Today’s News 31st October 2024

• The Politics Of Fear: Laying The Groundwork For Fascism, American-Style
  The Politics Of Fear: Laying The Groundwork For Fascism, American-Style

  Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “No one can terrorize a whole nation, unless we are all his accomplices.”

  – Edward R. Murrow, broadcast journalist

  America is in the midst of an epidemic of historic proportions.

  The contagion being spread like wildfire is turning communities into battlegrounds and setting Americans one against the other.

  Normally mild-mannered individuals caught up in the throes of this disease have been transformed into belligerent zealots, while others inclined to pacifism have taken to stockpiling weapons and practicing defensive drills.

  This plague on our nation—one that has been spreading like wildfire—is a potent mix of fear coupled with unhealthy doses of paranoia and intolerance, tragic hallmarks of the post-9/11 America in which we live.

  

  Everywhere you turn, those on both the left- and right-wing are fomenting distrust and division. You can’t escape it.

  We’re being fed a constant diet of fear: fear of terrorists, fear of illegal immigrants, fear of people who are too religious, fear of people who are not religious enough, fear of extremists, fear of conformists, fear of the government, fear of those who fear the government, fear of those on the Right, fear of those on the Left… The list goes on and on.

  The strategy is simple yet effective: the best way to control a populace is through fear and discord.

  Fear makes people stupid.

  Confound them, distract them with mindless news chatter and entertainment, pit them against one another by turning minor disagreements into major skirmishes, and tie them up in knots over matters lacking in national significance.

  Most importantly, divide the people into factions, persuade them to see each other as the enemy and keep them screaming at each other so that they drown out all other sounds. In this way, they will never reach consensus about anything and will be too distracted to notice the police state closing in on them until the final crushing curtain falls.

  This is how free people enslave themselves and allow tyrants to prevail. 

  This Machiavellian scheme has so ensnared the nation that few Americans even realize they are being manipulated into adopting an “us” against “them” mindset. Instead, fueled with fear and loathing for phantom opponents, they agree to pour millions of dollars and resources into political elections, militarized police, spy technology and endless wars, hoping for a guarantee of safety that never comes.

  All the while, those in power—bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporations—move their costly agendas forward, and “we the suckers” get saddled with the tax bills and subjected to pat downs, police raids and round-the-clock surveillance.

  Turn on the TV or flip open the newspaper on any given day, and you will find yourself accosted by reports of government corruption, corporate malfeasance, militarized police and marauding SWAT teams.

  America has already entered a new phase, one in which children are arrested in schools, military veterans are forcibly detained by government agents because of their so-called “anti-government” views, and law-abiding Americans are having their movements tracked, their financial transactions documented, and their communications monitored.

  These threats are not to be underestimated.

  Yet even more dangerous than these violations of our basic rights is the language in which they are couched: the language of fear. It is a language spoken effectively by politicians on both sides of the aisle, shouted by media pundits from their cable TV pulpits, marketed by corporations, and codified into bureaucratic laws that do little to make our lives safer or more secure.

  This language of fear has given rise to a politics of fear whose only aim is to distract and divide us. In this way, we have been discouraged from thinking analytically and believing that we have any part to play in solving the problems before us. Instead, we have been conditioned to point the finger at the other Person or vote for this Politician or support this Group, because they are the ones who will fix it. Except that they can’t and won’t fix the problems plaguing our communities.

  Nevertheless, fear remains the method most often used by politicians to increase the power of government.

  The government’s overblown, extended wars on terrorism, drugs, violence, disease, illegal immigration, and so-called domestic extremism have been convenient ruses used to terrorize the populace into relinquishing more of their freedoms in exchange for elusive promises of security.

  An atmosphere of fear permeates modern America. However, with crime at an all-time low, is such fear rational?

  Statistics show that you are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack. You are 11,000 times more likely to die from an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane. You are 1,048 times more likely to die from a car accident than a terrorist attack. You are 404 times more likely to die in a fall than from a terrorist attack. You are 12 times more likely to die from accidental suffocating in bed than from a terrorist attack. And you are 9 more times likely to choke to death in your own vomit than die in a terrorist attack.

  Indeed, those living in the American police state are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist. Thus, the government’s endless jabbering about terrorism amounts to little more than propaganda—the propaganda of fear—a tactic used to terrorize, cower and control the population.

  In turn, the government’s stranglehold on power and extreme paranoia about the citizenry as potential threats has resulted in a populace that is increasingly viewed as the government’s enemies.

  Why else would the government feel the need to monitor our communications, track our movements, criminalize our every action, treat us like suspects, and strip us of any means of defense while equipping its own personnel with an amazing arsenal of weapons?

  So far, these tactics—terrorizing the citizenry over the government’s paranoia and overblown fears while treating them like criminals—are working to transform the way “we the people” view ourselves and our role in this nation.

  Indeed, fear and paranoia have become hallmarks of the modern American experience, impacting how we as a nation view the world around us, how we as citizens view each other, and most of all how our government views us.

  The American people have been reduced to what commentator Dan Sanchez refers to as “herd-minded hundreds of millions [who] will stampede to the State for security, bleating to please, please be shorn of their remaining liberties.”

  Sanchez continues:

  I am not terrified of the terrorists; i.e., I am not, myself, terrorized. Rather, I am terrified of the terrorized; terrified of the bovine masses who are so easily manipulated by terrorists, governments, and the terror-amplifying media into allowing our country to slip toward totalitarianism and total war…

  I do not irrationally and disproportionately fear Muslim bomb-wielding jihadists or white, gun-toting nutcases. But I rationally and proportionately fear those who do, and the regimes such terror empowers. History demonstrates that governments are capable of mass murder and enslavement far beyond what rogue militants can muster. Industrial-scale terrorists are the ones who wear ties, chevrons, and badges. But such terrorists are a powerless few without the supine acquiescence of the terrorized many. There is nothing to fear but the fearful themselves…

  Stop swallowing the overblown scaremongering of the government and its corporate media cronies. Stop letting them use hysteria over small menaces to drive you into the arms of tyranny, which is the greatest menace of all.

  As history makes clear, fear and government paranoia lead to fascist, totalitarian regimes.

  It’s a simple enough formula. National crises, reported terrorist attacks, and sporadic shootings leave us in a constant state of fear. Fear prevents us from thinking. The emotional panic that accompanies fear actually shuts down the prefrontal cortex or the rational thinking part of our brains. In other words, when we are consumed by fear, we stop thinking.

  A populace that stops thinking for themselves is a populace that is easily led, easily manipulated and easily controlled.

  The following, derived by from John T. Flynn’s 1944 treatise on fascism As We Go Marching are a few of the necessary ingredients for a fascist state:

  • The government is managed by a powerful leader (even if he or she assumes office by way of the electoral process). This is the fascistic leadership principle (or father figure).

  • The government assumes it is not restrained in its power. This is authoritarianism, which eventually evolves into totalitarianism.

  • The government ostensibly operates under a capitalist system while being undergirded by an immense bureaucracy.

  • The government through its politicians emits powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.

  • The government has an obsession with national security while constantly invoking terrifying internal and external enemies.

  • The government establishes a domestic and invasive surveillance system and develops a paramilitary force that is not answerable to the citizenry.

  • The government and its various agencies (federal, state, and local) develop an obsession with crime and punishment. This is overcriminalization.

  • The government becomes increasingly centralized while aligning closely with corporate powers to control all aspects of the country’s social, economic, military, and governmental structures.

  • The government uses militarism as a center point of its economic and taxing structure.

  • The government is increasingly imperialistic in order to maintain the military-industrial corporate forces.

  The parallels to modern America are impossible to ignore.

  “Every industry is regulated. Every profession is classified and organized. Every good or service is taxed. Endless debt accumulation is preserved. Immense doesn’t begin to describe the bureaucracy. Military preparedness never stops, and war with some evil foreign foe, remains a daily prospect,” writes economist Jeffrey Tucker.

  “It’s incorrect to call fascism either right wing or left wing. It is both and neither… fascism does not seek to overthrow institutions like commercial establishments, family, religious centers, and civic traditions. It seeks to control them… it preserves most of what people hold dear but promises to improve economic, social, and cultural life through unifying their operations under government control.”

  For the final hammer of fascism to fall, it will require the most crucial ingredient: the majority of the people will have to agree that it’s not only expedient but necessary. In times of “crisis,” expediency is upheld as the central principle—that is, in order to keep us safe and secure, the government must militarize the police, strip us of basic constitutional rights and criminalize virtually every form of behavior.

  We are at a critical crossroads in American history.

  As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, fear has been a critical tool in past fascistic regimes, and it has become the driving force behind the American police state.

  All of which begs the question what we will give up in order to perpetuate the illusions of safety and security.

  As we once again find ourselves faced with the prospect of voting for the lesser of two evils, “we the people” have a decision to make: do we simply participate in the collapse of the American republic as it degenerates toward a totalitarian regime, or do we take a stand and reject the pathetic excuse for government that is being fobbed off on us?

  There is no easy answer, but one thing is true: the lesser of two evils is still evil.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 23:50

• Did Boston Dynamics Get Jealous After Spotlight On Tesla's Optimus Robot?
  Did Boston Dynamics Get Jealous After Spotlight On Tesla’s Optimus Robot?

  Less than a day after Tesla CEO Elon Musk made bold claims at the Future Investment Initiative Conference in Saudi Arabia, touting big AI growth in the coming years, which is only suggestive of powerful tailwinds for his Optimus robot, Boston Dynamics—once the leader in viral humanoid robot videos—published a clip on YouTube on Wednesday morning showcasing its robot performing typical warehouse tasks usually carried out by workers in Amazon distribution centers.

  Maybe a bit of jealousy is unfolding between Boston Dynamics and Musk’s Optimus robot, which has received a lot of attention in October – from the “We, Robot“ event on October 10 to Musk’s comment at the event in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday:

  “I think by 2040, probably there are more humanoid robots than there are people. Every country will have an AI or multiple AIs, and there will be a lot of robots, way more robots than people.”

  Back to the We, Robot event, where Musk said Optimus will cost less than $30,000 and forecasted that the humanoid robot will be the company’s most popular product in the years ahead… 

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

  NEW: Elon Musk introduces an army of Optimus robots, says people will be able to buy them to complete tasks.

  Epic.

  Musk then said attendees could walk up to the Optimus robots who would do things like serve drinks.

  “At scale, you should be able to buy an Optimus robot for… pic.twitter.com/zsGF4zzhaR

  — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) October 11, 2024

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

  Maybe all this attention on Optimus provoked Boston Dynamics to release a video of its bipedal humanoid robot, Atlas.  

  Here’s more from Boston Dynamics:

  Atlas is autonomously moving engine covers between supplier containers and a mobile sequencing dolly. The robot receives as input a list of bin locations to move parts between.

  Atlas uses a machine learning (ML) vision model to detect and localize the environment fixtures and individual bins [0:36]. The robot uses a specialized grasping policy and continuously estimates the state of manipulated objects to achieve the task.

  There are no prescribed or teleoperated movements; all motions are generated autonomously online. The robot is able to detect and react to changes in the environment (e.g., moving fixtures) and action failures (e.g., failure to insert the cover, tripping, environment collisions [1:24]) using a combination of vision, force, and proprioceptive sensors.

  Suppose robots and AI are forecasted to lead to millions of job losses in the years ahead. Then why did Democrats facilitate the greatest migrant invasion this nation has ever seen with low-skilled, unvetted illegal aliens when many of those jobs are likely to be automated away? Ah, yes, it’s all about the votes.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 23:25

• The Spinal Tap Election: Everything Is Turned Up To 11
  The Spinal Tap Election: Everything Is Turned Up To 11

  Authored by Charles Lipson via RealClearPolitics,

  To hear the candidates and their surrogates tell it, we live in Weimar Germany 1932. There are only fascists fighting communists, with nobody in the middle. The candidates have eagerly pinned those noxious labels on their opponents.

  MSNBC, which competes with ABC and CBS for dreadful news judgment, drove home that point with its coverage of Trump’s closing rally at Madison Square Garden. Amid clips of the Trump event, they spliced clips of Nazi rallies. Subtlety be damned.

  

  A better analogy than Weimar is “Spinal Tap,” the mockumentary about a hapless heavy metal band. In one scene, the band’s guitarist, Nigel Tufnel, explains why his amplifiers are louder than everyone else’s. Their amplifier dials only go up to 10. His go up to 11.

  Tufnel: It’s one louder, isn’t it? … What we do is if we need that extra … push over the cliff … you know what we do?

  Interviewer Marty DeBergi: Put it up to eleven.

  Tufnel:  Eleven. Exactly. One louder.

  That is American politics today. One louder. But with everyone louder – and angrier – no one can hear each other.

  With the amps at 11 and the country ideologically polarized, we are pushing America toward the cliff. Both parties think that’s the other’s fault.

  These intense passions won’t end when the ballots are counted, especially if the results are close. In 2020, Trump impugned the results and the winner’s legitimacy. In 2016, after Hillary Clinton lost, she repeatedly denounced Trump as an illegitimate president. That rhetoric mobilizes the most extreme followers. It’s kindling wood for violence, exactly what a constitutional democracy should avoid with the peaceful transfer of power.

  This turbulence has two sources. One is short-term, a cynical tactic to increase partisan turnout. Get them to the polls by playing on their fears. The other is long-term. Both sides are genuinely scared about what the other side will do if they win. Those two sources, long-term and short-term, reinforce each other.

  They push us toward the cliff. Before plunging over, it’s time for sensible people to take a deep breath and assess the real differences, not the hype, and consider how to cope with the dangers.

  The most fundamental point is this: America’s best protection against extreme dangers are robust constitutional institutions, combined with impartial law enforcement.

  What are these vital institutional protections?

  • Separation of powers
  • Respect for the rule of law
  • Impartial enforcement of our laws
  • Protection for the minority party’s rights, ensured by the Senate filibuster
  • Limits on presidential fiat, not governance by constant Executive Orders
  • Requirements that major rules proposed by administrative agencies receive clear approval from elected representatives before they can be implemented
  • Restraint and effective oversight on the enormous, secretive power of the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies, whose actions must be kept within constitutional bounds and never used for domestic political gain or political blackmail

  These institutional protections are the load-bearing walls of constitutional democracy. All of them have been under enormous strain, mostly by partisans who care far more about achieving their preferred outcomes than about preserving constitutional methods for achieving them. Indeed, they would readily change those methods, such as packing the Supreme Court, to achieve their goals.

  The dangers have grown because the policy differences between the two parties today are deep and fundamental. These are not the differences between Dwight Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson, or between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. They are deeper, angrier, and laden with almost-religious fervor. Apostates are excommunicated.

  These opposing views are amplified in today’s media landscape, which is characterized by separate silos for separate audiences. People tune in to see their views confirmed and others’ denigrated.

  Amid these changes, the base constituencies of both parties have moved away from the center, away from the possibilities of compromise.

  These cleavages are prominent in issues freighted with social and cultural meaning. That’s certainly true for disputes surrounding abortion and transgender rights. Both issues have practical consequences, but the disputes go further. They are fights over cultural symbols that matter to many people who have no direct, personal stake in reproductive rights or gender changes.

  For many women, abortion is a hard-won right and they believe that they alone should decide whether to keep their pregnancy or terminate it. Achieving that right (codified in the 1973 Roe v .Wade decision) was the most important feminist victory since the advent of voting rights for women. Their political opponents say pregnant women should not have unfettered discretion to deal with pregnancy since it involves another, innocent life. The debate over women’s rights, human autonomy, and the protection of innocents is suffused with both practical consequences and symbolic weight.

  The same is true for transgender rights. The right of adults to choose their gender is now widely accepted, a major change from 20 or 30 years ago. The battles now are whether children should be subject to irreversible changes, who should make those decisions, whether transgender women (born men) should compete against biological women and girls in sports, whether biological and transgender girls should use the same bathrooms and locker rooms, and whether taxpayers should pay for gender-changing operations on prison inmates and illegal aliens. The numbers involved in these issues are relatively small, but their symbolic weight is large. Opposing sides face each other across a cultural chasm, drenched with contempt for the opposition.

  These differences are playing out against a disorienting background condition, which is often ignored when we discuss politics and culture. The basic structure of modern economies is changing rapidly. The last such disorienting economic change was the Great Depression and, before that, the Second Industrial Revolution in the 1890s (the advent of big steel, oil, chemicals, and large corporations to manage them). Both the 1890s and 1930s produced long-lasting shifts in voters’ political alignments.

