Jul 01

Today’s News 1st July 2024

  • Keep An Eye On Ukraine's Military Buildup Along The Belarusian Border
    Keep An Eye On Ukraine’s Military Buildup Along The Belarusian Border

    Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

    Belarusian and Russian media have been flooded with reports over the past few days about newfound tensions along the Ukrainian-Belarusian border caused by Ukraine’s alleged military buildup there:

    * “Drone flying from Ukraine deep into Belarus shot down by border service”

    * “Stash with improvised explosive device parts found at Belarusian-Ukrainian border”

    * “Belarusian army deploys MLRS Polonez squadron to cover sections of state border”

    * “Passages open to sabotage, reconnaissance forces in minefields on Ukraine side of Belarusian border”

    * “Defense Ministry on provocations at Ukraine border: Ready to use all forces to defend Belarus”

    * “Additional forces deployed to detect drones at Belarusian-Ukrainian border”

    * “Belarusian military warns of rising tensions on border with Ukraine”

    * “All kinds of measures taken to contain complicated situation at Belarus’ southern border”

    * “Belarusian air defenses register increased number of Ukrainian drones”

    These follow Belarus’ concerns over the past year since the start of Kiev’s ultimately failed counteroffensive that it might soon be directly attacked by Ukraine and/or NATO:

    * 25 May 2023: “NATO Might Consider Belarus To Be ‘Low-Hanging Fruit’ During Kiev’s Upcoming Counteroffensive”

    * 1 June 2023: “The Union State Expects That The NATO-Russian Proxy War Will Expand”

    * 14 June 2023: “Lukashenko Strongly Hinted That He Expects Belgorod-Like Proxy Incursions Against Belarus”

    * 14 December 2023: “Belarus Is Bracing For Belgorod-Like Terrorist Incursions From Poland”

    * 19 February 2024: “The Western-Backed Foreign-Based Belarusian Opposition Is Plotting Territorial Revisions”

    * 21 February 2024: “Is The West Plotting A False Flag Provocation In Poland To Blame On Russia & Belarus?”

    * 26 April 2024: “Analyzing Belarus’ Claim Of Recently Thwarting Drone Attacks From Lithuania”

    These aforementioned developments coincide with rising NATO-Russian tensions as the West intensifies their proxy war in Ukraine out of desperation to achieve some sort of strategic victory despite the odds:

    * 24 May: “The US Is Now More Openly Allowing Ukraine To Use Its Arms To Strike Inside Of Russia”

    * 26 May: “The US Is Playing A Dangerous Game Of Nuclear Chicken With Russia”

    * 30 May: “Putin Expects NATO, And Possibly Poland In Particular, To Escalate The Proxy War In Ukraine”

    * 31 May: “Is Ukraine Going Rogue Or Did It Attack Russia’s Early Warning Systems With American Approval?”

    * 11 June: “Kiev’s Plan To Store F-16s In NATO States Raises The Risk Of World War III”

    * 15 June: “The US’ Security Pact With Ukraine Is A Consolation For Not Approving Its NATO Membership”

    * 16 June: “Duda’s Call For ‘Decolonizing’ Russia Proved That Putin Was Right To Warn About This Plot”

    * 21 June: “More Air Defenses & Cross-Border Strikes Won’t Change The Ukrainian Conflict’s Dynamics”

    * 27 June: “The US’ Reported PMC Plan For Ukraine Amounts To A Partial Conventional Intervention”

    * 28 June: “The ‘EU Defense Line’ Is The Latest Euphemism For The New Iron Curtain”

    All the aforementioned insight will now be summarized for the reader’s convenience before analyzing the significance of Ukraine’s alleged military buildup along the Belarusian border.

    In brief, Russia has already won the “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with NATO, being so far ahead that it’s now producing three times as many shells as that bloc at a quarter of the cost.

    Russia is therefore poised to achieve a military breakthrough across the front lines, which its fresh push into Ukraine’s Kharkov Region is expected to facilitate by stretching the defender’s forces even further. In that event, however, NATO might conventionally intervene in order to asymmetrically partition Ukraine.

    The reason why this escalation sequence is so dangerous is because Russia might fear that any large-scale NATO invasion force that potentially crosses the Dnieper could be preparing to attack its new regions. The NATO-Russian security dilemma is so serious right now as a result of the previously enumerated escalations that such intentions couldn’t confidently be ruled out if that happens. Russia might therefore resort to tactical nukes as a last resort out of self-defense, ergo its recent drills.

    President Putin would prefer for that dark scenario not to unfold, which his why he recently shared a generous ceasefire proposal in an attempt to avert it. Ukraine predictably refused to withdraw from the administrative borders of Russia’s new regions like he requested and is instead reportedly building up its forces along the Belarusian border in preparation of a possible offensive.

    While President Putin remains open to compromise, Zelensky clearly remains recalcitrant, likely due to fears about his political future.

    Ukraine’s potential Belarusian operation appears predicated on Kiev’s calculation that Russia might overreact in some way that prompts the conventional NATO intervention that Zelensky is hoping for or redirects troops from the existing front lines to this new one and thus creates an opening to exploit.

    The first could occur if it resorts to tactical nukes as a last resort in self-defense or launches another offensive from Belarus, the latter of which La Repubblica reported in early May would trigger a NATO intervention.

    As for the second dimension of Kiev’s risky calculation, policymakers might expect significant on-the-ground gains that could force Russia to prioritize this new front over the existing ones, thus relieving enormous pressure upon Ukraine. In that event, it could exploit whatever openings might emerge to go back on the offensive along the eastern and/or southern fronts, which could conveniently occur before the next NATO Summit from 9-11 July and thus provide a major boost to Western morale.

    This gamble could also fail and tremendously backfire on Ukraine, however, such as if Russia does indeed soon make a military breakthrough along the front lines and then steamrolls through the rest of its new regions precisely because Kiev misallocated so many of its forces to the Belarusian border. Furthermore, even though NATO might conventionally intervene in its support, Ukraine could lose a lot more land east of the Dnieper if the bloc stays on the western bank in order to manage its security dilemma with Russia.

    At the same time, it’s also possible that Western intelligence identified a serious weak point somewhere along the Belarusian border and told Ukraine to exploit it, in which case this gamble might at least partially pay off. It’s premature to predict its success or lack thereof either way, but in any case, observers would do well to keep a close eye on the Belarusian-Ukrainian border since Kiev’s military buildup appears to be something serious and not just a feint to “psyche-out” Russia.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 07/01/2024 – 02:00

  • The Hidden History Of Robert Mueller's Right-Wing Terror Factory, Part 1
    The Hidden History Of Robert Mueller’s Right-Wing Terror Factory, Part 1

    Authored by Ken Silva via Headline USA,

    In 2007, Orlando residents were furious to discover that an FBI informant had organized a neo-Nazi rally through one of the city’s mostly black neighborhoods a year earlier.

    “To come into a predominantly black community, which could have resulted in great harm to the black community? I would hate to be part of a game,” Orlando City Councilwoman Daisy Lynum said at the time, calling for a “full-scale investigation” into the matter.

    However, an FBI agent testified that his informant participated in the event, but didn’t organize it. The city’s uproar passed without a public investigation, full-scale or otherwise—until now.

    Thanks to a trove of previously unpublicized law enforcement records and interviews with several players involved, Headline USA can reveal that the Orlando neo-Nazi rally was indeed organized by the FBI. The Orlando event also seems to have been part of a larger program to hold Nazi rallies across the country. And according to FBI records, the bureau sponsored those events despite knowing they led to an increase in the number of card-carrying Nazis in America.

    Moreover, the FBI’s Nazi rallies led to a much larger operation to target right-wing groups. Dubbed “Primitive Affliction,” the operation featured a motorcycle front group, rogue undercover agents, Outlaw bikers, Satanists, bomb-makers and a fugitive on the lam in Mexico.

    To top it off, the FBI’s Nazi operation was briefed to the highest levels of the bureau, including to then-Director Robert Mueller, according to at least one record unearthed by this publication.

    Little has been written about Primitive Affliction outside of the Anti-Defamation League and Southern Poverty Law Center—biased groups that trained agents in the case, according to the newly revealed records.

    But despite the lack of publicity, Primitive Affliction covers a crucial time in right-wing extremist history. It began where the FBI’s 1990s-era cases against the Aryan Nations trailed off, and it helped shape the neo-Nazi groups that would march at the 2017 deadly Charlottesville Unite the Right rally—an event that inspired Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential candidacy.

    Along with big-picture history, the records from Primitive Affliction reveal malfeasance by FBI agents and officers who today hold higher positions at the bureau.

    The FBI declined to comment. Mueller didn’t respond to an email about Primitive Affliction.

    Fabricating Fascists

    About a year after the 2006 Orlando neo-Nazi rally, the FBI source who organized the event, David Gletty, had his cover blown in open court. When the Orlando Sentinel reported that Gletty organized the march, his handler reportedly denied the accusation—saying that the informant marched, but didn’t lead the rally.

    But Gletty told this publication a different story. He said the FBI instructed him to organize the rally for two main purposes: to raise Gletty’s profile in the neo-Nazi movement, and to allow the FBI to conduct surveillance of the Nazis who attended the rally.

    In fact, Gletty told this publication the FBI was staging Nazi rallies across the country with the similar goals in mind: to raise the profiles of their own informants while building a database of Nazis to track.

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

    “At the time, the FBI just before that was having me put on Nazi protests, and there were Nazi protests that were handled by the FBI, and operatives like myself,” he said.

