Today’s News 21st March 2021

• Brandon Smith: Is The Illegal-Immigration Crisis All About New COVID Lockdowns?
  Brandon Smith: Is The Illegal-Immigration Crisis All About New COVID Lockdowns?

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  In multiple articles I have published recently I outlined why an attempt at a new national covid lockdown in the US is inevitable. In my article ‘The Real Reasons Why Millions Of Americans Will Defy Covid Mandates And Vaccines’, I examined new polling numbers which show that a vast portion of the US population is refusing to comply with medical controls. The bottom line is this: Covid is a non-threat to 99.7% of the public, and the citizenry is getting wise to this fact.

  However, there are certain people that NEED the pandemic lockdowns to continue regardless of what the public wants.

  The Biden Administration and its globalist handlers have BIG plans for the next few years, and all of it relies on pandemic fears and totalitarian restrictions.

  The “Great Reset”, as Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum calls it, is never going to happen unless global populations are locked down and placed under control. Unconstitutional pieces of legislation that undermine or destroy the 2nd Amendment, like HR 127, will be impossible to enact if Americans are organized and unified to resist. Carbon taxation and “shared economy” policies will never be allowed to touch ground. Conservative Americans and many moderates will stamp out such measures like cockroaches within their own states. Law enforcement agencies in most areas would have no interest in being used as cannon fodder to enforce them.

  The only option the globalists have at this stage is to barrel forward with the pandemic narrative despite the fact that Covid has turned out to be a hollow issue with a death rate of 0.26% outside of nursing home patients. At least half the country is ready to revolt over the mandates, and almost half the country is refusing to take the vaccines or accept medical passports. That is millions of people that are laughing in the face of the Reset agenda.

  So, the question for the thwarted globalists is this: How do they turn their conservative enemies into unwitting allies? What is a 4th Generation warfare solution to their problem? How do they get a larger number of conservatives to support their own enslavement through the lockdown mandates?

  Well, one method would be to cause a convincing distraction that compels conservatives to embrace the notion of the lockdowns as an acceptable sacrifice in exchange for dealing with a potentially more dangerous problem.

  

  The crisis of mass illegal immigration is turning into a growing national debate right now. I suspect we haven’t even begun to see the consequences yet, and I also suspect that there is a plot hidden within these events.

  But let’s look at the surface arguments first…

  Obviously, most conservatives are going to view a huge influx of illegals into the US as a means for Democrats to secure elections for decades to come. I’m sure most people reading this article are aware of the “Cloward Piven Strategy”, and I won’t delve into it too much here except to say that I get it, and I realize it’s a problem; it’s just not the biggest problem that conservatives should be worried about right now.

  Yes, this exact program of social dilution was used in Europe only a few years ago, and to be clear, this is not a problem of “race”, it is a problem of culture and ideology. Muslim culture and Sharia law, for example, are for the most part incompatible with Western society. Forcefully mixing the two is a recipe for disaster as we have seen already in the EU. When Muslims immigrate LEGALLY and individually assimilate into Western culture instead of trying to import their own culture by attrition, things work. Otherwise things do not work. This is reality.

  By extension, mass illegal migration without assimilation of people from Central and South America into the US will also lead to disaster. These migrants are coming from predominantly socialist countries that have failed systems (that’s why these people are leaving and coming to the US). But, illegals tend to bring their socialist politics with them. They have no experience living within a culture that treats freedom as inherent and inalienable and are often motivated by access to government programs and handouts.

  This is why we have borders in the first place – to protect our society from intrusion and co-option by another society or group of people with incompatible values. Despite what leftists and some false libertarians might claim, without borders, freedom dies.

  Conservatives easily understand this simple concept, but leftists just don’t get it. They live in a Marxist fantasy land where Utopia is right around the corner and open borders are a magical tool for peace and prosperity. They also hate conservatives and that pesky Bill of Rights that we defend so much. They think inviting an army of potential socialists into the country will help to marginalize us and make us disappear. They’ll even brag about it openly on occasion.

  So, it’s not surprising that whenever a giant caravan of illegals starts marching towards the southern border, conservatives rally in opposition. We might even put more energy into this issue than we do for gun rights.

  Here is the problem…

  The migrant crisis is suddenly receiving heavy attention from the mainstream media after being ignored for months. Why is that? It feels as if there was a complete blackout on this issue, and now, the floodgates have opened and the media coverage is growing. With the amount of protection Biden has been lavished with by the MSM so far, their sudden critical position on his border policies has me suspicious. Since when do leftist corporate journalists care about the border?

  Well, reports of a possible “surge in covid” due to mass illegal migrations into America might explain everything.

  Think of it this way – The establishment and Biden need some kind of rationale for a new covid lockdown. I continue to predict that Biden will try to institute a Federal lockdown mandate similar to the Level 4 lockdowns used in parts of Europe, Australia and New Zealand. They know that there is too much conservative opposition and that they will not be able to get red states to comply. But, what if conservatives were made to think that the border would be more heavily guarded and illegal immigrants rounded up if they supported a new lockdown policy?

  What if conservatives were tricked into supporting covid lockdowns as a means to control illegal immigration?

  The solution should be obvious: Biden should be enforcing border protocols and laws WITHOUT needing covid lockdowns. But, he’s not going to do that. What he’s going to do is keep the border as porous as possible, do little to stem the tide of immigrant caravans until the situation devolves into chaos, and then announce that a “new wave” of covid infections has been brought to the US by the caravans.

  Again, covid is a non-threat to 99.7% of the population outside of nursing homes, but what about a “covid mutation”? Brazil has been conveniently reporting such a mutation that is supposedly “more dangerous” than the original covid virus.

  As this variant spreads, whether or not it presents any actual danger, Biden will then announce a national lockdown including a hard lockdown on the southern border. The question is, will some conservatives be more inclined to back off of their opposition to the mandates if it means illegal immigration will be stopped?

  This is essentially a protection racket. In other words, Biden will refuse to protect the border until we comply with the pandemic restrictions, just as he and the establishment will continue to push for restricted freedoms until ALL Americans submit to vaccinations and medical passports.

  However, there is another way…

  Counties on the southern border can take over the job of securing the region and refuse to allow illegal migrants to pass. If the border patrol is understaffed or is being hobbled by the federal government, then the locals can take control and do the job that Biden refuses to do. Furthermore, if the problem persists and the federal government seeks to interfere in local efforts to secure the border, then it may be time to create new borders. It may be time to do that anyway.

  Conservatives and moderates have almost nothing in common with the political left anymore; conservatives want freedom of speech, the right to self defense, the right to honest and accurate information, self reliance, economic freedom, secure borders and small government. Leftists support mass censorship, disarmament, business shutdowns, lockdown mandates, open borders, the big government nanny state, centralization and tyranny. Perhaps it is time we separate and build the societies we want, and well away from each other.

  Let’s see which system thrives and which one collapses. Let’s see which system people want to join and which system people want to escape.

  My point is, at no time should conservatives feel compelled to accept covid lockdowns or other totalitarian measures just to get border protections from the federal government in return. And, I probably don’t need to say this, but don’t buy into the covid mutation narrative. The pandemic is a failed part of the Reset agenda, nothing more. The elites are trying to pick up the pieces and turn garbage into gold. As long as conservatives and liberty minded people refuse to comply, their plans will crumble. And, if the border needs to be secured and the federal government refuses to do their job, then we should take control and make the border safe ourselves.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 03/21/2021 – 00:00

• If You Move To These Cities, The American Dream Is Still Achievable
  If You Move To These Cities, The American Dream Is Still Achievable

  Owning a piece of ‘The American Dream’ – if all that means to you is buying a house – has become out of reach for many (if not most Amercians) and the situation is getting worse.

  The serial-bubble-blowing Federal Reserve is making the same mistake it made during the mid-2000s and late 1990s by allowing untethered monetary policy to inflate housing prices to unaffordable levels.

  In many parts of the country, housing prices have outpaced household incomes. 

  A combination of factors during the pandemic resulted in surging home prices. First, the Fed slammed mortgage rates to record lows, and the socio-economic collapse of metro areas created an exodus to suburbia. The combination of the two has inflated overall US home prices. 

  Using data from job search site Zippia, this graphic below reveals the most and least affordable cities to purchase a home. 

  

  Head of content at Zippia, Kathy Morris, wrote that “the American dream of homeownership is still possible for the average worker.” She lists the top ten most affordable areas to live in: 

  1. Detroit, Michigan

  2. Akron, Ohio

  3. Toledo, Ohio

  4. Fort Wayne, Indiana

  5. Fishers, Indiana

  6. Pearland, Texas

  7. Cedar Rapids, Iowa

  8. Lee’s Summit, Missouri

  9. Cleveland, Ohio

  10. Grand Prairie, Texas

  To develop the list, Morris used the average home cost, monthly mortgage, and the minimum salary to determine which area is most affordable for working-class folks. She recommended that no more than 28% of gross (i.e., before tax) monthly income go toward mortgage payments. The sweet spot of home affordability was areas where people paid less than 28% of their incomes towards their mortgage. However, she said,

  “We did not take into account PMI, taxes, down payment size, or home insurance, since those differ greatly based on individual circumstances and loan type.”

  .. and being a dream, the bottom 90% of Americans need to be asleep to believe in it, or they will either wind up renting for life or own an unaffordable home and be house poor. Morris lists the ten least affordable cities for homeownership:

  1. Los Angeles, California

  2. San Francisco, California

  3. Honolulu, Hawaii

  4. New York City, New York

  5. Oakland, California

  6. Long Beach, California

  7. Miami, Florida

  8. Huntington Beach, California

  9. Anaheim, California

  10. San Jose, California

  How times have changed over the course of the past couple of decades as taking part in The American Dream now means you must move in Detroit – not exactly an all inspiring metro area. 

  Living the American Dream of runaway home prices juiced by Fed policy. Every time I hear word “inclusive,” I think to myself: Why don’t they start by ceasing policies that exacerbate the k-shaped entry price to put roof over all Americans’ heads? Too easy?@Quillintel@SoberLook pic.twitter.com/zX8QJSfGRA

  — Danielle DiMartino Booth (@DiMartinoBooth) March 18, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 23:30

• The Never-Ending Battle Between Leviathan And Liberty
  The Never-Ending Battle Between Leviathan And Liberty

  Authored by James Bovard via The Mises Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

  The notion that Americans will always be free is part of the catechism that is force-fed to public school students. For hundreds of years, philosophers, politicians, and reformers have touted a law of history that assures the ultimate triumph of freedom. “Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The urge for freedom will eventually come,” Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in his famous “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”

  

  But few political follies are more hazardous than presuming that one’s liberties are forever safe. None of the arguments on why liberty is inevitable can explain why it has not yet arrived. Most of the human race existed with little or no freedom for 95+ percent of recorded history. If liberty is God’s gift to humanity, then why were most people who ever lived on Earth denied this divine bequest?

  Many efforts at limiting state power have failed almost immediately. In the thirteenth century, oppressed English nobles revolted and sought to bind their kings in perpetuity. King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, petulantly accepting a limit to his prerogative to pillage everything in his domain. While the Magna Carta is celebrated nowadays as the dawn of a new age, it failed to even bind the king who signed the document. The ink on his signature was barely dry before King John brought in foreign forces and proceeded to slaughter the barons who forced his signature. King John died just after his vengeance commenced, providing a respite for Englishmen. In the final realm, the Magna Carta was simply a political pledge that was honored only insofar as private courage and weaponry compelled sovereigns to limit their abuses.

  History is a chronology of nations pillaged by reckless regimes. English kings recited coronation oaths that limited their power. Such oaths were as binding as a congressional candidate’s campaign promises. Rampaging kings sometimes converted smouldering discontent into a raging fire of resistance. Historian Thomas Macaulay summarized England’s path to its Glorious Revolution of 1688: “Oppression speedily did what philosophy and eloquence … failed to do.” King James II was ousted in 1688 and Parliament speedily enacted laws to curb all subsequent monarchs.

  The United States was the first government to be created with strict limitations on its power, enshrined in the Constitution. As James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” The Founders included numerous checks and balances in the Constitution to restrain political ambition. But they were never so naïve as to presume that a parchment barrier would keep American liberty safe in perpetuity.

  Within the first decade of the nation’s existence, Congress and President John Adams enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts, which destroyed freedom of the press and speech. Thomas Jefferson responded by writing a resolution in 1799 that warned, “Free government is founded in jealousy, not confidence…. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in men, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Senator John Taylor, in his 1821 book Tyranny Unmasked, scoffed at presuming “our good theoretical system of government is a sufficient security against actual tyranny.”

  Those “chains of the Constitution” have often been illusory or merely a placebo phantasm for government victims. Politicians perennially invoke the Constitution to prove that citizens have no reason to fear the government. When the House of Representatives considered the PATRIOT Act in October 2001, Representative James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) assured fellow members of Congress that “the bill does not do anything to take away the freedoms of innocent citizens. Of course we all recognize that the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution prevents the government from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures, and that is why this legislation does not change the United States Constitution or the rights guaranteed to citizens of this country.” Sensenbrenner talked as if that the mere existence of the Bill of Rights shackled Congress. This is akin to claiming that because automobiles have brakes, drivers can never exceed the speed limit. The PATRIOT Act unleashed a constitutional crime wave, as the Bush administration suspended habeas corpus and conducted waves of secret arrests, unleashed the FBI to conduct hundreds of thousands of warrantless searches, and entitled the National Security Agency to vacuum up Americans’ emails and other personal data.

  American presidents take an oath of office solemnly swearing to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” But this has long been an empty ritual, akin to Roman emperors making public sacrifices to pagan gods they knew did not exist. Fealty to the Constitution has evaporated in part because philosophical trends have long favored absolute power.

  Intellectual servility has been perennially profitable and there has never been a shortage of writers exalting supreme rulers. Writing in 1651, English philosopher Thomas Hobbes labeled the state as Leviathan, “our mortal God.” Leviathan signifies a government whose power is unbounded, with a right to dictate almost anything and everything to the people under its sway. While Hobbes was reviled in the first century after his book was published, his ideas later became fashionable as academics rushed to echo his derision of “tyrannophobia.” Hobbes declared that it is forever prohibited for subjects in “any way to speak evil of their sovereign” regardless of how badly they are abused. Hobbes offered “suicide pact sovereignty”: to recognize a government’s existence is to automatically concede the government’s right to destroy everything in its domain.

  Hobbes profoundly influenced subsequent political philosophers, including German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel, who trumpeted the doctrine that history is the actualization of freedom. But Hegel was not using “freedom” in the sense that the Founding Fathers did. Instead, Hegel declared, “The State in-and-for-itself is the ethical whole, the actualization of freedom.” Hegel also proclaimed that “[t]he State is the Divine Idea as it exists on earth” and derided the notion of freedom as individual choice as “uneducated superficiality.” Hegel’s slavish version of freedom was difficult to distinguish from Hobbes’ s totalitarian vision of sovereignty.

  Hegel had a profound influence on communism (via Marx), fascism, and on the most popular philosopher in Washington in recent decades. Francis Fukuyama, a State Department functionary, hailed Hegel as the supreme “philosopher of freedom.” In 1989, Fukuyama proclaimed the “unabashed victory of economic and political liberalism” and boasted that “we in the liberal West occupy the final summit of the historical edifice.” He announced “the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”

  Fukuyama’s “law of history” supposedly proved that government was no longer a threat to freedom. By making political power appear innocuous, Fukuyama became an instant hero inside the Beltway. Fukuyama’s “end of history” revelation was zealously embraced by the political-media establishment. Fukuyama provided a law of history that supposedly negated all the warnings from history about political power.

  Fukuyama’s doctrine “liberated” presidents in the name of freedom. In his 2002 National Security Strategy, President George W. Bush echoed Fukuyama’s view: “The great struggles of the twentieth century between liberty and totalitarianism ended with a decisive victory for the forces of freedom—and a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy, and free enterprise.” At a 2002 Republican fundraiser dinner, Bush declared: “We will do whatever it takes to make the homeland secure and to make freedom reign across the world.” In his 2005 inaugural address, Bush whooped, “We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom.” Bush used “freedom bosh” to sanctify his wars, torture regime, and militaristic threats against any foreign regime that disobeyed Washington.

  Why would history stop after either liberty or democracy is achieved? The experience of many countries has been “one person, one vote, one time.” Faith in democracy as a perpetual guarantor of freedom is tricky to reconcile with the collapse of more than thirty democracies around the globe in recent years. Few of the democracies that have survived have fastidiously respected citizens’ rights.

  Some libertarians are confident that, despite post–9/11 debacles, liberty will inevitably triumph in the end. But why would freedom be safer in the future than now? Because of a law of history that was never enacted by God, a convocation of cardinals, or even the Arkansas state legislature?

  Presuming that America or any other nation is destined to be free lulls people against potential oppressors. Author Robert Anton Wilson observed, “Every national border in Europe marks the place where two gangs of bandits got too exhausted to kill each other any more and signed a treaty.” Similarly, the current extent of government power marks the boundary of political onslaughts into the private domain of liberty.

  There will be no perpetual truce along this border, because political marauders will continually create new pretexts to invade citizens’ lives. The private domain relies primarily on voluntary agreements, independence, and peaceful coexistence. The political domain relies on command and control, subjugation, and threats and penalties.

  One of the greatest perils to the private domain is the notion that Leviathan is more legitimate than liberty. Downplaying government coercion is the key to this propaganda coup. For most of the American media, compelling submission to political commands is a nonissue, equivalent of the sun rising in the east each morning.

  At the time when political power began soaring, in the 1930s, American political thinking systematically disregarded the danger from government. In the 1940s, as Professor David Ciepley observed, “the State was dropped from American social science, as part of the reaction to the rise of totalitarianism. All traces of state autonomy, now understood as ‘state coercion,’ were expunged from the image of American democracy.” Ciepley explained that “the emergence of Hitler and Stalin as the ultimate social engineers led American political scientists to … fall silent about all such activities in the American governmental system. If totalitarianism means elite social engineering, then American democracy must mean popular control.” Democracy became the purported champion of freedom, because people were taught that democracies were inherently nonoppressive. But as Senator John Taylor warned two centuries ago, “Self-government is flattered to destroy self-government.”

  For many people, liberty is an abstraction until government agents ravage their lives. A lucid recognition of the coercive nature of Leviathan is vital for the defense of freedom. Leviathan’s abuses and atrocities must be weaponized to awaken as many people as possible to the perils they face.

  “Legitimacy” spawns a political fog that obscures people’s recognition of their own victimhood. Lenin reputedly said that the capitalists would sell communists the rope with which the capitalists were hanged. Similarly, Leviathan perennially provides ample gunpowder for detonating its legitimacy. Leviathan without legitimacy is simply a regime that must rely on brute force to compel submission to its decrees. At some point, the brute force becomes too great for regime lackeys to cover up.

  Once legitimacy is lost, governments can collapse like overheated soufflés. For instance, East Bloc regimes imploded much faster than almost anyone expected. Prior to 1989, Soviet leaders believed that cosmetic reforms would keep people subdued despite a failing economic system. CIA analysts predicted that 100+ million people in East Europe would remain docile and downtrodden for decades longer. But proliferating protests in several nations spurred the Hungarian government to permit a breach in the Iron Curtain along the Austrian border in May 1989. That breach quickly spurred a flood of humanity rushing to escape communism, taking with them the tattered remnants of regimes’ legitimacy. Six months later, the Berlin Wall was breached and governments fell like dominos. On Christmas Day, Romanian soldiers celebrated by lining their dictator and his wife up in front of a stone wall and executing them.

  Most contemporary governments have more popular support than Soviet Bloc regimes received in the 1980s. But sustained abuses can be an acid drip that eventually topples any government regardless of its purported mandate. More Americans believe in witches, ghosts, and astrology nowadays than trust the federal government. In the covid-19 era, America is degenerating into a cage keeper democracy, where voters merely select the politicians who place them under house arrest.

  Expecting liberty to permanently triumph would require rulers to miraculously become selfless if not self-sacrificing. But, as Hayek warned in his essay “Why the Worst Get on Top,” power is a magnet for the dregs of humanity. Faith in the state will continue reviving as long as some people feel entitled to domineer other people. Political action pays a higher premium on deceit than almost any other human activity and thus will remain perilous to everything decent. “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty,” as our forefathers recognized in the nineteenth century.

  To presume that liberty is inevitable is to absolve oneself from fighting oppression. As soon as people drop the reins on government, politicians will leash the people. Rather than hoping for an “end of history” triumph, people must battle forever to defend their rights. As long as individuals continue to defy oppressors, the seeds of resistance will produce bountiful harvests of freedom in better times.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 23:00

• Meet "Digit," A Humanoid Robot Testing Package Delivery From Curb To Doorstep
  Meet “Digit,” A Humanoid Robot Testing Package Delivery From Curb To Doorstep

  The virus pandemic has accelerated the push by some companies to develop driverless automobiles for deliveries. But there’s a common problem developing among many of these robot-delivery vehicles. How do packages go from the delivery vehicle to the customer’s doorstep?

  Some have proposed drones, while others, such as Oregon-based Agility robotics, have proposed a bi-pedal robot deployed from the rear of a robot-delivery van that will walk the package to a customer’s doorstep without the risk of face-to-face interaction.

  

  Agility intends to solve not the last-mile delivery problem but the last-foot delivery issues from robot-van to customer’s doorstep. 

  The goal of the robot, dubbed “Digit,” is to reach complicated areas where traditional robots would have issues traversing, such as stairs, tight spaces, and other complex terrains.  

  Agility Robotics founder Jonathan Hurst told local news station KOBI that Digit “can lift a 40-pound package.” He said, “the robot catches itself when it falls and reorient to get back up.”

  Hurst outlined the most significant problem in last-mile deliveries: 

  “Once you’ve got an autonomous vehicle that does a lot of it on the road. But now you’re stuck at the curb, right? And in order to really provide that service that people want, you need to then get from the curb to the doorstep. And that’s where we solve this problem.”

  Agility has sold two prototype robots to Ford Motor Company, who experimented with the bi-pedal robot launched from the rear of an autonomous delivery van to take a package from the vehicle to the customer’s doorstep. 

  “So many jobs that are basically robot jobs, they’re the dull, dirty, dangerous kinds of things that are injury prone and incredibly repetitive,” Hurst said. “That’s how you can then really increase the value of the jobs that the people get to do.”

  KOBI interviews Hurst and gets a first-hand view of the robot. 

  While autonomous delivery vehicles and Digit could one day lower last-mile delivery costs for companies – the combination of the two may result in a surge of technological unemployment. 

  … and to be frank, Digit is creepier than Boston Dynamics’ Spot. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 22:30

• "A Threat To American Democracy" – Federal Judge Alleges Democrats Control Almost All Major News Outlets
  “A Threat To American Democracy” – Federal Judge Alleges Democrats Control Almost All Major News Outlets

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  A federal judge this week said that the Democrat Party is close to controlling the press as he detailed what he described as shocking bias against Republicans.

  

  D.C. Circuit Court Judge Laurence Silberman outlined his opposition to the Supreme Court’s key decision in 1964 in New York Times v. Sullivan, which has since protected many media outlets from lawsuits.

  Silberman, a Reagan appointee, wrote that the ruling is “a threat to American Democracy” and must be overturned.

  “The increased power of the press is so dangerous today because we are very close to one-party control of these institutions. Our court was once concerned about the institutional consolidation of the press leading to a ‘bland and homogenous’ marketplace of ideas. It turns out that ideological consolidation of the press (helped along by economic consolidation) is the far greater threat,” he continued.

  “Although the bias against the Republican Party—not just controversial individuals—is rather shocking today, this is not new; it is a long-term, secular trend going back at least to the ’70s. (I do not mean to defend or criticize the behavior of any particular politician).

  Two of the three most influential papers (at least historically), The New York Times and The Washington Post, are virtually Democratic Party broadsheets. And the news section of The Wall Street Journal leans in the same direction. The orientation of these three papers is followed by The Associated Press and most large papers across the country (such as the Los Angeles Times, Miami Herald, and Boston Globe).

  Nearly all television—network and cable—is a Democratic Party trumpet. Even the government-supported National Public Radio follows along,” he added.

  The news outlets mentioned didn’t return requests for comment.

  The judge also expressed concern about the influence that Big Tech wields over how news is distributed, referencing how Twitter limited the spread of a New York Post article about President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden.

  Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey later told lawmakers that what happened was a mistake.

  Silberman added that there are few notable exceptions to the outlets he mentioned: Fox News, the New York Post, and the Journal’s editorial page.

  “It should be sobering for those concerned about news bias that these institutions are controlled by a single man and his son. Will a lone holdout remain in what is otherwise a frighteningly orthodox media culture? After all, there are serious efforts to muzzle Fox News. And although upstart (mainly online) conservative networks have emerged in recent years, their visibility has been decidedly curtailed by Social Media, either by direct bans or content-based censorship,” he wrote.

  The uniformity of news bias has a political impact, the judge continued, pointing to author Tim Groseclose’s 2011 book: “Left Turn.”

  The George Mason University professor said in his book that he found the way outlets report more favorably on Democrats aids the party’s candidates by 8 to 10 percent in a typical election.

  Silberman was writing a partial dissent in the case of Liberian government officials Christiana Tah and Randolph McClain versus Global Witness Publishing, an organization that investigates human rights abuses.

  “It should be borne in mind that the first step taken by any potential authoritarian or dictatorial regime is to gain control of communications, particularly the delivery of news. It is fair to conclude, therefore, that one-party control of the press and media is a threat to a viable democracy. It may even give rise to countervailing extremism,” Silberman concluded.

  “The First Amendment guarantees a free press to foster a vibrant trade in ideas. But a biased press can distort the marketplace. And when the media has proven its willingness—if not eagerness—to so distort, it is a profound mistake to stand by unjustified legal rules that serve only to enhance the press’ power.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 22:00

• Blame Millennials For The Dramatic Surge In Cord-Cutting
  Blame Millennials For The Dramatic Surge In Cord-Cutting

  Cord-cutting is not a new problem, but new data from a Pew Research Center survey shows an accelerating trend among millennials abandoning cable and satellite providers. 

  The survey of more than 1,500 US adults from Jan. 25 to Feb. 8, 2021, found cable and satellite users among all US adults have plunged from 76% in 2015 to 56% last month. About 71% of respondents said they don’t subscribe to cable or satellite because video content is abundant online. In comparison, 69% said cable or satellite costs are too high, and 45% of them don’t watch enough TV to justify to costs of cable or satellite. 

  The acceleration of cord-cutting is rapidly transforming how content is viewed. The coronavirus pandemic exacerbated the trend as many gravitated towards popular streaming services like Netflix and Hulu have gained popularity. 

  Among respondents who don’t have cable or satellite, 61% said they had cable or satellite service in the past, while 39% said they never subscribed. 

  Pew finds, “27% of U.S. adults are “cord cutters” and 17% have never had a cable or satellite subscription.” 

  The survey reveals demographic trends among cord-cutters. What’s notable in the chart below is that the share of 18 to 29-year-olds subscribing to cable or satellite has plunged from 65% in 2015 to 34% as of last month. Meanwhile, baby boomers are perfectly contempt with cable or satellite with a minimal decline over the previous six years. 

  

  “Not only do young adults stand out for not using cable or satellite TV, they are also much more likely than their elders to have never gotten TV at home via cable or satellite – and to say they don’t subscribe because they can find the content they want online,” said Pew

  What should be shocking for cable or satellite companies is that 61% of those who are ages 18 to 29 have never been a subscriber – with 91% of them indicating there’s enough content online to watch – 57% say cable or satellite services are too expensive – and 53% of them say they don’t watch enough TV. 

  

  The evidence continues to mount that younger generations are not just abandoning cable or satellite, but many have never been subscribers. It remains to be seen what the cable-TV industry has up its sleeves to attract millennial subscribers.   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 21:30

• America's Upside-Down Economy Just Took Another Bizarre Turn
  America’s Upside-Down Economy Just Took Another Bizarre Turn

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

  Is this a good economy or a bad economy?  Well, that all depends on who you are talking to. 

  For most Americans, economic conditions have been absolutely horrible ever since the COVID pandemic first arrived.  More than 100,000 businesses have permanently shut down, approximately 10 million Americans are in danger of being evicted from their homes, and weekly unemployment claims have been above the old record set in the early 1980s every single week for nearly an entire year.  Meanwhile, the absolutely insane polices that the Federal Reserve and our politicians in Washington have been pursuing have made the wealthy far wealthier than ever before.  In early 2020, M1 was sitting at about 4 trillion dollars, and now it is up to 18 trillion dollars.  Much of that money has ended up in the pockets of the ultra-wealthy, and now they are spending it is some pretty odd ways.

  

  For example, NFT art is one of the latest crazes.  You can’t hang NFT art on your wall, but that isn’t stopping people from paying ridiculous amounts of money for it.  In fact, things have gotten so crazy that one film director has decided to sell audio clips of himself farting as NFTs…

  A Brooklyn-based film director is simultaneously mocking and attempting to profit off the cryptocurrency craze for non-fungible tokens (NFTs) by selling a year’s worth of fart audio clips recorded in quarantine.

  “If people are selling digital art and GIFs, why not sell farts?” Alex Ramírez-Mallis, 36, told The Post of his dank addition to the blockchain-based NFT market.

  You would have to be absolutely nuts to purchase such a thing, but apparently someone has already purchased one clip for 85 dollars…

  Individual fart recordings are also available for 0.05 Ethereum, or about $85 a pop. The gassy group has so far sold one, to an anonymous buyer.

  “If the value increases, they could have an extremely valuable fart on their hands,” he said.

  Pizza Hut has decided that they want to get in on the NFT craze as well.

  In Canada, the company originally listen an NFT of a pizza slice for 18 cents, but it ended up selling for $8,824…

  Pizza Hut Canada has announced it is releasing “1 Byte Favourites,” aka digital images of pizza, as non-fungible tokens. “Pizza Hut believes no world should exist without pizza, especially their pan pizza. That’s why they wanted to make sure it was enshrined in the digital universe,” they said in a release. Each week the company will release a new image of a pizza slice, each of a different recipe, for purchase on Rarible. The first-ever “slice” was listed for $0.0001 ETH (a cryptocurrency the equivalent of 18 cents), but wound up being sold for $8,824.

  This is madness, and it is also a grave insult to all of those that are deeply suffering out there.

  Could it be possible that we are rapidly approaching our own “let them eat cake” moment?

  As the ultra-wealthy continue to throw their money around in absurd ways, most people are just struggling to get by from month to month.  On Thursday, we learned that another 770,000 Americans filed new claims for unemployment benefits last week…

  Figures released Thursday by the Labor Department show that 770,000 Americans filed first-time jobless claims in the week ended March 13, higher than the 700,000 forecast by Refinitiv economists.

  Weekly jobless claims have remained stubbornly high for months, hovering around four times the typical pre-crisis level, although it’s well below the peak of almost 7 million that was reached when stay-at-home orders were first issued a year ago in March.

  After all this time, the number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits each week is still about four times higher than pre-pandemic levels.

  And we just learned that retail sales fell pretty dramatically during the month of February…

  Americans shopped less in February, leading retail sales to fall 3% on a seasonally adjusted basis, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday.

  It was a much steeper drop than the 0.5% decline economists had predicted, according to Refinitiv.

  Bad weather across many states were part of the reason sales declined last month.

  When things go badly, they love to blame the weather.

  Of course the new stimulus checks that Americans are now receiving should help to boost retail sales temporarily.

  But at this point there are no plans to cut checks every month, and any short-term assistance will only briefly alleviate the long-term suffering that so many Americans are enduring.

  We are currently in the midst of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and a lot more pain is on the horizon.

  Even though I write about this stuff on a daily basis, I was surprised to learn that the results of a recent survey show that finances have now become the number one source of stress for the American people…

  WalletHub’s new Coronavirus Money Survey also reveals that the nation’s focus is now shifting from the virus to finances. The survey of over 750 Americans in March 2021 finds money is now the biggest stressor around the country.

  Three in 10 respondents say money is their greatest concern this year, a 15-percent increase over last year. COVID-19 is still the top stressor for 28 percent of Americans. As coronavirus safety measures fade however, researchers find people are getting back to worrying about how to make ends meet.

  If you don’t know how you are going to pay the bills this month, that can be a source of stress that never leaves you day or night.

  Those that have gone through this sort of emotional torment know exactly what I am talking about.

  So when the ultra-wealthy throw their money away on “farting art” or “Pizza Hut art”, that is like rubbing dirt in the faces of tens of millions of Americans that are desperately trying to figure out some way to survive from month to month.

  The ultra-wealthy can continue to flaunt their wealth, but already we are seeing the rise of the “Robinhood mentality” that so many have warned about.

  When things get bad enough, the poor will start venturing into rich neighborhoods, and they won’t be there for a social visit.

  We still have relative stability for this brief moment, but it won’t last very long at all.

  *  *  *

  Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 21:00

• If Bitcoin Didn't Exist, We'd Have To Invent It Right Now
  If Bitcoin Didn’t Exist, We’d Have To Invent It Right Now

  Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

  The conventional take on Bitcoin and crypto-currencies in general from the mainstream skeptics is that it’s some sort of speculative bubble. The recent mania in NFTs seemingly adds credence to this argument. However, the NFT craze, as unfathomable as it is, even to somebody like myself, has precedents that show it doesn’t invalidate the crypto thesis.

  Coming up in the domain and DNS business, I’ve seen this movie before. I’ve also made the point back in the 2017 crypto cycle that the Tulipmania analogy for Bitcoin was a bad one for many reasons, and that it was a more accurate comparison to the domain name aftermarket of the 2000’s era. When companies and speculators were paying millions of dollars for strings of words from the dictionary with “.com” appended to them, that was a speculative mania and it was akin to Tulipmania. And from our vantage point in the present we can draw the comparison to NFTs.

  But when the .com aftermarket fizzled, the entire internet kept right on plugging along using DNS as the carrier tone, and domain names for endpoints. That didn’t change and to this day, without DNS you’ve basically  got nothing.  It’s part of the internet plumbing (yes, there are multiple projects seeking to supplant DNS via blockchain, separate convo for another day).

  The overall point is, a seemingly speculative mania can erupt out of a relatively new protocol, be it the long defunct hedge fund that rang the bell at the top by purchasing “fund.com” for $10M USD, or an NFT selling today for $69M USD, and that doesn’t make the underlying protocol from which it sprang forth a speculative bubble (we discussed this along with attention markets and BAT on the latest AxisOfEasy Salon #40).

  But if everything from NFTs to stonks to real estate and gold and cryptos are all hitting fresh all-time-highs, it seems to be that the obvious pattern here isn’t necessarily that “Everything is in a Bubble” as much as that the numéraire is collapsing.

  

  Most people reading these kinds of articles know that bonds are a dead man walking and M2 money supply is going up everywhere. I was going to pull in charts from multiple places (my home country of Canada’s is below). Japan, Eurozone, China, there’s no point, they all look the same, everything looks like this:

  

  And if you zoom in on the last year, the Pandemic Year that will bisect modern history into The Beforetimes and The New Normal, they all look like this:

  

  The Pandemic panic and the monetary response to it pulled forward what I’ve been calling The Great Bifurcation by decades.

  That acceleration and its intensity is a big reason why everything that can be construed as an asset in the world is going like this:

  

  We aren’t in a hyperinflation yet. Policy makers are still trying to pretend inflation is undershooting and they’re still trying like hell to ignite it. As Charles Hugh Smith noted recently, money velocity is plummeting, even as M2 is blasting off (hold that thought).

  When you read about historical hyperinflationary episodes, you will find that what invariably happens is that capital flight occurs in all directions and people end up using some sort of “notgelt”. From Jens O. Parsson’s “Dying of Money”

  “The seas of marks which had been stored up… flooded forth and fought to buy into other investments, foreign currencies, tangible goods, almost anything but marks

  Germany’s money printing industry could not turn out enough trillions to keep up. States, towns, and companies got into the act by issuing their own “emergency money” (Notgeld). Barter became prevalent. Still money grew scarcer while prices continued to soar.”

  “Notgeld” could be a peculiar word. It might connote “not money”, “geld” or “gelt” being the German for money. If the money is worthless, people would want what isn’t that. However that’s because we’re thinking in English.  “Not money” in German would probably be nichtgeld. Notgeld actually does mean “emergency money”.

  In Zimbabwe it was prepaid cellphone cards. In 90’s Yugoslavia things came somewhat full circle and everybody flocked to Deutsche Marks.

  One time at easyDNS (in 2019), we found a customer who kept pre-funding his account with us and had enough of a balance in there to prepay his single website out to 2085. When I asked him what the hell he was doing, it turned out he was an Argentine trying to  protect his savings through one of their incessant currency collapses. He was using us as a bank.

  In all previous hyperinflations people just needed to get out of their local currencies and they’d come up with all manner of ways to do it. But when hyperinflation goes global, across all currencies in all nations, then what do you go into?

  Bitcoin in particular and crypto currencies in general are this coming hyper-inflationary event’s “Notgeld”.

  The recent institutional move into Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is a reaction against systemic, global financial repression. What the naysayers like Peter Schiff and Nouriel Roubani don’t get about where we are in history is this:

  If Bitcoin didn’t exist, we would have to invent it, right now.

  Fortunately Bitcoin and the other crypto-currencies do exist, and they’ve enjoyed a spectacular debut onto the world stage and into monetary history.

  Fortunately proof-of-concept has already occurred and countless FUD cycles surmounted.

  Fortunately the decentralized crypto ecosystems are ready for prime time, exactly when humanity needs it the most. Necessity really was the mother of invention.

  In my Crypto Capitalist Manifesto (30 pages), which is one of the documents subscribers receive after they sign up to my new Crypto Capitalist Letter, I lay out some scenarios which show the theoretical effect of an exodus from bonds and cash on the price of bitcoin, I’ll extract a couple below:

  

  This one estimates the lift to the Bitcoin price in nominal terms based on capturing a fraction of a fraction of a secular exodus from the nearly $20 Trillion USD in negative yield bonds. If half of the capital fled negative yielding debt and of that, 10% moved into Bitcoin, it would push it up over $100K (extrapolating in linear terms of the price is where it is today when this happens).

  

  There’s at least another $100 Trillion USD in nominally positive yield bonds, but mostly negative real returns that would also be good candidates for re-allocation. The second table tries to model Bitcoin capturing a fraction of a fraction of that as well. If there was a 25% exodus out of bonds and Bitcoin caught 10% of that, that alone would put Bitcoin up over $6 Trillion. Other alternative assets like other cryptos, and gold and silver and real estate would all experience similar lifts.

  Of course those are all linear extrapolations based on the current price. In the manifesto I model out a bit more, such as Bitcoin capturing more of the exodus out of bonds as it accelerates. There would also be a generalized acceleration of the Bitcoin price once the market participants became increasingly aware of this dynamic.

  In other words, this is what I think is happening, metaphorically….

  

  The Crypto Capitalist Letter will (hopefully) be in the tradition of The Privateer, but with a tactical focus on investing in crypto stocks.

  Given what has happened to asset prices and crypto in response to just an inkling of inflation, imagine if Charles Hugh Smith is right, looking at the collapse in money velocity occurring now, that this is one final deflationary “tide receding” before the inflationary tsunami hits. Then what happens to the price of Bitcoin, cryptos and gold?

  *  *  *

  To receive future posts in your mailbox join the Bombthrower mailing list or follow me on Twitter. We had to push the launch of The Crypto Capitalist Letter into the week of March 22nd, get on the invite list here for when that goes live.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 20:45

• Defiant US Soldiers Openly Questioning Why BLM Riots Weren't Treated Like Capitol 'Insurrection'
  Defiant US Soldiers Openly Questioning Why BLM Riots Weren’t Treated Like Capitol ‘Insurrection’

  Soldiers “from every echelon” of the US military have been openly questioning why last year’s violent BLM and Antifa riots weren’t treated like the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, a comparison which has flown sideways up the ass of the military’s top enlisted leader, Chief Master Sergeant Ramón “CZ” Colón-López.

  In a Thursday briefing at the Pentagon, Colón-López (CZ) told reporters that some troops have asked “How come you’re not looking at the situation that was going on in Seattle prior to that? [Jan. 6 riot]”

  “This is coming from every echelon that we’re talking to,” CZ added.

  The Pentagon is freaking out bc the extremism standdowns are backfiring and the troops keep asking about BLM riots and Antifa https://t.co/SGre8T7rNT

  — Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) March 20, 2021

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

  According to Military.com, CZ told reporters that he is “concerned about the way that some people are looking at the current environment.”

  Colón-López said the confusion some younger troops have expressed shows why the training sessions on extremism are needed.

  Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered the stand-down Feb. 5 and gave units across the military 60 days to discuss extremism in the ranks with troops.

  The military’s policies are clear, he said: Troops are not to advocate for, or participate in, supremacist, extremist or criminal gang doctrine, ideology or causes. –Military.com

  Others are wondering why leadership’s view is so disproportionate.

  Similar that’s ridiculous. The Capitol riot was 1 day. BLM had 600+ in just 90 days & they have the support of the mainstream media. Way bigger threat https://t.co/eEOubfM5Qf

  — Sean Fitzgerald (@IamSean90) March 20, 2021

  CZ claims that the military ‘remains an apolitical organization,’ and that it doesn’t matter if extremist groups are far left or right, adding “both are off limits.”

  “If it’s an organization that is actually imposing harm, threat, destruction, criminal activity and so on, then we don’t condone that behavior,” he said, adding “We’re focusing on letting people know exactly what the oath tells us to do when it comes to obeying lawful orders, remaining apolitical and basically being good stewards of society.”

  But as the training sessions took place, some themes emerged that worried leaders.

  Those conducting the sessions wanted “to make sure that military members understand the difference between Seattle and [the Jan. 6 riot in] Washington, D.C.,” Colón-López said. “But some of our younger members are confused about this, so that’s what we need to go ahead and talk to them about and educate them on, to make sure that they know exactly what they can and cannot do.” –Military.com

  According to CZ, ‘younger troops need to be educated’ on the difference between the broad (Marxist-organized) BLM and Antifa movement and extremists within said movements.

  

  Meanwhile on Saturday… it begins again:

  Protesters march down Michigan Highway 99/S Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard for today’s pro-socialism, Black Lives Matter protest in Lansing this afternoon #Lansing #Michigan #LansingProtest pic.twitter.com/AeWmhTj1Jy

  — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) March 20, 2021

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

  “Say her name – Breonna Taylor!” chants during today’s “Michigan People’s March” in Lansing #Lansing #Michigan #LansingProtest pic.twitter.com/kDXNhU2IDt

  — Brendan Gutenschwager (@BGOnTheScene) March 20, 2021

  Nothing to see here – just a group waving a communist flag that wants to disband the country’s law enforcement and usher in a state of lawlessness. Totally different from the January 6 ‘insurrection.’ 

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 20:30

• The Great Donkification
  The Great Donkification

  Authored by MN Gordon via EconomicPrism.com,

  “Right here, boys!  Right here!  Get your cake, pie, dill pickles, and ice cream!  Eat all you can!  Be a glutton!  Stuff yourselves!  It’s all free, boys!  It’s all free!  Hurry, hurry, hurry, hurry!”

  – Pleasure Island voiceover, Walt Disney’s Pinocchio (1940)

  

  Welcome To Pleasure Island!

  Did you get your stimmy check, yet?  If so, what are you going to do with it?

  Are you going to park it in your savings account, pay down debt, and pay off a few bills?  Are you going to buy Chinese ‘stonks’, cryptocurrencies, and digital NFT art?

  What about a new iPhone, fancy dinners, or a plane ticket to Cabo?  How about a new living room rug, a wood pellet grill, or a 75-inch flat screen TV with a sound bar?

  The collective answer to these questions is the difference between deflation, asset price inflation, and consumer price inflation.

  Billionaire folk hero Warren Buffett says you should use your stimmy check to “pay off credit card debt.”  His rationale is sound enough:

  “If I owed any money at 18 percent, the first thing I’d do with any money I had would be to pay it off.  You can’t go through life borrowing money at those rates and be better off.”

  Yet paying off credit card debt is the last thing Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell wants you to do with your stimmy check.  Because paying off debt is deflationary – it contracts the money supply.

  Powell wants inflation of both consumer prices and asset prices.  He wants prices to rise, and the dollar to fall, so that long-term public and private debt burdens are slowly inflated away.  He also wants the stock market to maintain a permanently high plateau; the retirements of millions of Baby Boomers are banking on this.

  Congress wants you to believe stimmy check money is free.  They want you to stuff yourself.  Be a glutton.  Eat all you can.  And vote for big government.

  Welcome to Pleasure Island!  By law, in the year 2021, free money – like free education, free food, and free drugs – is a human right.  Just don’t ask about the stealth inflation tax or the other dire consequences…

  Nation Of Donkeys

  “If we play our cards right, we’ll be on easy street!  Or my name isn’t Honest John!”

  – J. Worthington Foulfellow, aka Honest John, Pinocchio (1940)

  One option is to take your stimmy check money and go ‘all in’ on moonshots.  If you gamble on the right ‘stonk’, cryptocurrency, SPAC, or digital NFT art, you could quickly 10x or even 100x your money.  If you play your cards right, like Honest John says, you’ll be on easy street.

  Without question, there’s something irresistibly magical and intoxicating about the promise of free money.  For it promises life without labor…and life without limits.  Moreover, once a nation has taken a trip to Pleasure Island there’s no going back.  Free money, you see, is so delicious that too much is never enough.

  But beware.  Pleasure Island is a trap.  Those who stay too long succumb to a deadly curse.  If you recall from Pinocchio, after making complete jackasses of themselves on Pleasure Island, and behaving like destructive animals, the curse turns the boys into donkeys.

  First they grow donkey ears, then a tail, and their head turns furry with donkey hair.  After that, their laughing becomes braying, their hands and feet become hooves, and they lose the ability to talk.  Finally, they go on all fours.

  But wait, it gets worse!  The donkeys are then rounded up, stripped of their clothes, thrown in crates, and taken back to the mainland via ferry where they are sold into hard labor in salt mines.

  The point is two decades of extreme monetary intervention and several rounds of fiscal stimulus have turned America into a nation of donkeys.  We’ve been cursed.  So, too, Europe, China, Japan, and practically all other countries have also been curse by similar money printing experiments.

  

  What’s more, the stated intent of the American Rescue Plan Act is a lie.  The bill has little to do with rescue from the COVID-19 pandemic.  But it has everything to do with being a giant giveaway…

  • Pension fund bailouts ($86 billion).

  • State, local, and tribal governments bailouts ($350 billion).

  • Transportation provisions ($62.9 billion), including a new $2 billion gravy train for Amtrak.

  • Agriculture relief ($10.4 billion).

  • Cybersecurity funding ($3.67 billion).

  • Rental assistance ($21.6 billion).

  • Homeowner assistance ($10 billion).

  • Funding for colleges and universities ($40 billion).

  • Extensions to expanded unemployment benefits and stimmy checks (too much to tally).

  • And much, Much, More…

  Hee-haw?  HEE-HAW!

  The Great Donkification

  “Go too far.  Stay too long.  Can’t get back.”

  – Words of an old preacher

  The U.S. national debt has now eclipsed $28 trillion.  The budget deficit for the 2021 fiscal year will likely run up to nearly $3 trillion – possibly more.  Hence, it will be financed with printing press money…that is credit created from thin air by the Federal Reserve and loaned to the Treasury.

  Hee-haw?  HEE-HAW!

  Moreover, after two decades of extreme monetary intervention and several rounds of stimmy checks the economy has been led to dependency.  Institutions, individuals, and businesses have been donkified.  There’s no going back.  What remains is a terrible choice…

  Voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion and a crisis now.  Or further credit expansion and the final and total catastrophe of the dollar system later.

  Hee-haw?  HEE-HAW!

  This week the Fed doubled down – again – on the great donkification…and total catastrophe of the dollar system later.  On Wednesday, the Fed issued its FOMC statement.

  In the spirit of Jack and Jenny Assery, the Fed will hold the federal funds rate near zero until at least 2023.  The Fed will also continue to create credit from thin air to buy $80 billion per month of Treasuries and $40 billion per month of mortgage backed securities (MBS).

  Hee-haw?  HEE-HAW!

  But what’s this?  Are the stubborn donkeys now inhibiting Powell’s grand plans?

  On Thursday, as if to spite Powell, the yield on the 10-Year Treasury note topped 1.75 percent.  By our estimation, this puts us now about 30-basis points to disaster.  In anticipation, the NASDAQ dropped over 400 points.

  Hee-haw?  HEE-HAW!

  Such is the curse of the great donkification.  To break it, there’ll be hell to pay.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 20:00

• Gross Profits For House Flippers Hits Record As Fed Turbocharges Real Estate Bubble 
  Gross Profits For House Flippers Hits Record As Fed Turbocharges Real Estate Bubble 

  The housing boom unleashed by the Federal Reserve during the virus pandemic was built on historically low mortgage rates, low inventory, city-dwellers moving to rural areas, and remote-work phenomenon. Housing prices in all 20 major US cities have been rising at the fastest pace since 2014. A red hot market has lured house flippers who are pocketing record profits.  

  Research firm Attom Data Solutions’ latest note specifies homes flipped in 2020 generated a gross profit of $66,300 nationwide (the difference between the median sales price and the median amount initially paid by investors). 2020’s gross profits were up 6.6% from a year earlier and were at the highest levels since the housing boom in 2005. 

  

  Even with a red hot real estate market, flippers find they have to pay up for homes, which is compressing their return on investment, averaging 40.5% in 2020 compared with 41.5% in 2019. Average home prices across the 20 cities rose a stunning 10% year-over-year in December, its fastest acceleration since 2014.

  

  On top of soaring home prices, flippers found out everything from lumber to copper prices increased build costs and squeezed margins. The National Association of Home Builders recently said soaring lumber prices added an extra $24k in costs to builders for the average home in 2020. 

  Even though margins are compressing, profits on flips remain strong, as second-tier regional banks are handing out fix-and-flip loans at increasing paces. Small banks, many of which most people have never heard of, such as Cutter Hill Capital, Builders Capital, and Temple View Capital, have seen a surge in loan originations for flipper loans. The average annual rate on a fix-and-flip loan is around 7.09%, about twice the level on a 30-year mortgage. These loans are short-term and are often measured in months than years – making them appealing for banks and other institutions attempting to obtain yield. 

  John Piazza, a contractor, based in Wilmington, Delaware, said he’s never seen business like this in four decades. 

  “Banks are just throwing money at you,” Piazza said.

  There’s an issue of speculation in the real estate market. As we’ve previously outlined, home prices are rising faster than personal incomes – the last time this happened was in the mid-2000s. We all know what happened next. 

  

  Last month, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said the current state of the housing market is downright unsustainable and that the market is likely to calm down in the near term.

  As for now, flippers are profiting off city dwellers who are fleeing urban pandemic life and looking to purchase homes in the suburbs. 

  However, fears are mounting the housing boom is not just overheating but there could be a cooldown as 30-year mortgage rates jump and are no longer under 3%. 

  Flippers expect the housing boom to continue this year as families still leave cities for bigger homes in suburbia or rural communities. AlphaFlow estimates that flippers could sell $75 billion worth of homes over each of the next two years, compared with the $56 billion average each year for the next three years. 

  But not everyone is convinced the flipper paradise will continue. Curt Altig, CEO of Seattle-based lender Builders Capital, said low inventory is not producing enough opportunities for finding underpriced homes to fix up. He said more flippers are chasing fewer transactions. 

  Maybe if forbearance programs for mortgages end, more opportunities will arrive for flippers, which would add supply to the housing market and reverse prices. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 19:30

• Taliban Warns Of "Reaction" If US Stays In Afghanistan Beyond May 1st
  Taliban Warns Of “Reaction” If US Stays In Afghanistan Beyond May 1st

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The Taliban warned the US on Friday that there would be a “reaction” if President Biden failed to withdraw from Afghanistan by the May 1st deadline set by the US-Taliban peace deal signed in Doha last year. The comments were made from Moscow, where the warring sides met to discuss the peace process.

  “They should go,” said Suhail Shaheen, a member of the Taliban’s negotiation team. He warned if the US stayed beyond May 1st, it would be a violation of the Doha agreement. “After that, it will be a kind of violation of the agreement. That violation would not be from our side… Their violation will have a reaction,” Shaheen said.

  

  Shaheen also called for “expedited” peace negotiations. “It is important that the negotiations should be expedited because it will help us to achieve a permanent ceasefire and countrywide peace and this is our goal,” He said. “As we talked with Afghan politicians, they also insisted that the process should be expedited.”

  Shaheen’s comments come after a report from NBC News said President Biden is considering staying in Afghanistan in November. Sources told NBC that Biden was pushing back against the Pentagon’s efforts to stay in Afghanistan but was convinced to consider extending the withdrawal deadline to November, although no decisions have yet been made.

  Any deadline extension would have to be agreed with the Taliban, or the group would again target US troops, something Shaheen’s warning makes clear. February 8th marked the first full year that no US troops died in combat in Afghanistan since the war began.

  While the Taliban held up its commitment not to attack the US troops, US airstrikes still occasionally target the group. A US military spokesman announced on Wednesday that the US bombed Taliban targets this week.

  Zalmay Khalilzad, the US special envoy for the Afghan peace process, attended Afghanistan talks in Moscow on Thursday. Russia has been hosting Afghanistan summits for years now, but the US is usually not involved. The US, Russia, China, and Pakistan released a joint statement calling for a political settlement.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 19:00

• One Year Ago: 'Gather In Crowds', 'Masks Are Useless', 'Only A Few Percent Are Vulnerable'
  One Year Ago: ‘Gather In Crowds’, ‘Masks Are Useless’, ‘Only A Few Percent Are Vulnerable’

  Amid the always-fearmongering, always-pessimistic, always-more-control-demanded, (and almost always wrong) daily headlines from Dr. Fauci, Former FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb dared to speak optimistically about the way forward on Friday:

  “We now know that the vaccines dramatically reduce your chance of both contracting COVID and becoming symptomatic to the point where you are going to have a bad outcome; we also know it reduces asymptomatic disease and reduces transmission… we are seeing that in the data.“

  The Pfizer board member does hedge a little by suggesting those who are high risk should still take precautions.

  By many measures, March was supposed to be a “difficult month” but as the vaccine campaign continues uninterrupted, April and May will “look much more clear.”

  “…people can be more liberal… people will be taking off their masks because we are going to see prevalence decline around the country and people who’ve been vaccinated can go out with more confidence.”

  Then Gottlieb dropped some serious truth bombs (which were mysteriously edited out of CNBC’s clip above) saying that within a few weeks, it could be “obvious” that masks may be safely removed, and even more significantly, following CDC’s flip-flopping and confusing rules this week on distancing in schools:

  “This six-foot distancing requirement has probably been the single costliest mitigation tactic that we’ve employed in response to COVID… and it really wasn’t based on clear science… we should have readjucated this much earlier.“

  Watch this 70 seconds and consider the source – this is not some ‘white supremacist, disinformation-spreading, alt-right blogger’, this is the former FDA Commissioner who many mainstream media outlets have listened to verbatim through the crisis.

  “This six-foot distancing requirement has probably been the single costliest mitigation tactic that we’ve employed in response to COVID,” says @scottgottliebmd. pic.twitter.com/M5tmgj3kTY

  — CNBC’s Closing Bell (@CNBCClosingBell) March 19, 2021

  But, but, but, what about Fauci’s “science”?

  

  This shocking revelation comes just days after Senator Rand Paul destroyed Dr. Fauci’s so-called “science”-based reasons for various restrictions – from mask-wearing to social-distancing – as ‘useless political theater’.

  Interestingly, Gottlieb said “both [Paul and Fauci] made valid points,” but specifically said that “Senator Paul was right, we need to see light at the end of the tunnel and have guidance that prescribes an environment where people can start doing things again.”

  

  Amid the now-politicized divide between nanny-state-obeyers and science-denying-extremists (there is no middle ground anymore), it would appear the entirely opposite-think statements, declarations, and proclamations made by officials one year ago have been almost entirely ‘memory-holed’.

  As Sharyl Attkisson points out in an extensively researched note, around this time last year:

  • Vaccine propagandist Dr. Peter Hotez made the case against travel bans

  • Dr. Anthony Fauci said there was no reason to walk around wearing masks

  • New York City’s Health Commissioner urged people to go to crowded places and busy restaurants

  • Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) encouraged people to get out and be around others in San Francisco’s Chinatown

  And one year ago, the World Health Organization gave what many scientist called confusing guidance on wearing masks for Covid-19. 

  World Health Organization, March 19, 2020: “Wearing medical masks when not indicated may result in unnecessary costs and procurement burdens and create a false sense of security that can lead to the neglect of other essential measures, such as hand hygiene practices. Further, using a mask incorrectly may hamper its effectiveness in reducing the risk of transmission.”

  It was just ten days after Dr. Anthony Fauci stated, on March 8, “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.”

  Dr. Fauci also, notoriously, testified to Congress that coronavirus was ten times deadlier than flu about the same time he published a scientific paper that said something quite different: Covid’s lethality was akin to a bad flu season. 

  President Trump’s ban on travel from China had been installed January 31 when there had only been a few confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the U.S. 

  Here’s a look back at some of the most notable statements made by public officials from January through March 31, 2020. 

  Some of the comments, guidance, and reflections proved accurate in the long run; some did not. Some seem to have long been forgotten or deposited down the selective memory hole.

  Nothing to fear, It’s a ‘bad flu’, ‘masks, schmasks’…

  Dr. Anthony Fauci, White House Coronavirus Task Force, Jan. 21, 2020: “This is not a major threat to the people in the United States and it is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.”

  Dr. Fauci, in sworn testimony to Congress, March 11, 2020: ’Coronavirus ten times more lethal than flu.’ but Dr. Fauci in the New England Journal of Medicine, March 26, 2020: “…the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%)…”

  Dr. Oxiris Barbot, New York City health commissioner, Jan. 27, 2020: People “who had recently traveled from Wuhan were not being urged to self-quarantine or avoid large public gatherings.” “There is no reason not to take the subway, not to take the bus, not to go out to your favorite restaurant, and certainly not to miss the parade next Sunday.”

  and

  “As we gear up to celebrate the #LunarNewYear [Chinatown parade] in NYC, I want to assure New Yorkers that there is no reason for anyone to change their holiday plans, avoid the subway, or certain parts of the city because of #coronavirus…We are here today to urge all New Yorkers to continue to live their lives as usual.”

  and

  “…there’s no risk at this point in time…about having it be transmitted in casual contact, right?” “The risk to New Yorkers for Coronavirus is low, and our preparedness as a city is very high.”

  LA Times, Soumya Karlamangla, Jan. 31, 2020: For Americans, flu remains a bigger threat than coronavirus. “…unlike the coronavirus, which so far hasn’t led to any deaths in the U.S., influenza has killed approximately 10,000 Americans since October, according to federal data released Friday.” “…a much deadlier killer already stalking the United States has been largely overshadowed: the flu.”

  Rep. Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker, Feb. 24, 2020: Urged people to visit San Francisco’s Chinatown. “That’s what we’re trying to do today is to say everything is fine here. Come because precautions have been taken. The city is on top of the situation.”

  New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio, March 2, 2020: “…I’m encouraging New Yorkers to go on with your lives + get out on the town despite Coronavirus…” 

  Cuomo, March 23, 2020: “Many people will get the virus, but few will be truly endangered. Hold both of those facts in your hands: Many will get it, up to 80 percent may get it, but few are truly endangered and we know who they are.”

  Dr. Anthony Fauci, National Institutes of Health and White House Task Force, March 8, 2020: “there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.”

  Read more hypocritical insanity here…

  So what changed? Why did all these officials suddenly flip to fearmongering the deadliest of deadly things imaginable (that leaves 99.7% of those ‘infected’ unharmed)?

  

  It couldn’t be politics, surely?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 18:30

• What FBI Stats Really Reveal About Asian Hate Crimes
  What FBI Stats Really Reveal About Asian Hate Crimes

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  FBI crime statistics debunk the media’s narrative that white people represent the biggest violent crime threat to Asians, with figures showing whites significantly underrepresented in crime stats compared to their per capita population.

  

  Since the killing of six Asian women who worked in massage parlors in Atlanta, the media has amplified the false narrative that “white supremacy” is to blame.

  They hyped this explanation despite the fact that the attack had nothing whatsoever to do with race and despite two white women also being killed during the shooting.

  Despite admitting the attack had no racial motive, CNN still blamed it on “white nationalism and domestic extremism” in an article titled ‘White supremacy and hate are haunting Asian Americans’.

  However, official crime stats show that white people are significantly underrepresented in terms of the violent crime threat they pose to Asians.

  Article cites sources from justice department

  — ELIJAH SCHAFFER (@ElijahSchaffer) March 19, 2021

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

  As the Washington Examiner highlights, citing FBI statistics, whereas whites comprise 62% of the population, they committed 24% of crimes against Asians in 2018.

  In comparison, blacks, who comprise 13% of the population, committed 27.5% of all violent crimes against Asian Americans in 2018.

  So clearly, white people do not represent the biggest crime threat to Asian Americans.

  The figures once again underscore how the media has contrived another hysterical moral panic in order to bolster what can no longer be seen as anything other than institutional racism and hatred towards white people.

  *  *  *

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 18:00

• Bargain-Hunting Millennials Jump At Cheaper San Francisco Rents 
  Bargain-Hunting Millennials Jump At Cheaper San Francisco Rents 

  After a year-long exodus of residents, San Francisco begins to see people returning as the economy gradually reopens. The folks who are moving back are taking advantage of deeply discounted rents and high concessions offered by landlords desperate for new tenants. 

  The return of people to the metro area should not be viewed as recovery as deep economic scarring, caused mainly by government public health orders, has resulted in the decimation of small and medium-sized enterprises. Also, remote-work turbocharged the exodus from the metro area as many people moved to suburbia or out of state. The result is soaring vacancies putting downward pressure on rents as landlords have lost pricing power. 

  “It’s going to take years for the average landlord’s revenue to get back to pre-Covid levels,” said John Pawlowski, an analyst at real estate data and research firm Green Street, who Bloomberg quoted. The rapid decline in rents has made higher-end apartment buildings in the city more affordable for broke millennials.  

  Rents at San Francisco buildings owned by Essex Property Trust Inc plunged 17% during the pandemic. The company offers record concessions, such as three months of free rent and a preloaded debit card with $2k. 

  A similar trend is happening in Manhattan, where folks capitalize on cheaper rents and record concessions, resulting in a surge of new leases in early 2021. 

  The pandemic has transformed both San Francisco and Manhattan into ghost towns, but recently some life has returned, though nothing like the boom times of the pre-COVID era. 

  Data from the Cleveland Fed revealed San Francisco suffered the most significant outflow of people from last year than any other US metro area. In October, the entire downtown area of the city, once vibrant with business and tourism, transformed into a ghost town, mainly due to some of the country’s strictest public health orders, closing restaurants, cafes, bars, nightclubs, among other attractions. 

  According to Apartment List data, rents in San Francisco sank 27% during the pandemic to an average of around $2,000 per month. In early 2021, there appears to be some stabilization. 

  

  “It’s a turning point,” said Igor Popov, the chief economist at Apartment List. “People are moving back in, but we’re not jumping back to pre-Covid rents because the group occupying those units are different and have different price points.”

  People like Lindsay Albert, a director of programming for an arts organization in San Francisco, left the city last April because her living situation with other people made her uncomfortable during the pandemic. 

  

  Albert is now living in a one-bedroom apartment in the inner Richmond district for $2,000. She said the rent is $1,000 less than what she was looking at one year ago. 

  “I feel like I’ve won the lottery,” she said as the apartment complex showered her with amenities. “I’m 34 years old and I haven’t ever been able to live alone,” she added.

  

  Miles Garber, vice president of research with real estate marketing company Polaris Pacific in San Francisco, said, “while things have improved recently, there’s still a long way to go.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 17:30

• House Democrats Propose 4,350 Earmarks A Year Costing $13 Billion
  House Democrats Propose 4,350 Earmarks A Year Costing $13 Billion

  Submitted By Adam Andrzejewski of Forbes,

  Congressional earmarks are back. The Democratic majority in the U.S. House of Representatives will allow up to $13 billion in earmarks on House appropriations bills, 10 per member, for a total of up to 4,350 earmarks for fiscal year 2022.

  

  House Republicans released a statement arguing that earmarks are a pathway to congressional corruption. One member of the caucus, Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), argued that earmarks are “little more than legislative bribery.”

  The late Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) frequently called earmarks “the gateway drug” to corruption and overspending, and spearheaded the 2011 ban.

  Even President Barack Obama, in his 2011 State of the Union speech, said he would veto any bill containing earmarks, saying “… the American people deserve to know that special interests aren’t larding up legislation with pet projects, both parties in Congress should know this: If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it. I will veto it.”

  At the height of earmarking in 2005, Congress passed 15,000 Congressional earmarks, at a cost of $29 billion, according to The Heritage Foundation. And from the earmark largess flowed corruption, convictions, and waste.

  One notorious 2005 earmark, Sen. Ted Stevens’ (R-AK) Alaskan “Bridge to Nowhere,” cost an estimated $80 million to connect Ketchikan, Alaska, with Gravina Island, home to 50 people.

  Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-CA) went to jail after he tearfully confessed conspiring to pass out earmarks and pocketing $2.4 million in bribes, including a Rolls-Royce, a yacht and a 19th-century Louis-Philippe commode. (President Trump gave Cunningham a conditional pardon in Trump’s final days in the White House.)

  In 2005, former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) used a $207 million federal transportation earmark to construct the “Prairie Parkway” near some newly purchased farmland, which his trust proceeded to sell a few months later for a multi-million dollar profit.

  That same year, lobbyist Jack Abramoff and his associates were convicted for bribing legislators with gifts and campaign contributions for votes on earmarked funding.

  Over the years, other earmarks drew scrutiny and scorn: a $3.4 million earmark for turtle tunnels under a Florida highway, a $50 million earmark for an indoor rain forest in Iowa, $1 million for a Woodstock Museum in New York, $500,000 for a North Carolina teapot museum, and $273,000 to study Goth culture in Missouri, among others.

  Rep. DeLauro says the COVID-19 crisis has forced the House to return to funding the much-maligned pork projects, otherwise known as earmarks: “Members want Congress to help their communities, particularly now as the pandemic exposed so many inequalities and needs,” she said in a statement released by the House Appropriations Committee.

  The House started a moratorium on earmarks in 2011, but now Members are coining a new term to refer to earmark spending, pork projects, and “Member-directed spending.”

  Rep. DeLauros’ announcement introduced the new euphemism: “Community Project Funding.”

  “Community Project Funding will allow Members to put their deep, first-hand understanding of the needs of their communities to work to help the people we represent,” she said.

  The newly renamed earmarks will come with a small-sounding set-aside: “no more than 1 percent of discretionary spending,” Rep. DeLauro announced.

  Of course, one percent is not so small when Congress designated $1.298 trillion in discretionary spending for FY2021. Setting aside one percent for House appropriation earmarks in fiscal year 2022 would mean earmarks (or, ahem, “community project funding”) could equal $12.98 billion or more.

  There’s no telling what amount the Senate might add, and reports are they’re still negotiating on how and if to bring earmarks back. It’s also worth noting this appropriations committee policy will not count toward to transportation and infrastructure bills or those in future emergency spending bills.

  But many current members of Congress ran on the promise they would fight exactly the kind of pork barrel spending House Democrats are trying to resurrect.

  In one 2014 campaign ad, then-candidate Joni Ernst, now a Republican U.S. Senator from Iowa, talked about castrating hogs on her childhood farm and concluded, “So when I get to Washington, I’ll know how to cut pork …because Washington’s full of big spenders… Let’s make ’em squeal.”

  If noise from Washington’s Republican lobbyists is any indication, it’s likely Ernst will soon be fighting her own party. One former senate staffer, Mark Strand, recently argued that earmarks “can lead to healing.” Strand’s old boss, former Senator Jim Talent (R-MO), was a proponent and frequent user of earmarks.

  Senator Ernst and her waste-fighting colleagues argue otherwise: “There’s good reason why earmarks are referred to as pork: They stink, and they’re messy. With the national debt headed toward $30 trillion, the last thing Congress needs to be focused on is finding other ways to waste money.”

  Earmarks cross party lines—but not in a good way. Politicians from both sides of the aisle love directing taxpayer funds, and we’ll be seeing much more pork from the House in the coming years.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 17:00

• Biden Border Crisis: ICE Secures Hotel Rooms For Migrants; Admin Plans Flying Illegals To Canadian Border
  Biden Border Crisis: ICE Secures Hotel Rooms For Migrants; Admin Plans Flying Illegals To Canadian Border

  Biden’s migrant crisis along the southern US border has reached epic proportions.

  As we reported on Thursday, not long after Biden said he would “reverse Trump’s immigration policies” and vowed to give illegal aliens “a pathway to citizenship”, the ensuing chaos at the border has resulted in over 13,000 unaccompanied migrant children detained in federal custody (a third of whom have been sitting in the same ‘cages’ built by the Obama-Biden administration) and 3,000 of whom have been held beyond the 72-hour legal limit. In a desperate attempt to ease the crisis, Biden did a complete U-turn and told migrants to stop coming, after begging Mexico’s president to help stem the flood of illegal migrants

  According to the New York Times, after Biden halted construction on the border wall (leaving gaping holes at construction sites), stopped turning away children, and proposed a pathway to citizenship, the surge in migrants – i.e., future democrat voters – has overwhelmed the Biden administration’s ability to process them. Faced with a crisis of his own making, Biden reportedly asked Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador ‘whether more could be done to help solve the problem.’

  Biden and AMLO even discussed the possibility of the United States sending Mexico some of its surplus vaccine supply, a senior Mexican official told the Times, which notes that “Mexico has publicly asked the Biden administration to send it doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine, which has not been approved for use in the United States.”

  According to Mexican officials, efforts to secure vaccines are separate from immigration talks, but they have acknowledged that a shipment of doses would “help” relations.

  “Both governments cooperate on the basis of an orderly, safe and regular migration system,” said Roberto Velasco, director general for the North America region at Mexico’s foreign ministry, though he added that there is no quid pro quo for the vaccines.

  In other words, not only did Biden’s reckless promises to accept all immigrants backfire spectacularly, he is now is forced to beg and bribe Mexico with promises of a vaccine that nobody wants to prevent the migrant crisis that he started from getting even worse.

  But perhaps because the president lacks faith in his own diplomatic skills (justifiably so as demonstrated by last week’s catastrophic US-China summit), on Friday the Biden administration was reportedly considering flying migrants who illegally cross the US-Mexico border to near the US-Canada border for processing as a way to ease pressure on overwhelmed facilities in Texas, the WaPo reported.

  The tactic is under consideration amid an unprecedented surge in border crossings resulting from Biden’s policies and reform legislation that would create a path to citizenship for most illegal immigrants.

  Some data: the number of migrant family members caught crossing the southwest border more than doubled between January and February — rising from 7,000 to nearly 19,000, according to the most recently released agency data. And while border officials continue to use a Trump-era order to quickly return many families to Mexico. But Mexico has limited capacity to take in migrant families and won’t accept some with young children, according to administration officials. In total, the CBP reports that there was a record for February 100K “land encounters” along the border in February.

  

  42% of families were expelled to Mexico last month — down from 64% in January and 91% in October, according to the data. More than 13,000 family members who crossed the U.S. border illegally have been allowed into the country since the start of January, many released into border communities.

  In any case, in a move that is sure to delight Canada, Department of Homeland Security officials told the Washington Post that the administration is considering air lifts to the northern border due to large numbers of unaccompanied children and families crossing in the south. Officials told the Washington Post that on Friday morning 1,000 people who were either unaccompanied minors or in family units crossed the Rio Grande into Texas, and that another 1,000 still were awaiting processing from Thursday night.

  But wait, there’s more.

  In an apparent backup plan, Axios reports that the Biden administration has awarded an $86 million contract for hotel rooms near the border to hold around 1,200 migrant family members who cross the U.S.-Mexico border on behalf of ICE.

  The contract through Endeavors, a Texas-based nonprofit, is for six months but could be extended and expanded. The hotels will be near border areas, including in Arizona and Texas.

  ICE, which oversees the custody of migrant adults and families who cross the border illegally after they are apprehended by border patrol agents, is already transforming its family detention facilities into rapid-processing centers with the goal of releasing families within 72 hours. 

  While immigration agencies have used hotels in the past, unlike border patrol stations, they but do not have to follow the same safety protocols that official government detention spaces do, and as such could result in fresh covid “superspreader” events amid news that many of the migrants have covid. This is happening just as many predict that the US will be able to emerge from the covid pandemic within months, and for the conspiratorialy minded this latest development would provide the government with just the right catalyst to spark a new covid wave… which would naturally transform into trillions more of Universal Basic Income stimmy checks down the line, just as big government wants it.

  Finally, some have asked whether it would not be more practical, not to mention more patriotic to spend millions on hotel rooms for the 60,000 homeless American veterans, than the thousands of illegal immigrants who are only here because of the admin’s latest Plaxico.

  I’ll just leave this here. pic.twitter.com/e1o3AfPhAb

  — Rising serpent 🇺🇸 (@rising_serpent) March 20, 2021

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 16:55

• It's Official: All Foreign Travelers Barred From Attending Tokyo Games
  It’s Official: All Foreign Travelers Barred From Attending Tokyo Games

  As was forewarned and expected, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and local organizers of the Tokyo Olympics have reached a final decision on the admittance of foreign spectators to the games, ruling that outside travelers will be barred from attending the summer games. 

  “In order to give clarity to ticket holders living overseas and to enable them to adjust their travel plans at this stage, the parties on the Japanese side have come to the conclusion that they will not be able to enter into Japan at the time of the Olympic and Paralympic Games,” the Tokyo organizing committee announced in a statement Saturday.

  The government of Japan had a little under two weeks ago put additional pressure on the organizing committee to prevent foreign spectator attendance, saying that in response to public fears over a ‘super-spreader’ scenario due to an influx of hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of people, it will move to ban them from entering the country.  

  

  This ‘final verdict’ on the matter similarly echoed the Japanese government’s stance that a “safe” and secure games must be held with the Japanese public in mind. The committee said the foreign spectator entry ban will “further contribute to ensure safe and secure Games for all participants and the Japanese public.” 

  Reuters this month cited the latest surveys revealing rising fear and anxiety among locals that the games would lead to a surge in the coronavirus pandemic, citing Japanese newspapers:

  Most Japanese people do not want international visitors to attend the Games amid fears that a large influx could spark a resurgence of infections, a Yomiuri newspaper poll showed.

  The survey showed 77% of respondents were against allowing foreign fans to attend, versus 18% in favor.

  Some 48% said they were against allowing any spectators into venues and 45% were in favor.

  It’s further been confirmed that even the opening torch ceremony will be conducted without fans or spectators in the stadium. 

  Earlier this month the recently installed president of the Japanese committee Seiko Hashimoto forewarned that the health and medical situation in Japan would have to be “perfect” to hold the games without threat to athletes or the Japanese population – strongly hinting that this wouldn’t be possible with an influx of foreign travelers. 

  “We would really like people from around the world to come to a full stadium, but unless we are prepared to accept them and the medical situation in Japan is perfect, it will cause a great deal of trouble also to visitors from overseas,” Hashimoto said. The games kick off Friday, July 23.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 16:30

• Father Arrested After Continuing To Call His Child "She" Following Court-Ordered Gender-Transition Treatments
  Father Arrested After Continuing To Call His Child “She” Following Court-Ordered Gender-Transition Treatments

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  There is an extraordinary case out of British Columbia where a father referenced as CD was arrested after he continued to refer to his biological 14-year-old daughter (known as AB) as “she” and his “daughter” after he transitioned to a male gender.  The Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada ordered that the child receive testosterone injections without obtaining parental consent. CD opposed the transition as the parent but he was overruled after physicians at BC Children’s Hospital who decided the girl should receive testosterone injections. The father continued to defy gag orders, including a bar on his trying to persuade with his own child to wait before making such a change.

  

  We have previously discussed how such pronoun disputes (called “misgendering“) lead to criminal investigation in other countries like Great Britain.

  The Canadian courts withheld the father’s name but he has since gone public in interview and has a GoFundMe site under his real name.

  

  Previously, in a 2019 decision, Justice Gregory Bowden rejected the parent’s view as largely immaterial:

  In view of the established law regarding the right of a mature minor to consent to medical treatment and the assessments of a number of physicians that A.B.has capacity to consent as well as the evidence of his health care providers that the proposed treatment is in A.B.’s best interests, there is no serious question to be tried.

  At the second stage of the RJR test, the inquiry is whether the litigant who seeks the interlocutory injunction would, unless the injunction is granted, suffer irreparable harm. A.B.’s father has not demonstrated that a refusal to grant the injunction would adversely affect or irreparably harm him.

  After that decision, there was a gag order put into place that barred the father from even trying to convince his son to change his mind:

  “[1] AB, a 14 year old transgender boy, applies for a protection order to restrain his father, CD, from publishing, speaking or giving interviews about this case or about AB’s personal and medical information.

  “a) CD shall be restrained from: i. attempting to persuade AB to abandon treatment for gender dysphoria; ii. addressing AB by his birth name; and iii. referring to AB as a girl or with female pronouns whether to AB directly or to third parties;

  “b) CD shall not directly, or indirectly through an agent or third party, publish or share information or documentation relating to AB’s sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, mental or physical health, medical status or therapies.”

  The evening of the Bowden’s decision, CD spoke to the Federalist and said “because she is a girl. Her DNA will not change through all these experiments that they do.” He added:

  “I had a perfectly healthy child a year ago, and that perfectly healthy child has been altered and destroyed for absolutely no good reason. She can never go back to being a girl in the healthy body that she should have had. She’s going to forever have a lower voice. She’ll forever have to shave because of facial hair. She won’t be able to have children… Sometimes I just want to scream so that other parents and people will… jump in, understand what’s going on. There’s a child—and not only mine, but in my case, my child out there having her life ruined.”

  That led to a conviction of the father for “family violence” in April 2019. Furthermore, Judge Francesca Marzari even issued an order authorizing Clark’s arrest “without warrant” by any police officer who might catch him referring to his daughter “as a girl or with female pronouns.”

  Later YouTube interviews with the father were removed.  In addressing one of those interviews, Justice Michael Tammen of the British Columbia Supreme Court even ordered that Laura-Lynn  Thompson to pull her interview and, when she did not, he sent police to her house.

  The decisions reject any substantive weight given parental rights. I have long opposed an absolutist position against parental rights in areas like abortion with minors. The use of criminal penalties against this father only magnify those concerns.

  I personally disagree with the father in the use of the pronoun if his son has made this choice. I would yield to the child’s preference. However, the question is whether the state should play such a coercive and intrusive role in a family. 

  Ordering a parent not to speak to his child about the issue or arresting him for referring to the child’s biological gender raises very serious parental and free speech rights in my view.   I realize that many experts believe that opposing such gender transition is abusive and harmful. I do not discount that view. However, that is a position best left to persuasive rather than coercive means. We can debate this question and many can oppose the use of such pronouns as abusive. 

  Yet, arresting a parent for continuing to oppose such a transition or referring to the wrong pronoun is chilling. There is an utter disregard of the countervailing interests and rights of parents in these decisions.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 03/20/2021 – 16:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest