- Signatories Of Hunter Biden Laptop Letter Now Demand Greater Domestic Surveillance
Signatories Of Hunter Biden Laptop Letter Now Demand Greater Domestic Surveillance
Authored by Eric Lundrum via American Greatness,
A handful of the 51 signatories of the debunked letter which falsely called Hunter Biden’s laptop “Russian disinformation” are now calling on Congress to expand the scope of domestic surveillance in the United States…
As reported by the Daily Caller, the letter to House lawmakers on Tuesday was signed by former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Deputy Director for the National Security Agency (NSA) Richard Ledgett, former Deputy CIA Director Michael Morell, former CIA Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash, and former NSA General Counsel Glenn Gerstell. All five men had previously signed the controversial letter in 2020 claiming, without evidence, that information found on the recently-unearthed laptop of Hunter Biden was all “Russian propaganda” meant to influence the 2020 election.
In their new letter, the former intelligence community officials voiced their opposition to a bill that would reduce the ability of intelligence agencies to spy on Americans without a warrant. At the same time, they offered up praise for a bill that would allow surveillance of any location where internet access is provided.
“We cannot hamstring the U.S. Intelligence Community either by failing to renew Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or by limiting it in ways that would make it difficult for the government to protect Americans,” the letter reads in part.
“To be clear, Section 702 saves American lives and helps keep Americans safe from international terrorist attacks, foreign cyberattacks, overseas fentanyl suppliers, and other threats to our national security. There’s no substitute for it.”
In recent weeks, the House Judiciary Committee has been working on possible reforms to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the controversial provision which ultimately allowed the intelligence agencies to spy on then-candidate Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016, under the false pretenses that he was “colluding” with Russia.
“Reasonable minds might disagree on the details of the various reforms that might be needed, even as included in the [House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] bill,” they add.
“But it presents a rigorous approach to the challenges and attempts in a responsible way to balance privacy protections and our nation’s safety.”
Despite the claims in their 2020 letter, numerous mainstream media outlets eventually verified the authenticity of Hunter’s laptop and all of the information contained on it, which included details about Hunter’s numerous foreign business deals, his efforts to sell access to his father while he was Vice President, as well as his frequent drug use and solicitation of prostitutes, among other scandalous revelations.
It has since been revealed that the letter was orchestrated by the Biden campaign, under the direction of then-campaign advisor Antony Blinken, who now serves as Biden’s Secretary of State.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 23:40 - Trump Demands Action After 20% Of Mail-in Voters Admit To Fraud In 2020 Election Survey
Trump Demands Action After 20% Of Mail-in Voters Admit To Fraud In 2020 Election Survey
Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Former President Donald Trump issued an urgent call for action to his fellow Republicans over what he called “the biggest story of the year,” namely a survey showing that 20 percent of mail-in voters admitted to committing at least one kind of voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Former President Donald Trump speaks to reporters in New York City, on Dec. 7, 2023. (Eduardo Munoz Alvarez-Pool/Getty Images) The Heartland/Rasmussen poll, released on Dec. 12, suggests concerning levels of voter fraud in the 2020 election, bolstering President Trump’s longstanding claim that he was cheated out of a victory amid an explosion in mail-in ballots combined with state-level moves by the courts that made it easier to cheat.
The new survey shows 17 percent of mail-in voters admitting to voting in a state where they are no longer permanent residents; 21 percent filling out ballots for others; 17 percent signing ballots for family members without consent, and 8 percent reporting offers of “pay” or “reward” for their vote.
What’s more, 10 percent of all respondents to the survey (carried on a representative sample of 1,085 likely voters) said they know a friend, family member, co-worker, or other acquaintance who admitted to casting a mail-in ballot fraudulently.
Over 43 percent of 2020 votes were cast by mail, which is the highest percentage in U.S. history.
“Taken together, the results of these survey questions appear to show that voter fraud was widespread in the 2020 election, especially among those who cast mail-in ballots,” the Heartland Institute, a conservative and libertarian public policy think tank, said in a statement.
‘Biggest Story of The Year’
President Trump, who is the frontrunner for the GOP nomination in the 2024 race for the White House, took to social media to call on Republicans to take action in response to the survey’s shocking results.
“This is the biggest story of the year, and Republicans must do something about it,” the former president wrote. Further, he suggested that unless something is done quickly to address the problem of voter fraud, the issue will cast a pall over the 2024 election.
“Have to make a move now,” President Trump continued. “Get tough, get smart. Our country is being stolen!“
While Democrats and their allies claim that election fraud is little more than a myth, President Trump has said for years that voter fraud is a pervasive problem in U.S. politics —and insists he was robbed of a win in the 2020 election.
In a recent interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” the former president spoke about what went into his decision to challenge the results.
“I was listening to different people. And when I added it all up, the election was rigged,” he said, adding that it was his choice to contest the results because “I won the election.”
‘Nothing Short of Stunning’
While Democrats and their allies, along with some in the scientific community, argue that voter fraud was so small in the 2020 elections as to be negligible, the findings of the Heartland/Rasmussen survey bolster President Trump’s claims that he was robbed of victory.
Justin Haskins, the director of Heartland’s Socialism Research Center and primary author of the Heartland/Rasmussen survey, said in a statement that the results of the poll are “nothing short of stunning.”
“For the past three years, Americans have repeatedly been told that the 2020 election was the most secure in history. But if this poll’s findings are reflective of reality, the exact opposite is true,” Mr. Haskins said. “This conclusion isn’t based on conspiracy theories or suspect evidence, but rather from the responses made directly by the voters themselves.”
Some progress has been made on election integrity measures in over a dozen states in the aftermath of the 2020 election, Mr. Haskins acknowledged. He insisted, however, that “much more” work is needed in most parts of the country to bolster the integrity of elections—and voter confidence that the results reflect the actual will of the people.
“If America’s election laws do not improve soon, voters and politicians will continue to question the truthfulness and fairness of all future elections,” Mr. Haskins said.
Some states have reformed their laws and procedures amid widespread vote integrity worries prompted by the 2020 presidential election controversy. However, according to conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, more needs to be done.
The group’s Election Integrity Scorecard shows that not a single state in the country has a perfect score in a checklist of 12 possible problem spots, including voter ID, accuracy of voter registration lists, and absentee ballot management.
Tennessee has the best election integrity procedures in the country, with a score of 88 (out of a possible 100), followed by Georgia at 84, Alabama at 82, and Missouri at 83.
Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, recently wrote that “no state in the country has a perfect score of 100, which means everyone has some work to do.”
In order to make elections more secure and build shore-up public confidence that the declared results are legitimate, states should ensure that election officials maintain current, accurate voter rolls, he argues.
Further, they should require photo identification to cast a vote, both in person and absentee, according to Mr. Von Spakovsky, who also argues for a ban on partisan funding of state and local election offices.
He pointed to the Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database as a constantly updated record of various cases of voter fraud from across the country.
“In an era of razor-thin elections, guarding against this type of illegal behavior, as well as errors made by election officials, is especially important,” he wrote.
“In 2024, it could prove critical.“
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 23:00 - NYC Finance Jobs Hit Twenty-Year High
NYC Finance Jobs Hit Twenty-Year High
A new report from the New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli reveals that the number of securities-industry workers in New York City has hit a twenty-year high – even as layoffs in the banking industry rise and deal activity continues to slide.
DiNapoli said the total headcount at securities firms in NYC increased to 195,100 (based on year-to-date data), the highest level in over 20 years.
He added, “Whether firms will retain these additional positions as profits return to normal remains to be seen. Lower profits have also resulted in smaller bonuses, with the bonus pool estimated to be down 21% yearly, meaning a decline in related income tax revenue for the City and State.”
Revenues from commissions and underwriting activities plunged by 46.8% over the last two years, as the high cost of credit triggered a massive slowdown in equity issuances, debt issuances, and mergers and acquisitions.
Global debt offerings fell from $10.3 trillion in 2021 to $8.3 trillion in 2022 to $4.7 trillion in the first half of 2023.
Equity insurances have also tumbled.
Global M&A activity has crashed.
“These are volatile times in America and globally, and Wall Street’s relatively stable profits and employment levels could change quickly,” DiNapoli said in a statement to Bloomberg.
A slide in deal flow has softened earnings and revenues for major banks, including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs, who have all trimmed their respective headcount.
He continued, “Further declines could weaken New York’s tax revenue from the securities industry and have repercussions for our state and city budgets.”
While markets have expected the Federal Reserve to hold interest rates at elevated levels for an extended period, it appears the Fed has signaled a major dovish shift on Wednesday, with rates markets pricing in more than five cuts next year.
The current freeze in M&A activity could thaw in 2024.
Fed is frontloading rate cuts into the 2024 election year, at the expense of post-election 2025. https://t.co/NUY2GAjWyE
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Will 2025 be another bust year for Wall Street?
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 22:40 - Biden Scores Win As Supreme Court Throws Out Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Cases
Biden Scores Win As Supreme Court Throws Out Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Cases
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The Supreme Court on Dec. 11 threw out three cases involving federal COVID-19 vaccine mandates, handing a win to President Joe Biden and his administration.
President Joe Biden speaks during a news conference with UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in the East Room of the White House in Washington on June 8, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times) In unsigned rulings, the justices said that rulings against mandates imposed by President Biden and the U.S. military have been vacated.
They also remanded the cases back to lower courts with instructions for the courts to vacate preliminary injunctions that had been in place against the administration as moot.
The decisions mean that the rulings won’t act as precedent in future vaccine mandate cases.
“We believe the United States Constitution clearly does not permit the federal government to force federal workers—or any law abiding citizen—to inject their bodies with something against their will. In fact, the freedom to control your own body and your own medical information is so basic that, without those liberties, it is impossible to truly be ‘free’ at all,” Marcus Thornton, president of Feds for Freedom, said in a statement. “We are disappointed that the Supreme Court dodged these important Constitutional arguments and instead chose to vacate our case on technicalities.“
One case was brought by Feds for Freedom and involved President Biden’s mandate for federal employees. The mandate was imposed in 2021, with the president claiming that vaccination was the “best way to slow the spread of COVID-19” and that requiring vaccination would “promote the health and safety of the federal workforce and the efficiency of the civil service.”
An appeals court this year reinforced a preliminary injunction entered by a lower court, ruling that the court system—not a board composed of people appointed by the president—has jurisdiction over the case.
U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown had ruled previously that the president lacked the authority to impose the vaccine mandate.
Another case was brought by a federal worker who recovered from COVID-19 and thus enjoyed some protection against the illness but was still being forced to receive a vaccination under President Biden’s mandate because the government refused to formally recognize the post-infection protection. Jason Payne, the worker, said the mandate exceeded President Biden’s authority.
In the third case, federal judges ruled that the U.S. Air Force’s handling of its mandate was illegal, and prevented the branch from taking disciplinary action against members who had requested religious exemptions.
Government lawyers urged the Supreme Court to rule the decisions in these cases as moot, given that the vaccine mandates were ended.
“Consistent with this court’s ordinary practice under such circumstances, the court should grant the petition for a writ of certiorari, vacate the judgment below, and remand with instructions to direct the district court to dismiss its order granting a preliminary injunction as moot,” the lawyers wrote in one petition to the court.
Mr. Payne’s lawyers also asked for the decisions to be ruled as moot, after two courts ruled against him and following the rescinding of the mandate that affected him.
Lawyers for the other federal workers and for the military members opposed the request.
The government was asking the Supreme Court to endorse a “heads we win, tails you get vacated” version of a previous court decision, United States v. Munsingwear, lawyers for the federal workers wrote in one brief. If granted, the government would be able to “litigate to the hilt in both district and circuit court and—only if they lose—then decline to seek substantive review from this court and instead moot the case and ask this court to erase the circuit court loss from the books,” according to the brief.
Lawyers for the military members noted that Congress forced the military to rescind its mandate, but that the legislation didn’t prevent the Department of Defense from issuing another mandate.
Government lawyers said the mandates were rescinded because the pandemic situation had changed, not because they were challenged. They also argued that the mandates “cannot be reasonably expected to recur.”
Lawyers for the military members said that the claim was “in serious tension” with the demand to vacate the rulings under the Munsingwear precedent, given that the purpose of such a move “is to clear the path for future re-litigation without res judicata concerns.”
None of the Supreme Court justices except for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who was appointed by President Biden, explained their decisions on the cases.
“Although I would require that the party seeking vacatur establish equitable entitlement to that remedy, I accede to vacatur here based on the court’s established practice when the mootness occurs through the unilateral action of the party that prevailed in the lower court,” she said in regard to Mr. Payne’s case.
In the two other cases, Justice Jackson said that the government hadn’t “established equitable entitlement” to vacatur, but that she concurred with the overall judgment from her colleagues.
She cited a Dec. 5 decision in which the court ruled against a civil rights activist who sought a ruling that would force hotels to make information for disabled people publicly available.
Justice Jackson sided with the majority in that ruling but contested the majority’s decision to vacate a lower court ruling, arguing that vacatur—or the setting aside of the judgment—shouldn’t be granted automatically.
“Automatic vacatur plainly flouts the requirement of an individualized, circumstance-driven fairness evaluation, which, as I have explained, is the hallmark of an equitable remedy,” she wrote.
It’s also “flatly inconsistent with our common-law tradition of case-by-case adjudication, which ‘assumes that judicial decisions are valuable and should not be cast aside lightly,'” Justice Jackson said, quoting from yet another ruling.
“As a general matter, I believe that a party who claims equitable entitlement to vacatur must explain what harm—other than having to accept the law as the lower court stated it—flows from the inability to appeal the lower court decision.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 22:20 - "Most Of The World Was Against Me": Djokovic Says He's Not Anti-Vaccine, But 'Pro-Freedom To Choose'
“Most Of The World Was Against Me”: Djokovic Says He’s Not Anti-Vaccine, But ‘Pro-Freedom To Choose’
The world’s #1 tennis player Novak Djokovic says that he’s not against vaccination – he’s for people’s right to choose for themselves.
Novak Djokovic of Serbia hits a forehand against Daniil Medvedev of Russia (not pictured) in the men’s singles final on day fourteen of the 2021 U.S. Open tennis tournament at USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center in Flushing, New York, on Sept. 12, 2021. (Danielle Parhizkaran/USA TODAY Sports via Reuters) Djokovic, who faced significant backlash for his vaccination status, especially in Australia, told 60 Minutes about the ordeal, saying he was “basically declared as a villain of the world,” after refusing to take the Covid-19 vaccine in early 2022. While he initially received a vaccine exemption to play in the Australian Open, public outcry led to Australian immigration minister Alex Hawke revoking his visa, barring him from competition, and then deporting the tennis pro on the grounds that he was a “high-profile unvaccinated individual” who could influence public sentiment about vaccination.
“People tried to, you know, declare me as an anti-vax. I’m not anti-vax. Nor I am pro-vax. I’m pro-freedom to choose,” he said.
NEW – Tennis champion Novak Djokovic: “I’m not anti-vax. Nor I am pro-vax. I’m pro-freedom to choose.”pic.twitter.com/rqBMsmr3Xj
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 9, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
“Most of the world [was] against me. I had that kind of experience on the tennis court with crowds that were not maybe cheering me on. But I never had this particular experience before in my life,” he continued.
This decision, which led to Djokovic’s exclusion from the Australian Open and subsequent U.S. Open, was met with a mix of criticism and support, while the legal battle that ensued raised questions about the role of public figures in influencing health decisions.
Djokovic’s lawyers argued that his presence was not a risk to public health and that the visa cancellation could actually fuel anti-vaccination sentiment. However, the court sided with the minister, suggesting Djokovic’s choices could indeed foster anti-vaccination views.
Greg Barns S.C., spokesman for the Australian Lawyers Alliance, described the visa ban as “troubling” in a free society. Yet, the Australian government later overturned the ban, allowing Djokovic to participate in the 2023 Australian Open.
Djokovic made a perfectly reasonable personal health decision that had no impact on the spread of COVID, but because he contradicted the (incorrect) public health/media industrial complex consensus, he was declared a villain
One of the most embarrassing time periods in history https://t.co/tlpRxZv2Yb
— Ian Miller (@ianmSC) December 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Amidst this controversy, a broader conversation emerged about vaccinating athletes. A letter by cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough and structural biologist Panagis Polykretis revealed a startling number of cardiac arrests and major medical issues in vaccinated athletes, raising concerns about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in high-performance sports.
“Important reminder that Djokovic has NEVER said he was against vaccines. He even confirmed that he had all the vaccines as a child but when it came to the brand new Covid vaccine he was an advocate of freedom of choice and that everyone should be free to make their own decisions,” said Pavvy G, a tennis blogger, in a Dec. 9 post on X, the Epoch Times reports.
Moderna, a key player in vaccine development, reportedly placed Djokovic on a “vaccine misinformation” watch list. His victory at the Moderna-sponsored U.S. Open was seen by some as a challenge to vaccine mandates, with social media users highlighting the irony of his unvaccinated status in a tournament sponsored by a leading vaccine manufacturer.
The pharma company claimed that unvaccinated people were celebrating his win, with social media users “mockingly” pointing out that Moderna was the sponsor of the competition. The firm said that the “optics of Djokovic” bolster “anti-vaccine claims that vaccines—and mandates—are unnecessary.” -Epoch Times
Bravo for standing your ground, Novak.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 22:00 - Florida High School Fined For Letting Boy Play On Female Sports Team
Florida High School Fined For Letting Boy Play On Female Sports Team
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
A Florida high school has been fined for letting a boy who claims he’s a girl play on a female sports team.
Monarch High School in Coconut Creek, Fla., in January 2023. (Google Maps/Screenshot via The Epoch Times) Allowing the transgender student to play volleyball with girls was violative of state law and Florida High School Athletic Association policy, the association informed Monarch High School in a Dec. 12 letter.
The association’s policy states that boys may not participate on female sports teams “if the school’s overall boys’ athletic program equals or exceeds the girls’ overall athletic program.”
A Florida law passed in 2021 and signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, bars males who identify as females from participating in women’s sports. The law was upheld recently by a federal court.
Broward County officials reported to the athletic association that a male had played on the girls’ volleyball team, prompting an investigation.
The investigation resulted in the determination that the school violated the law and association policy, and the association levied a $16,500 fine, Justin Harrison, an associate executive director with the association, informed the school and county in the new letter.
The fine is based on the number of games the volleyball team played in recent years.
The association is also formally reprimanding the school, which means the school will have an official censure on its record; placing it on administrative probation through November 2024; requiring school representatives to attend a compliance seminar; and requiring the school to host association staff for a compliance workshop.
Dorian Norton, the boy who says he’s a girl, is also not eligible to participate in sports at any schools that are a member of the association. The boy participated in two seasons of volleyball.
“Thanks to the leadership of Governor Ron DeSantis, Florida passed legislation to protect girls’ sports and we will not tolerate any school that violates this law,” Manny Diaz Jr., Florida’s education commissioner, told The Epoch Times via email. “We applaud the swift action taken by the Florida High School Athletic Association to ensure there are serious consequences for this illegal behavior.”
The Florida Department of Education previously said in a statement: “Under Governor DeSantis, boys will never be allowed to play girls’ sports. It’s that simple.“
Mr. DeSantis said when signing the law, “We believe in the state of Florida protecting the fairness and integrity of women’s athletics.”
The letter was first reported by the Daily Signal.
Moira Sweeting-Miller, the principal of Monarch High School, and Broward County Superintendent Peter Licata did not respond to requests for comment.
Broward County Public Schools has a policy that transgender students should play on the sports team that corresponds with their gender identity. But Mr. Licata told reporters in November that, moving forward, the district would make sure students were “eligible for the sport they’re playing … in accordance with state law” and association policy.
Court Ruling
Dorian and Dorian’s parents brought a legal case against the law, arguing it illegally discriminated against transgender females in violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal law.
Title IX says, for instance, that no person in the United States “shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity, receiving Federal financial assistance.”
Broward County receives federal assistance, as does the athletic association either directly or indirectly, the suit stated.
“Under Title IX, excluding transgender individuals from school programs or athletic opportunities within schools is discrimination on the basis of sex,” it alleged.
U.S. District Judge Roy Altman disagreed, ruling against the plaintiffs.
The law “simply provides that, consistent with the inherent biological differences between the sexes, biological boys (of whatever gender identity) cannot play on girls’ sports teams,” said Judge Altman, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump.
He noted that under the law, Dorian can still play on boys’ teams or coed teams.
Dorian and his parents had accused state legislators of animus against trangender people, including state Sen. Kelli Stargel, who said at a press briefing that “men are stronger than women.”
The judge said the legislators were merely emphasizing “the inherent biological differences between men and women in a way that comports with [the law’s] express interest in giving female athletes an opportunity ‘to demonstrate their strength, skills, and athletic abilities,’—without having to compete with biological men.”
Dorian’s family says Dorian identified as a girl from a very young age when the boy Dorian was 5 or 6, his parents “realized based on D.N.’s behavior and statements, that their daughter was transgender.”
Dorian was diagnosed with gender dysphoria at 7 and shortly after began using a girl’s name, the family said.
At age 11, Dorian took puberty blockers, and recently started taking estrogen and will continue to do so for the rest of his life, the suit stated.
Making Dorian participate on boys’ teams would open him up to “an invasion of privacy” because he identifies as a girl, he and his parents said. “It is not an option for her to be on the boys’ team, because she is not a boy,” they said.
Losing the ability to participate on female teams would lead the boy to stop playing sports altogether, the family said.
Some students spoke out in support of letting the student play.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 21:40 - Tech Bros Fight Back Against Democrat Socialist Who Blames "Capitalism" For Poop-Covered San Fran Streets
Tech Bros Fight Back Against Democrat Socialist Who Blames “Capitalism” For Poop-Covered San Fran Streets
The CEO of startup incubator Y Combinator, a registered Democrat, has had enough of radical progressive lawmakers in his own political party who have done nothing more than transform San Francisco into a crime-ridden hellhole with shit-covered streets.
The San Francisco Standard has described Garry Tan as the metro area’s “preeminent political pitbull, an attack dog with a taste for progressives.” This is because Tan, along with other tech bros, have been funding campaigns to rid the city of awful progressives, such as former Soros-backed District Attorney of San Fran Chesa Boudin.
Tan’s latest post on X quoted a New York Post article about San Francisco Supervisor Dean Preston’s claim the city’s collapse into turmoil is a direct result of “capitalism.”
“You understand why I donated $50K this year just to get this guy out of office, right?” Tan wrote.
You understand why I donated $50K this year just to get this guy out of office right? https://t.co/j5085bZfQe
— Garry Tan 陈嘉兴 — e/acc (@garrytan) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Elon Musk commented on Tan’s post, “Wow.”
Wow
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Preston’s District 5 includes the Tenderloin District, a part of the town with shit-covered streets, open-air drug markets, a huge homeless population, and violent crime.
The Democratic Socialist blamed his district’s woes on capitalism:
“I think what you’re seeing in the Tenderloin is absolutely the result of capitalism and what happens in capitalism to the people at the bottom rungs.”
The socialist continued:
“The biggest driver of why folks are on the street is because they lost their jobs, income or were evicted from their homes, usually for not being able to pay the rent. So you have major landlords literally causing folks to lose their homes, and real estate speculation making it impossible for folks to find an affordable place to live.”
Preston has been an advocate for disastrous social justice policies and continues to call for defunding the police. He noted:
“I think we have a very, very bloated police budget. All kinds of waste in the police department. I could cut $100 million out of the department.”
Musk has called for Preston to be fired:
“He is arguably the person most responsible for the destruction of San Francisco.”
We must add that capitalism in the metro area worked fine until radical leftists took control of City Hall and implemented one failed public policy after another for more than a decade.
X users expressed similar sentiments:
These people live in an upside down world. Just absolutely broken worldviews. Not just wrong about things – completely opposite of the truth is what they believe.
— tyler hogge (@thogge) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
We’ve had capitalism for over a century. The only thing that changed were certain people making bad public policy decisions over the past decade.
— namsh!k (@namshik) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
I absolutely appreciate your honesty on this subject. Enabling addicts is a recipe for disaster, I really hope SF gets it together soon, I’ve always loved that area. It’s sad to see it in such a state of decline.
— Jenna (@determinedbatch) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
that bro’s brain-wormed philosophy and policies are responsible for so many unnecessary deaths and misery
the dude is evil
— Shibetoshi Nakamoto (@BillyM2k) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
At least Mayor London Breed recognized the shifting winds and made a gigantic U-Turn this past summer to refund the police as her 2024 re-election bid remains murky due to a failed crime plan.
Oddly enough, Democrats decided to clean up the homeless, open-air drug markets, and shit-covered streets (only temporarily) when Chinese President Xi Jinping came into the town for a major economic conference last month. This leads us to believe that crime-ridden streets, a by-product of failed progressive public policies, are a manufactured crisis with sinister intentions.
At least now, Silicon Valley tech bros are fighting back against rogue Democrats to save the city.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 21:20 - 70% Of Deaths From Pfizer Vaccine In Japan Reported Within 10 Days Of Jab: Study
70% Of Deaths From Pfizer Vaccine In Japan Reported Within 10 Days Of Jab: Study
Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Around 70 percent of people who died in Japan after receiving a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine lost their lives in the first 10 days following the jab, according to a recent study.
Syringes and vials of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine are prepared to be administered at a drive-up vaccination site in Reno, Nev., on Dec. 17, 2020. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images) The peer-reviewed Japanese study, published in the Cureus journal on Dec. 7, looked at the association between Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination and deaths within 10 days of vaccination.
The risk period was defined as within 10 days of vaccination, with vaccination day being Day 1, and the control period defined as 11 to 180 days after vaccination.
The analysis was divided into two groups: Group 1 representing individuals aged 65 and above and Group 2, which included people aged 64 and below.
The researcher identified 1,311 deaths in Group 1, which included 662 males and 649 females. In Group 2, the team identified 247 deaths—155 males and 92 females.
“The percentage of reported cases that experienced death within 10 days after vaccination was 71 percent in Group 1 and 70 percent in Group 2,” said the study results.
Over-65s
In Group 1, more women than men died overall from various medical conditions in the first 10 days of vaccination. Following the 10 days, there were more deaths reported of men.
Most of the post-vaccine deaths happened on the second day, followed by the third and fourth days.
Other than “unexplained deaths,” the biggest cause of death in this group was ischemic heart disease (119 deaths), followed by heart failure (92), and aspiration pneumonia/asphyxia (72). Autopsies were performed in eight of the 239 unexplained death cases.
Group 2
In Group 2, over two times more men died than women from various medical conditions during the first 10 days of vaccination. Overall deaths after the initial 10 days were only slightly higher among men.
The highest number of post vaccination deaths were registered on the third day, followed by the fourth, second, and fifth days.
After “unexplained deaths,” the biggest cause of death in this group was ischemic heart disease (27 deaths), cardiac arrhythmias (24), subarachnoid hemorrhage (20), and myocarditis/pericarditis (17). Autopsies were conducted in nine out of the 51 unexplained deaths.
There was an outsized difference in male–female deaths owing to myocarditis/pericarditis during the “risk period,” with eight men dying compared to just one woman. Heart failure resulted in the deaths of nine men compared to two women.
“Some myocarditis/pericarditis cases may be included within the unexplained deaths category. Myocarditis is a complication of vaccination, especially in young adults and adolescent males,” said the study.
One contributing factor for higher deaths of men during the first 10 days is “thought to be the high number of myocarditis/pericarditis deaths including undiagnosed cases.”
For both groups, the other death causes were: cardiac arrhythmias, aortic aneurysm/dissection, intracerebral hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, cerebral infarction, respiratory failure, interstitial lung diseases, pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, sepsis, anaphylaxis, thrombocytopenia, and marasmus.
In short, many more older Japanese women and men below 64 faced a higher risk of death immediately within the first 10 days of Pfizer vaccination.
Male–Female Differences, Study Limitations
The author, Yasusi Suzumura, calculated sex ratios for all-cause deaths and each outcome by dividing the number of males by that of females and multiplying by 100. That is, the higher the sex ratio, the greater the number of male deaths.
The author found notable differences between the number of deaths of men and women in both groups, impacting the study’s sex ratio.
“If there is no effect on the occurrence of death, there should be no difference in sex ratios by period. Thus, this finding indicates that vaccination may influence the occurrence of death during the risk period and might be associated with death,” the study stated.
The data on death numbers for the study were sourced from Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (MHLW).
Specifically, cases involving only the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA vaccination reported between Feb. 17, 2021, and March 12, 2023, were included.
The study does not directly link the deaths with the vaccinations. “The results indicate that the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination may influence the occurrence of death during the risk period,” said the study.
The author pointed to some of the limitations of the study including that the number of days from vaccination to death may vary depending on treatment, and that the study did not consider the effects of the vaccination after 11 days.
Besides this, the author said the sex-based reporting could have only been performed by a few doctors, and that the mortality rates could not be calculated because the analysis was performed only for deaths after vaccination.
The study had a limited sample size, and hence should be “carefully” interpreted. “Finally, the analysis results should be carefully interpreted because not all deaths reported to the MHLW were related to vaccination. Incidental deaths may be included in the reported deaths.”
The study author stressed that since vaccines are administered to mostly healthy individuals, it should have a “higher level of safety than pharmaceuticals used for treatment and should have an exceptionally low vaccination mortality rate.”
Therefore, even when the vaccination mortality rate is exceptionally low, vaccine safety must be analyzed with statistical methods.
“On this occasion, it is difficult to determine whether a post-vaccination death is incidental or vaccine-related,” said the study. However, the author concluded that this approach can offer valuable insights into assessing vaccine safety.
The Epoch Times reached out to Pfizer for comment.
‘Similar to Vaccine Deaths in US’
Commenting on the study, cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough said that the data on “COVID-19 vaccination and death in Japan is very similar to vaccine deaths in US/Domestic cases in VAERS,” according to a Dec. 9 X post. “Strongly supports causality for the nearly 1150 immediate deaths observed.”
VAERS has reported 18,188 deaths from COVID-19 vaccination through Sept. 29, 2023, with 1,150 deaths occurring on the same day as the vaccination.
In addition, 2,040 miscarriages, 9,053 heart attacks, 17,433 permanent disabilities, 5,057 myocarditis/pericarditis cases, and 36,184 severe allergic reactions were also reported.
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons also shared the Japanese study on X.
The study author clarified that they have received “no financial support” from any organization for their submitted work.
Multiple other studies have also linked COVID-19 vaccines with higher mortality rates. A Sept. 17 report by Correlation Research in the Public Interest found that in the 17 nations analyzed, all-cause mortality increased when COVID-19 vaccines were distributed.
Nine out of these 17 nations had no detectable excess deaths following the March 2020 WHO declaration of the pandemic. Excess deaths only began with the vaccination campaign.
In 15 of the 17 nations, there were unprecedented peaks in all-cause mortality in January and February 2022, which coincided with or followed the rollout of booster shots.
The study estimated 1.74 million excess deaths in the 17 nations during the vaccination period, which comes to roughly 1 per 800 injections.
Meanwhile, Japan has approved the world’s first self-amplifying mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, although the manufacturer has not published safety or efficacy data for the shot.
The latest iteration of the mRNA vaccine is even more potent than the present version, as it generates more spike proteins in the human body.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 21:00 - DC Transit Could Become "Unrecognizable" With Drastic Service Cuts, Layoffs Amid Deficit
DC Transit Could Become “Unrecognizable” With Drastic Service Cuts, Layoffs Amid Deficit
Millions of metro riders in crime-ridden Washington, DC, could face hellish commutes in the coming months as the district’s public transportation system head warned of potential dramatic service and job cuts to close a $750 million budget gap.
It’s “no secret we have massive budget challenges,” Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority general manager and CEO Randy Clarke said during a briefing Monday.
WMATA plans to reduce its 12,000-person workforce by nearly 20% or approximately 2,300 people. The reduction will lead to reliability issues across the metro’s network, a decline in safety, and dirtier stations.
During the presentation, a slide was shown depicting WMATA’s bleak outlook: “Balancing Budget with Severe Service Cuts Would Make Metro Unrecognizable.”
Clarke pointed out the level of proposed service cuts “is hard to imagine.”
This also includes reducing or eliminating service on 108 of its 135 bus lines. The rail system will have its midnight hours reduced by 2 hours and cease operations at 10 pm.
Furthermore, Clarke’s budget calls for increased ticket prices on trains and busses, upwards of 20%. This means a regular Metrorail fare could cost $7.20 per trip.
Here’s an overview of the potential changes to WMATA’s services if the budget gap is not filled (list courtesy of NBC Washington):
Metrorail
- All stations would close at 10 pm. Currently, the earliest Metro normally closes is midnight.
- Ten stations would be shut down completely. WMATA has not decided which stations would close, but the final decision would be based on ridership numbers.
- Metro frequency would be reduced. Right now, the majority of Metro trains arrive every six minutes or less, but without a funding fix come July of next year, the percentage of trains with six-minute service or better would drop to just 10%.
Metrobus
- Metro could eliminate nearly half of its bus lines. Under the proposed budget, 67 of the existing 135 lines would be eliminated. Another 41 lines would see service reductions.
- A third of bus service would be cut across D.C., Maryland and Virginia.
Fare increases
- Metro warned of a 20% increase in fares and parking fees. For example, the max fare on Metrorail right now is $6. Under the proposed budget, a Metrorail fare would be capped at $7.20.
Job cuts
- In January 2024, Metro plans to freeze salary and wage increases.
- In July 2024, 2,286 employees would be laid off.
The potential service cuts would only hurt the working poor because an increasing number of them have been forced to rely solely on public transportation in an era of failed ‘Bidenomics.’
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 20:40 - Peter Schiff: Joe Biden Doesn't Have Anything To Take Credit For
Peter Schiff: Joe Biden Doesn’t Have Anything To Take Credit For
Most mainstream pundits characterized the November jobs report as a “Goldilocks” report. Job growth was strong enough to support the “soft landing” narrative but not so strong it might scare the Fed into raising interest rates again.
President Joe Biden used the report to boast about his economic achievements. But according to Peter Schiff, Biden doesn’t have anything to boast about. He talked about it during a recent interview on the Capitol Report on NTD News.
After the jobs report came out, Biden released a statement bragging, “On my watch, we have achieved better growth and lower inflation than any other advanced country. A year ago, forecasters said it couldn’t be done.”
As far as Biden taking credit for the strong economy, Peter said he doesn’t think there is anything for the president to take credit for.
First of all, the job numbers – sure, it was better than expected. But we’ll probably end up revising it to ‘worse than expected’ next month. That’s pretty much what they do. They come out with a number and then the following month they revise it lower.”
Peter pointed out that 24% of the “new jobs” were striking auto workers and motion picture workers going back to jobs they already had.
That’s not really job creation.”
And 82% of the remaining jobs created were in the government and healthcare sectors.
These are not the productive jobs that are producing goods that we need, that we can consume, that we can export. And all these government workers have to be paid for by the private sector. That means the government has to run even bigger deficits. That means they have to create more inflation to pay their salaries. That puts more upward pressure on prices. I don’t think we have a strong labor market.”
Meanwhile, the economy is creating a lot of part-time, low-wage jobs.
People are taking second and third jobs because the economy is so weak that you can’t get by on one job anymore. So, most people need multiple jobs.”
The NTD anchor noted that gold hit a record high prior to the jobs report. What does that say about the state of the economy?
Peter said he thinks if people understood how bad things really are, and how much worse it will likely get, they would be buying even more gold. For one thing, despite Biden bragging about “lower inflation” Peter said it’s a huge problem that’s going to get worse.
The talk of the Fed successfully returning inflation to 2% — that’s all talk. It’s not going to happen. The genie is out of the bottle. There’s no putting it back in.”
Peter said in the meantime, we’re heading toward a severe recession.
I think we’re going to have a worse financial crisis than the one we had in 2008. In fact, we’d already be in it if it wasn’t for the bailouts of the banks earlier in the year, back in March. But that has a short shelf-life. I think the problems underlying the banking system are building. The entire banking system is insolvent based on more than 10 years of zero percent rates. They’ve loaded up on long-term, low-yielding bonds. They’re underwater in those positions. Meanwhile, I think the real economy is weakening. The deficits are skyrocketing.”
And as the national debt surges upward, the interest expense on the debt is rising. Interest expense rose by 23% to $879 billion in fiscal 2023.
This is a fiscal time bomb that’s going to blow, and I think people would be buying more gold if they understood how short this fuse was.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 20:20 - Ford CEO Says Video Of Stuck Cybertruck Was Not Intentionally Staged For PR Purposes
Ford CEO Says Video Of Stuck Cybertruck Was Not Intentionally Staged For PR Purposes
Ford CEO Jim Farley made an odd comment on ‘free speech’ social media platform X, stating that the video of a Tesla Cybertruck getting stuck on a snow-covered grassy hill and winched up by a Super Duty truck was “NOT advertising.”
“Just to be clear… this is a Super Duty and NOT advertising. Glad a @Ford owner was there to help,” Farley wrote on X.
Just to be clear… this is a Super Duty and NOT advertising. Glad a @Ford owner was there to help. https://t.co/Rr78EY9k2T
— Jim Farley (@jimfarley98) December 13, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
This isn’t the first instance where the rival Cybertruck has been compared with a Ford truck. Last month, the CEO posted a video showing the F-150 Lightning climbing the same off-roading trail where a Cybertruck seemed to have difficulty just a few weeks early. Farley captioned the video with “F-150 Lightning does it all.”
Or does it?
BREAKING: Ford Lightning stuck in snow on flat ground, but nobody cares since it’s not a Tesla Cybertruck. “yikes” “the AWD software is so bad” pic.twitter.com/tmOCALq1CJ
— TSLA CHASE (@TESLAenjoyer) December 12, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Meanwhile, demand for F-150 Lightnings has plunged as the legacy automaker plans a 2024 production capacity of 150,000 Lightnings a year, or about 3,200 per week. That means its production target for next year will be halved.
It’s unclear whether the Cybertruck incident was intentionally staged to portray Tesla negatively and highlight Super Duty’s capabilities.
What is particularly noteworthy is the unusual comment made by the CEO of Ford.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 20:00 - Final Batch Of Pfizer Documents Released By FDA
Final Batch Of Pfizer Documents Released By FDA
Authored by Megan Redshaw via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
(Marco Lazzarini/Shutterstock) The FDA released the final batch of documents it relied upon in licensing Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine for ages 16 and up—more than 800 days after the agency approved the shot.
The documents are “finally in the hands of the public, where they belong,” the Informed Consent Action Network said in a press release. “Now, independent scientists and researchers can see everything FDA saw when it made its decision that this vaccine was ‘safe and effective.’”
The recent documents disclosed as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) show the agency knew its safety monitoring system was “not sufficient” for assessing the risk of heart conditions associated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine when it licensed the company’s “Comirnaty” vaccine.
Advertisement – Story continues below
Documents also reveal numerous manufacturing problems in Pfizer batches released to the public and show the FDA knew about a phenomenon known as vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) in those vaccinated who experience breakthrough COVID-19.
FDA Knew Safety Monitoring System Was ‘Not Sufficient’
Federal health agencies claim COVID-19 vaccines are part of the “most intensive vaccine safety monitoring effort in U.S. history,” with “continuous” and “robust” safety monitoring that helps ensure that the vaccine’s benefits outweigh any risks. Yet the final documents released from Pfizer’s biologic product file reveal the agency knew its safety monitoring program was not sufficient to assess the serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
An FDA memo in the 51,893 pages of disclosures specifically addressed the agency’s CBER Sentinel Initiative and its ability to evaluate the risk for myocarditis and pericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination. The Sentinel program is the FDA’s national electronic system used to monitor the “safety of its regulated products” and is a “major part” of the agency’s mission to “protect public health.”
The memo states:
“The CBER Sentinel Program is NOT sufficient to assess the serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis, and subclinical myocarditis associated with COMIRNATY (BNT162b2) in lieu of PMR safety studies under FDAAA [Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act].
“At the time of BLA [Biologics License Application] approval, the data sources in the CBER Sentinel Program are not sufficient to identify the outcomes due to lack of sufficient power to assess the magnitude of risk in patients 12-30 years of age. In addition, CBER Sentinel Program is not sufficient to follow up cases for recovery status and long-term sequelae, or for identification and characterization of subclinical myocarditis cases.”
Cardiac Disorders Higher in Vaccine Trial Group
According to an Aug. 23, 2021, BLA Clinical Review Memorandum, there were more cardiac disorders in trial participants who received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine compared to the placebo group and more instances of tachycardia in the younger vaccinated age group.
Cardiac conditions were reported as the cause of death in nine participants 25 to 128 days after having received at least one dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, including seven cases of cardiac arrest, one case of cardiovascular disease, and one case of congestive heart failure.
Five cardiac-related deaths in the placebo group occurred 15 to 81 days after having received a placebo, including two cases of myocardial infarction, one aortic rupture, and two cardiac arrests.
“Because COVID-19 mRNA and its Spike protein are found in the human heart at autopsy causing inflammation and heart damage, it is incontrovertible that the COVID-19 vaccines are cardiotoxic,” cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough told The Epoch Times in an email.
“Younger individuals with healthy hearts take up more of the damaging vaccine into the cardiac tissue resulting in symptoms of chest pain, palpitations, fluctuations in blood pressure, dizziness, and sadly, some, end up with cardiac arrest either during exercise or in the early morning waking hours. At both time periods, an internal surge of adrenalin appears to be the trigger for the fatal arrhythmia in those with COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis,” he added.
Despite nearly double the number of reported cardiac events in vaccine recipients versus placebo recipients, the FDA concluded the deaths were “unlikely to be related to vaccination.”
“As a cardiologist, these serious adverse events are unacceptable,” Dr. McCullough said. “I have called for all COVID-19 vaccines to be removed from the market with an urgent push for research strategies to prevent cardiac death after injection.”
Vaccines Released Despite Manufacturing Issues
According to the Pfizer Andover Response to Form FDA 483 included in the released documents, numerous manufacturing issues and inadequacies in quality oversight were also identified. Several batches of COVID-19 vaccines were flagged for deviating from product quality standards, yet the affected batches were released to the public in various lots, the numbers of which were redacted.
In November 2021, whistleblower Brook Jackson, who worked as a regional director at testing sites by Pfizer contractor Ventavia, told the British Medical Journal that Pfizer’s trial was riddled with issues. Ms. Jackson said the company “falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial.”
Ms. Jackson, a trained clinical trial auditor with more than 15 years of experience in clinical research coordination and management, emailed a complaint to the FDA and was fired later that day. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against Ventavia and Pfizer, alleging Pfizer had defrauded the government while developing its COVID-19 vaccine.
FDA Acknowledges Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease
In its Pharmacovigilance Plan Review Memorandum, the FDA referenced a condition called “vaccine-associated enhanced disease.” According to the journal Vaccine, VAED is the modified presentation of a clinical infection affecting individuals exposed to the wild-type pathogen after having received a vaccine for the same pathogen.
In its memo, the FDA stated there are reported deaths in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in patients reported to be fully vaccinated. Although the agency said that passive surveillance and spontaneous adverse event reporting generally cannot be used to conclude vaccine effectiveness because of the lack of a control group, reporter bias, and underreporting, “severe manifestations and death from COVID-19” increase the possibility of developing VAED, which has “overlapping clinical manifestations with natural SARS-CoV-2 infection, making it difficult to differentiate VAED from severe COVID-19 disease in individual VAERS reports.”
The FDA said Pfizer was assessing the condition in its continuation of Phase 3 clinical studies and active surveillance studies. VAED has been observed in other vaccine trials involving the dengue virus, respiratory syncytial virus, and measles.
FDA Took Over 800 Days to Release Data
The Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, a nonprofit consisting of public health and medical professionals, scientists, and journalists, filed a FOIA lawsuit against the FDA in September 2021 to force the release of hundreds of thousands of documents relied upon by the agency in licensing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for individuals age 16 and older.
Even though the FDA said in a news release it was committed to “ensuring full transparency, dialogue and efficiency” regarding COVID-19 vaccines and reiterated its commitment to full transparency when it licensed Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine, they wanted 75 years to produce an estimated 451,000 documents at a rate of 500 pages per month. It previously estimated it had 329,000 pages of responsive records and wanted 55 years to release them to the public.
Attorney Aaron Siri, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the group, said the federal government was shielding Pfizer from liability, gave it billions of dollars, and forced Americans to get vaccinated while preventing the safety and efficacy data supporting the licensure of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine from being released until the year 2076. Yet it only took 108 days from when Pfizer started producing records to the agency for the FDA to license its vaccine.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 19:40 - Pentagon Seeks EMP Weapon To Eliminate Drone Swarms
Pentagon Seeks EMP Weapon To Eliminate Drone Swarms
Faced with the reality that drones are reshaping the modern battlefields in Ukraine and Gaza, the Pentagon has been tasked with finding a budget-friendly solution to eliminate these ‘flying IEDs.’ While missiles are too expensive, and laser beams are a distant dream, the next best cost-effective weapon US military officials are eyeing up could be electromagnetic pulse weapons to counter drone swarms.
According to the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) website, the US Air Force has published a contract opportunity for private industry titled “Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Defense Against Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS).”
The service outlined the drone-killing features of the new EMP weapon it is seeking:
“The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL/RI) is conducting market research to seek information from industry on the landscape of research and development (R&D) for available Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) solutions towards countering multiple Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). EMP solutions could be ground and/or aerial based that provide effective mitigation against Department of Defense (DoD) UAS groups 1, 2, and smaller group 3 aircraft.”
As for an aerial-based EMP weapon, the service explained:
“Any EMP solutions hosted on air vehicles will have to be determined to be air-worthy by the Government. DoD must comply with the following general restrictions on UAS: 1. The air vehicle must be based on or derived from US components and electronics. 2. The air vehicle must have sufficient flight hours and reliability data.”
The proposed EMP weapon would be able to neutralize drones with a directed EMP blast to damage the electronic parts – this is a much cheaper solution than missiles that cost tens of thousands of dollars, if not hundreds of thousands, a piece.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 19:20 - How Tax-Exempt Nonprofits Skirt U.S. Law To Turn Out The Democrat Base In Elections
How Tax-Exempt Nonprofits Skirt U.S. Law To Turn Out The Democrat Base In Elections
Authored by Steve Miller via RealClear Wire,
Even as Democrats such as Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse warn of “right-wing dark-money network seeking to undermine the future of democratic elections in the United States,” progressives have far outstripped Republicans in harnessing the power of putatively non-partisan, nonprofit organizations that push the boundaries to win elections.
More than 150 progressive nonprofits spent $1.35 billion on political activities in 2021 and 2022, according to data compiled by Restoration of America, a conservative political action committee. Although there are no readily available estimates of comparable conservative efforts, observers say they are overmatched.
“The liberal nonprofit sector is much bigger than the conservative nonprofit in the political arena,” said Bradley Smith, a former commissioner with the Federal Election Commission and founder of the conservative Institute for Free Speech.
The progressive nonprofits include faith-based groups, ethnic activist operatives, and colleges and universities, which have taken on an outsized part of the Democratic party’s election strategy.
The groups work around legal restrictions on nonprofits that accept tax-deductible donations by selectively engaging in nonpartisan efforts including boosting voter education and participation.
But, like the estimated $332 million that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan donated to public elections offices to help run the 2020 elections, much of it winds up in the hands of groups that operate in liberal strongholds and work with reliably Democratic constituencies.
This is in part how two influential groups, the Voter Participation Center and its partner group, the Center for Voter Information, increase Democratic turnout.
Both have the stated mission of encouraging people in specified demographics – “young people, people of color and unmarried women” – to vote. All three groups are part of the Democratic Party’s base. Voters in these groups are up to two-and-a-half times more likely to vote when engaged by a nonprofit, according to research from Nonprofit Vote, an advocacy group for tax-exempt activist groups.
The value of these groups was underscored when the Biden administration prepared to compose his executive order directing federal agencies to “expand citizens’ opportunities to register to vote.” In July 2021 officials met with leading progressive operators, including Democracy Fund, Fair Elections Center, FairVote, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Al Sharpton’s National Action Network and the George Soros-backed Open Society Policy Center, according to an internal administration email obtained by the Foundation for Government Accountability, a conservative nonprofit that is suing the administration to obtain records related to the executive order.
The Democratic Party’s stance on issues, from climate change to voting procedures, is also echoed by their nonprofit allies. The Fair Elections Center, for example, calls those who questioned the outcome of the 2020 presidential race “election deniers” who oppose the right to vote. Their stance echoes President Biden, who said last year that there were “more than 300 election deniers on the ballot” for the midterms, adding that “It’s damaging, it’s corrosive, and it’s destructive.”
Significant funding for these and other voting activist operations flows from the same sources that put millions of dollars into Democratic and progressive campaigns.
Among them:
- The Tides Foundation, with $1 billion in revenue in 2020, funds the moveon.org PAC while also giving to the Voter Registration Project, League of Women Voters, and Project Vote. The foundation is one of several Tides nonprofits that operate in the charity world of progressive funding, giving to groups that advocate for abortion rights, gun control, and “equity” causes. Tides is also a partner of Black Lives Matter.
- New Venture Fund, formed in 2006 as Arabella Legacy Fund, lobbies for progressive causes, including election laws, in 41 states, and in 2020, according to a civil rights lawsuit filed by a former employee, “disbursed nearly $500 million to address progressive issues such as racial justice.” The lawsuit contends New Venture engaged in prohibited partisan political activity, which is disputed by New Venture. New Venture is also a key financial supporter of progressive voting groups American Votes, NAACP National Voter Fund, and Fair Elections Center.
- The Silicon Valley Community Foundation since 2020 has given $106 million in grants to nonprofits for voter education and turnout. It was the primary conduit of Zuckerberg’s millions in grants that went to public elections offices around the U.S. in 2020 and has donated money to Planned Parenthood and Democracy Now, while its employees have donated exclusively to Democratic candidates.
The number and funding of electorally active progressive nonprofits have increased dramatically during the past decade. Their get-out-the-vote efforts are replacing those of political campaigns, which traditionally relied on their own staffers to engage voters.
Much of the switch from party and campaign activity to nonprofits stems from a changing political landscape, which de-emphasizes the short-term goals of candidates (winning elections) to a longer-term vision for party dominance, said Sasha Issenberg, author of “The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns.” His 2012 book chronicled this shift through the increasing use of micro-analytics and social science in voter targeting, a strategy first dominated by Republicans, then updated and refined by Democrats. That refinement was carried out by younger individuals who were comfortable with a collectivist mindset, he said.
A “historical volunteer culture” set the table for a blossoming of the nonprofit base of the left, Issenberg told RealClearInvestigations. “When you had this era of innovation on the left, it set upon a culture that was already in place and wanted to perfect this idea.”
The progressive voter groups adroitly navigate tax rules that allow 501(c)(3) nonprofits to engage in voter participation and get-out-the -vote drives provided the effort is not aimed to benefit a political party.
These groups have access to solid voter and other demographic data, along with large teams of experienced community organizers, said Erick Kaardal, a Minneapolis-based attorney who has filed dozens of election-related lawsuits, some in connection with his role as special counsel for the conservative Thomas More Society.
“These groups are very good at legal compliance,” Kaardal said. When conservative nonprofits violate the rules, their liberal opponents “justly file complaints.” But Republicans, he said, “are novices … and [conservative nonprofits] also lack the resources [progressives] have. It’s not unfair; they have paid big money to have this well-oiled machine and to keep it legal it takes those resources.”
Today, tax-exempt entities drive the efforts to get out votes and register voters while engaging in advocacy that virtually copies the platforms of leading elected Democratic officials.
Under the guise of civic engagement or voter advocacy, the advocacy nonprofits pepper email inboxes with fund-raising pitches while alleging that efforts to reform or stem practices that lead to ballot fraud are tantamount to voter suppression. “In a crucial state that decided control of the U.S. Senate in the last two elections, Georgia voters are no stranger to voter suppression schemes,” reads an email sent to constituents by Vote.org, seeking to raise money to combat voter integrity measures passed by Republican lawmakers in 2021.
Vote.org describes itself as the largest “nonpartisan voting registration and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) technology platform in America,” while its correspondence often echoes statements made by Democrats including Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams of Georgia, and President Biden. “Threats to democracy” and voter “suppression” are a common term in Vote.org’s press releases and in social media posts. The organization largely embraces the Democratic party’s position that voter integrity measures backed by Republicans – including voter ID laws and restrictions on mail-in ballots – are almost always aimed at voter suppression. Voter.org also focuses on areas and groups that may be less likely to vote, which tends to include young and minority voters that Democrats count on.
“The overall upshot of how we make the selections is based on where voter turnout isn’t matching the demographics of the area,” said Nick Hutchins, a spokesman for Vote.org. “We want the vote to be accessible to everyone.”
A Leftward Disparate Impact
As a result, seemingly neutral efforts have a disparate impact that helps Democrats far more than Republicans.
“There’s a line of administration and politicking here, and unless you hit every constituent in the same way, it will have disproportionate effects,” said Ryan Williamson, co-author of the book, “Nationalized Politics: Evaluating Electoral Politics Across Time.”
The charities that fund voter registration have been created by an activist league with roots in community organizing from Barak Obama’s 2008 presidential candidacy.
“The proliferation of these nonprofits has accelerated in the last few years, and it was engineered by the Obama campaign in 2008,” Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told RCI.
That was the same year the nonprofit Arabella Legacy Fund was founded by former Clinton administration appointee Eric Kessler with a stated mission of “environmental preservation and protection.” Arabella’s application cited Bible verses to support its proposed environmental advocacy. In 2009 the group became the New Venture Fund, which has provided millions of dollars to voting nonprofits. Arabella became the for-profit Arabella Advisors, which handles strategy and management for New Venture and a host of other, similarly partisan nonprofit enterprises.
Courting, creating, and funding nonprofits by progressives is now a core Democratic Party strategy, one that has proven successful as Democrats have prevailed or outperformed historical expectations in national elections.
“They are after a new American majority, and that includes people of color, women, students, LGBT, and [progressives] have a strategy for each group,” said Ned Jones, deputy director of the conservative Election Integrity Network. “It’s all about registering voters and getting a ballot in their hands, and they know what they’re doing,”
Republicans, he said, are far behind. “The opposing team doesn’t have the funding, the structure or the system to do what progressives are doing.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 19:00 - Could This Supreme Court Case End Government Overreach By Three-Letter Agencies?
Could This Supreme Court Case End Government Overreach By Three-Letter Agencies?
Submitted by Gun Owners of America,
What do fishing, Three Letter Agencies, and gun rights all have in common?
Well, thanks to a little-known case called Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, commercial fishing and gun rights are intrinsically tied together. The outcome of this case could change the legal landscape of the entire country when it comes to the ability of three-letter agencies such as ATF to make regulations.
To understand the scope and effect of the Raimondo case, we’ll need to first look at two different things. The first is the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The second is a legal principle called Chevron Deference.
Let’s start with the Fishery Act, as that’s the basis for this case.
In 1976, Congress passed the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act into law. The law provides for the management of marine fisheries in US waters.
The MSA was enacted to assert control over foreign fisheries that were operating within 200 miles of the US coast. However, a provision of the law is that the National Marine Fisheries Service may require private fishing boats to carry federal monitors on board to enforce the agency’s regulations.
This is where the problems start.
In the years since the passage of the MSA, the budget for the National Marine Fisheries Service started to fall, but the need for monitor coverage was growing. The Fisheries service was put in a bind. They couldn’t afford to pay for the increased coverage needed to maintain their surveys and studies.
Well, to fix the problem, they did what all Government agencies seem to do these days: administrative rulemaking.
In doing so, they identified an area in the law that did not explicitly say that the government couldn’t make the private companies pay the salaries of the federal monitors.
So, in February 2020, the National Marine Fisheries Service published its final rule establishing a standardized process that would require industry-funded monitoring.
In response, Loper Bright Enterprises, a family-owned herring fishing company, sued the National Marine Fisheries Service in the United States District Court for the District of Colombia.
Loper Bright’s argument was that the Magnuson-Stevens Act did not authorize the Fisheries Service to force private companies to pay federal monitors.
You’d think that the Court would see this and agree with Loper Bright. Well, you’d be wrong. The Court sided with the National Marine Fisheries Service by using a legal doctrine called Chevron Deference.
So, what’s the Chevron Deference?
The Chevron in Chevron Deference refers to a landmark 1984 decision in Chevron USA Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council Inc.
Chevron is considered to be one of the most important decisions in US administrative law. It has been cited in thousands of cases since the decision.
But how does it work?
If a law is ambiguous, Chevron’s doctrine requires the court to evaluate if the agency’s interpretation of the law is reasonable or permissible. If the agency’s interpretation is deemed to be reasonable or permissible, the court must accept the agency’s interpretation of the law.
In practice, administrative agencies like ATF can essentially govern as lawmakers. They create “rules” and “regulations” based on existing law, then use Chevron to affirm their rule change as “reasonable.”
Administrative agencies face fewer steps in rulemaking, sometimes only involving those inside the current administration. In the case of bump stocks—which is an attachment for a rifle—the reversal of agency policy was not the result of any new factual findings or thoughtful re-examination of the statute, but instead was ordered by one person—President Trump.
Even when agencies don’t apply Chevron to their argument, sometimes Judges will do it anyway, because it allows them to defer to an authority instead of making a decision, taking the easy way out of complex cases.
But it goes deeper. Chevron has seriously distorted how the political branches operate. Thanks to Chevron, Congress does less, and the executive branch does more, as Congress can count on the executive branch to tackle controversial issues via executive orders without the need for compromise.
This creates a dynamic where the “law” on important and divisive issues radically changes with every presidential administration.
For example, the Chevron doctrine is what “allows” the ATF to claim that pistol braces are legal for years, then, on a dime, suddenly change course and change the legal status of 40 million pistols overnight.
There’s a reason that GOA has submitted an amicus curiae supporting Loper Bright.
So, back to the case at hand. By using Chevron, the lower court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo determined that the Fisheries Service “reasonably interpreted the law” as there was no clear language about the cost of at sea monitoring in the law.
On Nov. 10, 2022, Loper Bright petitioned the Supreme Court to hear its case. In the petition, Loper Bright asked two questions. The first asked the court to rule on whether the lower court properly applied Chevron when granting the Fisheries Service the power to force private enterprises to pay for monitors.
Secondly, they asked the court to rule on whether Chevron should be overruled outright or limited in scope.
The Supreme Court granted the petition but limited it to only the Second question.
Seems like the Supreme Court may have an issue with Chevron.
This is evidenced in 2022 when Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote, “Chevron deserves a tombstone no one can miss.”
Justice Clarance Thomas has said similar things as well. In 2015, Thomas wrote that Chevron “wrestles from courts the ultimate interpretive authority to ‘say what law is’ and hands it over to the executive branch.”
Interestingly, Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson heard the case at the circuit level right before being nominated to replace Justice Steven Breyer on the Supreme Court. She has recused herself from the case accordingly.
We’ll have to wait and see what happens with the oral arguments, but it looks like the Supreme Court might actually be ready to put Chevron to bed.
Watch: What do fishing, Three Letter Agencies, and gun rights all have in common?
This case is important not just for gun owners but anyone who’s been a victim of federal overreach.
* * *
We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 18:40 - Let The Games Begin: Biden Impeachment Inquiry Authorized By House
Let The Games Begin: Biden Impeachment Inquiry Authorized By House
The House on Wednesday approved the launch of a formal impeachment probe into President Biden, just hours after Hunter Biden ditched Congressional testimony on Capitol Hill.
The 221-212 vote was along party lines, with Republicans formalizing a processes which began weeks ago, and Democrats criticizing the vote as a political stunt for retribution over the impeachments of former President Donald Trump – who was impeached for asking Ukraine about obvious Biden corruption, and his alleged role in the Jan. 6 riot.
Formalizing the impeachment process will grant Congress additional power by improving the likelihood that a court will authorize access to grand jury materials, as well as boosting the chances that Republicans will be able to overcome objections such as executive privilege, the Wall Street Journal reports.
The White House several weeks ago challenged House subpoenas and demands for transcribed interviews with Biden family members on the grounds that the existing impeachment probe, launched by GOP leaders in September, wasn’t valid because the House didn’t vote to authorize it.
“The impeachment inquiry is necessary now,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) told reporters this week, “because we’ve come to this impasse where following the facts where they lead is hitting a stone wall because the White House is impeding that investigation.” –WSJ
The inquiry has so far been two-pronged, with the House Oversight Committee focusing on the Biden family’s financial malarkey, and the House Judiciary Committee focusing on on the weaponization of the Justice Department and FBI.
“This vote will allow the House Judiciary, Oversight and Ways and Means committees to continue their investigations. The evidence mounting against the president cannot be ignored,” said House Majority Whip Tom Emmer in Wednesday comments to reporters.
“We know Joe Biden has lied to or misled the American people about his knowledge of his son’s business dealings over and over again, and it is very likely that he was involved in and benefited from his family’s corrupt business dealings as well.”
Democrats tantrum
“No amount of evidence could convince Republicans that Joe Biden did nothing wrong because they’re not looking for truth, they’re looking for revenge,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA), the top Democrat on the House Rules committee, ahead of the vote.
Earlier Wednesday, Hunter Biden defied a subpoena to appear before the House to testify about his family’s dealings, instead saying in a Capitol Hill speech: “Let me state as clearly as I can: My father was not financially involved in my business.”
The younger Biden has faced congressional and legal scrutiny regarding his overseas business dealings in Ukraine, China and elsewhere as well as alleged tax evasion, and Republicans have sought to show links between Hunter’s work and his father.
While Hunter Biden said he was willing to testify publicly, he rebuffed a subpoena from House Republicans to answer questions behind closed doors on alleged links between his foreign business dealings and his father. “I’m here today to make sure that the House committee’s illegitimate investigations of my family do not proceed on distortions, manipulated evidence and lies,” he said.
The younger Biden had previously said he was only willing to testify publicly so that Republicans couldn’t selectively leak portions of his statements. House leaders said the president’s son couldn’t dictate the terms of his testimony and said they would now initiate contempt of Congress proceedings against Hunter Biden. -WSJ
“He was just across the way at the Capitol, you’d think he could’ve come here and sat for questions,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH).
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 18:20 - US Blocks Transfer Of Over 20,000 Rifles To Israel Over Settler Violence
US Blocks Transfer Of Over 20,000 Rifles To Israel Over Settler Violence
There’s been some serious mixed messaging and contradictory signals coming from the White House of late regarding Israel and the Gaza War. President Biden on Tuesday had for the first time offered criticism of Israel’s “indiscriminate bombing” of Gaza – even while keeping the massive defense aid flowing to Israel’s military on an unconditional basis. He said Israel risks losing the world’s support.
But even as it hands over 2,000-pound bombs and other heavy munitions, the US administration has ironically enough temporarily blocked a shipment of more than 20,000 rifles on fears the small arms could fuel more Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. Most or all of the rifle shipments appear to be M-16s.
Illustrative file image These military-grade assault rifles had been requested by the Netanyahu government from within the first week of the war, in the wake of Oct.7.
Axios writes in a fresh report, “The Israeli request was treated with caution by the Biden administration because of concerns Itamar Ben Gvir, the ultra-nationalist minister of national security who oversees the police, would distribute the rifles to extremist settlers in the West Bank, according to U.S. officials.”
A US official told the publication, “This deal isn’t moving anywhere at the moment. We need more assurances from Israel about the steps it is going to take to curb attacks by violent settlers and to make sure no new U.S. weapons will reach settlers in the West Bank.”
This week, Turkish media correspondents documented the following incident in the West Bank:
Israeli settlers on Monday confronted olive pickers in the town of Aqraba, southern Nablus, firing live rounds to intimidate and force them to leave their lands, the Palestinian Wafa news agency reported.
Israeli occupation forces and settlers have carried out a total of 333 attacks against olive pickers since the beginning of the season in October, the agency said, citing the Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission.
Last week, the US administration unveiled rare sanctions on Israeli settlers involved in attacks on Palestinians, which bans them from traveling to the United States.
The US government has not sanctioned Israeli settlers going all the way back to the Clinton administration, but Washington has consistently condemned settler expansion in the West Bank, at least as far as public policy and rhetoric goes.
Video shows how Israeli settlers, escorted by Israeli forces, steal crops from Palestinian-owned olive trees and cut down several trees outside of Awarta, occupied West Bank. pic.twitter.com/QYRFfDW6Vn
— In Context (@incontextmedia) December 11, 2023
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The conflict centered on Gaza has received by far most international media attention, but there’s been a parallel war raging in the West Bank. Nablus, for example, has been declared a closed military zone and is under blockade by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). An estimated more than 270 Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem have died in clashes with police and settlers since Oct.7.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 18:00 - The Trojan Horse That Would Force Your Barista To Spy On You
The Trojan Horse That Would Force Your Barista To Spy On You
Authored by Gene Schaerr via RealClear Wire,
It was T.S. Eliot who coined the phrase “wilderness of mirrors” in his poem, “Gerontion.” It was the saga of the CIA’s James Jesus Angleton’s betrayal by Soviet double-agent Kim Philby that made the phrase a byword in the shadowy world of intelligence.
In that world, deception, deceit, and disinformation are just tools of the trade. These are, no doubt, useful tools when dealing with all manner of criminals and agents of despotic powers. But this culture of deception seems to have infected the ability of the intelligence community – and a few of their champions on Capitol Hill – to play it straight with Congress and their constituents, the people intelligence agencies are meant to serve.
That culture of deception even seems to infect the so-called FISA Reform and Reauthorization Act, proposed this week by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a bill that represents the wish-list of the intelligence community.
First, the bill’s marquee “reform” is the prohibition of only a handful of searches or “queries” of information about Americans under Section 702, the authority enacted by Congress to enable foreign surveillance but often used by the government for domestic spying. The type of search the bill would prohibit is “evidence-of-a-crime only” queries. But in 2022, out of over 200,000 queries of Americans’ data, there were only two instances of the FBI accessing Section 702 data under this rubric. And even if that prohibition were in place, the FBI could easily evade it simply by claiming in every instance that agents were looking for some (hypothetical) terror threat in addition to possible crimes. The bill’s non-reform “reform” would thus do nothing to stop the routine snooping on Americans, from 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign, to a House member and a \senator, a judge, and numerous protesters of the left and right. Nor would this “reform” prevent known abuses, such as the NSA agents who used this powerful search program to check out online dating prospects and potential tenants.
Even more outrageous is a problematic provision tucked away in this “reform” bill but not so much as mentioned in the committee’s report. Section 504 of the House Intelligence bill requires that those who have access to the “equipment that is being or may be used to transmit or store such communications” shall be treated as “electronic communication service providers” and thus subject to Section 702’s general requirement to (secretly) disclose our data to the government.
Let us unpack this: Under current law, electronic communication service providers include Internet service providers such as Google, Facebook/Meta, and Microsoft. It also includes telecom providers such as AT&T and Verizon. Under the law, these big companies are routinely compelled to hand over billions of foreign communications in addition to vast amounts of Americans’ communications that are “incidentally” caught up in this surveillance net.
But the House Intelligence bill’s expansion to include “equipment” would cover, for example, any small or medium-sized business that simply provides Wi-Fi or stores data. This means that your business landlord, Airbnb host, hotel manager, or coffee shop barista will have a legal obligation to give the government any of your emails, texts, or phone metadata that ran through their equipment. Larger entities, such as data centers, would also be enlisted in spying on Americans.
To call the expansion of government-mandated spying to baristas and landlords “reform” shows the contempt the intelligence community has for Congress and the very idea of oversight. It is nothing less than a Trojan horse buried in the House Intelligence bill.
The good news, to quote the poet again, is that “every moment is a fresh beginning.” Now that these tricks have been spotted in the House Intelligence bill, House members will have a chance to toss out that bill and vote instead for the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, which passed the House Judiciary Committee with overwhelming support. That bill likewise reauthorizes Section 702, but also imposes real reforms that will better protect Americans’ privacy from our nation’s overgrown and (sometimes) deceptive intelligence apparatus.
Gene Schaerr, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney and former associate counsel to President George H.W. Bush, serves as general counsel to the non-partisan Project for Privacy and Surveillance Accountability.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 17:40 - Boston Boondoggle: Sanctuary City May Grant Voting Rights To Noncitizens For Local Elections
Boston Boondoggle: Sanctuary City May Grant Voting Rights To Noncitizens For Local Elections
In a controversy-sparking move, Boston, a self-proclaimed sanctuary city, is weighing a resolution to allow immigrants with “legal status” to vote in local elections. This proposal, which has reportedly gained the backing of the majority of Boston city councilors, was a central topic in a council meeting last week.
A temporary migrant shelter funding package cleared the Massachusetts State House in Boston this week despite Republicans opposing the measure. (Tim Graham/Getty Images) The resolution, introduced by Councilor Kendra Lara, would allow immigrants who have “worked, sacrificed, and invested in their neighborhoods,” to provide these residents a voice in local governance, despite their lack of citizenship.
The Boston debate echoes a similar policy shift in Takoma Park, Maryland, where city clerk Jessie Carpenter gave Boston lawmakers insights from her experience. Takoma Park, which has allowed noncitizens to vote for 30 years “regardless of their legal status.”
In Takoma Park, “nearly one-third of the residents are foreign-born,” according to Fox News, which adds that a significant portion of registered noncitizen voters actively engage in the electoral process.
Boston, with a population exceeding 650,000, presents a stark contrast to the much smaller town of 17,000, suggesting that the number of potential immigrant voters could be significantly higher. According to Carpenter, immigrant voters are only required to show proof of identity and city residency, without any inquiry into their legal status.
Elections Commissioner Eneida Tavares said a similar policy change could prove logistically challenging for the much larger city of Boston, telling city councilors Tuesday that the Boston Election Department would need to evaluate whether it had the capabilities to maintain two separate databases “without causing any confusion.”
“Our preferred method would be to use the secretary of state’s database because it’s just one place where we can house everything,” Tavares said. “It’s easier to update voting, voter information, give voter history to voters and everything of that nature.”
Tavares also told councilors that the city would likely not be able to keep an individual’s immigration status private if their public voting information were requested for a court proceeding. –Fox News
Amidst these discussions, concerns were raised about the possibility of noncitizens mistakenly voting in state or federal elections, which could jeopardize their path to citizenship. City Councilor Liz Breadon underscored the potential risks, stressing the need to avoid any errors that might impact an immigrant’s journey towards citizenship.
The broader context of this proposal is Massachusetts’ struggle with the recent influx of migrants from the southern border. Democratic Gov. Maura Healey has declared a state of emergency, with the National Guard activated to manage the crisis. FEMA also granted the city $1.9 million over the summer to help migrants with shelter and transportation.
Boston City Councilor Kendra Lara introduced a bill to allow migrants to vote. (Jonathan Wiggs/The Boston Globe via Getty Images) Meanwhile, House Democrats in the Massachusetts state legislature recently pushed a $2.8 billion spending bill, allocating substantial funds to shelter vulnerable families, including migrants. This bill comes as the state’s emergency shelters face increasing pressure from a surge in migrant and homeless families.
Republicans in the state have voiced strong opposition, criticizing the lack of formal debate on the bill and challenging the actions of the Democratic majority as a “one-party monopoly.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 12/13/2023 – 17:20
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
