Today’s News 23rd January 2024

• The Globalists' New Weapon
  The Globalists’ New Weapon

  Authored by Robert Malone via The Brownstone Institute,

  On the heels of Davos (World Economic Forum) week, the MSM hysterical propaganda push from the globalists regarding “Disease X” is in full swing.

  

  Just take a gander at a few of the Corporate Mockingbird Media headlines…

  

  Almost every major news outlet in the world has run black propaganda pieces about Disease X. Why do I write black propaganda – because the “experts” aren’t actually named, the peer-reviewed papers supporting the thesis of “a deadly pathogen causing 20 times more deaths than COVID-19” or “killing 20 times more people than COVID-19” or “killing 50 million people” are non-existent. Yet these narratives are all headline news in mainstream media.

  This is just another exercise in globalized messaging to support the WHO (World Economic Forum) and WEF-pushed narrative that governments must pour billions into the largest transnational corporations in the world to “cure” a non-existent disease.

  What isn’t black propaganda but rather grey propaganda is that this fearporn is being pushed by the WEF and the WHO. WHO officials are most of the featured speakers and panelists on “Disease X” at the Davos meeting this week. From the WEF website:

  World leaders are set to discuss preparation for the next pandemic at the World Economic Forum in Davos… 

  Officials from across the globe will be heading to the annual meeting in Switzerland, with the risk posed by what’s known as Disease X one of the key items on the agenda.

  The meeting will address new warnings from the World Health Organisation (WHO) that the unidentified disease could kill 20 times more people than the coronavirus pandemic.

  The big push from the WHO and the WEF is that “Disease X” will be zoonotic. That money to surveil every speck of land in the world is the path forward to stopping “Disease X.” What a coincidence that the brand new CIA/intelligence agency designated to run the National Counterproliferation and Biosecurity Center to surveil pathogens intends to do just that. And that this happens to be intended to run in parallel with the CIA mission to surveil the world for other (nefarious?) purposes.

  According to the WHO, Disease X is all about One Health solutions. The World Health organization describes One Health as the following:

  Government officials, researchers and workers across sectors at the local, national, regional and global levels should implement joint responses to health threats. This includes developing shared databases and surveillance across different sectors, and identifying new solutions that address the root causes and links between risks and impacts.

  Basically One Health gives public health officials total control and surveillance across AI, the internet, agriculture, climate change, public health, medical systems, ecological sites, urban, and rural areas. It can encompass just about anything. It also values animal and plant life as equal to human life. The WHO goes on:

  investigating the impact of human activity on the environment and wildlife habitats, and how this drives disease threats. Critical areas include food production and distribution, urbanization and infrastructure development, international travel and trade, activities that lead to biodiversity loss and climate change, and those that put increased pressure on the natural resource base – all of which can lead to the emergence of zoonotic diseases.

  We have seen this playbook before…

  The International Journal of Arts of Social Science published the paper titled: “The World Economic Forum, “The Lancet,” and COVID-19 Knowledge Gatekeeping.” That paper is seminal in understanding just how corrupting the WEF as well as the WHO have become to scientific journals, scientists, universities, and media (fact-checkers).

  

  Abstract:

  The study investigated the links that the World Economic Forum has established with organizations and persons linked to the Lancet article titled Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19. Guided by the Gatekeeping Theory, appended by the Political Economy of Knowledge Theory, the study implemented an integrative literature review (textual synthesis). 

  Relevant online pieces of literature were sampled through a snowballing technique using the Google search engine platform to elucidate on the funding and ownership of the Lancet, and the 27 authors of the said article and their affiliations with higher learning institutions vis-à-vis their connections with the World Economic Forum to highlight their implications to gatekeeping and COVID-19 knowledge production in journal publications, particularly that of the Lancet.

  Results revealed that the WEF has penetrated all knowledge institutions that benefit from the natural COVID-19 virus origins hypothesis and the silencing of contrarian hypotheses, including the lab-leak narrative. A model of the WEF knowledge production complex against the lab-leak hypothesis was presented to visually represent the influence of the WEF on scientific journal gatekeeping in the context of the Lancet.

  This is the paper being discussed:

  

  The latter was the scientific paper that stopped the “spread” of “misinformation” that Cvoid-19 could have originated from a lab. This paper was crucial in shutting down “lab-leak” investigations at the WHO and in the US. In fact, the WHO Report published on February 2021 on the origins of the virus concluded that the lab-leak hypothesis was “Extremely unlikely.” They later scuttled a second investigation, because WHO officials claimed China was uncooperative – while never even admitting that the US may have had a significant role in both funding and directing the Wuhan laboratory research program.

  Back to that original 2020 Lancet paper, the 27 WEF affiliated authors included both Peter Daszak and Jeremy Farrar (Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization since 2023. He was previously the director of The Wellcome Trust from 2013 to 2023).

  From the 2020 Lancet paper:

  The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.

  What Brian Bantugan, the author of “The World Economic Forum, ‘The Lancet’, and COVID-19 Knowledge Gatekeeping” discovered is shocking. The publishers, the authors, the affiliated universities, the NGOs, and the funding sources – are almost all directly linked to the WEF. They all continued to suppress information about the lab leak through out the pandemic. He writes:

  Through content analysis, by way of a matrix of analysis, the study established the connections that exist between The Lancet and the WEF. The study argued through the Gatekeeping and Political Economy of Knowledge Production that the connections found between The Lancet and the WEF suggest likely collusion that led to the marginalization of the lab leak origin narrative as early as February 2020 and a network of disinformation within established but invisible networks of knowledge production.

  Furthermore, scientific journals used what is called “gatekeeping” to withhold information.

  According to author Brian Bantugan:

  The term “gatekeeping” was coined by Kurt Lewin to refer to a process of blocking “unwanted or useless things by using a gate” (communicationtheory.org, n.d., para. 2). The theory asserts that “(t)he Gatekeeper decides what information should move to group or individual and what information should not” (para. 3). According to Shoemaker and Vos (2009), gatekeeping is the “… process (that) determines not only which information is selected, but also what the content and nature of messages… will be” (para. 1). Initially, it was used to describe the process of news production in mass media involving “selecting, writing, editing, positioning, scheduling, repeating, and otherwise massaging information to become news” (Vos & Reese, 2009, in Omlette à la Chantal, 2021).

  First off, the Lancet is owned by Elsevier which is owned by the WEF partner RELX Group. This fact, by the way, is not transparent on the Lancet website.

  But it gets worse.

  Some examples of this effort were Elsevier Novel Coronavirus Information Center, Center, the Wiley COVID-19 Resources and News portal, the Springer Nature COVID-19 resources centre, and the Frontiers Coronoravirus Knowledge Hub (Matias-Guiu, 2020). Elsevier is owned by WEF partner RELX Group. John Wiley & Sons published Schwab‟s Stakeholder Capitalism (WEF, 2022). Springer Nature is owned by WEF partner Holtzbrinck Publishing Group. Frontiers was founded by WEF-affiliated Henry Markram (WEF, 2022).

  So, all of these publishers have direct ties to the WEF… and yet they have been the gatekeepers of what got published during Covid-19. Including publishing the original animal origins paper.

  <Of note, Frontiers in Pharmacology (founded by WEF-affiliated Henry Markram) was the publication that back-tracked on publishing any early treatment for Covid-19 studies. I was editor of the special edition for early treatment. When this happened, I and the other four senior editors all resigned.>

  But the paper goes on to document that almost all of the 27 Lancet authors and their universities have strong affiliations to the WEF. The details of those relations are laid in a series of tables, which can be found here. But the paper goes on:

  The fact that the authors of the controversial article in The Lancet are all quite involved with high- profile organizations like the UN-FAO, WHO, and the USAID reveals much about why they decided to support the actions that led to the immediate “conspiratorialization” of other hypotheses on the virus origins, and mass immunizations they heavily promoted not long after the lockdowns were in place all over the world.

  Assuming that the UN-FAO, WHO, and the USAID operate within a seamless system, embodied by the One Health approach they championed years before the pandemic happened, it would not be difficult to think that the editorial processes linked to and supported by their system will work towards their and the WEF’s benefit and advantage.

  The data show that the WEF is part of the micro and macro environments that shape editorial gatekeeping. There is a playing field biased towards their system and only ideas that promote their system will have a chance to be heard. That the lab-leak hypothesis is silenced is what the article of the 27 authors may have likely aimed to ensure. Figure 1 below shows the network supporting the natural origins hypothesis of COVID-19.

  Figure 1 below, based on the data above <tables found in the article>, shows the complex relationships on which the WEF has firmly established itself. Through the influence of the WHO and UN-FAO, WEF is not only shaping WEF- affiliated higher education institutions but also those that look up them as models.

  However, recent developments have shown that it is not only the Lancet that was rendered questionable by its decision to privilege the work of the 27 authors affiliated with WEF-linked universities, resulting in the marginalization of competing but equally valid theories on the origin of the Covid-19 virus, but also NatureMedicine (Campbell, 2022) which is also under an organization affiliated with the WEF.

  Clearly, gatekeeping in scientific journals is seen here as equally vulnerable to the influence of the political and economic elite, like the rest of mainstream and social media. Given that leaked and redacted documents linking Fauci to some of the authors in the controversial Lancet article have emerged (showing that some of the authors were communicating directly with him before the article was published) (Peak Prosperity, 2022), and the web of relationships in Figure 1, it is not surprising that the controversial article was released in no time. “Scientific” gatekeeping and “truth” -making seems to be favoring the interest of the WEF, above all

  

  Put together with the data in Tables 2 and 3, one can infer that the WEF has penetrated all the institutions that shape the minds of people, through their policies and programs.

  The top executive editors of the Lancet, its owners, and funding agencies aside, the WEF has undeniably positioned itself to influence future leaders, policymakers, and knowledge gatekeepers like the Lancet, especially those in prestigious schools that can only be accessed by the privileged and the wealthy. It is not difficult to think that the interest of the WEF would be top-of-mind among the students and graduates of such universities compared to the multitude who have no interest in the workings of the WEF at all.

  Right now, Disease X and One Health are being propagandized in the mainstream media as being the solution to save the world from a massive die-off` – this propaganda is being driven by the WEF in collaboration with the WHO. The EcoHealth Alliance is also at the forefront of the One Health initiative and has collected millions of dollars for their research projects into One Health. The Davos meeting is being used to prop up support for the WHO Pandemic treaty that removes national sovereignty over public health by promoting.

  The WEF and the WHO envision solutions to the imaginary “Disease X” that involve more loss of freedoms. They want control over food systems, more money, more censorship, more surveillance, control over the climate change agenda – all in the name of public health. But even worse, they want all this codified in a document that turns over national sovereignty to the WHO.

  The WEF and the WHO know that One Health and the pandemic agreement are their best pathways to more world control.

  Without ever consulting sovereign nations, the WHO has placed the global “rights in nature” movement on par or above humans. This is why the One Health model must be rejected.

  Listen below to The World Economic Forum’s 2024 Discussion “Preparing For Disease X” as Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus, the WHO Director General, speaks about the Pandemic Agreement:

  To have better preparedness and to address disease X we have Pandemic Agreement. The Pandemic Agreement can bring all the experience and all the challenges we have faced all in one…This is a common global interest and very narrow national interest should not come in the way. Of course, national interest is natural but it is NARROW national interest that can be difficult and affecting the negotiations as we speak…

  Dr. Tedros, Davos 2024

  This is the face of the enemy.

  This particular embodiment of enemy comes in the form of the WEF and the WHO.

  They now control the buttons for the mainstream media, the fact-checkers, academic institutions, the publishers of the scientific journals, and heads of state.

  The list of who they own or have bought off is almost endless.

  The fight in front of us is vast. Now is not the time to give up.

  *  *  *

  Republished from the author’s Substack

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 23:40

• Visualizing Racial Diversity Across All US States
  Visualizing Racial Diversity Across All US States

  As of 2020, there was a 61.1% likelihood that two people chosen at random will be from different ethnicities in America.

  This number comes from the Census Bureau’s Diversity Index, which ranges from 0% to 100% per jurisdiction. A value closer to 0% means that a population is more homogenous, while 100% means that a population has more racial diversity.

  This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu and Dorothy Nuefeld, maps the most diverse states in the U.S., based on the most recently available data.

  

  Racial Diversity Across U.S. States

  Below, we rank states based on their Diversity Index score in 2020. Each score represents the probability that two people chosen at random will be of different racial or ethnic backgrounds:

  

  In Hawaii, the most diverse U.S. state, 44% of marriages are interracial. Overall, the Hawaiian population is 36.5% Asian, 21.5% white, 10.2% Native Hawaiian or Pacific, and 9.5% Latino or Hispanic.

  Meanwhile, California ranks as the second most-diverse state in the country. As the largest ethnic population in the state, Hispanics and Latinos make up 39.4% of residents, followed by 34.7% white, and 15.1% Asian.

  In terms of counties, the Aleutians East Borough in Alaska is the most diverse in the country. The least diverse state is Maine, and it also ranks as the oldest state in the country by median age.

  Diversity in America, meanwhile, has increased roughly 6% according to the Diversity Index since 2010.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 23:20

• Iran Mobilizes To Drive US Troops Out Of Iraq
  Iran Mobilizes To Drive US Troops Out Of Iraq

  Via Middle East Eye,

  When Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed al-Sudani arrived in New York City in September for the UN General Assembly, a delicate truce was in balance between the two foreign powers that loom over Baghdad. Iraqi paramilitaries, backed by Iran, had frozen their attacks on US troops in the country. Iraq’s new leader arrived in New York City amid the lull. He was feted on a circuit of swanky receptions with western businessmen and diplomats on the sidelines of the General Assembly, as he pitched Iraq’s oil-rich but corruption-riddled economy as an investment destination.

  Four months later, the Iraqi leader is condemning Iran and the US for launching deadly strikes in his country and his investment pitch to the global elite at Davos Switzerland is overshadowed by his call for the US military and its coalition partners to leave Iraq. Since the Hamas-led attacks on October 7 and the war in Gaza, Iranian-backed militias have launched at least 70 attacks on US forces in Iraq.

  

  In early January, the US hit back with its most powerful response yet, launching a drone strike in Baghdad that killed Mushtaq Taleb al-Saidi, also known as Abu Taqwa, a senior commander in the Popular Mobilization Units, an umbrella organisation of Iraqi state-funded and Iran-aligned, Shia militias.

  Baghdad hit out at the strike as “a violation of Iraq’s sovereignty”. But no sooner was Iraq chastiszing the US for the strike, when Iran launched a barrage of ballistic missiles into the Iraqi city of Erbil, killing four people, including a prominent Kurdish real estate developer and his one-year-old daughter.

  Baghdad slammed Tehran’s allegation that the house struck in Erbil was an Israeli Mossad “spy center”. At Davos, Sudani called the strike “a clear act of aggression”. Iraq has recalled its ambassador to Tehran and says it will file a complaint at the UN Security Council.

  The dual rebukes of Iran and the US underscore the tightrope Baghdad is walking as the war in Gaza seeps out beyond the besieged Mediterranean enclave’s borders. Across the region, Tehran and Washington are flexing their muscles, vying to outflank each other in a deadly proxy war. The shadowy conflict has taken on different flavours that reflect local and geopolitical realities.

  In Lebanon, the US is trying to de-escalate fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, with both sides wary of being dragged into a wider conflict. Meanwhile, Iran-backed Houthi fighters in Yemen have made themselves targets of US air strikes as a response to their attacks on commercial shipping.

  But the conflict is perhaps at its most intense, and complex, in Iraq. “The Iraqi government is weak, divided and fundamentally can’t control conflict on its borders from foreign powers,” Renad Mansour, director of the Iraq Initiative at the Chatham House think-tank, told Middle East Eye.

  “It emerged as the playground of choice, where the US and Iran can fight it out. The risk of escalation here is lower for both. And they can show force and compete for influence.”

  Syria, through Iraq 

  For Iran and its Iraqi allies who dominate Baghdad’s government, the war in Gaza has presented an opportunity to drive home their goal of expelling the US from Iraq. A former senior US official and an Iraqi official told MEE that there has been increased coordination between Iranian-backed paramilitaries in Iraq and Lebanese Hezbollah with that aim. According to media reports, a top Hezbollah official, Mohammad Hussein al-Kawtharani, arrived in Baghdad earlier this month to oversee the operations.

  Iran-backed “Islamic Resistance in Iraq” published a video “targeting Ain Al Assad AB with a UAV”.
  Looks quite similar to the one that was used for attacking Erbil before. pic.twitter.com/w3WY4TiJZt

  — Aleph א (@no_itsmyturn) January 22, 2024

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

  “Instead of attacking Israel, what we are seeing in Iraq are more attacks on US forces,” Andrew Tabler, a former Middle East director at the White House’s National Security Council, told MEE. The pressure building in Baghdad to expel US troops has been underlined by Sudani’s public calls for an exit since the assassination of Abu Taqwa. If he follows through, experts say it would present a strategic victory for Iran.

  Roughly 2,500 US troops are in Iraq to advise and train local forces as part of a coalition to defeat the Islamic State militant group. They are mainly based in Baghdad and northern Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region. The latter is especially important for providing logistical support to 900 US troops in northeastern Syria.

  The US’s legal justification for being in Syria is also based on its agreement with Baghdad. “Erbil is crucial for supporting Syria,” Tabler said, referring to the capital of Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan region. “The US needs to have the ability to move troops and supplies on the overland route between the Iraqi frontier and Syria.”

  Speaking in Davos on Thursday, Sudani said that “ISIS is no longer a threat to the Iraqi people,” and that “the end of the international coalition mission is a necessity for the security and stability of Iraq”.

  The Biden administration and Baghdad were already negotiating the future of the US-led coalition in Iraq before the war in Gaza erupted, a former senior US official told MEE, but the war changed Washington’s approach to the talks. “It doesn’t look good to be discussing a drawdown when the Iranians are attacking US soldiers with missiles and drones. So there is a sense from the administration that we need to pause these talks.”

  While the US continues to conduct small-scale raids against IS cells in the region, Washington views its military footprint in northeast Syria as a key counterweight to Iran and Russia, which back the Bashar al-Assad government in Syria. “The US mission in northeast Syria depends on Iraq,” Joel Rayburn, a former US special envoy for Syria, told MEE.

  ‘Same foxhole’

  The US military presence in Iraq has ebbed and flowed since the invasion 20 years ago. In 2011, the US pulled all of its forces from Iraq, only for them to return in 2014 at the invitation of Baghdad to fight IS. But in that period, Shia paramilitaries backed by Iran emerged as the most powerful armed groups in Iraq. Trained and funded by Iran, the Popular Mobilisation Units also fought IS.

  Some groups, like Kata’ib Hezbollah, have been at the forefront of attacks on the US in Iraq. The group’s founder, Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes, was killed in the same US strike that assassinated the Iranian commander, Qassem Soleimani.

  

  Today, the PMUs boast more than 150,000 fighters. They maintain vast patronage networks and many are incorporated into Iraq’s official state security apparatus, with the Iraqi government paying their salaries. They have been accused of kidnappings, assassinations and suppressing peaceful protests.

  The inability of successive Iraqi governments to rein in the sweeping powers of the PMUs has sown discord between Baghdad and Washington. Not only have US forces come under attack from the paramilitary groups, but Washington funds Iraq’s security system. In 2022, Iraq received $250m in military aid from the US.

  Despite sporadic outbursts of fighting between the paramilitaries and Iraq’s security services, “the cost of going against the militias for the Iraqi government is far higher than the cost of keeping them,” Abbas Kadhim, head of the Iraq Initiative at the Atlantic Council, told MEE. “For Washington, it’s an urgency because they are under attack, but it’s not a crisis for the Iraqi state. The militias are fighting in the same foxhole as the Iraqi government.”

  Pay raise for Iranian militias

  Sudani is supported by the Coordination Framework, a coalition of Tehran-backed Shia political parties that are tied to many of Iraq’s paramilitaries. While Sudani negotiated a six-month truce that saw attacks on US forces in Iraq stop, the PMUs have gained more influence under his rule, experts say.

  “Iran-backed militias have a more visible presence on Baghdad’s streets during Sudani’s tenure,” setting up new checkpoints, Michael Knights, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote, adding that they have also deepened their business activities.

  This year, Sudani’s government passed a three-year budget that allocated $700m more dollars to the PMUs, which will allow them to add almost 100,000 new fighters to their ranks, according to analysts. But current and former US and Iraqi officials say Baghdad wants to maintain good relations with Washington.

  Sudani has framed his call for quick exit of US-led coalition troops as necessary to preserve “constructive bilateral relations” with the US, which he told Reuters could include training and advising Iraqi security forces. His comments are a reflection of the unique ties Baghdad maintains to both Washington and Tehran.

  The dollar trap

  Iran and Iraq share a thousand-mile border.  The two Shia-majority countries have an estimated ten million border crossings annually, with many Iranian pilgrims visiting shrines in Karbala and Najaf. Iraq is the second most important destination for Iranian exports and is dependent on Iran for about 35 to 40 percent of its power needs.

  Iran has never shied away from flexing its economic weight over its neighbor. But Iraq’s finances are also intricately tied to the US.

  The second largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Iraq depends on its oil revenue to fund its government – including to pay the salaries of Iranian-backed paramilitaries. The proceeds from Iraq’s oil sales are deposited in the US Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

  A recent US crackdown on money laundering in Iraq has helped fuel a currency crisis in Iraq, showcasing the immense sway Washington has over Iraq’s finances because of its dependence on the dollar. The US has also backed Sudani’s appeal for international investments in Iraq.

  When Baghdad threatened to expel US-led coalition forces from Iraq after the 2020 assassination of Soleimani, the Trump administration threatened to cut Iraq’s access to its dollar reserves and stop issuing sanctions waivers for Iraq to buy Iranian energy, former US officials familiar with the talks told MEE.

  The same officials say that cudgel is an option the Biden administration retains if demands for a US exit grow, but some question whether the administration would use it, after trying to reset relations with Baghdad after the tumultuous Trump years. “The US can’t be expelled from Iraq if it doesn’t want to be,” Rayburn, the former US special envoy for Syria, told MEE.

  “If the US doesn’t have a military presence in Iraq, then the US need not do other things on behalf of the Iraqi government. Like facilitating dollar supply from the Federal Reserve, protecting against lawsuits, and issuing sanctions waivers,” he said.

  While Iranian-backed militias want to expel the US from Iraq, experts say even the most hardline groups like Kata’ib Hezbollah benefit from Iraq’s economic links to the West. “Even the most anti-American leaders in Iraq realize they need some kind of relationship with the US,” Mansour told MEE. “Iraq is a lifeline for Iran. Its access to US dollars and financial markets is key.”

  Kadhim, at the Atlantic Council, believes the focus among policymakers in Washington to merely protect US troop presence in Iraq is shortsighted. “Of course, Iran’s ideal goal is to get the US out of Iraq completely, but their practical goal is to make the US presence a liability,” which he says, the Iranians have already achieved.

  “Basically, you have a small number of US troops in Iraq sequestered to their barracks. They can’t even go to town,”   he said. “In the long run, someone is going to ask why are we here.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 23:00

• 6 Attorneys Allege DOJ Seeking Retribution Against Journalist For Recent Jan. 6 Coverage
  6 Attorneys Allege DOJ Seeking Retribution Against Journalist For Recent Jan. 6 Coverage

  Authored by Joseph Hanneman via The Epoch Times,

  Attorneys for a journalist threatened with prosecution for being at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, are challenging federal prosecutors to try his case outside the District of Columbia, suggesting prosecutors are seeking retribution for his recent reporting on possible Capitol Police perjury and the Jan. 6 pipe bombs.

  

  Six attorneys who said they volunteered to represent Stephen Baker of Raleigh, N.C., released a statement on Jan. 22 expressing belief that the DOJ is seeking even more serious Jan. 6 charges as retaliation.

  Mr. Baker, a former independent journalist, now writes for Blaze Media.

  “We now have information that Steve’s reporting has so agitated officials in multiple federal agencies that an effort is now underway to find a basis to charge Steve with more serious crimes and to use those more serious crimes as a pretext for early morning raids to execute search and arrest warrants on him and his family,” the statement read.

  “If this is true, and search and arrest warrants are used to drag Steve out of his house in the early morning hours someday soon, that will be evidence of retaliation against a journalist exercising his First Amendment rights to report information that is embarrassing to government officials.”

  The statement is signed by five well-known Jan. 6 defense attorneys: James Lee Bright, Brad Geyer, Phillip Linder, William Shipley, and Edward Tarpley Jr. It was also signed by Mr. Baker’s Raleigh-based attorney, Matthew Ceradini.

  Mr. Geyer and Mr. Shipley were federal prosecutors for more than two decades.

  “After not having indicted me for three years, it is clear that any move to do so now will be in retaliation for my reporting,” Mr. Baker wrote in a news release.

  “I will not be intimidated. I will continue to report the findings of my investigation into the evidence being made available to me to review,” he said.

  Questions Over Jurisdiction

  The attorneys challenged the DOJ to try any case against Mr. Baker in the eastern district of North Carolina where Mr. Baker lives, or the northern district of Texas, where his employer, Blaze Media, is located.

  “Are citizens of those two districts not suitable jurors in Steve’s case?” the statement asked.

  “Is the federal judiciary in those two districts not able to provide a fair and impartial trial?

  “On what basis does the United States Department of Justice believe the ‘United States’ can only get a fair trial in the District of Columbia and not one of those ‘United’ States?”

  The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia for comment, but did not receive a response before press time.

  Mr. Baker’s most recent coverage identified the person who found one of the two pipe bombs on Jan. 6 as an undercover U.S. Capitol Police officer and not a “passerby.”

  Since October 2023, he wrote a series of stories that said events described under oath by two Capitol Police officers in the first Oath Keepers trial in 2022 could not have happened, based on Mr. Baker’s examination of security video.

  Mr. Geyer suggested that reporting should result in the Oath Keepers’ convictions being thrown out.

  Mr. Baker was one of dozens of journalists at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

  His video footage appeared in an HBO film and was licensed by the BBC, The New York Times, and The Epoch Times.

  Mr. Baker was first contacted by the FBI in July 2021 about his presence at the Capitol. He voluntarily sat down with FBI special agents in November 2021. He said he was told the DOJ was considering charging him with interstate racketeering because he received money from licensing his Jan. 6 video.

  In March 2023, he said he was warned by a high-profile journalist that his reporting was chafing some high-level DOJ officials.

  In August, he was served a subpoena for his Jan. 6 video.

  In December, the FBI told his attorney that his arrest was imminent, although that plan was subsequently delayed.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 22:20

• As China Stocks Crash, Beijing Proposes Multi-Trillion Market Rescue Package
  As China Stocks Crash, Beijing Proposes Multi-Trillion Market Rescue Package

  Earlier today, we lamented the latest implosion in Chinese markets, which we discussed in “China Stocks Crash Through ‘Snowball Derivatives’ Trigger Levels Overnight“, in which we pointed out the unprecedented failure of the centrally-planned market to halt its collapse be it through short selling bans, or even the latest impotent intervention by the “National Team”, China’s Plunge Protection Team, which today failed to spark even a modest rebound in the relentless selling which had triggered key liquidation levels.

  

  We then summarized just how badly Beijing had boxed itself, noting that “after short selling ban did nothing, China PPT stepped in… and couldn’t do jack. Beijing trapped.” We concluded that “either they watch liquidation cascade as snowball derivatives are knocked in sparking rout and leading to social unrest, or they stop talking and finally do something.”

  This is bad: after short selling ban did nothing, China PPT stepped in… and couldn’t do jack. Beijing trapped: either they watch liquidation cascade as snowball derivatives are knocked in sparking rout and leading to social unrest, or they stop talking and finally do something pic.twitter.com/rMpV5UQVwr

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 22, 2024

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

  Well, just a few hours later we were proven correct again, because shortly after China reopened on Tuesday, Bloomberg reported that according to “people familiar with the matter, asking not to be identified” – i.e., government sources eager to do a market test, China is considering a package of measures to stabilize the plummeting stock market, after earlier attempts to restore investor confidence fell short and prompted Premier Li Qiang to call for “forceful” steps.

  Specifically, Beijing is reportedly seeking to “mobilize” about 2 trillion yuan ($278 billion), mainly from the offshore accounts of Chinese state-owned enterprises, as part of a stabilization fund to buy shares onshore through the Hong Kong exchange link; it has also earmarked at least 300 billion yuan of local funds to invest in onshore shares through China Securities Finance Corp. or Central Huijin Investment Ltd.

  In other words, what was already a nationalized stock market is about to get even more nationalized, and instead of ad hoc interventions by the Plunge Protection Team, such market purchases by official state authorities will now become institutionalized.

  Or maybe not: after all, China isn’t actually doing anythjing. Yes, it is mulling stuff, just like it has been mulling a 1 trillion yuan fiscal stimulus and a 1 trillion yuan “special “bond stimulus. but nothing has actually happened yet, because Beijing is absolutely terrified of the market reaction if and when the country with the 300% debt/GDP stats layering on more trillions in debt. Alas, at this point that’s just a matter of time, because either Beijing keeps mulling stuff and does nothing as it watches it cities burn amid the recent surge in strikes and protests…

  

  … or it goes back to what it has been doing for the past 25 years, and floods the economy with new debt to boost contain the property crash, stabilize the economy and normalize the soaring youth unemployment. And since it really has no choice, it will be the latter… the only question is how much pain will Beijing suffer first before it capitulates.

  Anyway, going back to the official Bloomberg report, it notes that “officials are also weighing other options and may announce some of them as soon as this week if approved by the top leadership”, but again, “the plans are still subject to change.” And they will, because either stocks soar and don’t drop, thereby obviating the need for an actual rescue package, or they resume their plunge and China will be forced to do even more when it actually does something in the very near future.

  *HANG SENG CHINA STOCK GAUGE EXTENDS GAIN TO 3.5%

  Enjoy it while it lasts. it won’t

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 23, 2024

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

  In any case, the report of panicked deliberations underscores that just as we predicted earlier today, there is an “elevated level sense of urgency” among Chinese authorities to stem a selloff that sent the benchmark CSI 300 Index to a five-year low this week. Calming the nation’s retail investors – many of whom have also been bruised by the protracted property downturn – is also seen as key to maintaining social stability. And if there is anything Beijing fears more than anything in this world, it is 1 billion angry lower and middle-class Chinese heading toward Beijing, armed with torches and pitchforks.

  Which brings us to the next question: as even Bloomberg admits, it is unclear is these measure will be enough to end the rout is far from certain. We can help Bloomberg: it won’t be anywhere near enough, and indeed, after a modest bounce in the Shanghai Composite which pushed it in the red on the Bloomberg report, the index has once again slumped in the red, just as we said it would.

  

  We weren’t the only ones to unleash a gusher of cynicism in response to the news: others agreed as well that this is a disaster..

  Daisy Li, fund manager at EFG Asset Management HK.

  “The biggest question I have is how the SOEs will come up with 2 trillion yuan from their offshore accounts and why they will choose to invest onshore through the Hong Kong exchange link. We are in need of a white knight to boost some confidence, given how bad things have been.”

  Aninda Mitra, a macro and investment strategist at BNY Mellon

  “The stock market package is a welcome measure, and shows some responsiveness from the authorities. But at under 2% of its GDP, we fear this is still inadequate. This amount falls short of even the reduction in the market cap, from early December to now, of Chinese enterprises listed in the Hong Kong stock exchange. These measures also need to be twinned with longer-term reforms to boost confidence in broader corporate sector.”

  Michelle Lam, economist at SocGen’s HK Branch.

  “Larger stimulus aimed at turning around the economy is needed for a sustained rally. What I think is critical for us to see a turnaround in market confidence is a step-up in PBoC’s PSL to support project completion and urban village redevelopment and a decisive increase in fiscal deficit which partly support household income.”

  Rajeev De Mello, macro portfolio manager at GAMA

  “The boost to China’s markets from any rescue package will only lead to a short-term rebound as more fundamental changes are needed. Frequently, packages which target the stock market do have an effect but it can be very short-lived if not accompanied by more fundamental changes.Without more forceful economic and regulatory policy actions, it will not lead to the beginning of a bull market in China.”

  Alvin Tan, head of Asia FX strategy at RBC in Singapore

  “I am doubtful that the rebound in Chinese equities on the back of this rescue package news is sustainable so long as the fundamental growth trajectory doesn’t change”

  And now that the market has called Beijing’s bluff in less than an hour, the panic will be truly palpable and instead of just focusing on the market, China will now be bombarded on all sides by a relentless collapse: the property crisis, depressed consumer sentiment, tumbling foreign investment and diminished confidence among local businesses after years of volatile policymaking are exerting strong downward pressure on both the economy and financial markets.

  Which means China now has two options: pretend that the failed policies it has been doing (or pretending to do) so far has been successful, which it likely will until there is just too much blood on the streets, or it will finally capitulate and unleash the biggest fiscal stimulus ever seen in China: we are talking multiple trillions here, and in dollars not yuan, consequences be damned, because we are nearing the point of peak panic where Beijing will do anything at all to buy social order and stability for just a few more months. And once all those tens of trillions in Chinese deposits start fleeing, that’s when the real meltup in non-fiat assets – read gold, silver, crypto, fine art, wines, etc – will truly start.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 22:09

• Watch: Relatives Of Israeli Hostages Storm Parliament Demanding More Be Done
  Watch: Relatives Of Israeli Hostages Storm Parliament Demanding More Be Done

  Update: Israel has made a substantial proposal for a new ceasefire deal that includes multiple phases at the end of which all remaining hostages held in Gaza would be released.

  *  *  *

  Over 100 Israelis remain held in captivity in the Gaza Strip, but there have been no signs of any renewed hostage exchange deal on the horizon, leaving loved ones despondent over their fate. Arab media sources have blamed the Israeli government for the collapse of ceasefire negotiations, but talks have remained delicate and complicated, and have been on again off again.

  Lack of any clear plan or strategy to gain the release of the captives has continued causing deep anger within Israeli society, amid growing suspicions that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will keep the war going in part to ensure his own political survival. The protest movement led by the relatives, who feel that Israeli leadership just isn’t doing enough, has escalated as a group burst into a closed-door session of Knesset Monday in order to demand action. Watch:

  “אתם לא תשבו כאן ולנו מתים הילדים שלנו!” – משפחות החטופים התפרצו לוועדת הכספים בדרישה להשיב את החטופים: “מה עם פדיון שבויים?” pic.twitter.com/dypLHW8pNC

  — ערוץ כנסת (@KnessetT) January 22, 2024

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

  The group of about 20 protesters were able plow forward past Knesset security staff to barge into a hearing of Knesset Finance Committee, and the incident was all caught on video and is being featured on Israeli media frontpages. One man was physically being held back by a security guard but still bulled forward.

  “You will not sit here while our children die,” the protesters yelled. “What about ransoming captives?” It reportedly took physical force for security to eventually remove them, and at least one protester required treatment by paramedics.

  While PM Netanyahu was not present at the session, the protest movement has escalated its tactics against him, having set up tents outside his residence to hold round-the-clock demonstrations.

  Of the some 250 people kidnapped on Oct.7 – 105 were freed back in November as a result of Qatari-mediated negotiations. Of the rest which remained in captivity, the Israeli miliary has since confirmed 31 have died or been executed. Three of these were killed in a tragic friendly fire incident which outraged Israeli society.

  More footage of Monday’s incident…

  Families of the Israeli hostages captured on October 7th entered Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, forcing their way through security forces as their rage over Netanyahu’s failure to achieve any significant military or diplomatic progress grows. pic.twitter.com/74zrJcUWqp

  — MintPress News (@MintPressNews) January 22, 2024

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

  The protesters further accused lawmakers of playing politics with their family members’ lives. In many cases, the wait is all the more agonizing for family members given they have no proof of life from Hamas. 

  As fighting has intensified, especially in south Gaza’s Khan Younis, hopes have faded for a new substantial prisoner swap deal with Hamas. In November, hundreds of Palestinians were released from Israeli jails as part of the deal. There have since been rumors that the two warring sides were close to reaching another deal, but one hasn’t materialized. The ongoing Gaza operation and the question of long-term strategy has been an increasing source of tension and division in Israeli society.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 22:00

• The Real Story Of The Two Americas
  The Real Story Of The Two Americas

  Authored by Stephen Moore, op-ed via The Daily Caller,

  For the past thirty years or so the left has invented a narrative that there are two Americas.

  A group of very super-rich people (the one percenters) who have prospered over the past several decades, and everyone else who has gotten poorer.

  It’s a fairy tale narrative because almost all Americans have seen financial progress.

  The median household income adjusted for inflation rose by more than 40% since 1984.

  

  Prosperity isn’t an “us versus them” zero-sum game. A rising tide really does lift all boats.

  But there really are Two Americas today.

  First, there are the cultural and over-educated snobs – the kind of people who religiously read the New York Times, drive EVs, wear Harvard or Yale sweaters, and have never even heard of NASCAR or eaten at Popeyes or ridden a John Deere tractor.

  And then there is normal main street America. The snobs thumb their collective noses at the unrefined working-class Americans. The elites believe they are intellectually, culturally, and morally superior to the working class and rural America. You won’t see too many elites at a Trump rally with 30,000 people.

  A group I helped found, the Committee to Unleash Prosperity, just published a study entitled “Them Vs. U.S.” examining how America’s cultural elites (defined as at least one postgraduate degree, $150,000+ annual income, high-density urban residence, and attended an Ivy League school) are hopelessly out of touch with ordinary Americans. Pollster Scott Rasmussen did the research.

  Here are some of the key jaw-dropping revelations from the survey:

  • Financial Well-being: Nearly three-quarters of the elites surveyed, believe they are better off now financially than they were when Joe Biden entered the White House. Less than 20% of ordinary Americans feel the same way.

  • Individual Freedom: Elites are three times more likely than all Americans to say there is too much individual freedom in the country. Astonishingly, almost half of the elites and almost six-of-ten ivy leaguers say there is too much freedom.

  • Climate Change: An astonishing 72% of the Elites – including 81% of the Elites who graduated from the top universities – favor banning gas cars. And majorities of elites would ban gas stoves, non-essential air travel, SUVs, and private air conditioning. That means no air travel with the kids to Disney World.

  • Education: Most elites think that teachers unions and school administrators should control the agenda of schools. Most mainstream Americans think that parents should make these decisions.

  Oh, and about three-quarters of these cultural elites are Biden supporters. Surprised?

  The Grand Canyon-sized divide between the elites in America and ordinary Americans is so profound that it is as if they live in two different countries.

  Silicon Valley, Manhattan, and Washington, D.C. have become bubbles that have lost contact with everyday Americans. This explains why the political class – which is a big part of the elite group – is confused by poll numbers showing that voters are feeling financially stressed out. The elites are doing fine, so they believe that everyone is prospering. I suspect that most don’t want radical change in the public schools because their kids attend blue-chip private schools. They are fine with abolishing SUVs because in big cities Americans generally don’t drive those cars – if they drive cars at all.

  Crime, illegal immigration, inflation, fentanyl, and factory closings aren’t keeping the elite up at night because in their cocoons they don’t encounter these problems on a daily basis the way so many Americans do today.

  Not too many main street Americans are losing sleep about climate change or LGBTQ issues.

  The elites in America tend to work in the “talking professions” – university professors, journalists, lawyers, actors, and lobbyists. They keep talking and normal Americans are more than ever not listening to them.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 21:40

• Lawmakers Push Funding To Replace The Ultra-Expensive Weapons Used In Yemen
  Lawmakers Push Funding To Replace The Ultra-Expensive Weapons Used In Yemen

  Via The Libertarian Institute,

  As the White House has started an open-ended and unauthorized war in Yemen, some members of Congress are pushing for legislation that would provide funding to replace the munitions dropped on the Middle East’s poorest nation. 

  Politico reports, “As American warships burn through expensive missiles against Houthi targets in the Red Sea and Yemen, lawmakers, lobbyists, and the Navy are angling to use a multibillion-dollar national security supplemental to replenish the military’s inventory of munitions.”

  

  In November, the Houthis announced that Yemeni forces would target Israeli-linked shipping in the Red Sea until Tel Aviv ends its military campaign in Gaza. Two weeks ago, President Joe Biden, without consulting Congress, authorized strikes on the Houthis. 

  In response, the Houthis began targeting American-linked shipping transiting the region. The White House is ordering attacks on Yemen nearly every day. However, the White House claims it is not at war with Yemen, and it does not need Congressional authorization for the operations. 

  Biden’s war in Yemen could drag on for some time. US officials told the Washington Post the administration has “no end date” and “little exit strategy” for its military operations in Yemen. President Biden has admitted that the strikes are not deterring the Houthi attacks. 

  Additionally, the US operations against Yemen are expensive. Washington has combated drone and missile attacks from Yemen on ships in the Red Sea by using expensive interceptors to down the inexpensive Houthi munitions. The White House has largely relied on ship-fired Tomahawks to hit targets in Yemen. Some lawmakers worry the operations against the Houthis will impact Wasington’s ability to dominate the globe. 

  Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said fighting in Yemen means Congress needs to add further spending for munitions to a supplemental military funding package. “As I’ve warned for weeks, using million-dollar missiles to defend against thousand-dollar drones strains an already insufficient inventory of long-range capabilities,” he added. “The supplemental is our chance to expand our capacity to meet the national security challenges we face.”

  Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) argued that additional missiles are needed to confront China. “We’re looking — one of the parts of the supplemental is to make sure we have the rounds we need, whether it’s [the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile] or possibly things like [the] Tomahawk that we have for the Western Pacific.” He continues, “And that is a capability we would need if we ever got in a conflict with China.”

  Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) said “a big plus up” in munitions funding is imperative for Tomahawks, Naval Strike Missiles, and Harpoons. He also explained that the weapons are needed for global dominance. “And those kinds of weapons systems are critical everywhere, Taiwan in particular,” the Senator said. 

  Politico notes that Pentagon officials and lobbyists for arms makers are also pushing for increased funding for munitions production in a supplemental defense spending bill.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 21:00

• Harvard Teaching Hospital To Retract Papers As Falsified Data Scandal Unfolds
  Harvard Teaching Hospital To Retract Papers As Falsified Data Scandal Unfolds

  Weeks after Harvard President Claudine Gay resigned amid a plagiarism scandal, the university’s teaching hospital is set to retract or correct dozens of papers authored by four of their top researchers, following claims of data falsification.

  

  Six papers have already been selected for retraction, and 31 others are in the process of being corrected by the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, according to the Harvard Crimson, citing the hospital’s research integrity officer, Dr. Barrett Rollins.

  The corrections come amid claims of data manipulation against DFCI President and CEO Laurie H. Glimcher ’72, Executive Vice President and COO William C. Hahn ’87, Senior Vice President for Experimental Medicine Irene M. Ghobrial, and Harvard Medical School professor Kenneth C. Anderson. The allegations of misconduct were first compiled and publicized in a Jan. 2 blog post by data sleuth Sholto David.

  In the statement, Rollins wrote that David contacted DFCI with allegations of data manipulation in 57 manuscripts. According to Rollins, 38 were articles in which DFCI researchers “have primary responsibility for the potential data errors.”

  Four of the researchers at the Dana-Faber center have faculty appointments with the Harvard Medical School.

  

  The data manipulation claims came to light after investigator Sholto David published a blog post several weeks ago alleging irregularities among 57 papers. He had previously alleged “data forgery” – which included discrepancies in images consisting of duplications of blots, bands and plots, according to the report.

  David, who holds a doctoral degree in biology from Newcastle University, alleged that three papers authored by Glimcher, 12 by Hahn, 10 by Ghobrial, and 16 by Anderson contained “data forgery,” including five co-authored by both Anderson and Ghobrial. As is typical for scientific research, all of the papers referenced by David have several co-authors, though his post focused on the four DFCI researchers.

  

  The papers, published between 1999 and 2017, most commonly have duplications of blots, bands, and plots within images, David alleged. In a Saturday interview, David said he used a combination of artificial intelligence image analysis software ImageTwin and manual detection to look for errors in the papers. -Harvard Crimson.

  In short, AI is going to absolutely wreck a lot of ivory tower copycats…

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 20:40

• Journalist Who Attacked Top Tennis Player For Refusing COVID Vaccine Dies Suddenly
  Journalist Who Attacked Top Tennis Player For Refusing COVID Vaccine Dies Suddenly

  Events have been so frenetic over the past few years that it may be difficult for some to remember, but at the height of the covid panic there was a massive media campaign to destroy the image of any celebrity that publicly refused to take the vaccine.  They could be TV or film celebrities, famous scientists, politicians or even sports figures; it didn’t matter.  Anyone with a “platform” and an audience was expected to toe the line on the government covid narrative, or suffer the consequences.

  One could argue that the mandates and vaccines were more a loyalty test than an effort to save lives:  Those who complied were considered devout collectivists or at least people who could be controllable, and those who refused to comply immediately stood out as a potential threat.  This is how a world-class tennis player from Serbia, Novak Djokovic, was treated when it was revealed that he was not vaccinated when he entered the Australian Open in early 2022. 

  Djokovic was subsequently removed from the tournament and had his travel visa revoked.  Keep in mind the player had a clean bill of health at the time, but his example of defiance of the jab was considered unacceptable by Australian authorities.  What would follow was an endless attack on his character and intelligence on social media, which a number of corporate journalists joined in on.

  One of the lead instigators of this attempt at cancellation was Mike Dickson, a prominent British sports journalist working for the Daily Mail.  Dickson is noted as being relentless in his criticism of Djokovic, calling the player “arrogant and deplorable” for refusing to submit. 

  

  This week, Mike Dickson is reported to have collapsed and “died suddenly” at the age of 59 while covering the Australian Open.  The cause of death has been kept confidential.

  Despite Dickson’s attempts to paint Novak Djokovic as a global villain, the player had only kind words for the journalist upon news of his passing, offering his condolences.  Contrary to all the accusations, very often it’s the covid cultists that act like villains while the people they criticize display character and honor.    

  Australia proved to be an exceptionally submissive country when it came to the mandates, and some may blame the lack of complete info available that debunked frantic mainstream claims.  However, even in 2022, there was considerable evidence contrary to government assertions on covid and the vaccines.  

  For example, it was well known that the vaccines do not necessarily prevent transmission or infection of the virus, as was originally argued when they were distributed.  And the proof is in the fact that there are endless breakthrough cases (people who are vaccinated but who still get infected).  The FDA doesn’t even require evidence that a vaccine can prevent transmission or infection for the product to be approved.

  It is was also a fact that covid infections and fatalities from the original strain dropped dramatically well before the vaccines were widely distributed.  

  

  Then there was the Infection Fatality rate, which dozens of studies show to be around 0.23% regardless of how many vaccinated or unvaccinated people there are in a particular region, and the vast majority of deaths were among people with multiple preexisting conditions.  Why take an experimental vaccine for a virus with a 99.8% survival rate, especially if you are a top athlete?

  All of this information and more was available to journalists from 2021 onward, but they ignored it in favor of creating artificial panic.

  The chaos of covid hysteria has faded and cooler heads have prevailed, but the event still offers a lesson on the fragility of civil liberties and how vulnerable they are to mob mentality and mass fear. 

  Those that championed the destruction of the lives and careers of the unvaccinated are discovering that nothing guarantees longevity, and taking other people’s freedoms is not the path to safety.       

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 20:25

• White Americans Are Quiet-Quitting Our Leading Institutions
  White Americans Are Quiet-Quitting Our Leading Institutions

  Authored by Jeremy Carl via American Greatness,

  As the work-from-home trend took off during the COVID-19 pandemic, the term “quiet quitting” entered the contemporary lexicon.

  According to the Harvard Business Review:

  “Quiet quitters continue to fulfill their primary responsibilities, but they’re less willing to engage in activities known as citizenship behaviors: no more staying late, showing up early, or attending non-mandatory meetings.”

  Simply put, having perceived their jobs to not have value and meaning, they do no more than absolutely necessary.

  There is debate among scholars as to the extent of the quiet quitting phenomenon, but there is increasing evidence that white Americans are increasingly quiet quitting America’s leading institutions. And the possible implications of that for American society are profound.

  This phenomenon is a consequence of the trends I write about in my forthcoming book, The Unprotected Class, about the rise of anti-white racism in American culture and how both formal and informal anti-white discrimination have become a factor in almost every area of American public life.

  

  Little surprise then, that more and more young whites, especially young white men, are looking at the overall environment and saying, “Thanks, but no thanks,” to our leading institutions. Last week, the armed forces announced that the number of white recruits had fallen precipitously over the last five years.

  According to a report at Military.com, most of the Army’s much-discussed incoming recruiting shortfall is due largely to this dramatic decline. While a bit more than 44,000 white Americans signed up to join the army in 2018, that number cratered to just over 25,000 by 2023—a stunning drop in a short period of time when black and Hispanic recruiting was largely flat. As a result, white recruits went from 56.4% of soldiers in 2018 to 44% in 2023.

  Even military leaders attribute this decline in significant part to the souring of conservative whites, who have traditionally formed the backbone of the military, but are now looking at the woke anti-white military under Joe Biden and opting out. 

  “There’s a level of prestige in parts of conservative America with service that has degraded,” a senior army official told Military.com. Or, as conservative talk show host and U.S. marine combat veteran Jesse Kelly put it on X, “My sons will not serve. I don’t have a single veteran friend who’s encouraging his sons to serve. Most are actively discouraging them from doing so.”

  A collapse in any demographic’s willingness to serve in the military would be a concern, but a collapse in (disproportionately conservative) whites in the military is more likely to precipitate a readiness crisis. White soldiers are far more likely than non-whites to be the “tip of the spear,” taking on the most dangerous and important combat tasks. In Iraq and Afghanistan, approximately 80% of special forces were white. Despite heavy diversity recruitment efforts in recent years, 84% of Navy SEALs are white. These special forces teams are filled with objective qualifications, performance, and candidate interest. It may be politically incorrect to say, but as a matter of math, in the current environment, a military that is less white is also a military that’s almost certainly less capable.

  Even before the current recruiting collapse, we were already seeing the results of diversity uber alles in military performance. A recent article in Palladium Magazine described this growing competence crisis, and how it affects not just the military but all American institutions. On the military side, in a short period of just three months in 2017, there were three warship collisions resulting in 17 deaths. In 2020, there was a fire that resulted in the destruction of the USS Bonhomme Richard, a $750 million navy ship, resulting in 63 injuries. According to Palladium, a subsequent off-the-record interview with dozens of Navy officers (both current and retired) laid the blame for the incidents at the Navy prioritizing diversity training over warfighting capability. Yet, the armed forces are busy eliminating or de-emphasizing meritocratic tests for service in an attempt to “improve” diversity.

  It’s not just the military.

  Whites, as a percentage of medical school students, are well below their population numbers. 

  White college enrollment for 18-24 year-olds has dropped from 43% in 2010 to 38% in 2021, the sharpest drop for any major ethnic group (it is now essentially equal with African-Americans, though African-American students are, on average, far less college-ready than whites) Enrollment is down particularly sharply among white men, the group that has historically led America’s institutions, having collapsed from just 41% to 33%—an attendance rate far below Asian-Americans and just a couple of points above African-Americans and Hispanics.

  Given that SAT Scores are on, average, much higher for whites than either blacks or Hispanics, it is clear that whites make up a hugely disproportionate number of the students qualified for college but not attending.

  Discriminated against by race-based preferences in both academia and the workplace, young white men in particular are increasingly dropping out. There has been an almost a continuous drop in white male labor force participation over decades now, a drop sharper than seen in any other ethnic group.

  In the mid-twentieth century, American employers began focusing more intensely on objective measures to assess human capital, as standardized tests for everything from college entrance to the military reigned supreme. This differentiation allowed talented people from modest social and financial backgrounds to ascend the professional ladder. But, however well intended, the Civil Rights Act and its later interpretations, particularly disparate impact and affirmative action, have ended that brief meritocratic moment. Desperate to balance leadership demographics for political reasons and increasingly unable to game any objective system to reduce white influence further, colleges and even law schools and medical schools are dispensing with standardized tests entirely in the name of “equity.”

  For decades now, the government has dispensed valuable contracts to preferred constituencies on the basis of their not being white—at the federal level, such contracts for which whites are ineligible run to tens of billions of dollars annually. As Palladium notes, racial and other quotas have even come to the supposedly sacrosanct halls of corporate finance. As of 2021, Goldman Sachs, perhaps the world’s most prestigious investment bank, will not underwrite the initial public stock offerings of companies that do not have at least two non-straight white men on their board. Interestingly, their gender board diversity rules do not apply to their clients in Asia.

  There were certainly many problems, discrimination among them, in the old white-dominant regime that ran America from its founding through the mid-to-late twentieth century, but whatever its flaws, this was the America that people from all over the world—from every different color and creed—have scrambled to join.

  Can America’s institutions run as well in the 21st century if white Americans are quiet quitting them in despair?

  It looks like we’re about to find out.

  *  *  *

  Jeremy Carl (@realJeremyCarl) is a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, His book, The Unprotected Class, on the rise of anti-white racism, is available for pre-order and will be published this spring.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 20:20

• Mother Of Daughter Raped And Murdered By Illegal MS-13 Gang Member Sues Biden DHS For $100 Million
  Mother Of Daughter Raped And Murdered By Illegal MS-13 Gang Member Sues Biden DHS For $100 Million

  The mother of a 20-year-old autistic woman who was raped and murdered by an illegal immigrant MS-13 gang member in 2022 is suing the federal government for playing “Russian roulette with our lives.”

  Kayla Hamilton was raped and strangled to death by the 17-year-old El Salvadorian, who she was living with in a trailer which the suspect, according to Aberdeen, Maryland police. Authorities arrested him in January 2023 based on DNA evidence from the crime scene. He was charged with first-degree murder, as well as rape and robbery, and is currently being held without bail ahead of his June 28 trial.

  

  “For me this not a political issue this a safety issue for everyone living in the United States,” said her mother, Tammy Nobles, during testimony last Thursday in front of the House Homeland Security Committee.

  “This could have been anyone’s daughter. I don’t want any other parent to live the nightmare that I am living. I am her voice now and I am going to fight with everything I have to get her story told and bring awareness of the issue at the border,” Nobles continued.

  Nobles is seeking $100 million from US government, and has accused the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services of failing her daughter by allowing the unidentified migrant into the country without confirming his identity, neglecting to confirm a verified sponsor, and allowing him to be placed at a holding facility – from which he ran away and ultimately ended up as Hamilton’s roommate.

  “Nobody at the border did their job and checked his background,” Nobles said two days later during an interview with NewsNation.

  

  “We’re bringing this lawsuit because we’re tired of being held hostage in our own country. We’re tired of DHS playing Russian roulette with our lives,” said family attorney, Brian Claypool.

  Tammy Nobels is suing the Biden DHS and HHS for $100 million.

  Her autistic daughter Kayla was rapęd and kiIIed in MD by an MS-13 member in July 2022.

  The illegal gang member was let into the country by the Biden DHS and sent to Maryland by the Biden HHS.

  He had gang tattoos… pic.twitter.com/ivOs5GWKxi

  — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 22, 2024

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

  Over 300,000 migrants crossed the southern border in December, according to CBP. In 2023, US authorities encountered almost 140,000 unaccompanied minors at the US-Mexico border – of which nearly 10,000 are still in the custody of the DHHS’ Office of Refugee Resettlement.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 20:00

• As Delinquencies Spike, Banks Are "Granting Fewer Credit Lines", Fed Analysts Warn
  As Delinquencies Spike, Banks Are “Granting Fewer Credit Lines”, Fed Analysts Warn

  Authored by Sam Bourgi via CreditNews.com,

  With credit card delinquency rates at their highest levels in more than a decade, getting approved for a new line of credit is getting harder, Fed analysts warned.

  

  According to a new report from the Philadelphia Fed, 3.19% of credit card balances were at least 30 days past due by the end of the third quarter of 2023.

  That’s up from 2.76% in the second quarter and the highest level since 2012.

  Just as concerning, the percentage of balances that were at least 60 days and 90 days past due shot up to the highest levels since the beginning of Covid.

  “All stages of delinquency rates now exceed pre-pandemic levels for the first time,” Fed economist Gene Huang and senior analyst Anna Veksler wrote in the report.

  In even more bad news, the Fed researchers found that only 33.18% of accounts paid their balance in full—suggesting that 1 in 3 Americans are carrying a balance every month.

  That’s the highest level since 2020.

  Since 2020, “the share of accounts making the full payment has moderated, driven by strong consumer spending and dwindling government support,” the researchers said.

  “Greater consumer fragility,” as the Fed described it, makes banks think twice before granting new lines of credit. According to the researchers, banks’ rejection rate today is the highest in the past year.

  Natural rebound or something to worry about?

  While experts generally agree that rising delinquency rates are a source of concern, they’re split on how bad the problem is—and what it says about consumer finances.

  On the one hand, Smead Capital Management CEO Cole Smead said, “We’re coming off really low delinquencies” in 2022, “so you’re going to see a natural uptick.”

  CFRA bank analyst Alexander Yokum adds that rising delinquencies aren’t a big deal “with unemployment under 4%,” suggesting that Americans will continue making payments so long as they’re employed.

  But according to Odeon Capital analyst Dick Bove, banks are getting red flags from retailers, who’ve warned for months that customers are having trouble paying their debt.

  Credit card losses are “the big issue that certain banks have to worry about,” he told Yahoo Finance. Currently, credit card issuer Capital One and digital bank Ally Financial face some of the biggest risks.

  “I think we’re going to see a wave of loan losses for both these companies,” Bove said.

  The good news is that banks seem to be prepared for a delinquency spike and have set aside cash to cover bad loans, according to Stephen Biggar, an analyst at Argus Research, a New York-based market research firm.

  Banks are “thinking that the higher interest rate environment, what the Fed was doing to take the heat off of such high inflation, was going to result in a downturn and an uptick in unemployment,” he said. So they’ve increased the amount of dry powder they have.

  The real reason delinquencies are rising

  Credit card delinquencies don’t happen in a vacuum, but rather depend on the overall debt households carry, according to Wells Fargo economist Seery Grein.

  “Households who have other debt, so student or auto loans, for instance, are actually seeing delinquencies rise fastest in terms of their credit card purchases,” she said, adding that delinquencies tend to jump when interest rates increase.

  Creditnews has recently reported on a sharp rise in auto delinquencies, especially among subprime borrowers.

  In September, the percentage of subprime borrowers who were at least 60 days behind on their car payments increased to 6.11%—the highest since at least 1994.

  Student debt is another mounting issue after the government resumed mandatory payments in October. So far, millions of borrowers have refused to pay.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 19:40

• San Fran Police Recruitment Drops 72% From 2019 Despite $112,000 Rookie Salary
  San Fran Police Recruitment Drops 72% From 2019 Despite $112,000 Rookie Salary

  San Francisco is (believe it or not) having trouble recruiting new police officers. After all, who wants to try and be the police in a ‘woke’ city where lawlessness is encouraged and the police are hated just for doing their jobs?

  Things have gotten so bad in the Bay Area that the city is now trying to entice rookie officers with a massive starting pay of $112,398 per year – and the city is still having trouble finding new officers for its force, according to Yahoo/Bloomberg. 

  According to the report, San Francisco’s police force faces a severe recruitment crisis, with only 26 recruits joining in 2023, a 72% drop from 2019 and the lowest in over a decade.

  The city’s police staff has declined by 13% since 2020, from over 1,800 to just under 1,600, the report says. Currently, only 23 trainees are at the academy, with no certainty of graduation. The six figure payday offer for new San Francisco cops marks the highest for rookies in major U.S. cities, surpassing Chicago’s $88,746 after 18 months. 

  

  Ted Schwartz, acting police chief in Ithaca, added: “Twenty years ago, we would have hundreds of people knocking down our door to be police officers. That’s not true in our society anymore.”

  San Francisco, despite cutting $120 million from police budgets under protest pressure, isn’t alone in struggling to recruit officers. Cities like Arcata, Ithaca, and Chicago are offering up to $50,000 bonuses, while Alameda, California, leads with a $75,000 bonus and a starting salary of $113,654, more than San Francisco.

  Chuck Wexler, the executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, commented to Bloomberg: “These bonuses sound more like sports teams than a civil service position. I’ve never seen anything like it. It feels like desperation.”

  In 2022, police officer resignations surged by 47% and retirements increased by 19% compared to 2019, reveals a survey by the Police Executive Research Forum, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, covering nearly 200 police agencies.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 19:20

• 2024 – America's Year Of Living Dangerously
  2024 – America’s Year Of Living Dangerously

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

  Lame-duck presidencies, especially in the last six months of their final term, in general can offer opportunities for America’s enemies to take advantage of a perceived vacuum as one government transitions to the next.

  

  But these normal changeover months are especially dangerous when a perceived weak or appeasing lame-duck president is likely to be replaced by a strong deterrent successor that will likely serve as a corrective to his disastrous policies.

  James Buchannan (1857-1861), a northern but pro-South president, was a particularly anemic chief executive. He had done little if anything to try to deal with the growing rift between North and South, especially the furor over the Dred Scott decision and Bloody Kansas. Even when warned, Buchannan did little to beef up the U.S. Army or increase its weapon stockpiles to deter any potential secessionist state.

  After Buchannan declined to run for a second term, the South understood that the abolitionist and anti-slavery Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln might well be elected in 1860—given the North/South split within the Democratic Party. And they understood that President Lincoln might well use force to stop secession.

  Therefore, in the waning days of the Buchannan administration, after Lincoln’s victory, seven southern states seceded during the presidential transition, a confused North reacted little, more would follow, and a terrible Civil War became inevitable.

  During the waning days of the crippled second term of Richard Nixon in summer 1974, communist North Vietnam saw a once deterrent president fatally weakened by Watergate. It was encouraged by a renewed antiwar movement, a likely soon anti-war Congress, and the next president, Gerald Ford—a probable caretaker soon to be replaced by an anti-war Democrat. And so in late 1974 and 1975, the communists renounced ignored peace accords, judged correctly that the directionless US would not help South Vietnam stop a massive invasion from the North, and thereby won the 12-year-long war.

  As the Jimmy Carter administration began to wind down and as it was increasingly judged as weak abroad, the new theocratic revolutionary government in Iran stormed the U.S. embassy and took hostages in November 1979. Throughout the next year, Tehran systematically humiliated the U.S., mocked an impotent Carter administration, and rebuffed all U.S. efforts to secure the return of the hostages.

  The Soviet Union as well saw the dying and still inert Carter term as ripe for exploitation and so invaded Afghanistan a month later, in December 1979. It too concluded that there would be a year of continued timidity in Washington before a likely remedy from a Republican president—in this case, Ronald Reagan, who had declared his candidacy a little over a week after Iran took hostages with clear promises to restore U.S. deterrence abroad.

  We are now once again entering one of these dangerous moments, compounded by a weakening of the armed forces. During Biden’s tenure, the U.S. military has suffered historic shortfalls in recruitment, the disastrous humiliation in Afghanistan, a new DEI commissariat that wars on meritocratic promotions and assignments, the politicization of generals and admirals, the hyped but otherwise inane effort to root out mythical white supremacists and “domestic terrorist” bogeymen from the ranks, and the expulsion of some of our best soldiers for their reluctance to be vaccinated, many of them having developed natural immunity from prior infection.

  The Pentagon is short on ships and planes. U.S. weapons stocks are dangerously low, drained by the abandonment of billions of dollars of equipment to the Taliban, the resupply efforts to Ukraine and Israel, the failure of the Biden administration to fund the restocking of our munitions and to ramp up resupply production—and a $35 billion national debt fed by $2 trillion annual deficits.

  Add eight million illegal aliens who pranced over a nonexistent southern border, nearly uninhabitable big-city downtowns, an epidemic of violent crime, and a president who resuscitates mostly to blast half the country as “semi-fascists” and “ultra-MAGA” extremists.

  Add it all up, and the world abroad agrees America is in a strange, self-inflicted decline and will not or cannot defend its interests, or for that matter itself.

  In particular, both enemies and neutrals have accordingly drawn a number of self-interested conclusions about the waning Biden administration and what may follow:

  1. That Joe Biden, to their apparent delight, has in the last three years reversed the Trump deterrence policies and thus has green-lit their aggressions.

  2. That given the ensuing chaos, they have further agreed that Biden’s growing unpopularity with the American people makes it likely that both he and his appeasement policies will be gone by January 2024.

  3. That Donald Trump may well return to office. That would mean a much worse deal for Russia, China, Iran, and its terrorist satellites, and thus recognition that 2024 is a brief window of opportunity for aggression.

  Putin remembers that Trump blasted 200 Russian mercenaries in Syria, got out of a bad missile deal with Moscow, upped sanctions on Russian oligarchs, flooded the world with cheap oil, destroying Russian oil export profits, sold once-canceled offensive weapons to Ukraine, and warned what would happen if Putin invaded Ukraine. Of the last four administrations, Trump’s was the only one that saw no Russian cross-border invasions.

  China remembers that Trump slapped tariffs on its mercantilist market economy, accused China of birthing the COVID virus at its Wuhan virology lab, increased military spending, forced NATO to spend another $100 billion on munitions, and jawboned more alliance members into upping their military contributions. Beijing knew that to send a spy balloon across the continental United States between 2017-21 would have meant its destruction the minute it entered U.S. airspace. China did not serially threaten Taiwan during the Trump era—and may believe that this year could be the last chance in a decade to confront Taiwan.

  Iran has concluded two things about 2024:

  1) they do not wish to see another Trump presidency on the horizon that took out its top-ranking terrorist-general Qasem Soleimani, slapped sanctions on its oil, yanked the U.S. out of the flawed Iran Deal, declared the Iranian Houthi satellites a foreign terrorist organization, cut off all aid to the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, moved the U.S. closer to Israel, and warned Hezbollah of consequences should it start a war with Israel; and

  2) that the present Biden abdication will likely be short-lived and thus now may be the time to take advantage of a currently directionless global superpower that either will not or cannot deter Iranian aggression.

  So what should we expect in 2024?

  • Lacking a strong U.S. patron and sponsor, Israel will be subject to more international calls to leave Gaza, to negotiate with Hamas, and to give up the idea it can “destroy” Hamas.

  • Hezbollah will likely up its daily barrage of missiles into Israel.

  • Iran will become more overt in supplying Russia, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis with weapons.

  • China will increase its threats to Taiwan and weigh carefully the costs-to-benefits of attacking the island.

  The common denominator?

  All our enemies are right now calculating how best to use their gift of the next 12 months from a non-compos-mentis president and his neo-socialist team that either believes the U.S. is at fault for much of the world’s pathologies or is too terrified to do anything about them.

  In sum, adversaries believe there is a rare window of opportunity in which the U.S. uncharacteristically does nothing to deter its enemies, back its allies, or win over neutrals. And over the next year, we can only pray they are mistaken.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 19:00

• Israel Offers Substantial 2-Month Gaza Ceasefire For Release Of All Hostages
  Israel Offers Substantial 2-Month Gaza Ceasefire For Release Of All Hostages

  In a huge and surprise development, Israel has made a substantial proposal for a new ceasefire deal that includes multiple phases at the end of which all remaining hostages held in Gaza would be released. The negotiations front has been quiet and considered to be a failure for the past couple months, leading to general pessimism that Israel had a new proposal in the works. At the same time the Red Sea crisis and damage to global shipping through the vital transit waterway has reached a boiling point.

  Israeli officials have confirmed the deal on the table to Axios, which has involved Qatari and Egyptian mediators, but it’s still too early to know whether Hamas will seriously contemplate it, given continued fierce ground fighting happening in the southern Strip, focused particularly on the city of Khan Younis. Yet it’s a rare hopeful sign after weeks of regional escalation and worsening news.

  Axios writes in the breaking Monday report that “While the proposal doesn’t include an agreement to end the war, it is the longest period of ceasefire that Israel has offered Hamas since the start of the war.” The proposed deal envisions a two-month long pause in fighting.

  

  Presumably the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) would not retreat from their positions in northern Gaza, but would likely initiate some degree of pullback in the south. Aerial bombardment would cease, but it would also require Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) to halt their rockets launched into southern Israel.

  Over 130 hostages still remain in Gaza, though there are fears some could have already died or have been executed. Inside Israel, domestic pressure is growing on the Netanyahu government to strike a deal. Increasingly large and angry protests have been sustained, led by victims’ families who have demanded that Netanyahu gain captives’ freedom at any cost.

  Of the some 250 people kidnapped on Oct.7, there were 105 freed back in November as a result of Qatari-mediated negotiations. Of the rest which remained in captivity, the Israeli miliary has since said that 31 have died or been executed. Three of these were killed in a tragic friendly fire incident which outraged Israeli society. All of this has contributed pressure on the government to offer a serious proposal.

  Israeli officials have been cited as saying their outlook remains “cautiously optimistic.” Biden’s envoy Brett McGurk is in Egypt working with Qatar and other parties on hammering out the deal. According to more of the details via Axios: 

  • Under the proposed deal, Israel and Hamas would agree in advance on how many Palestinian prisoners would be released for each Israeli hostage in each category and then separate negotiations on the names of these prisoners would take place, the officials said.
  • The Israeli officials said the proposal includes Israel redeploying Israeli Defense Forces so that some would be moved out of main population centers in the enclave and allowing a gradual return of Palestinian civilians to Gaza city and the northern Gaza strip as the deal is being implemented.
  • The Israeli officials said the proposal makes clear Israel will not agree to end the war and will not agree to release all 6,000 Palestinian prisoners from Israeli prisons.

  The Israelis have yet to promise that will halt all military actions, but targeting would likely become more focused and smaller in scale. In the November deal, which included a successful ceasefire that held for a week, hundreds of Palestinians were freed from Israeli prisons.

  A key reason why it wasn’t extended is that Israeli leaders accused Hamas of seeking to separate family members. Israel said that in separating children from their mothers, Hamas was seeking to inject last-minute leverage. The November ceasefire collapsed and wasn’t renewed over disagreements regarding which hostage groups would be freed in follow-up rounds. 

  💥Families of Israeli hostages in Gaza have set up a tent city in front of Netanyahu’s Jerusalem residence pic.twitter.com/r1PbUx0kB0

  — Noga Tarnopolsky נגה טרנופולסקי نوغا ترنوبولسكي💙 (@NTarnopolsky) January 21, 2024

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

  Thus even if Hamas is amenable to this new deal on the table, the two sides would have to agree on which hostages go free in specific phases. Hamas is also likely to push for multiple thousands of Palestinians to be let from from jails, if not all of them. And Tel Aviv has already said that is a non-starter.

  Gaza’s health ministry has meanwhile said the Gaza death toll has surpassed 25,000 – and is made up of mostly civilians. For this reason Israel finds itself under increasing scrutiny and isolation from the “international community” – but the US and UK have stuck firmly by its side, and are even stepping up intelligence assistance and surveillance drone flights over the Strip. 

  If the brakes don’t get applied to the Gaza war anytime soon, the ongoing regional spillover could explode into a huge regional conflagration with unforeseen consequences…

  Another wild week as the Middle East Powder Keg heats up.

  10 things you may have missed (all from accounts you should follow) 👇 pic.twitter.com/txTI5jExiH

  — Ian Ellis (@ianellisjones) January 21, 2024

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

  If there actually were a two-month pause, this could mean a good chance of a lasting peace. However, Netanyahu shows no signs of backing down from his ultimate war aim of completely eradicating Hamas. Regardless, a substantive and far-reaching offer of a deal in and of itself helps him politically at this tense moment.

  At this point it’s entirely unclear how many battlefield losses Hamas has suffered, but it’s likely in the thousands, yet by all account the jihadist militant group remains intact, and is effectively using the vast Gaza tunnel network in guerilla and insurgent operations.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 18:40

• The Sinister Links Between Jeffrey Epstein, CBDCs, & Bitcoin
  The Sinister Links Between Jeffrey Epstein, CBDCs, & Bitcoin

  Authored by Aaron Day via The Brownstone Institute,

  he purpose of this article is to create awareness of the urgent threat of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), to discuss and describe Jeffrey Epstein’s potential involvement in both funding CBDCs as well as his possible role in changing the underlying purpose of Bitcoin, rendering it unusable as a cash alternative for day-to-day transactions.

  

  The article also provides a snippet from my book, The Final Countdown, which goes into detail and further provides practical advice for avoiding CBDCs. 

  The CBDC Threat

  Imagine a future where every dollar you spend is tracked – not by a bank, but by the government. This isn’t a distant sci-fi scenario; it’s a real possibility with the advent of Central Bank Digital Currencies, or CBDCs. These are not just new forms of money; they are potentially powerful tools for monitoring and controlling human behavior.

  The concept is simple yet profound – a digital currency issued by the government that can be programmed with specific rules. For instance, your savings could be frozen if your online activities don’t align with governmental standards, or mandatory spending could be enforced to stimulate the economy. This level of control could extend to everyday choices, dictating the groceries you buy or the vacations you can access, all based on a digital scoring system.

  

  My book delves into this topic, painting a picture of a future where CBDCs could lead us into a dystopian society and the first chapter is available here. 

  The urgency of this matter propelled me towards cryptocurrencies and precious metals in 2019, when I completely exited the dollar. It compelled me to author a book, and even run for presidential office to shed light on these critical issues. As a fellow at Brownstone Institute, my current focus is to educate and empower others about the potential risks of CBDCs, with possible implementation before the 2024 elections.

  In my travels, I’ve encountered significant gaps in public awareness about CBDCs. Over 80% of Americans have never even heard of them, as mainstream media seldom covers the topic. Those who have view CBDCs as a distant future concern, or believe they offer financial convenience and inclusivity, a belief held particularly among younger generations.

  This article aims to clarify and warn about the current state of CBDC technology in the US, explain the existing political momentum for their adoption, and highlight the intriguing yet concerning connections between Jeffrey Epstein and cryptocurrency developments. Epstein’s link to the MIT Multimedia Lab, which played a pivotal role in significant CBDC trials and influenced changes to Bitcoin’s functionality, suggests a narrative far from the revolutionary currency Bitcoin once was, and potentially melding it into a tool for the elite.

  Documents released by the US District Court for the Southern District of New York have only deepened the mystery surrounding Epstein’s motives and actions. His interest in cryptocurrency has been documented as early as 2017, and while the full extent of his involvement remains unclear, the ties are enough to warrant scrutiny. 

  In raising the alarm on Epstein’s connection to the crypto and CBDC ecosystem, I aim to challenge any narrative that paints CBDCs in a purely positive light. Proponents of CBDCs, such as the WEF, World Bank, UN, Central Banks, and politicians like Senator Elizabeth Warren. claim that CBDCs promote financial inclusions and fight terrorism and money laundering. This is not the true intent, only clever marketing. They are about control, which should be acutely apparent after experiencing the tyranny and erosion of personal freedoms during Covid. This article, along with upcoming video interviews, will aim to peel back the layers of this complex issue and explore the potential consequences to our financial liberties.

  CBDCs Coming to America (edited excerpt in part from Chapter 4 of The Final Countdown)

  The US stands at a critical juncture, as the government’s pursuit of CBDCs gains unprecedented momentum. Within the next 12 months, the cherished American ideal of freedom could be undermined by a centrally controlled digital currency. Unbeknownst to many, the Federal Reserve has already conducted three successful wide-ranging CBDC pilots, while President Joe Biden has championed the cause through the sweeping Executive Order 14067. This order has set in motion a multi-agency effort to lay the foundation for digital currencies, bringing the dystopian scenarios outlined at the beginning of this article and further detailed in my book. 

  In this section, we will examine President Biden’s Executive Order, delve into the three CBDC pilot programs, and explore the implications of FedNow infrastructure, launched nationwide in July 2023, which could enable the rapid deployment of CBDCs in the US. The situation is more dire than it even appears on the surface, as they want to be able to not only control and program money but also digital assets.

  Imagine if stocks, bonds, homes, cars, computers, literally any assets could be tracked centrally by the government and the sale or transfer of those assets could be blocked by multiple 3rd parties (including the government, Federal Reserve, and other centralized 3rd parties). The shock, alarm, and anger provoked by these revelations should serve as a rallying cry for those seeking alternatives, striving to share this crucial information and take action to stop this before it’s too late. 

  Executive Order 14067

  On March 9, 2022, President Biden signed Executive Order 14067, “Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets.” The order directs the US government to take a whole-of-government approach to the development of digital assets, including CBDCs. The order is expansive in its scope, covering a wide range of issues related to digital assets, including their potential impact on the financial system, national security, and consumer protection. The order also directs the US government to work with international partners to develop ‘responsible standards’ for digital assets (enter UN, WEF, IMF, World Bank, and BIS).

  Jim Rickards, a respected expert on financial markets and geopolitics, has sounded the alarm bell about the significant problems and overreach in this Executive Order. He believes that the order is too broad and does not provide enough guidance on how the government should develop and implement a CBDC. He is also concerned that the order could lead to the erosion of privacy and financial sovereignty. Rickards explains, “Executive Order 14067 is a dangerous step towards a cashless society. It gives the government too much power to track and control our financial transactions.” He further adds, “The order is also a threat to privacy and financial sovereignty. It could lead to the erosion of our right to control our own money.”

  To be very clear, the President of the United States has put forward a framework that looks like the dystopian nightmare we are so desperately trying to avoid. Rickards warns, “The order is a missed opportunity to promote innovation and competition in the payments system. Instead, it is a recipe for government control and surveillance.”

  US CBDC Pilot Programs

  Even prior to Biden’s Executive Order, the Federal Reserve was well underway in researching, developing, and piloting CBDCs.

  Let’s take a closer look at the key CBDC initiatives: Project Hamilton, Project Cedar, the Regulated Liability Network (RLN) program, and explore what they mean for the future of money and personal freedom in the United States. As you explore this keep in mind that all 3 of these pilots received funding from the MIT Multimedia lab which has direct ties to Jeffrey Epstein. 

  Project Hamilton

  Project Hamilton, a joint venture between the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and MIT, explored the use of a retail CBDC during a pilot program that ran from 2020-2022. A retail CBDC is a digital form of fiat currency that is issued by a central bank (in this case the Federal Reserve) and can be accessed directly by the public. This form of electronic cash would replace the dollar and would be used to make payments, saved, or used to make investments.

  A recently published whitepaper details the pilot program’s results, which include signs that a digital dollar can handle a large number of transactions safely and securely. The pilot managed to process approximately 1.7 million transactions per second at its fastest. By comparison, the current US banking system can only handle 150,000 transactions per second. Clearly, this new CBDC has the technical capacity to replace the existing financial infrastructure. 

  The group leading Project Hamilton, the MIT Digital Currency Initiative, was funded in part by the MIT Media Lab, which has received contributions from prominent donors including Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein. These connections suggest a potential globalist agenda aimed at consolidating power and compromising individual sovereignty. Joi Ito, the former director of the MIT Media Lab, and Bill Gates are reported to have visited Epstein’s infamous island multiple times. Joi Ito stepped down from his position as head of the MIT Media Lab a day after Ronan Farrow’s exposé in the New Yorker, titled ‘How an Elite University Research Center Concealed Its Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.’

  To provide an accurate picture, the full extent of Epstein’s financial involvement with the MIT Media Lab remains opaque. Nonetheless, we have some insights from the New Yorker article:

   Epstein was acknowledged for facilitating at least $7.5 million in donations for the lab, which included $2 million from Gates and $5.5 million from [Leon] Black. These contributions were described in emails as being ‘directed’ by Epstein or made at his insistence.

  The lab staff’s awareness of Epstein’s involvement was so pervasive that some members of Joi Ito’s office informally referred to Epstein as Voldemort or ‘he who must not be named.’

  In a statement, MIT’s president, L. Rafael Reif, expressed regret, stating, ‘In retrospect, we acknowledge with humiliation and distress that our institution contributed to enhancing his prestige, inadvertently helping to deflect attention from his egregious behavior. No expression of regret can reverse that.’

  In addition to Epstein’s direct and indirect investments in the MIT Multimedia Lab, as reported by the Washington Post, Epstein also invested $1.2 million for Ito’s own investment funds. 

  We also know from this Slate article that Joi Ito visited Epstein’s Island as part of the courtship process. 

  Project Cedar

  Contrasting with other initiatives, Project Cedar sets its sights on investigating the potential applications and use cases of a CBDC specifically within the context of the wholesale market. This project is a joint venture involving the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, several prominent banking institutions, namely JPMorgan Chase, Bank of New York Mellon, and State Street, along with the BIS and the MIT Media Lab, which also played a role in Project Hamilton.

  To better understand, the wholesale market refers to a financial environment where transactions are typically large in scale and high in value, conducted predominantly between financial institutions like banks, businesses, and other financial entities. It’s a behind-the-scenes arena where substantial monetary exchanges take place, far from the realm of individual or retail transactions.

  Thus, the primary audience for Project Cedar encompasses the financial institutions and stakeholders who operate within this wholesale market. The goal of the project is to comprehend how a digital dollar could be utilized in this setting, facilitating these significant transactions efficiently, securely, and seamlessly. 

  As part of the pilot program, Project Cedar scrutinizes numerous aspects of a wholesale CBDC. This includes the technology’s capacity to enable instantaneous, secure settlements between institutions, the potential regulatory challenges that may arise, and the compatibility of the digital dollar with the existing financial infrastructure. 

  Technically speaking, the pilot program has been successful, paving the way towards the next phase of the project: selling the concept to the public and gaining consensus among central banks.

   Regulated Liability Network (RLN)

  In addition to Project Cedar (which is in its second pilot phase) the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is also involved in another pilot called the Regulated Liability Network (RLN) that “will participate in a proof-of-concept project to explore the feasibility of an interoperable network of central bank wholesale digital money and commercial bank digital money operating on a shared multi-entity distributed ledger.” 

  What does this mean, exactly? Imagine a future where every asset you buy (stocks, bonds, homes, cars, electronics, jewelry, etc.) is issued as digital tokens that can be tracked and settled by the government and other third parties through a centralized framework. In addition to being able to censor and freeze your money if you don’t behave the way those in control demand, they can also block the sale and perhaps even the use of your assets.

  Imagine that you buy a computer with a CBDC. A digital token is created that is associated with that computer. If you engaged in behavior that the authorities didn’t like, they could track your computer and remotely disable your ability to use it or sell it. In Chapter 1 we discussed how the government could control your UBI based on your social credit score. With something like the RLN, they could also potentially block your ability to sell your car, home, or even impair your ability to use your assets remotely through this type of digital asset tracking and remote monitoring.

  Like the other two pilot programs, the RLN pilot has ties to globalist organizations including the BIS and the MIT Media Lab (who is involved with all 3 CBDC pilots).

  The RLN pilot is a collaboration between a number of leading financial institutions, regulators, and technology providers. It is a significant step forward in the development of a regulated digital asset ecosystem.

  MIT Media Lab

  The Throttling of Bitcoin

  The opening line of the Bitcoin Whitepaper, which describes Bitcoin’s functionality, states, “A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.” From its inception, Bitcoin was intended to be an improved form of currency, offering people worldwide the chance to possess ‘sound money’ that could be spent at any time and anywhere. With negligible transaction costs—a mere fraction of a penny—funds could be transferred almost instantaneously. 

  However, in 2017, Bitcoin underwent significant changes that rendered it virtually useless as money. During that year, Bitcoin faced substantial growing pains, resulting in high transaction fees and delays. The Bitcoin community was embroiled in an intense debate on how to scale the network to manage the rising volume of transactions. Key figures in this debate included developers who received indirect funding from Joi Ito of the MIT Multimedia Lab, coinciding with Jeffrey Epstein’s first and sole interview about Bitcoin. Here is what we understand about Bitcoin’s state in 2017: 

  1. High Fees and Transaction Delays: Bitcoin’s transaction fees soared amid the congestion of 2017. In December of that year, the average transaction fee hit a peak of approximately $55, a stark increase from the sub-dollar fees seen the previous year. The network also suffered from severe delays; transactions that should have been confirmed within about 10 minutes could take hours or even days, particularly if the attached fee was insufficient to incentivize miners.

  2. Specific Example of Transaction Issues: The 2017 holiday season exemplified these problems. The surge in transaction volume led to significant delays and exorbitant fees for many users. Here are some actual tweets from disappointed users from late 2017. 

     • @ChrisPacia Bitcoin fee for median size tx = $30.72 Dec 20, 2017

     • @beijingbitcoins Bitcoin Core’s average transaction fee has gone up nearly 600% in the last two weeks alone. This isn’t sustainable. Dec 21, 2017

     • @ErikVoorhees At $40 fee, we’re well past coffee. Even a $250 purchase now doesn’t make sense with Bitcoin.Dec 21, 2017

  3. Impact on Retailers and Websites: The impractical transaction conditions caused numerous large retailers and websites to reconsider or cease accepting Bitcoin as a payment method. Notably:

     • Steam: A popular platform for digital game distribution, stopped accepting Bitcoin in December 2017 due to high fees and volatility.

     • Stripe: A payment processing company, ended Bitcoin support in April 2018, citing slow transaction times, high fees, and fewer use cases.

       • Here is a direct quote from Stripe explaining their decision to stop using Bitcoin for payments: “Over the past year or two, as block size limits have been reached, Bitcoin has evolved to become better-suited to being an asset than being a means of exchange. Given the overall success that the Bitcoin community has achieved, it’s hard to quibble with the decisions that have been made along the way. (And we’re certainly happy to see any novel, ambitious project do so well.) But it’s no longer feasible to support Bitcoin as a payment option.”

     • Microsoft: Temporarily halted Bitcoin payments in January 2018, citing the same concerns as other companies. They later resumed Bitcoin support.

     • Fiverr: An online marketplace for freelance services, stopped accepting Bitcoin in February 2018 due to the high fees and slow transaction times.

     • Expedia: A travel booking website, stopped accepting Bitcoin in June 2018, citing the same reasons as other companies.

     • Reddit: The popular online forum stopped accepting Bitcoin payments for Reddit Gold in March 2018, citing the high fees and transaction times.

  4. Influence of Joi Ito and the MIT Media Lab: Joi Ito, as the director of the MIT Media Lab, influenced the Bitcoin community through the lab’s Digital Currency Initiative (DCI). The DCI was engaged in a variety of cryptocurrency-related research and development projects. Joi Ito’s association with Digital Garage, which funded the DCI, meant that he indirectly affected Bitcoin’s development. The DCI supported prominent Bitcoin core developers like Wladimir van der Laan and Cory Fields, who played critical roles in updating and refining Bitcoin’s codebase, including the implementation of Segregated Witness (SegWit). I won’t go into detail about SegWit in this article, but will just say briefly that SegWit was a technical change that was critical in transforming Bitcoin from a medium of exchange (digital cash) to a store of value (digital gold). 

  5. Jeffrey Epstein’s Public Comments on Bitcoin in 2017: Against the backdrop of Bitcoin’s scaling issues and the involvement of Joi Ito and the MIT Media Lab’s DCI, the article “Billionaire financier weighs in on the future of Bitcoin” by Dylan Love, published by the Next Web on October 10, 2017, takes on added significance. Jeffrey Epstein’s portrayal of Bitcoin as more of a store of value than a currency reflects the shifting narrative of Bitcoin’s identity during this period—a change concurrent with SegWit’s implementation and the scaling debates. This shift aligns with the period during which the MIT Media Lab, indirectly funded by Epstein, was involved in Bitcoin’s development, leading to speculative links about Epstein’s potential impact on Bitcoin’s evolution.

  The developments in 2017 underscored Bitcoin’s scalability challenges and set off a search for resolutions. Although SegWit was introduced to address some of these issues, the debate over Bitcoin’s scalability endures, with the community still seeking sustainable solutions to manage an increasing transaction volume effectively.

  What Does All This Mean?

  Here’s the crux of the situation:

  1. The Federal Reserve has executed three successful CBDC pilots in partnership with the MIT Media Lab.

  2. Joi Ito, Chair of the MIT Multimedia Lab, received funding directly from Jeffrey Epstein and also from other sources, such as Bill Gates, via Epstein. Many of these contributions were marked as anonymous.

  3. Concurrently, the DCI provided funds for developers like Wladimir van der Laan and Cory Fields, whose modifications transformed Bitcoin from a peer-to-peer digital cash system to a store of value.

  4. At the same time, Jeffrey Epstein made his only public remarks about Bitcoin, explicitly referring to it as a store of value rather than a currency.

  5. Following the release of the New Yorker story detailing Ito’s involvement with Epstein, Ito resigned within a day. In response, MIT revised its policies and pledged to donate an amount equivalent to the funds received from any Epstein foundation to a charity that supports victims of sexual abuse.

  Do we have conclusive evidence linking Epstein’s funding directly to the CBDC pilots or to the transformation of Bitcoin from a medium of exchange to a store of value? No, not directly. In fact, most of the CBDC pilots began after Epstein was arrested for the last time on July 6, 2019. I doubt Epstein had any involvement with Project Cedar or Regulated Liability Network. However, Project Hamilton was announced in 2020 (presumably the funding was lined up prior to announcement). 

  Nonetheless, it is evident that Americans should be wary of the progress in CBDC development, President Biden’s intentions to implement them, and maintain a healthy skepticism regarding the intentions and involvement of Joi Ito, the MIT Multimedia Lab, and Jeffrey Epstein concerning both the deployment of CBDCs and the restriction of Bitcoin’s capabilities.

  I intend to further investigate the specific area of Epstein’s potential funding of Project Hamilton (which replaces cash) as well as SegWit (which transformed Bitcoin from digital cash to digital gold). Just as Bitcoin was gaining in adoption as an alternative to the dollar, it was throttled. Shortly thereafter, a project was launched to create a government-controlled CBDC alternative. Certainly topics worthy of more investigation. 

  To go in depth on many of these topics, check out my book, The Final Countdown. It outlines a potential dystopian future shaped by CBDCs and social credit systems. It discusses the global progression of CBDCs, the impending collapse of the dollar and fiat currency at large, and presents tangible measures to avert CBDCs by adopting and utilizing self-custody cryptocurrencies, gold, and silver for transactions within a parallel economy.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 18:20

• Airbus A330 Flight Cancelled After Passenger Spots 4 Missing Fasteners On Wing
  Airbus A330 Flight Cancelled After Passenger Spots 4 Missing Fasteners On Wing

  “Well, at least it’s not a Boeing.”

  That was likely the thoughts of everyone in the Boeing C-suite, exhaling a collective sigh of relief, when the latest airline safety mishap began making its rounds through the newscycle Monday.

  That news was the cancellation of an Airbus A330 flight bound for New York after 41 year old passenger Phil Hardy looked out the window and noticed “screws missing from the plane’s wing,” according to the New York Post.

  The plane, set to take off as Flight VS127 from Manchester Airport, had “four missing fasteners,” according to the report.

  Hardy, a frequent flyer, said: “I’m a good flyer, but my partner was not loving the information I was telling her and starting to panic, and I was trying to put her mind at rest as much as I could.”

  He continued: “I thought it was best to mention it to a flight attendant to be on the safe side.”

  

  Engineers showed up to examine the plane and the flight was eventually cancelled. 

  A representative for Virgin Air said the flight was cancelled to “provide time for precautionary additional engineering maintenance checks, which allowed our team the maximum time to complete their inspections.”

  They continued in a statement: “The safety of our customers and crew is always our top priority and this was not compromised at any point. We always work well above industry safety standards and the aircraft is now back in service.”

  An Airbus chief wing engineer said the panel was supplemental and was secured properly: “Each of these panels has 119 fasteners, so there was no impact to the structural integrity or load capability of the wing, and the aircraft was safe to operate.”

  “As a precautionary measure, the aircraft underwent an additional maintenance check, and the fasteners were replaced,” he concluded.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 18:00

• Bienvenidos! Supremes Roberts, Barrett Join Libs In Allowing Biden To Remove Texas Border Wire
  Bienvenidos! Supremes Roberts, Barrett Join Libs In Allowing Biden To Remove Texas Border Wire

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Supreme Court voted 5–4 vote to allow U.S. Border Patrol agents to remove razor wire that was set up along the U.S.–Mexico border by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott while a legal challenge plays out.

  

  In a brief order, the high court vacated a ruling issued in mid-December by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh voted to deny the application to vacate that lower court injunction, which would have prevented Border Patrol agents from removing the barrier.

  Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor sided with the Biden administration. No one provided an explanation for their vote.

  The order represents a win for President Joe Biden’s administration, which has struggled to curb illegal immigration into the United States since he took office in 2021, amid an ongoing battle with Mr. Abbott, a Republican, over the border.  The administration had filed an emergency request to the Supreme Court and argued that Texas was blocking federal agents from carrying out their duties.

  In arguments to the high court, Biden administration lawyers claimed that the barrier prevented agents from reaching illegal immigrants who already entered the United States. Lawyers for the state of Texas, however, have said that Washington has not been able to secure the border as Mr. Abbott’s administration set up razor wire fencing under the Operation Lone Star plan.

  They argued that the razor wire blocks agents from gaining access to “the very border they are charged with patrolling and the individuals they are charged with apprehending and inspecting.”

  “Like other law-enforcement officers, Border Patrol agents operating under difficult circumstances at the border must make context-dependent, sometimes split-second decisions about how to enforce federal immigration laws while maintaining public safety,” Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote to the Supreme Court. “But the injunction prohibits agents from passing through or moving physical obstacles erected by the State that prevent access to the very border they are charged with patrolling and the individuals they are charged with apprehending and inspecting.”

  In the application, she also rejected the idea that federal agents have done anything illegal or improper.

  “Border Patrol agents’ exercise of discretion regarding the means of enabling the apprehension, inspection and processing of noncitizens in no way suggests that they cut wire for impermissible purposes,” the solicitor general wrote.

  In court papers, the administration also said that, in any case, federal immigration law trumps Texas’s efforts to stem the flow of migrants into the country.

  That was submitted after the Fifth U.S. Court of Appeals sided with Texas several weeks ago, saying that “the public interest supports clear protections for property rights from government intrusion and control.”

  Earlier this year, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration and multiple federal agencies and officials for destroying the razor wire. He and other state officials have argued that federal agents cut the wire to help groups crossing illegally through the river before taking them in for processing.

  

  “Federal agents have developed and implemented a practice of destroying Texas’s concertina wire to encourage, induce, and assist thousands of aliens to illegally cross the Rio Grande and enter Texas,” he said in a release in October. “Federal agents in some cases attempted to ease aliens’ ability to illegally climb up the riverbank into Texas by attaching ropes or cables to the back of pickup trucks. Federal agents regularly cut new openings in the wire fence, sometimes immediately after Texas officers have placed new wire to plug gaps in fencing barriers.”

  Mr. Abbott also has authorized installing floating barriers in the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass and allowed troopers to arrest and jail thousands of migrants on trespassing charges. The administration also is challenging those actions in federal court. A federal appeals court last month forced federal agents to stop cutting the concertina wire. Large numbers of migrants have crossed at Eagle Pass in recent months.

  In a separate case, the U.S. Fifth Court of Appeals in December ordered Texas to do away with a 1,000-foot-long buoy barrier in the Rio Grande, also designed to block illegal immigration. The court sided with the Biden administration, which argued that the barrier makes the Rio Grande difficult to navigate.

  This month, Texas denied entry to Border Patrol agents around Shelby Park in Eagle Pass after Mr. Abbott said that the state won’t allow agents “on that property anymore,” widening a dispute with the Biden administration.

  “We said, ‘We’ve had it. We’re not going to let this happen anymore,’” the governor said earlier this month, referring to the dispute.

  The Associated Press contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/22/2024 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest