Today’s News 22nd November 2024

• Chinese Agent Who Tried To Bribe IRS Against Shen Yun Sentenced To 20 Months in Prison
  Chinese Agent Who Tried To Bribe IRS Against Shen Yun Sentenced To 20 Months in Prison

  Authored by Eva Fu and Cara Ding via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A Chinese agent who tried to bribe the IRS and manipulate the agency into advancing Beijing’s transnational repression of a U.S. nonprofit has received a 20-month prison sentence.

  

  U.S. citizen John Chen, 72, was a principal actor in a $50,000 bribery scheme under the direction of a Chinese intelligence official to revoke the nonprofit status of New York-based Shen Yun Performing Arts.

  Shen Yun has long been on the Chinese regime’s target list. Founded in 2006, the company tours around the world to display the ancient Chinese culture that prevailed before the communist takeover of China, while highlighting the human rights abuses under the regime’s rule. It has often drawn attention to the ongoing persecution of the meditation group Falun Gong.

  Chen pleaded guilty in July after reaching a plea deal with prosecutors. He has spent the 16 months since his arrest in May 2023 in detention, and he will spend another four months in federal custody.

  He will also forfeit $50,000 and face three years of supervised release after serving the full prison term.

  For several months in 2023, Chen had been trying to move a fraudulent whistleblower complaint to help the Chinese Communist Party “topple” Falun Gong, according to court documents. Prosecutors said the whistleblower complaint was “facially deficient” and invoked propaganda rhetoric typical of Chinese authorities.

  During those conversations, Chen emphasized that Chinese leadership was “very generous” in financial support for the plan, according to the court filing.

  “After this-this-this thing is done,” the court document quoted Chen as saying, “reward for work will surely be given at that time.”

  Chen and another co-conspirator, Lin Feng, who served 16 months of detention, paid $5,000 cash bribes to an undercover agent posing as an IRS agent. They promised an additional $50,000 for opening an investigation along with 60 percent of any awards from the complaint if it went through.

  It was “a significant bribe,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Lockard said at the sentencing hearing. He noted that the undercover officer didn’t specify an amount.

  

  “The defendant chose the amount,” he said.

  Both Chen and Lin had traveled to Orange County in upstate New York, where Shen Yun is based, to surveil Falun Gong practitioners there, according to a court filing.

  Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said the sentencing was a reminder that “the U.S. justice system will hold accountable those who attempt to engage in malicious transnational repression on American soil.”

  “John Chen aligned himself with the PRC government and its goals to harass and intimidate the Falun Gong, a long-standing target of PRC repression. In doing so, Chen boldly attempted to bribe an individual he believed to be an IRS agent to corrupt the administration of the U.S. tax code and pervert the IRS whistleblower program,” he said in a statement on Nov. 19. “This Office will not tolerate efforts like this to repress free speech by targeting critics of the PRC in the United States.”

  

  Both Chen’s son and his lawyer declined to comment after walking out of the courtroom.

  While Chen’s son, three China-based siblings, two ex-wives, and fiancée have all written letters asking for leniency and describing him as a man who loves the United States, the prosecutors disagreed.

  In a Nov. 5 memo, they argued that a 30-month prison sentence—the longest under the sentencing guideline—would be appropriate because of the seriousness of the case and the need to deter criminal conduct, “particularly in cases of a foreign power’s repression of a disfavored group within the borders of the United States.”

  “The defendant has no mitigating motives or external factors justifying his offense,” the prosecutors wrote, noting that Chen was “not motivated by poverty” and that there was no evidence of Chinese officials’ pressure.

  

  Prosecutors noted that Chen had repeatedly referred to Chinese officials as his “friends” and that during the bribery scheme, he “called them ‘blood brothers,’ and described how ‘we’—Chen and his PRC Government friends—‘started this fight’ against the founder of the Falun Gong ‘twenty, thirty years ago.’”

  The memo displayed photos obtained from Chen’s electronic devices and online accounts showing him at a major military parade in Beijing celebrating the 70th anniversary of Chinese communist rule in 2019. Another photo showed Chen shaking hands with communist leader Xi Jinping.

  “Chen was extraordinarily proud of his history with the PRC Government and, in particular, his meeting with Xi,” the memo states, citing a recorded call in which he bragged that he had “climbed, climbed, climbed to this position,” and that “Uncle Xi” met him “three times in 10 years.”

  Chen had also featured those three meetings, along with a photo, in a 2020 digital résumé, according to the memo.

  Chen was aligned with the Chinese authorities in suppressing Falun Gong and “acted as a full-fledged and enthusiastic participant in the crimes,” the prosecutors said.

  “It was his fight,” Lockard said at the sentencing hearing, adding that Chen had tried to use the freedoms he enjoyed in the United States to undermine the country.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 23:25

• These Are America's Safest Cities
  These Are America’s Safest Cities

  Threats to safety in the U.S. range from health crises and natural disasters to financial challenges like unaffordable mortgages, lack of health insurance, and inflation.

  While no place is risk-free, the level of danger we face often depends on where we live.

  This map, via Visual Capitalist’s Kayla Zhu, visualizes the 50 safest cities in America according to WalletHub, which analyzed 182 cities across 41 key metrics to assess overall safety.

  The three main categories of metrics analyzed are:

  • Home and community safety: Law enforcement per capita, prevalence of terrorist attacks, mass shootings, murders,

  • Natural disaster risk: Earthquake risk, flood risk, hurricane storm surge risk, wildfire risk

  • Financial safety: Unemployment rate, uninsured population, foreclosure rate

  The data is updated as of August 27, 2024 and was collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Bureau of Investigation, TransUnion, and other sources.

  

  Which Cities are the Safest in America?

  Below, we show the 50 safest cities in America based on WalletHub’s analysis.

  Overall Rank	City	Overall safety score
  1	South Burlington, VT	74.2
  2	Casper, WY	71.5
  3	Warwick, RI	70.3
  4	Burlington, VT	69.6
  5	Boise, ID	69.2
  6	Yonkers, NY	68.8
  7	Cedar Rapids, IA	68.4
  8	Columbia, MD	68.1
  9	Portland, ME	67.8
  10	Virginia Beach, VA	67.6
  11	Irvine, CA	67.4
  12	Fargo, ND	67.2
  13	Chesapeake, VA	67.1
  14	Missoula, MT	67.0
  15	Nashua, NH	67.0
  16	Juneau, AK	67.0
  17	Vancouver, WA	66.9
  18	Honolulu, HI	66.9
  19	Madison, WI	66.8
  20	Huntsville, AL	66.8
  21	Laredo, TX	66.7
  22	Sioux Falls, SD	66.7
  23	Chula Vista, CA	66.3
  24	Fremont, CA	66.2
  25	Glendale, CA	66.2
  26	Salem, OR	66.1
  27	Santa Rosa, CA	65.9
  28	Nampa, ID	65.9
  29	Santa Clarita, CA	65.8
  30	Brownsville, TX	65.5
  31	Gilbert, AZ	65.3
  32	Port St. Lucie, FL	65.2
  33	Boston, MA	65.2
  34	St. Paul, MN	65.0
  35	Garden Grove, CA	64.8
  36	Huntington Beach, CA	64.8
  37	Oceanside, CA	64.8
  38	Bismarck, ND	64.7
  39	Scottsdale, AZ	64.3
  40	Pearl City, HI	64.1
  41	Aurora, IL	64.1
  42	Fort Wayne, IN	64.0
  43	San Diego, CA	64.0
  44	Modesto, CA	63.7
  45	Worcester, MA	63.5
  46	Chandler, AZ	63.3
  47	Lincoln, NE	63.3
  48	Rancho Cucamonga, CA	63.1
  49	Oxnard, CA	63.1
  50	Lexington-Fayette, KY	62.7

  Many of the top safest cities are concentrated in the Northeastern United States, including South Burlington, Burlington, Portland (Maine), Nashua, Warwick, and Yonkers.

  This region generally has lower natural disaster risks compared to other areas, contributing to higher safety scores.

  South Burlington, the second largest city in Vermont, ranked first overall as the safest city in America. It has one of the lowest pedestrian fatality rates in the nation and one of the highest number of EMTs and paramedics per capita, according to WalletHub.

  The city also ranks highly for financial stability, boasting the lowest unemployment rate in the U.S. at 1.9%, the second-lowest share of seriously underwater mortgages, and the third-lowest rate of non-business bankruptcy filings per capita over the past year.

  These indicators suggest that residents are financially secure, with a lower risk of facing unpaid bills, property loss, or homelessness.

  To learn more about the environment of different U.S. cities, check out this graphic that visualizes the dirtiest cities in the U.S.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 23:00

• Nonprofits Influence Climate Litigation Against Major Energy Companies
  Nonprofits Influence Climate Litigation Against Major Energy Companies

  Authored by Jonathan Draeger via RealClearPolitics,

  Over 30 lawsuits, modeled after the tobacco cases of the 1990s, have been filed by state, county, and city attorneys against energy companies seeking damages for the alleged effects of greenhouse gas emissions. An important factor in these lawsuits is the role of third-party funding and nonprofit activists working behind the scenes to shape the litigation and influence the courts.

  

  One such organization that has taken center stage is the Environmental Law Institute’s Climate Judiciary Project, which claims to educate judges on climate science and related legal issues. According to the ELI website, the project’s goal is to “provide neutral, objective information to the judiciary about the science of climate change as understood by experts.” Since 1990, the CJP says it has trained more than 3,000 judges across 28 countries.

  But judges are supposed to be disinterested arbiters of the facts and the law – and critics point out that on climate issues, the CJP is anything but neutral. In a 12-page report, the American Energy Institute accuses the CJP of “teaching judges about debatable climate science” and compares it to “working over the referees before the game even starts.” AEI contends that the so-called “objective” materials used by the CJP are crafted by activists who either advise the plaintiffs in these cases or support their claims through legal briefs.

  AEI also claims that the CJP has ties to many of the plaintiffs suing energy companies. The CJP denies these allegations, telling RealClearPolitics that it “does not participate in litigation, provide support for or coordinate with any parties in litigation, or advise judges on how they should rule in any case.”

  Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Energy Alliance, also criticized the CJP’s efforts to influence judges before they rule on climate-related cases. She told RealClearPolitics that the connection between nonprofit groups, judges, and attorneys involved in these cases forms a “tangled web” of “foundation activist groups, law professors, and judges attempting to use lawsuits to enact climate change policy.”

  “The Environmental Law Institute, through its Climate Judiciary Project, is trying to control the entire process – from who’s suing, what they’re suing for, to what judges think about it,” she continued.

  In some cases, there are close connections between CJP and the judges handling these lawsuits. One of the judges presiding over the City & County of Honolulu v. Sunoco LP case, Hawaii State Supreme Court Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald, disclosed that he presented at a CJP course in April 2023. Shortly afterward, Recktenwald authored an opinion that ruled against the oil and gas companies’ motion to dismiss the case in Hawaii. Before he authored the opinion, Sgamma said that Recktenwald “clearly has a conflict of interest and needs to recuse himself from the case.”

