Today’s News 28th August 2022

• Chang: China Is Weaponizing Chinese Worldwide To Support The CCP
  Chang: China Is Weaponizing Chinese Worldwide To Support The CCP

  Authored by Gordon Chang via The Gatestone Institute,

  • To make matters worse, the Chinese state has been open about its hostility to the United States. Among other things, in May 2019 People’s Daily, the Party’s self-described “mouthpiece” and therefore most authoritative publication in China, declared a “people’s war” on America.

  • Many of those “different social systems”—especially the United States—are squeamish when it comes to singling people out because of their race. Yet American policymakers cannot ignore the fact that the Communist Party’s appeal to overseas Chinese is overtly race-based.

  • In February… the Justice Department ended its Trump-era “China Initiative,” which concentrated law enforcement efforts on Chinese espionage. Yet given Xi Jinping’s call on overseas Chinese to work for the Chinese Communist Party, it is time to reinstitute that program and devote more resources to it.

  • Can Americans of Chinese descent be loyal to both America and China?

  • No. China’s Communist Party has made itself an existential threat to America and every other society…. The promotion of tianxia [ruling “All under Heaven”] means, among other things, that the Party views the U.S. government as illegitimate and America as nothing more a tributary society or colony.

  • Although we [“Chinese-Americans”] technically do not have an obligation to prove our loyalty to America, we must, as a group, understand that a hostile power is trying to weaponize us. Xi Jinping has openly called on us to become a subversive force, to help him destroy the country we now call home.

  • It is time, therefore, for us to begin cleaning our own ranks…. Moreover, it means not shouting “racism” every time law enforcement arrests someone of Chinese descent.

  • We may think it unfair, but we now have to make a choice.

  • After all, our country—the United States of America—is in peril because a foreign state—the People’s Republic of China—is attacking it and hoping to use us to take it down.

  • The Communist Party of China refers to us as “overseas patriotic forces.” People in our communities will want to know to which country we feel patriotic.

  “Promoting the great unity of the Chinese people is the historic responsibility of China’s patriotic united front work in the new era,” said Chinese ruler Xi Jinping at the end of last month to Communist Party cadres in Beijing. “To do the job well, we must… truly unite all Chinese people in different parties, nationalities, classes, groups, and with different beliefs, and those who are living under different social systems.”

  “Different social systems” is Party lingo for “other countries.”

  

  Xi’s words sound benign, but the intent is not. In short, Xi, at the Party’s United Front Work Conference, said he hoped to unite—in other words, mobilize—ethnic Chinese everywhere to support the CCP, to effectively make every Chinese individual a CCP agent.

  “The Chinese Communist Party just doesn’t accept that people who adopt foreign citizenship are no longer beholden to the motherland as represented by the Chinese Communist Party,” said Charles Burton of the Ottawa-based Macdonald-Laurier Institute to “CBS Eye on the World” on August 17. “There is no escape from this ethnic identification based on being descendants of the Yellow Emperor.”

  Xi’s predecessors also appealed to overseas Chinese, so in one sense there was nothing new in his words last month. Yet there is nonetheless cause for great concern. Mao Zedong in fact tried to use ethnic Chinese populations outside China to overthrow their governments. Xi reveres Mao, has adopted many of Mao’s tactics, and is surely as determined as Mao in using Chinese people to do his bidding. Xi is serious in seeing all the world’s Chinese as a single unified force.

  Many of those “different social systems”—especially the United States—are squeamish when it comes to singling people out because of their race. Yet American policymakers cannot ignore the fact that the Communist Party’s appeal to overseas Chinese is overtly race-based.

  “We all share the same ancestors, history, and culture, we all are sons and daughters of the Chinese nation and descendants of the dragon,” said Yang Jiechi, now China’s top diplomat, in 2013 to a group of overseas ethnic Chinese children attending a government-sponsored “roots-tracing” tour event.

  The regime sponsors these tours to indoctrinate. Foreign children, in Taishan in Guangdong province during a tour late last decade, were asked to sing the 1980s-era “Descendants of the Dragon.” The appeal to race is unmistakable, as this portion of the lyrics makes clear: “With brown eyes, black hair, and yellow skin, we are forever descendants of the dragon.”

  In fact, China’s regime asks, cajoles, threatens, and intimidates dragon descendants to commit crimes for “the Motherland.” As successful American prosecutions indicate, some ethnic Chinese are especially susceptible to those appeals.

  In February, however, the Justice Department ended its Trump-era “China Initiative,” which concentrated law enforcement efforts on Chinese espionage. Yet given Xi Jinping’s call on overseas Chinese to work for China, it is time to reinstitute that program and devote more resources to it.

  Many have called the initiative “racist,” but any new program would be merely responding to the Communist Party’s race-based appeals.

  The overwhelming majority of Americans of Chinese descent—especially those who have fled China recently— are loyal to America, but some Chinese in America flaunt their support for Chinese communism. The flying of flags of the People’s Republic of China in Chinatowns across the U.S.—especially San Francisco’s before the pandemic—was particularly disturbing and suggestive of disloyalty to the American republic.

  Can Americans of Chinese descent be loyal to both America and China?

  No. China’s Communist Party has made itself an existential threat to America and every other society. The Chinese regime, especially in recent years under General Secretary Xi, has been pushing the notion that it holds the Mandate of Heaven to rule tianxia, “All Under Heaven.” The promotion of tianxia means, among other things, that the Party views the U.S. government as illegitimate and America as nothing more than a tributary society or colony.

  To make matters worse, the Chinese state has been open about its hostility to the United States. Among other things, in May 2019 People’s Daily, the Party’s self-described “mouthpiece” and therefore most authoritative publication in China, declared a “people’s war” on America.

  Let me end on a personal note, as dragon blood proudly flows in my veins. My dad, who arrived in this country in early 1945, came from a small farming village in Jiangsu province, across the mighty Yangtze River from Shanghai. My mother’s family traces its roots to Dundee, in Scotland, but I have not identified with that half of my heritage. I grew up in New Jersey, steeped in Dad’s stories of the Yellow Emperor and of course tales of dragons.

  Nonetheless, my story-telling dad never missed an opportunity to vote or tell his four children how wonderful his adopted country was. He always said “China is my birthplace but America is my home.”

  We “Chinese-Americans”—I abhor the term—need to remember where we now live. We cannot remain oblivious, as we so far have had the luxury of doing.

  Although we technically do not have an obligation to prove our loyalty to America, we must, as a group, understand that a hostile power is trying to weaponize us. Xi Jinping has openly called on us to become a subversive force, to help him destroy the country we now call home.

  It is time, therefore, for us to begin cleaning our own ranks. This means, among other things, not tolerating displays promoting Chinese communism in our country. Moreover, it means not shouting “racism” every time law enforcement arrests someone of Chinese descent. If we do not take the lead in these tasks, others will naturally do that for us.

  We may think it unfair, but we now have to make a choice.

  After all, our country—the United States of America—is in peril because a foreign state—the People’s Republic of China—is attacking it and hoping to use us to take it down.

  The Communist Party of China refers to us as “overseas patriotic forces.” People in our communities will want to know to which country we feel patriotic.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 23:30

• San Francisco Shop Owners Threaten To Stop Paying Taxes Unless City Tackles Crime, Homelessness
  San Francisco Shop Owners Threaten To Stop Paying Taxes Unless City Tackles Crime, Homelessness

  Business owners in San Francisco’s Castro district have absolutely had it with the city’s inaction over burglaries, vandalism, and violent homeless people camping on the sidewalks in front of storefronts and residences.

  

  As the American Thinker‘s Olivia Murray notes:

  San Francisco has an established reputation as a capital for fringe culture and leftism, much of which converges in the enclave of Castro.  The first “Drag Queen Story Hour” event ever took place in the Harvey Milk Memorial Branch Library in the neighborhood and was “well received.”

  Now, under Democrat leadership, the iconically left community is ready to take drastic measures toward radical American patriotism.  Three days ago, the San Francisco Chronicle reported:

  For years, business owners in San Francisco’s Castro district have complained to city officials that homeless people struggling with mental illness and drug addiction have wreaked havoc on the neighborhood. Now, merchants say the situation has gotten so bad that they’re threatening to possibly stop paying city taxes and fees [emphasis added].

  The threat arises from a letter drafted and sent to city officials by the Castro Merchants Association on August 8.  According to co-president Dave Karraker, if the calls are neglected, the response will be civil disobedience, including refusal to pay taxes.

  Karraker said:

  If the city can’t provide the basic services for them [businesses] to become a successful business, then what are we paying for? You can’t have a vibrant, successful business corridor when you have people passed out high on drugs, littering your sidewalk.

  No, no, you can’t, which is why conservatives suggest not incentivizing criminality and drug use, nor electing D.A.s who hail from domestic terrorists and despise law and order like Chesa Boudin.

  Needless to say, it’s likely the irony is lost upon the residents and proprietors of Castro.  The very spirit they oppose in policy — revolutionary freedom from the yoke of taxation and anti-tyrannical government — is the very spirit they’re on the verge of embracing.

  The leftists in Castro appear to be halfway there. The government exists for one purpose, and that is to secure unalienable rights. One of those rights is property ownership, and between 2019 and 2020, storeowners saw a distinct rise in “burglaries and vandalism”, and in Castro, “the merchants association recorded more than 90 incidents totaling over $170,000 in repair costs since 2020[.]” When the government fails to safeguard our rights, it forfeits its legitimacy and authority to govern.

  After more than two years in which problems of vagrancy, vandalism, and petty crime have gotten only worse, Castro merchants say they’re going to withhold taxes from the City of San Francisco if it doesn’t address their concerns. https://t.co/11CrMjxIP5

  — SFist (@SFist) August 25, 2022

  Karraker added, “Until we see demonstrable change, everything is on the table, including civil disobedience[.]”  I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I think I actually have something in common with the San Francisco Marxists, and I applaud their initiative.

  And as Silvio Canto Jr. writes in the Thinker:

  I spoke with a friend who went to San Francisco, and he couldn’t believe the general decay of a once wonderful city.  He did not like Los Angeles, either.

  So it’s great to see that business owners are drawing the line.  Put the issue in the laps of the elected officials, and use your taxes as a weapon.  After all, you are paying for the police, and it’s the political class tying their hands.

  Thumbs up for these business owners in Castro.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 23:00

• 8 In 10 Americans Think Hunter Biden Laptop Cover-Up Changed Election Outcome; Poll Finds
  8 In 10 Americans Think Hunter Biden Laptop Cover-Up Changed Election Outcome; Poll Finds

  Authored by Paul Sperry via The Epoch Times,

  A whopping 79 percent of Americans suggest President Donald Trump likely would have won reelection if voters had known the truth about Hunter Biden’s laptop – that it was real and not “Russian disinformation,” as intelligence officials aligned with Joe Biden falsely led the public to believe, a new national poll reveals.

  

  The survey of 1,335 adults was conducted earlier this month by New Jersey-based Technometrica Institute of Policy and Politics. The vast majority of those following the issue said they believe that the laptop is real, while only 11 percent still believe it was created by Russia.

  The Washington Post and The New York Times recently confirmed that the laptop and contents found on it are, in fact, authentic, after initially pooh-poohing the idea the device belonged to the president’s son. In October 2020, the New York Post broke the story that Hunter Biden had abandoned the Apple computer at a Wilmington, Del., repair shop. The newspaper exposed emails from the hard drive indicating the Biden family may have participated in illicit business deals in Ukraine, China, and other countries. Social media censored the story, denying voters critical information on the eve of the election.

  Among those following the topic, almost three-quarters (74 percent) believe that the FBI and Intelligence Community deliberately misled the public—and voters—when they claimed the laptop was “disinformation” and part of a Kremlin plot to hurt Biden’s candidacy.

  On Oct. 19, 2020, more than 50 former U.S. intelligence officials, including CIA Director John Brennan, signed a public letter claiming the material published by the Post from Hunter’s hard drive “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation,” although none of them had seen it. Joe Biden cited their letter in the presidential debates to deflect questions about the laptop.

  “Terming the laptop ‘disinformation’ by the FBI, Intelligence Community, Congress, and the Biden campaign, along with Big Tech, impacted voters,” said Technometrica President Raghavan Mayur, who’s been recognized as the most accurate pollster in recent presidential elections. “A significant majority—78 percent—believe that access to the correct information could have been critical to their decision at the polls.”

  In fact, 47 percent said that knowing before the election that the laptop contents were real and not “disinformation” would have changed their voting decision—including more than two-thirds (71 percent) of Democrats.

  Almost 8 of 10 respondents said that a truthful interpretation of the laptop would have likely changed the election’s outcome more in favor of Trump.

  The poll also found that more than half—51 percent—give the media failing grades (D or F) for their coverage of the topic of the laptop.

  Also, 81 percent of Americans said they want the attorney general to appoint an independent special counsel to investigate possibly incriminating email and other evidence contained on Hunter Biden’s laptop. Federal investigators in Delaware have been investigating Hunter for possible money laundering, tax fraud, and other alleged crimes, but the probe has dragged on for years, and the FBI has yet to issue a warrant to search his home for evidence.

  The Senate Judiciary Committee revealed last month that FBI whistleblowers recently came forward to expose a “scheme” by FBI honchos in Washington to throttle the investigation of Hunter Biden in the run-up to the 2020 election by claiming that allegations of Biden influence-peddling in Ukraine was “Russian disinformation.”

  Former National Intelligence Director John Ratcliffe recently said there is growing evidence the FBI politically interfered in both the 2016 and 2020 elections while claiming they were worried about Russian interference.

  “The names have changed, but the allegations are the same, that these FBI agents were attempting to influence the outcome of the 2020 election by suppressing derogatory information about Hunter Biden and potentially Joe Biden,” Ratclifffe said.

  “It is the FBI that is the primary domestic authority for investigating and leading to the prosecution of election influence and election interference. It’s really a problem when the agency that is responsible for investigating those things is engaged in those things.”

  Ratcliffe in late October 2020 issued a forceful denial against the prevailing spin about “disinformation” after prominent Democrat leader Adam Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee proclaimed the Hunter Biden laptop story was “a smear on Joe Biden [that] comes from the Kremlin.”

  “I very clearly came out and said, ‘Look, Adam Schiff is making this information up. There is no Russian disinformation involved here. It is Hunter Biden’s laptop, and the investigation is real,’ “ he said. “And that has proven to be true.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 22:30

• "Get A Warrant" – ATF Agents Attempt To Confiscate Solvent Trap Components
  “Get A Warrant” – ATF Agents Attempt To Confiscate Solvent Trap Components

  A new report from the gun blog website AmmoLand Shooting Sports News claims that Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agents are paying visits to law-abiding gun owners’ houses to confiscate solvent trap components. 

  AmmoLand’s John Crump claims, “multiple law-abiding gun owners have contacted me about visitations by ATF agents attempting to get the individuals to hand over solvent trap components purchased on GunBroker.”

  

  Solvent traps are devices that can be used when cleaning firearms to catch the cleaning solution if poured down the barrel. The device helps prevent mess and if in the field, can help prevent harmful chemicals from being dumped into the environment. They can also be used as makeshift silencers.

  We pointed out earlier this year that ATF considered solvent traps as suppressors. This comes as some gun owners legally bought the devices and manufactured them into homemade suppressors, then filed a National Firearms Act “Form 1” with the ATF and paid a $200 tax to own them legally. 

  Crump provides an example of ATF agents showing up at a man’s house earlier this month. Agents demanded he turn over solvent trap components:

  “On the week of August 14th, a Louisiana man was visited by an ATF agent who demanded he turn over solvent trap components that were acquired through GunBroker Auction seller RifleRemedy2000. The ATF agent produced the Warning Notice pictured below. The man, fearing retribution and unwanted persecution by the rogue agency, agreed to sign a letter stating he had destroyed the items and no longer possessed the items the ATF has now deemed to be suppressors regulated by the NFA.”

  

  

  Then there’s this. On Thursday, a Florida man recorded ATF agents demanding he turn over the device. 

  “This video was captured by Nick, a Charlotte County, Florida man who multiple ATF agents visit his home. Nick had purchased solvent trap components through GunBroker seller RifleRemedy2000 and had paid for the tax stamp to complete a form 1 self-made suppressor.

  “Apparently, the man had enough solvent trap components to make more than one, self-manufactured suppressor, and the ATF was demanding that he hand over the materials to the ATF for confiscation and destruction. This man exercised his right to remain silent and asked the ATF to “come back with a warrant.” — Crump

  The video provides a unique view of an encounter between a private citizen and federal agents who deliberately intimidated the man. Gun Owners of America (GOA) posted the video of the conversation. 

  Here’s commentary from GOA on the video above. 

  The ATF agents got upset because a man exercised, not only his 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms, but also his 4th Amendment Rights, by refusing a warrantless search.

  Any door to door “enforcement” by the ATF is too much.

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) August 26, 2022

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

  ATF agents showing up at homes of gun owners have recently been making national headlines. We reported last week that agents are showing up at homes of people who bought legal forced reset triggers for AR-15-style rifles that were recently classified as “machine guns.” 

  Also, video footage last month captured a Delaware man stunned when special agents rang his doorbell and asked if they could do an inventory audit of his legally-obtained firearms.

  ATF agents and a #Delaware state officer showed up to a man’s house without a warrant demanding to see his #firearms. #2A pic.twitter.com/DKuRd8UtKt

  — Sarah Fields (@SarahisCensored) July 20, 2022

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

  And last summer, we told readers that the “puzzle pieces were all laid out” – in terms of how the ATF, weaponized under the Biden administration, would try to ban semi-automatic rifles. 

  Here’s what Biden said this week about banning guns:

  You heard that right folks, Joe Biden says that if America elects two more Democrat Senators, they will ban assault weapons. pic.twitter.com/W8dkHwEy9X

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) August 26, 2022

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

  The rise in the ATF’s door-to-door operations at homes of law-abiding citizens is disturbing as Second Amendment appears to be under attack. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 22:00

• The Worst & The Stupidest?
  The Worst & The Stupidest?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via AmGreatness.com,

  Our elites are now viewed with the disdain they have earned on their own merits. And they are none too happy about it…

  

  Elites have always been ambiguous about the muscular classes who replace their tires, paint their homes, and cook their food. And the masses who tend to them likewise have been ambivalent about those who hire them: appreciative of the work and pay, but also either a bit envious of those with seemingly unlimited resources or turned off by perceived superciliousness arising from their status and affluence. 

  Yet the divide has grown far wider in the 21st century. Globalization fueled the separation in a number of ways. 

  One, outsourcing and offshoring eroded the rust-belt interior, while enriching the two coasts. The former lost good-paying jobs, while the latter found new markets in investment, tech, insurance, law, media, academia, entertainment, sports, and the arts making them billions rather than mere millions. 

  So, the problem was one of both geography and class. Half the country looked to Asia and Europe for profits and indeed cultural “diversity,” while the other half stuck with tradition, values, and custom—as they became poorer. 

  The elite found in the truly poor—neglecting their old union-member, blue-collar Democratic base—an outlet for their guilt, noblesse oblige, condescension at a safe distance, call it what you will. The poor if kept distant were fetishized, while the middle class was demonized for lacking the taste of the professional classes, and romance of the far distant underclass.

  Second, race became increasingly divorced from class—a phenomenon largely birthed by guilty, wealthy, white elites and privileged, diverse professionals. For the white bicoastal elite, it became a mark of their progressive fides to champion woke racialism that empowered the non-white of their own affluent class, while projecting their own discomfort with and fears of the nonwhite poor onto the middle class as supposed “racists,” despite the latter’s more frequently living among, marrying within, and associating with the “other.” 

  The net result was more privilege for the elite and wealthy nonwhites, more neglect of the inner-city needy, and more disdain for the supposedly illiberal clingers, dregs, deplorables, chumps, and irredeemables. 

  The results of these contortions were surreal. The twentysomething who coded a video game that went viral globally became a master of the universe, while the brilliant carpenter or electrical contractor was seen as hopelessly trapped in a world of muscular stasis. Oprah and LeBron James were victims. So were the likes of Ibram X. Kendi, Ilhan Omar, and the Obamas, while the struggling Ohio truck driver, the sergeant on the frontline in Afghanistan, and Indiana plant worker became their oppressors. Or so the progressive bicoastal elite instructed us. 

  Globalization and its geography, along with the end of ecumenical class concerns, certainly widened the ancient mass-elite divide. But there was a third catalyst that explained the mutual animosity in the pre-Trump years. The masses increasingly could not see any reason for elite status other than expertise in navigating the system for lucrative compensation. 

  An Incompetent Elite

  In short, money and education certification were no longer synonymous with any sense of competency or expertise. Just the opposite often became true. Those who thought up some of the most destructive, crackpot, and dangerous policies in American history were precisely those who were degreed and well-off and careful to ensure they were never subject to the destructive consequences of their own pernicious ideologies. 

  The masses of homeless in our streets were a consequence of various therapeutic bromides antithetical to the ancient, sound notions of mental hospitals. The new theories ignored the responsibilities of nuclear families to take care of their own, and the assumption that hard-drug use was not a legitimate personal-choice, but rather a catastrophe for all of society. 

  From universities also came critical race theory and critical legal theory, which were enshrined throughout our institutions. The bizarre idea that “good” racism was justified as a get-even-response to “bad” racism, resonated as ahistorical, illogical, and plain, old-fashioned race-based hatred. 

  The masses never understood why their children should attend colleges where obsessions with superficial appearances were celebrated as “diversity,” graduation ceremonies matter-of-factly were segregated by race, dorms that were racially exclusive were lauded as “theme houses,” Jim-Crow-style set-aside zones were rebranded “safe spaces,” and racial quotas were merely “affirmative action.” 

  Ancient notions such as that punishment deters crime were laughed at by the degreed who gave us the current big-city district attorneys. Their experiments with decriminalizing violent acts, defunding the police, and delegitimizing incarceration led to a Lord of the Flies-style anarchy in our major cities. Note well, those with advanced or professional degrees who dreamed all this up did not often live in defunded police zones, did not have homeless people on their lawns, and found ways for their children to navigate around racial quotes in elite college admissions. 

  So, the credentialed lost their marginal reputations for competency. Were we really to believe 50 former intelligence heads and experts who claimed Hunter Biden’s laptop was “Russian disinformation”? Even if they were not simply biased, did any of them have the competence to determine what the laptop was? 

  Or were we to take seriously the expertise of “17 Nobel Prize winners” who swore Biden’s “Build Back Better” debacle would not be inflationary as the country went into 9 percent plus inflation? Did we really believe our retired four-stars that Trump was a Nazi, a Mussolini, and someone to be removed from office “the sooner the better”? 

  Or were we to trust the 1,200 “health care professionals” who assured us that, medically speaking, while the rest of society was locked down it was injurious for the health of people of color to follow curfews and mask mandates instead of thronging en masse in street protests?

  Or were we to believe Kevin Clinesmith’s FISA writ, or Andrew McCabe’s four-time assertion that he did not leak to the media, or that James Comey under oath really did not know the answers to 245 inquiries? Did Robert Mueller really not know what either the Steele dossier or Fusion GPS was? 

  Middle Class Competence

  On the operational level, the elite proved even more suspect. Militarily, the middle classes in the armed forces proved as lethal as ever, despite being demonized as racists and white supremacists. But their generals, diplomats and politicians proved so often incompetent in translating their tactical victories in the Middle East and elsewhere into strategic success or even mere advantage. 

  Nationally, the failure of the elite that transcends politics is even more manifest. The country is $30 trillion in debt. No one has the courage to simply stop printing money. The border is nonexistent, downtown America is a No Man’s Land, and our air travel is a circus—and not an “expert” can be found willing or able to fix things. Is Pete Buttigieg the answer to thousands of canceled flights or backed-up ports? Is Alejandro Mayorkas to be believed when he assures the border is “closed” and “secure” as millions flood across? 

  The universities are turning out mediocre graduates without the skills or knowledge of a generation ago, but certainly with both greater debt and arrogance. 

  Our bureaucratic fixers can only regulate, stop, retard, slow-down, or destroy freeways, dams, reservoirs, aqueducts, ports, and refineries—and yet never seem to give up their own driving, enjoyment of stored water, or buying of imported goods. 

  Is it easier to topple than to sculpt a statue? 

  A generation from now, in the emperor has no clothes fashion, someone may innocently conclude that most “research” in the social sciences and humanities of our age is as unreliable as it is unreadable, or that the frequent copy-cat Hollywood remakes of old films were far worse than the originals. 

  Does anyone think a Jim Acosta is on par with a John Chancellor? That Mark Milley is equal to a Matthew Ridgway? Is Anthony Fauci like a Jonas Salk or an Albert Sabin? 

  Yet this lack of competence and taste among the elite is not shared to the same degree in a decline of middle-class standards. 

  Homes are built better than they were in the 1970s. Cars are better assembled than in the 1960s. The electrician, the plumber, and the roofer are as good or better than ever. The soldier stuck in the messy labyrinth of Baghdad or on patrol in the wilds of Afghanistan was every bit as brave and perhaps far more lethal than his Korean War or World War II counterpart. 

  How does this translate to the American people? They navigate around the detritus of the elite, avoiding big-city downtown USA. 

  They are skipping movies at theaters. They are passing on watching professional sports. They don’t watch the network news. They think the CDC, NIAID, and NIH are incompetent—and fear their incompetence can prove deadly.  

  Millions increasingly doubt their children should enroll in either a four-year college or the military, and they assume the FBI, CIA, and Justice Department are as likely to monitor Americans as they are unlikely to find and arrest those engaged in terrorism or espionage. 

  When the elite peddles its current civil-war or secession porn—projecting onto the middle classes their own fantasies of a red/blue violent confrontation, or their own desires to see a California or New York detached from Mississippi and Wyoming—they have no idea that America’s recent failures are their own failures. 

  The reason why the United States begs Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia to pump more oil is not because of lazy frackers in Texas or incompetent rig hands in North Dakota, but because of utterly incompetent diplomats, green zealots, and ideological “scientists.” 

  Had the views of majors and colonels in Afghanistan rather than their superiors in the Pentagon and White House prevailed, there would have been no mass flight or humiliation in Kabul. 

  Crime is out of control not because we have either sadistic or incompetent police forces but sinister DAs, and mostly failed, limited academics who fabricated their policies. 

  Current universities produce more bad books, bad teaching, bad ideas, and badly educated students, not because the janitors are on strike, the maintenance people can’t fix the toilets, or the landscapers cannot keep the shrubbery alive, but because their academics and administrators have hidden their own incompetence and lack of academic rigor and teaching expertise behind the veil of woke censoriousness. 

  The Naked Emperors’ Furious Search for Fig Leaves

  The war between blue and red and mass versus elite is really grounded in the reality that those who feel they were the deserved winners of globalization and who are the sole enlightened on matters of social, economic, political, and military policy have no record of recent success, but a long litany of utter failure. 

  They have become furious that the rest of the country sees through these naked emperors. Note Merrick Garland’s sanctimonious defense of the supposed professionalism of the Justice Department and FBI hierarchies—while even as he pontificated, they were in the very process of leaking and planting sensational “nuclear secrets” narratives to an obsequious media to justify the indefensible political fishing expedition at a former president’s home and current electoral rival to Merrick Garland’s boss. 

  The masses increasingly view the elites’ money, their ZIP codes, their degrees and certificates, and their titles not just with indifference, but with the disdain they now have earned on their own merits. 

  And that pushback has made millions of our worst and stupidest quite mad.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 21:30

• 'Triple Threat'? Man Diagnosed With HIV, COVID, & Monkeypox At Same Time
  ‘Triple Threat’? Man Diagnosed With HIV, COVID, & Monkeypox At Same Time

  An Italian man on a ‘condomless’ sex escapade with men in Spain tested positive for HIV, Covid-19, and monkeypox simultaneously – the first known case to have all three viral diseases, according to a case study in the Journal of Infection.

  Researchers stated the 36-year-old male spent five days in Spain between June 16-20 and developed a fever (up to 39°C), accompanied by sore throat, fatigue, headache, and right inguinal lymphadenomegaly about nine days after his trip. He tested positive for Covid on July 2 — and his symptoms worsened that day. 

  “On the afternoon of the same day, a rash started to develop on his left arm. The following day small, painful vesicles surrounded by an erythematous halo appeared on the torso, lower limbs, face, and glutes. On July 5, due to a progressive and uninterrupted spread of vesicles that began to evolve into umbilicated pustules, he went to the emergency room” in Catania, Italy, and then was immediately transferred to an Infectious Diseases Unit at the Policlinico G. Rodolico – San Marco University Hospital,” researchers said. 

  By July 6, the man was diagnosed with monkeypox and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) while still Covid positive. By this time, he had overlapping symptoms from all three viral diseases. Researchers noted he was double jabbed against Covid with Pfizer’s BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine (last December). 

  Researchers said: 

  “As this is the only reported case of monkeypox virus, SARS-CoV-2 and HIV co-infection, there is still not enough evidence supporting that this combination may aggravate patient’s condition.

  “Given the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the daily increase of monkeypox cases, healthcare systems must be aware of this eventuality, promoting appropriate diagnostic tests in high-risk subjects, which are essential to containment as there is no widely available treatment or prophylaxis.” 

  The double jabbed man disclosed to researchers he had “condomless intercourse with men during his stay in Spain.” According to medical records, the man also had syphilis in 2019, though he tested negative last September. 

  Images of the man who was not identified were taken and shared in the medical study. 

  

  The fact that this man received two doses of Pfizer’s Covid vaccine and then tested positive for all three viral diseases at once is an eyecatcher. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 21:00

• The 'Great Reset': A Blueprint For Destroying Freedom, Innovation, & Prosperity
  The ‘Great Reset’: A Blueprint For Destroying Freedom, Innovation, & Prosperity

  Authored by J.B.Shurk via The Gatestone Institute,

  • Notice that no nation has managed merely to print money and tax its citizens on the path to prosperity. Real wealth cannot simply be conjured from thin air. There must be recognized value in what a nation and its citizens possess.

  • More than any other source for national wealth, however, one towers above the rest: innovation. The ability of the human mind to create something new and valuable provides society with endless wealth creation…. Innovation is the magic sauce for generating wealth.

  • Humans struggling merely to survive in the world do not waste time, labor, or resources on projects that offer no prospect for future reward. Humans working as servants to the state under centrally controlled economies have no incentive to innovate. Only when private ownership and personal liberty combine can human innovation flourish. Freedom is the secret ingredient to innovation’s magic sauce for increasing wealth.

  • A country whose institutions do not respect property rights or whose customs do not value freedom will remain a barren desert for human innovation. In this way, nations have a great incentive to liberalize over time. Should they not, they quickly become financially and militarily vulnerable to more innovative and wealthier nations. Observing this simple truth, classical liberals have always understood free markets as the gateway to human emancipation. Economic self-interest, in other words, ultimately leads to expansive human rights and liberties across the planet.

  • Nothing about Western politicians’ embrace of the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” or “Build Back Better” paradigms protects property rights or liberty in the slightest. The WEF’s agenda promotes radically anti-liberal programs… [that] will smother human innovation by first depriving Westerners of their freedoms.

  • Wealthy free nations are a threat to the WEF’s New World Order. If censorship must be embraced to control the “narrative,” then so be it. If citizens must be denied freedom of movement under the guise of a “health emergency,” no big deal. If private bank accounts must be seized to intimidate protesters, then such threats are the price for ensuring compliance. In this way, the WEF’s plans for a controlled economy intentionally reverse centuries of liberal progress. Political leaders today are dragging the West into the past.

  • First, individual liberties will continue disappearing. Then, the greatest economic engine of all, innovation, will dry up. Finally, wealth will return solely to the hands of a small “ruling class” minority. This is the future the World Economic Forum hails as “progress.” It is not. It is a recipe for human bondage.

  How do nations become wealthy? Many are blessed with abundant natural resources. Others conquer foreign lands. Some specialize in unique trade skills and crafts. Timber, mining, fishing, sugar, rum, narcotics, cotton, silk, agriculture, conquest, human slavery, manufacturing, oil, industry, banking, and so on — depending on the century and the region, nations have attained tremendous wealth in myriad ways. Notice that no nation has managed merely to print money and tax its citizens on the path to prosperity. Real wealth cannot simply be conjured from thin air. There must be recognized value in what a nation and its citizens possess.

  

  More than any other source for national wealth, however, one towers above the rest: innovation. The ability of the human mind to create something new and valuable provides society with endless wealth creation. Unlike central bank quantitative easing and other monetary tools (or tricks?), the brain really is a money-printing machine. Whether an innovator alters existing farming, mining, or manufacturing techniques to make production cheaper and more efficient, or an inventor designs something entirely unique, value that did not exist yesterday materializes the next. Innovation is the magic sauce for generating wealth.

  If innovation produces wealth, why aren’t all nations wealthy? Because too many nations fail to value innovators or encourage innovation. Without fundamental property rights, strong social institutions, and a dependable legal system, potential inventors have few incentives to build anything new. Humans struggling merely to survive in the world do not waste time, labor, or resources on projects that offer no prospect for future reward. Humans working as servants to the state under centrally controlled economies have no incentive to innovate. Only when private ownership and personal liberty combine can human innovation flourish. Freedom is the secret ingredient to innovation’s magic sauce for increasing wealth.

  When economists crunch gross domestic product numbers to see whether a nation’s economy is rising or sinking, a measure of innovation becomes quantifiable. Embedded within that number is something that encapsulates human ingenuity, personal freedom, and property ownership. In this way, economic innovation directly reflects the human condition at any point in time. It provides a measurement of a nation’s freedom.

  Now “liberalism” as it is classically understood — as a political philosophy embracing natural rights, limited government, free markets, political and religious freedoms, and freedom of speech, all promoted and protected by an impartial and just rule of law — has always grasped this fundamental truth. Liberty and property rights spawn creativity. Where both are soundly valued, great writers, artists, and inventors produce novelties that would not otherwise exist. It is why medieval Florence birthed at once both modern-day banking and the European Renaissance. The personal freedom to create, build, invest, and own property generates tremendous innovation and national wealth.

  Conversely, when today’s central planners argue for socialized control over markets and the substitution of “collective rights” in place of “individual rights” while calling their agenda “progressive liberalism,” they co-opt and subvert liberalism’s historic meaning.

  From this recognition that a nation’s freedom directly affects a nation’s wealth arises an even more remarkable truth: any nation that fails to embrace and protect human liberty will be the poorer for it. A country whose institutions do not respect property rights or whose customs do not value freedom will remain a barren desert for human innovation. In this way, nations have a great incentive to liberalize over time. Should they not, they quickly become financially and militarily vulnerable to more innovative and wealthier nations. Observing this simple truth, classical liberals have always understood free markets as the gateway to human emancipation. Economic self-interest, in other words, ultimately leads to expansive human rights and liberties across the planet.

  Now with all that as a bit of rudimentary background, how is it that today we have entities such as the World Economic Forum (WEF) pushing for a radical “Great Reset” of Western society that promises to handcuff free markets with economic regulation while concentrating power into the hands of a small international coalition of central economic planners — most notably their own? How could promising a future where people will “own nothing and be happy” possibly be conducive to a free and productive society — or even a happy one? How can a future in which all energy is controlled by international governing bodies and multinational corporations possibly provide individuals with the institutional building blocks for endless innovation? How can farmers sustain larger and more prosperous populations when Western governments continue to stifle agricultural production through regulation and eminent domain?

  The questions answer themselves. The WEF’s agenda promotes radically anti-liberal programs such as the use of artificial intelligence to censor dissent, regulate free speech, and even erase ideas from the Internet. Its repressive efforts to control all hydrocarbon energy and cattle and crop farm production will smother human innovation by first depriving Westerners of their ability to create, invent, and grow food. Its policies betray millennia of Western civilizational advancement by replacing respect for individual choice and free will with top-down management of human activity through the blunt instruments of force and coercion. Its motivations are indisputably anti-human at their core because each individual human life is treated as nothing more than a cog or input that can be manipulated as part of a centrally-controlled social machine. When Westerners are reduced to ones and zeroes that are sorted and shifted by the WEF’s social programming codes for a “better future,” builders obey but no longer create.

  Whereas personal liberty has unleashed the human mind and generated tremendous Western prosperity, the World Economic Forum’s push for a centrally controlled economic system will crush rights, stifle creativity, and mass-produce poverty and servitude. Its proponents, in fact, seem mostly committed to using a combination of pandemic, famine, and fear to centralize dominance for themselves.

  In order to persuade Westerners to give up more and make do with less, the WEF and its globalist allies promise Westerners a future Utopia. As with every similar lie ever told to justify the extraordinary acquisition of power, though, they will fail to deliver. No society, after all, was ever promised more than in Stalin’s 1936 Constitution of the USSR — or subsequently treated more abysmally. Despite its claims to the contrary, the WEF’s mission directives intentionally reverse Western trends toward greater human freedom, social mobility, and more broadly obtainable wealth — or what, in another era, would have been rightly regarded as true, liberal progress.

  Although the WEF and its sister organizations claim to be “saving the planet,” their efforts seem primarily an ignoble design to control the planet. “Clean” energy, after all, is controlled energy; and the more that energy is controlled by centralized governments, the more completely once-free markets become centrally controlled. If every potential entrepreneur must first receive permission to use electricity before producing anything new, then no entrepreneur can thrive without the central authorities’ blessing. If all manufacturing is viewed as a “threat to the planet,” then no independent upstart can innovate or build wealth without first seeking and obtaining government approval. If consumers are forbidden from buying anything unless it is first pre-approved, then free markets are transformed into controlled markets.

  Taking this trend to its logical yet communist conclusion, private property becomes antithetical to the state’s goals. We already see the ominous subversion of private ownership today with so-called ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) standards used to strong-arm industry goals and manipulate free markets. Because control over information makes control over markets more manageable, the more economic uncertainty that results from market manipulation, the more censorship we’ll continue to see. Recently, even a senior economist who correctly stated that the American economy had entered into a recession found his research “fact checked” and “corrected” by the U.S. government’s friends at Facebook. Where free markets are under attack, free speech is inevitably under attack, too. The individual blessings of liberalism are not easily dissected from the body politic without inevitably rendering liberalism’s death, as a whole.

  The issue today may be “climate change” or COVID-19 or “sustainable food supplies,” but the stated issue never seems anything more than a public relations campaign for fooling the masses. It always appears to be merely a disposable excuse designed to seduce Westerners into handing a small cabal of “elites” power and control over everyone else. Convincing mankind to believe that free markets will inevitably lead to some kind of apocalypse increasingly looks like the only policy goal that matters. It may well be the most diabolical trick those with power have ever played against those with no power at all. Fear is used expertly as a torturer’s tool to convince Westerners to forsake willingly their own freedom. The innocent mantra whispered into their ears is simple: Trust us, humanity, we will save you. The implication, however, is far more sinister: For your own good, you must be made to enjoy your new chains.

  Notice that for the World Economic Forum to succeed in its mission to control all human activity, it must first destroy the sovereignty of nation states. Why? Because, as noted above, liberal nations that embrace freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and free market entrepreneurship foster innovation and great wealth. Any nation not encumbered by the WEF’s market proscriptions will most likely continue to prosper, while those shackled to the “Great Reset” will most likely languish. This is why Western politicians have worked so hard together to push their “Build Back Better” proposals irrespective of the wishes of any one nation’s voting citizens.

  Wealthy free nations are a threat to the WEF’s New World Order. If censorship must be embraced to control the “narrative,” then so be it. If citizens must be denied freedom of movement under the guise of a “health emergency,” no big deal. If private bank accounts must be seized to intimidate protesters, then such threats are the price for ensuring compliance. In this way, the WEF’s plans for a controlled economy intentionally reverse centuries of liberal progress. Political leaders today are dragging the West into the past.

  First, individual liberties will continue disappearing. Then, the greatest economic engine of all, innovation, will dry up. Finally, wealth will return solely to the hands of a small “ruling class” minority. This is the future the World Economic Forum hails as “progress.” It is not. It is a recipe for human bondage.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 20:30

• Visualizing The State Of Central Bank Digital Currencies
  Visualizing The State Of Central Bank Digital Currencies

  Central banks around the world are getting involved in digital currencies, but some are further ahead than others.

  In this map, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Ku uses data from the Atlantic Council’s Currency Tracker to visualize the state of each central banks’ digital currency effort.

  

  Digital Currency – The Basics

  Digital currencies have been around since the 1980s, but didn’t become widely popular until the launch of Bitcoin in 2009. Today, there are thousands of digital currencies in existence, also referred to as “cryptocurrencies”.

  A defining feature of cryptocurrencies is that they are based on a blockchain ledger. Blockchains can be either decentralized or centralized, but the most known cryptocurrencies today (Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.) tend to be decentralized in nature. This makes transfers and payments very difficult to trace because there is no single entity with full control.

  Government-issued digital currencies, on the other hand, will be controlled by a central bank and are likely to be easily trackable. They would have the same value as the local cash currency, but instead issued digitally with no physical form.

  Central Bank Digital Currencies Worldwide

  105 countries are currently exploring centralized digital currencies. Together, they represent 95% of global GDP.

  When aggregated, we can see that the majority of countries are in the research stage.

  

  We’ve also divided the map by region to make viewing easier.

  Africa

  

  Asia

  

  Europe

  

  Middle East

  

  South America

  

  North America

  

  What are the Benefits?

  A major benefit of government-issued digital currencies is that they can improve access for underbanked people.

  This is not a huge issue in developed countries like the U.S., but many people in developing nations have no access to banks and other financial services (hence the term underbanked). As the number of internet users continues to climb, digital currencies represent a sound solution.

  To learn more about this topic, visit this article from Global Finance, which lists the world’s most underbanked countries in 2021.

  The 9%

  Just 9% of countries have launched a digital currency to date.

  This includes Nigeria, which became the first African country to do so in October 2021. Half of the country’s 200 million population is believed to have no access to bank accounts.

  Adoption of the eNaira (the digital version of the naira) has so far been relatively sluggish. The eNaira app has accumulated 700,000 downloads as of April 2022. That’s equal to 0.35% of the population, though not all of the downloads are users in Nigeria.

  Conversely, 33.4 million Nigerians were reported to be trading or owning crypto assets, despite the Central Bank of Nigeria’s attempts to restrict usage.

  Status in the U.S.

  America’s central bank, the Federal Reserve, has not decided on whether it will implement a central bank digital currency (CBDC).

  Our key focus is on whether and how a CBDC could improve on an already safe and efficient U.S. domestic payments system.

  – FEDERAL RESERVE

  To learn more, check out the Federal Reserve’s January 2022 paper on the pros and cons of CBDCs.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 20:00

• Canada Set To Miss Out On A Massive LNG Opportunity
  Canada Set To Miss Out On A Massive LNG Opportunity

  By Alex Kimani of Oilprice.com

  Shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine in late February, dozens of Eurozone countries pledged to heavily cut Russian natural gas imports or halt them completely as soon as they could afford to. These countries took several aggressive measures to replenish their natural gas stockpiles ahead of the winter season, including reaching a political agreement to cut gas use by 15% through next winter. It’s, therefore, little wonder that Germany–the country’s worst hit by the Russian energy crisis– is currently on a mad dash to secure alternate sources of gas before the onset of winter. But here’s the biggest irony of them all: Germany and Europe are more likely to secure future gas supplies from Mozambique, one of the world’s poorest nations with scant infrastructure, riddled with terrorism and located 8,140km away from Germany, than Canada, one of the biggest producers of the stuff, with more than a dozen potential LNG sites and a ‘mere’ 6,400km away.

  Indeed, this might turn out to be one of the biggest missed opportunities in Canadian history considering that at current prices, just one Canadian port exporting superchilled gas could be adding nine figures to the Canadian GDP each day. 

  

  Love-Hate Relationship

  Canada is the planet’s fifth largest producer of natural gas and ranks 15th in the world for proven natural gas reserves. The country’s biggest problem simply is lack of infrastructure–and political goodwill.

  It’s somewhat shocking to learn that Canada does not own a single LNG export terminal, with virtually all the country’s natural gas exports delivered to the United States via pipeline. It’s not for lack of trying though. In recent years, Natural Resources Canada says it has received proposals for 18 LNG export projects, including five on the East Coast. Currently, just one terminal is under construction, with a second not quite poised to break ground.

  In sharp contrast, Mozambique is gearing up for a $100B LNG windfall, with the country poised to ship its first cargo of liquefied natural gas (LNG) overseas at a time when prices have soared to record highs with Europe desperately trying to cut energy ties with Russia. 

  According to ship-tracking data compiled by Bloomberg, the BP-operated LNG tanker British Mentor was slated to arrive this week at a new floating terminal that Italian energy giant Eni S.p.A. is completing off Mozambique’s northern coastline. Eni has said that commissioning activities at the Coral-Sul FLNG vessel were progressing well, with first exports to be communicated in due course. The Italian company is already planning a second floating export platform in the southern African country that could be completed in less than four years. 

  All that progress despite the fact that Mozambique has been plagued by terrorism, civil strife and rampant systemic corruption for decades, to a point where it has been unable to exploit its vast fossil fuel reserves leading to its status as the world’s third poorest nation.

  You can blame this state of affairs on Canada’s love-hate relationship with fossil fuels.

  Despite the Canada–United States Free Trade Agreement in 1988, a sense of ambivalence towards fossil fuels prevails to this day. In the current geopolitical climate, oil and gas are both hated and adored. Hated because of their outsized role as the number one climate change pariah. Adored as an alternative source of natural gas, especially since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the attendant threat that Moscow might cut off gas supplies to Europe.

  Back in March, Canadian Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson announced that Canada has the capacity to increase oil & gas exports by up to 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) by the end of this year to help improve global energy security. He also added that Canada is looking at ways it may be able to displace Russian gas with liquified natural gas (LNG) after requests for help from Europe. Currently, a Shell-led consortium is building a large LNG facility on the west coast at Kitimat which is due for completion around 2025, but the country exports zero LNG.

  But it need not be this way. Canada’s energy regulatory framework is notorious for scaring away oil and gas projects, and in February turned down a $10-billion LNG export facility planned for Saguenay, Quebec largely on the grounds that it would increase greenhouse-gas emissions. All five of the now-languishing East Coast projects were in the planning stages as early as 2015 but have been held back by a hostile and byzantine regulatory climate.

  At this stage, it’s not 100% clear whether Canada is ready to relax its attitude towards fossil fuels. 

  Recently, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau went on record saying that exporting LNG  from Canada’s east coast to Germany could ease Europe’s gas crunch: “It’s doable, we have infrastructure around that,” he said at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz though he failed to offer a timeline when asked for one. 

  However, as Politico notes, doable doesn’t necessarily mean realistic, especially given that Europe wants to slash Russian gas purchases by two-thirds by the end of the year. 

  In the same vein, Trudeau conceded that weak business cases have kept proposed export facilities from moving forward: “Right now our best capacity is to continue to contribute to the global market to displace gas and energy that then Germany and Europe can locate from other sources,” Trudeau has conceded.

  Recent comments by Canadian gas producers are also quite telling. In an interview this week, Enbridge Inc. (NYSE: ENB) CEO Al Monaco hinted at Canada’s infamous industry red tape when he said the country needs to “get out of our own way when it comes to energy and building infrastructure.”

  Perhaps not even sky-high natural gas and LNG prices are enough to persuade Trudeau’s administration to change its stance on oil and gas. But as they say, you never really know, considering that the U.S. only began exporting LNG in 2016, and has managed to become the world’s leading LNG exporter in such a short space of time.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 19:30

• FBI Responds To Zuckerberg Claim It Helped Suppress Hunter Biden Laptop Story
  FBI Responds To Zuckerberg Claim It Helped Suppress Hunter Biden Laptop Story

  By Tom Ozimek of The Epoch Times

  The FBI has responded to an explosive claim by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg that Facebook algorithmically censored references to Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election after receiving a warning from the agency about “Russian propaganda.”

  Zuckerberg said on an Aug. 25 episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience” that Facebook actively reduced the reach of social media posts discussing Hunter Biden’s laptop in response to an advisory from the FBI to some Facebook staffers to be on guard for Russian disinformation ahead of the presidential election.

  “The background here is the FBI I think basically came to some folks on our team [and] were like, ‘Hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there’s about to be some kind of dump similar to that, so just be vigilant,’” Zuckerberg told Rogan.

  Clips featuring Zuckerberg’s response to Rogan quickly went viral, prompting a flurry of takes critical of the FBI, with some accusing the agency of engaging in election interference.

  Mark Zuckerberg tells Joe Rogan that the FBI reached out to Facebook to put them on notice that the Hunter Biden’s laptop story was similar to the previous Russian Propaganda and to be on high alert #joerogan #MarkZuckerberg #JRE pic.twitter.com/ojZHhK3isa

  — Giuseppe Mercadante (@itsmercadante) August 25, 2022

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

  “This isn’t just insane, it’s election interference,” Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) said in a statement, while calling on Zuckerberg to testify before Congress “about the FBI’s attempts to circumvent the First Amendment.”

  A similarly scathing take was expressed by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

  “The same FBI who lied about Russian ‘collusion’ and raided President Trump’s home asked Facebook to manipulate its feed to bury the Hunter Biden story,” Jordan said in a statement.

  FBI Reacts

  As the controversy swirled, the FBI issued a statement to media outlets on Friday, saying that its warning to Facebook was of a general nature and did not include a call to action.

  The FBI said it “routinely notifies U.S. private sector entities, including social media providers, of potential threat information, so that they can decide how to better defend against threats” and that the agency “has provided companies with foreign threat indicators to help them protect their platforms and customers from abuse by foreign malign influence actors.”

  The FBI added, however, that it “cannot ask, or direct, companies to take action on information received.”

  Meta also issued a clarifying statement, saying in a Twitter post that the remarks Zuckerberg made to Rogan were basically the same as what he told Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) in 2020.

  As we’ve said, nothing about the Hunter Biden laptop story is new. Below is what Mark told Sen. Johnson in Oct 2020 and what Mark told Joe Rogan this week. The FBI shared general warnings about foreign interference – nothing specific about Hunter Biden. https://t.co/pHtzvh6r0r

  — Meta Newsroom (@MetaNewsroom) August 26, 2022

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

  “The FBI shared general warnings about foreign interference—nothing specific about Hunter Biden,” Meta said in the statement.

  Zuckerberg told Rogan as much on the podcast when asked whether the FBI specified that Facebook needed to “be on guard” about the Hunter Biden laptop story.

  “No. I don’t remember if it was that specifically. But it was, it basically fit the pattern,” Zuckerberg replied.

  Hunter Biden’s Laptop

  The laptop of President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, became the subject of scandal and scrutiny in October 2020 after the New York Post broke the story on its contents, which included information about the younger Biden’s foreign dealings and sordid personal life.

  After the story broke, much of its coverage by legacy media outlets was focused on the possibility that the laptop was Russian disinformation meant to damage Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.

  The laptop story was also suppressed by Facebook and Twitter, while a group of former intelligence officials came forward and said in a letter (pdf) that it had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

  John Ratcliffe, then-director of national intelligence, said at the time that there was no intelligence that supported the claim that the laptop was Russian disinformation.

  More recently, Ratcliffe told Fox News in an interview on Friday that, if the FBI did indeed try to suppress information about Hunter Biden’s laptop, this would amount to election interference.

  “It is election interference, to the extent that these allegations are true that FBI agents were knowingly putting bad information out there, absolutely,” Ratcliffe said.

  Polling has indicated that if the public had been aware of the suppressed story ahead of the election, it may have cost the elder Biden several percentage points of voters—possibly enough to thwart his bid for the White House.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 19:00

• Mossad Chief Vows Continued Ops Against Iran If Nuclear Deal Finalized
  Mossad Chief Vows Continued Ops Against Iran If Nuclear Deal Finalized

  While the world still awaits Tehran and Washington’s final verdicts on the finalized text of a restored JCPOA (so far all signs point to it unraveling as things once again appear to stall), Israel has said that its military and intelligence is prepared to act against Iran even if a deal is signed. 

  While this isn’t the first time Israeli officials have issued such a threat, it is a rare moment that the head of the Mossad intelligence agency publicly spoke out this bluntly and revealingly: 

  Criticizing the United States for rushing into a terrible deal, Mossad Director David Barnea said on Thursday that a new nuclear pact with Iran would not block his agency from acting against the Islamic Republic to protect Israel’s security interests.

  

  The remarks came in a top level government meeting with Prime Minister Yair Lapid and other officials amid fears in Israel that a final restored nuclear deal is imminent. 

   Barnea, who has been the country’s spy chief for a little over a year, stressed that given “Israel has not signed on to the deal” it remains that “Israel is permitted to defend itself in any way possible – and will act this way.”

  “We cannot sit quietly and just watch as the danger grows closer,” Barnea said further. His stark assessment and preparatory warnings that Israel is prepared for the ‘day after’ a deal strongly suggests that it’s Mossad’s assessment that a final agreement is just around the corner. 

  Further emphasizing Israel’s freedom to act, he said: 

  “We deal with Hezbollah, not the US. We deal with Islamic Jihad, not the US; and with militias and the IRGC in Syria. We need to deal with this. Clearly, the US can get up and leave [the region] one day; we cannot leave. We are here. There are also conceptual differences and in our worldviews.”

  The top spy continued: “The strategic leaning by both the US and Iran to sign on to a new JCPOA [nuclear deal] does not change Iran’s long-term desire to obtain a nuclear weapon.”

  As for his mention of Syria, it remains the place where Israeli airstrikes have picked up in frequency and intensity of late, earning condemnation from Russia. Israel has said it is a security “red line” for Iranians to be operating in Syria, or also Iran-backed Hezbollah.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 18:00

• America Wouldn't Be In A Recession Now If We'd Stuck With Trump: Stephen Moore
  America Wouldn’t Be In A Recession Now If We’d Stuck With Trump: Stephen Moore

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Stephen Moore, former economic adviser to the Trump White House, told Newsmax in a recent interview that he’s convinced that if former President Donald Trump had been reelected for a second term, America’s economy would not now be in what he described as a “mild recession.”

  

  In the interview that aired on Aug. 25, Moore was asked to comment on the revised gross domestic product (GDP) numbers released earlier in the day, which confirmed that the U.S. economy contracted in the second quarter.

  While the number was revised slightly upward to minus 0.6 percent from a prior estimate of minus 0.9 percent, the government data showed that America’s economy experienced negative growth for two consecutive quarters, the common rule-of-thumb definition for a recession.

  Even though the two-quarter rule is not the official definition of a recession in the world’s biggest economy, numerous economists—including Moore—have insisted that the United States has, in fact, fallen into a recessionary downturn.

  “We are in a mild recession right now, no question about that,” Moore told the outlet.

  

  ‘Getting Worse, Not Better’

  What’s more concerning, however, is where the economy is headed, he added, pointing to deteriorating economic data in housing, manufacturing, consumer spending, and business confidence.

  “I would have to say that things are getting worse, not better,” Moore said, arguing that if Trump had won reelection and his policies were guiding U.S. economic policy, the picture would be reversed.

  “I believe that if we had just stuck with the Trump policies, the U.S. economy would be booming right now,” Moore told the outlet.

  “There’s no reason why the U.S. economy isn’t in an incredible skyrocketing fashion, except for the fact that Biden has put in place all of these policies in taxing and spending and regulating that hurt economic growth,” he argued.

  

  Moore’s view builds on previous remarks made to EpochTV’s “Fresh Look America” program, in which he said that if Trump were still in power, “we would have the economy flying high right now.”

  Key to his thesis that the United States would be in a much better position economically under Trump policies is the fact that the former president sought to unlock domestic energy production, in contrast to Biden’s crackdown on fossil fuels.

  Under Trump, the United States had low unemployment and low inflation at the same time, while enjoying energy independence, he said.

  “Now we have a president who has to go hat in hand to the Saudis and beg them to produce more oil. It’s humiliating, it’s a threat to America’s national defense, it makes the country look weak,” he said.

  

  Tackling Inflation

  Moore’s remarks come as inflation has soared to multi-decade highs, driven in part by spiking energy costs, prompting the Federal Reserve to hike rates to quell price pressures.

  Markets are bracing for Friday’s key speech by Fed Chair Jerome Powell at the Kansas City Federal Reserve’s annual monetary policy symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.

  Last year at roughly the same time, Powell insisted that the inflationary jump would likely be “transitory,” a prediction he later acknowledged was wrong.

  

  The Fed has since embarked on an aggressive tightening cycle to ease inflationary pressures, which have shown some signs of abating, along with mounting signals of economic weakness.

  Despite a number of weak patches in the U.S. economy, the labor market remains resilient and inflationary pressures remain high, prompting Fed officials to send hawkish signals about the future path of monetary policy.

  As the Fed seeks to shape market expectations, a number of Fed officials in recent days have sought to hammer home the point that they will push interest rates up and hold them high until inflation has been squeezed out from the economy.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 17:30

• Motorcyclist In Florida Killed After Being Hit From Behind In Tesla
  Motorcyclist In Florida Killed After Being Hit From Behind In Tesla

  If the NHTSA is investigating Tesla’s Autopilot use around motorcycles, as we reported it was just days ago, they may want to hurry up.

  That’s because yet another motorcyclist has died as a result of a an accident with a Tesla, this time in Boca Raton, Florida. It is unclear whether or not Autopilot was involved in the accident. 

  51 year old biker Ingrid Eva Noon was traveling west on Southwest 18th Street on her Kawasaki Vulcan, according to the South Florida Sun Sentinel, when, shortly after 2AM, a driver in a Tesla “struck her motorcycle from behind”.

  The Sheriff’s office did confirm that the driver “had drugs or alcohol in his system at the time of the crash” and it isn’t yet clear whether or not the vehicle was on Autopilot at the time of the accident. An investigation is ongoing. 

  However, the incident is eeriliy similar to other incidents the NHTSA is already investigating wherein Teslas on Autopilot potentially fail to recognize motorcycles in front of them. In the incidents the NHTSA is looked at, “Teslas collided with motorcycles on freeways in the darkness.”

  

  Recall, about 20 days ago we wrote that the NHTSA was investigating potential Autopilot crashes that left two motorcyclists dead. 

  The Tesla’s were “apparently running on Autopilot”, according to APs coverage of the story. The accidents wound up killing 2 motorcyclists, the report says. The NHTSA is looking at whether or not Tesla vehicle automation stops the vehicles for motorcycles. 

  Both accidents were similar in nature: the NHTSA said it “sent investigation teams to two crashes last month in which Teslas collided with motorcycles on freeways in the darkness”. In both instances, the motorcyclists were killed. 

  The agency now has suspicions “that Tesla’s partially automated driver-assist system was in use” during both accidents. 

  The first accident was at 4:47am, July 7 on State Route 91, on a freeway in Riverside, California, the report says. A Model Y collided with a green Yamaha V-Star motorcycle that was ahead of it and the driver of the bike was ejected from his motorcycle. 

  Another crash happened at 1:09am on July 24,  on Interstate 15 near Draper, Utah. A Model 3 was behind a Harley Davidson, the Utah Department of Public Safety said. 

  “The driver of the Tesla did not see the motorcyclist and collided with the back of the motorcycle, which threw the rider from the bike,” the statement says. The rider of the Harley was pronounced dead at the scene. The driver told authorities he had Autopilot on, the report says. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 17:00

• Pfizer Vaccine Whistleblower Responds To Motion To Dismiss False Claims Suit
  Pfizer Vaccine Whistleblower Responds To Motion To Dismiss False Claims Suit

  Authored by Alex Giordano via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Pfizer cannot use the government as a shield from liability for making false claims about its COVID-19 vaccine, lawyers for a whistleblower argued in response to Pfizer’s motion to dismiss a False Claims Act lawsuit.

  “Respondents claim fraudulent certifications, false statements, doctored data, contaminated clinical trials, and firing of whistleblowers can be ignored based on the theory that they contracted their way around the fraud,” lawyers for Brook Jackson, who worked as regional director at one of the clinical trials used to develop the Pfizer vaccine, wrote in their Aug. 22 response.

  “A drug company cannot induce the taxpayers to pay billions of dollars for a product,” they countered, “that honest data would show poses more risks than benefits, and that ignores the actual contract and the law itself.”

  

  Jackson’s lawsuit alleges that Pfizer and two of its subcontractors violated the False Claims Act by providing bogus clinical trial results to garner the FDA approval of its COVID-19 vaccine.

  Under federal law, individuals can sue on behalf of the government and win treble damages if they can prove an individual or company deliberately lied to the government.

  One of Jackson’s attorneys, Warner Mendenhall, told The Epoch Times that the payout could be as much as $3.3 trillion.

  “It would be enough to bankrupt Pfizer,” Mendenhall said.

  Mendenhall, whose law firm has won multimillion-dollar False Claims Act cases, based his estimates on the more than $2 billion the U.S. government has paid Pfizer for more than 100 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine.

  In motions to dismiss the lawsuit, Pfizer and its subcontractors argued that besides Jackson’s allegations being false, the government, not a private citizen, can initiate a False Claims Act complaint and that the lawsuit against them should, therefore, be dismissed.

  “The Relator may not pursue the claims against Pfizer without the Government first pursuing them in an administrative proceeding,” Pfizer’s motion states.

  The companies also argued that the FDA was well aware of Jackson’s claims for at least two years before the lawsuit was filed against them and that it publicly responded to Jackson’s allegations by expressing the agency’s “full confidence” in the data used to support the vaccine.

  However, Mendenhall said a false claims action is independent of the government’s knowledge and that Jackson only has to prove Pfizer and its subcontractors presented fraudulent information to the FDA.

  Jackson was third in command of the clinical trials conducted by Ventavia Research Group as part of Pfizer’s application for emergency use authorization of its COVID-19 vaccine. She was there for only 18 days before being fired by Ventavia after reporting what she called “absolute mayhem” and an utter disregard for safety protocols and federal regulations in developing the vaccine.

  Jackson has submitted over 400 exhibits as part of her complaint. Jackson said that a former Taco’s cashier was among those tasked with injecting patients with the experimental jab. She alleged that the trial staff falsified patient signatures on informed consent paperwork. And she has described a daily mess of unsanitary conditions.

  Jackson also responded for the first time to Pfizer’s characterization of her as an anti-vaccine, anti-government individual out for money as vengeance for her firing.

  Jackson has worked on a long list of government-run clinical trials for vaccines and said she is pro-vaccine. She pointed out that her children have had all their childhood vaccines and that her entire family gets the flu vaccine yearly. Jackson received the COVID-19 vaccine as soon as it was available and was initially one of its biggest cheerleaders.

  While she is seeking compensation for her termination as part of her actions against Pfizer and the other companies, Jackson said she plans to donate any money she receives under her legal action against the companies to those injured by the vaccine.

  “As far as I’m concerned, it’s blood money,” she said. “The world should be disgusted by what went on here with the shameful actions behind this dangerous vaccine.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 16:30

• World's Most Popular Password Manager, With More Than 33 Million Users, Discloses "Security Incident"
  World’s Most Popular Password Manager, With More Than 33 Million Users, Discloses “Security Incident”

  LastPass, one of the world’s most popular password managers, has confirmed it has been hacked…err, has had a “security incident”. 

  Last week the company started notifying its users of a “recent security incident” where an “unauthorized party” gained access to a developer account and accessed parts of its password manager’s source code and “some proprietary LastPass technical information,” according to The Verge. 

  The company said that some source code was stolen, but that no passwords were taken. 

  It wrote a letter to its users on Wednesday which stated: “Two weeks ago, we detected some unusual activity within portions of the LastPass development environment. After initiating an immediate investigation, we have seen no evidence that this incident involved any access to customer data or encrypted password vaults.”

  It continued: “We have determined that an unauthorized party gained access to portions of the LastPass development environment through a single compromised developer account and took portions of source code and some proprietary LastPass technical information. Our products and services are operating normally.”

  

  “In response to the incident, we have deployed containment and mitigation measures, and engaged a leading cybersecurity and forensics firm. While our investigation is ongoing, we have achieved a state of containment, implemented additional enhanced security measures, and see no further evidence of unauthorized activity,” the letter concluded. 

  In a FAQ attached to the bottom of the letter, the company says that users Master passwords had not been compromised: “This incident did not compromise your Master Password. We never store or have knowledge of  your Master Password. We utilize an industry standard Zero Knowledge architecture that ensures LastPass can never know or gain access to our customers’ Master Password.”

  The company also said that no data from clients vaults had been taken because the hack happened in the developer environment. The letter wrote: “This incident occurred in our development environment. Our investigation has shown no evidence of any unauthorized access to encrypted vault data.  Our zero knowledge model ensures that only the customer has access to decrypt vault data.”

  LastPass is used by more than 33 million clients worldwide. 

  According to the Verge report, the company has explained to its users that they don’t have to do anything specific to respond to the hack. And, as long as this week’s disclosure covered the extent of it, and there’s no additional details about the breach that come out over the next few days, maybe LastPass (and its users) can move forward from the incident…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 16:00

• The (Heavily Redacted) Trump Search Warrant Affidavit Has Been Released
  The (Heavily Redacted) Trump Search Warrant Affidavit Has Been Released

  Authored by Techno Fog via The Reactionary (emphasis ours),

  The DOJ just released the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant of former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence.

  Here it is for download.

  

  As expected, the judge allowed the Government to heavily redact the affidavit before it went public. In yesterday’s order, the judge found that parts of the affidavit must remain sealed because:

  disclosure would reveal (1) the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents, and uncharged parties, (2) the investigation’s strategy, direction, scope, sources, and methods, and (3) grand jury information protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).

  This aligns with the DOJ representations that (1) information in the affidavit “could be used to identify many, if not all” of the witnesses; (2) the affidavit would provide a “roadmap for anyone intent on obstructive the investigation.”

  Affidavit allegations:

  • Classified materials and “evidence of obstruction”

  

  • The contents of the boxes reviewed by the FBI

  

  • Discussions of declassification.

   

  • Allegations of improper storage of materials.

  

  • Details regarding the search of Trump’s office.

  

  Other thoughts.

  Some aren’t so convinced. According to The Wall Street Journal, Kash Patel, one of the foremost experts on Russiagate, has stated he didn’t know what was in the boxes taken from Mar-A-Lago by the FBI. The New York Times also has doubts about whether the documents included Russiagate materials:

  None of those documents or any other materials pertaining to the Russia investigation were believed to be in the cache of documents recovered by the F.B.I. during the search of Mar-a-Lago, according to a person with knowledge of the situation.

  In fact, many of the Russiagate documents declassified by Trump may already be in possession of the National Archives. According to June 2022 reporting from Politico:

  Former President Donald Trump has told the National Archives to grant journalist John Solomon access to non-public administration records, according to Solomon and a spokesperson for the former president.

  Solomon said Trump specifically directed the Archives to give him access to documents related to the Russia probe that were declassified in the final days of his administration. And he said the Archives have been cooperative and accommodating.

  Then there’s the issue of classification. Does it matter if the documents at Mar-A-Lago were classified or unclassified?

  As we stated when the warrant was released, the statutes in question do not necessarily require the documents to be classified. One of the statutes mentioned in the warrant – 18 USC § 2071 – prohibits the removal of “any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office. . .” Prosecution under § 2071 does not depend on the classification of the document.

  The Espionage Act (18 USC § 793) is also referenced in the warrant. Over at Lawfare they guessed that “the part of the Espionage Act that is likely most relevant in this case is § 793(d).” They ended up being wrong. The affidavit cites to 793(e), which prohibits the unauthorized possession and retention of documents “relating to the national defense.”

  The Espionage Act does not contain the term “classified.” And although the law’s application considers the status of classification, there’s a question of whether the documents must be classified for charges to be brought. See US v. Morison, 844 F.2d 1057, 1076 (4th Cir. 1988) (discussing the narrowing of the definition of documents “relating to the national defense” to those documents “which had been ‘closely held’ by the government and was ‘not available to the general public’”). This leads us to ask whether the government can consider a document to be “closely held” if it isn’t classified.

  The affidavit answers that question, stating “information related to the national defense” has been construed broadly by the courts.

  

  Make no mistake: the Garland DOJ would see no issue with prosecuting for the retention of unclassified documents. But maybe they don’t need to go that far, as they’re alleging the materials at Mar-a-Lago were classified. From the DOJ’s April 29, 2022 letter to Trump’s attorneys: “among the materials in the boxes are over 100 documents with classification markings, comprising more than 700 pages.” And back in May 2022, NARA stated it had “identified items marked as classified national security information, up to the level of Top Secret and including Sensitive Compartmented Information and Special Access Program materials.” And now we have the affidavit’s allegations that the materials were classified.

  Read more here…

  [ZH: Some hot takes from The Federalist‘s Sean Davis and others]

  And a Breitbart article pic.twitter.com/EJHjQrh5WB

  — Jeff Cunningham (@jeffrygc) August 26, 2022

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

  According to the government’s own affidavit demanding authority to raid Trump’s home, the unprecedented raid was necessary because a bureaucrat at the National Archives was mad that Trump had “newspapers, magazines, [and] printed news articles.” https://t.co/RwcfYi8ADP pic.twitter.com/OSpDrc1KeJ

  — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) August 26, 2022

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

  Transparency is one of DOJ’s and FBI’s passions. pic.twitter.com/1friuvyTyG

  — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) August 26, 2022

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

  In the affidavit, the Justice Department acknowledged that Trump’s lawyers and former officials pointed to his “absolute authority to declassify documents” as president.

  If the DOJ explains why they ignored that point, their rationale is completely redacted. pic.twitter.com/5sqyNVMioD

  — Vince Coglianese (@VinceCoglianese) August 26, 2022

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 15:55

• 4 Ways The "Inflation Reduction Act" Could Impact Supply Chains
  4 Ways The “Inflation Reduction Act” Could Impact Supply Chains

  By Alyssa Sporrer, by American Shipper

  As its name suggests, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) signed into law by President Joe Biden earlier this month is designed to reduce inflation, but it also includes $300 billion worth of grants and incentives for clean energy and initiatives to combat climate change. 

  The goal of the incentives is to accelerate electric vehicle adoption, green ports, increase renewable energy capacity and support products made in the U.S. There are also tax reforms and provisions for health care.

  The climate legislation is supposed to help the U.S. lower greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.

  1. Incentives for electric trucks

  The tax credit for purchasing an EV covers the price difference between a diesel truck and an electric truck, or 30% of the truck’s purchase price, whichever is lower. But it’s capped at $40,000 per vehicle purchase.

  New heavy-duty electric trucks can cost over $300,000, so it’s unclear how much this tax credit would incentivize fleet owners to invest in EVs.

  The tax credit may be “geared more toward incentivizing the purchase of smaller vehicles, such as cargo vans or box trucks used for short-haul package delivery in urban areas,” Beia Spiller, director of the transportation program at the nonprofit research group Resources for the Future, which studies the implications of vehicle electrification, told FreightWaves in a previous interview.

  The IRA also includes a credit for building EV charging infrastructure of up to $100,000 per charger.

  2. Renewable energy incentives

  The IRA includes production and investment tax credits for battery storage and renewable wind and solar energy. This should make it greener and cheaper for supply chain companies to power their warehouses, distribution centers and stores.

  Independent environmental and energy research nonprofit Resources for the Future projects the act will reduce electricity costs for the retail industry by 5.2% to 6.7% over the next decade, saving electricity consumers $209 billion to $278 billion. 

  These estimations were based on expected natural gas prices. One of the benefits of more clean energy is it insulates electricity consumers from volatile natural gas prices.

  The nonprofit predicted the GHG emissions from the electricity sector would drop between 70% and 75% by 2030 below 2005 levels. Without the IRA, those emissions were estimated to decrease by about 49% in the same time frame.

  “As the nation looks to increase production of renewable energy and the sustainability of the supply chain, these new public investments will help support more solar, more electric trucks and new clean-energy technologies and infrastructure,” Susan Uthayakumar, chief energy and sustainability officer at Prologis, said in a statement.

  3. Supporting domestic supply chains

  The IRA is expected to drastically increase the demand for components needed in solar panels, wind turbines and EVs. This could create more jobs in the clean energy and manufacturing sectors. 

  But there’s a catch. Some of the incentives hinge on a certain amount of raw materials being sourced in the U.S., the final product being constructed in the U.S. or meeting worker training and competitive wage standards.

  While these conditions support domestic supply chains and labor rights, some experts think it may slow the adoption rate of EVs and renewable energy. Domestic supply chains for EV and solar panel production are not mature right now. 

  It’s unclear whether these incentives will spur the expansion of these domestic supply chains or how fast that may occur.

  The National Association of Manufacturers “remains staunchly opposed to the IRA. It increases taxes on manufacturers in America, undermining our competitiveness while we are facing harsh economic headwinds such as supply chain disruptions and the highest rate of inflation in decades.”

  4. Greening ports

  The IRA includes $3 billion in grants and rebates for port authorities and marine terminals to purchase zero-emission cargo-handling equipment until September 2027. The goal is to address air pollution in and around ports.

  But it defines zero-emission port equipment and technology as being “human-operated equipment or human-maintained technology” and therefore excludes automated technology from being grant eligible.

  Zero-emission cargo handling equipment or technology must emit no air pollutants or GHGs, or it must capture 100% of those emissions produced by vessels at berth to qualify for the grants.

  “This would go a long way to help seaports meet their emission reduction goals,” said Elaine Nessle, executive director of the Coalition for America’s Gateway and Trade Corridors. “Freight projects often have economic benefits for the entire country, but they can also negatively impact local communities, so it’s good to have resources at the federal level to offset those negative impacts.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 15:30

• Mentor Of Jeffrey Epstein Found Dead In Connecticut Apartment
  Mentor Of Jeffrey Epstein Found Dead In Connecticut Apartment

  Steven Hoffenberg, known mentor to Jeffrey Epstein and a convicted Ponzi schemer, was found dead in an apartment in Derby, Connecticut on Friday morning.  Police could not identify the body initially due to extreme decomposition over the course of at least seven days.  The cause of death has not been released but autopsy reports indicate no signs of trauma.

  A private investigator for a woman who identified herself as a sexual assault victim of Epstein’s called police and requested a welfare check at the multifamily home on Tuesday, she had not heard from Hoffenberg for five days and that was unusual, police said.

  It should be noted that this suggests that Hoffenberg was in fact in contact with one of Epstein’s alleged victims for an extended period of time leading up to his death.   

  

  Hoffenberg was sentenced to 20 years in prison in 1997 for his involvement in a financial scam that swindled thousands of investors out of $460 million, though Hoffenberg maintained that Epstein was the actual architect of the plan.  Epstein was never charged.

  While it is likely that Hoffenberg’s death will be connected to “natural causes” associated with his older age (77), it is yet another strange footnote in the saga of the highly politically connected Jeffrey Epstein and his “Lolita Express.”  The infamous plane ride which whisked numerous political leaders off to Epstein’s island of Little Saint James, where some of them would allegedly participate in sex with underage prostitutes and exploited minors in exchange for money and favors.

  The Department of Justice has apparently been in possession of Epstein’s client list for some time.  The demands have been growing for the release of this list ever since his “suicide” in jail, after Epstein told prison officials for weeks that he would never try to kill himself. 

  Close Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who was recently convicted in December of helping Epstein groom teenage girls for prostitution, is in a position to confirm client details of any list that might be in the DOJ’s hands.  For now, Epstein’s client list remains unconfirmed.  Given the numerous political elites that visited his island over the decades, it might stay that way.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 15:00

• Falling Military Recruitment Is Another Sign Of Waning Faith In The Regime
  Falling Military Recruitment Is Another Sign Of Waning Faith In The Regime

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  The US Army reports it is having some serious problems when it comes to recruiting new soldiers. Last month, according to the AP: “Army officials … said the service will fall about 10,000 soldiers short of its planned end strength for this fiscal year, and prospects for next year are grimmer.”

  

  The army is not alone in missing recruitment goals:

  Senior Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps leaders have said they are hopeful they will meet or just slightly miss their recruiting goals for this year. But they said they will have to dip into their pool of delayed entry applicants, which will put them behind as they begin the next recruiting year.

  In fact, recruitment prospects are so grim that 2022 is looking to be the worst recruiting year for the army since 1973, when the US military transitioned to an all-volunteer—i.e., nonconscripted—force. The days of the post-9/11 surge in enlistments are long gone, and noted for two lost wars in recent years, the US military now faces a new environment of declining public support. Moreover, with its recent drive to showcase its commitment to so-called woke policy goals, the military may be alienating conservatives—a group that has long been a reliable source of recruits and political support.

  Ultimately, of course, the military can always get more troops by raising pay and lowering standards. The latter requires only a policy change. And, given the federal government’s ability to essentially print money, the former is unlikely to be an insurmountable problem for the Pentagon either.

  The good news, however, is that the military’s recruiting woes are likely yet another signal of declining support for the federal government and its institutions. The federal government has benefited immensely from the fact that the military has long been one of the most popular institutions within the central government. Even as many Americans claim they distrust the government or oppose “the bureaucracy,” widespread support for the government military bureaucracy has long helped to prop up the legitimacy of federal institutions. If falling enlistments are an indication of declining faith in the military overall, that would be a positive development, indeed.

  The Economics of Recruitment

  As has often been the case in the past, the military is now struggling to find enough willing recruits in an environment of low unemployment. After all, many recruits are motivated at least in part by promises of steady income, veterans’ benefits, and tuition reimbursement. These benefits look relatively less attractive when private-sector jobs are easy to find.

  As a result, the military has been “throwing cash” at the problem. All the services are now “leaning on record-level enlistment and retention bonuses” to attract recruits, with higher bonuses for riskier or more skill-intensive work.

  Military recruiting efforts, however, have long sought to “subsidize” salaries by promising psychic profits in the form of positive emotions obtained by fulfilling one’s supposed patriotic duty. Another benefit suggested by recruiters has been an alleged opportunity for “adventure.” Historically, recruitment efforts have relied on promising a variety of nonmonetary forms of “payment.”

  In their analysis of military recruitment efforts, Peter Padilla and Mary Riege Laner identified at least four different types of benefits promised to potential recruits. These include patriotism, adventure/challenge, job/career/education, social status, and money. Emphasis has differed based on social trends (such as the prevalence of antiwar sentiment) and, of course, on the personal preferences of individual recruits.

  The military, in any case, has recognized the need to appeal to all these aspects to meet recruitment goals. Even when military pay is generous, it is still necessary to get potential recruits to accept a job in which one cannot legally quit. Moreover, if a large number of potential recruits view the military as pursuing values and goals contrary to their own, monetary rewards would have to be raised quite high to overcome nonmonetary concerns.

  Another strategy that can increase recruitment is to lower (or change) standards for new recruits. This has been done in various ways. For example, as tattoos have become more fashionable among middle-class youth, the military has granted many more waivers. The Air Force is now considering allowing members to grow beards. These changes, however, are based largely on appearance. Broader changes that would qualify as truly lowering standards include efforts to lower physical fitness requirements for women, older members, and marijuana users. For more than a decade now, the army has also been accepting more and more recruits with lower scores on aptitude tests and with no high school diploma.

  Of course, there is no “correct” number of employees for the armed forces, and there is no functioning marketplace in the provision of “defense.” The size of the US military is arbitrarily determined by Congress and the White House based on political interests and goals. The military is nonetheless partly constrained by market realities, and by the subjective values of potential workers.

  Support for the Military Is Falling

  All else being equal, however, falling enlistment is evidence that workers are less interested in serving in the military outside mere economic considerations. This is reflected in the survey data suggesting that the military’s reputation among members of the general public has declined significantly.

  For example, as the Military Times reported last year, “About 56 percent of Americans surveyed said they have ‘a great deal of trust and confidence’ in the military, down from 70 percent in 2018.” Moreover, according to Gallup, the percentage of Americans who believe that military officers “have high ethics” dropped 10 percent from 2017 to 2021.

  As has long been the case, the military remains among the more trusted institutions in the US, but, as even the relentless promilitary Heritage Foundation admits:

  A more candid appraisal, however, would see this for what it is: a vote of declining confidence by America in its oldest and heretofore most trusted institution.

  More worrisome still—from the Pentagon’s perspective—is that much of this decline is coming from a drop in conservative and Republican support. Gallup reports that in its survey, military officers’ “image among the GOP is now the lowest Gallup has recorded since the first reading, in 2002, a period spanning Republican and Democratic presidencies.”

  Moreover, political rhetoric among many conservatives has decidedly turned against the Pentagon. This was noted last year in Foreign Policy:

  The long Republican romance with the military appears to have finally come to an end. And as conservative politicians and pundits have put the U.S. military—and especially the top brass—in their cross hairs, their supporters and listeners have taken note. The consequences for the U.S. military could be dire.

  Part of this is apparently due to the growing feeling among conservatives that military bureaucracy has committed itself to so-called woke politics. From Tucker Carlson to Ted Cruz to Sabastian Gorka, conservatives apparently are not nearly as enamored with the US military establishment as they once were. As Tucker Carlson complained back in May:

  Most of the generals we see quoted in the press seem more committed to meeting some counterproductive diversity goal—hiring more pregnant Air Force pilots, assembling the world’s first transgender SEAL team—than on defending the United States.

  The Effect on Enlistments

  These trends among historical supporters of the military may be finally showing up in recruitment realities. It’s difficult to directly measure the ideological leanings of new recruits. After all, enlistment forms don’t ask for one’s political and ideological beliefs. But we can indirectly make some guesses about who is joining the military based on where most of the recruits are coming from. For example, as the New York Times reported in 2018, military recruiters rely heavily on new recruits from the nation’s most politically conservative region—the South—to meet recruiting goals:

  In 2019, Fayetteville, N.C., which is home to Fort Bragg, provided more than twice as many military enlistment contracts as Manhattan, even though Manhattan has eight times as many people. Many of the new contracts in Fayetteville were soldiers signing up for second and third enlistments…. Military service was once spread fairly evenly—at least geographically—throughout the nation because of the draft. But after the draft ended in 1973, enlistments shifted steadily south of the Mason-Dixon line. The military’s decision to close many bases in Northern states where long winters limited training only hastened the trend.

  The significance of geography for new recruits can also be seen in the fact that politically conservative regions also tend to grant military recruiters better access to local schools. As school districts in many left-leaning urban areas restricted recruiters’ access to high school students in recent years, this has further increased the reliance on recruits from promilitary suburbs, exurbs, and rural towns. These are areas that tend to be more politically conservative. Moreover, new recruits lopsidedly come from families with a history of military service. While the extent to which military personnel support Republicans has been overstated, the military does nonetheless lean conservative. All this would suggest that new recruits come both from households and regions that lean conservative themselves.

  In other words, the military has becoming increasingly reliant on a dwindling number of communities and families. The military brass admits this model is not sustainable.

  The larger issue here is not whether or not the military can meet recruitment goals without big changes to current standards and pay. After all, if the economy continues to weaken and unemployment rises, this could bail out recruiters in a big way. Rather, the enlistment situation helps to illustrate what may be a developing and hopeful trend in which many conservatives are finally abandoning their long love affair with the US regime through its military institutions.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 08/27/2022 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest