- Escobar: I'm Gonna MAGA You, Baby!
Escobar: I’m Gonna MAGA You, Baby!
Authored by Pepe Escobar,
It’s the greatest show on earth – unleashing a double bill of New Paradigm and Manifest Destiny on crack. We are the greatest. We will rock you – in every sense. We will crush you. We will take whatever we want because we can.
And if you wanna walk away from the U.S. dollar, we will destroy you. BRICS, we’re coming to get ya.
Trump 2.0 – a mix of professional wrestling and MMA played in a giant planetary cage – is in da house starting next Monday.
Trump 2.0 aims to be on the driving seat on the global financial system; on control of the world’s oil trade and LNG supply; and on strategic media platforms. Trump 2.0 is gearing up to be an extended exercise in the capacity to hurt The Other. Any Other. Hostile takeovers – and blood on the tracks. That’s how we “negotiate”.
Under Trump 2.0, global tech infrastructure must run on U.S. software, not just on the profit front but also on the spy front. AI data chips must be American only. AI data centers must be controlled by America only.
“Free trade” and “globalization”? That’s for losers. Welcome to neo-imperial, techno-feudal mercantilism – powered by U.S. tech supremacy.
Trump’s National Security Advisor Mike Waltz has named a few of the targets ahead: Greenland; Canada; assorted cartels; the Arctic; the Gulf of “America”; oil and gas; rare earth minerals. All in the name of strengthening “national security”.
A key plank: total control of the “Western Hemisphere”. Monroe Doctrine 2.0 – actually the Donroe Doctrine. America First, Last and Always.
Why the chessboard needs to be rejigged
Well, let’s delve a bit on pesky material imperatives. The Empire of Chaos faces a humongous debt, owed to usual suspect loan sharks, that may only be – partially – repaid by selected export surpluses. That would imply re-industrialization – a long, costly affair – and securing smooth military supply chains.
Where the resource base will be for this Sisyphean task? Washington simply cannot rely on Chinese exports and rare earths. The chessboard needs to be rejigged – with trade and tech unified under U.S. unilateral, monopoly control.
Plan A, so far, was to simultaneously confront Russia and China: the two top BRICS, and key vectors of Eurasia integration. China’s strategy, since the start of the millennium, has been to trade resources for infrastructure, developing Global South markets as China itself keeps developing.
Russia’s strategy has been to help nations recover their sovereignty; actually helping nations to help themselves on the sustainable development front.
Plan A against the concerted geoeconomic and geostrategic strategies of the Russia-China strategic partnership miserably failed.
What has been attempted by the ghastly, exiting U.S. administration generated serial, massive blowbacks.
So it’s time for Plan B: Looting the allies. They are already dominated chihuahuas anyway. The – exploitation – show must go on. And there are plenty of chihuahuas available to be exploited.
Canada has loads of fresh water plus oil and mining wealth. The Canadian business class in fact has always dreamed of deep integration with the Empire of Chaos.
Trump 2.0 and his team have been careful not to name names. When it comes to the Arctic as a crucial, evolving battlefield, there may be a vague allusion to the Northwest Passage. But never a mention of what really matters; the Northern Sea Route – the Russian denomination; the Chinese call it the Arctic Silk Road. That’s one of the key connectivity corridors of the future.
The Northern Sea Route encompasses at least 15% of the world’s unexplored oil and 30% of the world’s unexplored natural gas. Greenland is smack in the middle of this New Great Game – capable of supplying years of uranium, as much oil as Alaska (bought from Russia in 1867), plus rare earths – not to mention providing useful real state for missile defense and offense.
Washington has been trying to grab Greenland from Denmark since 1946. There’s a deal with Copenhagen in place guaranteeing military control – mostly naval. Now Greenland is being revamped as the ideal U.S. entry point into the Arctic Great Game against Russia.
At the St. Petersburg forum last June, I had the privilege to follow an exceptional round table on the Northern Sea Route: that’s an integral part of Russia’s 21st century development project, focused on commercial navigation – “We need more icebreakers!” – and bound to surpass Suez and Gibraltar in the near future.
Slightly over 50,000 Greenland residents – which already enjoy autonomy, especially vis a vis the EU – would more than accept a full Danish exit; Copenhagen actually abandoned them since 1951. Greenlanders will love to profit from vast U.S. investments.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went straight to the point: “The first step is to listen to the Greenlanders” – comparing it to how Russia listened to the residents of Crimea, Donbass and Novorossiya vis a vis Kiev.
What Trump 2.0 actually wants from Greenland is crystal clear: total militarization; privileged access to rare earths; and commercially excluding Russia and Chinese companies.
Chinese military expert Yu Chun noted that “soon, the long-desired ‘golden waterway’ of the Arctic Ocean is expected to open, allowing ships to traverse the Pacific Ocean and sail along the northern coasts of North America and Eurasia into the Atlantic Ocean.”
As the Northern Sea Route is “a key element of Sino-Russian cooperation”, it’s inevitable that the U.S.’s “strategic vision is to prevent the establishment of a ‘golden waterway’ between China, Russia, and Europe by controlling Greenland.”
Freak out in the chihuahua front
On the wider chihuahua front, activity is frantic. Assorted Davos/ Deep State-linked elites across NATOstan – from Europe to Canada – are in the process of being replaced by new, Trump 2.0-affiliated elites.
That’s indissociably linked to the Looting the Allies strategy: the further destruction of the vassal EU economy to strengthen the heart of the Empire.
In Germany, the Afd’s Alice Weidel – pragmatic, intellectually capable – offers a quite intriguing perspective. She is stressing on the record that Germany needs to restart importing raw materials and cheap natural gas – let’s reopen Nord Stream – from Russia.
That opens the tantalizing possibility that Trump and his factotum Elon Musk fully realize that Germany is worthless to the U.S. as a de-industrialized backwater – even under the overall framework of a hardcore neoliberal asset stripping offensive. Of course Trump 2.0 will extract a hefty price for Germans to get a revitalized nation back.
Trump 2.0 at least holds the – dubious – merit of a relatively realistic reading of the chessboard; Russia, India, China – the Primakov triangle – as well as Iran have become too powerful to be looted. So the next best option is Plunder the Chihuahuas. The blowing up of Nord Stream as ordered by the Biden crime family – as detailed by Sy Hersh – was a gleaming starter.
The future of NATO in the Great America project is now up for grabs. Gotta pay up – or else: contribution of each member nation should go up to 5% of GDP instead of the current 2%.
Talk about a 150% price hike. Incidentally, Trump so far has not even muttered the nonsensical expression “Indo-Pacific”. For all practical purposes, Trump is telling NATO to take a hike.
In the event of a double NATOstan annexation of Canada and Greenland, the U.S. may be even able to match Russia’s resource base. Arguably that’s the key rationale for unleashing this New Great Game. Forget “multipolarity”. BRICS, take note.
The most intriguing side plot is, of course, Elon Musk. Trump badly needs Musk’s massive social media/propaganda digital megaphone. Simultaneously, on the chihuahua front, the platinum sidekick wants to profit from a Europe capable of assessing enough energy, raw materials and loads of consumers with solid purchasing power.
The facts on the ground already spell out the “rules-based international order” being replaced in a flash by a no-rules international disorder. After all, international law has already been abolished by the Empire of Chaos itself (that’s bipartisan) – when it comes to illegal, unilateral sanctions, theft of financial assets or legitimization of genocide and head-chopping “moderate rebels”.
Trump 2.0 will be nothing but enforcing a de facto phenomenon: a post-historical disorder. End of History – that was always for suckers.
All of this incendiary chain of events is on a roll essentially because of one single reason: the Empire of Chaos lost the proxy war in Ukraine. What remains to be discussed is the modality of the surrender. So it’s no wonder Trump had to come up with a seductive, but still fraught with danger, larger than life psy op to imperatively change the narrative.
* * *
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 23:25 - AI Facial Recognition Software Is Fueling A Rise In False Arrests
AI Facial Recognition Software Is Fueling A Rise In False Arrests
“Orwell is here, and he’s living large, man!”
Police nationwide are misusing facial recognition software, relying on it to arrest suspects without additional evidence, according to a new investigation by the Washington Post.
Most departments aren’t required to disclose or document its use. Among 23 departments with available records, 15 across 12 states arrested suspects based solely on AI matches, often violating internal policies requiring corroboration.
One report called an unverified AI match a “100% match,” while another claimed the technology “unquestionably” identified a suspect. At least eight people have been wrongfully arrested in the U.S. due to AI matches, two of which were previously unreported.
All cases were dismissed, but basic police work—such as checking alibis or comparing physical evidence—could have prevented these arrests. The true scale of AI-fueled false arrests remains unknown, as most departments lack disclosure requirements and rarely reveal AI use.
The Post identified 75 departments using facial recognition, with records from 40 showing arrests tied to AI matches. Of these, 23 provided sufficient detail, revealing that nearly two-thirds made arrests without corroborating evidence. Departments often refused to discuss their practices or claimed officers relied on visual judgment to confirm matches.
In Florence, Kentucky, police used uncorroborated AI matches in at least four cases, with mixed outcomes. Local prosecutor Louis Kelly defended officers’ judgment in identifying suspects, including those flagged by AI.
For its report, the Washington Post reviewed facial recognition use by 75 police departments, with detailed records from 23. It found 15 departments, including Austin, Detroit, and Miami, made arrests based solely on AI matches without independent evidence.
Some lacked records or transparency, while others relied on questionable practices like showing AI-identified photos to witnesses. Interviews clarified some cases, but reliance on uncorroborated AI remains widespread.
You can read the full investigation here.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 23:00 - Animal Farm Politics: The Deep State Wins Again
Animal Farm Politics: The Deep State Wins Again
Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,
“No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
– George Orwell, Animal Farm
It cost the American taxpayer $24 million to find out what we knew all along: politics is corrupt.
After four years of being subjected to special prosecutor Jack Smith’s dogged investigation into alleged election interference by Donald Trump, the Justice Department has concluded that Trump would have been convicted of breaking the law if only he hadn’t gotten re-elected.
In other words, the Deep State wins again.
The revelation here is not that Trump broke the law but the extent to which sitting presidents get a free pass when it comes to misconduct.
None of this is news.
The Deep State has been operating from this exact same playbook for decades, regardless of which party has occupied the White House.
Indeed, Richard Nixon let the cat out of the bag when he explained that the very act of being president places one beyond the rule of law (“when the president does it … that means that it is not illegal”).
This is how we ended up with an imperial president—empowered to act as a dictator, above the law and beyond any real accountability—and why “we the people” keep finding ourselves mired in a political swamp of lies, graft, cronyism and corruption.
George Orwell, who died 75 years ago on Jan. 21, 1950, must be rolling in his grave.
In the 75 years since George Orwell died, his works of dystopian fiction—which warn against rampant abuse of power, mind control and mass manipulation coupled with the rise of ubiquitous technology, fascism and totalitarianism—have become operation manuals for power-hungry political regimes wedded to the corporate state.
While Orwell’s novel 1984 foreshadowed the rise of an omnipresent, modern-day surveillance state, his novel Animal Farm aptly sums up the state of politics today, propped up by a two-party system designed to maintain the illusion that voting matters.
Orwell understood what many Americans, caught up in their partisan flag-waving, are still struggling to come to terms with: that there is no such thing as a government organized for the good of the people—even the best intentions among those in government inevitably give way to the desire to maintain power and control at all costs.
As Orwell explains:
“The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”
No doubt about it: the revolution was successful.
That January 6, 2021 attempt by President Trump and his followers to overturn the election results was not the revolution, however.
Those who answered President Trump’s call to march on the Capitol were merely the fall guys, manipulated into creating the perfect crisis for the Deep State – a.k.a. the Police State a.k.a. the Military Industrial Complex a.k.a. the Techno-Corporate State a.k.a. the Surveillance State—to amass even greater powers.
It took no time at all for the switch to be thrown and the nation’s capital to be placed under a military lockdown, online speech forums restricted, and individuals with subversive or controversial viewpoints ferreted out, investigated, shamed and/or shunned.
It was a set-up, folks.
The Justice Department’s policy of not prosecuting a sitting president was the tell.
The only coup d’etat to undermine the will of the people happened when our government “of the people, by the people, for the people” was overthrown by a profit-driven, militaristic, techno-corporate state that is in cahoots with a government “of the rich, by the elite, for the corporations.”
This swamp is of the Deep State’s making to such an extent that every successive president starting with Franklin D. Roosevelt has been bought lock, stock and barrel and made to dance to the Deep State’s tune.
Beneath the power suits, they’re all alike.
Donald Trump, the candidate who swore to drain the swamp in Washington DC, merely paved the way for lobbyists, corporations, the military industrial complex, and the Deep State to feast on the carcass of the dying American republic.
Joe Biden was no different: his job was to keep the Deep State in power.
Trump’s return to the White House has already thrown wide the gates to all manner of swampiness.
Follow the money. It always points the way.
As Bertram Gross noted in Friendly Fascism: The New Face of Power in America, “evil now wears a friendlier face than ever before in American history.”
Writing in 1980, Gross predicted a future in which he saw:“…a new despotism creeping slowly across America. Faceless oligarchs sit at command posts of a corporate-government complex that has been slowly evolving over many decades. In efforts to enlarge their own powers and privileges, they are willing to have others suffer the intended or unintended consequences of their institutional or personal greed. For Americans, these consequences include chronic inflation, recurring recession, open and hidden unemployment, the poisoning of air, water, soil and bodies, and, more important, the subversion of our constitution. More broadly, consequences include widespread intervention in international politics through economic manipulation, covert action, or military invasion…”
This stealthy, creeping, silent coup that Gross prophesied is the same danger that writer Rod Serling envisioned in the 1964 political thriller Seven Days in May, a clear warning to beware of martial law packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.
Incredibly enough, more than 60 years later, we find ourselves hostages to a government run more by military doctrine and corporate greed than by the rule of law established in the Constitution. Indeed, proving once again that fact and fiction are not dissimilar, today’s current events could well have been lifted straight out of Seven Days in May, which takes viewers into eerily familiar terrain.
The premise is straightforward.
With the Cold War at its height, an unpopular U.S. President signs a momentous nuclear disarmament treaty with the Soviet Union. Believing that the treaty constitutes an unacceptable threat to the security of the United States and certain that he knows what is best for the nation, General James Mattoon Scott (played by Burt Lancaster), the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and presidential hopeful, plans a military takeover of the national government. When Gen. Scott’s aide, Col. Casey (Kirk Douglas), discovers the planned military coup, he goes to the President with the information. The race for command of the U.S. government begins, with the clock ticking off the hours until the military plotters plan to overthrow the President.
Needless to say, while on the big screen, the military coup is foiled and the republic is saved in a matter of hours, in the real world, the plot thickens and spreads out over the past half century.
We’ve been losing our freedoms so incrementally for so long—sold to us in the name of national security and global peace, maintained by way of martial law disguised as law and order, and enforced by a standing army of militarized police and a political elite determined to maintain their powers at all costs—that it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it all started going downhill, but we’ve been on that fast-moving, downward trajectory for some time now.
The question is no longer whether the U.S. government will be preyed upon and taken over by the military industrial complex. That’s a done deal, but martial law disguised as national security is only one small part of the greater deception we’ve been fooled into believing is for our own good.
How do you get a nation to docilely accept a police state? How do you persuade a populace to accept metal detectors and pat downs in their schools, bag searches in their train stations, tanks and military weaponry used by their small-town police forces, surveillance cameras in their traffic lights, police strip searches on their public roads, unwarranted blood draws at drunk driving checkpoints, whole body scanners in their airports, and government agents monitoring their communications?
Try to ram such a state of affairs down the throats of the populace, and you might find yourself with a rebellion on your hands. Instead, you bombard them with constant color-coded alerts, terrorize them with shootings and bomb threats in malls, schools, and sports arenas, desensitize them with a steady diet of police violence, and sell the whole package to them as being for their best interests.
The 2021 military occupation of the nation’s capital by 25,000 troops as part of the so-called “peaceful” transfer of power from one administration to the next is telling.
That was not the language of a free people. This is the language of force.
January 6, 2021, and its aftermath merely provided the government and its corporate technocrats the perfect excuse to show off all of the powers they’ve been amassing so assiduously over the years.
Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats.
I’m referring to “government” with a capital “G,” the entrenched Deep State that is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and has set itself beyond the reach of the law.
I’m referring to the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.
This brings us back to Orwell’s Animal Farm, which turns 80 this year.
Originally titled a fairy story, the satirical allegory recounts the revolutionary struggle of a group of farm animals living in squalor and neglect on a poorly run farm managed by a derelict farmer.
Hoping to create a society where all animals are equal, the farm animals mount a revolution, ejecting the farmer, taking control of the farm, establishing their own Bill of Rights, and operating under the mantra “four legs good, two legs bad.” Not surprisingly, as is the case with most revolutions, the new boss—a pig named Napoleon—turns out to be no different from their old human oppressor. Over time, a ruling class of pigs comes to dominate on the farm, which is policed by dogs, with the pigs starting to dress, walk and talk like their human counterparts. Eventually, the pigs forge an alliance with their former two-legged adversaries in order to maintain their power over the rest of the farm animals. Before long, the pigs’ transformation into two-legged overlords is complete: “they were all alike.”
Much like the gullible, easily led creatures of Animal Farm, we find ourselves being brainwashed into believing that the tyrannies meted out against us are for our own good; that the trials are tribulations we experience at the hands of the ruling elite are privileges for which we should feel grateful; and that our bondage to the Deep State is actually, appearances to the contrary, freedom.
Over time, without their realizing it, the Seven Commandments of liberation and equality that were so central to Animal Farm’s revolutionary movement are whittled down to a single commandment: “ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.”
And that, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, is the lesson for all of us in the American Police State as we prepare for yet another changing of the guard in Washington, DC.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 22:35 - "Turns Out, Presidents Matter": Marc Andreessen Calls For US Strategy To Address China's Manufacturing Dominance
“Turns Out, Presidents Matter”: Marc Andreessen Calls For US Strategy To Address China’s Manufacturing Dominance
Marc Andreessen, the billionaire investor and co-founder of the influential Silicon Valley venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, joined the host of Uncommon Knowledge, Peter Robinson (former Reagan speechwriter), to discuss his pivotal role in shaping Silicon Valley and politics.
For decades, Andreessen has supported Democrats, including Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. However, a troubling 2024 spring meeting with Biden administration officials spooked the Silicon Valley entrepreneur. He said Biden officials explained their plan to control AI through government regulatory capture—a strategy reminiscent of Communist policies in China.
Andreessen told Robinson that President-elect Donald Trump’s knowledge about problem-solving in business and energy is “extremely sophisticated” and “world-class on real estate and communications.”
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 15, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
“My analysis would be he is world-class in real estate and on communications … and he’s world-class on both which is like probably the first person in the world to be world-class on both of those things, right? The real estate industry is not historically known for its great communicators,” Andreessen continued.
Robinson and Andreessen also discussed Silicon Valley’s technological and political evolution, Andreessen’s shifting political alliances from Clinton, Obama, and Biden to MAGA, and his vision for harnessing cutting-edge technology to advance societal progress. They also addressed energy challenges, border security, and national defense.
In particular, Robinson and Andreessen spoke about China’s manufacturing dominance.
Andreessen explained:
And I’ll just tell you where I’m worried right now, where the problem is compounding. So you mentioned the, sort of, iPhone assembly, and that’s a big deal. But basically, there’s three industries that sort of follow phones that are kicking in right now.
So, one is drones. And it’s sort of in a bizarre turn of events, the Chinese basically own the global drone market for all, basically, the consumer drones, all the cheap drones. Which by the way, numerically then are the drones that all the militarys also use in overwhelming numbers. And something over 90% of all drones used by the US military are made in China.
No, no, it gets worse, it gets worse, it gets worse, it gets worse before it gets. So the drone thing is not just a company, it’s an entire ecosystem. It’s all of the componentry.
He continued:
We have a drone company that’s been trying to compete with the Chinese company. Number one, the Biden FAA has been trying to kill us this entire time, trying to do all kinds of things to make sure that American drone companies can’t succeed as part of their war on tech. It’s literally just another in the long list of ways that they’ve been just trying to absolutely kill us.
But two is, China has figured this out. And so, the US has been sanctioning AI chips going to China, China is now sanctioning, they sanction our drone company for the battery, [LAUGH] cuz the battery is made in China, right? And so they have like significant leverage, not just for the drones, but for the entire supply chain.
By the way, the drone supply chain is very analogous to the car supply chain. A self driving electric car is very similar to a drone, or for that matter, to an iPhone. It’s an electrical mechanical device, but it’s a lot of the same kind of battery technology, chip technology, sensor technology.
So they now have their version of what the Germans used to have, which is sort of, the thousands of mid market companies that make all the parts that go into a car. But the German ecosystem is still making them for old internal combustion cars, the Chinese ecosystem is making them for electric cars and self driving cars.
And of course, that means the new Chinese cars that are coming out are really good and they have a giant advantage on cost. And they are starting to bring to market cars that are equivalent in quality to western cars at a third or a fourth of price. So that’s coming. And then the big one that follows phones, drones, and cars, logically, is robots.
Robinson asked Andreessen:
And the Chinese are ahead of us there?
Andreessen responded:
100%, now, we have the leading, this is important, we have the leading software,like we have the leading R&D.
Like, we have the smartest, I’m convinced we have like the smartest robotics AI people. We have the best people, specifically for the design of the systems, but we don’t have anything resembling the manufacturing capability at all.
Andreessen noted that these technologies are upstream from all the military applications because they are intertwined in the same supply chains. He said the US must confront this and reverse the fragmented approach, where the Biden administration would “hate the domestic American technology industry and is trying to kill it” one day and then, on other days, “thinks we’re gonna somehow develop some sort of competitive response to China on cars or on weapons in the future.”
🚨 NEW: Marc Andreessen on China’s manufacturing dominance
“There’s three industries that follow phones that the Chinese own the global market at:
1) Drones
Something over 90% of all the consumer drones are made in China. Which is what the US Military also uses. It’s the whole… pic.twitter.com/e94C927MMU— Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) January 15, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The takeaway from the interview is clear: Trump 2.0 must craft a coherent, competitive response to advancing technology under an ‘America First’ agenda. This is in contrast to the radicals in the Biden-Harris regime, who focused on de-growth policies (under the guise of climate change) that have allowed China to advance ahead of the US.
“What’s the whole of government strategy on China? Zero, right? It turns out the president matters,” Andreessen concluded.
Watch the full interview here:
Marc Andreessen (@pmarca) is a prominent Silicon Valley entrepreneur, investor, technologist, and co-founder and general partner at Andreessen Horowitz. In this @UncKnowledge discussion, Andreessen reflects on his journey—from growing up in rural Wisconsin to founding Netscape… pic.twitter.com/10fgVlqpW8
— Hoover Institution (@HooverInst) January 14, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
One must ask: whose team was the Biden-Harris administration on? It doesn’t appear they prioritized an ‘America First’ agenda. This will change under Trump.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 22:10 - Outgoing Biden Admin Bans Imports From 37 Chinese Companies Over Uyghur Forced Labor
Outgoing Biden Admin Bans Imports From 37 Chinese Companies Over Uyghur Forced Labor
Authored by Lily Zhou via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The outgoing Biden administration is banning imports from an additional 37 China-based companies over forced labor in Xinjiang, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said on Tuesday.
A worker moves freshly harvested cotton at a processing plant in Aksu, Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, China, on Dec. 1, 2015. Dominique Patton/Reuters From Wednesday, Huafu Fashion, one of the world’s largest textile manufacturers, 25 of its subsidiaries, and 11 Chinese solar or mining companies, will be included in the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Entity List for producing products or mining critical minerals in Xinjiang, where the Chinese communist regime is accused of human rights abuses against the Uyghur people and other Muslim-majority ethnic minorities.
Under the UFLPA, businesses are banned from importing products from companies on the list and anything mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in Xinjiang, unless they can prove no forced labor is involved.
Tuesday’s addition is the largest expansion to the list since the UFLPA became law in December 2021, bringing the total number of companies on the list to 144.
“In adding 37 companies to the UFLPA Entities List and bringing the total to nearly 150, we again demonstrate our relentless fight against the cruelty of forced labor, our unwavering commitment to basic human rights, and our tireless defense of a free, fair, and competitive market,” Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement.
The DHS said Huafu “maintains a vertically integrated supply chain from cotton planting in [Xinjiang], processing, and yarn spinning through textiles manufacturing.”
Among the 25 Huafu subsidiaries added to the list, 22 are located in Xinjiang.
According to a list published in July 2023, compiled by the Helena Kennedy Centre for International Justice at Britain’s Sheffield Hallam University, Huafu had been connected in media or academic reports to state-sponsored labor transfer outside Xinjiang, while one of its subsidiaries, Xinjiang Tianfu Cotton Supply Chain Co., Ltd., had been connected to state-sponsored labor transfer within the region.
Three of the subsidiaries were connected to the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, which is sanctioned by the United States, according to the Sheffield Hallam University list. They include Shihezi Huafu Hongsheng Cotton Industry Co., Ltd., Huyanghe Huafu Hongsheng Cotton Industry Co., Ltd., and Xinjiang Tianfu Cotton Supply Chain Co., Ltd.
Since the early 2000s, the Chinese regime has implemented programs to transfer labor within Xinjiang or from Xinjiang to other provinces, claiming the policy is aimed at alleviating poverty. However, researchers have said the programs are coercive and have more sinister purposes, such as reducing the density of the Uyghur population.
In a report published in 2021 by Washington-based defense policy think tank the Jamestown Foundation, Adrian Zenz, senior fellow and director of China studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, and one of the first researchers to expose the mass detention of Uyghur Muslims and other minorities in internment camps in Xinjiang, said evidence provided “strong proof of the systemically coercive nature of Xinjiang’s labor transfer programs and underscores a process-oriented approach towards designating such programs to be forced labor.”
The Chinese regime has previously denied forced labor in Xinjiang, saying the allegations were made up by “anti-China” individuals and organisations in the West.
Other companies being added to the UFLPA Entity List “mine and process Xinjiang’s critical minerals” or “manufacture inputs for solar modules with polysilicon made in Xinjiang,” the DHS said.
The list includes limited companies Jiangsu Meike Solar Technology, Baotou Meike Silicon Energy, Shuangliang Silicon Materials (Batou), Xinjiang Energy (Group), Xinjiang Energy (Group) Real Estate, Xinjiang Zijin Zinc Industry, Xinjiang Jinbao Mining, Zijin Mining Group, Xinjiang Zijin Zinc Industry, Xinjiang Zijin Nonferrous Metals, and Xinjiang Habahe Ashele Copper.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 21:45 - Biden Unveils Last-Minute FDA Proposal To Lower Cigarette Nicotine Levels
Biden Unveils Last-Minute FDA Proposal To Lower Cigarette Nicotine Levels
In the final days of the Biden-Harris administration, the Food and Drug Administration announced a proposed rule to reduce nicotine levels in cigarettes to decrease the addictiveness of combustible tobacco products. The news sent tobacco stocks marginally lower in the cash session.
The proposed rule (RIN 0910-AI76), “Tobacco Product Standard for Nicotine Yield of Cigarettes and Certain Other Combusted Tobacco Products,” aims to slash nicotine in cigarettes to approximately .7 milligrams per gram of tobacco.
“FDA is proposing this action to reduce the addictiveness of these products, thus giving people who are addicted and wish to quit the ability to do so more easily,” the FDA wrote in the proposed rule, adding, “The proposed product standard is anticipated to benefit the population as a whole.”
Major tobacco stocks, including Philip Morris International, Altria Group, and British American Tobacco, were each down around half a percent in the early afternoon cash session.
“Multiple administrations have acknowledged the immense opportunity that a proposal of this kind offers to address the burden of tobacco-related disease,” FDA commissioner Robert M. Califf wrote in a statement.
Califf continued, “This action, if finalized, could save many lives and dramatically reduce the burden of severe illness and disability, while also saving huge amounts of money.”
Whether the incoming Trump administration will allow the proposal to move forward remains unclear, given Reynolds American donated $8 million to Trump’s main super PAC during the prior election cycle.
Meanwhile, anti-tobacco advocates have been furious with the Biden-Harris team for its notable failure to ban menthol cigarettes before the election. Such a ban would’ve sparked a political backlash among Black voters – something Democrats tried to avoid.
NEW: The Biden admin is on the verge of effectively banning cigarettes, a move that would deliver a huge win to the cartels and the black market.
According to some reports, the rule could eliminate nearly *98%* of nicotine in cigarettes, effectively making them non-addictive.… pic.twitter.com/LmFoXRc6Gc
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) January 15, 2025
Reynolds American spokesman Luis Pinto told the New York Times that the new proposed rule, in draft form, is a major threat to the industry and would “effectively eliminate legal cigarettes and fuel an already massive illicit nicotine market.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 21:20 - Education Department Cancels Another $4.2 Billion In Student Loan Debt
Education Department Cancels Another $4.2 Billion In Student Loan Debt
Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
In the final days of his term, President Joe Biden announced the cancellation of federal student loan debt for more than 150,000 more borrowers.
US President Joe Biden speaks about student loan relief at Madison College in Madison, Wisconsin, on April 8, 2024. Photo by ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP The latest round of relief provides $1.26 billion for 85,000 individuals who attended schools that allegedly “cheated and defrauded their students;” $2.5 billion for 61,000 borrowers with total and permanent disabilities; and $465 million for 6,100 public service workers, the U.S. Department of Education said on Monday.
This latest action brings the total student loan debt canceled since Biden took office to $183.6 billion, benefiting more than 5 million Americans, according to the White House.
“I’m proud to say we have forgiven more student loan debt than any other administration in history,” Biden said in the statement.
Much of Monday’s relief is facilitated through a program called borrower defense, which allows students to apply for debt discharge if their colleges use misleading advertising or otherwise commit fraud.
A legal battle over borrower defense reached the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday when justices agreed to review the Biden administration’s borrower-defense rule, which simplified the application process for affected borrowers and allowed automatic debt discharges in some cases.
The borrower defense provision has existed since 1995 but was rarely used until after 2015, when Corinthian Colleges, a prominent for-profit education chain, went out of business. The collapse prompted widespread complaints from former students burdened with large amounts of debt.
In response, the Education Department issued a rule in 2016 that established a formal process for borrowers to apply for loan discharges. In 2019, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos revised the rule to tighten eligibility criteria and limit the amount of relief that borrowers could receive, assuming they had gained at least some value from their education.
Then-President Donald Trump supported this tightened approach. In 2020, as the Education Department began processing a massive backlog of borrower defense claims, Trump vetoed a bipartisan resolution that would have halted the 2019 rule, saying it would undermine students’ ability to make educational choices that best suit their needs.
In 2022, the Biden administration finalized a new borrower-defense rule designed to provide full relief to borrowers who had received partial forgiveness under the DeVos-era policy. However, the rule has been put on hold since the summer of 2023, following a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
That court granted a preliminary injunction in April, citing “numerous statutory and regulatory shortcomings” in Biden’s policy. The appellate judges also called some provisions “certainly unlawful” and criticized the rule’s “vague, brand new standards” for holding colleges accountable.
“The unbridled scope of these prohibitions enables the department to hold schools liable for conduct that it defines only with future ‘guidance’ documents or in the course of adjudication,” the judges wrote in their opinion. “Simply put, the statute does not permit the department to terrify first and clarify later.”
The Supreme Court has yet to say when it will hear oral arguments.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 20:55 - 'It Was The Most Tense Moment': U.S. Ambassador Reveals Deteriorating Relationship With China Worse Than Previously Known
‘It Was The Most Tense Moment’: U.S. Ambassador Reveals Deteriorating Relationship With China Worse Than Previously Known
In his final interview as U.S. Ambassador to China, Nicholas Burns told the Wall Street Journal’s Jonathan Cheng that Chinese officials severed communication with the U.S. after President Biden’s order to shoot down China’s spy balloon off the coast of South Carolina, calling it “the most tense moment” of his tenure in Beijing.
JONATHAN CHENG: This is perhaps your last interview here in Beijing, so let me just jump right in and ask: Was there a moment that you thought perhaps we were peering over the edge?
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: I have to tell you, after the balloon crisis—that was February, the beginning of February 2023—you remember that strange balloon that floated across the national territory of the United States from Alaska to South Carolina. When the president, quite rightfully, ordered it to be shot down over the territorial waters of South Carolina, in the aftermath of that, the Chinese shut down and refused to talk to us in senior-level channels. I was one of the few channels that we had going.
I was worried about the relationship. I think it was the most tense moment, February, March, April of 2023, and that is not healthy for a relationship between the two strongest military powers in the world because you don’t want a situation where a seemingly minor incident, like a misunderstanding in the Spratly Islands between our militaries, might become a major crisis. You want to be able to handle something like that.
JONATHAN CHENG: Now, if you’re sitting here in Beijing and you’re seeing the rhetoric about Canada, about Greenland, does it make it more difficult for the U.S. government to go to China and say we need to make sure that we respect sovereignty in the South China Sea or around the periphery of China? Does that make it harder?
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: The argument we made back three years ago when Putin invaded Ukraine is that country’s borders are sacred, that sovereignty is sacrosanct, and so that’s a fundamental building block of the stable, successful world that we had a lot of responsibility for building—that every single American president has honored.
JONATHAN CHENG: Part of the concern with China and Putin is the question of sovereignty. I mean, it sounds like it does make it more difficult.
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: Our message to Putin and the Chinese will be very strong and credible when we practice that respect for sovereignty, especially of our allies. These are two NATO allies. You know, NATO’s a collective defense organization. We pledge our fortunes to each other. On 9/11, it was the most extraordinary moment of my career when these countries, 18 others, came forward within several hours to say we’re with you. We’ll invoke this clause in the NATO Charter: an attack on one is an attack on all. Remember who led it? Canada.
JONATHAN CHENG: Now as we look ahead, The next administration, it looks like tariffs are going to be part of the mix here. Certainly, tariff threats are part of the mix. I mean, do you worry about that souring the relationship in particular? And do you grant that perhaps an approach that is tougher might actually yield some benefits?
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: I wouldn’t want to be unfair to them by trying to project what I think they may or may not do, but I will say this: President Biden has used tariffs. In fact, President Biden elevated the tariffs back in May of 2024. He ordered an increase of 100% tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles coming into the United States, 50% tariffs on Chinese semiconductors, and 25% tariffs on Chinese lithium batteries. So if the Chinese are going to compete unfairly, if they’re not going to meet us halfway, and if we were to avoid a second China shock that would lead to massive losses in manufacturing jobs in the United States, we’ve got to defend American workers.
JONATHAN CHENG: Certainly, the Republican Party would say so—that the Biden team hasn’t made that much progress on industrial overcapacity and that we need a tougher approach. And what would you say to them?
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: Well, we’ve certainly rung the village bell on industrial overcapacity. We see China trying to export its excess production of lithium batteries, solar panels, robotics, steel, to the rest of the world, and you’ve seen this extraordinary reaction. Who has raised tariffs on China? South Africa, Turkey, India, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Canada, the European Union, and the United States. So we are not alone in reacting to this, which tells you that the Chinese have miscalculated here, and we’ve reacted in a very strong way. When you raise tariffs in the way that President Biden did—so dramatically, with so much strength—I think that was the right thing for us to do.
JONATHAN CHENG: You’ve been concerned for your two-plus years at the time about the very aggressive Chinese government efforts to denigrate America, to tell a distorted story about American society, American history, American policy, and there’s a high degree of anti-Americanism online. As you walk out the door here, does that continue to concern you?
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: I think the efforts of the government to do all of that continue, unfortunately. You know, we call it the Battle of Ideas. The communist government here has an entirely different set of beliefs about the rights of individuals, about human freedom, about religious freedom, and we differ very strongly. We’re making sure that we have every possibility of going around their censors. They censor us every day, and it’s a cat-and-mouse game. We try to get our beliefs, a speech by President Biden, back into the airwaves here, back into the bloodstream of China, and I know we’re right in doing this. I think the American people would expect their embassy here to be waging this battle. It’s a peaceful battle, but it’s a battle for minds and for a true picture of American society. So, we’re just trying to defend an accurate view and project an accurate view of our society, our history, and the great ideals for which we stand.
JONATHAN CHENG: You’re going to get on a plane and return to the US. Do you worry about the future of US-China relations?
AMB. NICHOLAS BURNS: I think we should always be worried about it because here you have the two strongest economic powers and military powers at cross purposes on many of the major issues concerning the future of the world and the future of our relationships. So I think, as a diplomat, I’ve been constantly concerned in the nearly three years I’ve been here. We’ve got to have a combination of real strength and conviction that we’re going to uphold American national interests, and at the same time, we’re going to have to find a way to work with them and connect to them to keep the peace. Those are not contradictory; that’s two halves of a rational policy towards China.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 20:30 - If You Care About Healthy Food, Confirm RFK Jr.
If You Care About Healthy Food, Confirm RFK Jr.
Authored by Mollie Engelhart via RealClearHealth,
As a vegan chef turned regenerative cattle rancher, I’ve traversed the narrow divides between two worlds: the health-conscious, progressive enclaves of Los Angeles and the rugged, often misunderstood landscapes of rural Texas. For years, I lived and breathed the principles of organic farming and plant-based eating, firmly rooted in the belief that our food systems should be safe, resilient, and free from harmful chemicals. My community was predominantly left-leaning, passionate about clean water, food safety, and the dangers of over-medication. It felt like common sense.
Yet, a seismic shift occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. Suddenly, the very people who once railed against chemicals in our food were now clamoring for more. They went from advocating for natural and holistic approaches to a new cult-like devotion to any and every product produced by big pharma, big ag and big food – seemingly forgetting the principles they once held dear. It left me bewildered and questioning the values of a movement I had long identified with.
I am a lifelong liberal. I married someone who is undocumented, and I’ve spent years passionately advocating for organic farming and holistic health. But as the pandemic unfolded, I began to realize that I had more in common with those I once considered my ideological opposites. In seeking a deeper understanding of the debate over the COVID-19 vaccines, I found myself listening to voices I had previously dismissed, including those of the right. It was a disorienting journey, yet it opened my eyes to a broader narrative.
One voice that stood out was Tucker Carlson. Initially, I viewed him through the lens of my biases, assuming he was a racist and a bigot. But as I listened more closely, I realized that he, too, was a father concerned for his children’s health and future. He shared my values around environmentalism, clean water, and the importance of preserving our natural world. This was a turning point for me. I recognized that we were not enemies; we were parents trying to protect our families in a world fraught with uncertainty.
This brings me to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. His candidacy for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) resonates deeply with my journey. Many in my community dismiss him as a “whack job” with no medical background, but this kind of labeling is all too reminiscent of how I once viewed Carlson. RFK Jr. is not a threat; he is a champion for informed consent and transparency in our food and pharmaceutical systems.
His vision for HHS aligns perfectly with the values I hold dear. He advocates for reducing chemicals in our food supply and ensuring that parents have the right to understand what goes into their children’s bodies. As a mother, I believe it is our right to know the ingredients in the vaccines our children receive, just as it is our right to demand food that nourishes rather than harms. We cannot ignore the fact that cheap, chemically laden food is a privilege that comes at a grave cost to farmworkers’ health. I was reminded of this every time I spoke to Cynthia, a house cleaner in California, who was part of a team that harvested strawberries—each of them diagnosed with cancer before age 40.
The recent leftward shift towards accepting more chemicals in our food and water is disheartening. This is not merely a partisan issue; it’s a human issue. It’s about our children’s future and the environment we leave behind. We should be prioritizing clean air and water, not pushing for more fluoride or pesticides. True environmentalism is about ensuring that our food is safe, our air is breathable, and our water is drinkable. This has long been a cornerstone of progressive ideology, and it feels like we’ve lost our way.
It pains me to see my friends on the left resist RFK Jr.’s candidacy. He is an accomplished environmental advocate with a proven track record of holding powerful corporations accountable for their actions. He cleaned up the Hudson River and has been a steadfast voice for mothers who have often been ignored. His understanding of the intersection between corporate interests and government regulation is precisely what we need in this critical role.
I understand that the political landscape is fraught with emotion and disappointment, especially with the current administration. However, we must recognize that this is an opportunity for real, transformative change in our food systems—an opportunity to reshape the relationship between corporate interests and government oversight in a way that prioritizes public health and environmental responsibility.
As a mother, a farmer, a chef, and a concerned citizen, it would be a grave mistake to overlook the potential for substantial reform that RFK Jr. could bring to the Department of Health and Human Services. We have the chance to make significant strides toward a healthier food system and a more just society.
I urge the members of the United States Senate to move quickly to confirm Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services so that we can begin the critical work of making our nation’s food supply and its people healthy again.
Mollie Engelhart is an accomplished restauranteur, organic chef and regenerative farmer.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 20:05 - Which State Has The Longest Emergency Room Visit Time?
Which State Has The Longest Emergency Room Visit Time?
Emergency room wait times vary significantly across the United States depending on factors such as hospital resources, patient volume, and staffing levels, with some states facing delays that can stretch for more than three hours.
Long stays in the emergency department often point to issues like understaffing or overcrowding, leading to delays in treatment, and often times, worse patient health outcomes.
This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu, visualizes the average time patients spend in the emergency department before leaving, by U.S. state and territory.
Data comes from the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and is updated as of Oct. 30, 2024.
This data reflects the average time patients spend at the emergency department, from the time they arrive to the time they leave, and excludes those who died in the emergency department, left without the approval of a licensed provider, or lacked documented discharge destinations.
Which State Has the Longest Emergency Room Visit Time?
Below, we show the average time patients spent in the emergency room before leaving, by state.
Rank State/Territory Average time patients spent in the emergency room before leaving 1 District of Columbia 5 hrs 14 min 2 Puerto Rico 4 hrs 41 min 3 Maryland 4 hrs 10 min 4 Rhode Island 3 hrs 38 min 5 Massachusetts 3 hrs 36 min 6 Delaware 3 hrs 31 min 7 New York 3 hrs 24 min 8 North Carolina 3 hrs 11 min 9 New Jersey 3 hrs 11 min 10 Connecticut 3 hrs 9 min 11 California 3 hrs 6 min 12 Pennsylvania 3 hrs 3 min 13 Vermont 2 hrs 59 min 14 Illinois 2 hrs 55 min 15 Maine 2 hrs 55 min 16 Arizona 2 hrs 50 min 17 Virginia 2 hrs 46 min 18 Michigan 2 hrs 45 min 19 New Hampshire 2 hrs 45 min 20 South Carolina 2 hrs 43 min 21 New Mexico 2 hrs 42 min 22 Florida 2 hrs 41 min 23 Georgia 2 hrs 40 min 24 Tennessee 2 hrs 38 min 25 Oregon 2 hrs 37 min 26 Washington 2 hrs 37 min 27 Ohio 2 hrs 36 min 28 Kentucky 2 hrs 35 min 29 Missouri 2 hrs 35 min 30 Alabama 2 hrs 26 min 31 Texas 2 hrs 26 min 32 West Virginia 2 hrs 25 min 33 Nevada 2 hrs 24 min 34 Idaho 2 hrs 22 min 35 Alaska 2 hrs 20 min 36 Wisconsin 2 hrs 18 min 37 Colorado 2 hrs 15 min 38 Wyoming 2 hrs 15 min 39 Arkansas 2 hrs 13 min 40 Louisiana 2 hrs 12 min 41 Utah 2 hrs 12 min 42 Mississippi 2 hrs 7 min 43 Montana 2 hrs 7 min 44 Minnesota 2 hrs 6 min 45 Indiana 2 hrs 5 min 46 Kansas 2 hrs 1 min 47 Oklahoma 2 hrs 48 Iowa 1 hr 59 min 49 Hawaii 1 hr 57 min 50 Nebraska 1 hr 54 min 51 South Dakota 1 hr 53 min 52 North Dakota 1 hr 50 min The median emergency room visit time in 2024 in the U.S. was 2 hours and 42 minutes. Twenty states had average emergency room visit times higher than the national average.
Washington, D.C. residents had the longest average emergency department visit times at 5 hours and 14 minutes, followed by Puerto Rico at 4 hours and 41 minutes.
These extended wait times in D.C. and Puerto Rico are likely due to a combination of high population density, limited healthcare resources, and potentially higher rates of uninsured patients seeking emergency care.
Rural and less populated states like North Dakota (1 hour 50 minutes), South Dakota (1 hour 53 minutes), and Nebraska (1 hour 54 minutes) had the shortest emergency room times, suggesting that lower patient loads and less crowded facilities contribute to faster processing.
Long emergency department waits worsen patient health, raise healthcare costs, and strain hospital resources, increasing risks of mortality and compromised care.
A University of South Caroline study found that prolonging the wait of a patient who arrives with a serious condition by 10 minutes will increase the hospital’s cost to care for the patient by an average of 6%.
To learn more about the health care landscape in the U.S., check out this graphic that visualizes the largest health insurance company in each U.S. state.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 19:40 - Americans See Little Progress In Key Areas Under Biden: Gallup
Americans See Little Progress In Key Areas Under Biden: Gallup
Authored by Megan Brenan via Gallup,
WASHINGTON, D.C. — As President Joe Biden prepares to leave office, Americans offer a largely negative assessment of the progress the U.S. has made during his presidency on 18 economic, national and international issues.
Majorities of Americans think the U.S. has lost ground in six areas over the past four years, including the federal debt (67%), immigration (64%), the gap between the wealthy and less well-off (60%), the economy (59%), the United States’ position in the world (58%) and crime (51%). Pluralities also say the nation has fallen behind in six other areas: education, terrorism, trade relations with other countries, race relations, the nation’s infrastructure and energy.
Meanwhile, U.S. adults are more likely to see progress (39%) than regression (23%) or steadiness (31%) on just one of the issues — the situation for gay, lesbian and transgender people.
More Americans believe the country has stood still on two issues — climate change and the situation for Black people — than think it has made progress or lost ground. U.S. adults are about evenly divided on whether the U.S. has lost ground or stood still on healthcare, national defense and the military, and taxes, with relatively few seeing progress in these areas.
These findings are from a Gallup poll conducted Dec. 2-18, a month into the presidential transition after Biden’s vice president, Kamala Harris, lost the election to Donald Trump.
Democrats Offer Much More Positive Evaluation Than Republicans in All Areas
Democrats, including independents who lean toward the Democratic Party, have net-positive views of the changes that have occurred over the past four years on 14 of the 18 issues. However, these partisans’ positive evaluations are wide-ranging, from +51 for energy to +13 for the situation with Black people. The other issues on which Democrats have seen improvement during Biden’s presidency are the nation’s infrastructure, trade relations with other countries, the economy, the situation for LGBTQ+ people, national defense and the military, the United States’ position in the world, terrorism, crime, climate change, healthcare, education, and race relations.
Under Biden, Democrats think the nation has lost more ground than it has gained on the federal debt and the gap between the wealthy and less well-off. On taxes, Democrats are divided over whether the nation has made progress or lost ground, with a majority (63%) believing it has stood still on the issue. Democrats are also split on whether the U.S. has seen progress (30%) or lost ground (33%) on immigration.
Republicans and Republican-leaning independents perceive the country has lost ground in 17 of the 18 areas over the past four years, with their most negative views on immigration, the federal debt and the economy. The situation for gay, lesbian and transgender people is the only issue on which Republicans think there has been progress under Biden’s stewardship.
Biden Viewed Less Positively Than Predecessors on Many Issues
Gallup also measured Americans’ views of the nation’s progress at the end of Trump’s first presidential term in 2021, as well as Barack Obama’s and George W. Bush’s second terms in 2017 and 2009, respectively. Twelve of the issues measured in the December poll were likewise tracked at the end of these three presidents’ terms in office, another five were asked after Obama’s and Trump’s presidencies, and one (the nation’s infrastructure) was only measured in the latest poll. In general, Americans’ assessments of presidents’ progress on issues at the end of their term have been more negative than positive.
- Biden’s net progress lags his three immediate predecessors’ significantly on national defense and the military, immigration, and taxes, and is also worse than Obama’s and Trump’s on the federal debt, the gap between the wealthy and less well-off, and trade relations with other countries.
- Net progress is better for Biden than for Bush on energy, healthcare, the United States’ position in the world and the economy, but both Obama and Trump were credited with achieving more than Biden has on each of these issues.
- Of the four presidents, Obama was viewed most favorably on climate change, and Trump was viewed least favorably.
- Bush outperformed his three successors on net progress for race relations.
- Americans were more likely to say the two Republican presidents, Bush and Trump, made progress on crime and terrorism in the U.S. compared with Biden and Obama.
- Obama received much more credit than his two successors for advancing the situation for LGBTQ+ people, but Biden is viewed as making more progress than Trump in this domain.
- Biden’s net progress rating for education is similar to Trump’s, but both are lower than those for Bush and Obama.
- Net progress for improving the situation for Black people is similar for Biden, Trump and Obama.
Democrats’ views of the progress Biden has made are generally muted compared with Republicans’ views of Trump four years ago and Democrats’ perceptions of Obama in 2017 but somewhat similar to Republicans’ perceptions of Bush in 2009.
Bottom Line
Given Biden’s relatively low job approval rating and the expectation that history will judge his presidency negatively, it follows that Americans do not think the U.S. has improved during his time in office. However, Americans’ end-of-term assessments for prior presidents have also been largely negative — even for Obama, who left office with relatively high job approval ratings. Democrats’ generally subdued endorsement of Biden’s handling of a wide range of economic, national and international areas contribute to his unusually low net-positive ratings.
To stay up to date with the latest Gallup News insights and updates, follow us on X @Gallup.
Learn more about how the Gallup Poll Social Series works.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 19:15 - Manhattan Traffic Drops 7.5 Percent After New York's Congestion Toll Takes Effect
Manhattan Traffic Drops 7.5 Percent After New York’s Congestion Toll Takes Effect
Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Traffic in Manhattan decreased by 7.5 percent in the week after New York City’s congestion pricing plan took effect, according to preliminary traffic data released by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) on Jan. 13.
Devices used for congestion tolling hang above traffic on a Manhattan street in New York City on Jan. 6, 2025. Seth Wenig/AP Photo The congestion pricing program, which took effect on Jan. 5, is a policy that charges a standard $9 fare to drivers of most passenger cars entering Manhattan below 60th Street from 5 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays and from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekends.
Preliminary data showed that on average, about 539,000 cars entered Manhattan’s Central Business District daily between Jan. 6 and Jan. 10, a 7.5 percent decrease from an estimated average weekday baseline of 583,000 for January.
“Just look out the window: there is less traffic, quieter streets, and we think everyone has seen it,” Juliette Michaelson, MTA deputy chief of policy and external relations, told reporters on Monday. “Traffic patterns are already changing and they will continue to change.”
MTA stated that travel times on inbound river crossings into Manhattan, including the Holland and Lincoln tunnels that run under the Hudson River from New Jersey, also decreased by 30 to 40 percent on average.
Travel times on the Franklin D. Roosevelt East River Drive and the West Side Highway also improved during the afternoon traffic, falling between 20 percent and 46 percent, according to the data.
Cars traveling on the East-West streets in the CBD also experienced time improvements, especially in the afternoon hours, with trips becoming 4 percent to 36 percent faster. Travel times on some South-North avenues also improved, with trips becoming 21 percent faster, the data showed.
Despite anecdotal reports of more crowded train cars, Michaelson said the agency had not clocked a noticeable increase in subway users, largely because the baseline number of riders—more than 3 million daily—is so high. A handful of bus routes originating in Brooklyn and Staten Island had seen an increase in ridership the previous week.
Speaking to reporters on Monday, New York City Mayor Eric Adams emphasized the need to analyze the traffic data to identify any necessary improvements, noting that the newly implemented congestion pricing marked “a major shift” for New Yorkers.
“I just did not want to throw more hysteria into this whole thing. This is a major change,” the mayor said during a press briefing. “I want the data to come forward, I want us to analyze the data, see what we need to tweak. What do we need to do better? Are there changes that we can make? And I just wanted to give it a fair opportunity to do so. It’s the law of the land right now.”
The congestion pricing program was initially set to take effect last year with a $15 charge, but New York Gov. Kathy Hochul later decided to put it on hold. Hochul eventually revived the program with a lower $9 charge.
The governor estimated that the new lower toll would save daily commuters around $1,500 per year when taking into account what they were originally on track to pay, and she promised discounts for commuters at the lower end of the income scale. For example, car owners earning less than $50,000 per year get a 50 percent discount on every toll after their 10th toll in a given month.
President-elect Donald Trump has previously expressed intent to end the program when he takes office, but it’s unclear whether he will follow through. The plan stalled during his first term while undergoing a federal environmental review.
Trump said in November 2024 that congestion pricing “will put New York City at a disadvantage over competing cities and states, and businesses will flee.”
Michael Washburn and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 18:50 - Doctors Ask Supreme Court To Block California Board From Penalizing Certain COVID-19 Views
Doctors Ask Supreme Court To Block California Board From Penalizing Certain COVID-19 Views
Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Three doctors are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to prevent a California agency from investigating them over their opposition to state-approved COVID-19 policies.
The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Aug. 14, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times The California Medical Board considers the expression of the doctors’ dissenting views on the disease as potentially dangerous misinformation that should be suppressed. The board argues it has legal authority to discipline the doctors for speech it deems to be medical misconduct. The physicians counter that the fact that they have medical licenses doesn’t mean they forfeit their free speech rights under the First Amendment.
The emergency application in Kory v. Bonta was docketed by the high court on Jan. 8, one of the applicants’ attorneys, Richard Jaffe of Sacramento, California, told The Epoch Times.
The application for an injunction was submitted to Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees urgent appeals from California.
It is unclear when the Supreme Court will act on the application.
The justices could grant an injunction against the state, deny the injunction, or schedule the case for oral argument.
The application was brought by medical doctors Pierre Kory and Brian Tyson, osteopathic physician Le Trinh Hoag, Physicians for Informed Consent, and Children’s Health Defense, a nonprofit founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
President-elect Donald Trump, who will be inaugurated on Jan. 20, has nominated Kennedy to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, an attorney, is also listed as co-counsel on the application.
California’s executive and legislative branches are “threatening California physicians with professional discipline for their viewpoint speech contrary to the mainstream COVID narrative,” according to the application.
After the Federation of State Medical Boards in July 2021 encouraged its member medical boards in the United States to punish physicians for advancing perceived “COVID misinformation” and “disinformation” among patients and the public, California Medical Board President Kristina Lawson announced in February 2022 that the board planned to sanction physicians for what it called “COVID misinformation.”
The California Legislature passed AB 2098, which took effect in January 2023, making the dissemination of “misinformation” about the disease an offense for which doctors could be disciplined, the application said.
After a federal district judge blocked the law in January 2023, the Legislature repealed the misinformation provision effective January 2024. The application said the board continued to probe physicians for violating its COVID-19 policy after the repeal.
The applicants are challenging “the practice and policy of threatening and targeting physicians with discipline for providing information and recommendations contrary to the mainstream COVID narrative,” according to the application.
On April 23, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California turned down a request to preliminarily block the state’s enforcement program, finding that the applicants lacked legal standing.
The ruling was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Nov. 27, 2024.
The California Business and Professions Code, under which the California Medical Board claims its disciplinary authority, “regulates conduct, not speech,” the circuit court said.
“It provides for enforcement of the standard of care, which is the standard for physicians’ treatment of patients,” it stated.
To demonstrate standing, the applicants had to demonstrate that there was “a credible threat that the [board] will prosecute them under the statute” but they did not do so, the appeals court said.
The Ninth Circuit said the court record showed that the only disciplinary action taken against a doctor “involved a physician encouraging her patient to use veterinary ivermectin and resulted in the stipulated surrender of her license.”
The applicants are asking the Supreme Court for an injunction stopping the state from “continuing their enforcement program targeting the information, opinions, and recommendations on COVID-19 which California licensed physicians may provide to patients.”
Jaffe and Kennedy previously filed a related challenge with the Supreme Court that remains pending. In Stockton v. Ferguson, they asked the justices to block the Washington Medical Commission from investigating licensed physicians in the state over their criticism of COVID-19 policies.
The application was scheduled to be considered by the justices at the court’s private judicial conference on Jan. 10. The court may announce a decision on the case on Jan. 13.
The Epoch Times reached out to the California Medical Board and to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who represents the board, for comment but received no response by publication time.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 18:25 - RFK Jr. Effect: Cancer-Linked Red Dye Banned From US Foods
RFK Jr. Effect: Cancer-Linked Red Dye Banned From US Foods
The Biden administration stole some of the spotlight from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Donald Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services nominee, with just five days remaining in President Joe Biden’s first term.
Through the Food and Drug Administration, the Biden-Harris team took the initiative to ban the cancer-causing artificial food coloring Red No. 3, commonly found in highly processed toxic foods, including candy, chips, soda, and even cold medicine.
“The FDA is amending its color additive regulations to no longer allow for the use of FD&C Red No. 3 in food and ingested drugs in response to a 2022 color additive petition,” the FDA wrote in a press release on Wednesday morning.
The agency that RFK Jr. has said to have been captured by the industrial processed foods complex continued, “The petition requested the agency review whether the Delaney Clause applied and cited, among other data and information, two studies that showed cancer in laboratory male rats exposed to high levels of FD&C Red No. 3 due to a rat specific hormonal mechanism.”
“Manufacturers who use FD&C Red No. 3 in food and ingested drugs will have until January 15, 2027 or January 18, 2028, respectively, to reformulate their products,” the agency noted, adding, “However, foods imported to the U.S. must comply with U.S. requirements.”
We are witnessing the early chapters of a food revolution set to sweep the nation under Trump 2.0. Dubbed the “Make America Healthy Again” initiative, the ‘RFK Jr. Effect’ will likely result in dismantling the processed foods industrial complex that has poisoned Americans for decades.
BREAKING: The FDA is banning Red Dye 3, citing cancer concerns. RFK effect. pic.twitter.com/GvaY8KVIRx
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 15, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Sigh.
6. Red 3 and Red 40
Red 40 is the most used dye in America.
Linked “inextricably” to thyroid tumors in rats, a ban was proposed on Red 3 but was never implemented in America despite being banned entirely in the UK and Switzerland pic.twitter.com/OqA9nTvGpQ
— Coach Kev – Belly Fat Pro (@AskCoachKev) September 17, 2022
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
This recent NYT “fact check” is absurd and proves RFK JR’s point.
This is beyond parody.
The New York Times says RFK Jr. is “WRONG” about US foods containing artificial ingredients and dyes …
And then says US Froot Loops contain “red dye 40, yellow 5 and blue 1 as well as Butylated hydroxytoluene” while the Canadian version doesn’t. So …… pic.twitter.com/JKMc1V0ZfF
— Holden Culotta (@Holden_Culotta) November 17, 2024
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Trump 2.0, with RFK Jr. set to lead HHS, also needs to revive small farms and place the nation’s food supply chain back into the hands of the people from majority control of globalist corporations.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 18:00 - Preventable Deaths And Vitamin D3
Preventable Deaths And Vitamin D3
Authored by Robert W. Malone via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
We had an inexpensive life-saving solution both before and during the pandemic…
The inconvenient truth is that even at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a very simple, inexpensive and effective treatment was available that could have saved the majority of lives lost (1-3). All that the WHO and public health bureaucracy had to do was to recommend and support people taking sufficient Vitamin D3.
Vitamin D3 could have saved countless lives during the pandemic… This failure to act traces back to the unscientific bias and pro-vaccine obsession of Dr. Anthony Fauci. And once again the legacy media, while being paid by the US government and the pharmaceutical industry to promote vaccination, acted by censoring, defaming and suppressing the ability of physicians to inform people of scientific truth. The disease you suffered, the loss of life among your family and friends, could have been greatly reduced by simply getting enough Vitamin D3. This is another example of what happens when unelected bureaucrats are allowed to control free speech. Crimes against humanity.
The effectiveness of Vitamin D3 as an immune system-boosting prophylactic treatment for influenza and other respiratory RNA viruses was first discovered in 2006 (4, 5). Despite that fact that this treatment is amazingly effective for preventing death (by strengthening your immune system), it has never been investigated by the NIH, promoted by the CDC or by the US government for the treatment of influenza. One major issue has been that uncontrolled variables of dosing, timing of dosing and disease status have resulted in inconsistent clinical trial results (much as we have seen with the Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine COVID trials). However, when Vitamin D3 is given prophylactically at sufficient doses, there is clear and compelling evidence that Vitamin D blood levels of around 50 ng/ml will substantially reduce symptomatic infection, severe disease and mortality.
Pick up some potent D3 here…
K2/D3 plus Calcium and BioPerine Black Pepper Extract for maximum absorption… Longstanding worldwide public health policy is that Vitamin D should be taken at sufficient levels (typically supplemented in milk products) to prevent the bone disease called rickets. But this is just a minimal level to prevent a very obvious debilitating disease. The recommended Vitamin D levels in our milk are not sufficient for the more subtle immune system-boosting effects of this critical vitamin/hormone. Our bodies’ way of normally producing Vitamin D requires a lot of sunlight, but life in the modern world and northern latitudes make this difficult- particular in winter months, which is often when the respiratory viruses cause the most disease and death. In a sense, disease and death from Influenza and other respiratory RNA viruses are a lifestyle disease. Just the way things are. Largely avoidable unnecessary death.
As I write the above, I am reminded that I recently spoke with a scientist and physician who was on a team at the Department of Defense (DoD) in 2006 which had discovered a surprising finding while analyzing data from warfighters. He and his team had been looking for things that could help explain why some soldiers got bad disease from circulating influenza viruses, while others did not. I hear a lot of stories, but this one was a first for me.
In any given year, soldiers pretty much all get exposed to the same influenza virus variants, so why the differences in medical outcomes? Important to keep in mind that lots of data suggest that the 1918 “Spanish Flu” that swept the world at the close of WW I and caused so many deaths in relatively young people may well have come from young US midwestern recruits exposed to pig influenza viruses. This version of the 1918 influenza origin story goes along the lines that these young farmer recruits brought a human-adapted pig virus from US to the European battle theater, where it incubated in the infectious disease petri dish of the horrible conditions of trench warfare, and then was spread worldwide to civilians by returning soldiers. The “Spanish Flu” label which the US mainstream media of the time applied to the disease was yet another case of propaganda designed to deflect responsibility for a lethal infectious disease outbreak (from the US Government). In any case, you can understand why the DoD and the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research in particular has a long history of influenza virus research – starting long before the CDC, NIH or NIAID ever existed.
This DoD research scientist and his team had conducted a retrospective study which tied higher baseline vitamin D levels to lowered respiratory virus infection and disease (influenza), using a military database to correlate vitamin D levels to flu levels and death. The DoD believed that if he presented his research to Dr. Fauci, then Director of NIAID (National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases), that the US government might change direction by investing in this line of research and developing corresponding treatment guidelines. The DoD saw the potential of reducing influenza disease and death with this safe prophylactic, and directed him to contact Dr. Fauci to discuss this finding.
This scientist told me that he scheduled the meeting as assigned, and presented his rock-solid data to Dr. Fauci. He was then informed by Dr. Fauci that US policy is to control influenza in the USA with vaccines, not therapeutics. End of story. No funding or support available for future work. Therefore, NIAID had no interest in pursuing Vitamin D3 as a prophylactic for respiratory diseases, such as influenza, and the DoD dropped the follow up. That means that over fifteen years ago, Dr. Fauci had already set the policies which informed the US government’s present response to COVID. Because that policy extends well beyond flu, it is the response that the US Government falls back on for all infectious disease outbreaks, including those that emerge due to a pandemic or viral bio-threat. The official policy, set by Dr. Fauci, is that the US government wants vaccines for respiratory viruses above all else, and no other prophylactic solutions are to be promoted.
So, with that background, why would anyone expect anything else other than an exclusive USG obsession with a vaccine solution for an infectious respiratory disease such as COVID-19, even if there are excellent, cheap alternatives already available?
The data for the use of Vitamin D3 is extremely strong; there are now even randomized clinical trials supporting its use for the treatment of COVID (6), as well as many retrospective clinical trials showing its efficacy. The title of a major meta-analysis study published in October, 2021 is “COVID-19 Mortality Risk Correlates Inversely with Vitamin D3 Status, and a Mortality Rate Close to Zero Could Theoretically Be Achieved at 50 ng/mL 25(OH)D3: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” and that title pretty much says it all (7). Yet the NIH treatment guidelines found on their website in May 2022, state that:
“Recommendation: There is insufficient evidence to recommend either for or against the use of Vitamin D for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19.”
The CDC’s website says nothing about the link between Vitamin D3 levels and decreased severe disease and death in respiratory virus diseases, including COVID. The NIH guidelines cite a single study in which Vitamin D was given to COVID patients in the intensive care unit (late stage COVID) in Brazil as the sole criteria for their evaluation of Vitamin D. They even mention that this paper is flawed, writing that:
“It should be noted that this study had a small sample size and enrolled participants with a variety of comorbidities and concomitant medications. The time between symptom onset and randomization was relatively long. “
Yet this admittedly flawed work is the cited study from which the NIH determined that there is no link between Vitamin D levels and reduced incidence and disease due to SARS-CoV-2, while ignoring all other data including superior studies. Clear documentation of the scientific bias which has resulted in so many poor public health management decisions throughout the current outbreak.
There is nothing in the CDC guidelines about the meta-analysis studies, retrospective studies and even randomized clinical trials concerning preventative use of Vitamin D3–just an oblique reference to clinicaltrials.gov if one wanted more information. This is shocking. Can this be explained by anything other than regulatory capture by the US government institutes within the department of Health and Human Services, including CDC, NIH, and FDA?
With an emerging infectious disease, drugs and therapeutics are often the first line of defense. Physicians use deductive reasoning when confronted with a new infectious disease or even any unknown disease. This is how they are taught to respond to a newly identified disease of any kind, because it is a very effective way to treat when faced with an unknown or even unclear diagnosis when there is no proven treatment plan (8). Begin by treating the symptoms until you can figure out the underlying pathophysiology.
With COVID, it became clear early on that the front-line physicians were able to develop effective therapies using this strategy. There were many drugs and many treatments (including prophylactic Vitamin D3) that worked. These physicians made deductions and treated the symptoms. The numbers of lives saved using this method are astounding, but the government literally said that physicians should not use these treatments. Instead, the government instructed that patients were to go home and wait until their oxygen levels were so low that their lips were turning blue. That was criminal on the part of the HHS and US government. Truly a crime against humanity.
There are doctors who ignored these guidelines and behaved like doctors should act- when they are committed to the Hippocratic oath. They saved lives. They formed quiet communities with other doctors to find viable treatments. Dr. George Fareed and Dr. Brian Tyson are two such doctors that have saved thousands and thousands of lives, as documented in their book titled: “Overcoming the COVID-19 Darkness: How Two Doctors Successfully Treated 7000 Patients” (9). Compare the case studies and protocols in this book and the many complementary case histories of physicians working on the front lines (for example in the USA Drs. Peter McCullough, Pierre Kory, Paul Marik, Vladimir (Zev) Zelenko, and Richard Urso, and Didier Raoult and his colleagues in France as just a few examples) to what happened when the US government became involved in dictating medical treatments for COVID.
Unfortunately, the US government did not support any of this frontline physician work’, and in fact worked hard to undermine early multi-drug treatment using licensed drugs. Precisely as Dr. Fauci did 15 years ago when his learned of the role of vitamin D3 for the reduction of disease and death in respiratory diseases.
To further illustrate the enormous tragedy of this historic bias, just think of all the elderly who could have had a few more good years, whose grandchildren could have benefited from their wisdom, but instead died of the flu just because no one ever told them to keep their Vitamin D3 levels up. Because Dr. Fauci believes that vaccines should always be the first line of defense.
This also relates back to the faulty logic of vaccine-induced herd immunity. A logical fallacy that through the use of vaccines we could control influenza to a significant extent in the U.S. population. This is flawed because 1) influenza is constantly mutating to escape existing vaccines, 2) there is a large seasonal unvaccinated world population, and travelers are constantly bringing new strains to the USA, 3) the vaccines are at best 40% (and often much less) effective at preventing influenza disease (sound familiar?), and 4) there are enormous animal reservoirs which harbor and constantly develop new influenza virus strains. But due to the world’s success in eradicating smallpox, “official” public health (and Mr. Bill Gates) can not seem to understand that not all viruses are a DNA virus (like smallpox) that mutates extremely slowly and is only found in humans. Comparing smallpox to a rapidly mutating respiratory virus with a large animal reservoir is both illogical and naive.
But let’s take a step back in time, a decade back. Let’s imagine that Dr. Fauci had authorized the DoD or some other research entity to do a well-designed randomized clinical trial concerning the benefits of adequate D3 levels in preventing respiratory virus disease. If such a trial had been funded, results would have shown that higher vitamin D3 supplementation to achieve blood levels greater than 50 ng/ml helped prevent disease and death caused by influenza virus. Lets’ imagine that five years later (at the latest), a CDC guideline for D3 levels was put in place (particularly for the elderly). For sake of discussion, let’s even throw out a number. A conservative number, based on what we know now. That 50% of the people who have died from influenza could have been saved if they had sufficiently high vitamin D3 blood levels. Per a CDC website, on average 35.7 thousand people die per year of influenza. In other words, about 357,000 people have died of influenza over the last decade. Which means if 50% were saved by providing Vitamin D3 supplements, then 161,000 people could have been saved over the last decade in the USA by simply having the CDC advocate nationally for prophylactic administration of Vitamin D3. Think about that. A simple, pennies per day treatment that never happened. Why? Because Dr. Fauci believes that the USA uses vaccines to treat flu, and that vaccine-induced herd immunity is key – a fallacy that he has never revisited in his own mind.
Now let’s fast forward to COVID-19. How many people could have been saved from just having their levels of vitamin D3 brought up to 50 ng/ml (or higher!)? We knew about vitamin D3. It really didn’t take a randomized clinical trial to understand the link between D3 and RNA respiratory virus morbidity and mortality. The U.S.A alone could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Let alone all of the possible lives that could have been saved in the rest of the world. That these lives were unnecessarily lost is not acceptable in any way, shape or form. A crime against humanity.
Many people (and physicians) rely on the CDC and NIH to guide them in healthcare and wellness decisions. It is way past time that these organizations step up to the plate and do their job, and stop relying on the unscientific biases of highly influential bureaucrats. That job being to protect the health of the public. Not advancing the interests of the pharmaceutical industry and its shareholders.
Again, pick up some D3 here…
◇ References:
1. Brenner H, Holleczek B, Schottker B. Vitamin D Insufficiency and Deficiency and Mortality from Respiratory Diseases in a Cohort of Older Adults: Potential for Limiting the Death Toll during and beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic? Nutrients. 2020;12(8).
2. Ilie PC, Stefanescu S, Smith L. The role of vitamin D in the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 infection and mortality. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020;32(7):1195-8.
3. Maruotti A, Belloc F, Nicita A. Comments on: The role of vitamin D in the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 infection and mortality. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020;32(8):1621-3.
4. Cannell JJ, Vieth R, Umhau JC, Holick MF, Grant WB, Madronich S, et al. Epidemic influenza and vitamin D. Epidemiol Infect. 2006;134(6):1129-40.
5. Grant WB, Garland CF. The role of vitamin D3 in preventing infections. Age Ageing. 2008;37(1):121-2.
6. Villasis-Keever MA, Lopez-Alarcon MG, Miranda-Novales G, Zurita-Cruz JN, Barrada-Vazquez AS, Gonzalez-Ibarra J, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Vitamin D Supplementation to Prevent COVID-19 in Frontline Healthcare Workers. A Randomized Clinical Trial. Arch Med Res. 2022.
7. Borsche L, Glauner B, von Mendel J. COVID-19 Mortality Risk Correlates Inversely with Vitamin D3 Status, and a Mortality Rate Close to Zero Could Theoretically Be Achieved at 50 ng/mL 25(OH)D3: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients. 2021;13(10).
8. Shin HS. Reasoning processes in clinical reasoning: from the perspective of cognitive psychology. Korean J Med Educ. 2019;31(4):299-308.
9. Tyson B, Fareed, G.Crawford, M. Overcoming the COVID-19 Darkness: How Two Doctors Successfully Treated 7000 Patients. Amazon 2022 Jan 7, 2022.
This story was originally published on the Who is Robert Malone Substack.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge…
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 17:50 - Why This Lifelong Democrat Voted For Trump
Why This Lifelong Democrat Voted For Trump
Authored by Chris Fenton via RealClearPolitics,
This past November, I cast a ballot that I never would have expected: I voted for Donald Trump.
As a lifelong Democrat, this decision was not rooted in ideology, but instead born of personal frustration with America’s broken systems – financial, judicial, and political.
My story is not just my own but a reflection of the shared struggles of countless Americans, in almost every economic class, who feel left behind and betrayed by a corrupted system now designed to serve the few at the expense of the many.
The initial catalyst for my frustration came during the 2008 financial crisis, a crucible that revealed the staggering flaws of America’s financial infrastructure. Lehman Brothers’ collapse wasn’t just a headline for me – it struck home. My family’s savings were tied to complex and opaque financial instruments I didn’t fully understand, sold to me by institutions that prioritized profit over transparency. When Lehman declared bankruptcy, my portfolio was wiped out. Overnight, our family’s financial security evaporated, and I was forced to confront the harsh realities of a system rigged against most Americans.
But the financial system wasn’t the only institution that failed me. My trust in the judicial system was similarly shattered. First, the law of the land failed to punish any of those responsible for the great financial crisis. This was followed by a high-stakes legal battle of my own with my former employer. That fight revealed a labyrinthine system that seemed more designed to exhaust and entrap honest litigants than to deliver justice. Despite having a strong case and compelling evidence as the plaintiff, I found myself mired in five years of procedural delays, a strategic bankruptcy by the opposing side, and exorbitant legal costs. The experience was as emotionally scarring as it was financially ruinous and came close to destroying my marriage.
My disillusionment didn’t stop there. America’s current political system, too, exposed itself. As someone who worked extensively in the U.S.-China relationship, I tried to share my firsthand experiences and insights to all audiences through a book I authored and the media appearances that followed. I hoped to encourage constructive dialogue on America’s position in an increasingly competitive world. Instead, I faced a harsh backlash that highlighted the destructive tribalism entrenched in today’s politics.
As a lifelong Democrat, it was distressing to be told “Lose my f-ing number” by longtime progressive friends, simply because I appeared with hosts like Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham, Steve Bannon, Charlie Kirk, Clay Travis, or Maria Bartiromo. Similar vitriolic responses will certainly result again when this piece publishes.
I had no intention of switching political sides; I was trying to share a balanced perspective with a broader audience. Yet, this willingness to engage with what was perceived as “the other side” became a black-balling event. First, a CNN producer bluntly told me they wouldn’t have me on as a guest because I had appeared on Fox News. Then, investors avoided a fund I raised, coldly stating, “We won’t invest with someone who talks to those people.” Topping it all off, challenging the current U.S.-China dynamic was portrayed as anti-Asian, a disillusioning smear that I found deeply offensive. “I’m a Democrat, and many of my friends are Chinese!” I’d protest, only to be met with silence or accusations that I was “enabling” the opposition.
I was labeled an outcast by the very community I had supported my entire life – not because of a shift in my values, but because of my choice to engage in discussions outside the approved echo chamber. The experience underscored how deeply broken our political discourse has become – where dialogue is punished and dissenting voices are cast out, even when the goal is constructive progress to protect American interests.
This year, my frustration finally reached a boiling point. I was tired of politicians who promised change but delivered more of the same. Worse, my own party’s presidential candidate famously promised on “The View” not to change a damn thing.
Donald Trump, for all his flaws, represented a rejection of the status quo. His message resonated with millions of Americans who felt unseen and unheard. He wasn’t a polished politician, and that was the point. He spoke to our anger, our disillusionment, and our desperation for something different.
My vote for Trump wasn’t about embracing his ideology or ignoring his shortcomings. It was a pro-America protest vote, a way to signal my dissatisfaction with a current ailing system that had failed me and so many others. I wasn’t alone in this sentiment. The 2024 election was a referendum on today’s establishment, a wake-up call for a nation divided by economic and judicial inequality, institutional corruption, and cultural alienation.
Voting for Trump was not an act of blind faith. It was a calculated risk, a bet on the idea that disrupting the system might force it to reckon with its failures. I recognize the complexities and contradictions of that decision. Trump’s presidency will bring its own set of challenges, and not all his policies will align with my values. Yet, his election has and will continue to force a national conversation about the direction of our country and the need for a systemic reset.
Today, as I reflect on my vote, I am struck by the parallels between my personal journey and the broader story of America. Just as I had to rebuild my life after financial ruin, judicial betrayal, and political ostracism, our nation must confront its flaws and work toward a more impartial future. This requires not just identifying the problems but having the courage to take bold and sometimes uncomfortable actions to address them.
For me, the answer lies in reclaiming the principles that made America great: fairness, accountability, civil discourse, and opportunity for all. This means holding powerful institutions to account, from Wall Street and Washington to the judicial system. It means rebuilding trust in our political system by prioritizing the needs of most citizens over the interests of the elite. And it means fostering a culture of resilience and innovation that empowers individuals to succeed in the face of adversity.
The challenges we face as a nation are immense, but they are not insurmountable. My own experiences have taught me that even in the darkest moments, there is a path forward. It requires resilience, self-reflection, and a commitment to rebuilding – not just for us, but also for future generations.
Voting for Trump was not the end of my political journey; it was the beginning of a deeper exploration of what it means to be an American in a time of upheaval. It was a recognition that change is messy, imperfect, and often uncomfortable. But it is also necessary.
As we look to the future, I hope my story serves as a reminder that our choices are shaped by the systems we inhabit. When those systems fail us, it is our responsibility to demand change, hoping for better. Whether you agree with my decision or not, I hope we can all agree on the need for a government, judiciary, and economy that work for everyone – not just the privileged few.
The journey to a more perfect union will not be easy, but it is a journey worth taking. Let’s rebuild together, with hope, determination, and a shared commitment to the ideals that unite us as Americans.
Chris Fenton is a longtime media executive, producer, and author of “Feeding the Dragon: Inside the Trillion Dollar Dilemma Facing Hollywood, the NBA, and American Business.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 17:40 - Houthis Again Target US Carrier In Red Sea Just As Gaza Truce Deal Announced
Houthis Again Target US Carrier In Red Sea Just As Gaza Truce Deal Announced
Yemen’s Houthis have once again announced that military forces have targeted American warships in the Red Sea. The Pentagon has not offered confirmation, however, and rarely admits to coming under such direct attacks.
The Wednesday statement said missiles and drones were launched against the USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier and other US warships patrolling the Red Sea. It’s unknown whether direct hits resulted, or if all projectiles were intercepted.
Carrier Harry S. Truman, via US Navy “The missile force and the drone air force of the Yemeni Armed Forces … carried out a joint military operation targeting the American aircraft carrier USS Harry Truman and a number of its warships in the northern Red Sea with a number of winged missiles and drones, during their attempt to carry out operations to target Yemen,” the statement reads.
“This targeting of the carrier is the sixth since its arrival in the Red Sea,” it added. The Iran-backed group has clearly remained committed and defiant as it blocks Red Sea shipping, despite several rounds of US-UK-Israeli bombing campaigns.
The timing of this attack is interesting given that widespread reports of Hamas and Israeli having achieved a peace deal have persisted over the last 12 hours. President Biden as well as Donald Trump are hailing the deal, which still has to be voted on by Israeli lawmakers, which is set for Thursday morning.
The Houthis have consistently demanded that for it to halt its Red Sea attacks there must be full Israeli military withdrawal from the Strip.
The Houthi statement said it remains “ready for any American or Israeli escalation and will continue to perform its duties towards the oppressed Palestinian people,” and that “operations will not stop until the aggression stops and the siege on the Gaza Strip is lifted.”
If the promised hostage exchange happens by week’s end, the Houthis might halt these attacks or at least dial them back. Recently several ballistic missiles have been launched on central Israel.
If the Yemeni operations do persist, it could complicate or damage efforts to keep the peace in the Gaza Strip, as it’s already sure to be an extremely delicate and fragile truce.
The Houthis are claiming that they attacked the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group again. This is the sixth such claim. Here’s what I find interesting: First, this is the first time I’ve seen a consistent campaign about targeting an American CSG. https://t.co/l3AVnd8SEW
— Heather Mongilio (@HMongilio) January 15, 2025
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Still, many hurdles remain, and the details of phase 2 are still to be hammered out in phase 1. This leaves the potential for Hamas-Israel fighting to be sparked once again. So far a fragile truce in Lebanon with Hezbollah has held.
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 17:20 - Professors Say Trump's Policies Could Exacerbate Wildfires
Professors Say Trump’s Policies Could Exacerbate Wildfires
Authored by Gabrielle Temaat via The College Fix,
Professors at Syracuse and Duke universities said this week that President-elect Donald Trump’s pro-fossil fuel policies could exacerbate the wildfires in California.
“We well know Trump does not accept the science of climate change and the reality of climate change. He’s very dismissive of it,” Robert Wilson, an associate professor at Syracuse University’s Geography and the Environment Department, told Newsweek.
“Certainly, I’ve seen no news account over the past week where he’s acknowledged that climate change has played a role in making the wildfires in California worse,” he said.
Wilson called it “discouraging” that Trump is unlikely to “do much to address climate change” or “take the current and emerging threats of climate change, particularly with wildfire, seriously.”
Another professor in Wilson’s department, Jacob Bendix, also criticized Trump’s policies, saying they would directly worsen the wildfire crisis.
“The increased exploitation of fossil fuels that Donald Trump has promised would worsen our already severe wildfire problems. While there are numerous and varied contributing factors for large fires in the western United States and Canada all have one thing in common: dry hot conditions,” he said, according to Newsweek.
“Fires require heat, and they require dry fuel. The higher temperatures are, and the less precipitation there is, the more readily wildfires are ignited and the faster they spread,” he said.
Further, “using fossil fuels adds greenhouse gases to the atmosphere,” which results in “climate change,” “higher temperatures,” and “drought,” the professor said.
Therefore, “there is pretty much a direct line from [Trump’s] policies for fossil fuel use to increased wildfire,” he said.
A professor of environmental science at Duke University also said that Trump’s administration is “obviously…going to promote fossil fuels.” However, he is “probably going to take a broader view to energy policy,” Professor James Clark said.
“I think that’s all unknown, but…anything that continues to increase greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere is going to continue to have a big impact on wildfires,” Clark said.
While many academics are focused on the broader implications of Trump’s policies and the wildfires, one professor recently sparked controversy with a more personal and inflammatory comment.
University of Missouri Professor Karen Piper called the destruction of Trump-supporting actor James Woods’ house in the California wildfires “karma,” The College Fix previously reported.
“James Woods’ house is burning down. It’s karma calling,” Piper wrote.
However, she walked back the statement later in an email to The College Fix, saying, “That tweet was before I learned how catastrophic the situation was becoming.”
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 17:00 - Trump Effect Continues As Florida Vice Mayor Switches To Republican Party
Trump Effect Continues As Florida Vice Mayor Switches To Republican Party
In the 2024 election, there was a huge shift to the right, as counties across the country rejected the failed policies of the Biden administration and embraced Donald Trump once again.
Via CNN Continuing the trend, the City of Doral, Florida Vice Mayor Maureen Porras announced she’s left the Democratic Party and registered as a Republican, citing “socialist ideas” she says have seeped into the left.
As The Floridian notes;
This is yet another big blow to the core of the Florida Democratic Party. Vice Mayor Porras becoming a Republican all but confirms that a growing number of Democrats, both at the municipal and state level, do not see a future or a way forward as registered Democrats.
After the 2024 Presidential election, two Democratic state representatives Hillary Cassel and Susan Valdes changed their party affiliations to Republican.
Poras told The Floridian that she grew frustrated with the Democrat party, and praised Donald Trump’s reelection, characterizing his win over VP Kamala Harris as “a clear and resounding message from voters that our country needed a strong leader,” adding “President Trump’s leadership transcends all levels of government.”
Photo via The Floridian She added that the Democratic party doesn’t represent her “values and those of the majority of Americans.”
“Democratic Party has progressively moved further and further away from representing my values and those of the majority of Americans,” Porras continued.
The Floridian: What brought you to the decision to leave the Democratic Party and become a registered Republican?
Porras:For the past two years, as the only Democrat elected official in Northwest Miami Dade, I have worked closely with my Republican colleagues, friends, and neighbors. Throughout this time, we have found several commonalities and have worked together to uphold important values that define us and our community, including faith and family. I have felt strong support from Republican leaders in my work as a Councilwoman and now Vice Mayor of the City of Doral – support that I did not receive from Democratic leadership.
The Floridian: Do you feel the Democratic Party has moved so far to the extreme fringe in politics that it does not represent your values and the values of the majority of Americans?
Porras: I feel that over the last couple of years, the Democratic Party has progressively moved further and further away from representing my values and those of the majority of Americans. They have prioritized minority opinions and neglected to understand and address the real issues affecting our communities. That is why I cannot continue to represent a party that does not represent me or the community that I represent.
The Floridian: Did President-elect Trump’s mandated victory in 2024 influence your decision to jump ship?
Porras: President-elect Trump’s victory was a clear and resounding message from voters that our country needed a strong leader. President Trump’s leadership transcends all levels of government, becoming especially important in our city where he was able to intervene on behalf of our residents to keep a garbage incinerator from being rebuilt in our community. If it weren’t for his intervention, our community’s well-being and health would suffer. I am grateful as an elected official and resident that he cared enough about our community when other local leaders did not.
The Floridian: Also, considering that your family is from Nicaragua, do you believe or do you feel that the Democrat party has embraced some or many of the socialist values that have taken hold of Latin America?
Porras: Sadly, I have seen socialist ideas and beliefs from communist regimes seep into the Democratic Party and different Democratic groups. As an immigrant whose family fled the Nicaraguan communist regime and as an immigration attorney representing families fleeing socialism from Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Cuba, I cannot support advancing these ideas.
Read the rest here…
Tyler Durden
Wed, 01/15/2025 – 16:40
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...