  Several philanthropists funding the CJP have also poured money into Sher Edling LLP, the law firm representing Honolulu and many other cities and states in lawsuits against energy companies. Sher Edling openly states that its mission is to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for “decades-long deception” about climate change. The law firm’s cases, like the one in Honolulu, argue that these companies misled the public and contributed to climate-related damage.

  Both Sher Edling and the CJP receive funding from major philanthropic organizations such as the MacArthur Foundation, which supports efforts to address climate change. Other shared backers include the Collective Action Fund and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

  Another player in this arena is the Climate Accountability Institute, which has played a major coordinating role in climate litigation efforts. In 2012, it hosted a workshop in La Jolla, California, titled “Establishing Accountability for Climate Change Damages: Lessons from Tobacco Control,” which was instrumental in planning climate-related lawsuits.

  Strategies promoted at the CAI La Jolla workshop were later applied in lawsuits against energy companies. Chris Horner, a former senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told RCP that a key approach outlined in the La Jolla Workshop summary involved liberal private attorneys and nonprofits encouraging state attorneys general to probe for internal documents. These documents, they claimed, could potentially show that energy companies were aware of the risks of COâ?? emissions but either misrepresented or concealed this information.

  Horner noted that this bore fruit in 2015 when parties representing the Rockefeller Family Fund successfully urged the New York Attorney General to leverage the Martin Act, which grants broad powers to investigate possible “misrepresentation of information” to investors, to “subpoena documents from ExxonMobil.” 

  Later, the House Oversight Committee also subpoenaed energy company records, which, although never publicly released, appeared in an amicus brief filed by a Rockefeller Family Fund-funded group called the Center for Climate Integrity in one of these state lawsuits alleging that energy companies knew of the risks of fossil fuels but chose not to disclose them publicly.

  Since then, the CAI has focused on researching the potential damages of climate change and the accountability of energy companies. One of its largest projects is the Carbon Majors Database, which tracks the 100 largest fossil fuel producers since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. CAI claims that these top 100 organizations are responsible for 52% of all greenhouse gas emissions.

  This work was not merely an intellectual exercise; CAI argues that staggeringly high “reparations” are warranted. In 2022 and 2023, they spent $55,000 on a paper, later published in the academic journal One Earth, titled “Time to pay the piper: Fossil fuel companies’ reparations for climate damages.” The paper argues that “companies engaged in the exploration, production, refining, and distribution of oil, gas, and coal” bear the primary responsibility for the costs associated with addressing climate harm.

  The estimated “damages” are substantial. CAI’s analysis indicates that cumulative reparations from the top 20 climate-producing companies would total $5.4 trillion for the period of 1988–2022, payable over 25 years from 2025 to 2050. However, CAI states that even if this $5.4 trillion were paid, it would not cover all damages being sought in “climate-related litigation filed in numerous jurisdictions based on varying legal theories against major oil, gas, and coal companies.”

  Not covered in the paper? Where the money to pay such judgments would ultimately come from.

  “In gas and oil, if they have to pay an enormous settlement, that gets passed on to the customers,” Peggy Little, senior litigation counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance, told RCP. “The settlements are so enormous that they have to have a bearing on the cost of gasoline and fossil fuels, which will hurt the oil and gas companies’ bottom lines, but also the price of filling up a tank of gas and everyday goods.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 22:35

• 'A Significant Health Risk': How Everyday Items Fill Our Bodies With Microplastics
  ‘A Significant Health Risk’: How Everyday Items Fill Our Bodies With Microplastics

  Authored by Rachel Ann T. Melegrito via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The shirt on your back, the carpet beneath your feet, and the takeout container from last night’s dinner share a troubling secret: They’re slowly breaking down into invisible particles that are turning up everywhere from Mount Everest’s peak to your bloodstream.

  

  These microscopic plastic fragments, ranging in size from invisible to no larger than the width of a pencil eraser, have silently invaded human bodies in ways scientists are only beginning to understand—and the implications are unsettling, according to a September scientific review.

  “Microplastics pose a significant health risk, as they can persist in the environment and carry harmful chemicals,” Dr. Paul Savage, a toxin expert and founder and CEO of MDLifespan, told The Epoch Times.

  “A person might consume the equivalent of a credit card in plastic each week through food alone,” he said. “Once ingested, these particles can degrade into nanoplastics small enough to interfere with cellular DNA, potentially leading to genetic damage and chronic health issues.”

  Each year, between 10 and 40 million tonnes of microplastics are released into the environment. If current trends persist, this amount is projected to double by 2040.

  Even if all new emissions are stopped today, existing microplastic levels would continue to rise as older plastic debris breaks down into smaller particles.

  A review published in Science summarizes the current understanding of microplastic pollution two decades after the term “microplastic” was first introduced.

  How Microplastics Enter Our Bodies

  Microplastics are solid plastic particles measuring less than 5 millimeters (smaller than a pencil-top eraser). They permeate ecosystems, seeping into our food and water, and have found their way into our bodies.

  Microplastics mainly come from larger plastics breaking down but can also be released by plastic recycling, textiles, tires, paint, clothing, and soft furnishing.

  Many people do not realize that clothes are made of plastics, Aidan Charron, associate director of Global Earth Day, an organization dedicated to diversifying, educating, and activating the environmental movement worldwide, told The Epoch Times.

  “Fast fashion is all made with polyester, nylon, spandex, etc.,” Charron said. “Fast fashion” is the mass production and sale of low-cost clothing. “Another ’secret’ product often made of plastic textiles are carpets, curtains, and bedding,” he added, noting that these materials shed microplastics and toxic chemicals into the air we inhale.

  “They tend to be some of the most harmful because of the shedding of fibers they do into our air and waterways once washed,” he said. One study found that over 90 percent of microplastics indoors consist of polyester and manmade fiber, both derived from plastic.

  Microplastics can enter our bodies through various means:

  • Inhalation: Microplastics are in the air we breathe.
  • Skin Absorption: We can absorb them through contact.
  • Oral Ingestion: Consuming food or beverages contaminated with microplastics, such as milk, soft drinks, canned goods, sugar, and salt, or via organisms like shrimp and fish, is another way they enter our bodies. Infants are also exposed through breast and formula milk.

  Microplastics in the Human Body

  Research indicates that microplastics have infiltrated various parts of the human body, including:

  • Blood Vessels: Microplastics have been detected in carotid artery plaques and leg vein tissue samples.
  • Brain: Studies show that microplastics may reach the brain through the nasal passage, bypassing the blood-brain barrier. A 2024 study also found that the brain has a higher concentration of microplastics than kidney and liver samples.
  • Blood: One study identified four types of plastics in a plastic-particle concentration of 6 micrograms per milliliter in 22 healthy volunteers, with polyethylene being the most abundant. Polyethylene is a widely used plastic due to its versatility and is used in apparel, furniture, and consumer goods. There is still no established threshold or reference level for microplastics in human blood. However, for context, lead, commonly from sources like old paint and contaminated water, is considered concerning in children’s blood at levels above 3.5 micrograms per deciliter (1 deciliter is 100 milliliters).
  • Saliva: One study found 21 types of microplastics in saliva samples from patients with respiratory diseases.
  • Lungs: Microplastics were present in all regions of the lungs in 11 out of 13 study participants, with polypropylene and polyethylene terephthalate fibers being the most abundant. Higher concentrations of microplastics were found among smokers.
  • Feces: In one study, 10 common types of plastics were found in stool samples. Children appear to be at greater risk, with findings showing that infants have 10 times more plastic in their feces than adults. This difference may stem from infants’ higher exposure to plastics through activities like crawling, chewing on textiles, and mouthing objects. Studies also found microplastics in meconium—the first stool passed by newborns.
  • Placenta: Microplastics were detected in the part of the placenta, suggesting they can cross the placental barrier and potentially affect fetal development.
  • Liver: Microplastics were seen in liver tissues of people with cirrhosis, with concentrations notably higher than in samples from those without liver disease.
  • Colon: Microplastics were also detected in colon sections removed during surgeries, indicating they may remain in the digestive tract.

  While evidence that microplastics accumulate in the body exists, research on their health effects is still limited.

  Health Implications of Microplastics

  Because microplastics are foreign bodies, they trigger an immune system response. However, unlike viruses and bacteria, the body cannot effectively eliminate them. This chronic presence may lead to oxidative stress and inflammation, potentially resulting in a range of health issues, including DNA damage, allergic reactions, cell death, and cancer.

  Microplastics also contain chemicals that can disrupt normal hormone functions and metabolic processes. These harmful substances may leach from the microplastics and enter the body through skin absorption or ingestion.

  “Microplastics act as vectors that also carry viruses and bacteria, which then travel into our bodies if we inhale or ingest the microplastics,” Charron said.

  Research has linked microplastic exposure to an increased risk of diseases. For instance, according to the study on saliva samples, exposure may put people at higher risk of pulmonary diseases characterized by coughing, shortness of breath, wheezing, and a more severe inflammatory bowel disease. Additionally, the presence of plastic in arteriosclerotic plaques, fatty deposits that build up in the arteries, increases the likelihood of heart attack, stroke, or death.

  Despite growing evidence of health risks, there is still no way to assess microplastic risks or measure human exposure.

  “One major barrier is the lack of standardized testing for microplastic release in drinking water and other consumables,” Savage said. Creating such testing requires more comprehensive studies and standardized protocols to evaluate exposure levels and health impacts, he added. The challenge of measuring these particles in biological samples is due to their wide variation in size and composition.

  “Improved detection methods will help researchers better understand the extent and impact of microplastics on human health, allowing for more comprehensive studies and effective intervention strategies,” he added.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 22:10

• Make Education Great Again!
  Make Education Great Again!

  Authored by Adam Ellwanger via RealClearEducation,

  Imagine these words as the first speech delivered by the incoming Secretary of Education.

  

  Today, I am here to deliver bitter medicine: American education has failed. Teachers and parents, administrators and government—and even students—all bear some responsibility.

  The most common explanations for our educational crisis are inadequate funding, overuse of standardized testing, and systemic prejudice. They are false.

  • Our schools do not lack funding—no country spends more on public education.
  • The poor results of standardized tests indicate our failures; they are not the cause.
  • Our schools are not prejudiced—the most aggressive education reforms since 1955 directly aimed to eliminate systemic discrimination.

  For decades, we ignored signs of trouble, but the COVID-19 pandemic revealed the depth of our challenges. The problems are so pervasive and complex that there is no quick fix. We cannot merely repair; we must rebuild.

  Since 2020, American families have struggled mightily. The declining quality of education prompted affluent families to opt out of public schools, leaving middle- and working-class families with diminished resources and influence to push for reform. States’ refusal to enact school choice reforms widened the wealth gap and limited generational mobility.

  But lower- and middle-class families bear some responsibility, too. The rise of single-parent households, less common among affluent families, has been catastrophic. When the only adult in the home works up to 60 hours a week to make ends meet, there is little time for homework help, PTA meetings, or engaging with school officials. Even in households with two working parents, time and energy are often in short supply.

  Teachers, for their part, have good reason to despair. Despite the monumental importance of their work, many are underpaid. They face administrators who value standardized test scores above all else. Meanwhile, declining standards for decorum and discipline, often justified in the name of “social justice,” have made schools unsafe for both teachers and students. Violence and insubordination create an environment unfit for serious learning. Some parents treat schools as daycare centers or demand good grades for minimal effort. Worse, parents of disruptive students often refuse to ensure their children do not rob others of the opportunity to learn.

  Yet teachers, too, have failed. They inflate grades to keep their jobs but do no favors for students unprepared for future challenges. This, in turn, lowers the quality of education for students ready for more advanced work, driving gifted students out of public schools.

  Another harsh truth is that many teachers are unprepared for the job. The education system has failed for so long that many teachers have never mastered the material they are supposed to teach. Colleges steer future educators toward “education” majors, where coursework focuses more on leftist “social justice” ideology than on subject mastery. Some graduates believe their mission is to “dismantle” an “unjust” society by creating anti-American activists.

  When these activist-teachers enter classrooms, they often abandon their duty to transmit America’s culture, knowledge, and values. Instead, they teach students to disdain their nation, its people, its past, and its way of life. This undermines social cohesion and deprives disadvantaged students of the tools they need to succeed.

  Outdated curricula exacerbate these issues. Most schools still use models from the late 20th century, failing to address how computing, the internet, and artificial intelligence have transformed how we read, write, and learn. Even in innovative schools, teachers often struggle to balance the needs of non-native English speakers with those of native speakers, diluting the educational experience for the latter.

  Our colleges and universities are also broken. Admitting underprepared students has lowered academic standards nationwide. General education curricula often assume a need for remediation, leaving motivated students without the challenge or preparation they deserve.

  Government-run financial aid has inflated tuition costs while diminishing the value of college degrees. Proposals to cancel student debt signal to universities that they can continue raising prices without consequence, encouraging predatory admission policies that saddle students with unmanageable debt.

  How do we revitalize American education?

  Nothing short of an academic Sputnik will suffice. Just as Sputnik spurred the urgency that sent Americans to the moon, we need a bold initiative to revolutionize education:

  • We will create K-12 curricula prioritizing history, civics, and an understanding of our government.
  • We will eliminate curricula that divide Americans by race, class, religion, sex, or sexual identity.
  • We will implement school choice nationwide.
  • We will end federal student loan programs, allowing private lenders to evaluate borrowers’ ability to repay. Conditional lending will force colleges to lower tuition and revise admissions and program offerings.
  • We will expand vocational training and enhance opportunities for gifted students.
  • We will raise teacher credentialing standards to ensure advanced subject knowledge.
  • We will enforce decorum and discipline in schools. Uniforms will unify student bodies, and measures like suspension and expulsion will ensure classrooms are conducive to learning.
  • We will revise college accreditation standards to reflect post-graduation success and employment metrics.
  • We will penalize public colleges and universities that engage in discriminatory admissions practices.

  And that is just the beginning.

  The destiny of our nation depends on education. The effort to revitalize our schools must be as bold as our aspirations. Together, we will bring American education into the 21st century. Together, we will make American education great again.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 21:45

• Not Everyone's Excited About AI Tools
  Not Everyone’s Excited About AI Tools

  The release of ChatGPT in the fall of 2022 and the many AI-powered tools that followed in its tracks have sparked an excitement around artificial intelligence that sometimes feels like a 21st century gold rush.

  “AI is transforming every industry, company and country,” Jensen Huang, founder and CEO of Nvidia said this week.

  But, as Statista’s Felix Richter reports, while big tech companies invest billions of dollars to build the infrastructure necessary to run large language models, not everybody is convinced that AI will be as transformational as many people currently believe – especially from a consumer perspective.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  According to Statista Consumer Insights, there’s still a sizeable share of people who aren’t all that excited about AI.

  In fact, almost 3 in 10 U.S. adults surveyed by Statista said they didn’t care about AI tools at all.

  At the other end of the excitement scale, 24 percent of respondents said they liked to try out new and innovative AI tools and 22 percent said that they get excited about them.

  20 percent said that AI tools are already a part of their day-to-day life, which seems like a lot considering that the “era of AI”, as Huang recently called it, only just begun.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 21:20

• Former Green Beret: Trump Can "Turn Loose Delta Force" On The Cartels
  Former Green Beret: Trump Can “Turn Loose Delta Force” On The Cartels

  Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

  During a discussion with Joe Rogan, former Green Beret Evan Hafer, noted that if president-elect Trump decides to go to war with the cartels he could opt to use US Special Forces to destroy them.

  

  Hafer noted “if we declare war on the cartel, these dudes are not going to understand what the fuck is going on,”

  “They are in for a world of ultra violence they’ve never actually felt before because you know, obviously this is a very capable violent organization,” Hafer added.

  He continued, “They have fucking no clue if we organize these tier one units against them this is gonna be — what I would be doing if I was down there… I’d be getting ready to retire right now,” 

  “That’s what I would be doing. Because if Delta Force is hunting me bro, I would be so terrified,” Hafer further urged.

  “I thought about this for a long time where I’m like if they turn loose Delta Force and SEAL Team 6 on cartels and pedophiles, we could just kind of like erase the problem in about two years. It’d be gone,” Hafer, the founder of Black Rifle Coffee Company, emphasised.

  🔥 Special Forces Vet. Evan Hafer & Joe Rogan on Trump Declaring War on the Cartels: ‘It Is Going to Get Wild Come January 20th’

  “If we declare war on the cartel, these dudes are not gonna understand what the f*ck is going on. They are in for a world of ultra-violence they’ve… pic.twitter.com/lUp0onVgRr

  — Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) November 19, 2024

  Trump has repeatedly said that this option is on the table.

  His incoming border czar Tom Homan also recently stated that Trump intends to “use the full might of the United States Special Operations to take ’em out,” and “ take ’em off the face of Earth.”

  *  *  *

  Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 20:55

• Apple Releases Urgent iPhone Security Updates, Warns Hackers May Be Exploiting Vulnerabilities
  Apple Releases Urgent iPhone Security Updates, Warns Hackers May Be Exploiting Vulnerabilities

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

  Apple has released urgent security updates for its iOS and other operating systems to patch against vulnerabilities that both the tech giant and U.S. cybersecurity officials warned could be actively exploited by hackers.

  

  Apple’s security updates patch gaps in operating systems for the iPhone, iPad, and Mac products, as well as its Safari web browser, according to a series of security-related announcements on Nov. 19.

  Specifically, the software updates target iOS 17.7.2 and iPadOS 17.7.2, iOS 18.1.1 and iPadOS 18.1.1, visionOS 2.1.1, macOS Sequoia 15.1.1, Safari 18.1, and Safari 18.1.1.

  Apple noted that in all the above-listed cases, the patches fix two significant vulnerabilities in WebKit and JavaScriptCore. These vulnerabilities, which could lead to arbitrary code-execution attacks through malicious web content, may have been exploited by hackers.

  “Apple is aware of a report that this issue may have been actively exploited on Intel-based Macs,” the company wrote in several of the security alerts.

  No information was available as to the possible identity of any cyber-threat actors who may have exploited these vulnerabilities. In general, if hackers are able to execute arbitrary code through maliciously crafted web content, this could put sensitive user data at risk, potentially leading to unauthorized access, stolen credentials, or even device control.

  In addition, the security patches to Apple’s Safari 18.1 address multiple vulnerabilities that could be exploited for malicious purposes, including allowing hackers to misuse a trust relationship to download malicious content, to leak private browsing history, and to allow the processing of maliciously crafted web content that could prevent security protocols from being enforced or that could cause unexpected process crashes.

  The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) also took note of the security gaps in the listed Apple products.

  “A cyber-threat actor could exploit one of these vulnerabilities to take control of an affected system,” the CISA said in a Nov. 20 alert, noting that the security updates released by Apple address these vulnerabilities.

  According to Apple’s security alerts, the scope of affected devices is extensive. The updates for iOS 18.1.1 and iPadOS 18.1.1 address vulnerabilities for devices such as the iPhone XS and later, iPad Pro models (from the 3rd generation onward), and iPad Air and mini models released since the 3rd and 5th generations, respectively.

  Similarly, iOS 17.7.2 and iPadOS 17.7.2 extend coverage to slightly older devices like the iPad Pro 10.5-inch and the iPad 6th generation.

  Mac users running macOS Sequoia 15.1.1 or Safari on macOS Ventura and macOS Sonoma are also affected, as are early adopters of visionOS 2.1.1 on the Apple Vision Pro.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 20:30

• Trump's Opportunity To Reset US-Iran Relations
  Trump’s Opportunity To Reset US-Iran Relations

  Submitted by James Durso,

  Donald Trump is back and so is the “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran to “drastically throttle” Iran’s oil sales to kill Tehran’s nuclear program and its ability to fund regional proxies.

  But Trump aide Brian Hook who ran the anti-Iran campaign in Trump’s first term claimed Trump has “no interest in regime change.”

  That may be true but Iran, and everyone else, probably doesn’t believe it.

  

  The Trump 47 officials may soon learn that 2025 is not 2018 and, while Iran was on the ropes as Trump’s first term ended, things are different now.

  To start, open-handed American support for Israel’s campaigns against the Palestinian and Lebanese people has eroded support for U.S. moves by Middle East governments that might normally favor limits on Iran’s behavior.

  Saudi Arab’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), declared Israel was committing “genocide” in Gaza. By using the G-word, MbS has made it hard for his government to walk back his remarks or reverse course absent a cease fire and implementation of something like the Arab Peace Initiative (which has been gathering dust since 2002 and may need a reboot).

  MbS also warned Israel against attacking Iran.

  Arab-Sunni Saudi Arabia and Persian-Shia Iran have been drawing closer since 2023 they agreed to resume ties after seven years of tensions. That the deal was brokered by China is a sign the regional powers had little confidence in a U.S. role, possibly suspecting it is in Washington’s (and Jerusalem’s) interest to keep the countries of the region divided.

  The countries’ military chiefs recently held defense talks, and planned a joint military exercise in the Red Sea (that probably won’t be interrupted by Yemen’s Houthi rebels.) In the civil realm, the countries are moving toward increased economic ties.

  The presidents of the United Arab Emirates and Iran held their first face-to-face talks in October, and UAE – Iran trade is on the upswing, and the Saudi crown prince (and de facto ruler) recently spoke to Iran’s new president.

  Qatar (which shares a natural gas field with Iran) and Iran are trying to broaden their economic ties that are largely based on hydrocarbons, and Iran supported Qatar during the Saudi-led 2017-2021 attempt to isolate Doha for allegedly supporting terrorism, though criticism of Riyadh by Doha-based Al Jazeera and friendship with Iran are the likely reasons.

  After a recent exchange of fire by Israel and Iran, Iran warned its neighbors not to attack Iran or to help the Israelis, and the Gulf Cooperation Council promptly declared, “Our focus has been on de-escalation.” The Gulf states are dubious about “maximum pressure” and are concerned it will upend warming relations with Iran and increase regional tensions.

  Middle Eastern governments are sensitive to public anger over American support for Israel’s killing of civilians in Gaza and Lebanon, so will avoid any display of support for a U.S. campaign that may target Arab or Muslim peoples. The countries that signed up for the Abraham Accords may soon look pretty foolish, so when MbS accused Israel of “genocide” in Gaza he was demonstrating Saudi Arabia’s distaste for the U.S. line, unlike the UAE which has increased daily airline flights to Israel.

  Also wary of a renewed U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran and the Central Asian republics. The republics are growing their trade ties to Iran, a market of 90 million people, and the host of seaports at Bandar Abbas and Chabahar, essential for Central Asia trade with Asia and Africa. Iran also hosts the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), a 7,200-kilometer multi-modal transport corridor that connects India to Europe, and is Plan B if a transport route through Afghanistan and Pakistan is not reliable.

  Iran has been actively working to strengthen its relations with Central Asian countries as part of its Look East strategy which has seen increased relations with China, Russia, and to offset the effect of Western sanctions. Iran’s Foreign Minister has engaged in discussions with his counterparts in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and the other republics and the newly-elected president of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, has met the presidents of Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan.  

  In Central Asia. Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan have all increased trade links with Iran, in Tajikistan’s case to include a defense pact. The republics don’t want to sacrifice the opportunity in Iran, a country with a consumer market projected to grow 11% by 2030.

  Iran’s focus on Central Asia includes improving trade ties, developing infrastructure projects, and increasing connectivity through transportation networks. For example, Iran has proposed linking the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway project to its own network, which would provide Central Asian countries with access to the Persian Gulf and beyond.

  And the oil market has changed since 2018.

  According to Argus Media, Iran’s oil exports, which were below 500,000 b/d through the second half of 2019 and 2020 due to Trump-era sanctions, began increasing in 2021 and have increased every year since: “Exports averaged around 1.6mn b/d in January-October [in 2024].”

  If the U.S. again sanctions Iran, it may find it hard going as the remaining buyers may be “those who do not necessarily fear sanctions.” Iran has built out its network to bypass sanctions, and has expanded its tanker fleet, though the clandestine effort is not without substantial costs, such as Chinese customers demanding a substantial discount, and the cost of rebranding the oil to disguise its origin. 

  Iran has an oil export terminal on the Gulf of Oman, which was inaugurated in July 2021, and can export 1 million barrels per day of oil. The facility cannot replace Iran’s main export terminal at Kharg, which can handle 8 million barrels per day, but it allows Iran to bypass the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint and will require the Americans to try to cover two terminals instead of just the main facility at Kharg if Washington decides to attack Iran

  The U.S. may try to interdict Iran’s oil exports to China, but what will China’s response be if it considers the interdiction an act of piracy? Beijing may decide to provide a naval escort for the oil shipments or may reflag the vessels as Chinese, upping the ante for the Americans.

  If the Peoples’ Liberation Army Navy, the world’s largest navy with newer vessels than the U.S. Navy, deploys to escort the tankers it will refine its “blue water” operating skills. The increased operating tempo will also stress the U.S. fleet which for the second time in a year has no aircraft carrier in the Middle East.

  A recent U.S. Navy report noted on the material readiness of Navy ships: “several functional areas and subsystems remained degraded or showed declining trends” since 2017, and the U.S. Government Accountability Office noted in 2021 the Navy needed to improve its limited capacity for battle damage repair, in the event the U.S. and any foe come to blows.

  And if the U.S. seizes a China-bound cargo, then what? The ship will have to be anchored somewhere, the cargo will possibly be offloaded and stored, the crew will need to be housed and fed, consular support will need to be provided, and someone will have to guard the vessel. China is the biggest trading partner for every country between the Persian Gulf and the South China Sea, so the U.S. may be unable to find volunteers for these low-return chores.

  The U.S. ignored the warning of former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski who said the U.S. should avoid actions that would create “a grand coalition of China, Russia, and perhaps Iran, an ‘antihegemonic’ coalition.” The U.S. has masterfully created that coalition by expanding NATO, ignoring the One China Policy, and sponsoring the 1953 coup in Iran that has freighted the Iranian people with more and more authoritarian rulers.

  But the ascension of new presidents in Tehran and Washington may be an opportunity to start rebuilding relations.

  After his election in July 2024, President Masoud Pezeshkian announced his program in “My Message to the New World” and declared his intent to strengthen relations with Iran’s neighbors, specifically mentioning Iraq, Türkiye, and the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council. He emphasized the need for a “strong region,” said he hoped for “constructive dialogue” with Europe, criticized the U.S. for exiting the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and urged Washington “come to terms with reality.”

  In October, President-elect Trump declared,  “I would like to see Iran be very successful. The only thing is, they can’t have a nuclear weapon.” In 2023, then-Senator JD Vance said that Republican senators who wanted at attack Iran were “living in the past.” In 2024, Republican Vice-President candidate JD Vance said, “And our interest very much is in not going to war with Iran. It would be a huge distraction of resources. It would be massively expensive to our country,”

  Those are hopeful signs of a desire to reach a negotiated solution,  but can the U.S. abide by any deal once the ink is dry?

  Neither Russia, China, nor Iran believe the U.S. will abide by the spirit and letter of any agreement as it has a record of bailing out of any commitments when it is convenient, to wit,

  • Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
  • NATO expansion (“not one inch eastward”)
  • Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty
  • Paris Agreement (Paris Climate Accord)
  • Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
  • Minsk agreements
  • Open Skies Treaty
  • Algiers Accord
  • One China Policy

  U.S. intervention in Iran started with the 1953 coup. The U.S. then supported Iraq during 1980-1988 war after the U.S. and Iran agreed on the Algiers Accords (January 1981) where the U.S. pledged, “it is and from now on will be the policy of the United States not to intervene, directly or indirectly, politically or militarily, in Iran’s internal affairs,” but this did not stop the U.S. from backing Iraq when the war starting to go in Iran’s favor in 1982.

  The U.S. killed General Qasem Soleimani in Iraq when he was carrying a message to Saudi Arabia in an effort to defuse tensions between Tehran and Riyadh. Many Iranians and Saudis probably think Soleimani was killed because he was working to reduce tensions in the region, which they think only benefits the U.S. and Israel. Then there is the killing of civilian Iranian scientists involved in nuclear power research. No one has taken the credit, but the Iranians no doubt believe it was the Americans or the Israelis with American connivance.

  Last is the STUXNET virus, a joint U.S.-Israel effort to attack break Iranian nuclear centrifuge equipment which “leaked” and infected computers worldwide.

  The Chair of the NATO Military Committee recently admitted the only reason NATO troops are not is Ukraine fighting Russian troops is because Russia has nuclear weapons, which no doubt confirmed the views of Iranians who think the country should have nuclear weapons. Then there is the cautionary tale of Libya’s surrender of its nuclear program, and the mystery of why North Korea, one of the poorest and most isolated countries in the world, has not been attacked by the U.S.

  Iran’s relations with Russia and China have strengthened which adds to the country’s resilience.  

  China and Iran signed a 25-year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership agreement in March 2021. This agreement aims to enhance bilateral relations and includes significant investments from China in Iran’s economy.

  China plans to invest $400 billion in Iran’s oil, gas, petrochemicals, transportation, and manufacturing sectors. In return, China will receive a steady and heavily-discounted supply of Iranian oil. The agreement allows China to deploy security personnel to protect its projects in Iran.

  The investments will also go towards upgrading Iran’s infrastructure, and the agreement supports China’s One Belt One Road Initiative, by enhancing connectivity and trade routes.

  Russia has supplied Iran with Su-35 fighter jets, Mi-28 attack helicopters, Yak-130 pilot training aircraft; Iran has sent Russia drones, and ballistic missiles.

  Non-military trade is also increasing. The Moscow Times reports, “Russian exports to Iran rose 27% last year, and Russian imports from Iran increased 10%. Both sides have agreed to scale up trade in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, while Russia has pledged to invest an unprecedented $40 billion in Iran’s oil and gas sector.”

  The Times also notes, “Perhaps the most important changes, however, have been in transport networks. As a result of the fighting in Ukraine, and in a bid to bypass Western sanctions, Russia has begun shifting trade routes southward. This is why Iran and Russia have ramped up work to develop the much-touted and ambitious International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), which will stretch from the Persian Gulf to the Baltic Sea.”

  Despite its economic problems, Iran has increased its military budget, no doubt anticipating attacks by America or Israel. At the same time Iran has signaled it is willing to negotiate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), but not “under pressure.” Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araqchi clarified that when he told state television, “”There is still an opportunity for diplomacy, although this opportunity is not much. It is a limited opportunity.”

  A recent IAEA report notes Iran has begun implementing measures “aimed at stopping the increase of its stockpile [of near bomb-grade uranium]” though the IAEA also noted that Iran increased its inventory of 60% enriched uranium by 60% since the last report in August 2024.

  Iran’s President Pezeshkian has indicated he is open to U.S. engagement: “”Whether we like it or not, we will face the United States in regional and international arenas, and it’s better that we manage this arena ourselves.” And opinion leaders in Iran are saying their government should engage with Trump, with Shargh, the reformist daily newspaper editorializing that President Pezeshkian, must “avoid past mistakes and assume a pragmatic and multidimensional policy,” though others are skeptical anything will change under Trump.

  Even the Quds Force commander, General Qassem Soleimani, once mused: “maybe it’s time to rethink our relationship with the Americans,” though in the end it didn’t do him much good.

  All that said, “maximum pressure” is a slogan, not a strategy. If Iran says “Yes,” will Washington finally produce a coherent, executable strategy for its future dealings with Iran?  Up to now its only strategy has been “more sanctions,” hoping some liberals will miraculously appear and (democratically) seize power when in fact the Revolutionary Guard may take over and finally dispense with Vilayat-e Faqih.

  Whatever strategy Washington produces will be overshadowed by the disastrous retreat from Afghanistan in 2021, so the U.S. should favor a policy that increases regional connectivity and economic growth rather than carrying water for Israel or satisfying its desire to avenge the humiliation of 1979.

  Iran won’t surrender its hard-won nuclear expertise and has increased cooperation with the IAEA, but will it ever dash to the bomb? Israel claims it destroyed key Iranian nuclear fabrication facilities but the head of the IAEA said of the attack, “as far as the IAEA is concerned, we do not see this as a nuclear facility.”  Trump will not want to start a war with Iran over its nuclear program  as he will be sensitive to  the impact on the U.S. economy,  so sanctions (and the occasional Israeli attack) will be all he has left. If that is the case, and Iran’s economy and oil export scheme is resilient enough, and Russia and China remain constant, we may be looking at years of low-level “endless wars” to the joy of the Iran hawks in Washington.

  And there is a deadline of sorts for negotiations with Iran: 18 October 2025 sees the end of the JCPOA snapback mechanism, the last opportunity for world powers to initiate the snapback mechanism, returning all the sanctions that were lifted in the JCPOA agreement…”

  If the U.S. rejoins any sort of nuclear deal, it will have to be a new deal as Iran blew past the JCPOA 1.0 conditions after the U.S. abandoned the agreement. If the Americans want to expand a 2.0 deal to include ballistic missiles or Iran’s foreign policy, Iran may suggest similar limits on other countries in the region, and then demand that 2.0 be a treaty to bound future U.S. action, and to exploit differences in the U.S. on what is a “good deal” that will be all too evident once the Senate takes up the treaty for ratification.

  So far, each side has demonstrated a lack of empathy for the other, the result of years of successful propagandizing, leaving each feeling more sinned against than sinning.  And the hard-liners in each capital believe in the other’s perfidy, see conflict as key to their continued influence, and reap economic rewards from the status quo.

  On the U.S. side, Washington has never explained to American citizens its role in the 1953 coup that stifled Iran’s economic and political development, though Secretary of State Madeleine Albright admitted the U.S. role in overthrowing Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953 and called the coup “a setback for Iran’s political development.” To many Americans, the 1979 revolution and the hostage crisis appeared out of thin air.

  The U.S. needs to think long-term. Iran’s mullahs won’t rule forever and Americas association with economic hardship and violence won’t benefit it in the future. The U.S. should adopt a parallel effort to President Pezeshkian’s “strong region” plan to emphasize trade and connectivity which will help the region make up the gains sacrificed in the “lost decades” of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan.

  Despite all the talk about what Trump might do, Biden is still the U.S. president until 11:59 on 20 January 2025.

  If both sides stick to what is feasible, keep their emotions and hard-liners in check, and Iran offers Trump a deal that he feels only he could have made, we may see stability and more economic opportunity for the region’s youth and the start of the banishment of the legacies of 1953 and 1979

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 20:05

• Generational Differences In US Sexual Orientation
  Generational Differences In US Sexual Orientation

  A total of 9 percent of U.S. adults aged 18-64 identify as homosexual or bisexual, while another 1 percent prefer pansexual as their self-identification.

  This is according to data from Statista Consumer Insights and, as Statista’s Katharina Bucholz shows in the chart below, the proportion of people who do not identify as heterosexual is significantly lower among the older generations.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In the Baby Boomer group of participants, 96 percent see themselves as heterosexual.

  In Generation X, the figure is 94 percent.

  The first major generational shift can be observed among Millennials.

  For those born between 1980 and 1994, the figure is 88 percent.

  Another jump is then made when looking at the Generation Z results – here just 79 percent identify as heterosexual.

  The most common non-heterosexual response among Generation Z participants was bisexual, at 11 percent.

  The differences between the generations for those identifying as homosexual was minimal – three percent for all except Generation Z, with four percent.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 19:40

• Trump Promises To Use Recess Appointments If Needed, But What Are They?
  Trump Promises To Use Recess Appointments If Needed, But What Are They?

  Authored by Samantha Flom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  President-elect Donald Trump has wasted no time in appointing his Cabinet members since his victory in the Nov. 5 presidential election.

  In keeping with his promise to shake up Washington, some of his selections have raised eyebrows and questions about their chances to survive a potential confirmation battle in the Senate. But should his nominees stall, Trump has already identified a tool for sidestepping any delays: recess appointments.

  

  Before the election of Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) as the next majority leader, Trump said on social media that the next leader “must agree to Recess Appointments.”

  He noted that confirmation votes can take “two years, or more,” because of the polarization in Congress.

  “This is what they did four years ago, and we cannot let it happen again,” he said in the Nov. 10 post. “We need positions filled IMMEDIATELY!”

  Upon Trump’s inauguration, some 4,000 administration positions will need filling, including more than 1,200 that require Senate confirmation, according to the Partnership for Public Service, a nonprofit that assists with presidential transitions.

  Thune told Fox News on Nov. 14 that “all options are on the table” for ensuring Trump’s Cabinet appointments are confirmed.

  The president’s Cabinet consists of the top advisers and agency and department heads who are appointed to help lead the executive branch.

  Many of those roles require Senate confirmation, although others, such as the vice president or White House chief of staff, do not.

  Here’s a rundown of the Cabinet confirmation process, how it has historically evolved, and the obstacles that Trump could face in getting his team confirmed.

  

  What Is the Senate’s Role?

  As outlined under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the Senate’s “advice and consent” power gives it the authority to confirm or reject presidential appointments for Cabinet positions, ambassadorships, Supreme Court judges, and other officers of the United States.

  That process starts when the Senate’s executive clerk refers a nominee to relevant committees for consideration. Those committees will delve into the appointee’s background and hold hearings to assess his or her qualifications. Members will then vote on how to report the nomination to the full chamber: favorably, unfavorably, no action, or without recommendation.

  The full Senate will hold additional confirmation hearings and then vote on the nominee’s fitness for office, with a simple majority required for approval.

  How Often Are Nominees Rejected?

  Historically, only nine Cabinet nominations have been rejected by the Senate.

  President John Tyler holds the record for most rejected nominations, at four. But the most recent occurrence was in 1989, when President George H.W. Bush’s appointment of John Tower, a senator from Texas, as his defense secretary was derailed by allegations of excessive drinking and sexual misconduct.

  A handful of other nominations or near nominations were withdrawn either by the president or the appointees themselves as it became clear that they faced an uphill battle for confirmation.

  That happened several times under Trump’s previous administration. In February 2017, his secretary of labor nominee, Andrew Puzder, withdrew his own name from consideration amid allegations of wage theft and sexual harassment leveled against restaurants franchised by his company.

  Another notable example was Trump’s nomination of Dr. Ronny Jackson, the White House physician, for secretary of veterans affairs in 2018. Jackson denied allegations of workplace misconduct but eventually withdrew his name.

  

  While rejections and withdrawals are rare, it is not uncommon for senators to use various legislative tactics to slow the confirmation process. In fact, in recent years, it has become an expected part of the process amid the increasing polarization of Congress.

  One recent example was Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-Ala.) use of legislative “holds” to block the chamber’s expeditious consideration of President Joe Biden’s Defense Department nominees.

  For months, Tuberville blocked hundreds of military promotions in protest of the department’s decision to cover the travel expenses of service members seeking abortions. He ultimately dropped most of his holds when Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) indicated that he was preparing to bypass them and confirm hundreds of appointments at once.

  What Are Recess Appointments?

  Article II of the Constitution also empowers the president to fill vacancies while the chamber is in recess.

  The drawback, however, is that recess appointees can serve only until the end of the Senate’s next session. That means that a recess appointee could serve for, at most, close to two years.

  Monthslong recesses were not uncommon in Congress’s early years. Recess appointments allowed the president to ensure that important roles were filled if any vacancies arose during those extended absences.

  In recent years, however, increasing gridlock in Washington has prompted presidents to use recess appointments—typically mid-term—to bypass delays in the Senate confirmation process.

  Lawmakers, in turn, have limited opportunities for such appointments through creative scheduling and by holding “pro forma” sessions where no legislative work is conducted.

  The Supreme Court unanimously upheld that practice in 2014. The court also ruled that the Senate must be in recess for at least 10 days before the president can make unilateral appointments.

  As neither chamber can recess for more than three days without the other’s consent, the House also has some power over when recess appointments can be made.

  Recent Uses

  President Barack Obama was the last president to use the tool of recess appointments. He filled 32 positions in that fashion before he was sued over three appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.

  The appointments in question were made during one of the Senate’s pro forma sessions and were invalidated by the Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling on recess appointments.

  President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments and President George W. Bush made 171, according to the Congressional Research Service.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 19:15

• Trump Nominates Pam Bondi For Attorney General After Gaetz Withdraws From Consideration
  Trump Nominates Pam Bondi For Attorney General After Gaetz Withdraws From Consideration

  Update: Donald Trump said he is nominating former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi and his personal trial lawyer, to run the US Department of Justice, after his first pick, former Representative Matt Gaetz, withdrew his name from consideration.

  “Pam will refocus the DOJ to its intended purpose of fighting Crime, and Making America Safe Again. I have known Pam for many years — She is smart and tough, and is an AMERICA FIRST Fighter, who will do a terrific job as Attorney General!,” Trump said in a statement on his Truth Social platform on Thursday evening.

  

  Bondi, age 59, is an American attorney, lobbyist, and politician. A Republican, she served as the 37th Florida attorney general from 2011 to 2019. She is the first woman elected to the office. In 2020, Bondi was one of longtime ally President Donald Trump’s defense lawyers during his first impeachment trial. By 2024 she led the legal arm of the Trump-aligned America First Policy Institute.

  

  Trump initially picked Gaetz, as his AG but the former US representative from Florida said he would no longer seek the post after intense scrutiny over a House Ethics Committee investigation into allegations that he engaged in sexual misconduct, including having sex with a minor.

  “It is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump/Vance Transition,” Gaetz said Thursday.

  Trump has vowed to overhaul the Justice Department, an agency he has criticized over two federal indictments secured by Special Counsel Jack Smith over the president-elect allegedly trying to overturn the 2020 election and illegally retaining classified documents.

  If confirmed, Bondi would be heading a department at the center of many of Trump’s key policy initiatives, including plans to ramp up immigration enforcement and border security.

  Here’s why I like Trump’s new AG pick Pam Bondi

  Not only is she experienced, but I look at where someone stands during times of difficulty

  When Trump was being impeached for the perfect Ukraine phone call, Pam was brought in to defend him as legal counsel

  Not only was that a… pic.twitter.com/fZT4ebX6vl

  — DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) November 21, 2024

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

  JUST IN: MSNBC guest melts down over Trump picking Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General, says they should “fear” her because she’s competent.

  Liberal political scientist Jason Johnson said Bondi is an “effective pick” who is “worse” than Matt Gaetz.

  “We should all fear [her]… pic.twitter.com/PUaGWVqEeR

  — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) November 21, 2024

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

  Earlier:

  Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) has withdrawn his name for consideration for attorney general amid growing controversy over sexual misconduct allegations.

  

  “While the momentum was strong, it is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump/Vance Transition,” Gaetz wrote on X.

  “There is no time to waste on a needlessly protracted Washington scuffle, thus I’ll be withdrawing my name from consideration to serve as Attorney General.  Trump’s DOJ must be in place and ready on Day 1.”

  I had excellent meetings with Senators yesterday. I appreciate their thoughtful feedback – and the incredible support of so many. While the momentum was strong, it is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump/Vance…

  — Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) November 21, 2024

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

  President-Elect Trump acknowledged Gaetz’ efforts in a statement on Truth Social:

  I greatly appreciate the recent efforts of Matt Gaetz in seeking approval to be Attorney General.

  He was doing very well but, at the same time, did not want to be a distraction for the Administration, for which he has much respect.

  Matt has a wonderful future, and I look forward to watching all of the great things he will do!

  It’s unclear what’s next for Gaetz, as he resigned from Congress after Trump picked him for consideration. Rubio’s Senate seat?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 18:50

• "Kids All Grown Up": Gen Z Will Secure 10% Of All Managerial Jobs In 2025
  “Kids All Grown Up”: Gen Z Will Secure 10% Of All Managerial Jobs In 2025

  Born after 1997, the oldest Gen Zers turned 27 this year and have been in the workforce for about a decade. Despite negative headlines about this generation struggling with disastrous “Bidenomics” and some developing “TikTok brain,” a new report shows this generation will secure about 10% of all managerial jobs by 2025. 

  Glassdoor lead economist Daniel Zhao released the report Tuesday on future work trends titled “Glassdoor Worklife Trends 2025,” in which he stated:

  The kids are all grown up. In 2025, the oldest members of Gen Z will be 28 with almost a decade in the workforce. Gen Z already makes up just under 20% of the workforce, but as Gen Z ages, they’re also quickly entering the ranks of management. Based on current trends, one in ten managers in 2025 will be a member of Gen Z.

  

  Gen Z is on track to follow their older peers into the ranks of management. When comparing against previous generations when they were at the same age, Gen Z behaves very similarly to past generations. For example, 14% of Gen Z workers age 27 are managers, essentially the same percentage as Millennial (13%), Gen X (14%) and Baby Boomer (12%) workers when they were age 27.

  

  Zhao pointed out several changes in leadership styles over the last half-decade, especially since the emergence of Gen Zers securing managerial jobs…

  This is a useful reminder that generational differences are often overstated. The youngest members of the workforce often behave differently because of their age not because of their generation (for example, younger workers are likely to switch jobs as they are not settled into their careers, not because of changes in generational attitudes toward loyalty).

  That being said, there are some ways that management and leadership styles have shifted over the last five years, and the entry of Gen Z into the management ranks is likely to accompany this different leadership style.

  For example, when we look at Glassdoor reviews that discuss leadership or management, a few themes emerge. Terms like wellbeing and empathy are increasingly mentioned, with 222% and 76% increases in mentions, respectively, from 2019 to 2024, as employees look for leaders that are able to empathize with their needs. Similarly, mentions of boundaries (+99%) and burnout (+126%) have surged as workers feel overwhelmed. In turbulent times, employees also expect their leaders to help provide clarity (+52%) and address uncertainty (+45%). Lastly, equity (+41%) and inclusion (+76%) are increasingly important topics, especially for younger workers.

  While Gen Zers are coming to age, a separate report earlier this year found that 68% of small business owners say this generation was the “least reliable,” while 71% say they’re most likely to have a mental health issue in the workplace. 

  Actual Gen Z bosses.

  Is this the longhouse? pic.twitter.com/ZK6FkoF1y3

  — Cabana Boy 🌴 (@Alkibiades_) July 10, 2024

  Sigh.  

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 18:50

• A Free-Market Guide To Trump's Immigration Crackdown
  A Free-Market Guide To Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  President-elect Donald Trump based much of his campaign on promises to crack down on immigration and carry out mass deportations.

  Politically, this was likely a winning issue for Trump after social media exposed millions of Americans to countless reports and videos of foreign nationals getting free cash, free housing, food allowances, and overall special treatment at taxpayer expense. Meanwhile, actual taxpaying Americans endured inflation-fueled price hikes and a worsening economy while being harangued by the smug upper classes about the need to be “welcoming.” Many voters chose to support the candidate who wasn’t in favor of importing a new taxpayer-subsidized underclass.

  

  Because of this, Trump is likely to prioritize delivering at least some of his promised immigration crackdown.

  However, one does not need to be an advocate of open borders to have concerns when one hears about a federal law enforcement agency engaging in a “crackdown.”

  Federal officials don’t exactly have a stellar record when it comes to respecting the property rights of peaceful, law-abiding Americans, even when the purported target is foreigners.

  The countless violations of the rights of Americans under the Patriot Act and the “war on terror” are examples of this.

  On the other hand, many aspects of the proposed Trump crackdown are, one might say, “no-brainers” and have no apparent downside at all. These include cutting off all funding of any kind to migrants, and deporting all foreign nationals with a known criminal record.

  Nonetheless, some aspects of Trump’s immigration policy have the potential for fueling further expansion of a federal police state. These include any deportation plan that involves a “drag net” and places peaceful residents under suspicion for no offense other than “looking like” a migrant.

  The No-Brainer Solutions

  Immigration has long been subsidized in the United States in the sense that there are low barriers to new migrants benefiting from a bevy of social benefit programs. Immigrants who achieve status as refugees or asylees can access welfare programs almost immediately. Even run-of-the-mill legal migrants need only wait five years to begin living off taxpayer-funded benefits.

  These subsidization schemes have only grown more aggressive in recent years. It is now well known that many American cities and states—not to mention the federal government—offer “free” cash, housing, food, and more.

  This has done much to attract the flood of migrants that has arrived in the US in recent years. Earlier this year, for example, The New York Post reported that the mayor of New York is giving away pre-paid cash cards—each carrying “up to $10,000“— to foreign nationals in New York. Most of these migrants have arrived in New York with no invitation, no employment prospects, and no plan for housing. But most of them plan on staying. And why shouldn’t they? Upon arrival, thousands of them immediately went on the public dole in some way or another, relying on taxpayer-funded shelters, housing programs, and a variety of sources for “free” food. The federal government also provides free transportation to various American communities for many migrants, including 400,000 free riders in 2023 alone.

  Reversing this should be seen as “low-hanging fruit” by the Trump administration. Obviously, any and all access to federal dollars should be cut off immediately. This is true for both legal and illegal immigrants. Immigration needs to be a fully private-market process, not a taxpayer-subsidized activity.

  Any state or local government that attempts to entice more migrants with social benefits programs should lose all access to federal grants. All federal dollars should be cut off from any government schools that cater to illegal immigrants. Any NGO that attempts to funnel taxpayer dollars to immigrants should be blacklisted from any and all federal grants. These NGOs are still free to offer services to anyone they want—just not with taxpayer dollars.

  Many of these programs for putting immigrants on welfare are nowadays facilitated by smart-phone apps. These include the CBP One app which is designed to streamline migrants’ requests for asylum. This, of course, is an attempt to circumvent the normal immigration process and get migrants on social benefits even faster. Obviously, all of these apps should be immediately disabled.

  Note that none of this requires any law-enforcement contact with migrants at all. These solutions simply cut off migrants’ access to the hard-earned dollars of taxpayers. The phone apps will no longer work. The free money will no longer materialize to provide free food and housing for migrants. Those migrants who actually have jobs and contribute to the community can continue to do so. Those who relied on stealing from taxpayers will self-deport when the free ride disappears.

  The option of immigration—including legal immigration— to the United States must be fully privatized so it is only an option for those with the ability to support themselves economically.

  Note that none of this violates anyone’s property rights. No one’s right to travel is limited by cutting off free money for migrants. No one is being prevented from contracting with another private party for employment or housing. People simply are being forced to do all this with their own private property.

  Other Laissez-Faire Solutions: No Fast Path to Citizenship

  Another key in the equation is limiting access to citizenship. Citizenship is not a property right of any kind, and there is no such thing as a natural right to citizenship in any particular place. Excluding the tiny number of migrants who are genuinely stateless, all foreign nationals arriving in the United States already enjoy the benefits of citizenship somewhere.

  Moreover, gaining citizenship in the United States brings with it a variety of economic benefits. It provides permanent access to the welfare state. The granting of citizenship also provides foreign nationals—few of whom renounce their citizenship in their home countries—greater access to US government institutions.

  The benefits of citizenship ought to be greatly limited for new immigrants, with a waiting period of at least a decade, or perhaps even twenty years. Again, this does not limit a migrant’s ability to fully exercise his or her property rights.

  Birthright citizenship, a “right” invented by a federal judge, should also be abolished.

  The Problem with Mass Deportations

  Ultimately, when we consider options for limiting migration, while also respecting property rights, self-deportation needs to be the focus. The alternative is to empower the federal government to track down and round up countless US residents, demand “papers, please!” and then deport those without the proper government forms.

  Many supporters of mass deportation plans seem to think that federal agents can, through some magical power, identify illegal immigrants on sight. The reality is that immigration status must be determined by an investigation into whether or not a resident has the proper paperwork.

  Now, it is true that many illegal immigrants will essentially volunteer for deportation. Such people include criminals who are convicted of real crimes. Clearly, it does not require any sort of drag net to simply deport convicts who have already attracted the attention of authorities. Similarly, in a system that denies taxpayer funded benefits to foreign nationals, immigrants who attempt to collect social benefits would be guilty of fraud, and thus volunteer themselves for deportation. The same would be true of any non-citizen who attempts to vote.

  But what about immigrants who remain peaceful, self-supporting, and keep to themselves? The way federal agents have generally identified these people is by harassing residents through internal checkpoints and harassment of people who “look like” immigrants.

  For example, one of the great overreaches of federal power—one that is blatantly unconstitutional—is the 100-mile border zone. In 1946, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1946. The law granted immigration agents the authority “to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States.” This power was limited to a “reasonable distance” from the US border. Originally, this “reasonable distance” was 25 miles. But it was unilaterally extended by the Department of Justice to 100 miles without any change to the statute. Given that “the border” includes both land and water borders, two-thirds of Americans live within this border zone. Entire states are included within the zone, including Florida, Michigan, and Maine.

  Many peaceful Americans get caught up in this bureaucratic nightmare. Thanks to the hundred-mile zone American citizens who don’t carry their passports on them at all times can be harassed and arrested by Border Patrol agents, even well inside the US border. As the New York Post describes it, “Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are arresting US citizens by mistake and holding them at detention centers for months—sometimes even years.”

  There is nothing shocking here. This is how government agencies work.

  Yet, many Trump supporters are cheering the idea that an army of government agents be let loose on American cities and towns, as if this will not affect ordinary, law-abiding citizens in any way. This is the same attitude that gave us the Patriot Act, NSA spying programs, and everything else justified by the despotic slogan of “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about.”

  Indeed, there are countless ways that the federal government can harass ordinary citizens and violate their property rights. Consider, for example, how anti-immigration advocates promote despotism with programs like “eVerify.” The activists want federal bureaucrats to determine if you have a right to work. And then there are the calls for new laws designed to prosecute private citizens who are guilty of the “crime” of using their own private property to rent apartments to immigrants or pay immigrants for services rendered.

  It’s one thing to build a wall, to deport convicted criminals, or end taxpayer-funded subsidies for migrants. It’s quite another thing when federal agents start asking us for our papers and telling us what we can do with our own property. 

  A related video: 

  Some parts of the Trump plan are no-brainers like ending all federal money for immigrants. Other stuff raises red flags, such as the prospect of mass investigations of non-violent people to determine if they have all the right gov’t paperwork. I think the key here is to make… pic.twitter.com/5aLGrqeA4S

  — Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) November 19, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 18:25

• Visualizing 80 Years Of The Gold-to-Oil Ratio
  Visualizing 80 Years Of The Gold-to-Oil Ratio

  Gold and oil – two of the most influential commodities on the planet – have a fascinating relationship that has evolved over decades, captured in the gold-to-oil ratio.

  The gold-to-oil ratio represents the number of barrels of crude oil equivalent in price to one troy ounce of gold.

  It is viewed as an indicator of the health of the global economy, indicating when gold or oil prices are significantly out of balance with each other.

  This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows the gold-to-oil ratio since 1946, using data compiled by Macrotrends.

  

  What is the Gold-to-Oil Ratio?

  The gold-to-oil ratio expresses the price relationship between gold and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil. WTI is a grade of crude oil and one of the three primary benchmarks for oil pricing, along with Brent and Dubai Crude.

  A high ratio indicates that gold is relatively expensive compared to WTI crude oil, and vice versa. This can indicate periods of outsized demand for energy in the form of crude oil, or periods of monetary uncertainty when there is higher demand for gold.

  Below is the gold-to-oil ratio every decade between 1946 and 2024.

  

  During the 1950s and 1960s, fixed gold prices and stable oil prices kept the ratio between 11 and 13 for 20 years.

  Since the 1980s, the ratio has typically traded within the range of 6 to 40 with a notable exception: in 2020 when the ratio reached a high of 91.1. The peak in 2020 was driven by COVID-19, which boosted gold prices as a safe haven while oil demand and prices plummeted due to global lockdowns.

  In contrast, between 2000 and 2008, oil prices were relatively high compared to gold. During this period, the ratio dropped to nearly 6 but never rose above 16.

  When comparing the two commodities, it’s worth remembering that the crude oil market is around 10 times larger than that of gold, making it the largest commodity market in the world.

  If you enjoyed this graphic, make sure to check out this graphic that shows the top countries by natural resource value.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 18:00

• Tucker: "This Is The Most Evil Thing I've Seen In My Lifetime"
  Tucker: “This Is The Most Evil Thing I’ve Seen In My Lifetime”

  Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

  During a discussion with president-elect Trump’s former Office of Management and Budget Director, Russ Vought, Tucker Carlson posited that the outgoing administration is attempting to saddle Trump with a global conflict.

  

  “If you doubt how serious the opposition is to the public, not just to Trump, but to the majority of the country that voted for him, They’re trying to leave him with World War III on the way out,” Carlson urged.

  Russia is furious about the Biden administration lifting restrictions on use of US developed long range missiles, and Putin has repeatedly stated that such a move would mean NATO countries are at war with Russia.

  Carlson continued, “I can’t imagine a more desperate or evil thing for Tony Blinken, who I think is desperate and evil, in my view, to do. Leave him with a war?”

  “A lame-duck president trying to start a war with the world’s largest nuclear power, Russia. What do you make of that?” Carlson asked Vought.

  Vought responded, “It’s incredibly insidious, and then add to the fact that he can’t put two sentences together and he is largely not in control of his own government,” referring to Joe Biden.

  “You have almost an unelected president with individuals behind the scenes doing this,” he continued, further asserting “It doesn’t surprise me, though. I mean, these are the same people that have weaponized the Department of Justice and the lawfare.”

  “I have a colleague, Jeff Clark, who they’re trying to disbar because of the care he showed on behalf of the president in dealing with voter integrity and election fraud after 2020,” Vought further noted.

  “The system has thrown everything at the warriors who are on the field. You’re seeing that with Tulsi, you’re seeing that with Matt Gaetz,” he pointed out, adding “Why is all of this stuff being thrown at him slanderously?”

  The full exchange is below:

  Russ Vought ran OMB under Trump the first time, and hopefully will again. Here’s what he learned about how the deep state actually works.

  (0:00) What is the Office of Management and Budget?
  (7:57) How Our Intel Agencies Overrule the President
  (29:21) What Will the Congressional… pic.twitter.com/vl9au8UwU7

  — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) November 18, 2024

  Carlson also discussed the spiralling escalation in Ukraine with journalist Glenn Greenwald, noting that the decision to escalate the conflict with ATACMS missiles is “the most evil thing I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

  Greenwald also pointed out that Ukraine doesn’t have the expertise to use the guidance system for the weapons and therefore NATO countries and the US would be actively involved in launching them at targets inside Russia.

  Permanent Washington decides nuclear war is preferable to Donald Trump. Glenn Greenwald on the nihilism of our ruling class.

  (0:00) Permanent Washington Dangerously Misunderstands Vladimir Putin
  (23:06) We Are on the Verge of Nuclear War
  (28:11) The Concerted Effort to Control… pic.twitter.com/GOJDslU23W

  — Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) November 20, 2024

  As we highlighted yesterday, NATO member state Sweden is sending out pamphlets advising citizens how they should prepare for nuclear war in the wake of the escalation.

  *  *  *

  Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 17:40

• Federal Police Accuse Jair Bolsonaro Of Plotting "Violent Overthrow" Of President Lula
  Federal Police Accuse Jair Bolsonaro Of Plotting “Violent Overthrow” Of President Lula

  In a shocking development, but perhaps coming as no surprise to some (who have long warned “Brazil’s Donald Trump” would be target of an avalanche of further political persecution from the left once out of office) Brazil’s federal police on Thursday announced a formal call for the the indictment of ex-president Jair Bolsonaro over a 2022 “coup” plot.

  Supposedly this involved an organized criminal network which Bolsonaro directed to prevent current president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva from taking office. The police allege Bolsonaro and 36 other officials and individuals plotted the “violent overthrow of the democratic state.”

  

  “Federal police concluded on Thursday the investigation into the existence of a criminal organization that acted in a coordinated way in 2022 in an attempt to maintain the then-president in power,” the statement said.

  “The final report has been sent to the Supreme Court with the request that 37 individuals [including the ex-president] be indicted for the crimes of the violent overthrow of the democratic state, coup d’etat and criminal organization.”

  An initial social media statement from Bolsonaro responded simply, “The fight begins at the Attorney General’s office.” It’s as yet unclear whether the attorney general will take up the case, which could bring at least 12 years in prison if the ex-president is convicted.

  Bolsonaro has also said he’s the victim of a state-backed “persecution” and that he’s innocent of all allegations. Police allege the criminal conspiracy occurred in the last several months of Bolsonaro’s 2019-2022 presidency.

  Current reports have left open whether the plotting had anything to do with the later “insurrection” which rocked central government buildings Brasilia on January 8, 2023 – involving angry pro-Bolsonaro demonstrators breaking into the Congress building, the Supreme Court, and also storming the presidential palace. American and some international commentators had at the time characterized it as Bolsonaro’s own “J6 riot”.

  

  Bolsonaro is already facing other more minor investigations and charges, including allegedly falsifying his Covid-19 vaccination record. This new allegation by the federal police is the most serious one yet.

  The NY Times details that “The charges are the culmination of a sweeping two-year investigation in which police raided homes and offices, arrested senior aides to Mr. Bolsonaro and secured confessions and plea deals with people involved in the plot.”

  “The announcement comes two days after four members of an elite military unit, including a former top aide to Mr. Bolsonaro, were arrested and accused of planning to assassinate Mr. Lula shortly before he took office in January 2023,” the report indicates further.

  . @BRASILWIRE reports that another of the arrested is Rodrigo Bezerra de Azevedo, a former instructor at The School of the Americas — the infamous US army school in Georgia that trains Latin Americans how to torture people and carry out coups. pic.twitter.com/eOX3oXyHaf

  — Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) November 20, 2024

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

  So ultimately, the police are claiming a direct assassination plot targeting Lula. Already Bolsonaro has been barred from running for office for eight years, after in June 2023 Brazil’s highest electoral court says that he cannot run for or hold any public office until 2030. This means he’ll have to sit out the 2026 election regardless of if these coup allegations stick.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 17:20

• Will Democrats Finally Learn A Lesson?
  Will Democrats Finally Learn A Lesson?

  Authored by Daniel Lipinski via RealClearPolitics,

  Here we go again. Voters have elected Donald Trump president while giving Republicans majorities in the House and Senate. And once again, Democrats are asking themselves, “What do we do now?” When this occurred eight years ago, I was a Democrat serving in the House of Representatives. At that time, some of my colleagues who had seen many traditional Democrats in their district vote for Trump spoke out. They said that working-class voters were tired of feeling looked down upon by Democrats because of policies they supported, what they believed, or even who they were. So when Hillary Clinton was caught claiming that half of Trump’s supporters were a “basket of deplorables: racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic,” she was seen to be confirming this, helping to doom her campaign.

  

  But instead of changing course, Democrats doubled down by embracing a more ardent progressivism and demanding that everyone follow. Primary challenges by progressives rose dramatically. My experience was emblematic. Working-class voters were my base because I focused on bread-and-butter issues critical to struggling families, and I was not supportive of progressive social issues. After surviving in 2018, I lost in 2020 to a progressive challenger bankrolled by millions from national groups. At the same time, candidates for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020 were stumbling over each other, trying to get further to the left on a variety of issues. Decriminalizing illegal border crossings, funding sex-change operations for prisoners and detained illegal immigrants, and defunding the police became party dogma, further alienating the working class.

  Thanks to bumbling by President Trump and congressional Republicans, however, Democrats won the House in 2018 and captured the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2020.  Progressives felt vindicated and were emboldened to continue their agenda with a self-righteous swagger. President Biden, whose victory was made possible by a reputation he had built over five decades as a moderate deal-maker, foolishly embraced progressives to prepare to run for reelection in 2024. Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, who won in a state that gave Clinton and Biden less than 30% of the vote, was hounded out of the party by progressives who should have been thankful for every vote he gave them.

  In 2024, Republicans handed a massive in-kind gift to their opponents when they nominated the man most responsible for the Democratic Party’s election victories the past six years. Democrats were also given a unique opportunity to install a nominee who did not have to pander to progressives to win primaries. Perhaps the party had no other choice but Vice President Kamala Harris, who had taken some very progressive positions when running for the nomination in 2019. But with five long years having passed, she could have tried to make a clean and hard break from these. Instead, she chose to walk away from some of these positions softly, never seizing the opportunity to claim that a new working-class friendly perspective led her to change. Harris sealed her fate when she delivered a too-clever-by-half professorial response – “I’ll follow the law” – when asked whether she still supported taxpayer-funded sex-change operations for prisoners and detained illegal aliens. Donald Trump went on to become just the second Republican in 36 years to win the popular vote, thanks in part to significant support from non-white working-class voters, particularly Hispanics. 

  As Democrats try to figure out what to do next, it is folly to believe that all the party needs is “clarity of message,” as former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) recently claimed. And while it is good to propose new policies directed at helping those left behind economically, as Rep. Ro Khanna (CA) did, it won’t solve the political problem. But buried in that post-election piece by Khanna was one sentence that gets much closer to what Democrats must do: “For our economic message to be heard, we must show common sense on issues of crime and the safety of families and not shame or cancel those who may have honest disagreements with us on a particular social issue.” Rep. Seth Moulton (MA) expressed a similar sentiment when he said, “We lost, in part, because we shame and belittle too many opinions held by too many voters, and that needs to stop.” 

  While these are hopeful signs, Democrats must do more than pay lip service to change. After all, a few years ago, Khanna – who is now positioning for a presidential run – was publicly urging our Democratic House colleagues to cancel me from Congress because of honest issue disagreements. And last week, when Moulton dared to give a specific example of not wanting his daughters “getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete,” he was lambasted by multiple Democratic officials, including his state’s governor and one of his congressional colleagues. Nowhere did I see any Democrat have the courage to support Moulton’s commonsense concern or even defend him for being willing to raise an issue with significant public resonance.

  Voters are not fools, especially working-class voters who continue to feel that the country is going in the wrong direction and that they always get the short end of the stick. They may not watch day-to-day politics closely, but they understand who and what the Democratic Party now seems to really value. Only time will tell if the party has finally learned a lesson.

  Daniel Lipinski is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He represented the Third District of Illinois in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2005 to 2021.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 17:00

• The List: Policy Actions To Save America From Globalism Before Time Runs Out
  The List: Policy Actions To Save America From Globalism Before Time Runs Out

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  It’s been a wild ride. After years of near total leftist control of every significant social and governmental institution in the US and abroad the American people have said enough is enough. The progressives have once again been slapped with the ultimate lesson of our era – Get Woke, Go Broke. This time they’re not just broke; they’re broken.

  

  I don’t think I’ve seen such an electoral bloodbath in my lifetime (maybe the Reagan landslide in 1984, but I was only a child). The conservatives control the Oval Office, the Senate, the House and the Supreme Court. Regardless of what you might think of Trump, what’s important is that he ran his campaign on anti-woke and anti-globalism and the US population voted for that agenda en masse.

  The American people want an end to the madness of the leftist/globalist regime. They want an end to establishment corruption. They want an end to US involvement in foreign conflicts. They want the woke indoctrination of their children to stop. They want an end to open borders. They want an end to perpetual debt spending and inflation. And, they want reassurance that events like the attempted covid coup against our constitutional liberties will never happen again.

  Over the past several months I have been predicting a Trump election win based on the clear sociopolitical shift in popular sentiment. However, my concern has always been that Trump will not make good on his campaign promises, either because he is being thwarted by Neo-Cons within his own team or because he did not intend to follow through in the first place. We all saw what happened after 2016 – The status quo was mostly maintained.

  To be fair, in 2016 Trump’s team was mostly chosen for him and that team was comprised of many snakes in the grass. This time around I have a bit more optimism. Trump’s coalition is significantly better than his first term and many of the people involved seem to be dedicated to their particular cause. If this is the case and Trump really means to change things for the better, I have a few ideas on how he can ensure that America never again deviates into the path of globalism.

  Some of these actions have already been promoted by the Trump Administration in recent days, some of them have not. Obviously none of these changes are easy but they can be done with the proper enthusiasm and pressure from the American people applied to their representatives in the Senate and Congress. Here’s what we can do as a country to keep our society free and prosperous well into the future.

  1) Recess Appointments For Cabinet

  The first time Trump tried to appoint his cabinet the amount of Senate interference that took place caused delays of almost 4 months, and that was with appointees that represented no threat to the status quo. This time around it is clear that Neo-Cons within the Senate will work with Democrats to outright reject choices like RFK Jr and Matt Gaetz. They WILL try to sabotage any nominee that presents a legitimate threat to the establishment order.

  With this is mind, and per the Constitution, Trump has the option to call a recess of the Senate and make his appointments while they are away and without their approval. There is also a little known rule that allows him to force Congress to adjourn. Candidates for the Senate majority leader position all agreed to support recess appointments before they were voted on, which means there should not be any interference to a call of recess from Trump. Multiple presidents have used this emergency option to fill their cabinets.

  2) Federal Voter ID Law

  It’s seems like a no-brainer. Every state (except one) that the Democrats won in the 2024 election was a state with no voter ID laws. That’s not a coincidence. Correlation is not always causation, but it’s highly suspicious none-the-less. Many developed nations around the world have strict ID laws when it comes to elections. Why do we not have them in the US?

  With the advent of electronic ballots and large scale mail in ballots, a voter ID requirement is more important than ever to prevent election fraud. One of Trump’s top concerns after entering office in 2025 is to pass a federal voter ID requirement for all future elections. This cannot be left to flounder for years, it must be done by 2026.

  3) Total Border Control And Mass Deportation – The Details

  One of the key agendas of globalism is the forced establishment of open borders in the western world, along with mass migrations of third-world aliens cor cultural saturation and replacement. The goal is to destroy the west from within and then replace it with am economically Marxist and morally ambiguous civilization. Stopping this scheme will require aggressively enforced border laws and deportation laws. This requires multiple steps…

  Immediately Establish Texas-Style Border Controls

  Despite constant interference from the Biden Administration, the state of Texas and governor Greg Abbott have been incredibly effective in stopping illegal border crossings using expanded patrols and razor wire barriers. Encounters with illegals on the Texas border have dropped by 86% through Operation Lone Star in the span of a year. That’s impressive. Texas methods should be used across the entire border.

  Increased Fines Against Companies Hiring Illegal Immigrants

  This is a strategy being used by some European nations and it makes sense; a lot of illegals jump the border because they know there’s under the table jobs waiting for them. Trump must make it financially untenable for companies to hire migrants without proper work visas, and greatly increasing fines is the best way to do this.

  100% Tariffs On Mexico Until They Secure Their Own Borders

  The Mexican government is absolutely corrupt and often uses the US border as a pressure valve to get rid of their poor and their criminals. Instead of fixing the problems within their own country they export those problems to America. This needs to stop.

  End All Asylum Requests From Third World Countries

  Until the immigration problem is solved the asylum loophole needs to be closed. Save for a few citizens from countries where very real asylum protections are needed (like oppressed dissidents from China or North Korea), there’s no need to take in most of these people and their asylum claims are fraudulent.

  Increase Efficiency Of Immigrant Worker Visa Program

  Democrats often argue that America cannot survive without migrant workers. I say this is a lie designed to prevent legitimate immigration reform, but if there really is work that needs to be done in our country and migrants are somehow the only people that can do it, then we can have both.

  If Trump streamlines the work visa program to speed up the process while vetting applicants, then we can have controlled borders AND migrant workers. To pay for increased efficiency of the program, double the application fee and reduce their legal work period in the US to 1 year or less.

  Mass Deportations Of Illegals

  This was a key plank of the Trump campaign and it looks like he plans to make it happen. Starting with ALL the migrants that entered the US illegally in the past four years and all those relocated through Biden’s shady visa program. This can be achieved by cutting off existing subsidies to migrants, fines for companies that hire illegals, citizenship verification for home buying or home rentals, ending federal subsidies to Democrat sanctuary cities, etc. Ultimately, most illegals will leave the country on their own.

  4) Shut Down Globalist NGOs

  Globalist NGOs are the primary source of corruption within the US government and our society at large. NGO’s have all the rights of individual citizens with none of the limitations. They can generate billions of dollars for influence campaigns. They can lobby politicians (bribe them) to get legislation put in place. They can use their incredible financial resources to fund activist movements and create civil unrest from thin air. And, they can even fund programs to control education and encourage mass illegal immigration.

  NGOs should be banned from lobbying. And, any NGO’s caught engaging in the funding of woke propaganda in schools, violent activist groups or illegal immigration efforts should be immediately shut down. Some NGOs feed on government funding (like George Soros’ Open Society Foundation) while others are privately funded (like the Ford Foundation). If they are receiving subsidies, that money should be cut off. Stopping the operations of globalist NGOs is imperative to saving western civilization.

  5) Immediate Peace Negotiations On Ukraine

  Here’s the bottom line – Ukraine is losing the war against Russia. Their eastern front is collapsing due to attrition and in another year or less Russia WILL take the entire country. The war is also being managed by proxy by NATO. We are swiftly plunging into open conflict between the east and the west. This must stop. Even if the situation doesn’t go nuclear, a world war at this time would cause a catastrophic economic collapse, for the US, for Europe and most of the East. Only the globalists want this to happen.

  Ukraine is an irrelevant territory not worth fighting over. Americans don’t want to fight over it. Europeans don’t want to fight over it and I doubt the average Russian wants to fight over it. Vladimir Zelensky must be forced to accept the loss of the Donbas to Russia. A DMZ must be established and the fighting must end for the sake of the world.

  6) Investigate Covid Corruption

  There should be an in-depth investigation into the Biden Administration’s handling of the Covid mandates, including the attempted censorship of information contrary to the government narrative. There should be a real investigation into the viral laboratories in Wuhan, China and Anthony Fauci’s involvement with those labs to develop coronaviruses using gain of function research. Americans want answers.

  7) National Ban On CBDCs And The Cashless Economy

  In tandem with open borders, globalists at the IMF and BIS have been quietly building a massive global central bank digital currency framework (CBDCs). The erasure of nationally controlled economies and currencies would be required in order to create a globally centralized economy with a single world currency. And, in order to force populations to accept such a system, the globalists need CBDCs.

  With a cashless economy in place, elites within governments and central banks would have ultimate power to socially engineer public behavior. If they can take away your money any time they please, it’s much harder to rebel against them. If they can program caveats into CBDCs to prevent spending on certain goods (like meat or gas, for example) then they can pressure the populace into accepting carbon controls and other draconian measures. CBDCs are the end of freedom as we know it.

  8) Economic Stop-Gap Plan

  I have outlined options for preventing a total economic collapse in previous articles, so I won’t go in-depth here. I will quickly list some of the most important measures that could be taken to revitalize the struggling system. Many of them are designed to bypass the Federal Reserve.

  • End The Income Tax For 99% Of The Population – Tax The 1%

  • End Property Taxes On Single Family Homes – Only Tax Owners With Multiple Properties

  • Remove All Illegal Immigrants From The US – This Will Trigger A Drop In Property Prices And Rent

  • Create Subsidy Incentives For Married Couples With Children – Home Loans, Education

  • Bring Back Technical Apprenticeship Programs – Increase Technical Workers Without College

  • Use Tariffs, But Also Backstop Tariffs With Domestic Production – Focus On High Quality Goods

  • Domestically Manufacture High Quality Goods With Long Life To Help Fight Inflation

  • Issue A Gold/Silver Backed Treasury Bond – Offer Metals Backed Savings Accounts

  • Institute A Moratorium On Debt Ceiling Increases Until Government Deficit Spending And Debt Are Under Control

  There’s a lot of work that needs to be done to save the economy in the long run but the options above could help to boost the American worker and consumer and stall a breakdown. Currently, the US faces the highest national debt, the highest interest payments and the highest consumer debt in the nation’s history. We are also still in the middle of a stagflationary crisis. Something dramatic must be done soon, before it’s too late.

  Bonus Policy: Institute A Mandatory IQ Test And Mental Acuity Test For All Political Candidates And Leaders

  It’s hard to test a person for moral compass but you can at least test intelligence. A candidate should not be prevented from running for office because of low IQ, but I believe the public has a right to know who they’re voting for. If they decide they don’t want a low IQ leader, then that should be up to them.

  By extension, independent mental acuity testing should be a regular occurrence. As we saw with Joe Biden, the establishment will happily hide the mental decline of a politician if it serves their interests. The people have a right to know.

  No doubt hundreds of other policy ideas could be added to the list above, but these actions are a solid start.  If Trump instituted even half of these solutions the US could be saved from perhaps the worst existential crisis in the nation’s history and globalism would be on the ropes.

  *  *  *

  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
  Thu, 11/21/2024 – 16:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest