millhiser quickly pointed out, this sweeping claim leaves out two “intrusions on civil liberties” that any person with a basic grasp of history and sanity would surely rank as worse than pandemic policies: slavery and Jim Crow.

    An opinion piece published in the NY Times gasped, “Neil Gorsuch Has Given Himself Away,” made it seem as if the Justice was belittling every other civil rights mishap in the history of America while also blithely disregarding the folks who died during the pandemic.

    The New Republic condescendingly liberal-splained to the rest of us “What Neil Gorsuch Got Wrong About the Pandemic,” stating that “The justice’s vision of the judiciary’s role in public health may be more dangerous than any Covid-era restriction.”

    The site Above The Law literally said Gorsuch was stupid in the piece, “For An Originalist, Gorsuch Is Clearly Slacking On His Definitions And Their Historical Meanings.” The subheading reads, “Is what he said stupid? Yes. But let’s be technical here.”

    Law and Crime website also played the race card and did so right in the headline: Neil Gorsuch implies COVID restrictions were worse than slavery and Jim Crow, and the internet noticed.

    Let’s look at that definition of political gaslighting again…

    For example, the person or political party may downplay things their administration has done, discredit their opponents, imply that critics are mentally unstable, or use controversy to deflect attention away from their mistakes.

    Oof. If that textbook case of gaslighting isn’t embarrassing, it should be.  Then again, narcissists are rarely embarrassed.

    The gaslighting will escalate.

    Another thing about narcissists: they just get angry when they’re called out. They will respond by gaslighting you harder or seeking to “ruin” you. (source) They’ll punish you with a loss of “privileges,” money, material goods, and freedom. We’ve watched it happen again and again in our cancel culture media. Some of us have been unfortunate enough to have personal relationships with narcissists and learned this the hard way.

    The only way to end narcissistic abuse and gaslighting is to recognize it and remove yourself from the situation as much as you can. Obviously, when it’s our entire government and society, that becomes complicated. You may be stuck with just recognizing it. But that in itself gives you a certain amount of freedom and personal power. It helps you get off the hamster wheel, and you begin to spot the manipulations more easily.

    One thing we can be sure of is that this will escalate as more and more people say, “No, that’s not what happened.” This is something we can expect, and in some small way, maybe we can take comfort in the response. Perhaps we can smile to ourselves because we know those who were trying to manipulate us all are on the defensive.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 18:20

  • Chinese Developers Resorting To "Negative Down Payment" Practices
    Chinese Developers Resorting To “Negative Down Payment” Practices

    In its attempt to reboot China’s real estate property market bubble, which burst spectacularly in late 2021 when most housing developers blew up in the aftermath of Evergrande’s historic bankruptcy amid Beijing’s ill-fated deleveraging push, and which according to Goldman calculations is the world’s largest real estate bubble…

    … China’s real estate agencies have been quietly resorting to some of the oldest tricks in the US housing bubble book, such as marketing homebuying with “zero down payment” or “negative down payment” so that consumers not only don’t need to pay for down payment but also can obtain funds for future renovation, according to media reports.

    Of course, with Beijing still stuck in some bizarro Schrodinger economic purgatory where the government both wants housing to reclaim its pre-bubble all time highs yet is loath to inject the massive amounts of credit required, the It didn’t take long for some local overzealous bureaucrat to spill the beans, and as the Global Times reports, the Shenzhen Real Estate Intermediary Association in South China’s Guangdong Province released a notice on Friday, cautioning local agencies to avoid participating in or assisting the illegal practices of “zero down payment” and “negative down payment,” which have sparked discussion among homebuyers.

    One real estate agency based in Shenzhen reportedly was telling clients that if a property is evaluated at 5.7 million yuan ($806,828) the owner would sell it at 5.2 million yuan, the homebuyer could then buy the property in full using a bank loan of 5.7 million yuan while using the remaining 500,000 yuan for renovation, cnr.cn reported.

    As for the so-called “negative down payment,” the report said that it is executed through developers using down payment installments and returning down payment to buyers or setting a relatively high contract price for consumers to apply for a larger bank loan.

    If the funds returned to the buyer from the developer, or the bank loan secured against the property exceed the original down payment, the a “negative down payment” is “achieved,” per the report from cnr.cn.

    The Shenzhen Real Estate Intermediary Association on Friday issued the reminder to caution the market, stressing that the so-called practices of “zero down payment” and “negative down payment” violate China’s financial and credit policies. It warned local agencies and practitioners to strictly abide by the principle that “houses are for living in, not speculation,” calling for review and adjustment of agency management and prohibiting any form of participation in similar practices.

    If local agencies and practitioners are found to have been involved in offering assistance in implementing these illegal practices, the association will immediately report these parties to the competent administrative departments for investigation and punishment in accordance with the law.

    The so-called “negative down payment” is essentially the creation of a fictitious purchase agreement, which in turn inflates the purchase price of a home in order to fraudulently obtain a larger loan for the down payment, Yan Yuejin, research director at Shanghai-based E-house China R&D Institute, told the Global Times.

    Yan stressed the importance for financial regulators to monitor the situation, aiming to prevent the emergence of financial instability or financial risk, calling for a greater effort to regulate fraudulent contracts, falsified loan materials, and lax bank audits.

    Yan also noted that the concept of a “negative down payment” is illegal and comes with high risk. The leverage will be easily raised if a home purchase is not backed by a real down payment, burdening subsequent payment pressure for homebuyers and resulting in a higher risk of mortgage default.

    Chinese authorities issued a notice in 2017, strictly banning domestic developers and real estate intermediaries to engage in illegal practices such as providing down payment financing or down payment installments.

    Earlier in May, Huizhou in Guangdong issued a notice to further strengthen regulation and on property sales tackling the aforementioned illegal practices, according to media reports.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 17:45

  • South Dakota Governor Tells Higher Education Board To Remove Mandates On Preferred Pronouns
    South Dakota Governor Tells Higher Education Board To Remove Mandates On Preferred Pronouns

    Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly via The Epoch Times,

    South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem issued a letter on May 25 to the governing board that oversees the six public universities in the state. In it, she lamented about the situation of higher education in the country, and challenged the board to a series of actions to “show the nation what quality higher education is supposed to look like.”

    Among several points, the Republican governor told the board it should ban drag shows on university campuses, and, separately, remove all preferred pronouns in school materials, as well as remove all mandates that compel people to use preferred pronouns.

    However, what appears to be the priority is the first point of action she raised, which is that the board should aim to raise graduation rates across its six universities to 65 percent by 2028, compared to the current graduation rate of 47 percent. Meanwhile, in 2020, the national graduation rate was 63 percent.

    “At the K-12 level, we are taking steps to improve our standards and expand school choice in South Dakota so that all kids have access to a high-quality education that prepares them for whatever comes next after high school,” Noem told the board in her letter (pdf).

    “For those who choose to start attending a university after graduating, less than half are graduating. We must do better than that. I look forward to working with you all on ideas to improve our graduation rates.”

    The Epoch Times has emailed the Board of Regents for comment.

    ‘State of Crisis’

    Noem said that higher education across the United States is in a “state of crisis.”

    “For the last several decades, many states have allowed liberal ideologies to poison their universities and colleges. Once a hotbed of ideological diversity, debate, and the pursuit of truth and discovery, many institutions have become one-sided, close-minded, and focused on feelings rather than facts,” she wrote.

    “Professors have discarded reason and logic in favor of subjectivity and relativism. Higher education leaders have rejected universal truth and knowledge and replaced it with ‘individual truth.’”

    She said that students on campuses across the United States “have been taught the importance of diversity and equity and given access to ‘safe spaces’ instead of learning to tolerate the disagreement, discomfort, and dissent that they will experience in the real world.”

    “In many cases, students and their parents are not even aware of the damage these ideas have caused,” she said.

    Regarding drag shows, she wrote: “Just as other dangerous theories have been allowed to thrive on college campuses, gender theory has been rebranded and accepted as truth across the nation.

    “These theories should be openly debated in college classrooms, but not celebrated through public performances on taxpayer-owned property at taxpayer-funded schools.”

    Regarding preferred pronouns, she wrote that mandating them at some campuses has “compelled and coerced” some students to “provide speech they do not agree with.”

    “Students should have the ability to exercise their right to free speech. Colleges and universities should never compel students to speak or take a position on any issue,” the governor said.

    Noem also told the board her administration has created a new whistleblower hotline where students, faculty members, parents, or taxpayers, can report concerns at institutions of higher education in the state, by calling 605-773-5916.

    “Our children are our future, and South Dakota universities and technical colleges should best prepare them for our future,” Noem said in a post on Twitter.

    The governor noted that she recently appointed two members to the board, and will be making more appointments soon.

    Five Other Points

    Besides raising graduation rates, banning drag shows, and removing preferred pronouns and their enforcement, Noem noted that some universities have restricted speech on topics some people find “offensive.”

    “The Board of Regents should remove any policy or procedure that prohibits students from exercising their right to free speech,” she said.

    “Black Hills State University was recently challenged on and ultimately removed a policy that allowed administrators to silence opinions they disagreed with,” the governor noted, adding that colleges and universities should review and revise all policies that infringe on students’ right to free speech. The colleges should also adopt policies that “develop and strengthen resiliency among students” for when they encounter opposing ideas.

    Noem also wanted the Board of Regents to “take more steps to partner with businesses on registered apprenticeship programs and offer the lowest possible credit rates.” She noted that roughly 43 percent of students who graduated still found themselves unemployed or underemployed.

    The other three action points she presented to the board were: to cut costs to make higher education more affordable; to require a course in American Government and a course in American history as part of graduation requirements; and to remove any monetary influence, whether by funding or donations, from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

    “The [CCP] has been known to fund Confucius Institutes and other similar centers at American universities in order to provide skewed Chinese cultural training for U.S. students,” said Noem.

    “This is part of a multi-faceted propaganda effort, and money from the CCP has no place in South Dakota. The Board of Regents should reject any donations from sources and any other government that is hostile to the United States.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 17:10

  • Liberal US Cities Top Global List For Highest Homelessness Problem
    Liberal US Cities Top Global List For Highest Homelessness Problem

    Insider Monkey, a finance website, revealed a list of the top 30 cities worldwide with the highest homeless population. Notably, a handful of the US cities on the list are governed by progressive leadership, which may not surprise readers. While it is evident that some unfortunate individuals are facing homelessness, a trend exacerbated by recent inflationary pressures and a drug addiction crisis, some liberal policies have enabled others to sustain their nomadic lifestyles with taxpayer funds. 

    Insider Monkey found New York City is number 5 on the list, with a homeless population of about 69,000. Next is Chicago, at number 7 with 65,611. Washington, DC, is number 8 with 57,416, Los Angeles number 13 with 41,980, and San Fransisco number 14 with 38,000. 

    Even with the US government spending $54 billion on several programs to tackle the homelessness crisis, hundreds of thousands of Americans are still wandering the streets. This has been made worse by inflation in recent years and an out-of-control drug addiction crisis. 

    As for the rest of the world, Manila, Philippines, ranks number 1 with a staggering 3 million homeless. Buenos Aires, Argentina, is number 2 with 198,000. Moscow, Russia, is number 3 with 100,000, and Kanpur, India, is number 4 with 81,000.

    Here’s the partial list of 6 through 30:

    6. Kolkata, India

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 68,798

    Kolkata is one of India’s largest cities. It has played a crucial role in the country’s history due to its port.

    7. Chicago, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 65,611

    Chicago is one of the largest cities in the U.S. in terms of population and one of the largest business hubs in the country.

    8. Washington, D.C., United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 57,416

    Washington D.C. is one of the most expensive places to live in America – making it unsurprising that it also has a high number of homeless people.

    9. Mumbai, India

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 57,415

    Mumbai is India’s financial hub, but it is also famous for generations of homeless who are born and die on the streets.

    10. Lagos, Nigeria

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 50,000

    Lagos is one of the largest cities in the world with more than 24 million people living in the city.

    11. Damascus, Syria

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 50,000

    Damascus is the capital of Syria and one of the oldest cities in the world as it has been inhabited for thousands of years.

    12. Delhi, India

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 46,724

    Delhi has more than ten million residents and is one of the most historic cities in the world.

    13. Los Angeles, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 41,980

    Los Angeles is the second largest city in America in terms of population. It is a cultural center place for its state and the U.S.

    14. San Francisco, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 38,000

    San Francisco is a cultural and economic hub and a city that is notorious for high housing costs.

    15. Surat, India

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 36,144

    Surat is a Western Indian city in the state of Gujrat. It is the second largest city in its state and a hub for the global diamond industry.

    16. Sao Paulo, Brazil

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 31,884

    Sao Paulo is the largest city in Brazil in terms of both its population and economic output.

    17. Mexico City, Mexico

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 30,000

    Mexico City is the capital of Mexico. It is one of the largest cities in the world with a population of 9.2 million people.

    18. Athens, Greece

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 20,000

    Athens is one of the most historical cities in the world and the capital of Greece.

    19. Auckland, New Zealand

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 18,417

    Auckland is the largest city in New Zealand and has a population of 1.4 million people. It is an economic hub in its country and accounts for a large portion of New Zealand’s economic output.

    20. Tampa, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 16,000

    Tampa is a coastal Floridian city with one of the biggest ports in its state.

    21. Seattle, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 11,751

    Seattle is a highly developed city in the U.S. state of Washington.

    22. San Jose, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 10,028

    San Jose is an economic hub in the U.S. with a large presence of the technology industry.

    23. Budapest, Hungary

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 10,000

    Budapest is the capital and largest city of Hungary with nearly a million residents.

    24. Oakland, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 9,747

    Oakland is a Californian city. It is one of the busiest port cities in America.

    25. Dublin, Ireland

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 8,523

    Dublin is the capital of Ireland and the largest city in terms of population. It is also a hub for global multinational firms.

    26. San Diego, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 8,427

    San Diego is one of the most populous cities in America with a population of more than a million people

    27. Rio De Janeiro, Brazil

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 7,865

    Rio De Janeiro is the second largest city in Brazil. It also has the second largest economy in the country.

    28. Rome, Italy

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 7,709

    Rome is the capital city of Italy and one of the largest cities in the world with a population of more than 2.8 million people.

    29. Denver, United States

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 6,888

    Denver is the capital city of the U.S. state of Colorado. It has a population of more than seven hundred thousand people and is an economic hub in its state.

    30. Lisbon, Portugal

    Estimated Number of Homeless People: 3,780

    Lisbon is the capital city of Portugal. It is also the largest city in the country, with more than half a million people living in its boundaries.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 16:35

  • The Great Silence
    The Great Silence

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

    The kids are two years behind in education. Inflation still rages. White-collar jobs are disappearing thanks to the reversal of Fed policy. Household finances are a wreck. The medical industry is in upheaval. Trust in government has never been lower.

    Major media too is discredited. Young people are dying at levels never seen. Populations are still on the move from lockdown states to where it is less likely. Surveillance is everywhere, and so is political persecution. Public health is in a disastrous state, with substance abuse and obesity all at new records.

    Each one of these, and many more besides, are continued fallout from the pandemic response that began in March 2020. And yet here we are 38 months later and we still don’t have honesty or truth about the experience.

    Officials have resigned, politicians have tumbled out of office and lifetime civil servants have departed their posts, but they don’t cite the great disaster as the excuse. There is always some other reason.

    This is the period of the great silence. We’ve all noticed it. The stories in the press recounting all the above are conventionally scrupulous about naming the pandemic response much less naming the individuals responsible.

    Maybe there is a Freudian explanation: things so obviously terrible and in such recent memory are too painful to mentally process, so we just pretend it didn’t happen. Plenty in power like this solution.

    Everyone in a position of influence knows the rules. Don’t talk about the lockdowns. Don’t talk about the mask mandates. Don’t talk about the vaccine mandates that proved useless and damaging and led to millions of professional upheavals.

    Don’t talk about the economics of it. Don’t talk about collateral damage. When the topic comes up, just say, “We did the best we could with the knowledge we had,” even if that is an obvious lie.

    Above all, don’t seek justice.

    Where’s the National Commission?

    There is this document intended to be the “Warren Commission” of COVID slapped together by the old gangsters who advocated for lockdowns. It is called Lessons from the Covid War: An Investigative Report.

    The authors are people like Michael Callahan (Massachusetts General Hospital), Gary Edson (former deputy national security adviser), Richard Hatchett (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), Marc Lipsitch (Harvard University), Carter Mecher (Veterans Affairs), and Rajeev Venkayya (former Gates Foundation and now Aerium Therapeutics).

    If you have been following this disaster, you might know at least some of the names. Years before 2020, they were pushing lockdowns as the solution for infectious disease. Some claim credit for having invented pandemic planning. The years 2020–2022 were their experiment.

    As it was ongoing, they became media stars, pushing compliance, condemning as disinformation and misinformation anyone who disagreed with them. They were at the heart of the coup d’etat, as engineers or champions of it, that replaced representative democracy with quasi-martial law run by the administrative state.

    The first sentence of the report is a complaint:

    We were supposed to lay the groundwork for a National COVID Commission. The COVID Crisis Group formed at the beginning of 2021, one year into the pandemic. We thought the U.S. government would soon create or facilitate a commission to study the biggest global crisis so far in the 21st century. It has not.

    That is true. There is no National COVID Commission. You know why? Because they could never get away with it, not with legions of experts and passionate citizens who wouldn’t tolerate a coverup.

    The public anger is too intense. Lawmakers would be flooded with emails, phone calls and daily expressions of disgust. It would be a disaster. An honest commission would demand answers that the ruling class is not prepared to give. An “official commission” perpetuating a bunch of baloney would be dead on arrival.

    This by itself is a huge victory and a tribute to indefatigable critics.

    ‘We Didn’t Crack Down Hard Enough’

    Instead, the “COVID Crisis Group” met with funding from the Rockefeller and Charles Koch foundations and slapped together this report. Despite being celebrated as definitive by The New York Times and The Washington Post, it has mostly had no impact at all.

    It is far from obtaining the status of being some kind of canonical assessment. It reads like they were on deadline, fed up, typed lots of words and called it a day.

    Of course it is whitewash.

    It begins with a bang to denounce the U.S. policy response: “Our institutions did not meet the moment. They did not have adequate practical strategies or capabilities to prevent, to warn, to defend their communities or fight back in a coordinated way, in the United States and globally.”

    Mistakes were made, as they say.

    Of course the upshot of this kvetching is not to criticize what Justice Neil Gorsuch calls “the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.” They hardly mention those at all.

    Instead they conclude that the U.S. should have surveilled more, locked down sooner (“We believe that on Jan. 28 the U.S. government should have started mobilizing for a possible COVID war”), directed more funds to this agency rather than that and centralized the response so that rogue states like South Dakota and Florida could not evade centralized authoritarian diktats next time.

    The authors propose a series of lessons that are anodyne, bloodless and carefully crafted to be more-or-less true but ultimately structured to minimize the sheer radicalism and destructiveness of what they favored and did. The lessons are clichés such as we need “not just goals but road maps,” and next time we need more “situation awareness.”

    There is no new information in the book that I could find, unless something is hidden therein that escaped my notice. It’s more interesting for what it does not say. Some words that never appear in the text: Sweden, ivermectin, ventilators, remdesivir and myocarditis.

    ‘Look, Lockdowns and Mandates Worked!’

    Perhaps this gives you a sense of the book and its mission. And on matters of the lockdowns, readers are forced to endure claims such as “all of New England — Massachusetts, the city of Boston, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine — seem to us to have done relatively well, including their ad hoc crisis management setups.”

    Oh really! Boston destroyed thousands of small businesses and imposed vaccine passports, closed churches, persecuted people for holding house parties, and imposed travel restrictions. There is a reason why the authors don’t elaborate on such preposterous claims. They are simply unsustainable.

    One amusing feature seems to me to be a foreshadowing of what is coming. They throw Anthony Fauci under the bus with sniffy dismissals: “Fauci was vulnerable to some attacks because he tried to cover the waterfront in briefing the press and public, stretching beyond his core expertise—and sometimes it showed.”

    Ooooh, burn!

    “Trump Was a Comorbidity”

    This is very likely the future. At some point, Fauci will be scapegoated for the whole disaster. He will be assigned to take the fall for what is really the failure of the national security arm of the administrative bureaucracy, which in fact took charge of all rule-making from March 13, 2020, onward, along with their intellectual cheerleaders. The public health people were just there to provide cover.

    Curious about the political bias of the book? It is summed up in this passing statement: “Trump was a comorbidity.”

    Oh how highbrow! How clever! No political bias here!

    Maybe this book by the Covid Crisis Group hopes to be the last word. This will never happen. We are only at the beginning of this. As the economic, social, cultural, and political problems mount, it will become impossible to ignore the incredibly obvious.

    The masters of lockdowns are influential and well-connected but not even they can invent their own reality.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 16:00

  • World's First "Battery Tanker" Slated For 2026 Sea Trials
    World’s First “Battery Tanker” Slated For 2026 Sea Trials

    Tesla CEO Elon Musk made a bold prediction in 2017: “Everything will go fully electric, apart from (ironically) rockets. Ships are the next easiest to solve after cars.” Six years later, the world’s second-richest person might be right about the next battery boom in ships. 

    Japanese battery startup PowerX Inc. revealed a 140-meter-long electric propulsion vessel capable of transporting stored electricity across oceans. The “battery tanker” will be equipped with 96 containerized marine batteries that can haul renewable energy worldwide, connecting grids, islands, and offshore wind farms. The completion of the vessel is slated for 2025, with sea trials in 2026. 

    “For instance, in Japan, a battery tanker can carry power from regions with high renewable energy supply potential, such as Kyushu and Hokkaido, to high-demand areas of Honshu or for inter-island power transmission,” the company explained.

    While electric propulsion vessels might be the future to decarbonize the shipping industry, there appears to be a need to haul stored renewable power to other grids worldwide via a new tanker class. 

     

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 15:25

  • Taiwan Says It's In Talks On Being Brought Under US Nuclear Umbrella
    Taiwan Says It’s In Talks On Being Brought Under US Nuclear Umbrella

    Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

    Taiwan’s foreign minister said last week that the US and Taiwan are in talks on the possibility of the island being brought under Washington’s nuclear umbrella, a step that would make a catastrophic war between the US and China much more likely.

    Taiwanese Foreign Minister Joseph Wu made the comments before Taiwan’s parliament, the Legislative Yuan. Wu declined to detail the talks when pressed if Taiwan had asked the US to bring the island into its nuclear umbrella.

    US military file image

    “Regarding the discussion of this issue with the United States, it is not suitable for me to make it public here,” Wu said, according to The South China Morning Post.

    Many of the US’s allies are considered to be under the protection of the US nuclear umbrella, including Japan, South Korea, and every member of NATO.

    Giving such a guarantee to Taiwan would mean the US could use nuclear weapons if China invades the island or if war breaks out by other means. According to the SCMP report:

    As Washington and Beijing ramp up their military signaling on Taiwan, the self-ruled island has started to discuss what was once unthinkable – to come under the US nuclear umbrella that has successfully protected Japan, South Korea and Australia for decades.

    The debate was set off after Taiwanese Foreign Minister Joseph Wu suggested on Monday that the island had been in talks with the United States on the nuclear umbrella issue.

    Such a guarantee is unlikely to happen in the near term as it would require a radical change to US policy. While President Biden has vowed to send troops to intervene if China attacks Taiwan, the official policy on how the US would react to a Chinese invasion is still ambiguous.

    But the fact that the idea is being discussed will be viewed as a major provocation in Beijing. China has a no-first-use policy for its nuclear arsenal, but US policy leaves open the option to use nukes in response to a conventional attack.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 14:50

  • DOJ, Prosecutors Trying To Claw Back Donations Made To J6 Defendants
    DOJ, Prosecutors Trying To Claw Back Donations Made To J6 Defendants

    While BLM protesters got a Kamala Harris-endorsed bail fund during the violent and destructive mostly peaceful George Floyd riots, the Department of Justice is trying to claw back donations made to January 6th political prisoners.

    According to AP, the DOJ is trying to seize over $25,000 raised by Texas resident Daniel Goodwyn, who appeared on Tucker Carlson’s former Fox News show where he promoted a website for political donations.

    The AP looked at over 1,000 criminal cases from Jan 6., and noted that prosecutors have been asking judges to enhance fines on top of prison sentences to offset donations from supporters.

    Dozens of defendants have set up online fundraising appeals for help with legal fees, and prosecutors acknowledge there’s nothing wrong with asking for help for attorney expenses. But the Justice Department has, in some cases, questioned where the money is really going because many of those charged have had government-funded legal representation.

    Most of the fundraising efforts appear on GiveSendGo, which bills itself as “The #1 Free Christian Fundraising Site” and has become a haven for Jan. 6 defendants barred from using mainstream crowdfunding sites, including GoFundMe, to raise money.

    Were any of the BLM-linked fundraisers, or BLM itself, subject to DOJ scrutiny?

    As the AP notes, the success many J6 prisoners have had fundraising “suggests that many people in the United States still view Jan. 6 rioters as patriots and cling to the baseless belief that Democrats stole the 2020 presidential election from Donald Trump.”

    Virginia resident Markus Maly, who is set to be sentenced next month for assaulting police at the Capitol, raised over $16,000 from an online campaign. Prosecutors have requested a $16,000 fine, noting that he had a public defender and didn’t owe any legal fees.

    “He should not be able to use his own notoriety gained in the commission of his crimes to ‘capitalize’ on his participation in the Capitol breach in this way,” wrote a prosecutor in a court filing.

    A jury convicted romance novel cover model John Strand of storming the Capitol with Dr. Simone Gold, a California physician who is a leading figure in the anti-vaccine movement. Now prosecutors are seeking a $50,000 fine on top of a prison term for Strand when a judge sentences him on Thursday.

    Strand has raised more than $17,300 for his legal defense without disclosing that he has a taxpayer-funded lawyer, according to prosecutors. They say Strand appears to have “substantial financial means,” living in a home that was purchased for more than $3 million last year. -AP

    So far in 2023, prosecutors have sought to levy $390,000 in fines against at least 21 defendants, with amounts ranging from $450 to over $71,000, per AP. Of that, Judges have imposed at least $124,127 in fines against 33 riot defendants YTD, while in the past two years, over 100 defendants have been ordered to pay more than $240,000 in fines.

    Separately, hundreds of convicted rioters have been ordered to pay over $524,000 in restitution to the government to offset over $2.8 million in damage to the Capitol and other J6 related expenses.

    We don’t recall BLM protesters being ordered to help pay to clean up cities they set on fire. Wonder why?

     

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 14:15

  • 25,000 Traders Bet On ChatGPT's Stock Picks
    25,000 Traders Bet On ChatGPT’s Stock Picks

    Authored by Andrew Fenton via CoinTelegraph.com,

    Almost 25,000 investors have signed up to trade alongside ChatGPT as they follow the GPT Portfolio experiment from copy trading firm Autopilot.

    The traders have bet a combined $14.7 million on the AI’s stock picks, which would average about $600 each if they all invested after signing up. They’re hoping to take even a small slice of a purported 500% return from one of the strategies backtested in academic research.

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

    The GPT Portfolio gets the AI to analyze 10,000 news articles and 100 company reports to select 20 stocks for the $50,000 portfolio, updated each week. The initial picks included Berkshire Hathaway, Amazon, D.R. Horton and Davita Health. After two weeks, the portfolio is up around 2%, which is pretty much the same as the stock market. 

    Interestingly the bottom five picks lost more in percentage terms than the top five gained — Dollar Tree lost 17% after it missed earnings — so it might be more sensible in future to only invest in GPT-4’s best five or 10 ideas, but we’ll see how it works out.

    The smaller-scale ChatGPT Crypto Trader account is tweaking a similar strategy that gets GPT-4s advice on when to go long on Ethereum. He says it shows a profit of 11,000% backtested to August 2017, but in the real-world experiment since January, the portfolio is up by a third, while the Ethereum price has gained 60%.

    It’s worth being careful using AI for trading, however. Crypto derivatives platform Bitget recently abandoned its experiment of using AI on the platform due to the potential for misinformation. A survey of its users found 80% of users had a negative experience with the AI, including false investment advice and other misinformation. 

    Bitget Managing Director Gracy Chen says:

    “AI tools, while robust and resourceful, lack the human touch necessary to interpret market nuances and trends accurately.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 13:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

May 29

Today’s News 29th May 2023

  • Escobar: Eurasian Heartland Rises To Challenge The West
    Escobar: Eurasian Heartland Rises To Challenge The West

    Authored by Pepe Escobar,

    President Xi Jinping telling President Putin at the end of their summit last March in Moscow that we’re now facing “great changes not seen in a century” directly applies to the new spirit reigning across the Heartland.

    Cue to the China-Central Asia summit last week in Xian, the former imperial capital, where Xi solidified the expansion of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) from Western China in Xinjiang to its western neighbors and then all the way to Iran, Turkiye and Eastern Europe.

    Xi in Xian particularly stressed the complementing aspects between BRI and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), once again showing that all five Central Asian “stans”, acting together, should counter-act the proverbial external interference via “terrorism, separatism and extremism”.

    The message was stark: these hybrid war strategies are all integrated with the attempt by the Hegemon to continue fostering serial color revolutions. The purveyors of the “rules-based international order”, Xi implied, will go no holds barred to prevent ongoing Heartland integration.

    The usual suspects in fact are already spinning that Central Asia is falling into a potential trap, fully captured by Beijing. Yet this is something Kazakhstan’s “multi-vector diplomacy”, coined way back in the Nazarbayev years, would never allow.

    What Beijing is developing, instead, is an integrated approach via a C+C5 secretariat with no less than 19 separate channels of communication.

    The heart of the matter is to turbo-charge Heartland connectivity via the BRI’s Middle Corridor.

    And that, crucially, includes technology transfer. As it stands, there are dozens of industrial transfer programs with Kazakhstan, a dozen in Uzbekistan, and several in discussion with Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. These are extolled by Beijing as part of “harmonious Silk Roads”.

    Xi himself, as a post-modern pilgrim, detailed the connectivity in his keynote speech in Xian: “The China-Kyrgystan-Uzbekistan highway that runs across the Tian shan Mountains, the China-Tajikistan expressway that defies the Pamir Plateau, and the China-Kazakhstan crude oil pipeline and the China-Central Asia Gas Pipeline that traverse the vast desert – they are the present-day Silk Road.”

    The Revival of the Heartland “Belt”

    Xi’s China is once again mirroring lessons from History. What’s happening now brings us back to the first half of the first millennium B.C., when the Persian Achaemenid empire established itself as the largest to date, stretching from India in the east and Central Asia in the northeast to Greece in the west and Egypt in the southwest.

    For the first time in history, territories that spanned Asia, Africa and Europe were brought together; and that led to a boom in trade, culture and ethnic interactions (what BRI defines today as “people to people exchanges”).

    That’s how we had the Hellenistic world first getting in touch with India and Central Asia – as they set up the first Greek settlements in Bactria (in today’s Afghanistan).

    By the end of the first millennium B.C. all the way to the first millennium A.D. an immense area from the Pacific to the Atlantic – encompassing the Han Chinese empire, the Kushan kingdom, the Parthians and the Roman empire, among others – formed “a continuous belt of civilizations, states and cultures”, as Prof. Edvard Rtveladze of the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan defined it.

    This, in a nutshell, is at heart of the Chinese concept of “belt” and “road”: the “belt” refers to the Heartland, the “road” refers to the Maritime Silk Road.

    So slightly less than 2,000 years ago, that was the first time in human history that the borders of several states and kingdoms were immediately adjacent to each other along no less than 11,400 km, from east to west. No wonder the fabled Ancient Silk Road – actually a maze of roads -, the first transcontinental thoroughfare, emerged at the time.

    That was a direct consequence of a series of political, economic and cultural whirlwinds involving the peoples of Eurasia. History, in the high acceleration 21st century, is now retracing these steps.

    Geography, after all, is destiny. Central Asia was traversed by countless migrations of Near Eastern, Indo-European, Indo-Iranian and Turkic peoples; was the focus of serious intercultural interaction (Iranian, Indian, Turkic, Chinese, Hellenistic cultures); and criss-crossed virtually all major religions (Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, Christianity, Islam).

    The Organization of Turkic States, led by Turkiye, is even engaged in rebuilding the Turkic identity overtones of the Heartland – a vector that will be developing in parallel to the influence of China and Russia.

    That Greater Eurasia Partnership

    Russia is evolving its own path. A key debate was held аt a recent Valdai Club session on the Greater Eurasian Partnership when it comes to the interaction between Russia and the Heartland and neighbors China, India and Iran.

    Moscow regards the concept of a Greater Eurasian Partnership as the key framework for achieving much desired “political cohesion” in the post-Soviet space – under the imperative of indivisibility of regional security.

    This means, once again, maximum attention towards serial attempts of provoking color revolutions across the Heartland.

    As much as in Beijing, there are no illusions in Moscow that the collective West will take no prisoners in regimenting Central Asia to the Russophobic drive. For over a year now Washington for all practical purposes already addresses the Heartland in terms of threats of secondary sanctions and crude ultimatums.

    So Central Asia matters only in terms of the evolving hybrid war – and otherwise – against the Russia-China strategic partnership. No fabulous trade and connectivity prospects under the New Silk Roads; no Greater Eurasia Partnership; no security arrangements under the CSTO; no mechanism of economic cooperation like the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

    Either you’re a “partner” in the sanctions dementia and/or a secondary front in the war against Russia, or there will be a price to pay.

    The “price”, set by the proverbial Straussian neocon psychos currently in charge of US foreign policy, is always the same: proxy war via terror, to be provided by ISIS-Khorasan*, whose black cells are ready to be awakened in selected backwoods of Afghanistan and the Ferghana valley.

    Moscow is very much aware of the high stakes. For instance, for a year and a half virtually every month a Russian delegation arrives in Tajikistan to implement, in practice, the “pivot to the East”, developing projects in agriculture, health care, education, science and tourism.

    Central Asia should have a leading role in BRICS+ expansion – something supported by both BRICS leaders Russia and China. The idea of a BRICS + Central Asia is being seriously floated from Tashkent to Almaty.

    That would imply establishing a strategic continuum from Russia and China to Central Asia, South Asia, West Asia, Africa and Latin America – spanning the logistics of connectivity trade, energy, manufacture production, investment, technological breakthroughs and cultural interaction.

    Beijing and Moscow, each in their own way, and with their own formulations, are already setting the framework for this ambitious geoeconomic project to be viable: the Heartland back in action as a protagonist in the forefront of History, just like those kingdoms, merchants and pilgrims of nearly 2,000 years ago.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 05/29/2023 – 00:00

  • China Shadow Banking Defaults Surge
    China Shadow Banking Defaults Surge

    By Charlie Zhu, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and analyst

    Three things we learned last week:

    1. A town builder’s last-minute bond repayment reignited fears over a potential default by such issuers. Investors are watching out for the first missed payment by a local government financing vehicle, something regional authorities are trying hard to avoid. The possibility has recently increased, as a weakening fiscal situation means authorities are less able to provide support.

    Research from GF Securities Co. shows there were 73 cases of shadow-banking defaults in the first four months, already a full-year record since data became available in 2018.

    “Missing payments in shadow banking are a signal that debt risks in a certain region have become more prominent,” GF analysts led by Liu Yu wrote in a report.

    Yields on Kunming Dianchi Investment Co.’s note due in December surged to over 20% last week, as two holders said they didn’t receive payments until after business hours for a note due this month. Premiums of three-year AA rated LGFV bonds widened to the most since March, and investors cited local-debt worries as one of the reasons behind a decline in Chinese stocks.

    China’s LGFVs had 13.5 trillion yuan ($1.9 trillion) of bonds in total outstanding as of end-2022, or almost half of the nation’s non-financial corporate notes, data from Moody’s Investors Service show.

    Steps by authorities “to lower LGFV debt risks will not fully resolve long-term issues,” and their refinancing ability depends on investors’ confidence in government support, especially in weaker provinces, Moody’s analysts led by Ivan Chung wrote in a report.

    2. With the financial strength of both town builders and their sponsors deteriorating, investors became more pessimistic about China’s demand for raw materials. Copper dived below $8,000 a ton while iron ore breached $100, unwinding gains since Beijing ended its Covid Zero policies late last year.

    At the London Metal Exchange’s annual Asian event in Hong Kong, participants reported lackluster activity and said that any market optimism from the National People’s Congress in March had evaporated.

    The selloff in Chinese stocks also extended, with the benchmark CSI 300 Index erasing all of its gains for the year. Now, even bulls are rethinking their calls, with Citigroup Inc.’s global allocation team cutting its overweight rating on China to neutral.

    3. Luckily, positive developments on China-US bilateral relations helped to alleviate some of the pessimism. Soon after President Joe Biden said he expected ties with China to improve “very shortly” after a spat over an alleged spy balloon earlier this year, top commerce officials from the two countries agreed to strengthen communications. The meeting served as a sign that Beijing and Washington are trying to prevent their relations from worsening further.

    It remains to be seen though if China’s decision to bar Micron Technology Inc. from supplying critical infrastructure leads to another round of tension. Some analysts see this as an opening shot by Beijing to retaliate, while US lawmakers want to react with putting more Chinese firms on a blacklist.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 23:30

  • 'The Official Truth': The End Of Free Speech That Will End America
    ‘The Official Truth’: The End Of Free Speech That Will End America

    Authored by J.B.Shurk via The Gatestone Institute,

    If legacy news corporations fail to report that large majorities of the American public now view their journalistic product as straight-up propaganda, does that make it any less true?

    According to a survey by Rasmussen Reports, 59% of likely voters in the United States view the corporate news media as “truly the enemy of the people.” This is a majority view, held regardless of race: “58% of whites, 51% of black voters, and 68% of other minorities” — all agree that the mainstream media has become their “enemy.”

    This scorching indictment of the Fourth Estate piggybacks similar polling from Harvard-Harris showing that Americans hold almost diametrically opposing viewpoints from those that news corporations predominantly broadcast as the official “truth.”

    Drawing attention to the divergence between the public’s perceived reality and the news media’s prevailing “narratives,” independent journalist Glenn Greenwald dissected the Harvard-Harris poll to highlight just how differently some of the most important issues of the last few years have been understood. While corporate news fixated on purported Trump-Russia collusion since 2016, majorities of Americans now see this story “as a hoax and a fraud.”

    While the news media hid behind the Intelligence Community’s claims that Hunter Biden’s potentially incriminating laptop (allegedly containing evidence of his family’s influence-peddling) was a product of “Russian disinformation” and consequently enforced an information blackout on the explosive story during the final weeks of the 2020 presidential election, strong majorities of Americans currently believe the laptop’s contents are “real.” In other words, Americans have correctly concluded that journalists and spies advanced a “fraud” on voters as part of an effort to censor a damaging story and “help Biden win.” Nevertheless, The New York Times and The Washington Post have yet to return the Pulitzer Prizes they received for reporting totally discredited “fake news.”

    Similarly, majorities of Americans suspect that President Joe Biden has used the powers of his various offices to profit from influence-peddling schemes and that the FBI has intentionally refrained from investigating any possible Biden crimes. Huge majorities of Americans, in fact, seem not at all surprised to learn that the FBI has been caught abusing its own powers to influence elections, and are strongly convinced that “sweeping reform” is needed. Likewise, large majorities of Americans have “serious doubts about Biden’s mental fitness to be president” and suspect that others behind the scenes are “puppeteers” running the nation.

    Few, if any, of these poll results have been widely reported. In a seemingly-authoritarian disconnect with the American people, corporate news media continue to ignore the public’s majority opinion and instead “relentlessly advocate” those viewpoints that Americans “reject.” When journalists fail to investigate facts and deliberately distort stories so that they fit snugly within preconceived worldviews, reporters act as propagandists.

    Constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley recently asked, “Do we have a de facto state media?” In answering his own question, he notes that the news blackout surrounding congressional investigations into Biden family members who have allegedly received more than ten million dollars in suspicious payments from foreign entities “fits the past standards used to denounce Russian propaganda patterns and practices.” After Republican members of Congress traced funds to nine Biden family members “from corrupt figures in Romania, China, and other countries,” Turley writes, “The New Republic quickly ran a story headlined ‘Republicans Finally Admit They Have No Incriminating Evidence on Joe Biden.'”

    Excoriating the news media’s penchant for mindlessly embracing stories that hurt former President Donald Trump while simultaneously ignoring stories that might damage President Biden, Turley concludes:

    “Under the current approach to journalism, it is the New York Times that receives a Pulitzer for a now debunked Russian collusion story rather than the New York Post for a now proven Hunter Biden laptop story.”

    Americans now evidently view the major sources for their news and information as part of a larger political machine pushing particular points of view, unconstrained by any ethical obligation to report facts objectively or dispassionately seek truth. That Americans now see the news media in their country as serving a similar role as Pravda did for the Soviet Union’s Communist Party is a significant departure from the country’s historic embrace of free speech and traditional fondness for a skeptical, adversarial press.

    Rather than taking a step back to consider the implications such a shift in public perception will have for America’s future stability, some officials appear even more committed to expanding government control over what can be said and debated online. After the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in the wake of public backlash over First Amendment concerns, halted its efforts to construct an official “disinformation governance board” last year, the question remained whether other government attempts to silence or shape online information would rear their head. The wait for that answer did not take long.

    The government apparently took the public’s censorship concerns so seriously that it quietly moved on from the collapse of its plans for a “disinformation governance board” within the DHS and proceeded within the space of a month to create a new “disinformation” office known as the Foreign Malign Influence Center, which now operates from within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Although ostensibly geared toward countering information warfare arising from “foreign” threats, one of its principal objectives is to monitor and control “public opinion and behaviors.”

    As independent journalist Matt Taibbi concludes of the government’s resurrected Ministry of Truth:

    “It’s the basic rhetorical trick of the censorship age: raise a fuss about a foreign threat, using it as a battering ram to get everyone from Congress to the tech companies to submit to increased regulation and surveillance. Then, slowly, adjust your aim to domestic targets.”

    If it were not jarring enough to learn that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has picked up the government’s speech police baton right where the DHS set it down, there is ample evidence to suggest that officials are eager to go much further in the near future. Democrat Senator Michael Bennet has already proposed a bill that would create a Federal Digital Platform Commission with “the authority to promulgate rules, impose civil penalties, hold hearings, conduct investigations, and support research.”

    Filled with “disinformation” specialists empowered to create “enforceable behavioral codes” for online communication — and generously paid for by the Biden Administration with taxpayers’ money — the special commission would also “designate ‘systemically important digital platforms’ subject to extra oversight, reporting, and regulation” requirements. Effectively, a small number of unelected commissioners would have de facto power to monitor and police online communication.

    Should any particular website or platform run afoul of the government’s First Amendment Star Chamber, it would immediately place itself within the commission’s crosshairs for greater oversight, regulation, and punishment.

    Will this new creation become an American KGB, Stasi or CCP — empowered to target half the population for disagreeing with current government policies, promoting “wrongthink,” or merely going to church? Will a small secretive body decide which Americans are actually “domestic terrorists” in the making? US Attorney General Merrick Garland has gone after traditional Catholics who attend Latin mass, but why would government suspicions end with the Latin language? When small commissions exist to decide which Americans are the “enemy,” there is no telling who will be designated as a “threat” and punished next.

    It is not difficult to see the dangers that lie ahead. Now that the government has fully inserted itself into the news and information industry, the criminalization of free speech is a very real threat. This has always been a chief complaint against international institutions such as the World Economic Forum that spend a great deal of time, power, and money promoting the thoughts and opinions of an insular cabal of global leaders, while showing negligible respect for the personal rights and liberties of the billions of ordinary citizens they claim to represent.

    WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab has gone so far as to hire hundreds of thousands of “information warriors” whose mission is to “control the Internet” by “policing social media,” eliminating dissent, disrupting the public square, and “covertly seed[ing] support” for the WEF’s “Great Reset.” If Schwab’s online army were not execrable enough, advocates for free speech must also gird themselves for the repercussions of Elon Musk’s appointment of Linda Yaccarino, reportedly a “neo-liberal wokeist” with strong WEF affiliations, as the new CEO of Twitter.

    Throughout much of the West, unfortunately, free speech has been only weakly protected when those with power find its defense inconvenient or messages a nuisance. It is therefore of little surprise to learn that French authorities are now prosecuting government protesters for “flipping-off” President Emmanuel Macron. It does not seem particularly astonishing that a German man has been sentenced to three years in prison for engaging in “pro-Russian” political speech regarding the war in Ukraine. It also no longer appears shocking to read that UK Technology and Science Secretary Michelle Donelan reportedly seeks to imprison social media executives who fail to censor online speech that the government might subjectively adjudge “harmful.” Sadly, as Ireland continues to find new ways to punish citizens for expressing certain points of view, its movement toward criminalizing not just speech but also “hateful” thoughts should have been predictable.

    From an American’s perspective, these overseas encroachments against free speech — especially within the borders of closely-allied lands — have seemed sinister yet entirely foreign. Now, however, what was once observed from some distance has made its way home; it feels as if a faraway communist enemy has finally stormed America’s beaches and come ashore in force.

    Not a day seems to go by without some new battlefront opening up in the war on free speech and free thought. The Richard Stengel of the Council on Foreign Relations has been increasingly vocal about the importance of journalists and think tanks to act as “primary provocateurs” and “propagandists” who “have to” manipulate the American population and shape the public’s perception of world events. Senator Rand Paul has alleged that the DHS uses at least 12 separate programs to “track what Americans say online,” as well as to engage in social media censorship.

    As part of its efforts to silence dissenting arguments, the Biden administration is pursuing a policy that would make it unlawful to use data and datasets that reflect accurate information yet lead to “discriminatory outcomes” for “protected classes.” In other words, if the data is perceived to be “racist,” it must be expunged. At the same time, the Department of Justice has indicted four radical black leftists for having somehow “weaponized” their free speech rights in support of Russian “disinformation.” So, objective datasets can be deemed “discriminatory” against minorities, while actual discrimination against minorities’ free speech is excused when that speech contradicts official government policy.

    Meanwhile, the DHS has been exposed for paying tens of millions of dollars to third-party “anti-terrorism” programs that have not so coincidentally equated Christians, Republicans, and philosophical conservatives to Germany’s Nazi Party. Similarly, California Governor Gavin Newsom has set up a Soviet-style “snitch line” that encourages neighbors to report on each other’s public or private displays of “hate.”

    Finally, ABC News proudly admits that it has censored parts of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s interviews because some of his answers include “false claims about the COVID-19 vaccines.” Essentially, the corporate news media have deemed Kennedy’s viewpoints unworthy of being transmitted and heard, even though the 2024 presidential candidate is running a strong second behind Joe Biden in the Democrat primary, with around 20% support from the electorate.

    Taken all together, it is clear that not only has the war on free speech come to America, but also that it is clobbering Americans in a relentless campaign of “shock and awe.” And why not? In a litigation battle presently being waged over the federal government’s extensive censorship programs, the Biden administration has defended its inherent authority to control Americans’ thoughts as an instrumental component of “government infrastructure.” What Americans think and believe is openly referred to as part of the nation’s “cognitive infrastructure” — as if the Matrix movies were simply reflecting real life.

    Today, America’s mainstream news corporations are already viewed as processing plants that manufacture political propaganda. That is an unbelievably searing indictment of a once-vibrant free press in the United States. It is also, unfortunately, only the first heavy shoe to drop in the war against free speech. Many Chinese-Americans who survived the Cultural Revolution look around the country today and see similarities everywhere. During that totalitarian “reign of terror,” everything a person did was monitored, including what was said while asleep.

    In an America now plagued with the stench of official “snitch lines,” censorship of certain presidential candidates, widespread online surveillance, a resurrected “disinformation governance board,” and increasingly frequent criminal prosecutions targeting Americans who exercise their free speech, the question is not whether what we inaudibly think or say in our sleep will someday be used against us, but rather how soon that day will come unless we stop it. After all, with smartphones, smart TVs, “smart” appliances, video-recording doorbells, and the rise of artificial intelligence, somebody, somewhere is always listening.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 23:00

  • Race To 100 Million Users. Who Did It The Fastest? And What Does This Mean For Productivity?
    Race To 100 Million Users. Who Did It The Fastest? And What Does This Mean For Productivity?

    OpenAI’s viral ChatGPT chatbot reached 100 million monthly active users in just two months in January after launching in November, making it the fastest-growing consumer application in history. For some context, it took TikTok nine months after its launch to reach 100 million users and Instagram 2.5 years. 

    TS Lombard’s Dario Perkins told clients Thursday there are “large effects, and their macroeconomic impact could show up faster than economists anticipate – especially given the pace of technological adoption we are currently seeing.”

    Perkins, who heads the global macro desk at TD, found that the widespread adoption of the viral chatbot might spark faster innovation: 

    ChatGPT gained 100 million users faster than any other application in history, and these fast adoption rates are not confined to individual users. Major corporations, such as Bain & Company, have entered into deals with OpenAI to use generative AI in their strategy consulting business, while companies like Expedia have integrated ChatGP T through plug-ins.

    The more exciting impact on living standards, however, is likely to come from the second of our productivity channels – the pace of technological innovation. Generative AI can significantly expedite the R&D process by automating complex tasks, analysing vast datasets and predicting potential outcomes. It has already been useful in biological research: DeepMind’s AlphaFold predicted the 3-D structure of almost every known protein – a task that had been predicted to take decades of human labour (according to the journal Science, the most important scientific breakthrough of 2021). 

    This, alongside other AI breakthroughs, has led Dr. David Baker from the Institute for Protein Design to estimate that the pace of innovation in his field is now 10 times higher than it was 18 months ago. If we see rapid increases in innovation across other areas, the impact on productivity could be transformative.

    He stated AI “has huge potential to boost economy-wide productivity” and cited a recent MIT study that showed a massive improvement in productivity while using ChatGPT. Also, much of the productivity gains were seen between 21 to 40-year-olds. 

    Perkins mentioned “massive uncertainties about where AI is ultimately headed” from here. And he wasn’t too concerned about layoffs, unlike Goldman, who has warned about 300 million jobs could be displaced by AI in the US and Europe. 

    And AI is here to stay, unlike Zuck’s overhyped metaverse. 

    So the bottom line, as Perkins laid out, is that massive and rapid adoption of ChatGPT will “deliver significant productivity improvements” for society. He added, “This is a big deal for a global economy that has been stuck in a long secular productivity funk.” However, he wasn’t too concerned about jobs being displaced, unlike other macro desks. 

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

    There is much more in the full TS Lombard report available to pro subs in the usual place. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 22:30

  • Comedian Arrested In Beijing As Informants Become Norm Again In China, Eroding Mutual Trust
    Comedian Arrested In Beijing As Informants Become Norm Again In China, Eroding Mutual Trust

    Authored by Jessica Mao and Olivia Li via The Epoch Times,

    Recently, there is a growing trend of people informing on others secretly in Chinese society, with multiple high profile incidents occurring in succession. Current affairs analysts point out that the culture of reporting others to the authorities is a typical product of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) ideology, and breeds a lack of trust between people.

    On May 13, famous Chinese stand-up comedian Li Haoshi used a Chinese military slogan to commend his adopted stray dogs in two of his performances in Beijing.

    The slogan he used, to “have good conduct and capable of winning battles,” was originally Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s words when he set a goal for the People’s Liberation Army.

    An audience member reported on him, saying that he had insulted Chinese soldiers.

    Beijing then police arrested Li, saying that they had opened an official investigation into his performance. Li and the comedy firm he worked with were suspended from future performances and heavily fined.

    On May 19, the Kunlun Institute, a self-proclaimed independent Chinese research institute, republished an old article from 2021 on its official website, criticizing Chinese painter and sculpture artist Yue Minjun for engaging in an “organized and orchestrated campaign of insulting the military and opposing the Chinese Communist Party” with an art museum in Shunde, Guangdong.

    In the article, Kunlun’s guest commentator, Yang Zhaoyou, posted several paintings featuring Chinese communist soldiers and others. Each of the characters has an absurdly exaggerated smile, and some of them even had horns on their heads. These characters are based on ordinary soldiers, police officers, communist model soldier Lei Feng, and communist leaders such as Mao Zedong, Stalin, and Karl Marx.

    The article said these characters are “not to be insulted” and the author “strongly requests the relevant authorities to investigate this organized insult” to the military and the CCP.

    After the article was published, some Chinese social media users also launched attacks against Yue Minjun but others felt that the criticism of Yue was too far-fetched.

    In another incident on May 22, a Chinese netizen reported in an online post that a teacher at Lanzhou University, when lecturing in a classroom, publicly discredited the CCP’s propaganda of the Korean War, which the Chinese regime refers to as “The War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea.”

    According to two pictures in the teaching slides, the teacher presented the opposite view of what the CCP depicts as “aiding North Korea and defending our motherland.”

    Totalitarian System Controls People’s Minds through Informants

    Former Capital Normal University professor Li Yuanhua told The Epoch Times that authoritarian rulers are afraid of public opinion and often get increasingly paranoid about controlling people. Under communism in China, people are not allowed to think and express themselves freely, and rulers control people’s thoughts through informants and mutual supervision.

    “When words are crimes, it is actually tantamount to strengthening authoritarianism, and strengthening authoritarianism means that the authoritarians lack the self-confidence to rule, and have to resort to more controls to solidify their power,” Li said.

    Li believes that the continued development of this trend will have an erosive effect on people’s minds, and that there will be a lack of genuine trust between people. Even if they have ideas, people are afraid to express them for fear that they will be reported or ratted out by others.

    Product of Communist Culture

    New Zealand-based political commentator Ye Zhiqiu told The Epoch Times that the practice of informing on others is a typical product of culture under communist rule, which has two distinctive features.

    “One is that it does not distinguish between right and wrong, but only emphasizes political stance,” he said. “In other words, those who are reported and denounced are reported not because they have broken the law or violated social morality, but simply because their words and deeds do not conform to the views and stance propagated by the CCP. This phenomenon is also a product of decades of the CCP’s brainwashing education, which has ultimately led to intolerance of dissenting voices.”

    “Another significant feature of this phenomenon—the most serious problem—is that it usually occurs among acquaintances. The informants often report on people they know well, which destroys trust,” Ye said, adding that the CCP’s long-term brainwashing education makes people lose their humanity, leaving only the so-called communist party spirit.

    He believes that there needs to be a basic trust between people in order for society to operate normally.

    “But under communist rule, especially during the Cultural Revolution, even husbands and wives could inform on each other, and children were encouraged to report their parents’ behavior to the authorities. This eventually led to the dire consequence that people in society became enemies of each other and lost trust in each other, which made society very deformed. This is exactly what the CCP wants, because when people guard against or even fight against one another, it is difficult for them to unite and effectively join forces against the CCP,” Ye said.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 22:00

  • Pakistan Has The World's Highest Prevalence Of Diabetes (Not USA?)
    Pakistan Has The World’s Highest Prevalence Of Diabetes (Not USA?)

    Despite advancements in healthcare lengthening life expectancy across the world, there are still many diseases that are hard to beat. One of these growing and costly diseases is diabetes, but each country is being hit differently.

    As Visual Capitalist’s Freny Fernandes details below, one of the leading causes of death and disability globally, over half a billion people are living with diabetes today. The World Bank’s IDF Diabetes Atlas reveals that diabetes was responsible for 6.7 million deaths in 2021 alone.

    In this graphic, Alberto Rojo Moro uses this World Bank Atlas to map diabetes rates by country, highlighting the countries with the highest rates of the disease.

    What is Diabetes?

    Diabetes (also known as diabetes mellitusis) a long-lasting condition that affects how the body turns food into energy.

    Normally, our bodies break down the food we consume into glucose (a sugar) and release it into our blood. When our level of blood sugar rises, insulin produced by our pancreas signals the body to use excess glucose as energy or store it for later consumption.

    Diabetes restricts the pancreas from producing this life-saving insulin properly, thus causing high blood sugar levels. These high glucose levels can eventually impact the heart, kidney, and vision. There are two main types of diabetes:

    • Type 1 Diabetes: The immune system attacks and destroys the cells in your pancreas that make insulin. Causes are believed to be genetic and environmental.

    • Type 2 Diabetes: The body becomes resistant to insulin or doesn’t produce enough insulin to regulate blood sugar levels. It is caused by a mix of lifestyle factors (including obesity, physical inactivity, poor diet, and smoking) and genetics.

    Type 2 diabetes is by far the most common form of the disease, making up between 90-95% of global cases.

    Diabetes Rates by Country

    With close to 33 million (31%) of its adult population suffering from diabetes, Pakistan was the country with the highest prevalence of diabetes.

    Rank Country % of Diabetic Population Aged 20-79
    1 🇵🇰 Pakistan 30.8
    2 🇵🇫 French Polynesia 25.2
    3 🇰🇼 Kuwait 24.9
    4 🇳🇷 Nauru 23.4
    5 🇳🇨 New Caledonia 23.4
    6 🇲🇭 Marshall Islands 23.0
    7 🇲🇺 Mauritius 22.6
    8 🇰🇮 Kiribati 22.1
    9 🇪🇬 Egypt 20.9
    10 🇦🇸 American Samoa 20.3
    11 🇹🇻 Tuvalu 20.3
    12 🇸🇧 Solomon Islands 19.8
    13 🇶🇦 Qatar 19.5
    14 🇬🇺 Guam 19.1
    15 🇲🇾 Malaysia 19.0
    16 🇸🇩 Sudan 18.9
    17 🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia 18.7
    18 🇫🇯 Fiji 17.7
    19 🇵🇼 Palau 17.0
    20 🇲🇽 Mexico 16.9
    21 🇵🇬 Papua New Guinea 16.7
    22 🇦🇪 United Arab Emirates 16.4
    23 🇰🇳 Saint Kitts and Nevis 16.1
    24 🇫🇲 Micronesia 15.6
    25 🇻🇺 Vanuatu 15.6
    26 🇯🇴 Jordan 15.4
    27 🇹🇴 Tonga 15.0
    28 🇸🇾 Syria 14.9
    29 🇧🇿 Belize 14.5
    30 🇹🇷 Turkey 14.5
    31 🇧🇩 Bangladesh 14.2
    32 🇧🇧 Barbados 14.0
    33 🇴🇲 Oman 13.8
    34 🇵🇷 Puerto Rico 13.3
    35 🇬🇹 Guatemala 13.1
    36 🇧🇲 Bermuda 13.0
    37 🇰🇾 Cayman Islands 13.0
    38 🇸🇷 Suriname 12.7
    39 🇹🇹 Trinidad and Tobago 12.7
    40 🇬🇩 Grenada 12.6
    41 🇻🇮 United States Virgin Islands 12.4
    42 🇹🇿 Tanzania 12.3
    43 🇿🇲 Zambia 11.9
    44 🇦🇬 Antigua and Barbuda 11.7
    45 🇰🇲 Comoros 11.7
    46 🇨🇼 Curacao 11.7
    47 🇩🇲 Dominica 11.7
    48 🇬🇾 Guyana 11.7
    49 🇱🇨 Saint Lucia 11.7
    50 🇸🇬 Singapore 11.6
    51 🇧🇭 Bahrain 11.3
    52 🇱🇰 Sri Lanka 11.3
    53 🇧🇳 Brunei 11.1
    54 🇯🇲 Jamaica 11.1
    55 🇦🇫 Afghanistan 10.9
    56 🇨🇱 Chile 10.8
    57 🇿🇦 South Africa 10.8
    58 🇮🇶 Iraq 10.7
    59 🇺🇸 United States 10.7
    60 🇨🇳 China 10.6
    61 🇮🇩 Indonesia 10.6
    62 🇩🇴 Dominican Republic 10.5
    63 🇧🇹 Bhutan 10.4
    64 🇪🇸 Spain 10.3
    65 🇦🇱 Albania 10.2
    66 🇦🇩 Andorra 9.7
    67 🇹🇭 Thailand 9.7
    68 🇹🇳 Tunisia 9.6
    69 🇻🇪 Venezuela 9.6
    70 🇳🇮 Nicaragua 9.3
    71 🇲🇻 Maldives 9.2
    72 🇵🇸 Palestine 9.2
    73 🇼🇸 Samoa 9.2
    74 🇧🇦 Bosnia and Herzegovina 9.1
    75 🇮🇷 Iran 9.1
    76 🇲🇪 Montenegro 9.1
    77 🇲🇦 Morocco 9.1
    78 🇵🇹 Portugal 9.1
    79 🇷🇸 Serbia 9.1
    80 🇺🇾 Uruguay 9.0
    81 🇭🇹 Haiti 8.9
    82 🇧🇸 Bahamas 8.8
    83 🇧🇷 Brazil 8.8
    84 🇨🇷 Costa Rica 8.8
    85 🇻🇬 British Virgin Islands 8.7
    86 🇱🇾 Libya 8.7
    87 🇳🇵 Nepal 8.7
    88 🇨🇾 Cyprus 8.6
    89 🇰🇵 North Korea 8.6
    90 🇹🇱 Timor 8.6
    91 🇮🇱 Israel 8.5
    92 🇸🇨 Seychelles 8.5
    93 🇨🇴 Colombia 8.3
    94 🇵🇦 Panama 8.2
    95 🇱🇧 Lebanon 8.0
    96 🇲🇹 Malta 8.0
    97 🇻🇨 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 8.0
    98 🇭🇰 Hong Kong 7.8
    99 🇲🇴 Macao 7.8
    100 🇨🇦 Canada 7.7
    101 🇨🇺 Cuba 7.6
    102 🇵🇾 Paraguay 7.5
    103 🇧🇬 Bulgaria 7.4
    104 🇩🇯 Djibouti 7.4
    105 🇸🇲 San Marino 7.4
    106 🇰🇭 Cambodia 7.3
    107 🇲🇼 Malawi 7.3
    108 🇩🇿 Algeria 7.1
    109 🇨🇿 Czechia 7.1
    110 🇲🇲 Myanmar 7.1
    111 🇵🇭 Philippines 7.1
    112 🇭🇺 Hungary 7.0
    113 🇺🇿 Uzbekistan 7.0
    114 🇩🇪 Germany 6.9
    115 🇲🇳 Mongolia 6.9
    116 🇵🇱 Poland 6.8
    117 🇰🇷 South Korea 6.8
    118 🇳🇦 Namibia 6.7
    119 🇹🇲 Turkmenistan 6.7
    120 🇯🇵 Japan 6.6
    121 🇰🇿 Kazakhstan 6.6
    122 🇰🇬 Kyrgyzstan 6.6
    123 🇹🇯 Tajikistan 6.6
    124 🇧🇮 Burundi 6.5
    125 🇪🇷 Eritrea 6.5
    126 🇪🇪 Estonia 6.5
    127 🇷🇴 Romania 6.5
    128 🇷🇼 Rwanda 6.5
    129 🇸🇴 Somalia 6.5
    130 🇸🇸 South Sudan 6.5
    131 🇦🇺 Australia 6.4
    132 🇬🇷 Greece 6.4
    133 🇮🇹 Italy 6.4
    134 🇸🇻 El Salvador 6.3
    135 🇮🇲 Isle of Man 6.3
    136 🇬🇧 United Kingdom 6.3
    137 🇱🇦 Laos 6.2
    138 🇲🇨 Monaco 6.2
    139 🇳🇿 New Zealand 6.2
    140 🇫🇮 Finland 6.1
    141 🇱🇮 Liechtenstein 6.1
    142 🇲🇰 North Macedonia 6.1
    143 🇻🇳 Vietnam 6.1
    144 🇱🇻 Latvia 5.9
    145 🇱🇺 Luxembourg 5.9
    146 🇨🇫 Central African Republic 5.8
    147 🇹🇩 Chad 5.8
    148 🇨🇩 Democratic Republic of Congo 5.8
    149 🇱🇹 Lithuania 5.8
    150 🇸🇰 Slovakia 5.8
    151 🇬🇪 Georgia 5.7
    152 🇦🇲 Armenia 5.6
    153 🇦🇿 Azerbaijan 5.6
    154 🇧🇾 Belarus 5.6
    155 🇲🇩 Moldova 5.6
    156 🇷🇺 Russia 5.6
    157 🇺🇦 Ukraine 5.6
    158 🇧🇴 Bolivia 5.5
    159 🇨🇲 Cameroon 5.5
    160 🇨🇬 Congo 5.5
    161 🇬🇶 Equatorial Guinea 5.5
    162 🇬🇦 Gabon 5.5
    163 🇮🇸 Iceland 5.5
    164 🇸🇹 Sao Tome and Principe 5.5
    165 🇦🇷 Argentina 5.4
    166 🇾🇪 Yemen 5.4
    167 🇩🇰 Denmark 5.3
    168 🇫🇷 France 5.3
    169 🇧🇼 Botswana 5.3
    170 🇳🇪 Niger 5.2
    171 🇭🇳 Honduras 5.1
    172 🇪🇹 Ethiopia 5.0
    173 🇸🇪 Sweden 5.0
    174 🇭🇷 Croatia 4.8
    175 🇵🇪 Peru 4.8
    176 🇦🇴 Angola 4.6
    177 🇦🇹 Austria 4.6
    178 🇸🇿 Eswatini 4.6
    179 🇱🇸 Lesotho 4.6
    180 🇲🇬 Madagascar 4.6
    181 🇨🇭 Switzerland 4.6
    182 🇺🇬 Uganda 4.6
    183 🇳🇱 Netherlands 4.5
    184 🇪🇨 Ecuador 4.4
    185 🇦🇼 Aruba 4.3
    186 🇰🇪 Kenya 4.0
    187 🇫🇴 Faroe Islands 3.8
    188 🇧🇪 Belgium 3.6
    189 🇳🇬 Nigeria 3.6
    190 🇳🇴 Norway 3.6
    191 🇬🇱 Greenland 3.3
    192 🇲🇿 Mozambique 3.3
    193 🇸🇳 Senegal 3.1
    194 🇮🇪 Ireland 3.0
    195 🇬🇭 Ghana 2.6
    196 🇧🇫 Burkina Faso 2.1
    197 🇨🇻 Cape Verde 2.1
    198 🇨🇮 Cote d’Ivoire 2.1
    199 🇬🇳 Guinea 2.1
    200 🇬🇼 Guinea-Bissau 2.1
    201 🇱🇷 Liberia 2.1
    202 🇲🇱 Mali 2.1
    203 🇲🇷 Mauritania 2.1
    204 🇸🇱 Sierra Leone 2.1
    205 🇹🇬 Togo 2.1
    206 🇿🇼 Zimbabwe 2.1
    207 🇬🇲 Gambia 1.9
    208 🇧🇯 Benin 1.1

    The situation in Pakistan is currently not expected to improve in the near future. By 2045, the country is estimated to have 62 million people suffering from diabetes due to numerous reasons including malnutrition.

    This chronic disease has also reached alarming levels in many Oceanic island countries and territories, including French Polynesia, New Caledonia, and American Samoa. Each has a diabetic prevalence above 20%, with reasons ranging from malnutrition to obesity.

    Meanwhile, African nations like Benin and The Gambia recorded the lowest prevalence of diabetes in the world. In 2021, African countries had a combined total of 23.6 million adults with diabetes, less than 2% of the continent’s population. However, this number is predicted to double to 55 million by 2045.

    Most Diabetic Countries in Absolute Terms

    In China, diabetes was prevalent in 10.6% of the nation’s adult population in 2021. While this only puts the country in 60th place in terms of prevalence rate, this is equivalent to roughly 140 million adults with diabetes because of the country’s large population.

    Similarly, India’s 9.6% prevalence of diabetes equaled 77 million adults suffering from the disease in the country, more than double the number of Pakistan’s diabetic citizens.

    A similar story follows in the Americas, where Mexico has the highest adult prevalence of diabetes at 16.9% or 14.1 million people. Though the U.S. has a lower rate at 10.7%, its higher population gives it an estimated 32.2 million adults with diabetes.

    Breaking down diabetes rates by country highlights that this a global health challenge. To address the growing burden of diabetes, we need to focus on prevention, early detection, and management of diabetes.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 21:30

  • Col. Douglas Macgregor: "Bakhmut Is A Catastrophe [For Ukraine]… F-16s Won't Make A Difference"
    Col. Douglas Macgregor: “Bakhmut Is A Catastrophe [For Ukraine]… F-16s Won’t Make A Difference”

    Russia turned Bakhmut into the graveyard of Ukrainian military power, Col. Douglas MacGregor (ret.) explains ‘what comes next’ in his latest opinion piece at The American Conservative:

    Until the fighting begins, national military strategy developed in peacetime shapes thinking about warfare and its objectives. Then the fighting creates a new logic of its own. Strategy is adjusted. Objectives change. The battle for Bakhmut illustrates this point very well. 

    When General Sergey Vladimirovich Surovikin, commander of Russian aerospace forces, assumed command of the Russian military in the Ukrainian theater last year, President Vladimir Putin and his senior military advisors concluded that their original assumptions about the war were wrong. Washington had proved incurably hostile to Moscow’s offers to negotiate, and the ground force Moscow had committed to compel Kiev to negotiate had proved too small.

    Surovikin was given wide latitude to streamline command relationships and reorganize the theater. Most importantly, Surovikin was also given the freedom of action to implement a defensive strategy that maximized the use of stand-off attack or strike systems while Russian ground forces expanded in size and striking power. The Bakhmut “Meatgrinder” was the result. 

    When it became clear that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky and his government regarded Bakhmut as a symbol of Ukrainian resistance to Russian military power, Surovikin turned Bakhmut into the graveyard of Ukrainian military power. From the fall of 2022 onward, Surovikin exploited Zalenskiy’s obsession with Bakhmut to engage in a bloody tug-of-war for control of the city. As a result, thousands of Ukrainian soldiers died in Bakhmut and many more were wounded. 

    Surovkin’s performance is reminiscent of another Russian military officer: General Aleksei Antonov. As the first deputy chief of the Soviet general staff, Surovikin was, in Western parlance, the director of strategic planning. When Stalin demanded a new summer offensive in a May 1943 meeting, Antonov, the son and grandson of imperial Russian army officers, argued for a defensive strategy. Antonov insisted that Hitler, if allowed, would inevitably attack the Soviet defenses in the Kursk salient and waste German resources doing so.

    Stalin, like Hitler, believed that wars were won with offensive action, not defensive operations.

    Stalin was unmoved by Soviet losses. Antonov presented his arguments for the defensive strategy in a climate of fear, knowing that contradicting Stalin could cost him his life. To the surprise of Marshals Aleksandr Vasilevsky and Georgy Zhukov, who were present at the meeting, Stalin relented and approved Antonov’s operational concept. The rest, as historians say, is history.

    If President Putin and his senior military leaders wanted outside evidence for Surovikin’s strategic success in Bakhmut, a Western admission appears to provide it: Washington and her European allies seem to think that a frozen conflict—in which fighting pauses but neither side is victorious, nor does either side agree that the war is officially over—could be the most politically palatable long-term outcome for NATO. In other words, Zelensky’s supporters no longer believe in the myth of Ukrainian victory.

    The question on everyone’s mind is, what’s next? 

    In Washington, conventional wisdom dictates that Ukrainian forces launch a counteroffensive to retake Southern Ukraine. Of course, conventional wisdom is frequently high on convention and low on wisdom. On the assumption that Ukraine’s black earth will dry sufficiently to support ground maneuver forces before mid-June, Ukrainian forces will strike Russian defenses on multiple axes and win back control of Southern Ukraine in late May or June. Roughly 30,000 Ukrainian soldiers training in Great Britain, Germany, and other NATO member states are expected to return to Ukraine and provide the foundation for the Ukrainian counterattack force.

    General Valery Gerasimov, who now commands the Russian forces in the Ukrainian theater, knows what to expect, and he is undoubtedly preparing for the Ukrainian offensive. The partial mobilization of Russian forces means that Russian ground forces are now much larger than they have been since the mid-1980s. 

    Given the paucity of ammunition available to adequately supply one operational axis, it seems unlikely that a Ukrainian offensive involving two or more axes could succeed in penetrating Russian defenses. Persistent overhead surveillance makes it nearly impossible for Ukrainian forces to move through the twenty- to twenty-five-kilometer security zone and close with Russian forces before Ukrainian formations take significant losses. 

    Once Ukraine’s offensive resources are exhausted Russia will likely take the offense. There is no incentive to delay Russian offensive operations. As Ukrainian forces repeatedly demonstrate, paralysis is always temporary. Infrastructure and equipment are repaired. Manpower is conscripted to rebuild destroyed formations. If Russia is to achieve its aim of demilitarizing Ukraine, Gerasimov surely knows he must still close with and complete the destruction of the Ukrainian ground forces that remain. 

    Why not spare the people of Ukraine further bloodletting and negotiate with Moscow for peace while Ukraine still possesses an army? Unfortunately, to be effective, diplomacy requires mutual respect, and Washington’s effusive hatred for Russia makes diplomacy impossible. That hatred is rivaled only by the arrogance of much of the ruling class, who denigrate Russian military power largely because U.S. forces have been lucky enough to avoid conflict with a major power since the Korean War. More sober-minded leaders in Washington, Paris, Berlin, and other NATO capitols should urge a different course of action.

    *  *  *

    Finally, we note that Col. MacGregor sat down with host Charlie Kirk about the grave situation in Ukraine today, as well as an in-depth discussion of current geopolitical picture relating the US and NATO.

    “…the truth is Bakhmut was a catastrophe and everyone knows it… people know the Ukrainians can’t win and now we’re acting desperately at every turn – send them F-16s, send them whatever we have; Truth is none of that is going to make any difference… the real risk now is that fools in Washington will talk about direct intervention…”

    Click the image below to go to YouTube directly (video not embeddable) for this critically frank interview:

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 21:00

  • Top 10 Cheapest Beach Homes In America
    Top 10 Cheapest Beach Homes In America

    The 30yr fixed mortgage rate is back above 7% for the first time since early March. Housing affordability is the worst in decades. Those still searching for a beach home but don’t want to pay Hamptons or South Florida prices have other options that are still considered “affordable.” 

    A new report via Realtor.com reveals the top ten most affordable beach towns for homebuyers this summer. To find these affordable homes, Realtor analysts used listing data for every home put on the market in the past year located within a one-mile radius of each beach.” 

    “We then selected the most affordable beach towns by price per square foot. Only locations with at least 50 properties within a mile of the water in the past year were included,” they said. 

    Topping the list as the most affordable beach home community in the US is Gulfport, Mississippi, with an average median home price of around $225,000 within 1 mile of the beach. The median price per square footage within 1 mile of the beach was $144. 

    Second on the list is Newport News, Virginia, with average home prices within 1 mile of a beach around $220,000 and the median price per square foot around $150. 

    “The city is perched on the southern tip of the Virginia Peninsula, where the James River meets the Chesapeake Bay near its mouth to the Atlantic Ocean,” Realtor said. 

    The rest of the list includes:

    3. New London, Conn.

    4. Grand Isle, La.

    5. Corpus Christi, Texas

    6. Atlantic City, NJ.

    7. Navarre, Fla.

    8. North Beach, Md.

    9. Crescent City, Calif.

    10. Shirley, N.Y.

    Most of the affordable beach towns can be found in the South, Mid-Atlantic, or Northeast regions. However, Northern California also has one reasonably priced beach town. 

    Affordability challenges persist, with the mortgage rates back above 7%. 

    The beach towns listed above are gems of affordability. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 20:30

  • Washington Doctor Facing Probe For Criticizing COVID Policies Wins Emergency Injunction
    Washington Doctor Facing Probe For Criticizing COVID Policies Wins Emergency Injunction

    Authored by Caden Pearsen via The Epoch Times,

    A Washington state appeals court has granted an emergency injunction to a retired doctor facing disciplinary action from the Washington Medical Commission (WMC) over articles he wrote against the official COVID-19 narrative in 2021.

    Dr. Richard J. Eggleston, a retired ophthalmologist in Clarkston, Washington, faces disciplinary action over articles published in the Lewiston Tribune he wrote challenged the prevailing information and guidance regarding the pandemic.

    During the pandemic, doctors could be accused of spreading misinformation if they provided advice contrary to the official information. This included, for example, advocating or prescribing treatments such as ivermectin or disagreeing with the effectiveness of face masks and vaccines.

    The United States officially ended the pandemic emergency on May 11.

    The WMC filed charges against Dr. Eggleston, accusing him of unprofessional conduct, including spreading false information and misinformation about the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its treatments. They assert that his actions violated state laws related to moral turpitude, misrepresentation, and interference with an investigation.

    In response to the charges, Dr. Eggleston has maintained his innocence and has argued that his articles are protected under the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech. He sought to have the disciplinary proceedings dismissed on the grounds that the statutes applied by the WMC infringed upon his constitutional rights.

    Despite a separate, initial motion to dismiss being previously denied, the recent emergency injunction granted by the appeals court now provides a temporary reprieve for Dr. Eggleston. The injunction halts the disciplinary proceedings while the court further examines the case.

    The WMC wants to carry out the fact-finding hearing, they say, to protect public health and fulfill its disciplinary responsibilities for the medical profession “and to resolve issues of fact and credibility that require the expertise of the Commission to resolve,” according to a court filing (pdf).

    Court Commissioner Hailey L. Landrus noted in her ruling that while putting a stay on the proceeding would inconvenience the commission—as lawyers for the WMC argued—it doesn’t demonstrate harm to the public.

    ‘Chilling Effect’ on Free Speech

    Dr. Eggleston, on the other hand, argued that he sought to halt the disciplinary proceedings to assert his First Amendment right to free speech.

    Landrus favored the retired doctor’s argument, saying public dialogue by professionals receives strong First Amendment protection, and the mere fact of prosecution can have a “chilling effect” on the exercise of these rights for Dr. Eggleston and other medical professionals.

    “Dr. Eggleston has a competing interest in enjoining the disciplinary proceedings in order to seek First Amendment protection for his speech, which is the reason for the administrative proceedings in the first place. Denying a stay would, according to Dr. Eggleston, violate his constitutional right to free speech,” Landrus said in her ruling.

    “Balancing the parties competing interests and hardships favors Dr. Eggleston,” the court commissioner added.

    She found that it would be more efficient to review the trial court’s decision on the injunction instead of proceeding with a lengthy administrative hearing. Granting the injunction could potentially resolve the entire proceedings, saving time and resources, she noted.

    The court’s decision to grant the emergency injunction comes as a significant development in Dr. Eggleston’s ongoing legal battle with the WMC.

    The granted stay of the proceedings will delay hearings scheduled to commence this week, Wednesday through Friday. This delay provides a short window of opportunity for the WMC to withdraw the charges against Dr. Eggleston. However, if the WMC chooses not to withdraw the charges, the legal process will proceed as planned.

    “I’m very happy to see that this part of the legal system understands this First Amendment issue and basic rights to get accurate information from a physician,” Dr. Eggleston told The Defender.

    The legal team representing Dr. Eggleston expressed their satisfaction with the court’s ruling to grant the stay of proceedings. Todd Richardson, one of Dr. Eggleston’s lawyers, emphasized the significance of protecting First Amendment rights.

    “As Americans, if we don’t conscientiously defend these foundational rights and freedoms, we may soon wake up to realize we have lost them,” he told The Defender.

    The Epoch Times contacted WMC for comment.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 20:00

  • Lululemon Fires Two Store Employees For Calling Police On Masked Robbers
    Lululemon Fires Two Store Employees For Calling Police On Masked Robbers

    America’s descent toward lawlessness is most visible at retail stores in progressive metro areas. The latest incident occurred at a Lululemon store in Atlanta. Three masked men pillaged the store while two employees wearing overpriced yoga pants were fired by corporate for calling the police to report the robbery. 

    Local media outlet WXIA said Jennifer Ferguson, the former assistant manager of the Peachtree Corners Lululemon, and Rachel Rogers, a former employee at the store, encountered the men in “masks and hoodies” who “swiped” as much merchandise as they could before sprinting out the door.

    “No, no, no, you can march back out,” Ferguson said in a video that caught the entire robbery. One of the robbers told her, “Chill, b-tch, shut your ass up.” 

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

    New York Post said the thieves had robbed the store several times because Lululemon has a “zero-tolerance policy” on chasing or physically engaging with a robber. Although both employees did not physically try to stop the masked men, they called the police to report the theft. 

    “We are not supposed to get in the way. You kind of clear path for whatever they’re going to do.

    “And then, after it’s over, you scan a QR code. And that’s that. We’ve been told not to put it in any notes, because that might scare other people. We’re not supposed to call the police, not really supposed to talk about it,” Ferguson told WXIA. 

    In a Facebook post, the assistant manager’s husband, Jason Ferguson, said, “My wife was terminated from her job at Lululemon for ‘breaking employee handbook policy’ of not interfering with a burglary.” He continued:

    Lululemon representatives held a zoom call a few days after the incident to learn what Jenn knew about the policy. Then, a few days later, they scheduled a follow-up zoom call where they terminated her citing the company’s “zero-tolerance policy” in these situations. No warning. No coaching. No additional training. Just. Fired. Georgia being an at-will employment state, employers can do that whenever they wish. That is their right. But it doesn’t make it right. Especially in this situation.

    Jason Ferguson said the regional manager told his wife and the other former employee that calling the police would “look bad for Lululemon.” 

    Lululemon appears to have an open-invite policy for thieves, which puts its employees in harm’s way. Not intervening physically is probably smart because who wants to die over expensive yoga pants made in Southeast Asia? However, terminating employees for simply calling the police is upside-down clown world stuff. We hope Lululemon fixes these broken policies and puts more effort towards protecting employees and improving work conditions. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 19:30

  • What A Difference A Real DA Makes
    What A Difference A Real DA Makes

    Authored by Lloyd Billingsley via American Greatness,

    Chesa Boudin, named after cop-killer Joanne Chesimard, and son of Weather Underground terrorists Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, was elected district attorney of San Francisco in November 2020.

    Criminals were happy with the outcome. 

    “Chesa Boudin threw a monkey wrench into the city’s criminal justice system,” recalls Richie Greenberg, San Francisco resident and business consultant.

    “Amid a series of high-profile cases, his promise to release repeat criminals and to allow quality of life crimes to go unpunished, San Francisco descended into a scofflaw paradise.” 

    Greenberg spearheaded a recall effort and in June 2022 voters booted Boudin by a 60 percent to 40 percent margin. Mayor London Breed then appointed University of Chicago law alum Brooke Jenkins, a prosecutor in the city’s homicide division. 

    Jenkins proceeded to fire 16 Boudin loyalists, part of “important changes to my management team and staff that will help advance my vision to restore a sense of safety in San Francisco by holding serious and repeat offenders accountable and implementing smart criminal justice reforms.” 

    In November 2022, Jenkins prevailed over three rivals with approximately 54 percent of the vote. As the victor proclaimed. “I pledge that improving and promoting public safety will be my and our office’s top priority.” 

    The “scofflaw paradise” recently threw up a challenge. 

    On April 27, “black trans man” Banko Brown shoplifted items from a downtown Walgreens store. That drew the attention of security guard Michael Earl-Ray Anthony, who struggled with Brown. Anthony contended that Brown threatened to stab him and shot the shoplifter, who later died from the wound. No weapon was found on the decedent. 

    “Banko’s death is yet another testament to the dire need for increased advocacy for the safety of all trans people in this country, especially Black trans people,” said a statement from Tori Cooper of the Community Engagement for the Transgender Justice Initiative.

    “His death comes at a time of blatant hateful, xenophobic rhetoric and legislative measures which fuel violence against our community. We can’t continue to stand idle while this unfolds.” 

    Protesters also called for Anthony to be prosecuted for murder, but San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins took a different approach. “The killing of Mr. Banko Brown on April 27, 2023 was a tragedy and my heart breaks for his friends and family,” Jenkins said in a statement. 

    After careful review of all of the evidence gathered by the San Francisco Police Department in this case, my office will not be pursuing murder charges, at this time, in connection to the shooting. We reviewed witness statements, statements from the suspect, and video footage of the incident and it does not meet the People’s burden to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury that the suspect is guilty of a crime. The evidence clearly shows that the suspect believed he was in mortal danger and acted in self-defense. We cannot bring forward charges when there is credible evidence of reasonable self-defense. Doing so would be unethical and create false hope for a successful prosecution. No matter the case, however, we must follow the law and the evidence, wherever it leads. We never make decisions based on emotions or what may be politically expedient.

    For Jenkins, “this wasn’t someone just walking out with an item. This is a shoplifting that became violent because Banko Brown initiated that aggressive contact with the security guard which turned this legally into a robbery.”

    The D.A. asked that “even in the midst of very intense heightened emotions that people look at the same evidence that we did, because that is what our decision is based on.”

    “We all share that we wish that this never happened,” Jenkins added, “but the facts are what they are and that is what we are limited to.” One fact missing from many reports was that Michael Earl-Ray Anthony is also black and something of a hardship case. 

    “I’ve really been on my own since I was a young teenager,” Anthony told the D.A.’s office. “Always moving, different places, different houses, different family, friends. My parents never really worked. I was the only one working. My stepdad—he was on drugs.” 

    Anthony spoke of working as a security guard since he was 18, and for a time as an armored truck driver, delivering bags of up to $600,000 to banks. The guard was distraught at killing someone and told detectives, “I’m so sorry. I’m so sorry.” Local activists cast him as a murderer. 

    “If there was a crime that was committed in terms of stealing—that is if—there was a greater crime, which was murder.”

    That was Honey Mahogany, the first black trans chair of the local Democratic Party, in a May 17 protest outside the D.A.’s office. 

    “Banko Brown was not a danger to anyone,” according to Kevin Ortiz of the Latinx Democratic Club.

    “Brooke Jenkins needs to do her job—she must be held accountable for the families she’s failed. And that starts with Banko Brown.”

    The people of San Francisco might not think so. 

    California’s 2014 Proposition 47 changed felonies to misdemeanors and essentially legalized theft of property valued at less than $950. Car break-ins and property crime quickly surged, and in parts of the city, contrary to Tony Bennett, the stench of excrement filled the air. The pro-criminal Chesa Boudin made it all worse, and voters turned him out. 

    Brooke Jenkins, by contrast, has made public safety a top priority. She follows the law and the evidence and does not make decisions on what may be politically expedient. That is good advice for district attorneys in Los Angeles, New York, and across the country.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 19:00

  • Children's Hospital 'Health Hero' Award Given To Trans Democrat Pushing Child Sex Changes
    Children’s Hospital ‘Health Hero’ Award Given To Trans Democrat Pushing Child Sex Changes

    The Children’s Minnesota hospital system awarded state Rep. Leigh Finke an award last week after authoring a bill designed to promote child sex changes, the Daily Caller reports.

    Screenshot/YouTube/Leigh Finke

    Finke, a transgender individual, authored Minnesota’s HF146, the so-called “trans refuge” bill, which would prevent the enforcement of out-of-state laws that would remove a child from parents who cross state lines to administer transgender medical interventions, such as hormones or puberty blockers.

    “The law protects access to gender affirming care for Minnesotans and for those traveling to Minnesota from other states,” said Children’s Minnesota in a statement.

    The legislation was signed into law on April 27 by Gov. Tim Walz (D).

    Finke was also the author of a bill that would strip anti-pedophile language from the state’s existing anti-discrimination law. The law currently excludes sexual attraction to children from its list of legally protected sexual orientations, but Finke’s bill would remove language specifying that exclusion, which activists have argued could lead to pedophilia being interpreted as a protected sexual orientation.

    Republican state Rep. Harry Niska later proposed an amendment to the bill that would clarify that pedophilia is not a protected class, which was adopted unanimously. -Daily Caller

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsAccording to Children’s Minnesota, it’s “the only health system in the state that cares exclusively for children” via two hospitals and 25 other facilities for primary care.

    Meanwhile, similar “trans refuge” legislation has been passed in California, after states like Utah and Florida passed legislation to restrict sex change procedures on children.

    “I am extremely honored to be presented the Health Hero Award from Children’s Minnesota. At a time when young children are exploring who they are, and where they fit in society, we need to advocate and fight for their right to discover those identities with dignity and compassion,” said Rep. Finke.

    Or maybe wait till they’re 18, when society deems people to be adults capable of making major decisions for themselves?

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 18:30

  • Bill To Legalize Psychedelic Mushrooms Advances In California Senate
    Bill To Legalize Psychedelic Mushrooms Advances In California Senate

    Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

    A bill to decriminalize hallucinogenic mushrooms cleared the California Senate May 24, reaching the halfway point in the state’s effort to legalize the drug, despite increasing opposition by law enforcement and many citizens.

    Senate Bill 58 was introduced in December by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who said criminalizing drug use and possession does nothing but fill up prisons with people who are addicted.

    “We shouldn’t be criminalizing people for personal use of these non-addictive substances,” Wiener said in a May 24 statement.

    If passed, the bill would allow the cultivation, transfer, and transportation of fungi or other plant-based materials that can be used as ingredients for the drugs, according to the bill text.

    Psilocybin is found in a variety of mushrooms and can be produced synthetically. The bill would only allow plant-based psychedelic drugs for use by people 21 years old and older.

    Ingesting the drug can cause sensory perception changes, including auditory and visual hallucinations. The drug’s effects after ingestion can begin within 20 to 90 minutes and can last up to 12 hours in some cases, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

    Several law enforcement associations, local California governments, and organizations are opposed to legalizing the substance, including the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, the City of Beverly Hills, the California State Sheriffs’ Association, California Statewide Law Enforcement Association, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, Concerned Women for America, and many others.

    The California District Attorneys Association opposed the measure, expressing concern that legalizing the drugs for recreational use is not grounded in scientific evidence.

    “While we are sympathetic to proponents who argue that the veteran population might benefit therapeutically from exploration of these substances, these drugs are Schedule I controlled substances for a reason,” the association said, according to a Senate analysis of the bill. “They have no federally accepted medical use and have a high probability of misuse.”

    The California Contract Cities Association was also against legalization and was concerned about public safety risks associated with the cultivation and transportation of the materials.

    “This means that more hallucinogenic drugs would be able to move across local jurisdictions in far greater numbers with insufficient oversight or accountability from local agencies,” the cities association wrote in a Senate analysis. “This is very worrisome from the perspective of local decision-making authorities like our member cities.”

    Support for the bill includes the Hippie and a Veteran Foundation, Initiate Justice, the Alameda County Democratic Party, the California Association of Social Rehabilitation Agencies, and the California Public Defenders Association. The cities of West Hollywood and Eureka are also in favor of the bill.

    Clinical trials are underway to study its use for treating depression and other mental health disorders, according to the American Psychiatric Association.

    The association determined in a 2020 study that while research is still preliminary, psychedelics show promise for treating conditions including treatment-resistant depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder but the drugs were not ready for use as a treatment.

    Psychedelic mushrooms are still illegal under U.S. federal law. The Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has designated psilocybin, the substance found in psychedelic mushrooms, as a “breakthrough therapy,” speeding up the development and review of the drug to treat serious conditions.

    Preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over available therapy in clinical studies, according to the FDA.

    Local measures to deprioritize the policing or prosecution of conduct related to hallucinogens have passed in Oakland and Santa Cruz. Ann Arbor, Michigan, Denver, and Washington, D.C., have also passed similar measures.

    Oregon and Colorado have passed similar measures to decriminalize psilocybin and legalize it for supervised use.

    The legislation is a stripped-down version of a bill proposed by the same senator in 2021. That bill, which would have legalized plant-based and synthetic psychedelics—such as MDMA, LSD, and ketamine—failed to pass.

    In Wiener’s San Francisco district, rampant drug use has contributed to runaway homelessness throughout the city. The city passed a motion in 2022 calling for law enforcement to deprioritize investigations and arrests of adults found in possession of psychedelics.

    Last month, dozens of residents and advocates protested at San Francisco City Hall against open-air drug markets and unsafe streets. Rally organizer Ricci Wynne told The Epoch Times data showed that the most prominent issues in San Francisco stem from drug use and drug dealing.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 18:00

  • Vegas Group Accused Of Cheating Casino Out Of More Than $225,000 Playing Electronic Craps
    Vegas Group Accused Of Cheating Casino Out Of More Than $225,000 Playing Electronic Craps

    A group that played digital craps in Las Vegas in November and December 2021 is being accused of cheating, allegedly racking up $200,000 in illicit winnings from what CBS/KLAS has called a “dice sliding scheme”.

    The group reportedly played at The Cosmopolitan in November and December 2021 and went on a winning streak that cost the casino more than $225,000, the Nevada Gaming Control Board confirmed.

    The cheating took place on one of the newer, electronic craps tables, which have a smoother surface than traditional felt craps tables, and sometimes fewer dealers standing by to oversee the action. 

    According to the NGC, “the cheating involved multiple suspects and occurred on the Azure Roll to Win Electronic Craps table.”

    Documents on the incident stated: “The cheating method involved dice sliding and sliding occurs when the shooter slides one or both dice across the table in order to prevent the cubes from rolling. The dice will be in the same position as they started, allowing the shooter to control the outcome of the game.”

    Investigators also believe cheating may have taken place at Resorts World. 

    The group “was observed both together on the table and away from it, during and after fraudulent dice sliding activities occurred,” the CBS report says, citing case records. “Before illegally sliding the dice [one person whose name is redacted in court documents] would signal the other by placing single wagers in a circle motion around the main screen [wagers].”

    All four people involved now face “cheating-related charges” and are scheduled for a preliminary hearing in early June. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 17:30

  • As Interest Rates Rise, The Era Of "Deficits Don't Matter" Is Over
    As Interest Rates Rise, The Era Of “Deficits Don’t Matter” Is Over

    Authored Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

    Back in 2002, then-Vice President Dick Cheney claimed “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter” and went on to push for tax cuts combined with more federal spending. Indeed, the Bush administration would go on to push immense amounts of new spending, supporting a huge Medicare expansion and blowing hundreds of millions of dollars on costly and pointless occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The national debt grew by 70 percent during Bush’s eight years, but no one in Washington—Republican or Democrat—really cared. After 2003, the economy seemed to be growing and after the 2008 financial crisis hit, all that really mattered was bailing out Wall Street to “save” the global economy. 

    In fact, for more than thirty years, stern warnings about the federal debt and annual deficits have come from wet-blanket curmudgeons who insisted that running up huge debts would become a problem. They were right, but the time frame has proven to be quite a bit longer than most anticipated. Many significant global political and economic changes intervened to ease the process of incurring an enormous national debt, even as the total debt exploded from $5.6 trillion to $22.5 trillion between 2000 and 2019. These changes included rising global productivity, a new globalized work force, and solid global demand for dollars—which fueled apparently limitless demand for for US government bonds. This ensured the debt remained easy enough to manage. For a time.

    Things are changing, however, and in the coming five years we’ll begin to see how a newly accelerating debt, declining demand for dollars, and rising price inflation will finally reveal how and why deficits do matter, after all. 

    How Much Debt Are We Talking About?

    The US’s national debt is now projected to exceed $32 trillion in 2023. That’s up by nearly ten trillion dollars since January of 2020. Nearly eight trillion of that came in 2020 and 2021 alone. Since 2019, the rate at which the US government has taken on new debt has significantly accelerated beyond what was already a shocking rate of deficit spending. Back in 2019, I noted that the Trump administration had added nearly a trillion dollars to the deficit in a single year of what was considered an economic expansion. That was remarkable at the time. Of, cours, what happened under both Trump and Biden during the covid panic made a trillion dollars look like spare change. 

    Moreover, the debt has reached new post-World-War-II highs in proportion to the overall size of the economy. In 2020, total federal debt as a percentage of national GDP shot up to 120%. This puts the US at previously-unseen peacetime debt levels. 

    Comparing debt to GDP doesn’t tell us much about the government’s ability to pay and service its debt, however. A more realistic measure is total debt compared to federal revenues. By this measure, we also find debt has accelerated to peacetime highs. Total federal debt is now more than 6 times the size of annual federal receipts. 

    This Translates Into a Lot of Interest Payments 

    The problem with a large national debt isn’t that it’s big or difficult to pay off. An enormous debt can be sustained indefinitely by a government so long as it can manage paying the interest on the debt. For most of the past three decades, the US government had it very easy in this respect. It could run up huge annual deficits, incur trillions of dollars in new debt, yet interest payments on that debt remained remarkably stable and did not rise to “out of control” levels. 

    This was made possible by the fact that interest rates trended downward again and again for most of the past 35 years. If we look at the federal funds rate—which tends to trend with average interest levels paid on federal debt—we can see that debt levels surged at the same time that interest rates were falling. This fall in interest rates prevented interest payments from surging upward as well. 

    Why this rates fall? During much of the 1990s, the US grew to dominate the global economy in the wake of the end of the Cold War. This drove far greater need for dollars worldwide, and all those dollar holders put many of the dollars into buying US government debt. This pushed down the cost of issuing new federal debt considerably. Even after the rise of the euro after 1999, globalization helped sustain global demand for US debt, as did the eurodollar economy. 

    After 2008, interest rates on US debt were pushed down even further as the US central bank bought up nearly six trillion dollars worth of US bonds. As this artificial demand for federal bonds rose, the interest rate sank further. So, even as the federal government was adding trillions to the national debt after 2009, interest payments remained manageable.

    We can see how from 1998 to 2015, total debt service costs barely budged in spite of an ever growing national debt. This finally began to grow after 2017 with Trump’s growing mega deficits and efforts at the Federal Reserve to finally allow interest rates to increase over fears of price inflation. After 2020, of course, interest payments on the debt then surged above half a trillion dollars, and are projected to increase further: 

    Interest Payments Will Gradually Consume the Federal Budget

    It is here where we begin to see the problem with such huge debt levels. An enormous debt makes total debt payments far more sensitive to movements in interest rates. In 2007, when the national debt was at a “mere” nine trillion dollars, the federal funds rate could rise above five percent without a resulting surge in interest payments. More than a decade later, with debt levels at $30 trillion, a similar increase in the federal funds rates leads to a much larger increased in debt service payments. 

    In practical terms, this means that a government with enormous debt levels likely cannot sustain any sizable increases in interest. Under these conditions, debt payments will gradually grow larger and larger until they consume much of the nation’s federal spending. 

    We can see this in even the official federal projects for debt payments moving forward. For example, according to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the federal government will owe $660 billion in debt service in 2023. But this will increase to $960 billion by 2028, in five years. For comparison, we can note that the OMB also projects the entire defense budget in 2028 will be $966 billion. 

    The OMB’s projections are rather conservative compared to forecasts in a February report from the Congressional Budget Office. According to the CBO report, interest payments will reach nearly a trillion dollars in 2028 and will continue to climb after that. In a decade, total interest payments will exceed $1.4 trillion and will be the third largest federal “program” behind Social Security and Medicaid. At that time, interest payments will exceed defense spending by $300 billion. 

    On a per-capita basis, this is not exactly trivial. In 2030, for example, the $1.4 trillion owned in interest payments will work out to approximately $4,000 per American adult of working age (adults between ages 18 and 65). 

    In other words, within six years, American taxpayers will be forced to pony up more than a trillion dollars every year to just to cover long-past federal spending on various lost wars and failed social programs. Baby Boomers will be mostly dead or in nursing homes, but young workers will be paying for the bill incurred by their elders decades ago.  

    Keep in mind, however, that this is all a “best case scenario.” CBO and OMB estimates assume there will be no recessions in coming years, and they also assume relatively stable interest rates. The CBO estimates forecast interest on US federal debt will average about 2.7 percent in 2023, but will not increase significantly after that, rising only to 3.2 percent by 2031. 

    That’s possible, of course, but current trends suggests the CBO is too optimistic. Geopolitical realities point to a relative decline in demand for the dollar—which will also lead to a decline in demand for US bonds. The US insists on isolating itself both politically and economically as it wages sanction wars—or threatens to do so—on many of the world’s key economies. This will all drive up interest rates. As we’ve shown here on mises.org, the dollar is unlikely to disappear as an important global currency, but it is likely to face more competition. That will mean higher interest rates for federal debt as dollar demand wanes. 

    Another key development here is that the central bank no longer has the freedom to force down interest rates as it did a decade ago. Back then, the Fed could simply buy up new government debt to prop up demand and keep down interest rates. This has required the central bank to engage in large amounts of monetary inflation. For a time, that seemed to work, but then price inflation rose to 40-year highs and has remained stubbornly high.  The Fed can no longer simply print up an additional trillion dollars to buy up US government debt—and then just hope no price inflation appears. Rather, because price inflation is so politically unpopular, the Fed has to treat lightly on new monetary expansion. This ties the hands of Fed in how much it can intervene to keep interest rates low. 

    Thus, the very mild increases in interest rates predicted by the CBO may greatly understate the true risks. 

    Moreover, this all assumes that endless increases to debt service will be politically tenable ten years from now. Will voters really be convinced that they have to endure increasingly large cuts to popular government programs in order to keep paying money to bondholders forever and ever? 

    At some point, the voters are likely to say “enough” when it comes to escalating debt payments. And that’s when a country gets either hyperinflation or a sovereign debt crisis. In the meantime, that interest bill is just going to keep getting bigger.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 17:00

  • Bud Light Offers $2.99 18-Pack After Sales Tumble Accelerates
    Bud Light Offers $2.99 18-Pack After Sales Tumble Accelerates

    Bud Light is offering a massive Memorial Day weekend discount: $2.99 for an 18-pack of Bud Light or Budweiser, bringing the price per can down to just pennies. This aggressive pricing strategy is an attempt by the brewer to stimulate demand as an ongoing boycott dents sales for the sixth consecutive week. 

    Twitter handle Ramp Capital spotted the promotion on Saturday that reads, “Easy To Enjoy Memorial Day Weekend … Get Up To $15 Back Via Rebate On The Purchase Of One (1) Budweiser, Bud Light, Budweiser Select, Or Budweiser Selection 55′ 15-Pack Or Larger.” 

    Before taxes plus the rebate, an 18-pack of beer costs around 17 cents per can. Ramp Capital said, “17 cents per beer is cheaper than water.” 

    The rebate follows Anheuser-Busch’s disastrous partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney which sparked a boycott by conservatives. Then when Anheuser-Busch pulled support from Mulvaney, it unleashed a boycott among the trans community.

    According to Fox News, citing new data from trade publication Beer Business Daily, Bud Light sales volumes for the week ending May 13 plunged 28.4%, following a 27.7% decline the week before. 

    The boycott hasn’t been limited to just Bud Light. Other Anheuser-Busch products, such as Budweiser Red, recorded a 14.9% decline for that week, and Michelob Ultra fell 6.8%. 

    On the flip side, Business Daily said beer drinkers gravitated to Bud Light’s competitors, sending sales of Coors Light up 16.9% and Miller Lite up 15.1%. 

    Beer Business Daily analysts pointed out more discounting is likely throughout the summer as Bud Light and Budweiser sales stumble and wholesalers are left with rising inventories due to lackluster demand. 

    “This could be a promotional summer the likes we haven’t seen since after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, where there was so much beer inventory backed up in the trade that it initiated the price war of all price wars,” Beer Business Daily said.

    Since Bud Light’s promotion with Mulvaney on TikTok and the resulting boycott, investors have penalized Anheuser-Busch with a $19 billion wipeout in market cap.  

    Bud Light’s marketing blunder isn’t ending anytime soon. And along the way, other companies like Target and North Face have yet to learn from Bud Light.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 16:30

  • "What's More Tragic Is Capitalism": BLM Faces Bankruptcy As Founder Cullors Is Cut By Warner Bros
    “What’s More Tragic Is Capitalism”: BLM Faces Bankruptcy As Founder Cullors Is Cut By Warner Bros

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    Two years ago, I wrote columns about companies pouring money into Black Lives Matter to establish their bona fides as “antiracist” corporations. The money continued to flow despite serious questions raised about BLM’s management and accounting. Democratic prosecutors like New York Attorney General Letitia James showed little interest in these allegations even as James sought to disband the National Rifle Association (NRA) over similar allegations. At the same time, Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors cashed in with companies like Warner Bros. eager to give her massive contracts to signal their own reformed status. It now appears that BLM is facing bankruptcy after burning through tens of millions and Warner Bros. cut ties with Cullors after the contract produced no — zero — new programming.

    Some states belatedly investigated BLM as founders like Cullors seemed to scatter to the winds.

    Gone are tens of millions of dollars, including millions spent on luxury mansions and windfalls for close associates of BLM leaders.

    The usual suspects gathered around the activists like former Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias, who later removed himself from his “key role” as the scandals grew.

    When questions were raised about the lack of accounting and questionable spending, BLM attacked critics as “white supremacists.”

    Warner Bros. was one of the companies eager to grab its own piece of Cullors to signal its own anti-racist virtues.  It gave Cullors a lucrative contract to guide the company in the creation of both scripted and non-scripted content, focusing on reparations and other forms of social justice. It launched a publicity campaign for everyone to know that it established a “wide-ranging content partnership” with Cullors who would now help guide the massive corporation’s new programming. Calling Cullors “one of the most influential thought leaders in American public life,” Warner Bros. announced that she was going to create a wide array of new programming, including “but not limited to live-action scripted drama and comedy series; longform/event series; unscripted docuseries; animated programming for co-viewing among kids, young adults and families; and original digital content.”

    Some are now wondering if Warner Bros. ever intended for this contract to produce anything other than a public relations pitch or whether Cullors took the money and ran without producing even a trailer for an actual product. Indeed, both explanations may be true.

    Paying money to Cullors was likely viewed as a type of insurance to protect the company from accusations of racial insensitive. After all, the company was giving creative powers to a person who had no prior experience or demonstrated talent in the area. Yet, Cullors would be developing programming for one of the largest media and entertainment companies in the world.

    One can hardly blame Cullors despite criticizism by some on the left for going on a buying spree of luxury properties.

    After all, Cullors was previously open about her lack of interest in working with “capitalist” elements. Nevertheless, BLM was run like a Trotskyite study group as the media and corporations poured in support and revenue.

    It was glaringly ironic to see companies like Warner Bros. falling over each other to grab their own front person as the group continued boycotts of white-owned businesses. Indeed, if you did not want to be on the wrong end of one of those boycotts, you needed to get Cullors on your payroll.

    Much has now changed as companies like Bud Light have been rocked by boycotts over what some view as heavy handed virtue signaling campaigns.

    It was quite a change for Cullors and her BLM co-founder, who previously proclaimed “[we] are trained Marxists. We are super versed on, sort of, ideological theories.” She denounced capitalism as worse than COVID-19. Yet, companies like Lululemon rushed to find their own “social justice warrior” while selling leggings for $120 apiece.

    When some began to raise questions about Cullors buying luxury homes, Facebook and Twitter censored them.

    With increasing concerns over the loss of millions, Cullors eventually stepped down as executive director of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, as others resigned.  At the same time, the New York Post was revealing that BLM Global Network transferred $6.3 million to Cullors’ spouse, Janaya Khan, and other Canadian activists to purchase a mansion in Toronto in 2021.

    According to The Washington Examiner, BLM PAC and a Los Angeles-based jail reform group paid Cullors $20,000 a month. It also spent nearly $26,000 on meetings at a luxury Malibu beach resort in 2019. Reform LA Jails, chaired by Cullors, received $1.4 million, of which $205,000 went to the consulting firm owned by Cullors and her spouse, according to New York magazine.

    Once again, while figures like James have spent huge amounts of money and effort to disband the NRA over such accounting and spending controversies, there has been only limited efforts directed against BLM in New York and most states.

    Cullors once declared that “while the COVID-19 illness is tragic, what’s more tragic is capitalism.” These companies seem to be trying to prove her point. Yet, at least for Cullors, Warner Bros. fulfilled its slogan that this is all “The stuff that dreams are made of.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 16:00

  • Under Pressure From Fat Activists, NYC Bans Weight Discrimination
    Under Pressure From Fat Activists, NYC Bans Weight Discrimination

    Discriminating against fat people is now illegal in New York City, after Mayor Eric Adams on Friday signed off on a ban that will affect not only employment, but also housing and access to public accommodations — a term that encompasses most businesses. 

    We’re in safe company using the word “fat,” as champions of the cause refer to themselves as “fat activists.” With the mayor’s signature, two more categories — both weight and height — are added to New York City’s list of protected personal attributes, which already included race, gender, age, religion and sexual orientation. 

    As Mayor Adams signs the law, self-described (and everyone else-described) fat activist Tigress Osborn consumes more than her share of the backdrop (James Messerschmidt for NY Post)

    Embracing one of 2023’s innumerable strains of Orwellian brainwashing, Adams declared, “Science has shown that body type is not a connection to if you’re healthy or unhealthy. I think that’s a misnomer that we’re really dispelling.”

    Even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say obesity is an invitation to a host of maladies, including to high blood pressure Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke, gall bladder disease, many types of cancer, mental illness and difficulty with physical functioning. 

    “Size discrimination is a social justice issue and a public health threat,” said Councilmember Shaun Abreu, who introduced the measure. “People with different body types are denied access to job opportunities and equal wages — and they have had no legal recourse to contest it,” said Abreu. “Worse yet, millions are taught to hate their bodies.” 

    A full 69% of American adults are overweight or obese, but our woke overlords would have us believe the real “public health threat” is a nice restaurant that doesn’t want Two-Ton Tessie working the reception desk, or a landlord who’s leary of a 400-pound man breaking a toilet seat or collapsing a porch.  

    The enticingly-named Tigress Osborn, who chairs the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance, said New York’s ban “will ripple across the globe” — perhaps something like what would happen if the hefty Smith College Africana Studies graduate were dropped into a swimming pool.  

    Councilmember Shaun Abreu said he gained 40 pounds during the pandemic lockdowns and noticed people treated him differently

    The New York Times reports that witnesses who testified as the measure was under consideration included “a student at New York University said that desks in classrooms were too small for her [and] a soprano at the Metropolitan Opera [who] said she had faced body shaming and pressure to develop an eating disorder.” 

    Some have dared to speak out against the measure. “This is another mandate where enforcement will be primarily through litigation, which imposes a burden on employers, regulators and the courts,” said Kathryn S. Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, speaking in April. 

    Implicitly putting the weight ordinance in the same category as Brown vs Board of Education, Abrue said, “Today is a monumental advancement for civil rights, size freedom and body positivity and while our laws are only now catching up to our culture, it is a victory that I hope will cause more cities, states and one day the federal government to follow suit.” 

    Taking effect in six months, the law has an exemption for employers “needing to consider height or weight in employment decisions” — but “only where required by federal, state, or local laws or regulations or where the Commission on Human Rights permits such considerations because height or weight may prevent a person from performing essential requirements of a job.” 

    We pray there’s a federal exemption for employers of strippers and lap dancers. 

    Think we’re joking? We remind you that the chair of the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance is named “Tigress” — and this is her Twitter profile banner photo:

    via Tigress @iofthetigress

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 15:30

  • DeSantis Says He Would Sign Legislation To Defund "Corrupt" IRS
    DeSantis Says He Would Sign Legislation To Defund “Corrupt” IRS

    Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times,

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis called IRS a “corrupt organization” and said he would welcome a bill abolishing the agency if elected president in 2024.

    DeSantis made the comments during an interview with conservative radio host Dana Loesch on May 25, a day after the governor announced his White House bid on Twitter.

    “If Congress defunded the IRS and sent such a bill like that to your desk, number one, would you sign it?” Loesch asked. “And then what would you replace the system with? Are you for like a fair tax? A flat tax? Where do you stand on that?”

    “So, the answer’s yes,” DeSantis said in response. “I think the IRS is a corrupt organization and I think it’s not a friend to the average citizen or taxpayer. And so we need something totally different.”

    “I’ve supported all of the single rate proposals, I think they would be a huge improvement over the current system,” the governor added. “And I would be welcoming to take this tax system, chunk it out the window, and do something that’s more favorable to the average folks.”

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks at the Heritage Foundation’s Leadership Summit in National Harbor, Md., on April 20, 2023. (Terri Wu/The Epoch Times)

    DeSantis

    The governor has long spoken favorably of a flat tax system. In a Q&A published by Palm Coast Observer in 2012, months before DeSantis won his first term as a House lawmaker from Florida, DeSantis said he believed the federal tax code should be overhauled.

    “I think the federal tax code is an affront to a free society in the sense that it’s 70,000 pages,” DeSantis stated.

    “I am in favor of a complete overhaul; my principle is that consumed income should be taxed one time at a low, single, flat rate.

    He added, “Now whether that’s at the point of after savings and investment income on a flat tax, or on the point of consumption which people talked about a fair tax, I think you need to repeal the 16th Amendment for that because I don’t think you want a sales and an income tax.”

    Last year, DeSantis criticized the Biden administration’s nearly $80 billion in funding for the IRS, which Republicans argue would pave the way for the hiring of 87,000 tax agents, as giving  a “middle finger to the American public.” The funding to the IRS was part of the Inflation Reduction Act that President Joe Biden signed into law in August 2022.

    “I think of all the things that have come out of Washington that have been outrageous, this has got to be pretty close to the top,” DeSantis said at the time. “I think it was basically just a middle finger to the American public that this is what they think of you.”

    He continued, “All these problems we have to deal with, and they think the way is to do 87,000 IRS agents. There’s going to be more people in the IRS than in a lot of these other agencies combined now.”

    “They are going to go after independent contractors. They’re going to go after small-business people. They’re going to go after someone that may be driving an Uber or a handyman or all these things,” DeSantis added.

    “Why would they do that? Because you’re not going to be able to contend with the audit—so they’re going to crush a lot of people by doing that.”

    In January, the House passed the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Protection Act (H.R.23) on party lines with a 221–210 vote, with the aim to rescind the administration’s new funding for the IRS. The legislation is unlikely to advance in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

    Former President Donald Trump speaks during an event at Mar-a-Lago in West Palm Beach, Fla., on April 4, 2023. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

    2024 Race

    The 2024 race for the Republican presidential nomination now includes former President Donald Trump, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, biotechnology entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, conservative radio host Larry Elder, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), and DeSantis.

    Trump currently holds a sizable lead over other GOP presidential hopefuls, according to poll results.

    According to a new survey by Echelon Insights that queried 390 likely GOP primary voters between May 22 and May 25, Trump garnered 49 percent support, leading DeSantis by 30 percentage points.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence finished third with nine percent support, followed by Ramaswamy (eight percent), Haley (five percent), Scott (2 percent), former New Jersey governor Chris Christie (one percent), and Elder (one percent).

    In a hypothetical two-way matchup, Trump picked up 59 percent of support, with DeSantis trailing with 34 percent of support.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 05/28/2023 – 15:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest