- Will Trump Release The Files Exposing The Cunning Plot To Kill Kennedy?
Will Trump Release The Files Exposing The Cunning Plot To Kill Kennedy?
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 23:40Authored by Jacob Hornberger via The Future of Freedom Foundation,
With President Trump’s critics decrying his lack of respect for America’s democratic system by his refusal to concede to Joe Biden, now would be a good time to remind such critics of one dark-side aspect of America’s much-vaunted democratic system – the national-security’s state’s violent regime-change operation in Dallas on November 22, 1963.
From the beginning, the official story has been that a lone-nut communist ex-U.S. Marine, with no apparent motive, assassinated the president. Nothing to see here, folks, time to move on – U.S, officials said. Just a plain old ordinary murder case.
If anyone murders a federal official, you can be assured of one thing: the feds will do everything they can to ensure that everyone involved in the crime is brought to justice. It’s like when someone kills a cop. The entire police force mobilizes to capture, arrest, and prosecute everyone involved in killing the cop. The phenomenon is even more pronounced at the federal level, especially given the overwhelming power of the federal government
Yet, the exact opposite occurred in the Kennedy assassination. The entire effort immediately became to pin the crime solely on a communist ex-U.S. Marine named Lee Harvey Oswald and to shut down any aggressive investigation into whether others were involved in the crime.
What’s up with that? That’s not the way we would expect federal officials to handle the assassination of any federal official, especially the president of the United States. We would expect them to do everything — even torture a suspect — in order to capture and arrest everyone who may have participated in the crime.
For example, just three days after the assassination and after Oswald himself had been murdered, Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach sent out a memo stating,
“The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.”
How in the world could he be so certain that Oswald was the assassin and that he had no confederates? Why would he want to shut down the investigation so soon? Does that sound like a normal federal official who is confronted with the assassination of a president?
The answer to this riddle lies in the brilliantly cunning scheme of the U.S. national-security establishment to ensure that the investigation into Kennedy’s assassination would be shut down immediately and, therefore, not lead to the U.S. national-security establishment.
The assassination itself had all the earmarks of a classic military ambush, one in which shooters were firing from both the front and back of the president. It is a virtual certainty that responsibility for the ambush lay with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who had been waging a vicious war against Kennedy practically since the time he assumed office. (See FFF’s book JFK’s War with the National Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas Horne, who served on the staff of the Assassination Records Review Board in the 1990s.)
While the JCS were experts at preparing military-style ambushes, they lacked the intellectual capability of devising the overall plot and cover-up, given its high level of cunning and sophistication. That responsibility undoubtedly lay with the CIA, whose top officials were brilliant graduates of Ivy League Schools. Moreover, practically from its inception the CIA was specializing in the art of state-sponsored assassinations and in how to conceal the CIA’s role in them.
To ensure that the role of the Pentagon and the CIA in the Kennedy assassination would be kept secret, they had to figure out a way to shut down the investigation from the start. Their plan worked brilliantly. While the normal thing would have been all out investigations into the murder, in this particular murder the state of Texas and U.S. officials did the exact opposite. They settled for simply pinning the crime on Oswald, the purported lone nut communist ex-U.S. Marine.
Here is how they pulled it off.
As the years have passed, it has become increasingly clear that Oswald was a government operative, most likely for military intelligence or maybe the CIA and the FBI as well. His job was to portray himself as a communist, which would enable him to infiltrate not only domestic communist and socialist organizations but also communist countries, such as Cuba and the Soviet Union.
After all, how many communist Marines have you ever heard of? The Marines would be a good place to recruit people for intelligence roles. Oswald learned fluent Russian while in the military. How does an enlisted man do that, without the assistance of the military’s language schools? When he returned from the Soviet Union after supposedly trying to defect and after promising that he was going to give up secret information he had acquired in the military, no federal grand jury or congressional investigation was launched into his conduct, even though this was the height of the Cold War.
Thus, Oswald would make the perfect patsy. He could be stationed wherever his superiors instructed. And he would have all the earmarks of a communist, which would immediately prejudice Americans at the height of the Cold War.
But simply framing Oswald wouldn’t have been enough to shut down the investigation. An aggressive investigation would undoubtedly be able to pierce through the pat nature of the frame-up. They needed something more.
If you’re going to frame someone who is supposedly firing from the rear, then doesn’t it make sense that you would have shots being fired only from the rear? Why would they frame a guy who is supposedly firing from the rear by having shots fired from the front?
That’s where the sheer brilliance of this particular regime-change operation came into play. The plan was much more cunning than even the successful regime-change operations and assassinations that took place prior to the one against Kennedy — i.e., Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, Cuba from 1959-1963, and the Congo in 1961.
There is now virtually no doubt that Kennedy was hit by two shots fired from the front. Immediately after Kennedy was declared dead, the treating physicians at Parkland Hospital described the neck wound as a wound of entry. They also said that Kennedy had a massive, orange-sized wound in the back of his head. Nurses at Parkland said the same things. Two FBI agents said they saw the big exit-sized wound. Secret Service agent Clint Hill saw it. Navy photography expert Saundra Spencer told the ARRB in the 1990s that she developed the JFK autopsy photos on a top-secret basis on the weekend of the assassination and that they depicted a big exit-sized wound in the back of JFK’s head. A bone fragment from the back of the president’s head was found in Dealey Plaza after the assassination. That is just part of the overwhelming evidence that establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the shot that hit Kennedy in the head came from the front.
Okay, if you’ve got a shooter firing from the back and he’s a communist, and if you have other shooters firing from the front, then they have to be working together. So, who would the shooters be who were firing from the front? The logical inference is that they had to be communist cohorts of Oswald.
That’s what Oswald’s supposed visits to the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico just before the assassination were all about —making it look like Oswald was acting in concert with the Soviet and Cuban communists to kill Kennedy.
If the assassination was part of the Soviet Union’s supposed quest to conquer the world, retaliation would mean World War III, which almost surely would have meant nuclear war, which was the biggest fear among the American people in 1963.
But why not retaliate in some way? Would U.S. officials at the height of the Cold War hesitate to retaliate for the communist killing of a U.S. president, simply because they were scared of nuclear war? Not a chance! In fact, throughout Kennedy’s term in office the Pentagon and the CIA were champing at the bit to attack Cuba and go to war with the Soviet Union.
But here’s the catch: How do you take action that is going to destroy the world when it was your side that started the assassination game in the first place? Remember: It was the CIA that started the assassination game by partnering with the Mafia to assassinate Cuban leader Fidel Castro.
Thus, Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, and the JCS had the perfect excuse to shut down the investigation and pin the crime only on Oswald: If they instead retaliated, it would be all-out nuclear war based on an assassination game that the U.S. had started.
In fact, when Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade alleged from the start that Oswald was part of a communist conspiracy, Johnson told him to shut it down for fear that Wade might inadvertently start World War III.
Moreover, when U.S. Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren initially declined Johnson’s invitation to serve on what ultimately became the Warren Commission, Johnson appealed to his sense of patriotism by alluding to the importance of avoiding a nuclear war. Johnson used the same argument on Senator Richard Russell Jr.
From the start, the Warren Commission proceedings were shrouded in “national-security” state secrecy, including a top-secret meeting of the commissioners to discuss information they had received that Oswald was an intelligence agent. When Warren was asked if the American people would be able to see all the evidence, Warren responded yes, but not in your lifetime.
Does that make any sense? If the assassination was, in fact, committed by some lone nut, then what would “national security” and state secrecy have to do with it?
That’s undoubtedly how they induced the three military pathologists to conduct a fraudulent autopsy — by telling them that they had to hide the fact that shots had been fired from the front in order to ensure that there was no all-out nuclear war. That’s how we ended up with a fraudulent autopsy. (See my books The Kennedy Autopsy and The Kennedy Autopsy 2.)
Thus, the plan entailed operating at two levels: One level involved what some call the World War III cover story. It entailed shutting down the investigation, as well as a fraudulent autopsy, to prevent nuclear war. The other level involved showing the American people that their president had been killed by only one person, a supposed lone nut communist former Marine.
Obviously, secrecy and obedience to orders were essential for the plan to succeed. That was why the autopsy was taken out of the hands of civilian officials and given to the military. With the military, people could be ordered to participate in the fraudulent autopsy and could be forced to keep everything they did and witnessed secret.
That’s why Navy photography expert Saundra Spencer kept her secret for some 30 years. She had been told that her development of the JFK autopsy photos was a classified operation. Military people follow orders and keep classified information secret. Imagine if Spencer had told her story suggesting a fraudulent autopsy in the week following the assassination.
Gradually, as the years have passed, the incriminating puzzle has come together. The big avalanche of secret information came out in the 1990s as part of the work done by the Assassination Records Review Board.
Of course, there are still missing pieces to the puzzle, many of which are undoubtedly among the records that the CIA and national-security establishment are still keeping secret. But enough circumstantial evidence has come to light to enable people to see the contours of one of the most cunning and successful assassination plots in history.
* * *
It’s time to release all of the official assassination records of the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, and all other federal agencies. The national-security rationale for continued secrecy is ludicrous and baseless. The only reason for continued secrecy is that the national-security establishment knows that the records will fill in more pieces to its November 22, 1963, regime-change operation.
In the 1990s, the JFK Records Collection Act gave federal agencies another 25 years to release their assassination-related records, based on the ridiculous claim of “national security.” That period of time expired early in Trump’s administration. After promising to release the files, Trump surrendered to the CIA’s demands for more secrecy, extending the time for secrecy until October 2021.
But we all know what’s going to happen in 2021. The CIA is going to tell President Biden that national security requires more years of secrecy and Biden is going to defer to the CIA.
Time’s up. Amidst all the hoopla over whether Trump is behaving disrespectfully of America’s democratic system, how about ordering the release of the estimated 15,000 records of the CIA and the federal agencies that are still being kept secret from the American people? After all, it’s pretty hard to reconcile regime-change and cover up with America’s much-vaunted democratic system, isn’t it?
President Trump — Do the right thing. Order the National Archives to release those long-secret assassination records to the American people now. Who cares if the CIA, the Pentagon, and other federal agencies get upset?
- Feds Deploy Firefighting Drones With "Dragon Eggs" To Combat Wildfires
Feds Deploy Firefighting Drones With “Dragon Eggs” To Combat Wildfires
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 23:20California has experienced its worst year of fire on record. According to Digital Trends, to better combat the wildfires this year, the federal government deployed a fleet of drones to conduct backburn operations by releasing miniature fireballs.
Containing fires by setting prescribed burns, called backburns, is one method firefighters can control wildfires because it deprives fires of combustible material.
Helicopters equipped with flamethrowers are generally used for backburning operations. But a new process via an unmanned aerial system that releases “dragon eggs” has revolutionized the process this fire season.
Drone Amplified’s IGNIS System Dropping Combustible Dragon Eggs
“The Dragon Eggs are a brand name for a specific type of what is more generally known as an ignition sphere,” Carrick Detweiler, CEO of Drone Amplified, told Digital Trends.
“The ignition spheres have been used for decades by manned helicopters to perform prescribed burns and backburns on wildfires. One of the main ways to contain wildfires is to use backburns to remove the fuels — [such as] dead wood — in advance of the main wildfire. This then allows firefighters to contain and put out the wildfire,” Detweiler said.
The dragon eggs are spheres that contain potassium permanganate and can explode into flames when dropped.
“Our system, called IGNIS, carries 400 ignition spheres and is attached to a drone.
“When commanded by the operator, IGNIS punctures and injects the ignition sphere with glycol. This starts a chemical reaction that will cause the ignition sphere to ignite 30 to 60 seconds later. IGNIS contains onboard sensing and intelligence to safely and quickly inject the spheres at up to 120 per minute. This allows firefighters to precisely and safely start controlled burns while staying out of harm’s way,” he said.
IGNIS is controlled by artificial intelligence that is being fed data about its surrounding through sensors embedded on the drone. This allows the drone to drop firebombs without putting firefighters in even more danger.
Backburn Operation With Dragon Egg Drop On Predefined Flight Route
Digital Trends said “hundreds of thousands of the ignition spheres” have been dropped this year to contain fires in California, Colorado, Oregon, and elsewhere in 2020. This has saved the USDA more than $14,000 per day, compared with using helicopters to perform the same job.
Watch: Dragon Eggs Dropped In Colorado
- Armed Baltimore Gangs Target Delivery Drivers In Recent Wave Of Carjackings And Robberies
Armed Baltimore Gangs Target Delivery Drivers In Recent Wave Of Carjackings And Robberies
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 23:00As the coronavirus pandemic drives online holiday shopping – USPS, FedEx, UPS, and Amazon delivery workers distribute more mail and packages than ever. The increased number of deliveries has left delivery vans densely packed with a treasure trove of consumer goods and other valuable items, which have become sitting ducks for armed criminal gangs.
Armed criminal gangs in Baltimore City have recognized the online shopping boom. They’re giving up on robbing brick and mortar stores and have now opted to hijack or rob delivery service vehicles.
Just this week alone, there’s been a series of mail and package delivery drivers targeted in lawless Baltimore City.
According to FOX45 News, the first incident occurred on Monday along Mosher Street, in west Baltimore, an area known for criminal gangs, widespread homicides, and out of control opioid crisis. Investigators said armed suspects hijacked a USPS mail carrier. The van was recovered hours later, but it appears the suspects were able to loot it. USPS is offering a $50,000 reward for any information about the gang involved.
Postal Inspectors are offering up to $50K for info regarding the Nov. 16th robbery of a Letter Carrier on W Mosher St., Baltimore, MD. @USPIS_DC is working with @BaltimorePolice 💵🚨🕵️📞See Reward Poster for Details pic.twitter.com/jAbk3oeNL6
— USPIS_DC (@USPIS_DC) November 18, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
The second incident occurred Tuesday evening at Mary Avenue in northeast Baltimore. A UPS driver had their truck stolen and has since been recovered.
On Wednesday night, investigators say an Amazon delivery van was targeted along Highland Avenue in east Baltimore. Police say the Amazon worker was able to prevent the armed suspect from commandeering the delivery vehicle.
“There’s been an increase in the number of deliveries of packages, parcels and boxes,” Jeffrey Ian Ross, a criminologist with the University of Baltimore, told FOX45.
Ross said the attacks on delivery vans are”unusual.” He said with increased mail volume because of the virus pandemic and holiday season creates an opportunity for armed gangs.
“It’s a cost-benefit calculation,” Ross said. “They may find that other avenues of normal criminality are drying up for them so they’re innovating.”
With the pandemic resulting in increased brick and mortar store closures – criminal gangs are now targeting delivery vehicles as online shopping booms. How long until delivery service workers carry weapons and ride in armored vans?
- The Great Relocation: Americans Are Relocating By The Millions Because They Can Feel What Is Coming
The Great Relocation: Americans Are Relocating By The Millions Because They Can Feel What Is Coming
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 22:40Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,
This is a really odd time to be having a “housing boom”. We are in the middle of the worst public health crisis in 100 years, endless civil unrest has been ravaging many of our largest cities, and we are experiencing the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s. But even though more than 70 million Americans have filed new claims for unemployment benefits this year, home sales are absolutely rocking. How in the world is this possible?
Well, this phenomenon is actually quite easy to explain. As our society comes apart at the seams all around us, vast numbers of Americans are seeking greener pastures. According to ABC News, the chaotic events of 2020 have caused “millions of Americans” to relocate. In New York City alone, more than 300,000 former residents have permanently moved to new addresses.
We have never seen anything quite like this before, and it is anticipated that this trend will continue into 2021. Even though most Americans don’t know exactly what is ahead, I think that on some level many of them can feel what is coming, and they are getting out of the big cities while they still can.
So even though we are literally in the midst of a horrifying economic depression, homes are selling like hotcakes right now…
Home sales rose again in October, at their highest pace in 14 years, according to the National Association of Realtors.
But a record low inventory of available homes and a greater number of luxury homes sold have pushed the median home price up to a record $313,000, almost 16% more than a year ago.
With so many interested buyers and such little inventory, it has definitely become a seller’s market…
At the current pace of sales, it would take just 2.5 months to clear the existing inventory — a record low.
If you want to sell your home, now is a really good time to do so.
But then good luck finding a new place.
This incredible surge in demand for housing has also fueled a tremendous boom in housing starts…
Single-family starts experienced continued gains in October, according to data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Census Bureau. Single-family construction is up 8.6% year-to-date, with notable gains in 2020 for the Midwest and other lower-density markets.
The pace of single-family starts in October was the highest production rate since the spring of 2007.
So even though so many other sectors of the economy are deeply hurting at the moment, those that build homes are loving life right now.
Real estate websites are also doing extremely well. In particular, “Zillow surfing” has become a new national pastime…
Zillow usage has climbed since March, with online visitors to for-sale listings up more than 50 percent year-over-year in the early months of the pandemic.
People bond over listings on Discord servers, group chats and “Zillow Twitter,” and their obsession has made many strange and obscure listings go viral. Curbed, a website covering city life, real estate and design, recently started a column called My Week in Zillow Saves, in which people (myself included) share the homes they’ve admired on the site.
If you can believe it, “Zillow surfing” has become “especially popular among teenagers”…
Zillow surfing is especially popular among teenagers. A TikTok meme over the summer consisted of users talking about knowing where the bathrooms were in their friend’s or crush’s house before ever visiting it because they had toured all of their classmates’ homes on Zillow. Many young people have extensive lists of saved homes and discuss and share listings with friends.
When life is miserable, people like to daydream about something better, and “Zillow surfing” allows them to do that.
Personally, I have been hearing from so many people that have either recently relocated or that would like to move. So many that I know are feeling an urgency like never before, because they sense that really dark times are fast approaching.
Interestingly, one of the most important things that people look at when they are thinking of relocating is the political orientation of an area. In fact, one recent survey found that 42 percent of Americans “would be hesitant to move to an area where most people have political views different from their own”…
Forty-two percent of U.S. residents would be hesitant to move to an area where most people have political views different from their own, up from 32% in June, according to a new report from Redfin (redfin.com), the technology-powered real estate brokerage. That’s the highest share since 2017, when Redfin began posing this question to survey respondents.
Increasingly, Democrats are moving to “blue states” and conservatives are moving to “red states”.
Could this potentially have some very serious implications down the road?
I don’t know. I am just asking the question.
For other Americans, leaving the country entirely seems like a promising option…
Americans are leaving the country or seeking foreign visas in record numbers, according to immigration lawyers and expatriate organizations, during an oppressive year of political violence, racial strife and an uncontrolled pandemic that has kept families locked in their homes for months – with no clear end in sight.
As the economic suffering in the U.S. intensifies, the number of people wanting to leave will almost certainly go even higher.
With each passing day, more new restrictions are being put in place to try to control the COVID pandemic, and these new restrictions are going to make our ongoing economic depression a whole lot worse.
Already, it has become clear that another huge wave of economic pain is upon us.
The Greater Los Angeles Food Bank says that demand is up 145 percent compared to last year, and the other day people waited in absolutely massive lines for up to 12 hours at a food bank in Texas just to get some food.
Other Americans are stockpiling huge quantities of toilet paper and other supplies in anticipation of a very difficult winter.
No matter what happens with the election, things are about to get really crazy in this country.
Whatever you need to do to get prepared for what is ahead, I would do it as soon as possible.
The clock is ticking, and it appears that our day of reckoning is nearly here.
* * *
Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.
- TikTok-Mansions-For-Top-Influencers Company Goes Public
TikTok-Mansions-For-Top-Influencers Company Goes Public
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 22:20“Strike while the iron is hot,” the 15th-century proverb from the Medieval Times states. That’s what one New Jersey-based real estate firm that provides TikTok influencers with mansions has done through an unusual reverse takeover deal to go public.
On Nov. 12, West of Hudson Group Inc., the sole owner of “The Clubhouse,” a real estate portfolio of mansions in Southern California that houses top social media influencers with an estimated follower base of 90 million, was acquired by a shell company, Tongji Healthcare Group, Inc.
Subject to FINRA’s approval, “Tongji Healthcare Group, Inc.” will change its name to “Clubhouse Media Group, Inc.”
Called a “content house,” The Clubhouse operates a network of mansions with social media influencers living rent-free. There’s a catch – these influencers must give up a certain amount of revenues they collect from making videos about products.
Content houses have been an emerging trend in Los Angeles over the last year. Companies that run these unique properties, like The Clubhouse, are exploring options for sustainable business models. We’re surprised The Clubhouse didn’t excite the market with a special purpose acquisition company deal…
The Clubhouse is a network of three social media content creation houses (Clubhouse BH, Clubhouse Europe, and Not a Content House) that has received substantial press from top media organizations.
Clubhouse BH
Clubhouse Europe
Not a Content House
Heading to the capital markets may be part of a broader strategy, but like any penny stock, the name of the game is to launch a promotion for the pump as company insiders liquidate their positions in the dump. The Clubhouse could find a flurry of 10-year old hedge fund managers on Robinhood that would purchase shares.
… maybe these influencers will pump the stock?
What a bizarro world for capital markets as tens of millions of Americans face food and housing insecurity.
- Cooperate With China Or World War 3: Kissinger
Cooperate With China Or World War 3: Kissinger
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 22:00Authored by Gordon Chang via The Gatestone Institute,
“I would think we need first of all a dialogue with the Chinese leadership in which we are defining what we’re attempting to prevent and in which the two leaders agree that whatever other conflicts they have they will not resort to military conflict,” Henry Kissinger told Bloomberg News Editor-in-Chief John Micklethwait on November 16 at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum.
“Unless there is some basis for some cooperative action, the world will slide into a catastrophe comparable to World War I.”
Of course no one wants war of any type with China, but in a little over 14 minutes Kissinger managed to totally misinterpret Chinese history, support Beijing’s most important foreign policy goal, and give deeply misguided advice to Joe Biden. Kissinger has evidently learned nothing from years of dangerous Chinese behavior, which is partly the result of his policy formulations.
We start with history, because Kissinger was once an accomplished historian and his incorrect opinions on China today appear to flow from his unsupportable views of the Chinese past. He makes the case that Americans cannot understand Beijing’s insecurity.
“Americans have had a history of relatively uninterrupted success,” he noted.
“The Chinese have had a very long history of repeated crises. America has had the good fortune of being free of immediate dangers. Chinese have usually been surrounded by countries that have had designs on their unity.”
Even if his comments were true, no country now threatens China. China, in fact, has not faced any credible external threat to its unity for more than seven decades. The Communist Party dwells on history, such as the so-called “Century of Humiliation,” the subject of ruler Xi Jinping’s National Day speech last October, because that telling of history suits the needs of today’s insecure regime.
China’s troubled past, in short, is an excuse. What, after all, is it in history that justifies present-day Chinese aggression against India, Bhutan and Nepal, or its designs on Tajikistan, the Philippines and Malaysia?
Moreover, what justification is there for the Communist Party’s declaration of a “people’s war” on the United States in May of last year?
China is aggressive and militant at this moment because of the nature of its communist regime, which is quickly driving the country back to one-man rule and totalitarianism. Xi Jinping, the one man in China’s system, is now propagating the audacious concept of tianxia, that “all under heaven” owe allegiance to Beijing.
There are, unfortunately, some points in history when dialogue makes matters worse because hardline leaders perceive others’ desire to talk as a sign of weakness.
In any event, dialogue assumes that Chinese leaders can compromise, which at this point is a dubious proposition. For instance, Beijing last compromised a territorial claim in 2011 — with Tajikistan, when it took Tajik territory — but now is trying to reopen the settlement to grab even more. Since then, Beijing has added new claims — to the South China Sea — and has laid the groundwork for additional ones, especially over Japan’s Ryukyu chain.
The absence of Chinese goodwill leaves America a last resort: deterrence.
Kissinger, often cited as a deterrence expert, is now not a fan of it. When Micklethwait asked him whether he favored the notion of Biden advisors that democracies should unite in a coalition, the 97-year-old “grand consigliere of American diplomacy” — the Financial Times‘s description — was noncommittal. “I think democracies should cooperate wherever their convictions allow it or dictate it,” he replied. “I think a coalition aimed at a particular country is unwise, but a coalition to prevent dangers is necessary where the occasion requires it.” In Kissinger-speak, that is a “no” to international cooperation against Beijing.
Given what could be happening inside Communist Party political circles, there may now be no way to avoid war with a militant Chinese state. Yet whether peace is possible or not, it should be clear to Kissinger that the approach he has supported, and which has been adopted by every American president since President Nixon went to China in 1972, has contributed to Chinese aggressiveness. Kissinger, by urging conciliation when Beijing has made clear it cannot be appeased, has helped produced today’s grave situation.
Let us remember that Kissinger has always been intimidated by large communist states. He advocated détente in the early 1970s when he assumed there was no way to prevail over the Soviet Union. Reagan, after refusing to accept the USSR as a given, proved him dead wrong.
And Kissinger is dead wrong now.
“Trump has a more confrontational method of negotiation than you can apply indefinitely,” Kissinger told Micklethwait, appearing to speak to Joe Biden. That, James Fanell, the noted Swiss-based China strategist told Gatestone, is “an unambiguous declaration of Dr. Kissinger’s defeatism.”
As Fanell, a former director of Intelligence and Information Operations of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said, Kissinger believes the U.S. “cannot compete with the People’s Republic of China.”
America, however, is far stronger than China’s regime and has allies, which China, other than North Korea, does not. Moreover, the U.S. is knitting together a formidable coalition — the Quad with Australia, India, and Japan — giving Washington the ability to continue to confront Beijing on every front. The Chinese state is no match for nations, both near and far, it seems determined to antagonize.
What is the best indication that Kissinger is wrong?
Beijing at the moment is waging a concerted propaganda campaign to push his views as widely as possible. When your enemy wants you to do something, it is almost always not in your interest.
Kissinger essentially said the choice for America is cooperation or war, a narrative he has propagated in recent interviews. Yet repetition will not make his false dichotomy so. Countries can, between these two extremes, choose confrontation and deterrence. World War II in Europe, for example, started because Britain and France chose not to confront the Third Reich when doing so — in 1936 during the attempted remilitarization of the Rhineland — would have ended the German military threat.
Micklethwait started out the interview by asking about the Congress of Vienna, the subject of Kissinger’s A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the Problems of Peace 1812-22.
“Whenever peace—conceived as the avoidance of war—has been the primary objective of a power or a group of powers, the international system has been at the mercy of the most ruthless member of the international community,” he wrote. “Whenever the international order has acknowledged that certain principles could not be compromised even for the sake of peace, stability based on an equilibrium of forces was at least conceivable.”
Kissinger ducked the question and, for some reason, is now suggesting the United States put itself at the mercy of the world’s most ruthless regime.
- Tech Adviser Primed For "Major Role" In Biden Admin Recently Authored Book Denouncing Section 230
Tech Adviser Primed For “Major Role” In Biden Admin Recently Authored Book Denouncing Section 230
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 21:40The frontrunner to be Joe Biden’s technology adviser is seen as someone who would likely pave the way to more technology regulation. And among that regulation could be a roll back of the coveted Section 230, which big tech companies have been hiding behind while selectively censoring their users in the name of wokeness.
As of now, the President-elect’s top technology adviser, Bruce Reed, could wind up playing a key role for the Biden administration in dealing with how big tech companies are regulated. Reed is expected to “take a major role” in Biden’s administration, according to a Reuters report.
He had formerly helped negotiate with tech companies over the 2018 California Consumer Privacy Act, which is being seen as a potential precursor for a national privacy law.
Even more interesting, however, is the fact that Reed also helped write a chapter in a book a month ago that denounces Section 230, which makes it impossible to sue internet companies over the content of user postings.
He wrote: “If they sell ads that run alongside harmful content, they should be considered complicit in the harm. If their algorithms promote harmful content, they should be held accountable for helping redress the harm. In the long run, the only real way to moderate content is to moderate the business model.”
Reed’s resume includes working as Biden’s Chief of Staff from 2011 to 2013 while he was Vice President. He also served “as president of the Broad Foundation, a major Los Angeles philanthropic organization, and then as an adviser to Laurene Powell Jobs’ Emerson Collective in Palo Alto, California,” according to Reuters.
He also helped smooth the waters with tech companies during the California privacy campaign. Tech companies had initially been resistant to the change until Reed was able to compromise with Apple on the bill’s language. Other companies then fell in line.
Alastair Mactaggart, the real estate developer who masterminded the ballot initiative, said: “He understands that there needs to be good regulation. He wants to get something done. He wasn’t an ideologue who would take his toys and go home if it wasn’t perfect.”
We have a feeling the battle over Section 230 could wind up necessitating slightly more negotiation. We hope Reed is up to the task…
- "They Think You're Stupid!"
“They Think You’re Stupid!”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 21:20Authored by Andrea Widburg via AmericanThinker.com,
Yesterday, I expended considerable time and effort to write about “The Great Reset,” a leftist movement that imagines a brave new leftist world built around climate purity and socialist economic principles, with wise elites governing the masses. If I’d waited a day, I could have just shown you Paul Joseph Watson’s latest video – “They think you’re stupid” – which covers “The Great Reset” and the “Great Cover-Up about the Great Reset.”
If you’re debating whether to spend time to watch the video (at the end of this post), let me tell you a bit about it. Watson doesn’t stop with just the Great Reset that I’d described. Along the way, Watson torches just about everything that the elites are raining down on the masses, all courtesy of the extremely beneficial Wuhan virus.
Sure, the virus killed people (although I think it’s clear that, at least in America, mortality numbers have been inflated for political ends). But for the left, the virus has been an extraordinary blessing, allowing leftists to exert unimagined control over people, enrich themselves, and shift large sections of America into the government dependency category.
Watson hasn’t missed the fact that, while we’re being locked down and bankrupted, the rich are behaving just as they always do. Masks? Pfeh! Masks are for the little people. The same goes for social distancing.
And why shouldn’t our elites shut down religious holidays and the consolations of worship? For them, the fact that Judaism and Christianity give a strong moral fabric to Western society is an inconvenience. Of course, it’s different when it comes to leftist rallies. Americans need those — or at least that’s what the world’s elite are telling us.
Watson spares a moment to remind us that the leaders reveling in the benefits flowing to them from the Wuhan virus are becoming increasingly punitive as to those people who protest the loss of their rapidly diminishing liberties. You’d better be creative if you want to hug Granny, because the government thinks it’s a bad idea.
Meanwhile, the media, both at home and abroad, no longer make any effort to investigate the powerful or to learn more about events around the world. Whether in America, England, or elsewhere, the media exist solely as propaganda arms for the globalist elites. Even ostensibly conservative institutions, whether Fox News or activist groups, are getting in on the act.
Watson wraps up by reminding the “resistance” that they too were used by the monoparty elites. The Biden administration, should it come to pass, is every bit as committed to corporatism as any other modern administration (except for Trump’s, of course).
What’s clear is that this New Age socialism is not Karl Marx’s socialism. Marx envisioned the world’s exploited workers breaking down national barriers and uniting to create a world defined by common ownership of the means of production for the benefit of the people. In this scenario, it’s the elite — the educated and the plutocrats — who get re-educated or executed. This vision has failed everywhere it’s been tried and this failure has always been accompanied by endless pain and death.
What we’re experiencing now is Woodrow Wilson’s socialism: Wilson’s shtick was that the elite (i.e., the rich and educated) should rule the world. The elite would use their superior knowledge and intelligence to improve the lives of the little people in ways beyond the people’s abilities and imaginations. (It’s always about re-imagining things.)
One of the early progressives’ “superior” ideas was eugenics. Blacks were inferior, although they were useful for doing the elite’s dirty work. Mostly, though, abortion and breeding programs would purify the nation. The Nazis found Wilsonian Progressives inspirational.
Wilson also came up with the “bass-ackwards” idea that America should never use her military for something as crass as her own defense. Instead, the American people should expend their blood and gold to “make the world safe for Democracy.” The Obama administration embraced this notion under the rubric of U.N. ambassador Samantha Power’s “Responsibility to Protect.”
Watson’s video may make you see red, but it’s worth watching. As always, his videos come with a language warning.
- California Exodus: Silicon Valley Legend Keith Rabois Leaving 'Massively Improperly Run' San Francisco
California Exodus: Silicon Valley Legend Keith Rabois Leaving ‘Massively Improperly Run’ San Francisco
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 21:00Silicon Valley tech legend Keith Rabois is leaving San Francisco and “moving immediately” to Florida, adding to the list of tech heavyweights who have left the Bay Area.
“I think San Francisco is just so massively improperly run and managed that it’s impossible to stay here,” said Rabois, an early executive at PayPal, Square, Linkedin, Yelp who has been a Bay Area resident of two decades, telling Forbes that many in his social circles are leaving as well.
“COVID sort of masks this stuff. It’s not quite as obvious where people are moving to and if they’ve actually moved since everybody’s working remotely.”
Rabois is one of many Bay Area forsakers. His planned departure follows the flight of Peter Thiel, Rabois’s old Stanford buddy and PayPal partner, to Los Angeles in 2018. (Rabois joined Thiel’s venture capital firm Founder’s Fund last year.) In a much-read IPO prospectus this year, Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, a PayPal spinout and Rabois investment, also said he was relocating the company to Colorado after laying into the Valley’s tech firms, calling them unpatriotic for pooh-poohing military contracts. And Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter and Square, where Rabois worked as chief operating officer for three years, planned to move to Africa before the pandemic struck. –Forbes
An August “Suburban Market Report” by Zillow revealed that home prices in San Francisco had fallen 4.9% year-over-year, while inventory had jumped 96% during the same period as a flood of new listings hit the market. Zillow noted that they aren’t seeing the same trend in cities such as Miami, Los Angeles, Washington D.C. or Seattle.
“It may be tempting to credit the city of San Francisco’s inventory boom to the advent of remote work that came with the pandemic, but one only has to look at to San Jose to question that narrative,” Zillow economist Josh Clark told SFGATE, adding “The San Jose metro, which like the city of S.F. is dominated by tech workers, has not seen a similar rise. Two things that could drive the difference are San Francisco’s density and its smaller share of family households.”
- Ghislaine Maxwell In Quarantine After Covid Breakout In Her Unit
Ghislaine Maxwell In Quarantine After Covid Breakout In Her Unit
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 20:40To keep him quiet, Jeffrey Epstein was “suicided” last summer. A little over a year later, Ghislaine Maxwell may get the covid treatment.
Federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York reported on Monday that Epstein’s girlfriend and madam, Ghislaine Maxwell, 58, who faces criminal charges of sex trafficking and is being held in a federal lockup in Brooklyn, is in quarantine after a staffer working in her area of pre-trial lockup in the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) contracted the coronavirus, the Law & Crime blog reported. Maxwell herself has tested negative and is not exhibiting symptoms, for now.
The Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York, Photo: AP “Last week, a staff member who was assigned to work in the area of the MDC where the defendant is housed tested positive for COVID-19,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey wrote in a two-page letter. “In response, the MDC implemented the same quarantine protocols that apply whenever an inmate has potentially been exposed to the virus. Specifically, on November 18, 2020, the defendant was tested for COVID-19 using a rapid test, which was negative. That same day, the defendant was placed in quarantine.”
“As with any other quarantined inmate, the defendant will remain in quarantine for fourteen days, at which point she will be tested again for COVID-19,” the letter went on. “If that test is negative, she will then be released from quarantine. To date, the defendant has not exhibited any symptoms of COVID-19.”
The Bureau of Prisons reports that Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center currently has six active COVID-19 cases among staff and one inmate infection. Maxwell is awaiting trial there following her federal indictment for allegedly grooming underaged girls for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein and his powerful friends. Epstein was found dead in a different prison — Manhattan’s Metropolitan Correctional Center — in August 2019, after he reportedly killed himself.
Since Ghislaine remains the last surviving link to exposing an underworld of powerful and connected pedophiles, jailhouse authorities in Brooklyn are reportedly taking no chances to avoid the same fate as Epstein’s accused confederate, although if indeed Epstein did not kill himself, Ghislaine’s days are likely numbered.
“During her time in quarantine, the defendant will be housed in the same cell where she was already housed before she was placed in quarantine, and medical staff and psychology staff will continue to check on the defendant every day,” the letter states.
Still, since allowances must be made for her pre-trial preparations, Ghislaine – who has been held without bail since her July arrest – will have ample opportunities to catch the virus before her day in court.
“Like all other MDC inmates in quarantine, the defendant will be permitted out of her cell three days per week for thirty minutes,” prosecutors wrote. “During that time, the defendant may shower, make personal phone calls, and use the CorrLinks email system. In addition, the defendant will continue to be permitted to make legal calls every day for up to three hours per day. These calls will take place in a room where the defendant is alone and where no MDC staff can hear her communications with counsel.”
Maxwell’s attorneys did not respond to a different press inquiry earlier today, in response to the release of deposition excerpts by Epstein’s former house manager John Alessi who testified that Maxwell “constantly” took photographs of topless girls brought to his boss’s pool.
The worker, John Alessi, told lawyers for one of Maxwell’s accusers, Virginia Giuffre, in a June 2016 deposition that Maxwell had a “high-tech” camera and was constantly taking photographs by the money manager’s pool of European and American girls, most of whom were topless.
Maxwell, who was Epstein’s girlfriend and close aide, kept the photographs in an album on her desk, said Alessi, who said he last spoke to Epstein in 2014. A partial transcript of the deposition was unsealed in federal court in New York after failed efforts by the former socialite to keep it secret.
- MacroVoices: Are Markets Mispricing COVID-19 Vaccine Risks?
MacroVoices: Are Markets Mispricing COVID-19 Vaccine Risks?
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 20:20Daniel Lacalle, economist and fund manager at Tressis, joined Erik Townsend for an interview on this week’s episode of MacroVoices. With COVID cases soaring in Europe and the US, markets are trying to balance the promise of a COVID vaccine, which has helped goose markets in recent weeks, with the risks of more restrictive public-health measures.
With stocks near record highs, Townsend asks Lacalle for his view on whether markets are perhaps being too hasty in pricing in all this vaccine optimism. As Lacalle sees it, investors have lazily latched on to the positive headlines, while failing to really understand and analyze the risks that could create problems in the coming months.
Vaccines
Daniel: I completely agree. I think that markets are only accepting the positive newsflow without analyzing the real path to the widespread distribution of a vaccine. And even if you look at (for example) the messages that Pfizer, AstraZenec, and Moderna are saying, you’re absolutely right, we’re talking about the latter part of the second half – best case – third quarter of 2021. And in the meantime, you have a much worse situation in Europe, much worse situation in the United States. The hospitalization rates are much higher. The level of tightness in the intensive care units is extremely, extremely complex right now. And very, very, very, very challenging. So I think that you are absolutely right: Things will get worse before they will get better.
However, I think that for the average investor it is almost the following: When you get very bad news, as you’ve seen for example in Europe, what you bet on is that central banks, European Central Bank will massively increase the stimulus package, increase the purchasing program, launch a bazooka as they call it, etc.
And when the news are good, you just buy it because the news are good. You see what I mean? That the level of risk taking that an average investor is adding on to a portfolio is completely disconnected with the reality of the path of the vaccine – obviously a very, very, very positive piece of newsflow, however very challenging in terms of distribution.
You just mentioned the storage complications. But even in the most benign scenario (which I recently put in my Twitter feed), the most benign scenario assumes that by the end of 2021, less than 38% of the population at risk will have access to a vaccine, which means that the situation is getting very, very difficult in developed economies.
In the United States it is quite probably that if there is a new administration, lockdowns will be implemented. We are seeing lockdowns implemented in countries that rejected the idea – like for example Austria recently, in Europe.
So you’re absolutely right. The erosion of the potential of growth and the weakness of the economy is something that is much more important and certainly much more challenging than what markets are willing to take into account.
And everybody seems to be betting aggressively on the combination of massive monetary stimulus plus the idea that vaccines will solve everything at some point.
Stagflation
Does Lacalle see all this monetary and fiscal stimulus leading to a surge in inflation coupled by slowing growth? Maybe in the long term, but not right away.
Daniel: Well, I think that there is certainly a risk of stagflation. But more in the mid-term. We will first probably see a very aggressive level of deflation. Because inflation only happens when the newly-created money is going to the real economy. And therefore it becomes a massive devaluation of the purchasing power of the currency, which leads to a widespread rise in prices despite no economic growth. In this case, what is happening is that newly-created money is going to bonds – and fundamentally to sovereign bonds, obviously. And therefore inflation is being generated – and massively in sovereign bonds. We have in the Eurozone countries that are all but bankrupt or completely insolvent financing themselves at the lowest yields in history.
That is massive inflation. Okay? And when all of that newly-created money is utilized by governments to do two things – one is to perpetuation overcapacity and current spending that does not generate real economic return. The reality is that it does not create inflation the way that we would expect, because you’re basically adding overcapacity to overcapacity that makes it impossible to generate inflation. Second, the newly-created money goes actually to current spending with no real economic return.
So it’s very difficult to see the levels of inflation that we saw in the ‘70s. And, also, economies are much more open. Everybody is exporting, so that makes it more difficult. However, on the other side, what you have is a situation that I find fascinating, is that while official CPI, official index of consumer prices, is very low, the goods and services that people actually want to buy are actually rising much faster than real wages, than nominal wages, and than the official CPI. So, for example, we’re seeing how health care, education, food, clothing, utility bills, those elements are actually growing faster. And what’s coming down is everything that is subject to technology.
So non-replicable goods go up faster than official CPI and replicable goods go down significantly. Technology, tourism, hospitality. You name it.
So I think that what we are seeing right now is that, on one side, central banks do not see inflation. And, on the other side, you have a growing discontent among the lower classes, the less well-off, and the middle class because the access to goods and services is more challenging.
Cost of living is rising faster than nominal and real wages.
So, in my opinion, the risk of what is going on right now with the policy of central banks is, first, ignoring that the cost of living for the people in the middle to lower classes is rising much faster.
Second is to ignore the fact that there is actually a level of inflation in financial assets that is significantly more worrying than what anybody would imagine.
Think about this.
Just an increase of 100 basis points in the yields of sovereign countries would really bring them to absolute collapse in an environment in which 100 basis points would still be at a completely abnormal level of yield.
The problem from the central bank perceptive is that they are doing the following: Central banks are looking at the rearview mirror. It’s like somebody driving down the road at 250 miles an hour, looking at the rearview mirror, and saying “We haven’t crashed yet. Let’s accelerate.”
And the point here is that the risk of stagflation is rising very, very rapidly because of those factors that I mentioned. Because the non-replicable goods and services are rising faster than expected and because, at the same time, the economy is stagnating because of the debt saturation effect.
Another debt crisis in Europe?
As Europe pushes to pass its biggest-ever pan-European rescue package, what’s the risk that this seeds another round of core vs. peripheral frustrations in Europe, potentially tearing apart the EU?
Daniel: It’s a very, very good question.
Monetary policy in the Eurozone should be what it was designed to be, which is a tool to provide countries time to implement the structural reforms that are going to allow them to be stronger, more productive, and more solvent in the future.
However, monetary policy in the Eurozone had gone from being a tool that looks to provide some time for governments to implement structural reforms to being an excuse not to implement them.
And that tension between the north and the south is already happening.
You’ve seen it, for example, with the European Recovery Fund. How immediately there was this idea that the frugal countries were attacking the southern European countries because they did not want to monetize and mutualize all of the spending without question.
Because solidarity mechanisms exist in the Eurozone, but they don’t have to be something that goes from being a solidarity mechanism to a donation mechanism. And especially a donation to perpetuate and accelerate the structural imbalances and the weaknesses of the economy.
So what I think that the European Central Bank should do is to be a lot less strict about the rule. I think that the only thing that they need to do is to follow very, very simple rules by which both sides feel that there is a support. But at the same time it’s not a perverse incentive to undo reforms.
Which is what we’re seeing, for example, in Spain or, at some point, we saw in Italy.
And everything, just like in the United States it would be solved as well, would be solved by a set of measures in which discretionality of the individuals at the European Central Bank is limited.
So, for example, you have an asset purchase program. The asset purchase program goes to X amount of bonds but it doesn’t go beyond that.
And you say it very clearly, you explain it well in advance – communication consistent and constant about those rules – so that it’s very clear that those are the rules and those have to be implemented.
And then you have at least some level of security that governments will not use the period of expansionary monetary policies to simply get worse and to become almost too big to fail, as you were mentioning.
Because what’s happening right now is the following, and we saw it between 2014 and 2017 with Mario Draghi. Mario Draghi used to go to the market and say monetary policy is not enough. Countries have to implement structural reforms. If structural reforms are not implemented, monetary policy is not going to work.
And, literally, governments heard that the same way as they could hear a commercial on TV. They just didn’t even pay any attention.
What ends up happening is that governments would be at least aware that they could not use monetary policy to continue to increase the imbalances of the economy and the European Central Bank. The only thing it needs to do is to follow very strictly those rules. That would certainly prevent the perverse incentive that is being created right now.
As Lacalle claimed, the first signs of trouble ahead for the dollar and the dollar-based financial system will be when demand for greenbacks really starts to decelerate. Of course, one could argue that we’re already seeing that as Russia and China work to use both of their respective currencies more frequently to settle bilateral trade.
Listen to the full interview below:
- 7 Things That Used To Be "Crazy Conspiracy Theories" Until 2020 Happened
7 Things That Used To Be “Crazy Conspiracy Theories” Until 2020 Happened
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 20:00Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,
Remember back in the old days of, say, 2019, when anyone who talked about microchip implants, Americans being forced to show travel papers, and re-education camps was thought to be a crazy conspiracy theorist? And then 2020 rolled around and voila! It turns out those conspiracy theories weren’t so “crazy” after all.
And I’m not just talking about the government releasing info about UFOs.
We’re living in a time when someone will attempt to beat the crap out of you, burn your house down, or even kill you if you voted for the “wrong” presidential candidate. We’re being subjected to curfews, our movement is restricted, and our businesses have been forcibly shut down. One day, people will look back on this as the year that everything changed – or depending on how Americans respond to the mandates – the year we finally said enough.
Here are seven things that were considered crazy conspiracy theories…until now, when they’re becoming far too real.
#1) Universal Basic Income
Did you ever really think we’d live in a country where the government would tell private business owners when and how they could operate? Where workers would be told, “You can no longer go to work for your own good?”
Well, welcome to 2020.
22 million jobs were lost and only 42% of those were recovered by last August, when the country began to reopen. Millions of the lost jobs were permanent losses, as businesses across the country fold under the weight of the restrictions that either don’t allow them to operate or the money problems of their former customers.
“It’s clear that the pandemic is doing some fundamental damage to the job market,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics. “A lot of the jobs lost aren’t coming back any time soon. The idea that the economy is going to snap back to where it was before the pandemic is clearly not going to happen.”
…More than 10 million Americans are currently categorized as temporarily out of work. But historically, nearly 30% of people who tell the Labor Department that they are temporarily unemployed never get their job back, said Heidi Shierholz, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank.
“Even though we don’t know if the historical record will hold in this case, it’s an extremely valid concern that not all of those people are going to get called back,” she said.
People who are counting on businesses reopening their doors may be surprised to find that a temporary loss has become permanent one, said Zandi. (source)
Of the businesses that have closed, many will never reopen. Most harshly affected were small businesses.
About 60% of businesses that have closed during the coronavirus pandemic will never reopen, and restaurants have suffered the most, according to new data from Yelp. (source)
So we have not only people who became unemployed, but we also have business owners who’ve lost everything. As we go into the second round of lockdowns across the United States, it’s not a stretch of the imagination to think that some of the small businesses that have thus far managed to stay afloat will succumb to the economic effects of these mandates…taking with them even more jobs and plunging even more people into poverty.
Poverty is a vicious cycle and one seemingly small thing can suck those who are struggling into a vortex of fees and penalties from which emerging seems impossible. I’ve written about my own experiences with poverty here. The concern is that even fewer people will recover financially after this round of government mandates, leaving even more Americans broke, hungry, and homeless.
But don’t worry – the government is here to help and I mean that in the President Reagan threatening kind of way. They provided a “stimulus” check to everyone in America, gave such huge unemployment money to people that they made more staying home than they did going to work, and went so much deeper into debt that the number is simply unfathomable.
In effect, they paid people not to work. And it isn’t the fault of those people in most cases – the government forced their places of employment to close unless it was considered “essential.”
And that sounds a whole lot like Universal Basic Income. Or as I like to call it, modern feudalism.
Quite a few people are ready to give up their freedom so that someone else can take care of them.
They don’t think they’re giving up freedom. They’re convinced that they are embracing a smart, fair system that eliminates poverty. The greed, entitlement, and lack of ambition that seems inherent in many people today will have them slipping on the yoke of servitude willingly.
They feel like they deserve a living just for drawing breath. As Gawker’s headline reads, “A Universal Basic Income Is the Utopia We Deserve.”
The idea of a universal basic income for all citizens has been catching on all over the world. Is it too crazy to believe in? We spoke to the author of a new book on the ins, outs, and utopian dreams of making basic income a reality.
The basic income movement got a significant boost this week when the charity GiveDirectly announced that it will be pursuing a ten-year, $30 million pilot project giving a select group of Kenyan villagers a basic income and studying its effects. As an anti-poverty solution, universal basic income appeals to impoverished people in Africa, relatively well-off Scandinavians, and Americans automated out of their jobs alike. (source)
Sure, money for nothing sounds great on the surface.
But what would the real result of a Universal Basic Income be?
Feudalism. Serfdom. Enslavement.
UBI would fast-track us back to the feudalism of the Middle Ages. Sure, we’d be living in slick, modern micro-efficiencies instead of shacks. We’d have some kind of modern job instead of raising sheep for the lord of the manor.
But, in the end, we wouldn’t actually own anything because private property would be abolished for all but the ruling class. We’d no longer have the ability to get ahead in life. Our courses would be set for us and veering off of those courses would be harshly discouraged.
People will be completely dependent on the government and ruling class for every necessity: food, shelter, water, clothing. What better way to assert control than to make compliance necessary for survival? (source)
With this second round of lockdowns how many more jobs will go permanently down the tubes? What are all those people going to do for food? For rent? The government is going to give them money. And we can’t even argue, really, because everyone knows someone who has lost a job they had for decades and who can’t find other work.
They might call it something else, but Universal Basic Income is coming. And it’s coming soon.
#2) Travel Papers
Don’t be ridiculous. We’ll never have to show our “papers” to travel freely in the United States.
Doh.
Not until a COVID pandemic with all its subsidiary restrictions occurred. Back in March, days after I warned about the first lockdown, I wrote:
For everyone who thought the article about the Lockdown of America was a “hysterical overstatement” and that they could still do whatever they wanted because it wasn’t really being enforced, what are you thinking now that “travel papers” are being handed out? To me, this sounds like the lockdowns I wrote of yesterday were just the first incremental step toward a society that nobody hopes to see.
Yesterday, readers sent me photos of “travel papers” provided to them by employers so they could get to and from work. These are employees who work in industries like healthcare, pharmacies, and foodservice, as well as those who work in the production, transport, and sales of essential supplies.
One reader wrote, “We were told to show these if we got stopped on the way to or from work and that if the authorities gave us any trouble, to not argue and just go back home.”
Papers that people sent were from Pennsylvania, New York, Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, Kansas, New Jersey, West Virginia, Virginia, Oregon, Florida, Louisiana, and Ohio. Industries mentioned in the papers were trucking, grocery stores, medical clinics, hospitals, nursing homes, city transit workers, railroads, food production plants, pharmacies, gas stations, stores like Target and Walmart, and automotive repair facilities.
Most people were given their papers on Friday or Saturday and told they’d need them to get to and from work starting the week ahead. (source)
You can see some of the papers that people sent me here.
#3) Mandatory GPS tracking of humans
“Don’t be silly. Nobody is actually tracking you with your phone. You’re not Jason Bourne.”
Whoops. 2020 proved that was a lie when they rolled out contact tracing apps to make sure you didn’t breathe the same air as somebody who got a positive COVID test.
Not only do sick or potentially sick people need to worry about being phoned or questioned by contact tracers, but there’s also a whole new world of dystopian technology being rapidly developed.
Apple and Google formed a partnership to develop a phone app with the potential to monitor one-third of the world’s population. The Australian government has developed an app called COVIDSafe to “protect you, your family and friends and save the lives of other Australians. The more Australians connect to the COVIDSafe app, the quicker we can find the virus.”
In fact, all sorts of potentially invasive new technology tools are springing up to “fight COVID.” Some use AI to detect signs of COVID and the Department of Defense is deploying thermal imaging to detect signs of COVID.
These things won’t just go away when the pandemic is over. If they’re in use for a year or two years – however long this virus is with us – chances are, they’re here to stay. (source)
So…if you have a smartphone, rest assured, at some point you’re probably going to have an app like this forcibly installed during one of those relentless updates. Of course, they’ll say that the app is just the framework and you have to enable it for it to work. Oh, wait, they already said that. After installing “the framework.”
#4) Cashless societies
Somehow, the United States ran out of change.
There were no coins to be had…anywhere…for a while. Bloomberg reported in August:
As if a deep recession and a never-ending pandemic wasn’t enough, the U.S. now faces another crisis: a coin shortage. Thanks to the lockdowns, fewer coins are in circulation, leaving businesses unable to make change when customers hand over paper money. (source)
This had a lot of people concerned, especially since Venezuela used COVID to push citizens toward a cashless society. Here in the United States, the “change shortage” was so extensive is caused many stores to give you your change on a store loyalty card or invite you to donate that change to some cause. A true cashless society would allow significant control over our day to day lives. See this article for some of the totalitarian ways it would affect us.
#5) Microchips
Darpa got involved early on, touting it as a way to “save” us all from COVID. Robert Wheeler wrote:
But governments aren’t having to market the chip as a method to track, trace, and control their populations. Instead, they are marketing the chip as a way to track and detect COVID and other coronaviruses. Clearly, this is a much easier sell to a public literally terrorized by their governments and mainstream media outlets for the last six months.
Raul Diego details the creation and coming rollout of the new biochip in his article, “A DARPA-Funded Implantable Microchip to Detect COVID-19 Could Hit Markets By 2021,” where he writes,
The most significant scientific discovery since gravity has been hiding in plain sight for nearly a decade and its destructive potential to humanity is so enormous that the biggest war machine on the planet immediately deployed its vast resources to possess and control it, financing its research and development through agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and HHS’ BARDA.
The revolutionary breakthrough came to a Canadian scientist named Derek Rossi in 2010 purely by accident. The now-retired Harvard professor claimed in an interview with the National Post that he found a way to “reprogram” the molecules that carry the genetic instructions for cell development in the human body, not to mention all biological lifeforms.
These molecules are called ‘messenger ribonucleic acid’ or mRNA and the newfound ability to rewrite those instructions to produce any kind of cell within a biological organism has radically changed the course of Western medicine and science, even if no one has really noticed yet. As Rossi, himself, puts it: “The real important discovery here was you could now use mRNA, and if you got it into the cells, then you could get the mRNA to express any protein in the cells, and this was the big thing.” (Source)
The microchip talk died down but the fact it as even a discussion and topic of COVID research should be troubling. Anyway, after the initial microchip hubbub, the push got redirected toward our next conspiracy theory.
#6) Mandatory vaccines
Remember back when nobody thought that adults would ever be forced to take vaccines except for “crazy conspiracy theorists?” Well, that day is coming sooner than many people expect.
A much-heralded COVID vaccine could be rolled out in a matter of days. Pfizer and BioNTech have both concluded Phase 3 of rushing their jabs to market. There are still many, many questions.
The return to many of our old familiar ways will take time, and how much time remains unclear. The answers await more research into the vaccines, how they can be distributed and how many people are willing to get them.
“A vaccine won’t be available immediately for everybody,” says Arthur Reingold, a professor of epidemiology at the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley…
…“It probably will take four to six months,” he says. “What that says to me is that people will have to keep wearing masks at least until spring. We won’t be in a magically different situation by February or March. I don’t see how that can possibly happen.”
Equally important are the unknowns about the vaccines themselves. Scientists still don’t know how long vaccine-induced protection will last, for example, or whether inoculations can block actual infection, or only prevent the onset of disease. If the latter turns out to be the case, meaning the vaccines keep us from getting sick, but not infected, we still could be infectious to others. Until we know, don’t toss those masks into the trash…
…Andrew Badley, an immunovirologist who chairs Mayo Clinic’s covid-19 task force, says the return of any normal activities depends on numerous factors, including how many people get vaccinated.
“The only possibility that life will return to normal by summer is if the majority of the population receives the vaccines by then and the early efficacy data is borne out in ongoing studies,” he says. He adds, however: “I think it is unlikely we will be able to vaccinate the majority of the population by then.” (source)
And how will they make sure that “the majority” of the population gets the vaccines? It’ll start out easy – there are tons of people who will gladly roll up their sleeves to get a vaccination that was rushed to market with no testing on the long-term effects. And then, the rest of us will be coerced by being unable to go to work, to a concert, to school, or into a public building without proof we’ve been vaccinated.
YOU WALK TOWARD the arena, ready for a big game, tickets in hand. But what you see is a long line wrapping around the corner of the building and a bottleneck at the entrance as people search their pockets and purses for a small piece of paper. To be cleared to enter, you’ll also need that document—proof that you’ve received a COVID-19 vaccination.
This is the future as some experts see it: a world in which you’ll need to show you’ve been inoculated against the novel coronavirus to attend a sports game, get a manicure, go to work, or hop on a train.
“We’re not going to get to the point where the vaccine police break down your door to vaccinate you,” says Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist at New York University’s School of Medicine. But he and several other health policy experts envision vaccine mandates could be instituted and enforced by local governments or employers—similar to the current vaccine requirements for school-age children, military personnel, and hospital workers…
…The mandates can be directed toward customers, as well. Just as business owners can bar shoeless and shirtless clients from entering their restaurants, salons, arenas, and stores, they can legally keep people out for any number of reasons, “as long as they’re not running afoul of any antidiscrimination laws,” says Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, a professor of health and vaccine law at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law.
When a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available, some experts think states will require targeted industries to enforce vaccine mandates for their employees, especially those we’ve come to know as “essential workers.”
“Grocery store workers get exposed to a lot of people, but also have the chance to infect a lot of people because of the nature of their work and the fact that virtually everybody needs to buy food,” says Carmel Shachar, executive director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics at Harvard Law School. Hospitality industry workers—those who work in restaurants, bars, and coffee shops, for example—could also see similar mandates.
“It’s in an employer’s interest to make sure that their workplace is protected and that you can’t infect your colleagues,” Shachar says. “Having a widely accessible vaccine gets a lot of employers out of having to control their clients’ behavior.” And with a vaccinated workforce, “you don’t need to worry if the people you’re serving at the restaurant have COVID-19.”
Even the general public could be incentivized to get vaccinated. “Oddly enough, the best way to impose a mandate is to reward people with more freedom if they follow that mandate,” Caplan says. For example, with proof of inoculation, you would be able to attend a sporting event “as a reward for doing the right thing,” he says. “And I can imagine people saying, If you want to go to my restaurant, my bowling alley, or my tattoo parlor, then I want to see a vaccine certificate, too.”
Booster shots could also be required, depending on the efficacy of future vaccines. (source)
Doesn’t it just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside how all these experts are planning to force an unwilling populace to accept an untested vaccine? It’s all for our own good, you know.
#7) Re-education camps
Remember how we all used to joke about being put into FEMA camps? Well…..
Finally, for those of us who believed these conspiracy theories were conspiracy facts all along – oh – and for Trump voters – there’s the discussion about how to re-educate us so we can rejoin society.
In a Twitter thread run amok, we saw the dark side of some “well-educated” Democrats who were sincerely trying to figure out how to redeem those of us who did not vote for Joe Biden.
No seriously…how *do* you deprogram 75 million people? Where do you start? Fox? Facebook?
We have to start thinking in terms of post-WWII Germany or Japan. Or the failures of Reconstruction in the South.
— David Atkins (@DavidOAtkins) November 18, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
I know conservatives are upset by some of the responses here. And yeah, many are out of line.
But what do you expect people to do in self-preservation? The Right has been running 4 years on “fuck your feelings, my conspiracy theories are valid opinions, and we have more guns.”
— David Atkins (@DavidOAtkins) November 19, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Thank you for starting this conversation. Ignoring the propaganda and disinformation problem would be a grave mistake. We should already have a plan to combat it. Simply replacing the President does nothing. We need actual deprogramming efforts, & we should consult cult experts.
— Laura Miers (@LauraMiers) November 18, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Of course, he doesn’t really mean re-education camps. Of course not.
And no, of course I’m not advocating “re-education camps” or anything like that. The point is that conservative infotainment is disinformation propaganda indistuinguishable from cult programming, and social media algorithms enable it.
— David Atkins (@DavidOAtkins) November 19, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
And Laura found she bit off a bit more than she intended to chew. So of course she blamed non-Americans. (Probably those darned Russians, right?)
If anyone is interested in how these attacks work, see the below tweets. Suggesting public health measures or combatting propaganda brings trolls by the hundreds. It’s not organic, it’s organized. Information warfare. It has a chilling effect on speech, which is the point. https://t.co/1rEwPsz8zB
— Laura Miers (@LauraMiers) November 19, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
I’m not really sure how we go about combatting propaganda, disinformation, & hate when those who speak out on social media are targeted with tsunamis of hate, death & rape threats. I’ve never encountered it at this magnitude. It started after the election.
— Laura Miers (@LauraMiers) November 19, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Welcome to my inbox for the past 8 years, Laura. Every time I have posted a pro-gun, pro-self-defense article, I’ve been barraged with “creative” rape threats with a vast variety of implements and violent threats by the “peaceful” left. People have wished my children dead in a school shooting. So cry me a river, Laura, if your “thoughtful discussion” of putting me and people like me into anti-cult deprogramming in a gulag put you in an unpleasant position.
Trust me, you get used to it. Heck, you might even begin to understand why I’m a gun owner.
Is it just me or has 2020 been like reading every “crazy conspiracy” rabbit hole on the internet while dropping acid? Except you can’t come down from the trip because it’s all actually happening.
- "Just Let Me Go" – Shanghai Airport Plunged Into Chaos After Workers Sealed In For COVID Testing
“Just Let Me Go” – Shanghai Airport Plunged Into Chaos After Workers Sealed In For COVID Testing
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 19:40Thousands of airport workers at Shanghai’s largest international airport were sealed inside Sunday after an outbreak of COVID-19 was detected, reported WaPo.
On Sunday night, hazmat suit-clad health workers were seen on video, herding thousands of airport workers into the basement of Shanghai Pudong International Airport.
Chaos shortly broke out as people screamed:
“Just let me go,” shouts one man in the crowd. “I don’t want to die here,” cries out another.
昨晚的浦东机场，连夜核酸检测…….🙏🙏🙏 pic.twitter.com/yQaTBUyn2s
— 沉默的力量The power of silence (@2mmbPkM00IJwIUV) November 23, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
On Sunday night, Shanghai officials took action to test more than 17,000 airport workers following two new positive COVID-19 cases at the airport, bringing total cases this month to seven. The new cases were detected at the airport’s international cargo shipments area.
By Monday morning, 17,719 airport workers were tested for the virus – about 11,544 results came back negative so far, airport officials said.
During a news conference Monday, Shanghai officials blamed the latest cluster in cases at the airport on cargo shipped from North America.
“There was a lot of foam cushioning inside, and it was damp.
“Research has shown the coronavirus can survive in sealed, damp conditions, and neither of the two was wearing a face mask while cleaning it,” said Sun Xiaodong, vice director of the city’s pandemic control center.
The officials also said the airport would implement stricter virus prevention measures for inbound international cargo.
This isn’t the first time China has tried to portray imported goods from heavily-infected countries for creating outbreaks in the country.
In July, China claimed imported shrimp from Ecuador was carrying traces of the virus.
Then in September, China was at it again, when it urged domestic companies to halt frozen imports of food from countries that have been severely impacted by the pandemic due to the risk of transmission through packaging.
Virus cases tied to imports are just another tool for Beijing to keep the narrative alive. The virus originated outside China – Beijing has been caught implicitly supporting these conspiracy theories.
- "Why I'm Hopeful About 2021, But…"
“Why I’m Hopeful About 2021, But…”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 19:20Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,
What we need is not a return to the corrupt, tottering kleptocracy of 2019, but a re-democratization of capital, agency and money.
I’m hopeful about 2021, and no, it’s not because of the vaccines or the end of lockdowns or anything related to Covid. The status quo is cheering the fantasy that we’ll soon return to the debt-soaked glory days of 2019 when everything was peachy.
The problem with this “brand” of magical thinking is that stripped of self-serving PR, the world of 2019 was an autocratic kleptocracy stripmining the planet to enrich the few at the expense of the many. Viewed through this lens, what’s hopeful isn’t returning to an autocratic kleptocracy but moving beyond it.
The most hopeful thing in my mind is that the Status Quo is devolving from its internal contradictions and excesses. Here’s the status quo in a nutshell:
-
The solution to too much debt is more debt.
-
The solution to autocratic elites hogging wealth and power is to give the elites more wealth and power.
And so on: every status quo “solution” boils down to doing more of what’s failed spectacularly because it serves the interests of the few at the top of the wealth-power pyramid.
The Great Reset is a perfect example of this insanity: now that we’ve destroyed the planet with our private jets, greed and corruption, give us even more power over you.
The status quo is a perverse, intensely destructive system with powerful incentives for predation, exploitation, fraud and complicity. That’s the world of 2019; do we really want to go back to that? And even if we could, how long would it last? Another year or two? And at what cost to social cohesion and the planet?
A more humane, sustainable world lies beyond the Status Quo. The problem is those reaping the immense rewards of the privileged insiders will fight any reform tooth and nail, so the only real way to advance the interests of the common good is for the rigged, rotten, corrupt, unsustainable status quo to crumble to dust.
I know many smart, well-informed people expect the worst once the Status Quo (the Savior State and its kleptocratic banking / corporatocracy partners) devolves, and there is abundant evidence of the ugliness of human nature under duress.
But we should temper this Id ugliness with the stronger impulses of community and compassion. If greed and rapaciousness were the dominant forces within human nature, then the species would have either died out at its own hand or been limited to small savage populations kept in check by the predation of neighboring groups, none of which could expand much because inner conflict would limit their ability to grow.
The remarkable success of humanity as a species is not simply the result of a big brain, opposable thumbs, year-round sex or even language; it is ultimately the result of social and cultural associations that act as a “network” for storing knowledge and relationships– what we call intellectual and social capital.
I have devoted significant portions of my books–
-
Survival+: Structuring Prosperity for Yourself and the Nation (free chapter PDF)
-
An Unconventional Guide to Investing in Troubled Times (free chapter)
-
A Radically Beneficial World: Automation, Technology & Creating Jobs for All (free chapter PDF)
-
Will You Be Richer or Poorer?: Profit, Power, and AI in a Traumatized World (free chapter PDF)
-
A Hacker’s Teleology: Sharing the Wealth of Our Shrinking Planet (free chapter PDF)
–to an explanation of how community, sustainability, the public good and self-reliance have all atrophied under the relentless expansion of the autocratic Corporate-State kleptocracy.
The social capital and “return on investment” earned from investing time and energy in community and other social networks has been replaced by a check from the Central State–an MMT/UBI (Universal Basic Income) transfer payment that surely beats the troublesome work of investing in community in terms of risk and return.
The net result of the Savior State dominating society and the economy is the rise of a pathological mindset of entitlement and resentment–the two are simply two sides of the same coin. You cannot separate them.
Once self-reliance has been lost, so too has self-confidence been lost, and the Savior State dependent–individual and corporation alike–soon distrusts their ability to function in an open market.
This is a truly sad, self-destructive state of affairs, and deeply, tragically ironic. The calls for “help” quickly lead to dependence on the Savior State and corporate monopolies, and that dependence quickly breeds complicity and silence in the face of repression and predation by the State and its corporate partners.
In a very real sense, citizens relinquish their citizenship along with their self-reliance and self-worth once they accept dependence on the State. Citizenship in the original Greek concept was not simply the granting of rights to do as one pleased; it also demanded a commitment to serve the interests of the many via personal sacrifice.
I often mention that the U.S. has much to learn from so-called Third World countries that are poorer in resources and credit. In many of these countries, the government is the police, the school and the infrastructure of roadways and energy. Many of these countries are systemically corrupt, and the State is the engine and enforcer of corruption.
Rather than something to be embraced and lobbied, involvement with the State is something to be avoided as a risk. As a result, people depend on their social capital and community for sustenance, support, work and connections.
This is not altruism, it is mutually beneficial.
Once a community dissolves into atomized individuals who each get a payment from the Central State, then they no longer need each other. Rather, other dependents on the State are viewed as competitors for the State’s resources.
These atomized, isolated individuals have a perverse relationship with the State and what remains of the community around them: lacking the self-worth earned from work or engagement/investment in a community, then their only outlet for self-identity is consumption: what they wear, eat, drink, etc. as consumers. This lack of purpose and meaning is destructive to well-being; we all want to be needed and valued by our circle and society.
This dependence on the State and corporate monopolies also serves the State’s goal, which is a passive, compliant populace of dependents, and distracted, passive workers who enrich the owners of corporations with their labor and pay their taxes to the state. This dependence on the State and a hollow consumerism are ontologically bound: each feeds the other.
The era of debt-based consumption as the engine of “growth” and “prosperity” is coming to an end. Adding debt no longer creates growth; it actually takes away from the economy by expanding debt service (interest payments).
The vast majority of developed-world people have had the basics of life since the late 1960s — transport, food, shelter and utilities. The “growth” since then depended on cheap, abundant oil and a consumerist mentality in which one constantly re-defines one’s identity not from social investments in the shared community but from consumption of corporate goods and services funded by credit.
Not coincidentally, this dominance of consumption as the only metric for “growth” (as opposed to, say, productive activity) has been paralleled by the dominance of the Central State.
The end of credit-based consumption will be a very positive development, as will the devolution of the Savior State. The Savior State is like cheap oil–both are at their peaks and are starting their inevitable slide down the S-curve. The world they created was not as positive for human fulfillment and happiness as we have been told.
Indeed, study after study has found that people with the basics for life, a higher purpose that requires sacrifice and a tight-knit community are far and away happier than isolated, atomized, insecure consumers, regardless of their wealth and consumption.
This potential to re-humanize and re-democratize our economy and society is why I am hopeful. What we need is not a return to the corrupt, tottering kleptocracy of 2019, but a re-democratization of capital, agency and money.
More on that later this week…
* * *
If you found value in this content, please join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.
-
- US Attorney Gives Antifa Pass On Rand Paul Attack After Refusing To Investigate
US Attorney Gives Antifa Pass On Rand Paul Attack After Refusing To Investigate
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 19:00The US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia has declined to investigate who is funding the ‘thugs’ who attacked him on video following President Trump’s August 2020 White House nomination acceptance ceremony.
“The DC U.S. Attorney today confirmed to me that they will not pursue an investigation of who is funding the thugs who attacked my wife and me and sent a DC police officer to the hospital,” wrote Paul via Twitter.
The DC U.S. Attorney today confirmed to me that they will not pursue an investigation of who is funding the thugs who attacked my wife and me and sent a DC police officer to the hospital. https://t.co/abpESDJ4nx
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) November 23, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsShortly after the incident, Rand and his wife Kelley appeared on “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” where he said “It was terrifying.”
“I have never experienced anything like that in my life. We felt completely powerless.”
“At first I was trying to look in their eyes and trying to have any kind of reason … to see someone as a human being and I realized they did not see us as human beings,” said Kelley Paul, adding “We were Trump supporters, so they absolutely despised us.“
“in that moment, it was a bloodthirsty mob, and all I could think of was the man who was kicked in the head in Portland … or the man whose jaw was broken [in Kenosha] or an eight-year-old Secoriea Turner. I really thought we were going to lose our lives, I thought someone was going to throw a brick. It was the most terrifying moment of my entire life,” she continued.
INSANE: BLM mob attacks officer escorting Rand Paul out of the RNC. pic.twitter.com/4Mb3IX75gQ
— Essential Fleccas 🇺🇸 (@fleccas) August 28, 2020
- Bitcoin's Gut Check: The Time Of Crisis As The Moment Of Truth
Bitcoin’s Gut Check: The Time Of Crisis As The Moment Of Truth
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 18:40Authored by Marc Bernegger via CoinTelegraph.com,
If Bitcoin weathers the current financial storm, our monetary system will be on the brink of dramatic changes or even a revolution.
image courtesy of CoinTelegraph
We are at a turning point in history. The coming months will show how institutional investors will react in the medium term to the countless rescue packages in the wake of the coronavirus crisis. One thing is certain: States and central banks have been hard-pressed for solutions. Moreover, it looks like their efforts have been exhausted already at the start. Should investors end up losing faith in the measures taken, the consequences would be far more dramatic than a short-term stock market crash.
No one can foresee today what our future monetary system will look like, but the history of money has been marked sometimes by radical system changes. Today’s historical interventions in the free market are unparalleled, especially given their magnitude, and will no doubt in hindsight be seen as the beginning of the end of our current monetary system with its fiat currencies “made out of nothing.”
Is Bitcoin (BTC) “digital gold” and a “safe haven” currency? Yes, now more than ever before.
Bitcoin was created in 2008 in response to the financial crisis, and the present-day chaos on the global financial markets is the first major test of its ability to assert itself as an alternative and a new asset class. However, when liquidity is needed, as it is now, everything is sold, especially risky assets. John Bollinger, the creator of the so-called Bollinger Band, a technical indicator for price developments, rightly noted that in times of crisis, investors will “sell whatever they can sell,” and only after assets have been turned into cash is an investment made in crisis-proof assets — e.g., gold.
Flee toward “hard money”
In contrast to state-run monetary watchdogs who have been trying to safeguard “a continuously functioning market” by pumping in “avalanches” of money (and not just since the coronavirus outbreak), the pricing of Bitcoin is regulated without any intermediary interference and is solely based on supply and demand. There is also a cap to the number of Bitcoins that can be created — 21 million — and this means that in contrast to traditional fiat currency, no new Bitcoins can be arbitrarily printed.
New Bitcoins are “mined” in the same way that other commodities are — e.g., gold — but through a complex and clearly defined process. No one is able to alter the number of newly generated Bitcoins.
It will be a clear advantage for our traditional monetary system to have alternatives to fall back on in the likely event of hyperinflation. “Creative instruments,” such as helicopter money and similar interventionist measures, are not possible in the same way with Bitcoin, and neither governments, (central) banks nor other institutions are able to manipulate and/or change the parameters of this new decentralized asset class.
Since the hegemonic power of the United States has been also weakening, the topic of reserve currency will at some point be on the table. Already today, it is foreseeable that Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will compete with digital currencies issued by state governments.
Is Bitcoin a “global digital currency?” This might sound like science fiction, but it is actually not that unfounded.
Meanwhile, institutional investors have started to see the attraction of crypto assets. However, in times of crisis, they are often quick to withdraw their capital from risky investments, and Bitcoin is still classified as such by the majority.
Personally, I am convinced that Bitcoin, as well as other digital assets, can only benefit from the current developments and their dramatic long-term consequences.
- Trump Tells GSA To Allow Biden Transition To Proceed "In The Best Interest Of Our Country"
Trump Tells GSA To Allow Biden Transition To Proceed “In The Best Interest Of Our Country”
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 18:29In what is the closest words yet to a concession, President Trump agreed to let GSA proceed with the Biden administration transition. In a pair of tweets, Trump noted:
“I want to thank Emily Murphy at GSA for her steadfast dedication and loyalty to our Country. She has been harassed, threatened, and abused – and I do not want to see this happen to her, her family, or employees of GSA.”
Trump added that while the election litigation battle continues…
“Our case STRONGLY continues, we will keep up the good fight, and I believe we will prevail!”
… He will allow the transition to proceed:
“Nevertheless, in the best interest of our Country, I am recommending that Emily and her team do what needs to be done with regard to initial protocols, and have told my team to do the same.”
As a gentle reminder, this is NOT what happened in 2000 Bush vs Gore…
After Vice President Al Gore conceded the presidential election to Texas Gov. George W. Bush Wednesday night, General Services Administration chief David Barram announced that GSA would release transition funds and provide office space to the Bush transition team.
The 2000 Presidential Transition Act, passed in October, allocates more than $5 million for the transition and expands GSA’s role in it. GSA will publish a transition directory with information on each agency, and will help arrange briefings and furnish appointees with information on topics such as ethics and financial disclosure regulations. GSA’s transition office is at 1800 G Street NW in Washington.
Republican lawmakers had criticized Barram’s decision to withhold transition funds pending Gore’s challenge to election results in Florida. Last week, Rep. Steve Horn, R-Calif., chairman of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology, held hearings on the issue. Rep. Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., then introduced a bill that would’ve required GSA to support the Bush transition.
Barram had said he would not release the funds until an “apparent successful candidate” had been determined, as mandated in the Presidential Transition Act of 1963. The Transition Act requires GSA to provide federal money, office space and other logistical support to the incoming and outgoing administrations.
Trump’s tweets follow a letter from Emily Murphy (see below), the General Services Administration chief, in which she told Biden that “because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in Section 3 of the Act upon request,” which includes some $6.3 million in funding and other government resources, as well as access to current agency officials and briefing books.
The biggest change now is that the Biden transition team will be able to flood federal agencies with officials focused on preparing the way for his administration. They will have access to agency staff and briefing books assembled earlier this year.
Until today’s GSA letter, the Biden transition team had worked informally to establish a new administration, including assembling a coronavirus task force and consulting with public health officials outside of the federal government, mimicking the approach former Vice President Dick Cheney took during the disputed 2000 election.
In the letter, Murphy also said that she had received “threats online, by phone, and by mail directed at my safety, my family, my staff, and even my pets in an effort to coerce me into making this determination prematurely.” She added that she was not “directly or indirectly pressured by any Executive Branch official” into the making or timing of a decision on the presidential transition.
The full letter from the GSA’s Murphy details what she has gone through and what steps take place next… (emphasis ours)
Dear Mr. Biden:
As the Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration, I have the ability under the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, as amended, to make certain post-election resources and services available to assist in the event of a presidential transition. See 3 U.S.C. § 102 note (the “Act”). I take this role seriously and, because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, am transmitting this letter today to make those resources and services available to you.
I have dedicated much of my adult life to public service, and I have always strived to do what is right. Please know that I came to my decision independently, based on the law and available facts. I was never directly or indirectly pressured by any Executive Branch official—including those who work at the White House or GSA—with regard to the substance or timing of my decision. To be clear, I did not receive any direction to delay my determination. I did, however, receive threats online, by phone, and by mail directed at my safety, my family, my staff, and even my pets in an effort to coerce me into making this determination prematurely. Even in the face of thousands of threats, I always remained committed to upholding the law.
Contrary to media reports and insinuations, my decision was not made out of fear or favoritism. Instead, I strongly believe that the statute requires that the GSA Administrator ascertain, not impose, the apparent president-elect. Unfortunately, the statute provides no procedures or standards for this process, so I looked to precedent from prior elections involving legal challenges and incomplete counts. GSA does not dictate the outcome of legal disputes and recounts, nor does it determine whether such proceedings are reasonable or justified. These are issues that the Constitution, federal laws, and state laws leave to the election certification process and decisions by courts of competent jurisdiction. I do not think that an agency charged with improving federal procurement and property management should place itself above the constitutionally-based election process. I strongly urge Congress to consider amendments to the Act.
As you know, the GSA Administrator does not pick or certify the winner of a presidential election. Instead, the GSA Administrator’s role under the Act is extremely narrow: to make resources and services available in connection with a presidential transition. As stated, because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in Section 3 of the Act upon request. The actual winner of the presidential election will be determined by the electoral process detailed in the Constitution.
Section 7 of the Act and Public Law 116-159, dated October 1, 2020, which provides continuing appropriations until December 11, 2020, makes $6,300,000 available to you to carry out the provisions of Section 3 of the Act. In addition, $1,000,000 is authorized, pursuant to Public Law 116-159, to provide appointee orientation sessions and a transition directory. I remind you that Section 6 of the Act imposes reporting requirements on you as a condition for receiving services and funds from GSA.
If there is anything we can do to assist you, please contact Ms. Mary D. Gibed, the Federal Transition Coordinator.
So, ‘ascertainment’ has not been reached but presumably, “democracy” is “safe” once again.
- Leveraged Finance at Full Throttle
Leveraged Finance at Full Throttle
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 18:25Real Vision editor Jack Farley hosts Tyler Neville of Real Vision for a spirited debate about the fate of risk assets. Tyler makes the case that U.S. equities have a lot more room to run, basing his case on tight credit spreads and the Federal Reserve’s ever-expanding balance sheet. Tyler incorporates market breadth as well as venture capital funding to argue that the punch bowl may never be removed. Jack challenges Tyler’s bullish thesis, asking Tyler about the upcoming expiration of the Fed’s emergency lending programs and the possibility that the holiday season will accelerate the spread of the COVID-19 virus. Jack and Tyler then explore the future of so-called “zombie companies,” whose liabilities have swelled to over $1.2 trillion. In the intro, Real Vision’s Haley Draznin analyzes the promising developments of a coronavirus vaccine, how it impacts the markets, and why some sectors will benefit a lot more than others. For charts from Tyler as well as Jack, click here: https://rvtv.io/2URRNAH - Pennsylvania Governor Bans Alcohol Sales On The Day Before Thanksgiving
Pennsylvania Governor Bans Alcohol Sales On The Day Before Thanksgiving
Tyler Durden
Mon, 11/23/2020 – 18:20Democratic Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf is tapping into his state’s Quaker roots to deliver an economy-sized dose of Thanksgiving disappointment. In an effort to avert a coronavirus-inspired lockdown, the governor said Monday that he would ban alcohol sales in the state on the day before Thanksgiving via executive order.
Bars and restaurants should stop selling alcohol starting at 1700ET on Wednesday until 0800ET Thanksgiving morning. Since Thanksgiving is typically “the biggest day for drinking”, the governor hopes the mandate could help slow the spread of the virus.
So, for the millions of Americans who ignored the CDC’s warnings and traveled home for the holidays anyway, the traditional pre-Thanksgiving tradition of hooking up with an old high school classmate while out at the ol’ stomping ground bars on the night before Thanksgiving will be – like pretty much everything else in 2020 – ruined, in Pennsylvania and many other states.
*CDC Urges Americans Not to Travel for Thanksgiving
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) November 19, 2020
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Because while alcohol sales can legally continue in New York and New Jersey, those states have curfews in place or other restrictions to stop bars from opening to patrons this holiday season.
“This is an advisory,” Wolf said. “All Pennsylvanians, in order to stay safe, ought to stay home. It is vital that every single Pennsylvanian takes these mitigation steps seriously.”
The ban on alcohol sales follows orders to limit holiday gatherings to members of one’s immediate family or household. The governor warned that all of these restrictions would help the state avoid “greater strain” on its health-care system, which is more vulnerable in rural parts of the vast Keystone state.
“As our hospitals and health care system are facing greater strain, we need to redouble our efforts to keep people safe,” Wolf said in a statement. “If our health care system is compromised, it isn’t only COVID-19 patients who will suffer. If we run out of hospital beds, or if hospital staff are over-worked to the breaking point, care will suffer for every patient – including those who need emergency care for illnesses, accidents, or chronic conditions unrelated to COVID-19.”
To be sure, many Pennsylvanians had probably grown weary of Wolf’s aggressive restrictions even before this latest executive order.
They’ll have their chance to get their revenge at the polls some day. But for now, at least the Steelers game is still on.
Digest powered by RSS Digest
Saving...![<!–[if IE 9]><![endif]–>](https://i0.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/MDC%20brooklyn.jpg?ssl=1){kind=link}