Mar 11

Today’s News 11th March 2024

  • Are France & The UK Plotting A Ukrainian Power Play Right Under Germany's Nose?
    Are France & The UK Plotting A Ukrainian Power Play Right Under Germany’s Nose?

    Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

    There are indeed plans for a conventional Western intervention in Ukraine despite their leaders’ denials over the past two weeks, but they’ve yet to fully form and their execution can’t be taken for granted, but they also can’t be ruled out either.

    The debate that French President Macron provoked over whether NATO should conventionally intervene in Ukraine exposed the existence of two distinct schools of thought on this issue inside of Europe. France, the Baltic States, and Poland appear to be in favor of “non-combat deployments” there for demining and training missions, which could be carried out through a “coalition of the willing”, while the rest of the bloc supports Germany’s stance that this shouldn’t happen under any circumstances.

    “Scholz’s Slip Of The Tongue Spilled The Beans On Ukraine’s Worst-Kept Secret”, however, since he inadvertently revealed that there are already British and French troops there helping Ukraine with “target control”. The subsequently leaked Bundeswehr recording about bombing the Crimean Bridge confirmed that the Americans are there too. Nevertheless, what’s being proposed by Paris is a formalization of these deployments along with their gradual expansion in a “non-combat” capacity.

    Nobody should be fooled into thinking that France and the other four that appear to be in favor of this scenario are solely interested in demining and training missions. Rather, their intent seems to be to prepare these on-the-ground forces for surging eastward in the event that the worst-case scenario from Kiev’s perspective materializes whereby the frontline collapses and Russia starts steamrolling westward. These NATO members would then try to draw a red line in the sand as far as possible to save Ukraine.

    Germany’s approach is altogether different in that it prefers to formally stay out of the fray in order to focus on building “Fortress Europe”. This refers to Berlin’s policy of resuming its long-lost superpower trajectory through “defensive” military means with US support in order to lead Russia’s containment in Europe at Washington’s behest while America “Pivots (back) to Asia” to contain China. A major component of this plan is the “military Schengen” between Germany, the Netherlands, and Poland.

    The Baltic States and Poland are unlikely to participate in a conventional intervention in Ukraine without the official participation of a nuclear power because they fear being hung out to dry in the scenario that they clash with Russia inside of that crumbling former Soviet Republic. Therein lies the strategic importance of France’s involvement since it could assuage their concerns due to the possibility of Paris resorting to nuclear brinksmanship with Moscow if its own troops take part in the aforesaid clashes.

    The UK wouldn’t sit on the sidelines in that event since it’s already playing a leading role in NATO’s proxy war on Russia through Ukraine and previously signed a trilateral security pact with Kiev and Warsaw in the week before the latest phase of this decade-long conflict started in mid-February 2022. Like France, the UK also doesn’t want to see Germany resuming its superpower trajectory, and both might wager that they can either get the US’ approval for their intervention or do it unilaterally to make it a fait accompli.

    France isn’t yet part of the “military Schengen”, which could impede its ability to move large amounts of troops and equipment into Ukraine, so it can either soon join this pact or negotiate its own version with Poland and/or Greece-Bulgaria-Romania to complement its new deal with Moldova. Romania’s “Moldovan Highway” that’s being built in “emergency” mode is creating a new military corridor in the Balkans from which France can counter Germany’s growing military influence across the continent.  

    This emerging Greek-Ukrainian corridor is already one of the West’s most important logistical routes for perpetuating the proxy war after the traditional Polish one became unreliable following the farmers’ protests. It therefore makes perfect sense not only to invest in it for that sake alone, but also for countries like France and the UK to entrench their influence along the route in order to create their own “sphere of influence” there for decelerating Germany’s superpower trajectory.

    That’s precisely what France is doing via its new security deal with Moldova, which will lead to closer security ties of the “military Schengen” sort with Romania, Bulgaria, and Greece in order to facilitate the dispatch of “trainers” to that landlocked country. The UK can either follow suit in some way or redouble its influence in the Baltic States and especially Poland, possibly culminating in its troops conventionally intervening in Ukraine through the last-mentioned while France’s enter from Romania-Moldova.

    The possibility of France and the UK either receiving the US’ approval for this intervention or doing it unilaterally as a “coalition of the willing” in order to make it a fait accompli could pressure Germany to participate in order to not be left out and made to “look weak”. Its Air Force officers already claimed in the earlier cited leaked recording that the missiles that those two sent to Ukraine pressures them to do the same with the Taurus so the precedent is established for why they might think the same in that case.

    While it initially seems counterintuitive that France and the UK might want Germany to participate in this intervention when one of the reasons why they’re arguably plotting it is to decelerate its newly resumed superpower trajectory, there’s actually a clear logic to these calculations. Deeper German involvement in this conflict could further reduce the already dismal chances of it entering into a rapprochement with Russia after everything ends like many hawks still fear is possible and desperately want to prevent.

    It could also become overextended in some sense and thus lose the military-strategic grip that it’s recently obtained, thus creating openings for France and the UK to chip away at Germany’s influence in the Balkans and Baltics respectively in order to keep their historical rival’s rise somewhat in check. Berlin might not bite the bait though since Scholz has yet to even approve sending Taurus missiles there with the clandestine troop deployment that they require so there’s a chance that he’ll stick to his guns.

    If Germany formally stays out of the fray while France and the UK embroil themselves in it with disastrous or at least unimpressive results, including those that see their Baltic and Polish “junior partners” exploited as cannon fodder, then Germany might actually benefit a lot. Those two’s approach would be discredited, the possibility of which might be why the US thus far appears reluctant to approve their “coalition of the willing”, and by contrast lend credence to Germany’s approach.

    “Fortress Europe” might then be built at an even faster pace in the aftermath of this conflict as the only two possibly countervailing forces to keep its influence in check would have discredited themselves. On the other hand, a partially “successful” conventional Franco-British intervention in Ukraine could discredit Germany if it literally ends up saving Ukraine from collapse and stopping the Russian steamroller. In that event, “Fortress Europe” might be built a lot differently than Germany planned.

    Instead of the EU as a whole functioning as a pro-US German-led proxy bloc in the New Cold War, Berlin would have to accept London’s “sphere of influence” in the Baltics and a condominium with it in Poland while Paris would have its own “sphere” in the Balkans. Rather than relying on one country to rule the EU by proxy, the US would depend on three, with the advantage being that there’d be less of a chance that Germany would ever “go rogue” but at the detriment of this being more complex to manage.

    It remains to be seen whether France and the UK will go through with this Ukrainian power play right under Germany’s nose, but there’s little doubt that this is what they’re planning. The US could possibly disapprove, however, and they might then lack the confidence to conventionally intervene through their own “coalition of the willing”. There’s also the chance that the US takes the lead in this respect if Russia achieves a breakthrough before NATO’s largest drills in three decades end in June.

    It would be easier for the US to do this on its own with everyone else following it than to depend on others, but this could risk World War III by miscalculation much more than if France and the UK conventionally intervene while the US “Leads From Behind”, hence the latter scenario’s appeal. In any case, the top takeaway from this analysis is that there are indeed plans for a conventional Western intervention in Ukraine, but they’ve yet to fully form and their execution can’t be taken for granted.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 03/11/2024 – 02:00

  • Societal Self-Regulation
    Societal Self-Regulation

    Authored by Todd Hayen via Off-Guardian.org,

    Any group of human beings who are supposedly in a free society and who have a leader (or a council of people who lead), assigned by that group to make decisions for the common interests of the group, must rely on their own “self-regulation,” above and beyond the leaders’ government, in order to survive.

    This is imperative as a “check and balance” criterion for a healthy society.

    In most democratic societies this is done through the elective process. People are put into power, and taken out of power if need be, through elections, i.e., the popular vote. The people have to keep a keen eye on what is happening in their communities, at the local level, and in their nations, at a national level. And of course, they must exercise due diligence concerning global happenings as well. Only then will they know who to vote for that best serves their community.

    This is how we have control, albeit sometimes not enough, of our government. We have little control over non-government organizations (NGOs) through the elective process. But we do have control, again to some degree, on social norms, moralities, values, and other things that may grate against our own “community standards” as a mass, through protest and other demands for accountability. In this regard, our society is somewhat kept in check through a nation’s constitutional requirements, as well as our personal assertion as to what is “right” and what is “wrong.”

    Human beings have traditionally been on the same page with some of these very basic tenets. For example, there are very few cultures, if any, that advocate, as a foundational tenet, murder. Very few, if any, that advocate child sexual abuse, or physical abuse (of course, what determines either one of these things can be rather subjective.)

    Regardless of the outliers always present when making sweeping statements (which certainly there are, and a discussion of these outliers would take enormous time and attention), human beings share many fundamental tenets of “good humanness.”

    Unless, of course, they are pushed away from these fundamental tenets by some external force—corrupt government, con men, evil…Satan. Some will say we have a natural tendency to turn to amoral ways (think Moses stepping out for a moment to collect the Ten Commandments and what then ensued).

    That being said, what happens when a culture at large experiences, within that culture, something that deviates sharply from these tenets? The occurrence of such a deviation could come directly from the government, or come from the collective (or, in our current situation, appear to come from the collective, but in fact is an intentional deviation created by the agenda.)

    The answer to the first question, in ideal times, is this: The culture doesn’t stand for it. They make their dissatisfaction clear, and they revolt, or at the very least, do not comply with the agenda. They say, “I’m mad as hell, and I am not going to take this anymore!”

    Unfortunately, that time when our society would demonstrate such self-regulation is long past. We saw the last remnants of it during the Vietnam era in the United States—and only from a certain demographic of society—and certainly not that successfully.

    Since then, the government, or whoever it is behind this march to oblivion, has made certain that such a “dissatisfaction with the policies” of the ruling faction was not questioned, and if it is, the person or group questioning is severely punished. One very smart move toward this gripping mind control was getting everyone glued to a cell phone screen. How “they” did that, and it not being just a natural evolution of technology, would take a book to address.

    Despite the underlying reasons why we do not regulate as a society, the simple fact is we no longer do. There was a time, in a galaxy far, far, away, when the culture set these boundaries (if it were free to do so), and although the ruling class would attempt to cross them, they often failed. Today it is far more likely that boundaries can be crossed without even a glance from the masses. Today, they’ve got us eating out of their hands.

    I will cite a few examples:

    • Where is the societal outrage when people are forced to inject into their bodies a relatively unknown substance? Although the agenda gave “good reason” for such a thing, where was the evidence behind that reason? If any evidence came up contrary to the notion of a deadly virus killing the world and a vaccine being developed in eight months being “safe and effective,” it was quickly quelled by the powers that be and ruled to be “misinformation” and “dangerous.”

    • Where is the societal outrage when thousands of young people are suddenly seeking surgery and drugs to support the myth they have “misidentified” themselves based on what they are told is a lie about their biological identity? Where is the “I’m mad as hell” when “authority” determines that they are the final arbiters of truth over children, and their parents can just go to hell?

    • Where is the societal outrage when we are suddenly told that we will no longer be allowed to use cash, or that we have to carry a digital ID which will fundamentally wipe out any claim to personal autonomy, not to mention a complete destruction of personal privacy?

    • Where is the societal outrage when a government spends billions of dollars to support the killing of human beings in a “war” halfway across the world for no reason other than to fuel whatever nefarious, and unilateral, goals that government has?

    • Where is the societal outrage when large factions of unelected “people” decide to take over the governance of the world from lofty, and well-financed, institutions such as the UN, WHO, WEF, NATO, and locally, the FDA, and CDC?

    • Where is the societal outrage when a country’s government allows the illegal immigration of hundreds of thousands of people without any vetting whatsoever?

    This is to name only a few examples. This article would be a hundred pages long if I named even half of these “outrages.”

    What is the reason there is no shouting from the windows, “We are mad as hell!!”? There are many reasons, one comes from the concerted effort of those who have the power to implement such an effort. It is to brainwash the society into compliance.

    Read this article to gain a little bit of insight into this effort, or at least one possibility, Ghost Words from the Past. It is like we are all hypnotized, and whenever the agenda activates a part of its plan, the silver pendulum comes out and is swung in front of our eyes, accompanied by a soothing voice that says, “All is well, this is good for you.”

    Needless to say, that voice could also be murmuring, “The unvaccinated are evil, hate anyone who spreads misinformation, Putin is the devil incarnate, hate him with all of your heart.”

    Due to this sort of conditioning, among many other techniques, we as a society have lost nearly all critical thinking—and as a result, can no longer self-regulate as a culture.

    No matter how illogical an action is, if we are told it is fine, or if it is framed in some particular way (such as framing a 10-year-old’s desire to change his or her biological sex as an inalienable “right”), we jump right to the agenda’s plan—typically without a second thought. “2+2=5, 2+2=5,” again and again this is drummed into us, and eventually we believe it, and then it only needs to be said once.

    Soon it will be, “2+2=6,” and again, most of us will comply, and never give it another thought.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 23:20

  • Survey Shows Declining Concerns Among Americans About COVID-19
    Survey Shows Declining Concerns Among Americans About COVID-19

    A new survey reveals that only 20% of Americans view covid-19 as “a major threat” to the health of the US population – a sharp decline from a high of 67% in July 2020.

    (SARMDY/Shutterstock)

    What’s more, the Pew Research Center survey conducted from Feb. 7 to Feb. 11 showed that just 10% of Americans are concerned that they will  catch the disease and require hospitalization.

    “This data represents a low ebb of public concern about the virus that reached its height in the summer and fall of 2020, when as many as two-thirds of Americans viewed COVID-19 as a major threat to public health,” reads the report, which was published March 7.

    According to the survey, half of the participants understand the significance of researchers and healthcare providers in understanding and treating long COVID – however 27% of participants consider this issue less important, while 22% of Americans are unaware of long COVID.

    What’s more, while Democrats were far more worried than Republicans in the past, that gap has narrowed significantly.

    “In the pandemic’s first year, Democrats were routinely about 40 points more likely than Republicans to view the coronavirus as a major threat to the health of the U.S. population. This gap has waned as overall levels of concern have fallen,” reads the report.

    More via the Epoch Times;

    The survey found that three in ten Democrats under 50 have received an updated COVID-19 vaccine, compared with 66 percent of Democrats ages 65 and older.

    Moreover, 66 percent of Democrats ages 65 and older have received the updated COVID-19 vaccine, while only 24 percent of Republicans ages 65 and older have done so.

    “This 42-point partisan gap is much wider now than at other points since the start of the outbreak. For instance, in August 2021, 93 percent of older Democrats and 78 percent of older Republicans said they had received all the shots needed to be fully vaccinated (a 15-point gap),” it noted.

    COVID-19 No Longer an Emergency

    The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently issued its updated recommendations for the virus, which no longer require people to stay home for five days after testing positive for COVID-19.

    The updated guidance recommends that people who contracted a respiratory virus stay home, and they can resume normal activities when their symptoms improve overall and their fever subsides for 24 hours without medication.

    “We still must use the commonsense solutions we know work to protect ourselves and others from serious illness from respiratory viruses, this includes vaccination, treatment, and staying home when we get sick,” CDC director Dr. Mandy Cohen said in a statement.

    The CDC said that while the virus remains a threat, it is now less likely to cause severe illness because of widespread immunity and improved tools to prevent and treat the disease.

    “Importantly, states and countries that have already adjusted recommended isolation times have not seen increased hospitalizations or deaths related to COVID-19,” it stated.

    The federal government suspended its free at-home COVID-19 test program on March 8, according to a website set up by the government, following a decrease in COVID-19-related hospitalizations.

    According to the CDC, hospitalization rates for COVID-19 and influenza diseases remain “elevated” but are decreasing in some parts of the United States.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 22:45

  • Hedge Fund Icon: "We're Just Two Years Away From A US Debt Sustainability Crisis, Sparking A Major Global Market Event"
    Hedge Fund Icon: “We’re Just Two Years Away From A US Debt Sustainability Crisis, Sparking A Major Global Market Event”

    By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

    “The last time the debt as a share of GDP was this large was in 1945-1946, at the end of World War II,” wrote Daniel Wilson and Brigid Meisenbacherat from the Economic Research Department at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. I was grinding through my stack, piled high with white papers.  “Over the following three decades, the debt-to-GDP ratio steadily fell, reaching roughly 25% by 1975,” continued the San Fran Fed report [see here].

    I have growing conviction that in the coming 2-5 years we’re going to face a US debt sustainability crisis, sparking a major global market event. I’ve observed that when people from within our institutions raise an alarm, knowing it would be far easier for them to remain quiet, we’re getting closer.

    “That 30-year decline contrasts sharply with the projected 30-year increase in the debt-to-GDP ratio, reaching 172%, over 2024 to 2054, according to the latest current Congressional Budget Office projections.” Wilson and Meisenbacherat point out that the Fed projects a longer-term real Fed Funds rate of 0.50%.

    And their median projection for long-run real GDP growth is 1.8%. They highlight that the CBO, however, forecasts a lower 1.5% real GDP growth rate, and a longer-term real interest rate on US debt of 2.0%.

    “In this case, slow economic growth relative to interest rates would exert modest upward pressure on the debt ratio, primarily from higher interest payments,” they wrote.

    “The main source of the long-run upward pressure on the primary deficit is spending on mandatory programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Current legislated formulas used to determine spending per recipient for Social Security benefits and government health-care programs, especially Medicare, combined with the projected aging of the population, point to large increases in spending for these programs as a share of GDP. This pressure was absent after WWII because the overall US population was younger and because Medicare was not enacted until 1965.”

    And with no political party willing adjust these programs, it is increasingly likely the market will force change.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 22:10

  • The Big Con In The California Housing Mandate
    The Big Con In The California Housing Mandate

    Authored by Tony Hall via The Epoch Times,

    Anybody who has ever observed and studied the homeless situation in California will readily see how the nonprofit homeless service providers that have been enabled by our political leaders have not only helped create the crisis, but have institutionalized homelessness as a way of life.

    Now, a new conduit for corruption in the state of California is rearing its ugly head, and a word to the wise is to recognize this demon for what it really is. In brief, it is the role that nonprofits are playing in the California State Housing Mandate that the governor’s office and our legislature are promoting.

    I am not talking here about the role that traditional nonprofits are providing in our state’s economy, like those that provide services and benefits in the private sector in a variety of charitable and educational endeavors, and for the most part are self-funded and operate within the confines and purposes as dictated by IRS codes.

    No, I am talking about those nonprofit organizations that have been specifically set up and certified by elected politicians to receive awards and spend your hard-earned tax dollars and public funds to engage in the development, construction, ownership, master leasing, and/or management of housing that the state defines as necessary, whether needed or not.

    Bear with me while I set the scenario that is unfolding under our very eyes.

    An Ambitious Power Grab

    It is indeed one of the most draconian and deceptive ploys that I have witnessed in my lifetime that legally allows the state to take over ownership of private property. If it goes unchecked and unchallenged, you, the voter, will have been fooled again, and all because of your good nature that would like to see roofs over the heads of those who might be disadvantaged or fiscally challenged. No one wants to see anybody suffer because of lack of funds to adequately purchase shelter. But there is a right way and a wrong way to solve the problem.

    If we are to believe the narrative being spun by our “ever so concerned” leaders, the private sector can no longer be counted on to deliver the number of housing units that the state tells us we must build within the next eight years. The number of units that they say we need is highly speculative and biased toward a very low income demographic. They subscribe to the “build it and they will come” theory. If they cannot get enough low-income tenants, they always have the homeless to fill the gaps.

    Tilting the Playing Field

    According to the state housing gurus, private for-profit developers are only concerned with building luxury units in the million-dollar range. This simply isn’t true. Any private for-profit developer will tell you they could build for much less per unit if they were not subject to the onerous red tape, regulations, and planning approval delays that the nonprofits are not subject to. This systematic rigging of the playing field against the private sector developers is exactly what has contributed to the affordable housing deficit.

    State Monopoly of Housing Development

    The for-profit housing developers are being shut out of the housing market because “profit,” “free enterprise,” and “private property” are considered bad words among the politically correct today. The real greed mongers are the politicians who are capitalizing on these sentiments. They much prefer the power, control, and influence that the utilization of nonprofits provides.

    Profit has always been a strong motivator for progress, especially because it can produce the most material gain for the masses when properly utilized. However, the lure that power and control provides through specially created nonprofits is much stronger, especially in the public arena. Anyone who questions the basic tenets of profit, free enterprise, and private property in an economic system should study Economics 101 and comparative economics theories.

    Because most of today’s “housing gurus” and our governor push the theory that one of the basic functions of government is to provide housing for all who need it, the state has issued a Housing Element that mandates the participation of all counties and municipalities. This mandate is no longer voluntary, and financial incentives are severely withheld from those counties and communities that do not go along with the program.

    The governor and his misguided housing gurus have called for 2.5 million new units of housing to be built by 2030, of which about 50 percent shall be defined as “affordable.”

    Redefining Affordable

    The definition of affordable has been continually evolving, but at the moment it means units that would not cost more than 30 percent of annual gross household income to rent, or units that are subsidized by local, state, or federal funds. The whole “affordable” concept will soon be abandoned in favor of whatever the state decides it to be.

    Just today, March 4, 2024, one of our California legislators proposed free loans to non-documented immigrants help them in their “affordability crisis.” Of course, all such loans would have to be administered via one of the chosen nonprofits!

    The Housing Mandate

    To accomplish this, all communities must comply with the state mandate and build new housing whether it is needed or not, regardless of infrastructure needs or what it might do to the character of a neighborhood, town, village, county, etc.

    To sweeten the pot, at least $30 billion in taxpayer money has been invested in housing-related funding since our present governor took office. In San Francisco alone, approximately $1.2 billion has been put forth as housing-related bonds since 2015. These funds, along with multiple new bond monies, eliminate the need for private developers and their private sources of funding, as all the costs of financing and building are covered by the state. The state is acting as “the bank” in its use of nonprofits to do the building.

    Also, to add a little insurance that their chosen nonprofits will always be in the mix, communities like San Francisco have passed laws that give nonprofits the first right of refusal and first right of acceptance on the sale of all properties with three units or more. With their one-size-fits-all approach, these planning amateurs are not the least bit concerned with what true housing needs may or may not be, but only with how they can best control people in a fashion that furthers their political agenda, as you will soon see.

    Approximately two decades ago, there was concern that there was a growing shortage of “affordable” housing stock available or being built by private developers to accommodate those of lower income levels. If one was spending more than a third of his or her income on housing, such housing was not considered acceptable or affordable. Thus, legislation was eventually passed that required private for-profit developers to set aside 20 percent of whatever number of units they build as “affordable.”

    Perpetuating Political Control

    Instead of incentivizing the private for-profit builders with a multitude of intelligent approaches that would produce more than enough low-income housing, the politicians and planners decided to go against competitive market forces and penalize those in the construction business by limiting their ability to compete.

    In the years since, the “20 percent” formula has only served to restrict more development. But now that the state has realized how much money, power, and control is attainable through the use of nonprofits to supply the housing, there is a whole different demographic that we must cater to, and a different litmus test must apply to those who are classified in the “affordable” category, which will even include some homeless people if necessary.

    If you are foolish enough to buy into this scheme and want a little bit of the action, don’t worry about qualifying, because if you wait long enough, eventually everybody will be able to afford a house. This is thanks to the state’s desire to use public funds to have chosen nonprofits build units that the state owns and controls, and fund those who will occupy, but not own, the units! Mind you, this is a gigantic shift away from the whole principle, purpose, and concept of private property, home ownership, and how these relate to freedom in our American way of life.

    The Money-Go-Round

    The use of nonprofits in housing development is a big, big money game that makes the use of nonprofits in the homeless game look petty.

    For example, it is estimated that in San Francisco alone, one third of the rental housing stock, or approximately 100,000 units, are controlled, managed, or owned by nonprofits that have been publicly funded and are off the property tax rolls. With an average rent in the city of approximately $3,000 per month, that amounts to $300 million per month or $3.6 billion per year in income.

    Another way to look at it is this: 100,000 units at a value of just $250,000 per unit would be worth around $25 billion. If this were subject to the ongoing property tax rate of 1.25 percent, the city government would be gaining over $300 million per year in taxes alone if these were privately held properties and not owned by the city or nonprofits (which, for the most part, are exempt from paying taxes).

    Now, let’s throw into the discussion how and why these specialty nonprofits are so desirable by our elected leaders. Could it possibly be that it is because these nonprofits are so thankful to their benefactors that they are more than willing to help out during election time with copious donations and street campaigners from their members to ensure their survival?

    Knowing the political game as I do, I can unequivocally state that this is precisely one method that has been used very effectively by politicians to perpetuate themselves in office.

    In closing, and FYI, check out on the internet just how many nonprofits operate in state business in California, and you will understand why we are controlled by one political party. So much for diversity, equality, and inclusion for all, except when it comes to control and power over taxpayer money!

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 21:00

  • Rand Paul Teases Senate GOP Leader Run – Musk Says "I Would Support"
    Rand Paul Teases Senate GOP Leader Run – Musk Says “I Would Support”

    Republican Kentucky Senator Rand Paul on Friday hinted that he may jump into the race to become the next Senate GOP leader, and Elon Musk was quick to support the idea. Republicans must find a successor for periodically malfunctioning Mitch McConnell, who recently announced he’ll step down in November, though intending to keep his Senate seat until his term ends in January 2027, when he’d be within weeks of turning 86. 

    So far, the announced field consists of two quintessential establishment types: John Cornyn of Texas and John Thune of South Dakota. While John Barrasso’s name had been thrown around as one of “The Three Johns” considered top contenders, the Wyoming senator on Tuesday said he’ll instead seek the number two slot as party whip. 

    Paul used X to tease his potential bid for the position which — if the GOP takes back the upper chamber in November — could graduate from Minority Leader to Majority Leader. He started by telling his 5.1 million followers he’d had lots of people asking him about his interest in running…

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

    …then followed up with a poll in which he predictably annihilated Cornyn and Thune, taking a 96% share as of Friday night, with the other two below 2% each. 

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

    Elon Musk was quick to back the idea of Paul as GOP leader, while daring Cornyn and Thune to follow Paul’s lead by throwing their names out for consideration by the Twitter-verse X-verse. 

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

    Paul has been a stalwart opponent of security-state mass surveillance, foreign interventionism — to include shoveling billions of dollars into the proxy war in Ukraine — and out-of-control spending in general. He demonstrated the latter passion on the Senate floor this week as he ridiculed the latest kick-the-can spending package:   

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

    In February, Paul used Senate rules to force his colleagues into a grueling Super Bowl weekend of votes, as he worked to derail a $95 billion foreign aid bill. “I think we should stay here as long as it takes,” said Paul. “If it takes a week or a month, I’ll force them to stay here to discuss why they think the border of Ukraine is more important than the US border.”

    Don’t expect a Majority Leader Paul to ditch the filibuster — he’s been a hardy user of the legislative delay tactic. In 2013, he spoke for 13 hours to fight the nomination of John Brennan as CIA director. In 2015, he orated for 10-and-a-half-hours to oppose extension of the Patriot Act. 

    Rand Paul amid his 10 1/2 hour filibuster in 2015

    Among the general public, Paul is probably best known as Capitol Hill’s chief tormentor of Dr. Anthony Fauci, who was director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease during the Covid-19 pandemic. Paul says the evidence indicates the virus emerged from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. He’s accused Fauci and other members of the US government public health apparatus of evading questions about their funding of the Chinese lab’s “gain of function” research, which takes natural viruses and morphs them into something more dangerous. Paul has pointedly said that Fauci committed perjury in congressional hearings and that he belongs in jail “without question.”   

    Musk is neither the only nor the first noteworthy figure to back Paul for party leader. Just hours after McConnell announced his upcoming step-down from leadership, independent 2024 presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr voiced his support: 

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

    In a testament to the extent to which the establishment recoils at the libertarian-minded Paul, mainstream media outlets — which have been quick to report on other developments in the majority leader race — pretended not to notice that Paul had signaled his interest in the job. More than 24 hours after Paul’s test-the-waters tweet-fest began, not a single major outlet had brought it to the attention of their audience. 

    That may be his strongest endorsement yet. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 20:25

  • No Borders? No America
    No Borders? No America

    Authored by Justin Smith via The Burning Platform blog,

    Americans had better act soon, with or without Congress and with or without the Border Patrol to stop the current flood of illegal invaders across our Southern Border, because the Biden regime has no intention of ever stopping the invasion. To wait and ponder the crisis in the hopes that Donald Trump can stop it, if he wins the presidency, only ensures that millions more will cross, in addition to the twenty-seven million that have already entered the country, during Biden’s presidency — those which were detained at the border and the got-aways; and, intentionally or not, it makes America unsafe and sets in motion the Great Replacement, the replacement of white people and the virtues and principles of freedom and liberty with people of color who are already prone and predisposed to accepting big government controls, e.g. Marxism and Maoism, and the idea that all things come from government rather than individual initiative and independence. To do nothing and remain apathetic or complacent ensures the destruction of traditional America.

    One should recall that a 2018 study by both Yale and MIT suggested 22 million to possibly 40 million illegal aliens were already residing in America. It’s to Trump’s discredit that he didn’t pursue the border security issue forcefully in 2017, when the Republicans held a majority in both houses of Congress, rather than listen to the turncoat RINO Speaker Paul Ryan.

    In his last year in office, Trump had brought illegal alien entries down to approximately 1100 a day, or less.

    Under Joe Biden, the U.S. borders simply no longer exist. His regime’s minions have been ordered to process and parole illegal aliens into America as fast as possibly, virtually waving them on across with little to no scrutiny. And, as a result, we know for a fact that 330 illegals who are on terrorist watch lists have been released into the country, along with the unknown number of potential or actual terrorists within the ranks of the gotaways.

    Going all the way back to 1996, Augustin Cebada, radical spokesman for the Brown Berets, militant para-military foot-soldiers of Aztlan [Reconquista] shouted the following declaration, at Americans at an Independence Day rally outside the Federal Building in Westwood, California:

    “If anyone’s going to be deported, it’s going to be you! … Get out! We are the future. You’re old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you — leave like beaten rats. You old white people, it is your duty to die. Right now, we’re already controlling those elections, whether it’s by violence or nonviolence. Through love of having children, we’re going to take over.”

    Some may actually be coming here to become American citizens and try to live the American Dream, a dream that is crumbling and rapidly disappearing for natural born Americans, thanks to a multitude of bad Biden policies; but the cast majority are not. They simply want to abscond with as much American wealth as they can possibly accumulate while also riding the massive government expenditures of recent programs created to address their invading numbers.

    These illegals don’t want to be citizens; they don’t assimilate any more, as they did in days past; they set up shop just as they did in the Old Country and bring the same flawed mindsets that destroyed the nations they have fled.

    Through Joe Biden’s Open Borders Policy that don’t have to wait to for the illegal invaders to have children. They are simply flying them over, entire families and all, at the taxpayers’ expense.

    That’s part of what makes this all so maddening. Joe knows without a doubt, or at least his handlers know, that he absolutely is charged by the U.S. Constitution and given the authority as President and Commander-in-Chief to protect and defend our borders and sovereign domain. And yet, on March 7th 2024, Biden had the temerity to suggest in his State of the Union Address, that he needed a new immigration bill and more money, before he could do his job, none of which is true.

    Along with this, please note that Congress could pass ten great immigration / border security laws, or even 100, and it wouldn’t make a damned bit of difference. Joe Biden and the Democratic Party violate the Constitution and U.S. law — yes, even our existing laws on immigration and border security — with impunity, no qualms or pangs of conscience whatsoever. Biden absolutely would violate any new law, if it served his agenda and that of the radical Marxists and Maoists within the Democratic Party.

    Even this last so-called “bipartisan bill” had a loophole in it, actually allowing for 1.8 million illegals to be allowed to cross every year, before it’s safeguards were employed.

    That is unless Biden decided to suspend its mechanisms for a “national emergency” as the bill provided. The bill was a farce, a massive joke, and that’s why it was rejected.

    That’s the reason so many truly conservative Americans were so angered to hear Biden mock Republicans after some jeered his remarks on his “comprehensive bill to fix our immigration system” — understanding his underlying lie , as he said:

    “Oh, you don’t like that bill — huh? — that conservatives got together and said was a good bill? I’ll be darned. That’s amazing.” [transcript at Associated Press]

    President Woodrow Wilson sent Brigadier General John “Black Jack” Pershing out of Fort Bliss, Texas on March 15th 1916 to patrol the border between the U.S. and Mexico, in order to stop Pancho Villa’s cross-border raids and capture or kill him. Pershing went a few steps further and pursued Villa into 350 miles into Mexico proper, leading 10,000 soldiers behind him. All of this was done under the premise set forth in the Article IV Section 4 of our Constitution which states the federal government “shall protect each of [the states] against invasion” and Article I Section 10 which expressly guarantees states the sovereign power to repel an invasion and defend U.S. citizens from overwhelming and “imminent danger”. And there isn’t one damned thing preventing Joe Biden from exercising this same exact authority now other than the Democratic Party Communists’ intent to grant millions of illegal foreign invaders amnesty and the right to vote, in order to grow their base and hold power and control over all America for the rest of the century.

    For over three years, Joe Biden and Homeland Security [what an oxymoron] Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas have assured all America that the border is secure and the illegal alien invasion is being handled properly, when in fact, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol are being used to speed up the process of receiving illegal aliens into the country, rather than immediately detaining and returning them back across the border, should be the case. And all the while, through his lies, Mayorkas smugly and arrogantly smiles like a fat-headed Cheshire Cat, in his belief that he is untouchable, which has been the case so far.

    Biden’s Open Border Policy has been a massive success towards ultimately achieving the Democratic Party’s goals of changing the face of America and fundamentally transforming Her away from Her founding, and it has been an abject and complete catastrophe for Fly Over Country and the everyday average American who loves his country, God and family better than himself. The rising of this anti-American regime has been a sad and disgusting time to be marked as such in the annals of history, should honest historians ever reappear.

    And his policies have been a boon to the numerous drug cartels which have expanded their operations by tenfold in every major city in the U.S. and even the smaller cities and towns that once barely had a hint of drug and crime problems,

    At some point, anyone having a hand in the most massive betrayal of America in U.S. history must be made to face a day of reckoning, regardless of what form it may take.

    In the meantime, our daughters are continuously being assaulted, brutalized, kidnapped, raped and murdered in the most heinous of manners, unimaginable to most good and decent people, by these foreign, illegal alien invaders. Decent Americans of all walks of life, men, women and children, are being murdered by these monsters, the MS-13 drug cartel members and prisoners released from Venezuela’s prisons, much like young Kate Steinle in 2015, a 32 year old sales rep, and now Laken Riley, a 22 year old nursing student, who was bludgeoned to death and disfigured by an illegal alien monster, who entered the country in 2022.

    Adding insult to injury, Traitor Joe just apologized for calling Laken Riley’s murderer an “illegal”, during his State of the Union address. The apology came today, March 9th 2024, during an interview with MSNBC’s Jonathan Capehart. But that’s exactly what he is — a goddamned foreign, illegal, criminal piece of murderous shit from Venezuela who was also charged and released in New York City after endangering a five year old child [per Olivia Land/New York Post]

    On July 13th 2023, the Judiciary Committe’s Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security and Enforcement [The Consequences of Criminal Aliens on U.S. Communities] reported that 33,000 Americans had been killed by murder and manslaughter at the hands of illegal aliens between 2010 and 2015, which begs the question, just how many are now dying at the hands of millions of the anonymous, unvetted illegal aliens Biden has welcomed, even ferried, into America. As reported by this committee, just two weeks prior to its meeting, an illegal alien was sentenced to life in prison for raping and impregnating a nine year old Ohio girl, who later went to Indiana to get an abortion.

    I have two adult daughters, and if any illegal alien were to do them harm in any way, they had better hope law enforcement officers get to them before I do, especially now that we are actually seeing stone-cold murderers released without bail by anti-American, anti-law enforcement District Attorneys, bought and paid for by George Soros.

    From the Judiciary Committee’s report:

    “According to a report covering thirteen years of data from the Executive Office of Immigration Review, over forty-seven percent [of illegals] never even pursue an asylum claim once released into the country. More than eighty-five percent will be denied asylum and receive a deportation order, yet less than five percent ever leave the country. Anyone requesting asylum must be detained or made to remain in Mexico until their hearing is adjudicated. These numbers prove they can’t be trusted to be released.”

    These illegal aliens are also overwhelming the capabilities of America’s schools, hospitals, law enforcement and other general services provided at various levels of government. I see that as an extremely serious matter that is certainly facilitating the destruction of our economy, since the taxpayer dollars supporting this invasion means Americans everywhere are being deprived of the benefit of their own labor to support the dregs of the world; but it is much less important to me than knowing that foreign illegal aliens are snuffing out our countrymen’s lives, like they are nothing.

    These are real people with real lives and families, not just a data base of statistics, and for every victim of a criminal illegal alien, there is a devastated family. And still, Biden and Company drive on towards the abyss creating a dystopian nightmare along the way for law abiding citizens, watching the end of their country racing toward them like an out-of-control freight train and no Casey Jones at the controls.

    Former President Donald Trump has promised to start the largest mass deportation of illegal aliens in U.S. history, if he wins the upcoming election, and he plans to use the military to implement it, rightfully so. As reported in the Washington Post [February 21st 2024], Karoline Leavitt, spokeswoman for the Trump campaign, stated:

    “Americans can expect that immediately upon President Trump’s return to the Oval Office, he will restore all his prior policies, implement brand new crackdowns that will send shock waves to all the world’s criminal smugglers, and marshal every federal and state power necessary to institute the largest deportation operation in American history” as she also added that illegal aliens “should not get comfortable because very soon they will be going home.”

    We have the absolute right and a duty as sovereign citizens, living in sovereign states, to defend ourselves and our families, in the wake of a lawless federal government, this lawless Biden regime. The authority rests within the Constitution which has always allowed for the use of the States’ militias or the military to be mobilized for just such circumstances, and although we can be certain that Biden and some state governors will keep refusing to utilize the mechanisms at their disposal to fast-track the removal of these invaders, we have the right to gather ourselves armed with pistols and rifles — those of us able with the time and backbone to do so — to go to the border and tell the Border Patrol to do join us and do their Constitutional duty to stop the millions more who will try to cross between now and January 2025.

    I oft suggested in years past, half-jokingly, not so much anymore, that we should put them on a plane, parachutes optional, and shove them out over Mexico. This comment has become so much more full of meaning, now that we know the Biden regime has actively been seeking out these illegal caravans and flying their members into America.

    No matter how they arrive, by a fast jet, a slow boat or a reliable bus or train, we must send them back on a super-charged bus or jet just as quickly. Set about to deport every last one of them, and then effectively and totally seal the border and place a ten year moratorium on all immigration, legal and illegal, or until we have our nation and our population straightened out in a fashion that puts us back on a path to the same level of exceptionalism that used to be the rule in America and removes or eradicates, with extreme prejudice, those radicals who seek to fundamentally transform America and end our republic.

    Don’t let the enemies-from-within end America in so despicable a manner. Don’t let this be how America ends. Fight back like hell, and when the time is right, make the bastards who have committed this treason against America pay with their own lives.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 19:50

  • "Sleazy" Liz Cheney Loses It After Bombshell Report Claims She "Suppressed Exonerating Evidence" With J6 Committee
    “Sleazy” Liz Cheney Loses It After Bombshell Report Claims She “Suppressed Exonerating Evidence” With J6 Committee

    Former Rep. Liz Cheney (of the revolving door Haliburton –> White House –> war profiteer dynasty) came unglued this weekend following a report by The Federalist‘s Mollie Hemingway, which accuses Cheney and the January 6 committee of suppressing exonerating evidence of then-President Trump’s push for 10,000 national guard troops to protect the nation’s capital on the day of the Capitol riot.

    To summarize The Federalist;

    • Cheney and the J6 committee “falsely claimed they had “no evidence” to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops.”
    • In truth, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee “included precisely that evidence from a key source.”
    • That key source, Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato, said he overheard White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows push DC Mayor Muriel Bowser to request as many National Guard troops as needed to protect DC on Jan. 6.
    • Ornato also testified that Trump suggested 10,000 troops to keep the peace at public rallies and protests scheduled for Jan. 6, 2021 – and that the White House was frustrated with Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller’s slow deployment of assistance on the day of the riot.
    • Ornato’s testimony was corroborated by Kash Patel, the former chief of staff to the acting secretary of defense.
    • According to The Federalist, this information was suppressed.

    Hemingway writes that the committee not only mischaracterized the interview, they also suppressed the transcript from public review. 

    On top of that, committee allies began publishing critical stories and even conspiracy theories about Ornato ahead of follow-up interviews with him. Ornato was a career Secret Service official who had been detailed to the security position in the White House.

    Cheney frequently points skeptics of her investigation to the Government Publishing Office website that posted, she said, “transcripts, documents, exhibits & our meticulously sourced 800+ page final report.” That website provides “supporting documents” to the claims made by Cheney and fellow anti-Trump enthusiasts.

    However, transcripts of fewer than half of the 1,000 interviews the committee claims it conducted are posted on that site. It is unclear how many of the hidden transcripts include exonerating information suppressed by the committee. -The Federalist

    Click here to read the entire report, which includes Ornato’s full answers to the committee.

    “The former J6 Select Committee apparently withheld Mr. Ornato’s critical witness testimony from the American people because it contradicted their pre-determined narrative. Mr. Ornato’s testimony proves what Mr. Meadows has said all along: President Trump did in fact offer 10,000 National Guard troops to secure the U.S. Capitol, which was turned down,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA). Loudermilk’s subcommittee is reviewing the work of the Jan. 6 committee following accusations of unethical behavior at the expense of accuracy, along with collusion with other Democrat efforts at political persecution.

    Liz Loses it

    On Saturday, conservative commentator Mark Levin called Cheney out, posting on X: “Sleazy Liz Cheney needs to receive some of the Stalinist medicine she introduced into the body politick against scores of patriotic Americans — that is, she needs to be compelled to testify under oath about, among other things, what knowledge she may have about: possible witness tampering, censorship of exculpatory information and testimony, the destruction of committee evidence and data, etc.”

    Cheney responded, calling Mollie Hemingway a “bozo” – and directing people to various sections of the Jan. 6 report in which Secretary of Defense Miller (the guy who was ‘slow to deploy’ assistance) said Trump never ordered 10,000 troops, and that Kash Patel is “not a credible witness” (as determined by a judge with a conflict noted below).

    Note that Cheney never addresses the suppression of information.

    Cheney was dismantled in the replies:

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

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

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

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 19:25

  • The Great Replacement Loophole: Illegal Immigrants Score 5-Year Work Benefit While "Waiting" For Deporation, Asylum
    The Great Replacement Loophole: Illegal Immigrants Score 5-Year Work Benefit While “Waiting” For Deporation, Asylum

    Over the past several months we’ve pointed out that there has  been zero job creation for native-born workers since the summer of 2018…

    … and that since Joe Biden was sworn into office, most of the post-pandemic job gains the administration continuously brags about have gone foreign-born (read immigrants, mostly illegal ones) workers.

    And while the left might find this data almost as verboten as FBI crime statistics – as it directly supports the so-called “great replacement theory” we’re not supposed to discuss – it also coincides with record numbers of illegal crossings into the United States under Biden.

    In short, the Biden administration opened the floodgates, 10 million illegal immigrants poured into the country, and most of the post-pandemic “jobs recovery” went to foreign-born workers, of which illegal immigrants represent the largest chunk.

    Asylum seekers from Venezuela await work permits on June 28, 2023 (via the Chicago Tribune)

    ‘But Tyler, illegal immigrants can’t possibly work in the United States whilst awaiting their asylum hearings,’ one might hear from the peanut gallery. On the contrary: ever since Biden reversed a key aspect of Trump’s labor policies, all illegal immigrants – even those awaiting deportation proceedings – have been given carte blanche to work while awaiting said proceedings for up to five years…

    … something which even Elon Musk was shocked to learn.

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

    Which leads us to another question: recall that the primary concern for the Biden admin for much of 2022 and 2023 was soaring prices, i.e., relentless inflation in general, and rising wages in particular, which in turn prompted even Goldman to admit two years ago that the diabolical wage-price spiral had been unleashed in the US (diabolical, because nothing absent a major economic shock, read recession or depression, can short-circuit it once it is in place).

    Well, there is one other thing that can break the wage-price spiral loop: a flood of ultra-cheap illegal immigrant workers. But don’t take our word for it: here is Fed Chair Jerome Powell himself during his February 60 Minutes interview:

    PELLEY: Why was immigration important?

    POWELL: Because, you know, immigrants come in, and they tend to work at a rate that is at or above that for non-immigrants. Immigrants who come to the country tend to be in the workforce at a slightly higher level than native Americans do. But that’s largely because of the age difference. They tend to skew younger.

    PELLEY: Why is immigration so important to the economy?

    POWELL: Well, first of all, immigration policy is not the Fed’s job. The immigration policy of the United States is really important and really much under discussion right now, and that’s none of our business. We don’t set immigration policy. We don’t comment on it.

    I will say, over time, though, the U.S. economy has benefited from immigration. And, frankly, just in the last, year a big part of the story of the labor market coming back into better balance is immigration returning to levels that were more typical of the pre-pandemic era.

    PELLEY: The country needed the workers.

    POWELL: It did. And so, that’s what’s been happening.

    Translation: Immigrants work hard, and Americans are lazy. But much more importantly, since illegal immigrants will work for any pay, and since Biden’s Department of Homeland Security, via its Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency, has made it so illegal immigrants can work in the US perfectly legally for up to 5 years (if not more), one can argue that the flood of illegals through the southern border has been the primary reason why inflation – or rather mostly wage inflation, that all too critical component of the wage-price spiral  – has moderated in in the past year, when the US labor market suddenly found itself flooded with millions of perfectly eligible workers, who just also happen to be illegal immigrants and thus have zero wage bargaining options.

    None of this is to suggest that the relentless flood of immigrants into the US is not also driven by voting and census concerns – something Elon Musk has been pounding the table on in recent weeks, and has gone so far to call it “the biggest corruption of American democracy in the 21st century“, but in retrospect, one can also argue that the only modest success the Biden admin has had in the past year – namely bringing inflation down from a torrid 9% annual rate to “only” 3% – has also been due to the millions of illegals he’s imported into the country.

    We would be remiss if we didn’t also note that this so often carries catastrophic short-term consequences for the social fabric of the country (the Laken Riley fiasco being only the latest example), not to mention the far more dire long-term consequences for the future of the US – chief among them the trillions of dollars in debt the US will need to incur to pay for all those new illegal immigrants Democrat voters and low-paid workers. This is on top of the labor revolution that will kick in once AI leads to mass layoffs among high-paying, white-collar jobs, after which all those newly laid off native-born workers hoping to trade down to lower paying (if available) jobs will discover that hardened criminals from Honduras or Guatemala have already taken them, all thanks to Joe Biden.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 19:15

  • "Made By China" Is Possibly The Biggest Risk To The Economy, And It Is Staring Us Right In The Face
    “Made By China” Is Possibly The Biggest Risk To The Economy, And It Is Staring Us Right In The Face

    By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

    The Threat of “Made by China 2025”

    I cannot remember the first time that we discussed the transition from “Made in China” to “Made by China.” I do know that back in April 2023 we Locked in Some Themes, one of which was the Made by China theme. We also framed the discussion around the dollar, the yuan, and “reserve currency” status using the “Dark Web” as a useful way to think about it. Some reports age better than others, and that report seems to have aged particularly well.

    “Made by China” has been a theme that we have been using more and more. We are also starting to see it referenced more frequently. Not usually in those exact words (which we are trying to coin for ourselves) but the concept is the same – stiffer competition from Chinese goods makers.

    While in Chicago this week, we were able to discuss this in more detail on the Schwab Network in a segment they titled “Potential China Strategic Shifts.” It also came up in a Yahoo Finance interview that focused more on my bearish outlook for U.S. equities, but it did get incorporated. It may also have come up during a discussion with Rick Santelli at CNBC on Friday afternoon, but there isn’t a link available, and the interview and prep was such a blur that I cannot remember what was said on versus off-air. Well, I know a few things that were definitely not said on air, but that’s another story! In any case, I should have brought more than one tie to Chicago.

    Marching in Plain Sight

    General (ret.) Spider Marks, who spent much of his career in Asia as a senior intelligence officer, often discusses how China does things “in plain sight.” They tell us what they are going to do, and then they do it, and somehow we often seem surprised. I won’t harp on this theme, but it will permeate the report.

    I’m seeing references to China’s “Minsky Moment” on social media. The concept that China is somehow going to lay down and die, give up decades of growth, and succumb to an aging population and a falling real estate market seems almost ludicrous. Yet, that view seems to be far closer to the consensus than Made by China, despite lots of evidence that communist leaders rarely go down without leaving it all on the field.

    To ensure that I wasn’t completely off base, I spent a couple of minutes searching for China 2025. All sorts of references to Made in China 2025 popped up. Article after article, all done back in 2015! General (ret.) Walsh and I discussed this Thursday in preparation for today’s report. General Walsh played a key role in the national defense policies elevating China to a “Strategic Competitor.” He was also instrumental in our 2019 report – A D.I.M.E Framework for China, Trade & Strategic Competition.

    The main gist of our conversation was that China never stopped with the China 2025 initiative. They just publicized it less because it was attracting “the wrong sort of attention” in D.C. (at least from the perspective of China). They backed off discussing it because it made people concerned that China was going to change their relationship with us to a more competitive one on the goods side of things. That concern may have led to policies to thwart their efforts, so they backed off (at least publicly). Maybe this section should have been titled “out of sight, out of mind?”

    Back in 2015, China told us what they wanted to look like by 2025. Yet, here we are, in 2024 with lots of evidence pointing in the direction that they are continuing down that path with at least a modicum of success. I would argue more than a modicum, but let’s not go overboard, at least not yet.

    Fighting the Last War

    Another topic that comes up at Academy as we discuss geopolitical threats and the military is the risk that generals are “fighting the last war.” While I have no military experience, I know regulators are often viewed as fighting the last crisis, and I’d have to agree that there seems to be some truth to that assessment.

    We’ve often discussed that many of the views expressed by politicians seem to be based on China circa 2005, i.e., cheap manufacturing with limited IP. The reality is that just isn’t at all correct. Chinese manufacturing has grown increasingly sophisticated (as the U.S. and Europe largely ceded manufacturing to China). For some reason solar panels jump to the top of my list here, but the point is that China has developed very good (and not just cheap) manufacturing capabilities.

    On the IP side, maybe it was like a seesaw (or a teeter totter) with an adult on one side and a toddler on the other (i.e. very unbalanced). But as the adult has aged and the toddler has grown up, it is much more balanced. There are some areas where China has developed much of its own IP. Think back to the China 2025 initiative and their focus on machine learning, cryptography, etc. Again – marching in plain sight.

    So, I am worried that we shape policy based on an outdated view of China’s capabilities.

    Which brings me to TikTok. We did include it in We Didn’t Start the Fire and it has come up periodically as an issue due to all the information that is being collected.

    In theory, I should be paying more attention to the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. But I struggle to get too excited about it. First, talk about “shutting the gate after the horse has left the barn!” Yes, I’m full of colloquialisms and folksy sayings today.

    TikTok in some ways seems all pervasive! It seems to be everywhere. I believe that even while D.C. has some restrictions already for certain government employees regarding their ability to have TikTok on their devices, many politicians are turning to TikTok as a part of their campaign efforts. Color me “cynical,” but I’m not optimistic that much will be done or accomplished in this day and age and who knows how much damage has already been done. Maybe not quite fighting the last war (as this war is still raging), but we certainly got off to a late start.

    Made By China 2025

    Please keep in the back of your mind the concepts that:

    • China “marches in plain sight” and has outlined what they want to accomplish.
    • We have to think about where China is going (not where they’ve been) if we are going to get this right (possibly the closest I’ve come to quoting Wayne Gretzky).

    We tried to detail our thoughts in the piece titled Chess, Checkers, or Go – What is China’s Next Move? The simple version of this report is:

    • Yes, the Chinese economy faces many problems. We completely agree with consensus here.
    • No, China won’t just curl up and fizzle out, they will do something. As we saw during COVID, to maintain the power of the Chinese Communist Party, they will do things to appease the middle class (a few protests caused a complete reversal in their COVID policy). So, assuming Xi wants to stay in power (no indication that he/the party wants to relinquish power), he needs a strategy.
      • Increased domestic consumption isn’t a great option. The Chinese consumer has not demonstrated a willingness to spend like the U.S. consumer, and with real estate down and the stock market weak, there isn’t the money to spend, even if they had a propensity to spend it.
      • Increasing manufacturing for U.S. and European companies isn’t an option. More companies are extricating themselves from being reliant on China as their main production hub. Costs have been hidden, but COVID (amongst other things) exposed a lot of “hidden” costs, or costs not thought of – like complete shutdowns and the inability to access your facilities. Add in some IP protection risks and setting up new business in China isn’t top of mind. Finally, after years (and maybe even decades) of hoping to be able to compete openly and fairly in China with domestic companies, many doubt that we will. So, there is a long list of reasons why China is unlikely to think that they can increase their manufacturing of foreign products.
    • So, if two obvious things don’t work, what do you do? Remember the concept of “mirroring” that we discussed in The Game of Chicken in Today’s World? Don’t think about China and brands as we see them, think about China and brands as they see them.

    China has an economic problem, but there is one path that might work and it is a path that they have told us they intend to pursue (and have been pursuing).

    Let’s just pause for a moment. Re-read the last sentence/rant. Maybe it sounds too simple? Maybe we don’t think of it that way, but that might be the biggest mistake that we are making.

    I hear a lot of talk about “black swan” events or “grey swan” risks. Both in our geopolitical and macro conversations. I’m increasingly concerned that we are so busy looking for swans of different colors, we are ignoring the hammer hitting us in the head over and over! Is our thought process to think, “Yeah, that hammering kind of hurts, but I should ignore it and look for where the ‘real’ problems lurk?”

    How it Works – Domestic Consumption

    If you noticed, earlier in the piece I said that “increased” domestic consumption isn’t likely to work!

    So, like any practical businessperson, if you cannot increase the size of the pie, your best bet is to increase your share of the pie. When corporate strategists sit down at the table trying to figure out how to grow market share, they can only wish they had some of the tools that China has available.

    • Taxes, tariffs, content rules, etc. Companies have to lobby for these, but the Chinese government creates them. They have created them and will likely continue to use them to make “foreign” products (even those manufactured in China) less competitive.
    • Outright bans. Who can use what app or what hardware? Again, corporations can put their best foot forward, but China can do (to a large degree) as they please. If you were trying to suppress domestic demand, say, for a certain type of phone, maybe you would ban government employees from using it? And over time, extend that ban to more and more agencies and levels of government.

    China can make it so that foreign brands are less competitive domestically. I think there is clear evidence that is happening.

    By suppressing demand for “foreign” brands to benefit Chinese brands, they can improve the “domestic” economy even if the “pie” is stagnant (or shrinking) by taking greater market share.

    Let’s not forget that at the moment, certainly for the chip industry, the U.S. is doing a lot to enhance the ability to develop foundries domestically and manufacture more/higher quality chips. All countries can do things to help their domestic brands, especially domestically, but I just suspect that China will be more aggressive about it.

    I’m also worried that as we restrict things for China, it will just make them better at it. I think that we’ve asked before how China is making so many phones with 7 nanometer chips, when there have been restrictions in place on chips thinner than 10 nanometers. Underestimating China can be a real risk.

    Yes, some of the Geopolitical Intelligence Group members discuss the risk of “making your enemies 10 feet tall” and overestimating their capabilities, which can also lead to flawed policy. In hindsight, any assessment of Russia’s military was far too generous, which affected our behavior before and in the immediate aftermath of the invasion (the first offers were to evacuate Zelensky as Kiev was theoretically going to be overrun in a matter of days).

    China has flaws and may not be able to execute on their strategies, but I suspect that we are stuck underestimating their capabilities rather than overestimating them. I must admit that I’m curious to check out what a BYD EV is like in person – at the very least to better understand the “competition”.

    How it Works – Foreign Consumption

    The domestic advantages seem easy enough to implement. In some industries this has been going on for years, but I would expect more rather than less of it.

    The trickier issue will be how to grow foreign consumption of your brands. As with any strategy session, you look to your strengths and try to use those to leverage your position. Again, just like with their domestic efforts, the government has options not available to corporate strategists.

    • Compete on price. That seems like the obvious starting point. Offer a price to quality that can compete with foreign brands.
      • If you are competing on price, go to where price might be most important. I would target countries with large populations of people with some, but not a lot of money to spend. Where price will be paramount. Countries whose citizens are looking for the best quality or the cachet of owning a certain brand would not be my first choice. This leads me towards some emerging market countries – especially those that are resource rich.
    • Offer trade incentives. Corporations can hope to get governments to support them in trade (export-import banks still exist across the globe, etc.), but China is the government. Interestingly, I think China has trade deficits with some countries who might have the sort of consumer China is looking for. Countries that China is buying a lot of commodities from would seem like ideal potential customers, where China can offset some of their trade deficit by getting them to buy their brands.
    • Shipping. First, China has spent a lot of time, effort, and money to have access to (and in some cases control of) ports. Can they use that to their advantage? Why the heck not? The network of ports that China has built up could be used to their advantage. Could they prioritize their shipments into ports that they control? Again, maybe “we” wouldn’t even if we could (though we probably would when push comes to shove), but China operates under a different set of rules (or guidelines) than we do. So, it would not surprise me to see them leverage this network to improve distribution of their brands, potentially at the expense of others (which reminds me, I need to reach out to my shipping contacts to see if any of this is already occurring). Finally, and this might be weird, but if I’m a pirate or someone targeting shipping, attacking a Chinese ship would be low on my list, purely out of fear of retribution. Immediate, direct, and harsh retribution. Not proportionate to what was done, and they will send a message to never, ever, do it again.
    • Never underestimate the willingness of the American consumer to buy anything. While the American consumer wouldn’t be my first choice, why not try? I had never heard of Temu before the Super Bowl. I just hadn’t. To be honest, I’m a little nervous even going on the site (I assume that they, like TikTok, will use my information). I did a search for golf range finders (if China needs Temu to figure out that I’m a golf addict, their AI is way worse than I thought). I couldn’t find one listed for more than $100, which seems pretty cheap. On Golf Galaxy, there was one for $150, a couple for $200, and several that were much more costly. Though I recognized most of the brands at Golf Galaxy, I cannot say that I recognized any of the brands on Temu (and I was nervous to click on more than one – maybe I’m just paranoid). But if Temu isn’t an attempt to sell Chinese brands into America based on price, then what is it? Super Bowl commercials have ranged from iconic (Apple’s 1984 is still one of my favorites), to a staple (Budweiser horses), to things that have fizzled (too many to count), and to things that surprised some with their staying power (E-Trade babies are back!). When I mention Temu, I mostly get sideways glances, if not outright smirks, but why? Why dismiss something so easily that fits with what I would do if I was a strategist for China Inc.?

    Selling brands to different countries will be more difficult than increasing their domestic market share. But, as the CEO of Mercedes reminded viewers on Bloomberg TV a few months ago, at one time, Mercedes too was a “domestic” brand.

    The development of brands, first domestically and then in foreign markets, is a standard practice – why wouldn’t it be for China?

    Implications for Investors and Companies

    There are a few things that seem obvious and may already be playing out on a limited scale. Some might be further down the road if I’m correct, but that just means there is time to develop effective strategies to combat the risk.

    • Relying on sales into China. I would expect it to get more difficult to sell into China than easier. Forecasts for sales into China need to be checked and double checked. One also needs to play “devil’s advocate” for what potentially could be done to either thwart your sales, or to enhance the sales of domestic brands.
    • Selling into the most price-sensitive economies. Where price is extremely high on the purchase decision-making tree, what risk is there of competition from a Chinese brand? The initial reaction might be to be “dismissive.” Their brand can’t do what ours does. Probably true. Our brand has IP, and we would sue them (possibly true, but is it winnable especially if the Chinese government is supporting sales of the brand into that country?). Maybe after a thorough analysis, there is no risk, but I would think long and hard about that. Assume an uneven playing field. Assume you are up against a leadership that does not want to lose control and has tools at their disposal beyond what leaders in the Western world have. If the assessment is still good even after thinking of “worst case” possibilities as the “base case,” then all is fine. But I think it is too easy to be dismissive, and that is a risk for investors and corporations.
    • Chinese suppliers and shipping. This is probably “next level” stuff, but if there was an effort to thwart brands and products, shipping and suppliers might be used in that battle. It is probably next level but cannot be dismissed out of hand. One obvious risk already is in the chip industry. There is agreement here that the “highest level technology” needs to be protected but defining that in a way that works could prove tricky over time.
    • Bad inflation. As supply chains shift and shipping gets more complicated, we could see inflation rise. The cost of goods for domestic companies could increase, passing inflation to buyers in many regions.
    • Bad deflation. If China competes on price, then its competitors will likely have to compete on price, which will be a direct hit to profit margins.

    Bottom Line

    I can think of no greater or more obvious risk to our economy and stock market valuations than the rise of Chinese brands globally. Not tomorrow’s risk or even next year’s risk, but it is the sort of risk where in 5 years, we will look back and wonder how we got it so wrong – especially since it has been in plain sight!

    The good news is that there is time to plan, prepare, and win.

    • Without a doubt, many companies are already ahead in this battle and doing what it takes to be successful under a variety of competitive circumstances.
    • China, assuming they are pursuing this strategy, has to get a lot of things right. They need a lot of things to work in their favor. They may not get what they need or may not execute, but I wouldn’t rely on that as being my strategy.

    We can get back to living in markets that rise and fall 1% in a day (sometimes more), but I really wanted to make sure this message on “Made by China” is heard loud and clear as I think it is vital to understand and prepare for.

    And yes, currently I’m long FXI (I think that Chinese stocks are un-investible, but are tradeable) and short QQQ (lots of things pointing me to the risk/reward being skewed to more downside risk than upside risk in the near-term). For the “normal” macro stuff see:

    Good luck today, tomorrow, and beyond. I’m actually optimistic on the “beyond” front, but I’d be more comfortable if I felt more people, at all levels, were taking the Made by China theory more seriously.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 17:30

  • Watch: Col. Douglas Macgregor (Ret) Provides Nation With Alternative View Of The State Of The Union
    Watch: Col. Douglas Macgregor (Ret) Provides Nation With Alternative View Of The State Of The Union

    “I want to respectfully present an alternative view of the State of The Union,” retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor said in a video posted on X. 

    Macgregor begins by explaining how the Constitution mandates that the government promote the general welfare. This obligates Washington to secure the basic necessities of life, such as energy, food, and shelter. 

    “Regrettably, the current administration is failing to perform these tasks,” Macgregor said. 

    The combat war veteran and former senior advisor to the Secretary of Defense under the Trump administration, who is now the CEO of the media company “Our Country, Our Choice,” said Biden claims the economy is booming but noted that “much of it comes from government spending and employment,” adding that the government share of GDP is 42%—including federal, state, and local spending. 

    “This outrageous share is similar to what it was in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s—before the collapse. Rampant inflation stemming from this government share of the economy makes it difficult for families to buy nutritious food,” Macgregor said. 

    He touched on runaway inflation, which has decimated households in recent years, indicating that families are struggling to survive in the era of failed Bidenomics. 

    Macgregor segways into an ominous warning that ZeroHedge readers have understood for years: “Our national security is compromised.” 

    He warned about broken supply chains, power plants, and manufacturing facilities lacking critical spare parts. He blasted “ill-conceived domestic policies” that have sparked widespread job loss and homelessness. 

    Macgregor then focused on how decades of empire-building have drained America’s resources. 

    He pivoted back to the bloated government, explaining that there are between 12 and 25 million government workers and contractors. He added that this is all happening as national sovereign debt skyrockets to $34 trillion—or $1 trillion every three months. 

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

    “It’s impossible to drain the swamp with unsound money and colossal debt that we cannot sustain,” Macgregor said. 

    He continued: “Tragically, DC beltway politicians are controlled by the so-called donor class. This form of corruption is enabled by a cancerous central banking system … this ruling class orchestrates endless wars, enriching themselves and their cronies while sending our soldiers to serve in foreign lands of marginal strategic interest to the United States.” 

    Macgregor then warned about the invasion on the open southern border, indicating, “This uncontrolled influx is straining our resources, overwhelming our communities, and destroying our prosperity.” 

    “Reckless calls to defund and punish the police have crippled law enforcement. Officers are underfunded, undermanned, and unable to protect our citizens, making our cities unsafe for all, especially women, children, and the elderly,” he said. 

    Listen to Macgregor’s alternative State of The Union speech compared with Biden’s ridiculous speech, which focused on funding Ukraine and anti-Trump talk. 

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

    Perhaps Macgregor is the kind of leader this nation needs to save it from globalists and radical leftists who attempt a controlled demolition. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 17:25

  • David Sacks: "Biden's Big Backfire" Is Ukraine, Warns Of "Woke War III"
    David Sacks: “Biden’s Big Backfire” Is Ukraine, Warns Of “Woke War III”

    Venture capitalist David Sacks, who also hosts the All-In Podcast, sat down with Saagar Enjeti, a political commentator and podcaster from Breaking Points, to explore President Biden’s failures in Ukraine and Gaza. 

    Sacks has been a vocal critic of Western propaganda on Ukraine, advocating for a more nuanced understanding of the conflict and opposing NATO expansion to prevent further escalation. 

    “I was a little bit familiar with the conflict and with the idea that NATO expansion was something that the Russians really didn’t like. And so I started advocating on the All-In Podcast that we should take NATO expansion off the table; it’s clearly a huge irritant here in the situation,” Sacks told Enjeti. 

    Sacks continued, “I realized that this was the result of a deliberate US policy, kind of a neocon policy that either wanted this war or certainly wasn’t willing to avoid it. They weren’t willing to take NATO expansion off the table to avoid the war, so um, so yeah, I just started speaking out about it, I guess, using my channels.” 

    Enjeti asked Sacks what sources he reads to gather intel on the Ukraine situation. He blasted corporate media for “shading the truth or not telling us what was really happening in the war,” adding that independent media outlets and certain X users were giving the most accurate information about the conflict. 

    Sacks then criticized US foreign policy and neoconservatives for making “horrible policy decisions” on Ukraine in what could be the biggest blunder since the Iraq War. 

    Cough, cough, Victoria Nuland… 

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

    “The whole mainstream media stampeding us into this policy – and um the sort of the taboo they’re trying to create around it – where you know, it’s a lot like the Iraq War where anyone who opposed it was considered unpatriotic or sort of treasonous.” 

    Sacks pointed out, “I guess I wouldn’t speak out as much about it if I thought that the issue was being covered accurately – and it is such an important issue. This could lead to World War III or what I call Woke War III if we’re not careful.” 

    He also spoke about the “fusion of the woke left and the neocon right” in supporting the war in Ukraine, expressing concern over their views of not finding a peaceful resolution and only escalating the war closer to World War III. 

    Jumping to the halfway point of the interview, Sacks said:

    “I call this Biden’s big backfire. If you look at all of his claims at the beginning of the war, they’ve all come true in reverse. He said that we would weaken Russia in order to prevent them from waging uh this type of War again. In fact, we’ve made the Russian military stronger – it’s larger than it was before. It’s produced, uh, far more weapons the industrial base is ramped up, plus it’s now a battle-tested battle-harden, especially against Western weapons. It’s a much more formidable military Biden has created on the part of the Russians than when we started.

    “Meanwhile, it’s the United States that has seen its stockpiles depleted and hollowed out. Then you look at the economic claims that Biden made, he said that sanctions would crush the Russian economy. In fact, the Russian economy is growing faster than any of the G7 economies.” 

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

    Enjeti then asked Sacks: “How would you rate President Biden’s handling of the Israel-Gaza conflict so far?”

    Sacks responded: 

    “In the wake of October 7th, the first thing I said this was a little bit of reminiscent of 9/11. And the purpose of an outrageous terrorist attack is usually provoking overreaction, yes, and I hope that the Israelis would react wisely and not in the 911 manner as the United States did. It’s safe to say now that the Israeli reaction is exactly what Hamas wanted. 

    “They’ve created this humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and it’s basically turned the whole Middle East and most of the world against Israel. I’m shocked by some of the arguments I’m seeing now that this sort of decolonization narrative that used to really be in academic circles has now kind of gone mainstream. 

    “I think Biden made a huge mistake of basically going to the Middle East initially and hugging Netanyahu and giving him carte blanch … Israeli indiscriminately bombing a civilian population in Gaza is going to backfire horribly.” 

    Watch Sacks’ full interview below:

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 16:55

  • Trump Eviscerates Biden Over 'Apology Tour' After Calling Illegal Alien Murderer An "Illegal"
    Trump Eviscerates Biden Over ‘Apology Tour’ After Calling Illegal Alien Murderer An “Illegal”

    Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

    Joe Biden is now seemingly on an apology tour after accurately describing the illegal immigrant who killed Laken Riley as an “illegal” in his State of the Union speech.

    The 22-year-old nursing student at Augusta University was kidnapped and killed by an illegal immigrant from Venezuela when she was jogging at the University of Georgia last month.

    Biden accurately described her murderer as an “illegal” during his address to the nation, but only after being pressured into doing so by Marjorie Taylor Greene.

    Leftists who didn’t care at all about the murder are still mad at Biden for using the word “illegal,” and he’s now on an apology tour to try to make up for it.

    During your response to her heckling you, you used the word ‘illegal’, when talking about the man who allegedly killed Laken Riley,” an MSNBC host chastised Biden.

    “An undocumented person,” he responded, “I shouldn’t have used illegal, it’s undocumented,” before Biden attacked Trump for the way he talks about illegal immigrants.

    “I’m not gonna treat any of these people with disrespect. Look, they built the country,” the president added.

    Apparently, illegal alien murderers built America.

    Respondents on X slammed Biden and the leftist media.

    As we previously highlighted, both Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Chuy García were also incensed that Biden used the word “illegal”.

    Respondents on X pointed out that Garcia had never even previously expressed any outrage about the murder itself.

    Meanwhile, Donald Trump spent time with Laken Riley’s family prior to a rally in Georgia, and then slammed Joe Biden for apologising over calling the girl’s killer an “illegal” immigrant.

    During the Rally that followed, Trump spoke at length about Riley, noting “She was the brightest light in every room,” and vowed to her family to pursue “Justice for Laken.”

    He added “Laken Riley would be alive today if Joe Biden had not willfully and maliciously eviscerated the borders of the United States and set loose thousands and thousands of dangerous criminals into our country.”

    Trump also blasted Biden, saying the president “went on television and apologised for calling Laken’s murderer an illegal he didn’t want to call him an illegal. He said he should have called him an undocumented not an illegal and he wanted to apologise.”

    Trump referred to the alleged killer, Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang member Jose Ibarra, urging “He was an illegal alien, he was an illegal immigrant,” adding “he shouldn’t have been in our country and he never would have been under the Trump policy.”

    “Biden should be apologising for apologising to this killer,” Trump boomed as thousands in attendance roared their approval.

    Powerful stuff.

    As we also highlighted yesterday, the left is still pushing a narrative that conservatives are using the murder of Laken Riley by an illegal immigrant as a political point scoring stunt, despite the fact that the girl’s own family has slammed Joe Biden as “pathetic”.

    *  *  *

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

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 16:20

  • US Reinforces Haiti Embassy, Evacuates Some Staff In Overnight Airlift Mission
    US Reinforces Haiti Embassy, Evacuates Some Staff In Overnight Airlift Mission

    America could be on the verge of losing another embassy on President Biden’s watch.

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

    Haiti is quickly accelerating into greater chaos and violence by the day. The US military was forced this weekend to fly in reinforcements to the US embassy in the country’s capital, Port-au-Prince, where the area outside the embassy has been transformed into a warzone. 

    The late-night operation also included emergency evacuations for non-essential embassy personnel:

    “The airlift of personnel into and out of the embassy is consistent with our standard practice for embassy security augmentation worldwide, and no Haitians were on board the military aircraft,” US Southern Command wrote in a statement, as quoted by the newspaper Miami Herald. 

    Earlier this month, more than 4,500 inmates escaped from the Caribbean nation’s two largest prisons. Armed gangs who orchestrated the twin jailbreaks have demanded the resignation of Prime Minister Ariel Henry. 

    “In the past week, the political crisis in Haiti, combined with escalating violence and civil unrest, has created an untenable situation which threatens the country’s citizens and security,” US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told Newsweek on Friday.  

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

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

    Haitian authorities began a state of emergency last Sunday and extended it on Thursday as fierce battles continue across Port-au-Prince. 

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

    The US embassy wrote on X that it will “remain open” despite “heightened gang violence in the neighborhood near US embassy compounds and near the airport.” 

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

    Haiti is “on the cusp of even greater chaos and violence,” campaign group Human Rights Watch said last week, adding the political and economic crisis is driving a major humanitarian emergency. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 15:45

  • What is 'The Halving'? Explaining The Most Important Event In Bitcoin's History
    What is ‘The Halving’? Explaining The Most Important Event In Bitcoin’s History

    Authored by Brian Nibley via Finance Magnates.com,

    • The April 2024 halving, deemed the most significant to date, will reduce the block reward from 6.25 bitcoins to 3.125.

    • The emergence of spot Bitcoin ETFs and the enhancement in regulatory clarity are distinctive features unique to the current event.

    With spot Bitcoin ETFs having been approved the same year that the halving is set to take place, many newcomers to the space may be wondering: what is the Bitcoin halving? This is a common question among those wanting to learn more about the Bitcoin protocol. Expected to be the most important event in Bitcoin’s history, the 2024 halving is expected to occur sometime on or around April 13.

    Here we will cover the basics of how the Bitcoin halving works, what the Bitcoin halving is, why it happens, and what it may mean for markets this year and beyond.

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

    Understanding the Bitcoin Halving

    Before looking at the potential impacts of the 2024 halving, let’s discuss how the Bitcoin halving works.

    Bitcoin operates on a deflationary model, where the reward for mining new blocks is halved every 210,000 blocks, or approximately every four years, a process known as the “halving.” This event is significant because it reduces the rate at which new bitcoin are generated, thereby limiting supply. Bitcoin is the only asset in human history to have a fixed supply that never increases, making it the hardest currency ever known.

    This aspect of the protocol cannot be changed due to the decentralized distribution of nodes. For the supply limit of Bitcoin to be increased, the majority of nodes would have to agree to such a change. While this might be possibly in theory, it’s hard to imagine a scenario where it becomes reality. Thousands of independent node operators around the world would have to agree to making themselves poorer and reducing the value of Bitcoin as a whole.

    The 2024 halving will slash the block reward from 6.25 bitcoin to 3.125 bitcoin. Historically, each halving event has been followed by a notable increase in bitcoin’s price, although past performance is no guarantee of future results. However, the anticipation alone can lead to increased trading volume and price volatility, as we’ve seen in recent weeks.

    Contrary to what some market commentators may say, the halving can never be truly priced in before it happens. That’s because much of the selling pressure in the market comes from miners, who must sell coins to cover their operating expenses. After the halving, this selling pressure gets reduced by 50%, as the miner revenue declines by the same amount.

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

    What Happens to Miners after the Bitcoin Halving?

    Miners can struggle after the halving, as they see a significant reduction in revenue. Larger, public mining companies can have a lifeline by accessing capital markets for further investment. In the absence of a swift increase in the Bitcoin price, some smaller miners may be forced to shut down.

    As a result, the network’s hash rate tends to come down for a time after the halving. This then leads to a difficulty adjustment downwards, which can eventually make it possible for more miners to come back online.

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

    The Impact of the Bitcoin Halving

    This year’s halving may be the most important halving event in Bitcoin’s history. There are several converging factors that haven’t been present during previous halving cycles. Some of these include:

    • The emergence of spot Bitcoin ETFs;

    • increased regulatory clarity surrounding Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, and exchanges;

    • a washout of many bad actors from the previous cycle (think FTX, Celsius, Voyager, etc.);

    • potential nation-state adoption of bitcoin (El Salvador and rumors of other, larger countries);

    • and, corporate adoption of bitcoin (Microstrategy, other public Bitcoin companies).

    In the past, the halving has been a significant event for both Bitcoin’s price and the industry as a whole, even in the absence of the above variables. It stands to reason that this time around could be astronomical given the compounding effect of these new developments.

    In addition, because retail investors can now gain exposure to bitcoin through ETFs, there could be ripple effects throughout the entire financial system. How this might take shape is anyone’s guess.

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

    A few of the more certain impacts of the halving and associated bull market include:

    • an increase in crypto transactions. Merchants who accept cryptocurrency as payment tend to see a rise in purchases, as holders look for ways to take profits;

    • increased trading volume. This can be so extreme that exchanges encounter difficulties. For example, Coinbase suffered an outage on February 28 that led to users seeing a “0” balance in their accounts for a time, as the Bitcoin price rapidly shot up to $64,000;

    • renewed investment and hiring in the crypto space. Bitcoin and blockchain-related companies tend to do a lot of hiring during this time, and investors look to fund more startups;

    • and, speculation and market sentiment. Not surprisingly, market sentiment tends to get euphoric, and speculation in Bitcoin and altcoins can reach extreme levels. The legendary volatility of the asset class shows its full potential during this time.

    And most entertaining of all, the creation of new Bitcoin-related memes tends to skyrocket during this period.

    Stay tuned to social media for more on the subject.

    Bitcoin Halving Conclusion

    The Bitcoin halving is a pivotal event, occurring approximately every four years and reducing the rate at which new bitcoin comes online. As we approach the 2024 halving, there’s a lot of anticipation for its potential impact on Bitcoin’s price and the broader industry.

    With the emergence of spot Bitcoin ETFs, increased regulatory clarity, and growing adoption by both nations and corporations, this halving could be more significant than ever before. While the exact outcomes remain uncertain, past halving events have historically led to increased trading volume, market volatility, and renewed investment in the crypto space. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 15:10

  • Britt Busted For Misleading Sex-Trafficking Story In Bizarre SOTU Response
    Britt Busted For Misleading Sex-Trafficking Story In Bizarre SOTU Response

    Already the subject of bipartisan ridicule for the jaw-droppingly strange persona she displayed in her Republican response to the State of the Union address, Alabama Sen. Katie Britt is now taking more serious fire — for having deceptively framed a 16-year-old anecdote about sex trafficking to mislead the audience about when and where the crime happened and how she learned about it. 

    Observers of all political stripes winced as soon as first-termer Britt started speaking, sounding every bit like she was delivering an absurdly melodramatic audition for a B-movie part. This video nicely captures the difference between Normal Britt and Thursday night’s godawful Middle-School-Theater Britt: 

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

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

    As she proceeded through her bizarre delivery, Britt eventually came to the subject of border security. Within that passage, she shared an anecdote about a victim of sex trafficking, and did so in a way that misled the audience in three dimensions, making it sound like: 

    • Britt happened to encounter a woman who shared her story in a one-on-one conversation 
    • The sex trafficking happened recently — and during Biden’s term
    • The sex trafficking occurred in the United States

    None of that is true. 

    Here’s what Britt said: 

    When I took office [in 2023], I took a different approach. I traveled to the Del Rio sector of Texas. That’s where I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped.The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoebox of a room, and they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end.

    We wouldn’t be ok with this happening in a third world country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it. President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.

    On Friday, independent journalist Jonathan Katz posted a video in which he revealed that the unnamed woman Britt described is a Mexican citizen and prominent public advocate against human trafficking named Karla Jacinto Romero who testified before Congress in 2015.

    Britt’s framing — “I spoke to a woman” in the Del Rio sector “who shared her story with me” — made it sound like she came across a little-known person, living in America, who decided to open up to Britt in an intimate conversation. In fact, Britt heard Romero’s account when Britt, Romero, and Sen. Marsha Blackburn participated in a public, roundtable discussion.

    Britt (second from left) heard Romero’s account of being abused inside Mexico from 2004 to 2008 during this round-table discussion (Sen. Marsha Blackburn/Twitter)

    At the event, 31-year-old Romero gave her frequently-shared and reported account of having been sex-trafficked between the ages of 12 and 16 — in other words, way back during the George W. Bush administration. 

    Beyond serving as an indicator of how long ago Romero’s abuse occurred, the question of who was US president at the time is utterly irrelevant, because Romero wasn’t even trafficked in the United States or anywhere near it. It all took place inside Mexico and, from reporting on her story, it appears most or all of her forced-prostitution happened in the vicinity of Mexico City — nearly 1,000 miles from the American border.

    In her speech, Britt melodramatically proclaimed, “We wouldn’t be ok with this happening in a Third World country. This is the United States of America.” And now we find the whole thing did happen in a Third World country. 

    Romero doesn’t even live in the United States, making Britt’s emphasis on having spoken with her near Del Rio, Texas all the more misleading. Interviewed from Mexico by the New York Times, Romero said when she learned about Britt using her story in the speech, “I thought it was very strange.”

    There are enough real horror stories associated with America’s open border to make the case for better security. Britt’s decision to mislead her audience with an anecdote about sex trafficking that happened some 16 years ago far outside America is as baffling as her choice of persona for her first big moment in the spotlight. 

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

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 14:35

  • SpaceX-Backed Flying Car Startup Gets FAA Nod
    SpaceX-Backed Flying Car Startup Gets FAA Nod

    Authored by Felicity Bradstock via OilPrice.com,

    • Alef Aeronautics, based in San Mateo, California, has seen an impressive number of pre-orders for its two-seater eVTOL vehicle, Model A, with plans to develop a four-seater sedan, Model Z, by 2035.

    • The company has received a Special Airworthiness Certificate from the FAA for its Model A, highlighting its innovative design and potential for commercial viability in personal and urban mobility.

    • Competitors like Joby Aviation and Lilium are also advancing in the eVTOL market, focusing on flying taxis and partnerships to facilitate urban air mobility, indicating a growing industry trend towards airborne personal transport.

    Pre-orders for a “flying car” have soared in recent months leading industry experts to question how close we are to small passenger vehicle flight. Alef Aeronautics, a company backed by Space-X, specialising in the production of flying cars, has achieved 2,850 pre-orders for its electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) vehicle. The firm is backed by Tesla investor and venture capitalist Tim Draper, which has helped draw attention. Based in San Mateo, California, Alef Aeronautics is allowing customers to pre-order its two-seater flying car, the Alef Model A, online with a $150 deposit. Customers are allowed to withdraw the deposit at any time to cancel the pre-order. 

    The car is expected to be priced at around $300,000 when it becomes commercially available, which gives the company an order value of over $850 million to date. Jim Dukhovny, Alef’s CEO, stated: “As of today we have a little bit more than 2,850 pre-orders with deposits down, which makes it the bestselling aircraft in history, more than Boeing, Airbus, Joby Aviation and most of the eVTOLs combined.”

    Alef is also developing a four-passenger sedan called the Model Z. It is expected to become commercially available for the much lower price of $35,000, by 2035. It is just one of many start-ups developing flying car technology, but, over the last year, it has been recognised for the significant progress it has made. Alef’s Model A looks like a futuristic car. They use a mesh shell to cover rotors, allowing air to flow through the car. 

    The company first unveiled a half-size model of the vehicle at the Mobile World Congress, catching the attention of consumers and automakers worldwide. Dukhovny believes the Model A will be the world’s first flying car, as most other vehicles under development resemble something similar to a jet or a drone, fitted with wings or rotors. The CEO explained, “I know that people have claimed the first flying car… But we always had the idea that it has to be a car, a physical car, a regular car, as you can see it’s an eVTOL, an electric car. a regular car, drive, park, look, everything as a car, and a vertical take-off.” 

    The aim is for the car to be capable of being driven on the road, similarly to an electric vehicle (EV), at speeds of between 25 and 35 mph, as well as used to fly in any direction using its eight propellers, where it will reach speeds of up to 110 mph. As it is expected to weigh just 850 pounds, it can be classed as a small EV, making it more likely that the regulatory bodies will approve the car for flight by as early as 2025. 

    While Alef gained greater fame following the Mobile World Congress, this is not the first we are hearing of the company. Alef initially started working on its concept car in 2015, producing the first prototype of the Model A in 2019. In July 2023, it was issued with a Special Airworthiness Certificate by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which allowed the company to fly its Model A in limited locations for exhibition, research and development. The vehicle falls under the categorisation of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), which is used for technology such as air taxis and VTOL aircraft. 

    However, several companies are hot on Alef’s tail, hoping to rapidly develop their own flying car technology for commercial release.

    The eVTOL producer Joby Aviation is constructing a manufacturing plant at Dayton International Airport in Ohio. The company hopes to begin producing up to 500 aircraft a year at Dayton, starting in 2025. Joby is focused on the flying taxi market, designing the tiltrotor eVTOL to carry a pilot and four passengers at speeds of 200 mph. The company has already announced a partnership with Delta Airlines and expects to launch in cities such as New York and Los Angeles by as early as 2025. 

    The German start-up Lilium is developing an eVTOL to serve as an air taxi for up to five people, with a range of around 300 km and a top speed of 300 Kmh. In December, Lilium signed a memorandum of understanding with the air carrier Lufthansa to explore a strategic partnership on eVTOL aircraft operation in Europe. The two companies plan to explore ground and flight operations, future aircraft maintenance, as well as crewing and flight training. 

    Klaus Roewe, the CEO of Lilium, stated, “We are delighted that the Lufthansa Group has decided to cooperate with us to jointly advance in the future of flying. The Lufthansa Group has been at the forefront of some of Europe’s most important aviation initiatives, especially in the area of environmental sustainability. We are thrilled to explore opportunities on bringing eVTOL flights to Lufthansa Group customers.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 14:00

  • Pope Francis Urges Ukraine To Have 'Courage Of The White Flag' & Negotiate End To War
    Pope Francis Urges Ukraine To Have ‘Courage Of The White Flag’ & Negotiate End To War

    Pope Francis has sparked fresh controversy after he said in a new interview published Saturday that Ukraine should have the “courage” to sit at the negotiating table with Russia and end the war through a peace agreement.

    In particular his referencing the “white flag” is drawing outrage from European and Ukraine officials. “I think that the strongest one is the one who looks at the situation, thinks about the people and has the courage of the white flag, and negotiates,” Francis told Swiss broadcaster RSI. He said this would happen with the help of outside mediating powers.

    Francis continued by explaining that “the word negotiate is a courageous word.” He emphasized, “When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you have to have the courage to negotiate,” and spelled out, “Negotiations are never a surrender.” However, the words surely sting for the Zelensky government given how the Pope highlighted (albeit indirectly) that Ukraine forces are losing on the battlefield.

    In April 2022, Pope Francis kissed a Ukrainian flag brought from Bucha. via AP

    Francis additionally said that either side should “not be ashamed of negotiating before things get worse,” and he offered that he himself would willingly mediate peace talks, or else several European countries could.

    “Today, for example, in the war in Ukraine, there are many who want to mediate,” he said. “Turkey has offered itself for this. And others. Do not be ashamed to negotiate before things get worse.” President Zelensky just returned from a trip where he met with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

    Almost immediately in the wake of the interview being released, the pope was widely accused of siding with Russia. For example, Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski posted on X, “How about, for balance, encouraging Putin to have the courage to withdraw his army from Ukraine? Peace would immediately ensue without the need for negotiations.”

    As The Associated Press noted on Sunday, Ukrainian officials agreed with statements comparing to the Pope’s comments to being willing to compromise with Hitler:

    In a separate post, Sikorski drew parallels between those calling for negotiations while “denying (Ukraine) the means to defend itself” and European leaders’ “appeasement” of Adolf Hitler just before World War II.

    Andrii Yurash, Ukraine’s ambassador to the Holy See, said that it was “necessary to learn lessons” from that conflict. His post on X appeared to compare the pope’s comments to calls for “talking with Hitler” while raising “a white flag to satisfy him.”

    Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni has sought to clarify Francis’ remarks but did not back down or retract the pontiff’s ‘controversial’ statement. He said it was the interviewer that introduced the white flag reference to “indicate a cessation of hostilities, a truce reached with the courage of negotiation.”

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

    Bruni emphasized that Francis has “deep affection” for Ukraine and he’s ultimately calling for “conditions for a diplomatic solution in search of a just and lasting peace.”

    Francis has been no stranger to controversy throughout the over two-year long war. After the opening few months of the war, in May 2022 he suggested that NATO expansion was a prime catalyst for the tragic conflict, describing that NATO had long been “barking at Russia’s door” with its eastward expansion. That too elicited angry reaction from Ukraine officials and some of the Western allies. But NATO itself seemed to later acknowledge that this is accurate.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 13:25

  • Watch: Crowd Roars As Trump Enters Packed UFC Arena
    Watch: Crowd Roars As Trump Enters Packed UFC Arena

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news,

    A huge crowd at a packed UFC arena in Miami roared with delight as Donald Trump made his way into the stadium before later chanting “fuck Joe Biden!”

    A video clip shows Trump walking to ringside with CEO Dana White as the audience greets him like a rock star.

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

    Many members of the crowd reached out to high five Trump as he was given a welcome that would rival any of the top performers.

    Trump was also seen shaking hands with Dave Portnoy and Dan Bongino before he took his seat.

    “Never seen anything like it,” commented Mike Cernovich.

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

    “Biden could never get this kind of introduction or energy from a crowd, absolutely unbelievable!” gushed another respondent to the video.

    After Trump made his appearance and the event got underway, the audience also erupted with a huge chant of “fuck Joe Biden!”

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

    Trump made his appearance two days after Biden delivered an angry, shouty State of the Union speech which many hope will be his last.

    *  *  *

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

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 03/10/2024 – 12:52

Digest powered by RSS Digest