    Gletty’s statement is a bold one, and shouldn’t be taken at face value. An undercover operative and private investigator, he said the FBI trained him to lie professionally.

    But in this case, Gletty’s allegation is borne out by the evidence.

    For starters, there’s the fact that the group that Gletty marched with in Orlando, the National Socialist Movement, or NSM, was founded in the 1970s by an FBI informant—a fact revealed by Headline USA last September. That FBI informant, Robert Brannen, was active during the bureau’s COINTELPRO era, and he chaired the NSM for nearly a decade.

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

    Other former NSM members have also accused the FBI of staging the mid-2000s rallies. For instance, according to former NSM member and current prison inmate Bill White, the FBI sponsored the 2005 Toledo rally, which would be one of the most violent racial protests until 2017 Charlottesville.

    “In October 2005, FBI [confidential human source] Jeff Schoep asked me to go to Toledo, Ohio, to help organize a ‘March Against Black Crime’ by what were supposed to be ‘local residents,’ but were really federal CHSs,” White said in an October 2020 sworn declaration, referring to Schoep, who led the NSM from the 1990s until shortly after the 2017 Charlottesville Unite the Right rally.

    While there’s no smoking-gun evidence that Schoep was an FBI informant when he led the NSM, numerous other neo-Nazis have accused him of being one. There are also FBI records from the early 2000s showing he at least spoke to agents once, and perhaps the strongest evidence is that he now works openly as a “reformed Nazi” with groups sponsored by the DHS, FBI and other law enforcement organizations.

    Along with his accusations that Schoep was a fed, White also described the Toledo rally as being similar to what would happen in Charlottesville 12 years later—with the local cops and FBI allowing the neo-Nazis to clash with the left-wing counter-protestors.

    “On the day of the march, the Toledo Police and the FBI occupied [a nearby parking lot] and ordered myself and the NSM to use [another] parking lot. I and a small team from the NSM  arrived before the Communists to secure the location; no police were present at this time …,” White said.

    “About an hour later, police began to deploy, and, directed NSM members to enter [their parking lot] by driving through the mob. This started problems … After the police line formed, the mob then attacked the police, not us.”

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

    A March 2006 FBI report about the Toledo rally largely matches White’s description of events—though it omitted the fact that law enforcement failed to keep the Nazis and counter-protestors separate.

    “Before the NSM could begin their march, local residents and counter-demonstrators began throwing rocks and bricks at vehicles, local residences and businesses. Toledo police responded by firing tear gas into the gathered counter-demonstrators and local residents. Toledo police advised the NSM to leave the area for their own protection and the NSM complied,” the report said.

    “Local residents and counter-demonstrators continued with the clash with the police, looting a store and setting fire to a local bar. This rally and riot, and the attendant media coverage for the NSM, was deemed a great success by the majority of the white supremacy movement,” the report added.

    “NSM reported increased fundraising and increased applications for membership immediately following these events,” the report concluded.

    That last sentence in the FBI report is particularly telling. It demonstrates that even if the FBI didn’t stage the Toledo event, it knew that neo-Nazi rallies increased the number of card-carrying Nazis in America—and it chose to stage one in Orlando via Gletty anyway.

    If all that evidence—Gletty and White’s statements, the evidence that Schoep was an informant, and the smoking-gun evidence that NSM was founded by an informant—weren’t enough, Headline USA also unearthed a document showing that yet another NSM Nazi rally was organized by an informant.

    That document, a 2006 FBI report, reveals that a November 2005 “rally against violence” in Kingston, New York was organized by the notorious white supremacist talk show host and former NSM affiliate Hal Turner (his name is redacted in the report, but his identity is corroborated by a separate ADL article).

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

    The Kingston rally held by Turner—who outed himself as an informant in 2009 after he was charged with threatening public officials—was apparently uneventful. An ADL report from the event said it drew about 50 supporters and 100 counterprotestors. The low turnout may have been because Turner was already suspected in the neo-Nazi movement of being an informant due to his provocative calls for violence.

    “He has alienated some fellow racists in the past by making threats against them and because others consider him a liability for having urged violence against public figures,” the ADL’s 2005 article noted. “In fact, some white supremacists have said that they would only attend the event if Turner were not the one in charge.”

    Turner didn’t respond to an email seeking comment.

    Setting the Stage

    In a vacuum, the FBI’s mid-2000s neo-Nazi events had little impact on national politics. However, as this series will show, they set the stage for an even larger, and arguably more sinister, FBI operation to target right-wing groups.

    Indeed, after Gletty staged the 2006 Orlando rally and had his cover blown nearly a year later, the FBI apparently decided to up the stakes by creating a neo-Nazi motorcycle FBI front group. That front group, the 1st SS Kavallerie Brigade Motorcycle Division—named after a horse-mounted unit of Nazi Germany’s Waffen-SS—will be the subject of the next article in this series.

    Also in the next article, Headline USA will reveal the document showing then-Director Mueller’s involvement in the operation, which was one of the first right-wing FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force operations in post-9/11 history.

    Stay tuned…

    Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 23:55

  • DOJ To Offer Boeing "Sweetheart Plea Deal" For Criminal Fraud As Boeing Agrees To Buy Spirit Aero For $4.7BN
    DOJ To Offer Boeing “Sweetheart Plea Deal” For Criminal Fraud As Boeing Agrees To Buy Spirit Aero For $4.7BN

    Boeing has finally hit rock bottom.

    The US Department of Justice will charge Boeing with criminal fraud, Bloomberg reported, leaving the planemaker to choose between pleading guilty or taking the risk of going to trial, just as the company finalizes its acquisition of Spirit Aerosystems for $4.7 billion.

    Boeing has until the end of the week to decide whether to plead guilty to the charge, the department told the families of victims of two fatal 737 Max crashes and their attorneys in a meeting Sunday, Bloomberg reported citing “people who asked not to be named.”

    Yet contrary to speculation that the DOJ would seek a pound of flesh from the Chicago-based planemake, the department will only pursue a proverbial slap on the write as it informs Boeing it will have to pay an additional criminal fine of only $243.6 million on top of the $243.6 million already paid with a 2021 deferred-prosecution agreement, bringing the total amount of fine close to $500 million, or roughly the price of five of the giant paperweights better known as 737 MAX airplanes. The company will also have to hire a corporate monitor for three years, they said.

    Officials from the Justice Department’s fraud section and the US Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas attended the Sunday meeting, according to an email seen by Bloomberg. Paul Cassell, an attorney representing the crash victims’ families, called the offer the department plans to make to Boeing a “sweetheart plea deal.”

    “The deal will not acknowledge, in any way, that Boeing’s crime killed 346 people,” he said in an email. “The families will strenuously object to this plea deal.”

    The fine the department will seek falls far short of a nearly $25 billion fine the families requested — with the possibility of suspending $14 billion to $22 billion of that if Boeing devotes those funds to an independent corporate monitor and improvements to its safety programs. In fact, the total punishment is far less than the monetary damages slapped on Alex Jones, even though last time we checked nobody died as a result of Jones’ newscast.

    Sweetheart deal or not, a guilty plea to criminal charges would mark a low-point in Boeing’s century-long history and a stunning development for a company that was once renowned for its cautious, straight-laced culture which has since devolved into a DEI-driven, virtue signaling nightmare that has culminated with planes “designed by clowns…supervised by monkeys.”

    According to Bloomberg the plea deal “raises concerns over US government contracts for the company at a time when Boeing needs its defense division to counteract plunging revenue at its commercial airplane business.” Of course, that’s not even remotely true since the deep state is intimately involved in using taxpayer funds to pay off contractors such as Boeing for perpetuating the US war machine, while it collects its 10% commission in perpetuity.

    The meeting comes after the Justice Department determined the planemaker violated the 2021 deferred-prosecution agreement struck between Boeing and the government in the waning days of the Trump Administration. The deal allowed Boeing to avoid criminal prosecution as long as it met certain conditions. But in May, the department concluded the company had failed to meet a requirement to implement an effective compliance program to prevent and detect violations of US fraud laws. Boeing told the DOJ that it disagreed with the finding.

    At the same time, the planemaker is in the midst of a leadership shakeup as it searches for a new chief executive officer to take over for Dave Calhoun, who plans to step down from the role later this year but not before collecting a $33 million bonus for… it’s not exactly clear what.

    And just to make it even more difficult for outside observers to keep track of things, on Sunday, Boeing agreed to acquire Spirit AeroSystems for $4.7 billion, Reuters reported citing two people familiar with the matter said, ending months of talks over a deal the U.S. planemaker hopes will help ease a spiralling safety crisis (spoiler alert: it won’t).

    Boeing will pay $37.25 per share for Spirit Aero, in an all-stock deal, after the boards of Boeing and Spirit met on Sunday and agreed to terms, and an official announcement is likely early on Monday. The acquisition values Spirit at around $4.7 billion.

    The deal, which is subject to regulatory approvals, would result in the breakup of Spirit, with some of the Kansas-based supplier’s assets going to French planemaker Airbus.

    Boeing is trying to move past a year of difficulties sparked by a Jan. 5 mid-air blowout of a door plug on a new 737 MAX 9 jet that exposed myriad safety and quality problems. Those issues have led to a substantial slowdown in output at Boeing – rippling across the global commercial aviation industry.

    And because two wrongs can somehow make a plane that flies, Spirit – which was spun off from Boeing in 2005 in one of a series of moves that critics say were emblematic of a focus on cost-cutting over quality – is the manufacturer of the defective door plug. So instead of punshing it, Boeing is rewarding its supplier by acquiring it just to make sure its DEI-infused workforce can kill even more people.

    Boeing made the decision to buy back Spirit in the aftermath of the Jan. 5 incident, which took place on an Alaska Airlines-operated flight, as part of an effort to reform its safety problems and shore up its production line. Earlier, Boeing discussed paying $35.50 per share in cash for Spirit, but this was raised to $37.25 when the agreement shifted to stock. The terms of a parallel deal for Spirit to sell its Europe-focused operations to Airbus were not immediately clear.

    Buying Spirit Aero will not immediately resolve Boeing’s problems. Following the January door plug incident, the Federal Aviation Administration imposed a cap on production of Boeing’s best-selling MAX jets.

    And with faith in Boeing among the flying public at an all time low, the once iconic US company has been losing market share to Airbus for years, and it is still dealing with the aftermath of twin crashes that killed nearly 350 people and forced a grounding of the 737 MAX.

    Those crashes led to the appointment of current CEO Dave Calhoun, who was brought in to resolve the problems at the manufacturer, but who will leave later this year with the company under greater regulatory scrutiny and with a reputation that has taken a beating.

    U.S. senators on June 18 sharply criticized Calhoun for the planemaker’s safety issues and repeatedly questioned him about his salary. Some airlines have vented their frustration with Boeing publicly and privately due to delivery delays and the company’s ongoing issues.

    Boeing recently submitted a comprehensive plan to the FAA addressing “systemic quality-control issues” at the company. We just can’t wait to find out what percentage of its workforce will have to be women and minorities after the “quality control” overhaul.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 23:20

  • Confidence In U.S. Universities Plunges To New Lows, As Young People, Women And Democrats Sour On Academia
    Confidence In U.S. Universities Plunges To New Lows, As Young People, Women And Democrats Sour On Academia

    Who could have guessed that after multiple Ivy League university presidents publicly humiliated themselves during congressional testimony – and then it broke that Harvard’s president, among others were likely involved in plagiarising key parts of their “academic” work – that confidence in U.S. universities has plunged to a new low?

    The data is according to two new national polls commissioned by FIRE and conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago. Americans were asked “How much confidence, if any, do you have in U.S. colleges and universities?” 

    In FIRE’s May poll, 42% of Americans expressed “some” confidence in U.S. colleges and universities, similar to Gallup’s 40%. However, fewer Americans reported “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence (28% vs. 36% in Gallup), while more expressed “very little” or “none at all” (30% vs. 22% in Gallup).

    When compared to other institutions, confidence in higher education is on par with the U.S. Supreme Court (27%) and banks (26%). However, Americans have much higher confidence in small businesses (65%) and the military (60%), and much lower confidence in Congress (8%), television news (14%), and the criminal justice system (17%).

    Confidence in higher education varies by political affiliation. Over 40% of liberals and Democrats reported high confidence in colleges, a stark contrast to only 12% of conservatives, 12% of Republicans, and 28% of independents.

    Notably, significant drops in confidence are seen among young adults (18-34), Democrats, and women. Confidence among 18-34-year-olds fell from 42% to 22%, among Democrats from 59% to 42%, and among women from 39% to 29%. These declines suggest growing disillusionment in groups that previously held higher confidence in higher education.

    Confidence in colleges and universities has dropped sharply since last summer, with notable declines following encampment protests in April and May. In February, 31% of Americans had “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in these institutions, which fell to 28% in May. The percentage reporting “very little” confidence remained at 30%, but those with “none at all” rose from 7% to 10%.

    Encampment protests, particularly those highlighting the war in Gaza, have coincided with these drops. Major subgroups, including liberals, Democrats, young adults (18-34), college graduates, Republicans, white Americans, and women, all showed reduced confidence since February. No subgroup in May reported a majority with high confidence.

    The protests and the responses to them likely influenced these declines. This erosion of trust mirrors broader skepticism towards science and perceptions of universities as politically biased and financially burdensome.

    And if you think these results are ugly, just wait until the public hears what’s being taught in economics courses…

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 22:45

  • Autism Reversal In Twin Girls Through Lifestyle And Environmental Changes: New Study
    Autism Reversal In Twin Girls Through Lifestyle And Environmental Changes: New Study

    Authored by Emma Suttie, D.Ac, AP (emphasis ours),

    Findings from a recent case study show that personalized lifestyle and environmental changes successfully reversed autism symptoms in fraternal twin girls diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). The study appeared in the Journal of Personalized Medicine.

    The study also reviewed existing literature on the impact of lifestyle and environmental modifications on ASD, supporting the findings with evidence from similar cases and studies.

    (Shavlovskiy/Shutterstock)

    The Study Details

    The case study involved 4-year-old dizygotic twins who were diagnosed with “level 3 severity” autism spectrum disorder, which the study describes as “requiring very substantial support.” The twins were diagnosed at approximately twenty months of age.

    Dizygotic twins, or fraternal twins, result from two separate eggs (ova) being fertilized by two separate sperm. These twins are genetically similar to typical siblings but can be as different from each other as siblings born at different times. They do not share the exact same genetic material and, therefore, can look different and have different characteristics.

    The case study shows that a non-drug, personalized approach by a team of multidisciplinary clinicians successfully reduced the number and severity of ASD symptoms using a variety of methods.

    Conception

    The twins were conceived through in vitro fertilization using an egg donor and carried by a surrogate. Their father was 51 years old at the time of conception. They were born two months premature and spent several weeks in the neonatal intensive care unit. The twins received routine vaccinations at three and six months, but no further vaccination until fourteen months. The girls were given acetaminophen before and after vaccination.

    Initial Symptoms

    The girls’ parents observed some initial symptoms. One twin had sensitivity to changes, eczema, and digestive issues, and the other had problems making eye contact, babbling communication, difficulty breastfeeding, and decreased muscle tone (hypotonia).

    Both twins received breast milk (from the surrogate and their biological mother) for twelve months and had no issues with eating or sleeping.

    At twelve months, the girls stopped drinking breast milk, and the introduction of cow’s milk caused digestive as well as behavior and language problems in both girls.

    In March of 2021, the girls received the series of vaccines that had been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. After this round of vaccinations, their parents noticed a worsening of some symptoms, including “significant language loss” for one of the girls, who began communicating using only single words.

    ASD Diagnosis

    Due to the worsening symptoms, the twins were evaluated for autism spectrum disorder, and both subsequently met the criteria for DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition) autism spectrum disorder diagnosis.

    Lifestyle and Environmental Interventions

    After their diagnosis, the twins’ parents began a comprehensive, personalized approach to address their daughters’ condition. Their approach was holistic and non-pharmacological and considered a variety of potential environmental and biological factors influencing ASD.

    The interventions and support for both the twins and their parents began after the twins’ diagnosis at approximately twenty months of age and continued over the following two years. The following is a summary of their interventions and support:

    • The parents worked with a coach to help understand the twins’ diagnosis and gain confidence.
    • The parents learned about the “total allostatic load” concept, which links chronic stressors to disease, and used resources like webinars and forums through Epidemic Answers.
    • The parents completed the Child Health Inventory for Resilience and Prevention survey—“a comprehensive assessment of total allostatic load (cumulative effects of chronic stress on mental and physical health) among children.”
    • Made Dietary changes—They followed the Reduced Excitatory Inflammatory Diet, eliminating glutamate, gluten, casein, sugar, artificial colors, and processed foods, and focused on organic, fresh, home-cooked meals from local sources.
    • Incorporated dietary supplements—The girls took supplements that included omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins, and homeopathic remedies.
    • Differentiated the twins’ needs—Genetic variants revealed that each twin had different needs, for example, one twin needed more vitamin D, while the other needed support for neuroinflammation and detoxification.
    • The twins received various therapies, including Applied Behavior Analysis, speech therapy, and occupational therapy focused on neuro-sensory motor reflex integration.
    • The family addressed toxins in their home, using an environmental consultant to evaluate air quality, moisture levels, and water damage.
    • One twin had osteopathic care on the recommendation of a developmental optometrist resulting in notable improvements in communication and overall disposition.

    Throughout the study, the children’s parents shared insights about their journey, “Conventional statistics have stacked the odds against the ability to recover a child from an ASD diagnosis. Our approach was therefore focused on following a nonconventional, holistic understanding of each daughter’s bio-individual needs, exploring root cause and designing customized support,” they said.

    “We chose practitioners who were aligned in our belief in our daughters’ intrinsic ability to heal given the right support.”

    Results

    Due primarily to the implementation of lifestyle and environmental changes over two years, the twins achieved a reversal of their diagnoses of level 3 autism spectrum disorder. Significant improvements were seen in their social interactions, communication skills, and behavioral patterns.

    There were also dramatic improvements in scores using the Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist—a 77-question assessment tool used to evaluate the effectiveness of ASD treatment, with lower scores indicating improvement in symptoms.

    Both twins “improved dramatically,” with one going from a score of 76 to 36 in seven months, and the other from 43 to 4 over the same period.

    The study notes that the improvements were so profound the pediatrician exclaimed that one of the girls had undergone “a kind of miracle.”

    The combined interventions, along with the commitment of the children’s parents, led to a “dramatic improvement and reversal of ASD diagnoses” for the twins.

    Beth Lambert is founder and executive director of Epidemic Answers, a website made up of parents, clinicians, researchers, authors, and wellness experts dedicated to helping kids heal from health issues. She is also one of the study authors.

    Mrs. Lambert spoke with The Epoch Times and explained that there is hope for children with ASD and other conditions as well as resources for parents to support them through the process.

    “We’re doing research to try to gather evidence that many of these conditions are reversible. But also we’re trying to create a platform where we can give solutions to parents—we’re trying to educate them, and we have an online community [Healing Together] where we’re teaching them how to do this work themselves,” she said.

    Autism Prevalence

    According to the study, the prevalence of autism is growing with increasing speed. In the early 1990’s the number of children diagnosed with autism in the United States was 1 in 2000. Throughout the 1990s, the diagnostic criteria for autism were broadened to include a wider range of symptoms and behaviors. This expansion is reflected in updated editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

    For example, in the DSM-IV, published in 1994, the diagnostic criteria were expanded and broken into subtypes such as Asperger’s disorder, autistic disorder, and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified.

    There was a further expansion of the criteria in the DSM-5 released in 2013, which merged the previous subtypes into one unified diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, or ASD.

    These changes contributed to a significant increase in autism diagnoses in the subsequent years—however, some physicians believe that these factors alone are not enough to account for the dramatic rise in ASD diagnoses.

    According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, in 2000, 1 in 150 children had a diagnosis of ASD, but their most recent data state that in 2020, 1 in 36 children had a diagnosis of ASD, which represents more than a 300 percent increase in the last two decades.

    The study states that “Published projections estimate that even if the future prevalence of ASD remained unchanged over the next decade, there would be approximately 1 million new cases, thereby resulting in an additional $4 trillion of lifelong social costs in the United States. Furthermore, if the current rate of increase in prevalence continues, costs could reach nearly $15 trillion of lifelong costs by 2029.”

    Mrs. Lambert says, “Modern living is making our children sick, but it’s also making all of us sick—and our children are the canaries in the coal mine.”

    Final Thoughts

    The study findings suggest that environmental and lifestyle factors play a significant role in the manifestation of ASD symptoms and that targeted interventions in these areas can lead to substantial and lasting improvements—including a reversal of symptoms.

    The study authors note that the engagement of the parents or caregivers is vital to the process.

    “The commitment and leadership of well-informed parents or guardians is an essential component of the effective personalization that appears necessary for the feasibility of such improvements.”

    What the study clarifies is that treating ASD requires a personalized, multifaceted approach rather than a one-size-fits-all solution, as ASD diagnoses are as unique and complex as the individuals they affect.

    The twins’ parents agree, according to a section in the study containing their perspective.

    “Having fraternal twin daughters diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder at 20 months has given us a profound appreciation of the highly individual presentation of Autism.”

    For families dealing with an ASD diagnosis, Mrs. Lambert says “You are not alone.”

    “I want people to know that there is support for them. We have a conference [Documenting Hope] so that we can invite parents in so that they can become part of our community. We can do this together, which is working to heal our kids together.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 22:10

  • California To Help 1,700 First-Generation Homebuyers With Down Payments
    California To Help 1,700 First-Generation Homebuyers With Down Payments

    Authored by Jill McLaughlin via The Epoch Times,

    California will help 1,700 first-generation homebuyers with down payments in the second round of its Dream for All Shared Appreciation Loan program, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced June 28.

    The state program that debuted last year provides potential homebuyers with vouchers to pay up to 20 percent of a home’s value up to $150,000 to cover a down payment and closing costs. Eligible applicants need to be first-time homebuyers (haven’t owned a home in the last three years) and whose parents don’t currently own a home in the United States.

    “As part of the state’s comprehensive efforts to improve affordability, build generational wealth, and unlock access to housing, Dream for All is paving the way home for thousands of Californians,” Mr. Newsom said in a statement Friday.

    “This program is more than just financial assistance—it’s about providing a pathway for individuals to achieve their California dream.”

    The program allows low- to moderate-income families to apply for assistance.

    Due to the extremely high demand for the program, however, the California Housing Finance Agency uses a random selection process to ensure all applicants have an equal chance at receiving funding from the $255 million available for the second round of awards.

    A third-party audit is performed to certify that voucher recipients meet key program requirements, according to Mr. Newsom’s office.

    The housing finance agency plans to allocate funds across nine regions throughout the state—the Capital Region, Central Coast, Central Valley, Inland Empire, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area, and rural areas.

    Those who receive assistance have 90 days to find a home.

    The state provides a portion of the down payment in exchange for a share in the property.

    If the recipient sells or refinances the home later, they will be required to repay the initial amount of assistance, plus up to 20 percent of any increase in the home’s value.

    Program proceeds will be used to fund the next round of homeowners, according to the governor’s office.

    When the program was launched on April 3, 2023, with the passage of a bill authored by Sen. President Pro Tempore Toni Atkins, its $300 million budget was depleted within days.

    More than 2,400 first-time homebuyers qualified for the first round, according to Ms. Atkins.

    Only 2,200 families received first-round financing, the governor said Friday.

    The income limitation to qualify for the assistance is $159,000 for several counties throughout the state, including San Francisco, Santa Clara, and San Mateo.

    Los Angeles’s limit is $180,000. and Orange County has the highest income limit in Southern California at $230,000.

    The original legislation, written in 2021, proposed a $1 billion per year budget for the program for up to 10 years to assist an estimated 150,000 Californians.

    However, after some negotiations, the proposed amount dropped to $500 million in 2022 after the state faced a $25 billion budget deficit that year.

    Mr. Newsom again decreased the allocation to $300 million before the program debuted in 2023.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 21:00

  • "Outrage": Philadelphia Airport Adds Hidden 3% Surcharge To All Vendor Items
    “Outrage”: Philadelphia Airport Adds Hidden 3% Surcharge To All Vendor Items

    With the idea of an unrealized gains tax being tossed around at the Federal level, and just when you thought we couldn’t possibly conjure up any more fees, taxes, surcharges or other burdensome cash grabs, the Philadelphia Airport is calling your bluff.

    The airport spurred “outrage” this week after it was revealed that they are adding a 3% surcharge to every purchase, according to View From The Wing. As if airports weren’t already adding 50% surcharge on everything they sell there to begin with…

    According to the report the surcharge is  “to offset the employee wages and benefits” that must be paid to airport workers, but none of the money actually goes to employees. 

    View From The Wing then asks the astute question: “You might ask, why allow vendors to charge people more than the marked prices, instead of just raising prices?”

    And you already know the answer, right? It’s because the airport doesn’t let them raise prices, stating that “operators are only permitted to charge up to 15% more than a comparable street-side unit”.

    Thus, the airport then pretends that a surcharge isn’t a price increase. And while we’re fuzzy on the innerworkings of the charge, it would seem to us that it puts another set of hands in between the customer and the vendor, so we’d be doubtful about vendors having access to all of the new cash they are bringing in. You’ll have to pardon our skepticism, but just remember, we’ve covered Wall Street for decades.

    Off-airport stores have increased prices due to 20% inflation over the past four years, and airport vendors have followed suit. With price caps based on a percentage over ‘street pricing,’ the dollar gap between outside and airport prices has grown, the report says. 

    Now as a result of the charge, menu prices appear lower than they are, with a $10 item actually costing $10.30, excluding tips. This 3% surcharge, not a service charge, is attributed to the high minimum wage at the airport, which is $15.06 plus benefits.

    Despite wages being a cost factor, not all airports have the same wage levels, with some, like St. Louis, paying more. Perhaps funds from paid water refill stations could cover these costs instead.

    Vendors must disclose the surcharge but only at the point-of-sale and on receipts, meaning customers learn of it after being charged. This likely leads to lower tips as customers try to keep their total bill as expected. The 3% surcharge diverts money from worker tips to concession owners, undermining the minimum wage increase benefits for workers.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 20:25

  • Price Action Indicates Lack Of Any True Conviction Or Depth Of Liquidity
    Price Action Indicates Lack Of Any True Conviction Or Depth Of Liquidity

    By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

    Assume

    I think it was in the Bad News Bears, where I first saw that “Assume” can make an a** out of U and Me. I couldn’t get a good clip of that but did come across a scene from The Odd Couple where they went through the same dissection of the word (The Odd Couple, believe it or not, was before my time).

    I’ve chosen this word for today’s report as I think it is relevant on many fronts. I am also going back and trying to figure out how many things I “assume” that I should recheck. We will use presume as well, which seems like a less severe version of assume. Finally, we will discuss “mirroring” once again, as this could be very important in the coming weeks.

    Markets

    Last weekend we wrote about Fragility in a One Stock, Stock Market, and we followed up on Thursday with One Trick Pony. While much of the focus is on the difficulties and risks of interpreting broad market signals in a market that is led by a handful of stocks, we can probably rephrase it in terms of assumptions and presumptions. “Normally” we see X and can interpret Y. In some groups, there has been a lot of discussion of co-movement versus correlation. In this case, correlation is more persistent and there is an element of causation, as opposed to a few things that seem to move together from time to time. I’d lump Bitcoin and almost anything in this category, as somedays it seems very correlated to big tech, and others it beats completely to its own drum – a drum that is getting weaker, but more on that later this week.

    Then we can add “passive” to the mix. The large “passive” rebalancing in XLK is over, but in general, for the largest indices, every inflow and outflow is disproportionately (by historical standards) impacting a small percentage of the stocks in the index.

    For now, I’m sticking with the overall sentiment being one of “greedy, but less greedy than before.”

    Monday’s large sell-off in the Nasdaq 100 was completely reversed on Tuesday. The index moved higher Wednesday and Thursday, only to wind up fractionally down on the week, as stocks faded into the close on Friday. Maybe I’m alone in struggling with this price action, but it does seem indicative of a lack of any true conviction or depth of liquidity (in either direction).

    We “presumed” or concluded (or guessed) that the debate would highlight the deficit and the fact that neither candidate is particularly serious about getting it under control, let alone balancing the budget.

    In terms of being right for the wrong reasons, the 10-year Treasury yield closed at 4.4%, smack in the middle of our 4.3% to 4.5% range. But it had nothing to do with the debate (based on the trading during and after the debate). It had absolutely nothing to do with the economic data, as inflation data came in nicely (should have been priced in), and Michigan inflation expectations were surprisingly down (not priced in, but easily ignored). In any case, we were at 4.26% before the market rolled over.

    The Nasdaq 100 decided to follow Treasury prices and moved almost in lockstep with them. Whether there was causation or not remains to be seen. It was month-end and quarter-end, so that could have had an impact, though normally the “rebalancing” trades create both demand and supply for stocks/bonds. However, both were for sale. One “assumption” many use is that month-end is good for bonds, as index trackers “extend” duration into the close. That didn’t occur, again, making us wary of assumptions and rules of thumb. Adding to that, NVDA, which has been one of our main “tells” was higher for most of the day, before finishing the day lower.

    Do we bounce on Monday as we start the new quarter? Or has momentum lost enough steam that selling continues? Will asset managers slow their purchases or sell now that they have finalized what they show clients on their quarter-end statement? I remain focused on the 50-day moving averages for the broad indices, which would indicate more selling to come.

    Oil behaved differently. It traded strongly into the open, sold off with the economic data, and while finishing lower on the day, it had support into the close (unlike stocks or bonds). We will have more to come on oil as the best geopolitical risk trade.

    Elections and Debates

    European elections are nearing, and I’m leaning towards them causing some market hiccups in Europe. I’d avoid European risk here, and those elections could add pressure to U.S. markets.

    While we are non-partisan here at Academy, it is impossible to ignore the debate. While it didn’t seem to have any immediate market impact, it is difficult to know if it had any influence on markets over the course of the day (I’d like to claim I was right and the debate was why Treasuries sold off, but that is a stretch).

    There are two things that I think I can safely say about the debate:

    • Based on betting data, we saw President Biden’s odds decline, noticeably, but former President Trump’s odds increased marginally. Basically, the betters were taking chips off the Biden table, and spreading them around, not just throwing them all to Trump. I used RealClearPolling (the link seems ok, but I wouldn’t bother clicking it without a good VPN). It seemed comprehensive and in line with other reports I’ve seen. I do not know how easily manipulated the betting markets are (e.g., depth of liquidity). So, you can take this with a grain of salt, but I do think that we’ve seen a change in how people are thinking about the upcoming election.

    • We can now see why the media has been very careful to say “presumptive” nominee, as there was a lot of chatter, from sources I would consider pro-Biden, that some consideration should be given to rethinking the Democratic ticket (which seems supported by the betting odds).

    I don’t think this is what drove markets on Friday, as the day wore on, but I do think it is important from a geopolitical risk perspective.

    Assumptions and “Mirroring”

    We have discussed the concept of “mirroring” in many different reports. It is the “problem” that intelligence officers face when trying to extrapolate what an adversary might do. It is extremely difficult not to “mirror” your thoughts and perspectives when analyzing an adversary. It is one of the reasons why most military exercises have “red teams” – teams that play the role of opposition. Trying to gameplay things “properly” is important so that you are facing, in practice and simulation, the opponent that you will face on the battlefield.

    The concept of “mirroring” or making incorrect assumptions is likely part of why Academy, with our geopolitical insight, has not only been correct on our trajectory with China but was also predicting it well ahead of time. We cut through some of the “mirroring” issues many seem to face. It is certainly one element of our The Threat of Made By China 2025.

    But today, we are revisiting this concept, because it may prove important in understanding how our adversaries/competitors may take the debate.

    • China (Xi), Russia (Putin), Iran (Khamenei), and North Korea (Kim) are all autocrats. They are in charge. What they say goes. While they likely “understand” at some level, how our House of Representatives and Senate work and how the Supreme Court has influence, it may be difficult for them to comprehend that the president (with “Executive Powers”) doesn’t have the same freedom of action that they do. It seems like there is at least a potential that these actors (and some others across the globe) may view the criticism of Biden’s performance as something bigger than it is.
    • The U.S. media was (and is) completely domestically focused at the moment. U.S. media coverage always tends to be “parochial” (relatively small domestic events/human interest stories often take priority over potentially much more important events occurring globally). However, the U.S. media and social media are being dominated by the debate and the election.
      • To the extent any of these actors were planning on influencing U.S. elections, they probably already have some elements in place.
      • It seems plausible, that having watched the Ukraine funding debate and the relationship with Israel evolve since October 7th, any bad actor has potentially added some new influencing tools to their tool kit.

    A combination of misunderstanding how the U.S. works and overconfidence in their ability to win a misinformation campaign may give these bad actors the incentive to act sooner than later.

    In our recent Geopolitical Risks – Perception vs Reality we highlighted “wildcard risk.” The intensity and variety of geopolitical risks already seemed high (something we’ve mentioned in recent reports), and it seems that it is necessary to increase our estimate of geopolitical risk after Thursday.

    The concern is that some adversary, or competitor, will try to take advantage of what they perceive as an opportunity, with the president facing some new questions, even from supporters.

    The common denominators between these countries (and their likely actions) are commodities and trade.

    I want to own energy and commodity related assets now (the commodities, but also the stocks of companies in those industries). Since I’m worried about trade, in the event of some act, I’m leaning more towards energy than industrial commodities. I’ve been asked about gold and silver (and Bitcoin), but I don’t have a strong opinion (though, gold and silver would certainly seem to fit my geopolitical risk thesis).

    If you have time, re-reading The Game of Chicken in Today’s World seems like a good use of time, as all of the actors above are likely trying to figure out what, if anything, to do given the election news here and in Europe.

    Bottom Line

    Higher yields and less inverted curves. 4.3% to 4.5% is still our working range for 10s. The bias is now to break higher, but geopolitical risk, while not providing a “flight to safety” trade like it has done in the past, will support Treasuries (more at the front end).

    Lower stocks and the “catch-up” will only occur in a down market at this stage.

    With geopolitical risk rising, own commodities and commodity-related stocks (and bonds) with a bias towards energy.

    Apologies to anyone we may have offended regarding politics or the debate. We have tried to stick to the obvious things that have been happening since the debate. It would be easier to avoid discussing it at all, but since our adversaries and competitors are analyzing it, and it could influence their behavior in the coming weeks, we felt that it was important to go down this uncomfortable path. Given Academy’s expertise in Geopolitical Risk, and often being asked when and how to hedge it, it seems more timely than ever to put some trades on that will benefit from increased activity (while hoping, on a personal level, that nothing occurs, as we already have more than enough fighting happening in this world).

    In the meantime, we will continue to challenge our own assumptions and presumptions in this tricky market and world.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 19:50

  • Retiring Wealthy Now Means More Than $3 Million In Many U.S. States
    Retiring Wealthy Now Means More Than $3 Million In Many U.S. States

    The cost of living in American cities has skyrocketed so much that retirees now need more than $3 million to be considered “wealthy” in them, according to a new study from GoBankingRates.

    In this study, a team of researchers first calculated the minimum savings needed to retire for 20, 25 and 30 years in America’s 50 largest cities.

    They analyzed each city’s annual cost of living and subtracted the annual Social Security income (as sourced from the Social Security Administration’s Monthly Statistical Snapshot as of May 2024).

    Then, to find the savings needed to be “rich”, the study took the minimum savings needed in each city and doubled those amounts. We ranked each city based on the smallest to largest amounts needed to be considered rich for 25 years of retirement.

    The study found:

    1. It takes more than $3,000,000 to be considered wealthy in 10 cities. The top three cities where you’ll need the most savings to be rich are all in California: San Francisco (~$6,000,000), San Jose (~$5.5M) and Oakland (~$4.5M).
    2. It takes significantly less savings to be wealthy in New York than it does in San Francisco. You’ll need roughly $3.8M to retire rich in New York, which is substantially less than the $5.95M needed in San Francisco.
    3. Austin is more expensive than many people realize. Austin was the 11th most expensive city on our list, ranking right next to Boston. In Austin, you’ll need more than $2.5M to be considered rich for 25 years of retirement.

    According to the data, the financial requirements for retirees looking to enjoy a rich lifestyle are particularly steep in cities such as San Francisco, San Jose, and New York City.

    For instance, in San Francisco, the savings needed for a 20-year retirement amount to a staggering $4,757,745. Extending this to a 25-year retirement pushes the savings requirement to $5,947,182, and for a 30-year retirement, retirees would need an eye-watering $7,143,762. The annual cost of living after Social Security in San Francisco is $118,944, reflecting the high cost of living in this iconic city.

    Similarly, San Jose demands equally substantial savings, with $4,422,401 needed for a 20-year retirement, rising to $6,640,241 for 30 years. The annual living cost post-Social Security here is $110,560, emphasizing the financial burden retirees face in the heart of Silicon Valley.

    New York City, another major metropolitan area, requires retirees to save $3,069,460 for 20 years of retirement, increasing to $4,608,798 for 30 years. The annual cost of living after factoring in Social Security stands at $76,736, making it one of the most expensive cities to retire in. This trend is mirrored in other high-cost cities like Los Angeles and Oakland, where retirees need upwards of $2.8 million and $3.6 million respectively for a 20-year retirement, and the costs only escalate with longer retirement periods.

    The study and data on all 50 states can be read in its entirety here. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 19:15

  • California Has Seized Nearly 7 Million Fentanyl Pills Since January
    California Has Seized Nearly 7 Million Fentanyl Pills Since January

    Authored by Rudy Blalock via The Epoch Times,

    A California task force has seized nearly 7 million fentanyl pills since January thanks to efforts statewide and near ports of entry into the United States from Mexico, officials announced this week.

    The updated figures were issued in a June 26 press release from Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said the state will continue its crackdown on the drug.

    “We will continue to take fentanyl out of our neighborhoods, hold drug traffickers accountable, and expand access to life-saving medicine,” he said, referencing Narcan, an opiate blocker.

    In a May press release, Mr. Newsom announced that the same task force had assisted in the seizure of 5.8 million fentanyl pills since the start of the year.

    During a one week stretch in April more than 1 million pills and more than 500 pounds of methamphetamine were seized in San Diego County and at the border, according to the press release.

    Mr. Newsom increased the number of California National Guard officers near the state’s southern ports of entry last year by 50 percent to help stop drugs from being brought across the border, according to his office.

    The crackdown has resulted in over 62,000 pounds of fentanyl seized in 2023, 1,066 percent more than what was confiscated in 2021 and up 115 percent from 2022.

    A recently launched state website, opioids.ca.gov, also now offers a “one-stop-tool” for drug prevention, treatment resources, and updates on the state’s battle to hold pharmaceutical companies and drug traffickers accountable for the drug crisis, according to the governor’s most recent press release.

    Mr. Newsom also met with President Joe Biden in February to discuss border policy and immigration issues, and last October spoke with Chinese leader Xi Jinping about addressing the transnational shipping of precursor chemicals that are used to create fentanyl, according to the same announcement.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 19:00

  • 'BI-DONE!' – Plane Trolls Biden's 'Joyless' Dud Of A Hamptons Mega-Donor Event
    ‘BI-DONE!’ – Plane Trolls Biden’s ‘Joyless’ Dud Of A Hamptons Mega-Donor Event

    In the wake of his historically disastrous presidential debate performance, President Biden set out to ease the worries of Democratic mega-donors gathered at a sprawling Hamptons oceanfront estate on Saturday afternoon.

    However, a powerful, competing message was in the air — literally — as an airplane flew by the event toting a sign with a message that concisely proclaimed that Biden’s 2024 re-election bid is already over: “BI-DONE!” According to the New York Post’s sources, the next-level aerial trolling was the work of an unnamed New York Republican donor.

    The truth is up there: This fly-by of Biden’s star-studded mega-donor event in the Hamptons sought to feed growing doubts (photo obtained by New York Post)

    The aerial rhetorical assault proved unnecessary — as donors who attended the event told the Wall Street Journal it was a “joyless” affair, and said Biden’s appearance only served to solidify their deep worries about his fitness. The event was tightly orchestrated, and Biden did his speaking with the aid of a teleprompter, reminding attendees of his inability to manage unscripted dialogue — even with a friendly audience. 

    The event was hosted by hedge fund billionaire Barry Rosenstein on his 18-acre beachfront property in East Hampton, NY. Rosenstein and his wife Lizanne set a then-US record for a home purchase price when they paid $137 million for the place in 2014. Attendees reportedly included celebrities like Sarah Jessica Parker, Matthew Broderick and Howard Stern, along with Michael J. Fox and his wife Tracy Pollan, all of whom paid upwards of $250,000 to see Biden’s hollowing husk in person. Loews Hotels CEO Jonathan Tisch attended too. 

    The aircraft flew a route that took it from Montauk to Sag Harbor via East Hampton. 

    Ahead of the event, anonymous mega-donors shaken by Biden’s Thursday-night disaster confided to the Post that they were gritting their teeth and following through on their planned attendance — which they’d already paid for. “We have no choice but to believe Biden will redeem himself. The alternative is so unthinkable,” said one of them. “I’m going and everyone I know is still going.” 

    Another longtime Democratic funder, who’d opted against attending, said the mood among the people who write the big checks is dark: “Everyone going [to the fundraiser] is extremely disappointed. Everyone paid in advance… so it could be an opportunity to encourage him to drop out.” The same donor pointed a finger of blame at Jill Biden: “Lots of people are blaming his wife … for not telling him [to step aside].”

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

    Donors who spoke to the Journal said they’re waiting for the incoming round of post-debate polling results, anticipating that cratering support would greatly ease the challenge of ejecting Biden, who would be 86 years old if he defied all odds and managed to serve out a second term. 

    Meanwhile, as the editorial boards of major newspapers like the New York Times and Atlanta Journal-Constitution have begun urging Biden to quit the race, Democrats of a lesser station aren’t waiting for new polls before doing some urging of their own. These demonstrators, positioned alongside Biden’s motorcade route to Saturday’s Hamptons fundraiser, tried some gentle-but-firm messaging: 

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

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 18:05

  • Iowa Utility Board Approves Eminent Domain For Controversial CO2 Pipeline
    Iowa Utility Board Approves Eminent Domain For Controversial CO2 Pipeline

    Authored by Beth Brelje via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    In a major project milestone, the Iowa Utility Board (IUB) this week approved a proposal by Summit Carbon Solutions to build the world’s largest carbon capture pipeline.

    Fourth-generation South Dakota farmer Ed Fishbach is leading the charge against a five-state carbon capture pipeline proposal by Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)

    The total project spans five states: Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska. It will slice through 2,500 miles of land and connect with 57 ethanol plants, and affects thousands of private landowners, many of whom have fought against the project. The portion approved in Iowa is 680 miles, a Summit spokeswoman told The Epoch Times.

    Many landowners have said, in public hearings and official protest letters submitted to the IUB, that they object to allowing the company to have a right-of-way on their land.

    With this decision, 859 land parcels can be taken by the company through eminent domain.

    “After weighing numerous factors for and against Summit Carbon’s petition, the Board found that the service to be provided by Summit Carbon will promote the public convenience and necessity,” the IUB wrote in its decision. “The Board found Summit Carbon could be vested with the right of eminent domain.”

    Conditions of Approval

    It did put some conditions on the approval.

    Summit will be required to submit certain revised exhibits as compliance filings for IUB review before the board issues the construction permit. And Summit must obtain and maintain at least a $100 million insurance policy; comply with certain construction methods; and ensure that landowners and tenants are compensated for damages that may result during construction.

    Also, Summit needs approval in all the other states.

    “The momentum will continue as we prepare to file our South Dakota permit application in early July,” said Lee Blank, Summit CEO in a statement. “We look forward to engaging with the state throughout this process and are confident in a successful outcome.”

    The company reports that it has already signed easement agreements with 75 percent of Iowa landowners on the route.

    Landowners Protested Project

    Iowa land owners attend Iowa Utility Board hearing in Fort Dodge in August, 2023, on permitting of Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline project that would require easements on hundreds of private properties. (Courtesy of Jessica Mazour)

    Landowners have argued that the project is not for the public good, but instead, is an untested science that will only profit the company making use of the private lands.

    “There is a deep-rooted passion for our farm ground in many farmers, and to have something like this rip it apart for something so unnecessary is unimaginable,” said Austin Hayek, a Fort Dodge, Iowa, farmer whose land is to be affected if the project goes ahead. “Many have wanted to be able to allow their families to continue their legacy of farming as they want, and if this is allowed, it takes options off the table for them.”

    The project is encouraged with federal tax credits as an answer to climate change. It will capture carbon dioxide from ethanol plants, compress the captured CO2, and send it by pipeline to North Dakota where it will be permanently stored underground in deep geologic storage locations.

    “Doing so will drastically reduce the carbon footprint of ethanol production and enhance the long-term economic viability of the ethanol and agriculture industries,” Summit’s website explains.

    Large-scale carbon sequestration projects receive federal tax incentives like the federal Carbon Capture and Sequestration tax credit, also called the 45Q, which is worth up to $85 per ton of CO2 captured.

    Summit expects to store 16.7 million tons of CO2 per year. That amounts to $1.4 billion in tax incentives from taxpayers.

    Tax credits can be converted into cash. Companies that have more tax credits than they can use, sell them at a discount to other companies. This way, the seller makes a profit, and the company buying the credits gets a break on their taxes, paying less than face value for the credits.

    The decision came after the IUB reviewed nearly 4,200 written comments, 7,500 pages of hearing transcripts, testimony at hearings from more than 200 witnesses and landowners; and the IUB reported receiving some 50,000 pages of prefiled testimony and exhibits from hundreds of witnesses and landowners, accepting more than 150 intervenors into the docket, and conducting 33 public information meetings over 34 months. The IUB heard a range of viewpoints in these materials.

    The Sierra Club Iowa Chapter is one group that has partnered with landowners in opposition of the project.

    “This is far from over,” Sierra Club Iowa Chapter Conservation Coordinator Jess Mazour said in a statement. “We will appeal this decision and make our arguments in front of a fair decision maker.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 17:30

  • Watch: Chinese Rocket Static-Fire Test Goes Horribly Wrong 
    Watch: Chinese Rocket Static-Fire Test Goes Horribly Wrong 

    Beijing Tianbing Technology Co., also known as Space Pioneer, suffered a catastrophic failure on Sunday during a static-fire test of the first stage of its Tianlong-3 launch vehicle at a testing facility in the Henan Province.

    “The first stage of its Tianlong-3 rocket under development had detached from its launch pad during a test due to structural failure and landed in a hilly area of the city of Gongyi in central China,” Reuters reported. 

    Space Pioneer’s two-stage Tianlong-3 (“Sky Dragon 3”) is a partly reusable rocket that is under development to compete with Elon Musk’s SpaceX. Tianlong-3 is comparable to SpaceX’s Falcon 9.

    Footage uploaded on X shows the Tianlong-3’s first stage detached from the test bench due to structural failure and soared into the sky, only to come back and crash down to Earth, igniting in a massive fireball about a mile away from the launch facility.  

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

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

    “Space Pioneer was conducting its test as a buildup to an orbital launch of the Tianlong-3, which is benchmarked against the SpaceX Falcon 9, in the coming months,” according to Space News, adding, “The company announced earlier this month that it has secured $207 million in new funding.” 

    Meanwhile, SpaceX continues to dominate the industry with its reusable rockets.

    Data from BryceTech shows that Musk’s rocket company launched an impressive 525 spacecraft (mainly Starlink satellites) in the first quarter of 2024 – more than any other rocket company or nation.

    Musk is quite literally America’s rocket program: SpaceX launched about 429,125 kg of spacecraft upmass in the first quarter, significantly outpacing China’s rocket program (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation), which launched a measly 29,426 kg. 

    It’s not just China struggling to compete with SpaceX’s reusable rockets (read: “SpaceX Leads Reusable Rocket Race, While China Continues Crashing Boosters To Earth”) . Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin is also lagging behind. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 16:55

  • Le Pen Is Mightier: Conservative National Rally Crushes Macron, Socialists In 1st Round Of French Election
    Le Pen Is Mightier: Conservative National Rally Crushes Macron, Socialists In 1st Round Of French Election

    As expected, Le Pen’s conservative (or in the world’s of the liberal media, “Far Right”) National Rally (RN) party won the first round of France’s parliamentary election on Sunday, exit polls showed, but the final result will depend on several days of horsetrading before next week’s run-off.

    The RN was seen winning around 34% of the vote, exit polls from Ipsos, Ifop, OpinionWay and Elabe showed. That was ahead of both far-left and centrist rivals, including President Emmanuel Macron’s Together alliance, whose bloc was seen winning a paltry 20.5%-23%, a far cry from his crushing victory several years ago. The New Popular Front (NFP), a hastily assembled left-wing coalition, was projected to win around 29% of the vote, the exit polls showed.

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

    The exit polls were in line with opinion polls ahead of the election, but provided little clarity on whether the anti-immigrant, eurosceptic RN will be able to form a government to “cohabit” with the pro-EU Macron after next Sunday’s run-off.

    The RN’s chances of winning power next week will depend on the political dealmaking made by its rivals over the coming days. In the past, centre-right and centre-left parties have teamed up to keep the RN from power, but that dynamic, known as the “republican front,” is less certain than ever.

    If no candidate reaches 50% in the first round, the top two contenders automatically qualify for the second round, as well as all those with 12.5% of registered voters. In the run-off, whoever wins the most votes take the constituency.

    According to Reuters, the high turnout on Sunday suggests France is heading for a record number of three-way run-offs. These generally benefit the RN much more than two-way contests, experts say.

    Sure enough, the horsetrading began almost immediately on Sunday night. In a written statement to the press, Macron called on voters to rally behind candidates who are “clearly republican and democratic”, which, based on his recent declarations, would exclude candidates from the RN and from the hard-left France Unbowed (LFI) party. The problem, of course, is that Macron’s party was crushed in the recent European parliamentary elections precisely because the people have had enough with “clearly republican and democratic” puppets of the World Economic Forum and want actual change.

    LFI leader Jean-Luc Melenchon said the second-placed NFP alliance will withdraw all its candidates who came third in the first round.”Our guideline is simple and clear: not a single more vote for the National Rally,” he said. It is, however, unlikely that many will care what the French socialists want: after all, last week the French socialist leftist alliance said it would raise the top marginal income tax rate to 90% if it were to take over the government.

    Meanwhile, Jordan Bardella, the 28-year-old RN party president, said he was ready to be prime minister – if his party wins an absolute majority. That’s right, a 28 year old kid may soon be a prime minister of the 2nd largest European economy. He has ruled out trying to form a minority government and neither Macron nor the NFP will form an alliance with him.

    “I will be a “cohabitation” Prime Minister, respectful of the constitution and of the office of President of the Republic, but uncompromising about the policies we will implement,” he said.

    While the RN is seen winning the most seats in the National Assembly, only one of the pollsters – Elabe – had the party winning an absolute majority of 289 seats in the run-off. Experts say that seat projections after first-round votes can be highly inaccurate, and especially so in this election.

    Voter participation was high compared with previous parliamentary elections, illustrating the political fervour Macron aroused with his stunning decision to call a parliamentary vote after the RN trounced his party in European Parliament elections earlier this month.

    His decision plunged France into political uncertainty, sent shockwaves around Europe and prompted a sell-off of French assets on financial markets.

    A longtime pariah, the RN is now closer to power than it has ever been. Le Pen has sought to clean up the image of a party known for racism and antisemitism, a tactic that has worked amid voter anger at Macron, the high cost of living and growing concerns over immigration.

    At 1500 GMT, turnout was nearly 60%, compared with 39.42% two years ago – the highest comparable turnout figures since the 1986 legislative vote, Ipsos France’s research director Mathieu Gallard said.

    In short, the people have had enough and they finally want to be heard.

     

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 16:45

  • IRS, Treasury Announce New Crypto Tax Reporting Rule For Brokers
    IRS, Treasury Announce New Crypto Tax Reporting Rule For Brokers

    Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) published a final rule on Friday that requires cryptocurrency brokers to report details of digital asset transactions to the tax agency.

    The Treasury Department in Washington on March 25, 2024. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

    “The final regulations announced today will require brokers to report gross proceeds on the sale of digital assets beginning in 2026 for all sales in 2025,” the Treasury said in a June 28 press release.

    “Brokers will be required to also report information on the tax basis for certain digital assets beginning in 2027 for sales in 2026.” Tax basis refers to the original purchase price of digital assets and is used to determine taxes owed following its sale.

    The new rule does not change tax requirements for taxpayers. It is only directed at brokers for reporting on crypto transactions.

    Normal taxpayers engaged in digital asset transactions have always owed taxes on the sale or exchange of digital assets. Earlier, they had to rely on expensive third-party services to calculate their gains or losses to pay taxes, the Treasury stated. But under the new rule, the brokers will send this information to taxpayers.

    “By implementing the law’s reporting requirements, these final regulations will help taxpayers more easily pay taxes owed under current law, while reducing tax evasion by wealthy investors,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Aviva Aron-Dine in the press release.

    Various organizations had previously raised concerns about the rule when it was proposed last year. In comments submitted by Cboe Global Markets, the organization pointed out that while the rule requires “brokers” to file information returns and provide payee statements related to digital asset transactions done by customers, “we are concerned about the overly broad definition of broker.”

    The rule defined a broker as including certain digital asset trading platforms, payment processors, and hosted wallet providers.

    Cboe pointed out that the definition covers “entities that are not best positioned to provide information for tax reporting purposes.” And by requiring these entities to comply with the new reporting requirements, the rule creates complications, it said.

    For instance, “digital asset exchanges—like Cboe Digital—would have different and more onerous tax reporting obligations from those that exist for traditional securities exchanges.” The rule would also require exchanges “to report information that may be outright infeasible to provide.”

    Meanwhile, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce criticized the rule’s effective date which begins on Jan. 1, 2025. The chamber said the deadline does not provide enough time “for even the most sophisticated, well-resourced digital asset brokers” to develop and test systems required to implement the reporting rules.

    Boosting Tax Compliance

    IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel praised the reporting requirements, noting that the regulations were finalized after reviewing thousands of public comments. The final rule addresses concerns raised by the public, he said. The regulations will help close the “tax gap” related to digital assets.

    ‘These regulations are an important part of the larger effort on high-income individual tax compliance. We need to make sure digital assets are not used to hide taxable income, and these final regulations will improve detection of noncompliance in the high-risk space of digital assets,” Mr. Werfel stated.

    “Our work to address potential non-compliance in digital currency is another reason why it is so critical to fully fund IRS operations … These new assets expand the complexity of our tax system, and the technology and personnel necessary for the IRS to keep pace with these changes is resource intensive.”

    The IRS pointed out that the new regulations were not applicable to brokers who do not take possession of the digital assets being exchanged. These brokers are also called decentralized or non-custodial brokers. The IRS and the Treasury intend to provide rules for these brokers in the future.

    Meanwhile, current tax rules require Americans to report all cryptocurrency and digital asset incomes they made when filing taxes.

    The IRS has placed a question related to these transactions on tax forms. For tax year 2023, the question was: “At any time during 2023, did you: (a) receive (as a reward, award, or payment for property or services); or (b) sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of a digital asset (or a financial interest in a digital asset)?”

    All taxpayers filing forms 1040, 1040-SR, 1040-NR, 1041, 1065, 1120, 1120 and 1120S must answer the question regardless of whether they conducted digital asset transactions or not.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 16:20

  • Replace Biden With Gavin Newsom? Polls Show Democrats Would Still Lose
    Replace Biden With Gavin Newsom? Polls Show Democrats Would Still Lose

    Remember when it was “conspiracy theory” to question Joe Biden’s cognitive abilities? After Joe Biden’s dismal debate performance in Atlanta this week, the media-sphere is swirling with conjecture over a potential replacement for the doddering candidate.  The Biden team continues to insist that he won’t drop out of the race by the time the Democratic National Convention launches in Chicago this August.  That doesn’t mean the DNC won’t consider picking another candidate to run, though.

    Convention rules are not legal requirements, they are simply rules dictated by the DNC and by tradition.  Delegates that already voted for Biden are supposed to continue their support, but there are avenues by which they can change their minds and trigger an open nomination process on the convention floor.  It’s telling that far-left media outlets like Time Magazine and Politico are already war-gaming the possibility of Biden stepping down; that’s how poorly received his debate performance was.

    Following Thursday’s debate Johanna Maska, a Democratic consultant and former Barack Obama aide, posted a video on X urging her party to change its 2024 presidential candidate. She said: “We cannot do this, Democrats. Joe Biden can’t put a sentence together. We have to change our candidate, and we have so many good candidates who are sitting on the sidelines.”

    While some (like Maska) don’t like the idea, one name that is continually mentioned in this discourse is California Governor Gavin Newsom.  Many Democrats and some Republicans believe he would be the primary alternative if Biden is somehow removed from the running.  Their suspicions have merit – Last year Newsom was given ample attention by the establishment media and he did act as if he was running for president.     

    Newsom’s capacity for authoritarianism was made clear during his strict pandemic lockdowns, as was his hypocrisy when he was caught attending lavish parties while millions of other Californians were ordered to stay home and away from friends and family.  

    His one and only talent seems to be a capacity for twisting statistics to fit his false narratives; he has consistently misrepresented California’s increasing economic distress as “success” and downplayed growing homelessness and crime.  His advantage is that he’s able to do this with a completely straight face, and for those unfamiliar with such statistics and how they can be manipulated, Newsom appears knowledgeable and formidable. 

    Beyond that, he’s not very impressive as a candidate and the polls show this.

    A March Rasmussen Reports survey of 912 likely voters found that former President Trump would lead by 17 points (51 percent to 34) if Newsom were the 2024 Democratic nominee.

    In February 2024, an Emerson College Polling survey of 1,225 showed that Trump would win in a hypothetical White House race against Newsom by 10 points (46 percent to 36).

    A November 2023 Fox News poll of 1,001 registered voters found that Trump would win an election against Newsom by four points (49 percent to 45).

    Other candidates fare even worse.  Trump crushes Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (also a potential alternative to Biden) by 12 points in Emerson polls.  

    Kamala Harris loses by 6.6 points in Real Clear Politics polling.  Meanwhile, former first lady Michelle Obama also trailed behind Trump in a hypothetical matchup (50 to 43 percent) according to Rasmussen.

    Bottom line?  The Democrats might want to replace Biden, but they don’t have anyone that will win according to the current data.  A switch may occur simply as a way to avoid any irreparable disgrace to the party going into November, but it’s important to remember that Biden is simply a foil, a mouthpiece for a political ideology of socialist extremism that the majority of Americans now find dangerous and ugly.  Every candidate the Democrats put forward will espouse the same exact rhetoric and promote the same exact policies. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 15:45

  • The Housing Tide Starts Turning: National Inventory Rose 4% In Q1 2024
    The Housing Tide Starts Turning: National Inventory Rose 4% In Q1 2024

    While the government may be able to fake BLS and CPI data to gloss over the fact that 5.5% rates have already likely driven the nation into a deep recession, independent data on the housing market is showing a decades-long shortage in inventory starting to rebound. 

    A new report from Construction Coverage has revealed where the largest increases in real estate inventory in the U.S. are taking place.

    The report notes that the current housing shortage—which is now estimated to be between four million and seven million homes—can trace its beginnings to long before the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 10 years following the Great Recession, the United States constructed fewer new homes than in any other decade since the 1960s.

    They write that the lack of housing affects certain areas more severely than others. Researchers ranked locations based on the percentage change in the average monthly housing inventory—the total number of active listings plus pending sales at the end of the month—between Q1 2023 and Q1 2024.

    Data from a national level showed that U.S. housing inventory decreased from more than two million in 2012 to a low of approximately 630,000 at the start of 2022.

    Over the same period, months’ supply—a measure of how long it would take existing inventory to sell if no new homes came on the market—plummeted from a national high of 7.5 months to a historic low of 1.1 months, the report adds.

    It also noted that inventory has rebounded slightly since early 2022: throughout the first quarter of 2024, the national inventory hovered around 970,000 homes for sale, marking a 4.0% year-over-year increase.

    Despite this uptick, existing inventory would sustain the current sales pace for just 2.9 months—a marginal increase from the 2.8 months’ supply recorded last year.

    The report broke down trends by cities and states, finding that as of the first quarter of 2024, states with the lowest levels of supply are concentrated in and around the Midwest (such as Kansas with 1.5 months of supply) and the Northeast (including Rhode Island with 1.8 months of supply).

    However, Washington also stands out for having some of the lowest levels of available housing nationally, with just 1.9 months of supply.

    In contrast, several states in the South, led by Florida (5.2 months of supply), along with Hawaii (5.2 months) and Montana (5.1 months), present notably more favorable conditions for buyers.

    Among the nation’s largest cities, Denver, El Paso, and Dallas recorded the largest year-over-year increases in housing inventory. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Las Vegas, Raleigh, and Chicago recorded the biggest declines.

    The data is hardly a 2008-style collapse, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t noteworthy. 

    While the ‘turning of the tide’ still remains muted, the housing market is so large it rarely corrects swiftly. It’s important to notice, however, that rising inventory ticking higher – combined with mortgage rates now over 7% – could easily be telegraphing a correction in prices heading into 2025.

    You can view the entire study here.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 14:35

  • Judge Denies Alec Baldwin Motion To Dismiss Manslaughter Charge In 'Rust' Shooting
    Judge Denies Alec Baldwin Motion To Dismiss Manslaughter Charge In ‘Rust’ Shooting

    Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A New Mexico judge on June 28 denied actor Alec Baldwin’s request to dismiss an involuntary manslaughter charge against him relating to the 2021 fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the set of his film “Rust.”

    Alec Baldwin attends the Roundabout Theatre Company’s annual gala at the Ziegfeld Ballroom in New York City on March 6, 2023. (Charles Sykes/Invision/AP)

    Previously, Mr. Baldwin’s lawyers requested that the court dismiss the charge, arguing that the firearm involved in the shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was damaged during FBI forensic testing before defense attorneys could examine it.

    Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer rejected the arguments, stating that Mr. Baldwin’s lawyers failed to establish that the firearm had “an exculpatory value that was apparent before the evidence was destroyed.”

    “Rather, a significant amount of evidence indicates that the unaltered firearm did not possess apparent exculpatory value,” she stated in an 18-page ruling.

    The judge referenced Mr. Baldwin’s statements to a New Mexico Occupational Health and Safety Bureau officer on Dec. 8, 2021, in which he claimed that “the problem didn’t have to do with the gun. It had to do with the bullet.”

    “Further, prior to the accidental discharge testing, [FBI forensic examiner Bryce Ziegler] found the firearm to be fully operative and without modification,” the judge added.

    Judge Sommer added that Mr. Baldwin’s lawyers also failed to establish that “the State acted in bad faith when destroying certain internal components of the firearm in the course of the accidental discharge testing.”

    “In other words, the evidence before the Court does not demonstrate that the State or its agents knew that the unaltered firearm possessed exculpatory value at the time of the accidental discharge testing, and nonetheless destroyed it, thereby indicating that the evidence may have exonerated the Defendant,” she stated.

    The judge also ruled that prosecutors must fully disclose to the jury “the destructive nature of the firearm testing, the resulting loss, and its relevance and import.”

    Mr. Baldwin is set to stand trial in July.

    Ms. Hutchins was killed after a gun Mr. Baldwin was handling discharged on set on Oct. 21, 2021. He has pleaded not guilty to an involuntary manslaughter charge, which carries a maximum sentence of 18 months in prison.

    Sheriff’s investigators initially sent the revolver to the FBI for routine testing, but when an FBI analyst heard Mr. Baldwin say in an ABC TV interview that he never pulled the trigger, the agency told local authorities they could conduct an accidental discharge test, though it might damage the gun.

    The FBI was told by a team of investigators to go ahead, and tested the revolver by striking it from several angles with a rawhide mallet. One of those strikes fractured the gun’s firing and safety mechanisms.

    Armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was convicted in March of involuntary manslaughter for her role in the shooting and was sentenced to 18 months in prison.

    The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 14:00

  • Watch: Just Another Night In Gavin Newsom's California 
    Watch: Just Another Night In Gavin Newsom’s California 

    President Joe Biden’s disastrous debate with former President Trump on Thursday has led leftist corporate media to publish headlines calling for the elderly president to step aside.

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

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

    Although there is no evidence that Biden is willing to end his presidential campaign, some corporate media outlets have suggested replacements, such as California Governor Gavin Newsom.

    However, Gov. Newsom is probably one of the worst possible candidates. The entire nation has watched the radical leftist governor transform California into a socialist hellhole over the years characterized by rampant lawlessness, widespread homelessness, an affordability crisis, and a poor economic climate with high taxes. 

    The latest issue in the Golden State has been out-of-control youth reenacting scenes of the video game ‘Grand-Theft-Auto’ through wild street takeovers.

    According to the Los Angeles Police Department, at least 50 vehicles were involved in a street takeover in downtown Los Angeles early Saturday morning. 

    Videos of the chaos were uploaded on X. They show multiple cars engulfed in flames. 

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

    Los Angeles City Councilman Kevin de Leon told CBS News that street takeovers are unacceptable, adding, “It angers me, because it puts other people in danger.” 

    The lack of law and order in the state suggests Gov. Newsom has a very limited shot against Trump.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 06/30/2024 – 13:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest