Today’s News 13th May 2023

• Could The US "Lose" Australia?
  Could The US “Lose” Australia?

  By Russell Clark of the Capital Flows and Asset Markets substack

  Australia as a colony, and then after independence, operated as part of the British armed forces, sending substantial number of troops to World War I and II to fight in Europe. However during World War II, the collapse of Singapore saw Japanese forces attack the mainland Australia. Only the US was able to offer military support, and from this moment on, Australia military was reconfigured to ally with the US rather than British Armed Forces. The military bond between the US and Australia is so close, that Australia reintroduced conscription during the Vietnam war. Even today songs like “Khe Sanh” and “I was only 19” that describe the trials and tribulations of Australian soldiers in Vietnam are well known.

  

  After the Vietnam war, for years Australian defense policy was centered on a “large country to the north” aka Indonesia. Military fears were driven by the invasion and annexation of West Papua by Indonesia in 1969 that saw a number of Australian journalists perish. Papua New Guinea was ruled by Australia until 1975, meaning that Australia was already protecting a land border against Indonesia. As an Australian military map shows, only Indonesia is close enough to possibly invade the populated East Coast. A military policy focused on stopping a potential Indonesian threat was both logical and sensible.

  

  The isolation of Australia with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the rise of democracy in Indonesia has led Australia to have defense policy of “strategic warning time”, which in essence meant that Australia had 10 years to respond to any real military threat. The most recent review argues that this period is over, and Australia needs to commit to a much more rigorous defense strategy. In particular it is looking to work much more closely with other nations in the Indo-Pacific region to counteract the influence of China. The landmark agreement of AUKUS where Australia will acquire nuclear submarines from the UK. The problem is that Australia now seems to be investing heavily to protect itself from its largest trade partner (memorable parodied here).

  

  Given the distances involved, and China’s dependence on Australian raw materials, the likelihood of China invading Australia seems very low. Australia already spends around 2% of GDP on military, which is enough to make it the dominant power in Oceania.

  

  Militarily Australia looks like its spends more than enough to resist any possible invasion, and to project power near its borders. So what exactly is the aim of Australia’s more robust defence posture, and the AUKUS treaty. The most controversial feature of the AUKUS treaty was Australia cancelling the contract to buy Collins class submarines from France, and buying nuclear powered submarines from the UK. There is much debate over whether these submarines are actually better, for Australia, but it is very clear that the nuclear submarines can travel much further than conventional submarines.

  

  The conclusion I make from all of this is that Australia has decided to participate in the potential defense of Taiwan. The reunification of Taiwan to the mainland has been government policy since the foundation of the People’s Republic of China. If that is the unstated aim of this policy, then the question has to be whether this is correct strategy. If the aim is to bolster Taiwanese defences, then it would make more sense to bolster spending in areas near a potential conflict. Why not have Australia send more military equipment to Taiwan? Or why not give Japan nuclear submarines? The AUKUS plan has Australia building 8 submarines coming into service in 2030s and 2040s. Given the current mismatch between Chinese and Taiwanese navies, what is the point?

  

  Plainly Australia’s military plans are sending a political signal, but at the cost of $10bn a year for 30 years. Other problems included the lack of nuclear industry in Australia means developing the know how to deal with nuclear material from scratch, as well as making mainland Australia a legitimate target if China did invade Taiwan. While the Vietnam war is still remembered in song, the failures of British military strategy in World War I are remembered even more keenly in Australia (ANZAC day is a more important that either Australia Day or Federation day – and commemorates the loss of Australian and New Zealand soldiers lives in a badly planned military campaign in Turkey). Some historians saw the debacle in Turkey in World War I was the true beginning of Australian independence from Britain. Confused strategy regarding Taiwan could have the same effect. Former Prime Minister Paul Keating has already spoken out against this new military strategy, and he makes a valid point.

  As the parody video linked above makes clear, Australian military strategy would benefit from clearer objectives, and perhaps refraining from throwing money at projects until it can clearly state those objectives.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 23:40

• YouTuber Admits Crashing Plane Into California Mountain For Views To Lock "Sponsorship Deal"
  YouTuber Admits Crashing Plane Into California Mountain For Views To Lock “Sponsorship Deal”

  Society needs to have a national discussion regarding the lengths social media influencers go to produce outrageous and dangerous content in pursuit of more views and sponsorship deals. 

  The story of Olympic snowboarder turned YouTube influencer Trevor Jacob is a prime example of the ridiculousness on social media. He admitted to federal prosecutors that he deliberately crashed his small plane into a mountain in Southern California to boost views for a sponsorship deal.

  Jacob pleaded guilty to one count of destruction and concealment with the intent to obstruct an investigation, the US Attorney’s office for Central California wrote in a press release. He faces a maximum penalty of 20 years behind bars. 

  According to his plea agreement, Jacob is an experienced pilot and skydiver who had secured a sponsorship from a company that sold various products, including a wallet. Pursuant to the sponsorship deal, Jacob agreed to promote the company’s wallet in a YouTube video that he would post. – federal prosecutors

  Jacob admitted in his plea agreement that he intended to make money through the video. 

  

  Recall the video was posted on YouTube in late 2021 titled “I Crashed My Airplane,” which shows Jacob parachuting out of the plane as the engine appeared to have stalled. 

  We noticed the video about a week after it went live and pointed out a large number of folks who believed the social media influencer staged the air emergency. 

  As of Friday afternoon, the video has more than 3 million views. The ratio on the video of likes versus dislikes is horrendous: 33k likes/207k dislikes. 

  

  Months after Jacob posted the video, the Federal Aviation Administration sent him a letter on April 11, 2022, indicating he violated the agency’s regulations and operated his small plane in a “careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.” His pilot license was revoked shortly after. 

  Now he faces jail, all because he wanted more views. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 23:20

• Why Was EcoHealth Alliance's Grant Reinstated Despite Group's Apparent Failure To Comply With NIH Conditions?
  Why Was EcoHealth Alliance’s Grant Reinstated Despite Group’s Apparent Failure To Comply With NIH Conditions?

  Authored by Hans Mahncke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has reinstated a grant that had been terminated by President Donald Trump in April 2020. However, a document first obtained by the House Oversight Committee reveals that the NIH’s conditions for reinstatement have not been met.

  

  The grant, titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,” was originally awarded in 2014 by Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Under the terms of the grant, EcoHealth Alliance, a government-funded nonprofit that purportedly engages in research to prevent pandemics, was awarded $3.8 million over five years to assess the spillover potential of bat viruses “using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments in cell culture and humanized mice.” Put in simple terms, NIAID was paying EcoHealth to genetically engineer and manipulate bat viruses in labs.

  In May 2016, the grant was suspended after Erik Stemmy, a NIAID program officer, noticed that federal government funds may have been used for prohibited gain-of-function experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China. At the time, the Obama administration had put in place a moratorium on gain-of-function experiments. However, for reasons that remain unclear, the suspension was lifted in July 2016. At the time, EcoHealth’s president, Peter Daszak, thanked NIAID in an email for lifting the gain-of-function funding pause.

  As part of the conditions of the grant, EcoHealth had to file regular activity reports. However, starting in 2018, EcoHealth stopped submitting these reports. EcoHealth would later blame technical difficulties for their failure to submit. The missing reports comprised the critical 2018–2019 timeframe right before the outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan.

  Despite EcoHealth’s delinquency in filing the status reports, NIAID did not stop funding the project. It was only after a Freedom of Information Act request for the reports was filed in 2021 that EcoHealth was prompted by NIAID to provide the reports. The reports, which were finally submitted by EcoHealth at least two years too late, in 2021, revealed that the NIAID grant had been used by EcoHealth and the WIV in part to create laboratory-engineered bat viruses. Had this fact been reported in a timely manner, the experiments would likely have been shut down by NIAID.

  When the connections between the WIV and NIAID’s grant became known in April 2020, Trump terminated the grant. Trump’s decision caused an outcry among the media and his critics. However, the NIH, which is NIAID’s parent body, appears to have been well aware that Trump’s actions were merited.

  On July 8, 2020, Michael Lauer, the NIH’s deputy director for extramural research who was in charge of “ensuring scientific integrity, public accountability, and effective stewardship of the NIH extramural research portfolio,” wrote a letter to EcoHealth, listing seven demands that needed to be fulfilled as a condition for reinstatement of the grant.

  NIH Issued 7 Demands

  First, EcoHealth needed to provide a sample of the COVID-19 virus which it used to determine the virus’ genetic sequence. The ostensible purpose of this demand was to compare this original sample with other samples in order to assess when it first emerged.

  Second, EcoHealth was required to “explain the apparent disappearance of Huang Yanling, a scientist / technician who worked in the WIV lab but whose lab web presence has been deleted.” Huang Yanling has long been thought to be patient zero. Her profile was scrubbed from the WIV’s website shortly after the outbreak of the pandemic in 2019 and she has not been seen since.

  

  Third, EcoHealth was asked to share the “WIV’s responses to the 2018 U.S. Department of State cables regarding safety concerns.” These cables had warned of a “serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate” the WIV’s high-level containment laboratories. They also warned that the National Health and Family Planning Commission, a state agency of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), had denied a request to conduct coronavirus experiments at biosafety level 4. The actual experiments were carried out in low biosafety level 2 facilities.

  Fourth, EcoHealth was required to “disclose and explain out-of-ordinary restrictions on laboratory facilities, as suggested, for example, by diminished cell-phone traffic in October 2019, and the evidence that there may have been roadblocks surrounding the facility from October 14-19, 2019.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 23:00

• Judge Finds Federal Age-21 Rule For Handgun Purchases Unconstitutional
  Judge Finds Federal Age-21 Rule For Handgun Purchases Unconstitutional

  A 54-year-old federal prohibition on the sale of guns to Americans between 18 and 20 years old has been ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge in Richmond, Virginia. The Justice Department is expected to appeal and ask for the ruling to be put on hold as the case is further adjudicated. 

  The case has three plaintiffs, all between 18 and 20 years old. One, John “Corey” Fraser, was refused when he attempted to buy a Glock 19x from a Federal Firearm Licensed Dealer (FFL). The other two want to buy a handgun but haven’t tried, in light of Fraser’s experience.

  The challenged provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968 didn’t prohibit possession by 18- to 20-year-olds, it only made it illegal for FFL’s to sell handguns to them. Rifles and shotguns have no such federal restriction. 

  

  The ruling is the latest in a string of defeats for gun-control measures. The trend is driven by the application of a new constitutionality test prescribed in the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision.

  This week’s ruling is particularly significant because it’s one of the first that uses Bruen to kill a federal law, as opposed to a state one. In February, a federal court applying the Bruen test shot down a 30-year-old law banning gun ownership by people subject to domestic-violence restraining orders

  Using the Bruen test, a gun-control law can only be upheld if the government demonstrates that it’s “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Further, when examining the record, judges are compelled to give the most weight to historical sources from the era of the Second Amendment’s 1791 ratification. 

  In Thursday’s ruling, Judge Robert E. Payne of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia concluded the government’s defense of the age-21 law failed the Bruen test: 

  “The government has not presented any evidence of age-based restrictions on the purchase or sale of firearms from the colonial era, Founding or Early Republic,” wrote Payne in a 71-page decision. 

  While the Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller decision found that the right to ‘keep arms’ isn’t exclusively tied to militia service, Payne scrutinized the history of militia laws — and particularly, age stipulations in those laws — as part of his review of the historical tradition of gun regulation relative to the challenged law.

  

  Those laws blew holes in the government’s case. “At the time surrounding ratification of the Second Amendment, 16 or 18 was the age of majority for militia service throughout the nation,” wrote Payne, who was nominated by President George H.W. Bush.  

  Elsewhere, he noted that, “if the Court were to exclude 18-to-20-year-olds from the Second Amendment’s protection, it would impose limitations on the Second Amendment that do not exist with other constitutional guarantees.” 

  Gun control advocates railed against the decision. “Research shows us that 18- to 20-year-olds commit gun homicides at triple the rate of adults 21 years and older,” said Janet Carter, senior director of issues and appeals at Everytown Law. She added that the age-21 handgun-purchase law “is not just an essential tool for preventing gun violence, it is also entirely constitutional.” 

  

  This decision is very important, but it doesn’t yet settle the issue nationally, as judges have been ruling in both directions where age restrictions are concerned:

  • In December, a federal judge in the Western District of Louisiana upheld the same federal restriction that Payne found constitutional this week.
  • Florida’s age-21 law for any gun purchase was upheld in March by an Eleventh Circuit panel.
  • A federal judge ruled in March against a Minnesota law establishing a minimum age of 21 to qualify for a handgun-carry permit.
  • Last year, the Ninth Circuit ruled against California’s age-21 rule for buying centerfire semiautomatic rifles.

  The patchwork of decisions could make the issue ripe for Supreme Court consideration. In the meantime, amid all that judicial inconsistency, state legislatures have been actively installing or considering new age-21 restrictions. For example: 

  • In April, Colorado set age 21 as the minimum for buying any firearm. 
  • Earlier this month, the Oregon House passed a bill that would raise the minimum age for buying semiautomatic weapons to 21.
  • This week, a Texas legislative committee advanced a bill setting 21 as the minimum for buying semiautomatic rifles.  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 22:40

• Migrants Reveal Plans To Sneak Into US Since Title 42 Has Expired
  Migrants Reveal Plans To Sneak Into US Since Title 42 Has Expired

  Authored by Joe Gomez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The COVID-19 pandemic-era immigration policy Title 42 came to an end just before midnight on May 11 and thousands of illegal immigrants are anticipated to surge to the U.S. border when that happens, according to migrants and Mexican charity workers who spoke with The Epoch Times.

  “We all want to reach the United States as quickly as we can,” Anna Maria Estrada told The Epoch Times in Mexico City. Estrada traveled from Guatemala into Mexico illegally with a group of dozens of other migrants.

  

  They’ve been given visas by the Mexican government called Forma Migratoria Multiple, which translates as Multiple Immigration Forms, so they can travel freely through the country.

  Estrada said that she and others are trying to get to the United States while there is still “time” to possibly take advantage of the chaos in the change of immigration regulations.

  This idea has been spread widely by transnational criminal organizations to induce migrants to pay to smuggle them into the United States.

  “DHS expects that encounters at the Southwest Border will increase as smugglers spread disinformation, which will place a strain on our immigration system, our communities, and our dedicated workforce,” the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement in early May.

  Estrada says her group and others are willing to risk everything to get to the United States even if it means taking the dangerous train called “la bestia,” which translates as “the beast” or the “train of death.” The train travels from Guatemala to the outskirts of Mexico City and then up to various parts of the U.S.–Mexico border. Hundreds die every day by falling off the train onto the rails below, with the hope of making it to the border.

  “We are going to the train to see if we can make it if there is still time,” Estrada said.

  

  Mexico City has provided shelter and aid to migrants traveling through, as have local churches like the Basilica of Guadalupe.

  “Mainly the migrants are devoted to the Virgin of Guadalupe so they will come here to pray for them and their families,” Arturo Duran, who works at the church, told The Epoch Times. “They have always gathered here as their safe place.”

  Duran said the migrants are mostly peaceful as they head to the border, wanting only to seek a better life, but some have other intentions.

  “Some brothers are very angry about what happened in the Juarez prison [a migration center that burned to the ground, killing at least 40 people in March] and are seeking revenge.”

  Estrada’s group is part of thousands of other migrants trying to cross into the United States illegally.

  10,000 illegal immigrants have been captured daily on Monday and Tuesday of this week, according to Reuters.

  End of Title 42

  Title 42 allowed border authorities to quickly expel certain immigrants who illegally crossed into the United States seeking asylum, but it did not prevent them from doing so again.

  Now that it has ended, a stricter rule entitled Title 8 will be enforced, which would ban illegal immigrants who are captured crossing the border for up to five years.

  The new rule would encourage illegal immigrants who are traveling to the United States from Central America to first seek asylum in other countries.

  “We’ve gotten overwhelming cooperation from Mexico. We also are in the process of setting up offices in Colombia and other places where someone seeking asylum can go first,” President Joe Biden said at a White House press conference on May 9. “But it remains to be seen. It’s going to be chaotic for a while.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 22:20

• Pentagon Officials Acknowledge Uncertainty In Defending Against Hypersonic Missiles
  Pentagon Officials Acknowledge Uncertainty In Defending Against Hypersonic Missiles

  Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The United States Department of Defense (DOD) is seeking nearly $30 billion in its $680 billion Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) budget request for missile defeat and defense programs across all branches of the military.

  

  Right now, the DOD is in a race to develop its own hypersonic missiles and engineer effective defenses against the high-velocity, maneuverable missiles being developed by Russia and, particularly, by the Peoples Republic of China (PRC).

  During questioning by Senate Armed Services Committee’s Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chair Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) in a May 9 budget hearing, four flag officers said some existing systems have “capabilities” against hypersonic weapons but did not know for sure until they are tested against the evolving missile systems.

  King was not happy. “It seems to me that we are spending a lot more money to developing hypersonic missiles than we are developing capabilities to defend against them,” he said.

  King asked Missile Defense Agency Director Vice Adm. Jon A. Hill if an aircraft carrier could be defended against a hypersonic missile attack.

  “We have the capability to stop it in two places, in the boost-glide phase” and when the missile re-enters the atmosphere, Hill said, noting the Navy’s SM-6 missiles are “cruise missile killers” designed to track and kill fast-moving, maneuverable targets that can fly high and skim the surface. “It would be defeated by a destroyer defending a carrier.”

  Noting Ukrainians claim they shot down a Russian hypersonic weapon last week with a Patriot anti-air missile provided by the U.S., Hill said the Patriot systems, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missiles (THAAD), and Aegis ballistic defense system all have “capability” demonstrated in tests against hypersonics.

  “THAAD operates on the edge of the atmosphere,” he said. “We haven’t tested it against hypersonic, but I’m willing to bet there are capacities that we can leverage there.”

  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy John F. Plumb said the budget request “makes substantial investments in regional ballistic, cruise, and hypersonic missile defense capabilities,” including $1.2 billion for PAC-3 Patriot missile “interceptors,” $1 billion for Aegis and THAAD interceptors, and $259 million for regional hypersonic and ballistic missile defense space sensors and the development of a G

  

  21st Century Missiles vs. 1980s Technology

  King said these ant-missile systems are based on technologies from the 1980-90s and asked why DOD is not experimenting with using direct energy weapons to knock down missiles.

  At $4 to $10 million each, using missiles in a “bullet on bullet approach is an expensive proposition” in defending against other missiles.

  Developing a “directed energy” weapon for missile defense has been “a target for a period of time,” Hill said with prototypes being tested in the fleet. “It is scaling its way there. That work is being done today.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 21:40

• Thai Rice Crop In Crosshairs Of El Nino As Farmers Are Warned About Water Shortages
  Thai Rice Crop In Crosshairs Of El Nino As Farmers Are Warned About Water Shortages

  A disruptive El Nino pattern might impact rice production in Thailand, the world’s second-biggest exporter of the grain that feeds half the world’s population. 

  Bangkok Post reported farmers are being asked by the Office of the National Water Resources “to grow only one rice crop this coming season as rainfall will be below average because of the El Nino weather pattern.” 

  Surasee Kittimonthon, the ONWR secretary-general, said the rainy season, which usually begins in late May, will be delayed with periods of intermittent rain in June. 

  Kittimonthon said ONWR had devised a plan for increased water preservation within the country’s reservoir system. 

  “We can provide water to farmers for the first rice crop, starting in the rainy season.

  “But for the second or third crops, we would like farmers’ cooperation to grow other plants that need less water to help limit the water shortage,” he said.

  Rice production requires substantial amounts of water and relies heavily on irrigation systems and sufficient rainfall. It’s an early warning sign of how El Nino is set to wreak havoc on the global food system this year. 

  

  We told readers last month the weather-altering phenomenon had a high probability of forming. We said, “If El Niño does form, it could result in heavy rainfall and heatwaves in specific regions across the globe, potentially causing disruptions in the agricultural industry.” 

  And days ago, we informed readers about record-breaking heatwaves in Asia and Europe in a note titled “Is El Nino Supercharging Heatwave Across Asia?” 

  Separately, earlier this month, Fitch Solutions published a report that forecasts this year’s global rice production will log its biggest shortfall in two decades. 

  “At the global level, the most evident impact of the global rice deficit has been, and still is, decade-high rice prices,” Fitch Solutions’ commodities analyst Charles Hart told CNBC. 

  Sliding rice production causes grain prices to increase for 3.5 billion people, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region — this region of the world accounts for 90% of the world’s rice consumption. 

  “Given that rice is the staple food commodity across multiple markets in Asia, prices are a major determinant of food price inflation and food security, particularly for the poorest households,” Hart said.

  He said this year’s global shortfall would be around 8.7 million tons, the largest global rice deficit since 2003/2004 of 18.6 million. 

  As a result of tightening global supplies, rough rice futures trading on the CBoT have soared above $18 per cwt, the highest level since September 2008. Cwt is a unit of measurement for certain commodities such as rice.

  

  Recall in the late summer of 2022. We told readers:

  • The Stage Is Being Set For A Massive Global Rice Shortage
  • “Situation Is Really Precarious”: World’s Largest Rice Exporter Faces Output Decline Amid Heatwave

  … and just recently. 

  • Thai Rice Prices Jump As Global Food Crisis Reignites

  El Nino appears set to decrease precipitation levels, potentially causing disruptions in the global food industry. Persistently high food inflation could increase the likelihood of societal unrest in developing economies. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 21:20

• Biden EPA Announces Toughest-Ever Rules For Power Plant Emissions
  Biden EPA Announces Toughest-Ever Rules For Power Plant Emissions

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  After weeks of buildup, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unveiled its strictest-ever rules for power produced using natural gas, coal, and oil that could spur the use of carbon capture technologies.

  

  The standards released on May 11 would impact new and old power infrastructure, including new natural gas turbines and the country’s existing coal fleet. Though the United States still has hundreds of coal plants, the number of such installations has fallen sharply during the past decade.

  “We will see some coal retirements,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan told reporters on May 10.

  

  He added that individual states and companies would have significant discretion in terms of implementation.

  U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry in 2021 said America simply “won’t have coal” on its grid by 2030.

  The EPA thinks its proposals will induce American power plants to boost their use of certain technologies, including the co-firing of fossil fuels with what it calls low-greenhouse gas (GHG) hydrogen and, in particular, the capture, sequestration, and storage of carbon.

  More Details from EPA

  Regan told reporters that the standards are about “clean air to breathe,” claiming they would yield “substantial health benefits” as well as “regulatory certainty” for the energy sector.

  The agency projects that the standards will help America avoid thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of lost workdays, and over 300,000 asthma attacks just in the year 2030.

  Regan and others with the EPA repeatedly stressed that they do not believe their vision runs afoul of West Virginia v. EPA.

  That landmark Supreme Court decision, decided 6 to 3, concerned a carbon emissions plan for existing power plants put forth by the EPA under former President Barack Obama.

  

  The court found that Congress hadn’t given the agency the authority to issue such emissions caps, referencing the plan’s “generation shifting approach” from coal to natural gas and other sources.

  “The proposed limits and guidelines follow EPA’s traditional approach under the Clean Air Act to control pollution from stationary sources by relying on control technologies that are cost-effective and can be applied directly to power plants to reduce CO2,” an EPA spokesperson told The Epoch Times in a May 10 email.

  In its 681-page notice, the agency argued that co-firing hydrogen as a substitute for natural gas can qualify as a “system of emission reduction” under the Clean Air Act. It specified that hydrogen would have to be low-GHG, “the availability of which is expected to increase significantly and the cost of which is expected to decline significantly in the near future.”

  “The EPA recognizes that even though the combustion of hydrogen is zero-GHG emitting, its production entails a range of GHG emissions, from low to high, depending on the method,” the proposal reads.

  The agency claims that technologies to capture 90 percent of carbon dioxide have become “adequately demonstrated” and “cost reasonable” while realizing “substantial emissions reductions.”

  2035 Target for Carbon-Free Electricity Still Viable: Officials

  The EPA said their proposal offers “ample lead time and substantial compliance flexibilities.” That might appear to conflict with President Joe Biden’s aim of achieving “a carbon pollution-free electricity sector by 2035,” as expressed in a 2021 executive order.

  EPA officials and staff told reporters on May 10 that the ambition was still within reach.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 21:00

• The Supreme Court Might Curb The 'Deep State' By Overruling The Chevron Case
  The Supreme Court Might Curb The ‘Deep State’ By Overruling The Chevron Case

  Authored by Rob Natelson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Supreme Court will not be announcing its decisions in most of this year’s big cases until June or early July. But the court recently agreed to consider a case that could trim the power of the “deep state.”

  The “deep state” is a web of federal administrative agencies, career politicians, lobbyists, and compliant mass media. It acts as a shadow government that largely sets the nation’s political agenda.

  The deep state has been around for decades, but is more powerful than ever because the federal government is larger and more intrusive than ever. Most Americans witnessed deep state power for the first time during the Trump administration, when it publicly resisted the authority of an elected president.

  One prop of the deep state’s power is the 1984 Supreme Court’s ruling in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (pdf). That ruling is called the “Chevron doctrine.” On May 1, the justices granted certiorari in (that is, agreed to review) a new case in which they may overrule the Chevron case and its “Chevron doctrine.”

  

  The ‘Deep’ Background

  The Constitution created a democratic federal republic. It instituted an elected Congress to make laws, an elected president to enforce laws, and an appointed judiciary to resolve disputes under those laws.

  In addition to empowering the new government, the Constitution also limited it. The Constitution included some specific exceptions to federal authority, such as the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights. It also reserved most governmental functions to the states, a reservation encapsulated in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

  People who wield power are seldom happy with limits on their power. Federal officials and those who cater to them always pushed back against the Constitution’s limits. Those limits began to fall in earnest during the late 1930s and early 1940s. Instead of resisting the assault, liberal majorities on the Supreme Court “reinterpreted” the Constitution to accommodate the assaulters. I described the court’s decisions during that era in my Epoch Times series, “How the Supreme Court Re-Wrote the Constitution.”

  This process of constitutional distortion slowed after 1944, but it didn’t end. It continued for the entire six decades that liberal justices comprised a majority—that is, until late in the 20th century.

  In Epoch Times essays published in 2021 and 2022, I described the major themes of the liberal jurisprudence that prevailed throughout most of the 20th century. That jurisprudence is now embedded in the court’s case precedent.

  Liberal justices enormously increased the authority of Congress. For example, they transformed Congress’s power to regulate Commerce (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) into authority to oversee the entire national economy. They changed Congress’s power to tax (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1) into a license to spend for almost any purpose. These and other changes rendered the federal government supreme in American life.

  Not only did liberal justices permit Congress to exercise almost unlimited power, they also permitted Congress to delegate it to unelected administrative agencies. Congress may (and frequently does) pass a statute creating an agency and telling it to regulate some broad swathe of activities, and—voilá!—Americans are saddled with a new set of bureaucratic masters.

  It’s true that the court has stated restrictions on Congress’s ability to delegate, but those statements are mostly empty words. The justices readily approve vague and undefined delegations such as “this agency may regulate the airwaves in the public interest.”

  Liberal Supreme Court majorities also stacked the rules heavily against any citizen challenging federal power. Outside of a few areas (such as freedom of speech) a citizen claiming a federal law is unconstitutional must prove that there’s no possible constitutional reason for the law. (This was why Obamacare’s insurance mandate was upheld on the silly (pdf) theory that it was a “tax.”)

  How Chevron Fits In

  Just as the court imposed an almost impossible burden of proof on citizens challenging a law’s constitutionality, the Chevron doctrine imposes a similar burden on citizens challenging the power of federal agencies. The doctrine says that an agency almost always has the final word on whether federal law gives it the powers it claims. Courts must defer to these self-interested agency decisions unless they are “unreasonable.” In constitutional law, it’s exceedingly difficult to prove that a government decision is “unreasonable.”

  The Un-Conservative Supreme Court

  As I have explained in several Epoch Times essays, contrary to the mainstream media narrative, the current Supreme Court doesn’t have a 6–3 conservative majority. Rather, the bench is highly fragmented: It contains three liberal activists, one nearly pure originalist, one justice who usually defers to government decisions (liberal or conservative), and four others in between.

  As a result, the current court has left almost all the liberal case precedents in place. (The principal exception, Roe v. Wade, was an unusually weak decision but even so it was overruled by only a bare 5–4 majority.) When the media characterize a ruling as “conservative,” it’s often because the court has applied a liberal precedent that liberals no longer find convenient.

  Thus, the current composition of the court suggests that, just as it has preserved other liberal precedents, it may well preserve Chevron.

  Criticisms of the Chevron Doctrine

  On the other hand, there’s some evidence the justices may overrule Chevron. Several justices have been critical of the Chevron doctrine. They and other commentators point out that:

  • The doctrine makes an agency a judge in its own cause, thereby violating the Constitution’s guarantee of due process of law;

  • it encourages agencies to expand their power;

  • administrative agencies are part of the executive branch, so allowing them to make legislative or judicial decisions violates separation of powers; and

  • the Chevron decision was not well considered, and over time the Supreme Court has had to carve out exceptions.

  Another reason for believing that Chevron’s days are numbered is that the court didn’t refer to it when adjudicating recent cases on the limits of agency authority.

  The Present Case

  The case the court agreed to hear is Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (pdf). Loper Bright Enterprises is the plaintiff. It operates fishing vessels in the Atlantic Ocean.

  The defendant, Gina Raimondo, is the Secretary of Commerce. Part of her department is the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which Congress created to regulate fishermen.

  Federal law allows NMFS to require fishing boats to carry official observers to ensure compliance with federal regulations. That much is undisputed. But the NMFS also claims federal law allows it to force fishermen to bear the cost of paying the observers. Loper Bright disputes that.

  The appeals court held that under the Chevron doctrine, the fishermen lose because the agency’s interpretation isn’t completely “out-to-lunch.” But if the Supreme Court overrules Chevron, the fishermen will have a chance to persuade a judge that the NMFS exceeded its power.

  The case probably will be argued in the fall and decided before June 30, 2024.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 20:20

• South Africa Lashes Out At US 'Megaphone Diplomacy, Bullying' After Arms For Russia Allegations
  South Africa Lashes Out At US ‘Megaphone Diplomacy, Bullying’ After Arms For Russia Allegations

  The South African government has rejected US allegations that it approved of an arms sale to Russia, with President Cyril Ramaphosa having ordered an official inquiry. The presidency’s office said Friday there was “no evidence” currently of such an arms sale, also with the foreign ministry saying there was “no record of an approved arms sale by the state to Russia related to the period/incident in question.”

  Further, one of Ramaphosa’s cabinet ministers, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, has blasted Washington’s “megaphone diplomacy” and vowed that South Africa will not be “bullied by the US”.

  

  “It is the US which has sanctions against Russia… they must not drag us into their issues with Russia,” Ntshavheni, told a public broadcaster. South Africa’s foreign ministry on Friday summoned the US Ambassador in order to lodge complaints and demand answers.

  The Kremlin for its part confirmed Friday that President Vladmir Putin had spoken to his South African counterpart by phone. The two pledged “mutually beneficial ties” after the massive Thursday allegation sent shockwaves across South Africa. 

  It was only on Thursday that the US ambassador to Pretoria accused South Africa of transferring arms to Russia in a covert naval operation, which further spotlighted President Ramaphosa and his country’s ties to the Kremlin and its position on the Ukraine war. Ambassador Reuben Brigety had told local media on Thursday the US believed that weapons and ammunition was loaded onto the Lady R, a sanctioned Russian vessel that docked in the Simon’s Town naval dockyard near Cape Town in December.

  “Among the things we noted was the docking of the cargo ship… which we are confident uploaded weapons and ammunition onto that vessel in Simon’s Town as it made its way back to Russia,” he said, in comments reported by South Africa’s News24. “The arming of the Russians is extremely serious, and we do not consider this issue to be resolved,” he added.

  Meanwhile, an unexpected foreign ministry statement was issued later in the day following the US ambassador being summoned. The claim is that the US has “apologized”: 

  South Africa’s foreign ministry said in a statement on Friday the U.S. ambassador to South Africa, Reuben Brigety, had “admitted that he crossed a line” and “apologized unreservedly” after he said a Russian ship had picked up weapons in South Africa last year, causing a diplomatic uproar. 

  But so far there’s been no official confirmation of this exchange from the US side. Interestingly, the whole episode may in the end push South Africa further into the Kremlin’s corner, given rising public anger over what may be seen as Washington interference in South African affairs, and as part of attempts to humiliate the Ramaphosa government.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 20:00

• US Bill Seeks To Combat Syria Normalization As King Salman Extends Assad Invitation
  US Bill Seeks To Combat Syria Normalization As King Salman Extends Assad Invitation

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  A bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House have introduced a bill aimed to combat Syria’s normalization with regional countries that would expand sanctions and prohibit the US from establishing diplomatic ties with the government of Bashar al-Assad.

  The bill was introduced by Reps. Joe Wilson (R-SC), Michael McCaul (R-TX), Steve Cohen (D-TN), and several other members of the House. The legislation comes as a response to Syria being readmitted to the Arab League, which has enraged US officials who want to keep Syria isolated.

  

  “The United States must use all of our leverage to stop normalization with Assad. I am proud to join my colleagues in mandating further sanctions against any form of investment in territory under the control of the Assad regime, as we remain committed to ensuring the Syrian people receive justice,” McCaul, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement on the bill.

  The bill seeks to expand the Caesar Act, which the US used to impose crippling economic sanctions on Syria in 2020 that are designed to prevent the country’s reconstruction. The sanctions have had a devastating impact on Syria’s civilian population, and the House recently voted overwhelmingly to keep enforcing them following an earthquake that killed thousands of Syrians.

  According to a summary of the bill, the legislation would “expand the Caesar Act by plugging loopholes in the original bill which made it hard to enforce.”

  The bill would “clarify the applicability of current sanctions to Syrian regime airlines, and to energy transactions – sending a clear sign to countries normalizing with Assad which are considering allowing Syrian regime airlines to land in their airports.”

  The legislation would require “an annual strategy for five years to counter normalization with the Assad regime by countries which have taken steps to normalize with the Assad regime.” It would prohibit any US federal agencies from “recognizing or normalizing with any government in Syria led by Bashar al-Assad.”

  Arab League readmits Syria

  What Next?
  1. Refugee return / jump-starting the Syrian economy
  2. Captagon drug trade
  3. Reducing foreign occupation & influence in Syria

  Immediate effects will be few b/c of US & EU sanctionshttps://t.co/Ml6JbhfWwy via @AlMonitor

  — Joshua Landis (@joshua_landis) May 7, 2023

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

  Despite Washington’s hardline position on normalization, regional countries are still following through with their plans. On Tuesday, Syria and Saudi Arabia said they were resuming diplomatic ties for the first time in over 10 years. The following day, Saudi King Salman invited Assad to attend an Arab League summit in Jeddah later this month.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 19:40

• California's Deficit Deepens To $32 Billion (14-Year-High)… And That's Before Reparations
  California’s Deficit Deepens To $32 Billion (14-Year-High)… And That’s Before Reparations

  California is now facing a $32 billion budget deficit, as the state faces a much deeper hole than previously projected, Bloomberg reports.

  

  “We are walking into a budget where we need to maintain our prudence,” said Governor Gavin Newsom (D) on Friday, warning that a recession could worsen the financial situation in the years to come.

  “That is an uncertainty that we must take very soberly and seriously as it relates to macro economic headwinds,” he added.

  The expected shortfall is $9.5 billion worse than a $22.5 billion January estimate, according to figures released today, and will be the biggest deficit since 2010…

  

  Newsom proposed a $224.1 billion general-fund budget for the fiscal year starting on the 1st of July, according to the report.

  Revenue has been hurt by the sinking fortunes of California’s wealthiest residents, who shoulder a disproportionate share of the tax burden. Roughly half of the state’s personal income taxes coming from the top 1% of earners.

  Thousands of workers have been laid off from California-based tech giants including Alphabet Inc., Meta Platforms Inc. and Twitter. The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, which mainly catered to the tech and venture capital sectors, along with two other California-based regional lenders earlier this year adds to the economic turbulence. -Bloomberg

  That said, the deficit is comparatively small vs. the cash crunch faced by the state during the last session, but this time Newsom will need to persuade Democrat lawmakers to make deep cuts – something which doesn’t come naturally to tax-and-spend liberals.

  Meanwhile, deadlines to file and pay taxes were extended by six months to October 16 in most counties in the state due to the severe winter storms earlier this year.

  State legislators – who must now negotiate over potential cuts to the budget – have until June 15 to pass one or they forfeit their pay for each day they are late.

  Earlier this year Newsom touted ‘transformative investments’ in housing, education, childcare, health care and climate programs as part of his preliminary spending plan.

  “This was not an easy budget, but I hope you see we will try to do our best to hold the line and take care of the most vulnerable and most needy, but still maintain prudence,” said Newsom.

  Is it any wonder, Newsom is quickly (and carefully) sidestepping the $800 billion in reparations costs that he has implicitly promised California’s black residents, preferriung instead to remind citizens that “its about more than just cash payments.”

  We suspect, there may well be a few (million) disillusioned voters who feel like they were promised cash for being black.

  As one minister declared at the hearing last week, “Tell Governor Newsom we’re coming. He knows me.”

  Did the virtue-signaling golden-boy just hit a reality wall?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 19:20

• The Voter Registration Machine Flipping The States Blue
  The Voter Registration Machine Flipping The States Blue

  Authored by Hayden Ludwig via American Greatness,

  New documents reveal the Center for Election Innovation and Research’s true purpose: Juicing Democrat registration in the states, thanks to data provided by ERIC.

  

  In modern elections, the candidate who can turn out the bigger base is usually the winner. Put differently, the campaign with better voter data holds the trump card.

  For more than a decade now, Democrats unquestionably have owned that trump card and used it to carve deep inroads into once solidly red states such as Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia, while Republicans have looked on in bafflement. It’s no secret why the Left is winning elections despite shrinking in the polls: They register new voters in droves, and conservatives do not.

  More than 160 million people cast a ballot in the 2020 election. Yet there may be as many as 60 million more eligible-but-unregistered individuals (EBUs) out there—people who could lawfully vote but may not until they register in their state. They’re typically hard to reach and politically disinterested. Yet the party that can tap into this electoral goldmine—that is, identify and reach these potential voters—would be unbeatable.

  For years, that party has been the Democrats. It may soon be the Republicans. Here’s why.

  Permanent Democratic Power

  In 2010, the Supreme Court ushered in a torrent of new political spending through its Citizens United v. FEC decision. “Progressives” who were convinced that big business would back Republicans to the hilt saw doom written on the wall. To counter this Republican tide, groups such as the Brennan Center proposed adding “millions of new voters onto the rolls through a modernized registration system—starting in 2010.”

  In short, they needed to balloon the Democratic Party’s ranks to survive a GOP onslaught—an onslaught that never came.

  “Voter registration modernization” proved a euphemism for inserting operatives into state election machinery. But EBU data is protected behind layers of federal privacy laws and across multiple state agencies (e.g. motor vehicle departments) and thus not available to political groups. It was Pew Charitable Trusts, a powerful left-of-center funder, that discovered the back door.

  Between 2010 and 2012, Pew incubated the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit that billed itself as the solution to an entirely different problem presented to the states: Maintaining their voter rolls, which are notoriously inaccurate and constantly in flux. For a fee, ERIC would graciously warehouse states’ voter roll data and identify potential double voters using sophisticated data-matching software.

  That’s the sales pitch, anyway. In truth, ERIC makes the removal of ineligible voters entirely optional and tedious, while mandating member states spend hundreds of thousands in taxpayer dollars to register new voters. Far from streamlining voter rolls, ERIC expands them, which is why non-ERIC states have cleaner rolls than their ERIC counterparts.

  More furtively, ERIC would also gain access to invaluable data on tens of millions of EBUs—a database that no other group in the world has access to. But how to use it?

  Project Get-Out-The-Vote

  We know from public records requests that ERIC soon established a data-sharing agreement with a heretofore obscure nonprofit, the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR). Amazingly, the corporate leftist media continues to claim this inconvenient fact is “without evidence.”

  ERIC and CEIR share a founder: David Becker, a partisan elections lawyer who previously worked for the far-left People for the American Way and the Justice Department’s voting rights arm. Becker is well known as a “hardcore leftist” who can’t “stand conservatives.” Yet Pew presented him as the nonpartisan face of its ERIC project.

  Becker spent four years persuading nearly two-thirds of the states to join ERIC before departing to found CEIR in 2016. Yet until recently, Becker remained a nonvoting member of ERIC’s board, courtesy of a carve-out in ERIC’s bylaws made specifically for him to ensure continued oversight of the ostensibly “neutral” and state-led organization.

  If ERIC is the face presentable to election officials, CEIR is Becker’s policy shop. The group was founded with seed capital from the Hewlett Foundation and eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, who routed the cash through Arabella Advisors’ massive “dark money” network.

  More funding may have come from Pew, which continued to fund CEIR’s “sister” group, ERIC, for years. We know that CEIR’s other co-founder, Amy Cohen, led Pew’s Google-funded Voting Information Project, part of the “voter registration modernization” push. Yet strangely, Cohen never appears in CEIR’s disclosures as a paid employee, perhaps because her salary was paid by Pew.

  CEIR supports vote-by-mail expansion and ever-earlier voting. It also pushes the lie that conservatives and Trump supporters are a threat to election workers while barring center-right reporters from its press conferences. Becker himself dismisses critics as “fueled by disinformation” because we “want our democracy to fail.”

  CEIR received $70 million from Mark Zuckerberg in 2020, funds that drove Democratic turnout in Maryland and helped subsidize ERIC’s voter registration mandate in other states. Pennsylvania received $13 million, Michigan $12 million, New York $5 million, Georgia $5.6 million, and Arizona $4.8 million. How each grant was spent remains largely unknown, despite watchdog groups’ best efforts.

  But CEIR’s founding documents reveal the truth about its origins. It was created to encourage ERIC membership and “work closely with ERIC” to register millions of new voters using exclusive EBU data in order to “turn non-voters into active participants” in future elections.

  Imagine having a picture-perfect map of everyone—both registered and unregistered—living within your state’s borders. A campaign knows that an individual’s age, race, county of residence, and marital status are enough to strongly indicate how that person will vote. How difficult would it be to only target your own party’s likely voters?

  Armed with this near-perfect picture of every person living in ERIC’s 32 member states—more than 200 million Americans—there is nothing stopping CEIR from doing it exactly that: registering only its preferred voters.

  If that sounds far-fetched, consider that in 2020 alone, the left-wing groups funneled $434 million through a vast array of tax-exempt nonprofits, such as Stacey Abrams’ Fair Fight in Georgia, that do nothing but register new Democrats. Virtually all of that money came from the Tides, Ford, Open Society, Wyss, and Buffett Foundations, among other donors supposedly engaged in charity.

  These organizations would be near-worthless without EBU data, which is only available through ERIC. So where do they acquire it? The smart money would pin it on Becker’s CEIR.

  CEIR operates virtually in the dark with little scrutiny from the “progressive” press, who are less interested in covering CEIR’s misdeeds than covering for them. Contrast that with the work of investigative reporters like Todd Shepherd of the right-leaning outlet Broad + Liberty. He recently reported that Pennsylvania transferred partial data profiles of hundreds of thousands of EBUs to CEIR in 2020. That information would have proved invaluable to partisan groups active in Pennsylvania that year. Yet CEIR refuses to say what it did with the trove of voter data.

  But CEIR’s founding documents give us every reason to believe this is precisely what it’s doing. It’s up to Becker and Co. to convince the public that it isn’t misusing this priceless data, despite having the means, motive, and opportunity to do so.

  A Right-Wing Wrecking Ball

  So what can conservatives do to level the playing field?

  A good axiom in warfare applies here: Turn your enemy’s strength into his greatest weakness. 

  Japan famously turned many Pacific islands into impenetrable fortresses in World War II and dared U.S. forces to attack them. Instead, we sailed around them to take weaker targets and let the garrisons starve. After Rome’s devastating defeat at the hands of Hannibal’s mighty army in the Second Punic War, Rome divided its legions into smaller forces to cover more ground. Like wolves wearing out a bear, they could be everywhere while the Carthaginians could not. Hannibal lost. 

  Likewise, we won’t defeat this powerful cabal in a single battle, but by nibbling it to death. The House should demand to know why the IRS refuses to strip these groups of their tax exemption for trespassing the law on biased voter registration campaigns. Conservative legislatures ought to hold hearings on out-of-state nonprofits running partisan registration drives in their jurisdiction. The states can tighten rules about who gets to register voters the same way they restrict ballot harvesting—either restricting it to family members or banning it altogether. Where there’s room for abuse, the Left will abuse the law.

  Watchdogs and citizens can and should file complaints with the IRS and FEC against these groups. Conservatives are used to being attacked for their political views; very few leftists have ever faced the same kind of scrutiny. They can also demand 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) groups’ annual Form 990 disclosures, which reveal how much they took in and spent. (Here is a template and some guidelines.)

  To date, nine states—Ohio, Florida, Missouri, West Virginia, Louisiana, Texas, Iowa, Alabama, and Alaska—have left or are about to leave ERIC. Their leaders know that they don’t need ERIC to maintain good voter rolls because they already have the tools necessary for the job.

  That leaves Arizona, Georgia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin for election integrity advocates to address.

  The good news? In almost all cases, the decision to leave ERIC is entirely within the purview of the governor and secretary of state. Red states with a blue governor can look to the others on this list for legislation to leave ERIC without the governor’s consent.

  Every one of these states to depart is one less state transmitting EBU data to the Left’s registration machine.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 19:00

• Shaq Argues He Was Never Properly Served, Asks Judge To Throw Out FTX-Related Lawsuit Against Him
  Shaq Argues He Was Never Properly Served, Asks Judge To Throw Out FTX-Related Lawsuit Against Him

  On today’s edition of “You Got Served: Shaq Style”, we present the curious case of NBA great Shaquille O’Neal and investors suing him, alleging that he “duped” them into the FTX collapse. 

  The legendary basketball player is arguing that lawyers who tried to serve him with the lawsuit instead “tossed” the document in front of his car while he was driving out of the gates of his home, according to Bloomberg. 

  Plaintiffs lawyers have now said that there have been “dozens of attempts” to try and serve him with the suit, including tracking him down at residences that he has in both Georgia and Texas, the report says. 

  Those attorneys were told that Shaq lives in the Bahamas a month ago, so they instead tried to serve Shaq digitally, sending him a link via his social media and arguing “that should be good enough given his status as an active user of Instagram and Twitter”. The lawyers argued that he was “clearly aware of the suit”, Bloomberg wrote. 

  

  Then on April 17, The Moskowitz Law Firm declared success, posting publicly on Twitter that they had served O’Neal: “UPDATE: Plaintiffs in the billion $ FTX class action case just served SHAQ outside his house. His home video cameras recorded our service and we made it very clear that he is not to destroy or erase any of these security tapes, because they must be preserved for our lawsuit.”

  But Shaq’s lawyers saw things otherwise, asking the judge to dismiss the suit against O’Neal because lawyers missed their deadline to serve him. 

  “Mr. O’Neal has not evaded service by failing to be at the residences where plaintiffs belatedly attempted service or by driving past strangers who approached his car,” his lawyers wrote. 

  Moskowitz responded: “The video will show Mr. O’Neal finally being served, after many months of hiding, as he attempts to possibly injure the process server. We expected better from an officer of the law. Mr. O’Neal and his lawyers need to stop running and finally deal with these serious allegations.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 18:40

• DeSantis Allies: Nominating Trump Hands Biden Control Of Congress
  DeSantis Allies: Nominating Trump Hands Biden Control Of Congress

  Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClear Wire,

  Allies of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis want Republicans watching Donald Trump from home tonight to remember that the former president is a loser. Ahead of his return to CNN, they warn that nominating Trump a third time won’t just cost the GOP the White House. It could hand Congress to Democrats.

  

  That is the argument from Never Back Down, the pro-DeSantis super PAC launched by former senior administration official Ken Cuccinelli and chaired by former Trump ally Adam Laxalt. In a polling memo shared exclusively with RealClearPolitics ahead of the Trump CNN townhall, they point to the last three election cycles to make the case that Trump is a net drag on the ticket.

  The topline from WPA pollster Chris Wilson: “The data suggest that if Trump were to become the 2024 nominee, he will likely cost the GOP control of the House and multiple winnable seats in the Senate.”

  It is a somber warning to the right ahead of a what promises to be an entertaining, no-holds barred brawl on the cable network the former president publicly says he hates the most. Trump knows how to make good television, Cuccinelli told RCP, predicting that there would be “plenty of entertainment value” when his former boss sits down with CNN in prime time, “but it comes with losses across the board. And he talks about coattails, he has negative coattails.”

  Controversy has always been a feature of the Trump show. For the right, the entertainment value is unmistakable when he “owns the libs,” castigating Democrats and liberal journalists alike. But Cuccinelli likens that to an unhealthy binge, warning that while “it is fun to have the buzz, the hangover isn’t so great.” Viral moments in prime time, he warned, won’t comfort conservatives after an election that hands Democrats unified control of government: “The potential for more harm here is enormous.”

  Jason Miller, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, dismissed that argument and suggested that the governor, who hasn’t yet declared a presidential bid, was too scared to make his own case in prime time. “Is this what candidates who are too chicken to do nationally broadcast town halls do with their time?” Miller asked before pointing RCP to a recent Washington Post-ABC News survey that showed Trump leading Biden, 44% to 38%, compared to DeSantis leading Biden, 42% to 27%.

  Primary voters will hear plenty about electability once the race begins in earnest, and many are likely already familiar with warnings about the down ballot detriment of Trump. In the memo, Wilson points to analysis of the 2018 and 2022 midterms that shows how the former president’s endorsement had “a meaningful negative effect” in both of those contests by mobilizing “Democratic donors and voters” and reducing “general support for Republican congressional candidates.”

  But the pollster and pro-DeSantis super PAC go farther. Never Back Down identifies 18 incumbent House Republicans in the memo who would likely lose, according to their analysis, if they run for reelection alongside Trump in 2024.

  Wilson points to April studies by Public Opinions Strategies that showed a Trump nomination reducing the standing of a generic Republican congressional nominee by 10 points in Arizona and 8 points in Georgia. If that trend holds, applying those numbers to the Cook Political Report’s Partisan Voting Index yields significant GOP losses that are enough to set Biden up with healthy majorities in the House and Senate going into a second term.

  The list of Republican incumbents “likely to lose if Trump is on the ballot” includes Michigan Rep. John James, who narrowly won a congressional district that has been solidly Republican for at least two decades, and Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke, who served as the former president’s interior secretary.

  With Trump at the head of the Republican party again, Wilson reports that control of the Senate could be out of reach, with GOP candidates having to overcome an estimated 10-point swing for Democrats in battleground states like Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

  Some conservatives have blamed Trump for focusing on himself and his grievances at the expense of Republicans. He was still litigating the last general election, for instance, rather than rallying the base to support former Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler in the Georgia runoff. Had Democrat Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona not balked at changing the filibuster rules in the Senate, Cuccinelli said Biden would’ve had a free hand to implement even more of his agenda.

  “But for those Democrats, Trump’s damage would have been permanent and far-reaching to a degree that it hasn’t even reached yet,” he said, arguing that Trump made possible Biden’s legislative success. “This was all self-inflicted by one person.”

  Deny Trump the nomination for a third time, Cuccinelli insisted, make DeSantis the face of the Republican party instead, and the GOP has a banner year.

  “No one else running, or looking at running, for president has a performance like DeSantis in supporting his team. No one can demonstrate that, or even make a case that they can perform that well,” Cuccinelli said of the governor’s reelection and Florida Republicans’ dominance in Florida. “He went from narrow legislative control to blow-out control.”

  “If he even came close to replicating that at the national level,” he concluded, “it is a blow-out year in 2024 for Republicans at every level of government.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 18:20

• Terra Luna Founder Do Kwon Released After Montenegro Court Accepts $436k Bail
  Terra Luna Founder Do Kwon Released After Montenegro Court Accepts $436k Bail

  Terraform Labs co-founder Do Kwon is set to be freed from jail pending trial after a court agreed to a €400,000 ($436,000) bail, according to a report in Montenegro news site Pobjeda. 

  “…and like that, he’s gone”…

  As CoinTelegraph’s Savannah Fortis reports, Montenegro has granted approval to the bail terms proposed by lawyers for Terra founder Do Kwon, who was charged with the criminal offense of document forgery under Montenegrin law.

  

  According to the official document released by local authorities on May 12, the court has accepted the proposed bail offer for Kwon and Han Chang-Joon – Terraform Labs’ chief financial officer – of 400,000 euros ($436,000) each.

  This is in addition to being put under house arrest instead of being taken into custody.

  According to the documents, if the house arrest is compromised, the bail will be entered into a “special section” of the court’s working budget.

  Additionally, the notice said it would be necessary to verify the authenticity of travel documents and identity cards, which were “allegedly” issued by the competent authorities of Belgium.

  This update comes only one day after Kwon’s lawyers filed their request for such conditions to the Montenegrin authorities.

  If the party is “unsatisfied” with the court decision, they have three days to repeal it.

  Kwon and Chang-Joon were arrested by Montenegrin authorities in March 2023 at Podgorica airport for allegedly using false documents. The two had their passports confiscated in South Korea, their country of origin, in October 2022.

  Interpol has wanted the Terraform Labs co-founder for his part in the Terra ecosystem’s $40 billion collapse in May 2022 that rocked the crypto industry.

  The current criminal trial in Montenegro is anticipated to start on June 16.

  Reports from May 10 revealed that South Korean authorities had frozen $176 million of Kwon’s personal assets as part of the ongoing criminal proceedings.

  In the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission has also brought civil charges against Kwon, accusing the executive of failing to “provide the public with full, fair and truthful disclosure as required for a host of crypto asset securities.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 18:00

• Why The Economic War Against Russia Has Failed
  Why The Economic War Against Russia Has Failed

  Via The Spectator,

  There was much mirth in the West this week when Vladimir Putin’s Victory Day parade through Red Square included just one tank, itself a relic from a museum. The inference was that Russia has lost so much military kit in Ukraine that it is a shadow of the military superpower the Soviet Union used to be.

  

  Russia has certainly borne heavy losses (although any country conducting a foreign war would presumably have its military hardware on active duty rather than on ceremonial parade). But we should avoid being smug. The truth is that the war is not going well for the West either – at least in one respect.

  When Putin sent tanks into Ukraine on 24 February last year, western countries rapidly adopted a two-pronged strategy.

  One prong was that they would not engage in direct military conflict, but would support Ukraine with weapons and other military equipment. Some countries were quicker than others, but this part of the strategy has been a remarkable success. Ukraine has managed to resist Russian forces, and to push them back from many areas, even if the outcome is still far from certain.

  The other prong, though, has turned out to be blunt: the plan to wage economic war with Moscow, unleashing financial shock and awe on a scale never seen before. Russia was to be cut off almost entirely, with sanctions and boycotts on all imports and exports save for humanitarian ones such as medicines. Putin’s Russia, went the theory, would be impoverished into surrender.

  Few people in the West are aware of how badly this aspect of the war is going. Europe has itself paid a high price to effect a partial boycott of Russian oil and gas. UK fossil fuel imports from Russia totalled £4.5 billion in 2021; in the year to January 2023 that was – officially – down to £1.3 billion. In 2020 the EU sourced 39 per cent of its gas and 23 per cent of its oil from Russia; in the third quarter of last year this was down to 15 per cent and 14 per cent respectively.

  But these figures do not explain the scale of the failure to damage the Russian economy. It soon became clear that while the West was keen on an economic war, the rest of the world was not. As its oil and gas exports to Europe fell, Russia quickly upped its exports to China and India – both of which preferred to buy oil at a discount than to make a stand against the invasion of Ukraine. Worse, some of the Russian oil exported to India appears to have been siphoned back to Europe, with a rise in the number of ships taking refined oil from India through the Suez Canal.

  There seems to be some siphoning in the other direction, too. An investigation by the German newspaper Bild has uncovered a disturbing growth in exports to countries bordering Russia. The importing of German motor vehicles to Kazakhstan, for example, rose by 507 per cent between 2021 and 2022 and to Armenia by 761 per cent. Exports of chemical products to Armenia increased by 110 per cent and to Kazakhstan by 129 per cent. Sales of electrical and computer equipment to Armenia are up 343 per cent. What happens to these goods once they reach these former Soviet republics is not easy to establish, but one likely explanation is that they end up in Russia as diverted trade flows. And even if such commodities are not formally being re-exported, many Russian citizens retain visa-free access to those countries and are able to take goods across the border.

  The West has had a policy of trying to target wealthy Russians in particular with economic sanctions. But ironically they are the people who can most easily access western goods through diverted trade. It is they who have dual passports; they who can afford to travel abroad in order to shop for their luxury goods. Short of a wholesale global boycott against Russia, it is very hard to prevent western-made goods reaching the hands of wealthy Russians.

  The West embarked on its sanctions war with an exaggerated sense of its own influence around the world. As we have discovered, non-western countries lack the will to impose sanctions on either Russia or on Russian oligarchs. The results of the miscalculation are there for all to see. In April last year, the IMF forecast that the Russian economy would contract by 8.5 per cent in 2022 and by a further 2.3 per cent this year. As it turned out, GDP fell by just 2.1 per cent last year, and this year the IMF is forecasting a small rise of 0.7 per cent. And that is all in spite of the war in Ukraine going much more badly than many imagined it would in February of last year. The Russian economy has not been destroyed; it has merely been reconfigured, reorientated to look eastwards and southwards rather than westwards.

  It was not necessarily wrong to declare economic war on Russia. The country has suffered harm from western sanctions, even if nothing like on the scale that we imagined we could inflict. But if the West is thinking that in future it can fight wars purely by economic means, without bombs or bullets, it is badly mistaken.

  Western military equipment has allowed Ukraine to mount a David vs Goliath battle which it may yet win – and certainly to avoid annexation by Putin. As for economic sanctions, however, we will have to think again.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 17:40

• Anderson Cooper: 'You Have Every Right Never To Watch CNN Again' After Trump Town Hall
  Anderson Cooper: ‘You Have Every Right Never To Watch CNN Again’ After Trump Town Hall

  The chaos going on at CNN after Wednesday night’s town hall featuring former President Trump is the gift that keeps on giving.

  

  “It was a total debacle and I’ve never been more ashamed to work at CNN,” one prominent on-air talent told The Hill on Thursday. “I don’t think anybody came out looking good. This is entirely a corporate and management failure. They should have anticipated how out of control Trump would be … to think he was going to act more presidential in that kind of setting is just naivety on a galactic scale.”

  According to CNN media reporter Oliver Darcy, CEO Chris Licht was “facing a fury of criticism — both internally and externally over the event.”

  “And CNN aired it all. On and on it went. It felt like 2016 all over again. It was Trump’s unhinged social media feed brought to life on stage,” Darcy ranted. “And Collins was put in an uncomfortable position, given the town hall was conducted in front of a Republican audience that applauded Trump, giving a sense of unintended endorsement to his shameful antics.”

  Plenty of attention was being paid Thursday to the audience at the town hall, which was highly supportive of Trump.  

  “It felt like we got some of these people from a MAGA rally,” the on-air talent said.  

  CNN on Thursday clarified it had curated the audience through community, student politics and government, faith groups, as well as agriculture and education organizations. The school and campaign also invited guests, the network said.  

  Trump, a day before the event, said CNN had made his campaign “an offer [he] couldn’t refuse,” so he agreed to participate in the town hall. -The Hill

  Following the event, hosts Anderson Cooper and Jake Tapper were absolutely beside themselves – with Tapper seemingly on the verge of tears.

  CNN talking heads VERY triggered over Trump tonight. pic.twitter.com/W7AAku8AyQ

  — The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) May 11, 2023

  And on Thursday, Cooper apologized to the network’s audience, telling viewers they have “every right to be outraged.” 

  “You have every right to be outraged today and angry and never watch this network again,” said Cooper. “But do you think staying in your silo and only listening to people you agree with is going to make that person go away? If we all only listen to those we agree with, it may actually do the opposite. If lies are allowed to go unchecked as imperfect as our ability to check them is on a stage in real time, those lies continue, and those lies spread. If you’re angry or upset, I understand, but you have the power to do something about it. You can actually get involved. You can make a difference, whatever side of the aisle you’re on. After last night, none of us can say I didn’t know what’s out there. I didn’t know what’s coming. We asked Republican Senators for their thoughts about last night. Some preferred not to say anything. Others did.”

  JUST IN: Anderson Cooper gives wild opening monologue, telling his audience he understands if they never watch CNN ever again.

  “You have every right to be outraged today and angry and never watch this network again. But do you think staying in your silo and only listening to… pic.twitter.com/xZXYSwtAoF

  — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) May 12, 2023

  On MSNBC, host Joe Scarborough called the town hall “disgraceful on every level.”

  “I wouldn’t say it’s dangerous for democracy because we passed that a long time ago, but it showed the corrosive effects of Trumpism over eight years. And I’ve got to say the most shocking part was an audience that cheered on a president who tried to overturn American democracy. An audience that mocked and ridiculed a woman who a jury of Donald Trump’s peers found had been sexually assaulted. Those Americans there last night turned that into a punchline. Laughed and dismissed cops getting the s*** kicked out of them on January 6th, getting beaten up over and over again. Calling a cop a thug who was actually trying to stop people on the House floor from being killed. I could just go on and on.” -Joe Scarborough

  Watch:

  Amazing how threatened they are by free speech, eh?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 17:20

• It's Official: Top NBCUni Ad Exec And World Economic Forum Taskforce Chair Is Twitter's New CEO
  It’s Official: Top NBCUni Ad Exec And World Economic Forum Taskforce Chair Is Twitter’s New CEO

  Update: It’s official – moments ago NBC confirmed that its head of advertising is leaving the company…

  NBCUniversal today announced that Linda Yaccarino is leaving the company, effective immediately. Mark Marshall, currently President, Advertising Sales and Client Partnerships, will become interim Chairman of NBCUniversal’s Advertising and Partnerships group, reporting to Mark Lazarus, Chairman, NBCUniversal Television and Streaming.

  Mike Cavanagh, President of Comcast Corporation said, “We are grateful for Linda Yaccarino’s leadership of NBCUniversal’s Advertising Sales business, and for the innovative team and platform she has built. Linda has made countless contributions to the company during her twelve year tenure, and we wish her the best.”

  Linda Yaccarino said, “It has been an absolute honor to be part of Comcast NBCUniversal and lead the most incredible team. We’ve transformed our company and the entire industry—and I am so proud of what we’ve accomplished together, and grateful to my colleagues and mentors, especially Brian Roberts, Mike Cavanagh and the entire NBCU leadership team.”

  Mark Lazarus was named Chairman, NBCUniversal Telvision and Streaming in May

  Musk has finally tweeted to confirm her position, noting that Yaccarino will focus primarily on business operations, while he will focus on product design & new technology

  I am excited to welcome Linda Yaccarino as the new CEO of Twitter!@LindaYacc will focus primarily on business operations, while I focus on product design & new technology.

  Looking forward to working with Linda to transform this platform into X, the everything app. https://t.co/TiSJtTWuky

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 12, 2023

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

  Paul Joseph Watson breaks down the two sides’ view on this hire…

  * * *

  Are Twitter’s days of encouraging free speech and independent thought numbered… or is Musk, just days after unveiling that Tucker is joining, playing 4D chess?

  Just hours after Elon Musk announced he had picked a new female Twitter CEO candidate, the WSJ revealed the identity of the person in talks to become the next CEO of the world’s most important social network: it is Linda Yaccarino, who is currently NBCUniversal’s influential head of advertising.

  

  Yaccarino, who is chairman of global advertising and partnerships at NBCU, has been with NBCU for more than a decade, where she has been an industry advocate for finding better ways to measure the effectiveness of advertising. As head of NBCU’s advertising sales, she was key in the launch of the company’s ad-supported Peacock streaming service.

  Elon Musk, Twitter’s owner, said in a tweet Thursday that he had hired a new CEO, but didn’t say who it was. “She will be starting in ~6 weeks!” Mr. Musk said in the tweet.

  In some ways, Musk’s pick of Yaccarino is not a surprise: as Chair of the Advertising Council’s Board of Directors and arguably NBCU’s top advertising exec, she is meant to fill a critical void at the new Twitter: that of advertising. After all, despite having massive traffic, Musk’s social network – which as a reminder cost him $44 billion – has been hemorhaging ad revenue as woke brands have abandoned the website.

  Of the top 100 advertisers on Twitter before Mr. Musk bought the company, 37 spent nothing on Twitter advertising during the first quarter of this year, according to market-intelligence firm Sensor Tower, while an additional 24 brands reduced their average monthly Twitter ad spending by 80% or more.

  As such, it will be Yaccarino’s job to convince advertisers to return: Yaccarino, who oversees roughly $13 billion in annual ad revenue, is well-known for her tight relationship with marketers and ad agencies. Yaccarino has a reputation for hard-nosed negotiating tactics, and media buyers have described her as the “velvet hammer.”

  Musk’s announcement of the new CEO came days before one of the biggest events of the year for NBCU, the company’s annual pitch event for advertisers, known as the upfront, which is scheduled for Monday in New York. And according to the WSJ, an NBCU spokesman said Ms. Yaccarino is in back-to-back rehearsals for NBCU’s upfront.

  On the other hand, the hiring of Yaccarino to head the social network which in recent months has become the bane of liberals and progressives through its encouragement of free speech and independent thought, both of which are despised and suppressed by the left, could be a problem.

  For one, according to her LInkedIn profile, Yaccarino is the “Chairman of the WEF’s Taskforce on Future of Work and sits on the WEF’s Media, Entertainment and Culture Industry Governors Steering Committee. She is also highly engaged with the Value in Media initiative.” Most recently, she delivered the following speech in Jan 2020: ‘World Economic Forum: Creating the Workplace of the Future by Focusing on People.”

  

  Additionally, in 2014 Yaccarino joined the Ad Council Board of Directors and became a member of the Executive Committee in 2015. She first served as Vice Chair before her appointment to Board Chair from 2021-2022.

  And then there’s this: in 2021-2022, as Ad Council Chair, “Yaccarino partnered with the business community, the White House, and government agencies to create a COVID-19 vaccination campaign, featuring Pope Francis and reaching over 200 million Americans.”

  Know the facts! The @AdCouncil is working to inform Americans on why we must embrace an FDA-approved #Covid vaccine and how to go about it. We’re almost there, let’s cross the finish line. @lisaesherman https://t.co/AUv9tf9IFb

  — Linda Yaccarino (@lindayacc) November 24, 2020

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

  And finally:

  As an industry advocate, Yaccarino has called for a return to values-based, trusted partnerships, spotlighting the most important issues facing her colleagues and peers. As 2021-2022 Ad Council Chair, Yaccarino partnered with the business community, the White House, and government agencies to create a COVID-19 vaccination campaign, featuring Pope Francis and reaching over 200 million Americans. At NBCU, she uses the power of media to advance equity and helps to launch DEI-focused initiatives, including BOLD, a program for employing veterans; #ShesMy, a campaign to uplift women and girls; Scene in Color, a collaboration with Target to elevate emerging BIPOC film creatives; and a partnership with Telemundo to release a Latina-centric storytelling guide. 

  Yes! It’s time for action and working towards a more inclusive society. https://t.co/IMQreJ1K9P

  I nominate @laura_molen @MarkMarshallNBC @joefbenarroch @OsAnsari @kknorring

  — Linda Yaccarino (@lindayacc) October 21, 2020

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

  Things get a little more complicated however, when one considers that in May 2018 Trump Named Yaccarino (alongside Bill Belichick and a bunch of other folks) to a two-year term on the President’s Council on Sports, Fitness and Nutrition. It wasn’t immediately clear how long she lasted in this particular role.

  Bottom line: despite that last rather odd detour, which can be attributed to Trump’s habitual lack of due diligence, Yaccarino appears to be the perfect establishment hire, one who will help Twitter recover most of its lost ad revenue… the trade-off may very well be that in the process twitter may just become the same company it was before its acqusition by Trump.

  In response to the news of her hiring, the outcry has been – as one would imagine – extremely polarized.

  The ostensible new Twitter CEO is a literal Cathedral propagandist who is an executive at NBC, the WEF, and the Ad Council creating vaccine propaganda pic.twitter.com/cngnBxSufO

  — America’s Conscience (@saveusculture) May 11, 2023

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

  Please, @elonmusk, tell me you’re trolling us, Linda Yaccarino!
  You may as well put Rachel Maddow in charge of Twitter pic.twitter.com/jy5jNS08sq

  — Vince Langman (@LangmanVince) May 12, 2023

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

  This is reportedly the new Twitter CEO.

  Pro- mask, pro-vaxx, and a participant in The World Economic Forum.

  Under her Twitter, The #DiedSuddenly film would have never been allowed to see the light of day. @elonmusk if this is true- please reconsider this decision. pic.twitter.com/H9qqjdxH0f

  — DiedSuddenly (@DiedSuddenly_) May 12, 2023

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

  In Linda Yaccarino, Elon Musk gets a CEO who is a seasoned ad executive who generally shares his political leanings.

  But she’s also the Chairman of a World Economic Forum task force so she can comfortably liaise with Twitter’s current investors and advertisers around the world.

  — Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) May 11, 2023

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

  Linda Yaccarino (@lindayacc), the woman who is reportedly the new CEO of Twitter, follows:

  – Chaya Raichik
  – Jesse Watters
  – Michael Shellenberger
  – Ron DeSantis
  – The Babylon Bee
  – Giorgia Meloni
  – Maye Musk
  – Catturd
  – Vivek Ramaswamy
  – Tulsi Gabbard
  – Bari Weiss

  — Max Berger (@maxberger) May 11, 2023

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

  BREAKING: It appears that the new CEO of Twitter will be Linda Yaccarino, if the Wall Street Journal’s reporting is correct.

  People are already unfairly attacking her for her ties to different organizations and because she follows certain accounts here on Twitter.

  The new CEO… pic.twitter.com/Cm6WKRAqEy

  — Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) May 12, 2023

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

  JUST KIDDING!!

  It looks like Trump ally Linda Yaccarino will be taking over.

  So don’t expect the trolling, hate speech, disinformation or criminal acts committed on this site to stop anytime soon! https://t.co/B40PDiOtzW

  — Whistleblower Rebekah Jones (@GeoRebekah) May 12, 2023

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

  If true, Linda Yaccarino would be a great CEO of Twitter. She gets the ad business and understands the needs of advertisers, can talk their language (ROI/brand safety) and will speak her mind while being deferential. $TSLA @elonmusk https://t.co/qIh2ktrc4r

  — Gary Black (@garyblack00) May 11, 2023

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

  Elon Musk is reportedly in talks to bring Linda Yaccarino, “Top World Economic Forum Official,” on board as his new CEO of Twitter.

  Anyone else getting major Twitter 1.0 vibes or is it just me? pic.twitter.com/yTDrUWhNPr

  — Jason Jones (@jonesville) May 12, 2023

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

  @elonmusk don’t Bud Light yourself

  — Dom (@brutusbrandy) May 12, 2023

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

  Finally, the boss himself:

  The commitment to open source transparency and accepting a wide range of viewpoints remains unchanged

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 12, 2023

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

  In conclusion, while it is certainly possible that Musk is playing 4D chess here, a prevailing sentiment among the replies is that “Twitter was fun for a few months. See you guys in the gulag.” One can only hope that it is wrong.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/12/2023 – 17:05

Digest powered by RSS Digest