  We are seeing another great realignment now, driven (on the economic side) by rapid innovation in computer technology, artificial intelligence, and robotics. When those are combined with low-cost transportation, virtually free communication, and trade rules that encourage globalization, the result is social dislocation and disorientation. There is a palpable threat to employment in American manufacturing and, increasingly, in service industries.

  Both political parties have responded by supporting trade protection, with Trump taking the lead. Doing so has helped him forge a populist Republican Party, centered on the working-class.

  Amid these vast changes and bitter ideological differences, it is hardly surprising to see our political discourse becoming more virulent, depicting the opposition as “enemies,” as Trump has done for some elected representatives (and not just violent extremists).

  The only way to contain those differences peacefully is to channel them through established democratic institutions, using well-established procedures. That’s the only hope the losing side will accept the results as legitimate.

  To propose major changes to those institutions risks further undermining their already-wobbly legitimacy. To impose those changes for immediate political victories, to impose them with support from only one party, is worse than foolhardy. It’s dangerous. It would keep the amplifiers pinned on 11 while we scream at each other across the deafening noise.

  Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago. His latest book is Free Speech 101: A Practical Guide for Students. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 23:00

• Trick-Or-Treat Around The World
  Trick-Or-Treat Around The World

  Trick-or-treating has been associated with Halloween celebrations in the U.S. and Canada since the early 1900s, but, as Statista’s Katharina Buchholz shows below, traditions of children going door to door in a quest for treats exist in many parts of the world, with one European custom being widely recognized as the precursor of the North American tradition.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As far back as the Middle Ages, people in the British Isles dressed up for holidays and went from door to door performing scenes in order to receive a thank-you in the form of food and drink.

  The tradition is preserved today in Scotland and Ireland under the name guising and features dressed-up children rather than theater displays.

  The origin of Halloween, celebrated on October 31, also goes back to Celtic traditions, more specifically the Samhain festival, which marked the beginning of winter and a time when fairies and spirits needed to be appeased. 

  Like many Christian holidays, All Saints’ Day (November 1) and its eve, All Hallows’ Day, coincide with the pagan festival and trick-or-treating is done in Portugal on the first day of November.

  All Saints’ Day also has a big significance in Mexico (celebrated as Day of the Dead there) but U.S. Halloween traditions have also been adopted, most heavily in the Northern and Central parts of the country, where the custom is named calaverita (litte skull) after the sugar skulls which are gifted for the festival.

  But scary dress and trick-or-treating antics are not tied to a single date: Scandinavian children engage in them around Easter, while those in Northern Germany and Southern Denmark pick New Year’s Eve. In Southern Germany, Austria Switzerland, the Netherlands and Flanders in Belgium, treats are given out not for threats, but for songs, which children perform on November 11 (St. Martin’s Day). Caroling for sweets is also performed during Ramadan in Central Asia. This is where trick-or-treating blends into Christmas caroling, which is sometimes also rewarded with food offerings, for example in Eastern Europe.

  The practice is associated most closely with England and the United States, but involves adults as well as children and more commonly the collection of money, for example for charity.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 22:35

• US Coast Guard To Expand Presence, Cooperation In Indo-Pacific Amid China Concerns
  US Coast Guard To Expand Presence, Cooperation In Indo-Pacific Amid China Concerns

  Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The U.S. Coast Guard said that it intends to send specialized forces, training teams, and other capacity-building assets to help Indo-Pacific allies bolster their ability to safeguard exclusive economic zones and protect their natural resources from exploitation, according to the Coast Guard 2024 operational posture report released on Oct. 25.

  

  The report states that the region remains “a top regional priority” for the United States, citing its geostrategic importance, vital role in global trade, and the need to ensure “a free, open, and rules-based maritime order.”

  “We are expanding our presence and cooperation in Southeast and South Asia, with a focus on advising, training, deployment, and capacity building,” the Coast Guard stated while also pledging to continue to support its allies’ efforts in combating “predatorial fishing practices.”

  The report comes amid growing concerns over China’s military assertiveness in the region but did not mention the Chinese communist regime by name. It stated that the United States aims to boost the capacity of regional coast guards to support them in countering “malign influence,” enforcing their laws and addressing their priority interests such as climate change.

  According to the report, the Coast Guard will deploy its National Security cutters—the centerpiece of its fleet—to the Western Pacific and move the 270-foot Harriet Lane cutter to the Indo-Pacific. The Coast Guard said it will also maintain operations of fast response cutters and buoy tenders in Oceania.

  During an Oct. 18 press conference, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin warned that China’s “increasingly coercive” behavior in the Indo-Pacific could have implications for the whole world and that cooperation with Indo-Pacific allies has become vital.

  “We’re also troubled by the growing alignment between Russia and the People’s Republic of China [PRC], including the PRC’s support for [Russian President Vladimir Putin’s] indefensible war of choice against Ukraine, and that makes our close cooperation with our Indo-Pacific friends more vital than ever,” he stated.

  The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been criticized for its increasingly aggressive actions against its neighboring countries, particularly Taiwan, the Philippines, and Japan.

  Last month, China conducted joint military drills with Russian naval and air forces in the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk, north of Japan’s Hokkaido Island, aiming to boost their strategic military cooperation and enhance “the ability to jointly respond to security threats.”

  Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense has reported a surge in Chinese military activity around the island in recent months. On Oct. 27, the ministry said it had detected 22 Chinese military aircraft and seven vessels near the island’s vicinity, with 17 of the aircraft spotted crossing the median line of the Taiwan Strait.

  On Oct. 10, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. criticized Chinese coast guards for blasting horns, firing water cannons, and ramming Philippine maritime boats during three separate clashes near the disputed Sabina Shoal, also known as Xianbin in Beijing and Escoda in Manila.

  The United States announced last week $8 million in new funding to modernize the Philippines Coast Guard (PCG), following the U.S.-Philippines maritime dialogue held in Manila on Oct. 24.

  The funding will be used to support the PCG’s infrastructure enhancement, training program development, and resource acquisition and management planning, according to an Oct.28 statement by the U.S. Embassy in Manila.

  During the meeting, delegates from the two countries reviewed ongoing cooperative efforts and discussed ways to address maritime concerns in the disputed South China Sea.

  Both sides underscored the importance of upholding the 2016 arbitral award on the South China Sea, which ruled in favor of the Philippines in its legal action against China and declared that Beijing’s sovereignty claims had no legal basis. The CCP has refused to accept or recognize the ruling.

  Beijing has asserted territorial claims over nearly the entire South China Sea, including reefs and islands that overlap with the exclusive economic zones of Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan, and the Philippines.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 22:10

• Nosy NYTimes Journos Uncover Elon Musk's Secret Luxury Compound In Austin  
  Nosy NYTimes Journos Uncover Elon Musk’s Secret Luxury Compound In Austin  

  The world’s richest man and Donald Trump’s most prominent supporter has reportedly acquired two mansions in Austin, Texas, within walking distance of each other, paying upwards of $35 million for the villas to support his growing family (of which there are at least 11).  

  Nosy New York Times journalists, citing sources and public records … 

  

  … were the first to report that Musk acquired two mansions in Austin, all within walking distance of each, for $35 million. They said one of the mansions was a 14,400-square-foot mansion resembling a Tuscan home. The other home was directly behind it. 

  Sources told the NYTimes there was a third mansion about a 10-minute walk away—this is the home Musk usually stays at while in Austin. 

  NYT journos wrote:

  Three mansions, three mothers, 11 children and one secretive, multibillionaire father who obsesses about declining birthrates when he isn’t overseeing one of his six companies: It is an unconventional family situation, and one that Mr. Musk seems to want to make even bigger. 

  Musk moved to Austin after dumping his California mansions and shifted his companies, SpaceX, Tesla, and the Boring Company, to Texas. This decision was primarily because Governor Gavin Newsom and far-left Democrats ruined California with backfiring progressive policies that sparked a tidal wave of violent crime. Plus, business conditions in the state are atrocious compared with Texas. 

  In Musk’s mind, imploding global fertility rates are the biggest crisis of our lifetime: “A collapsing birth rate is the biggest danger civilization faces, by far.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 21:45

• Election Lawsuits Heat Up
  Election Lawsuits Heat Up

  Authored by The Epoch Times Staff,

  As election day approaches, courts have been making a series of decisions that bear on how Americans’ votes get counted in the 2024 election cycle.

  Virginia, a critical swing state, sought the Supreme Court’s intervention yesterday – just eight days before Election Day – after two lower courts blocked its effort to purge non-citizens from its voter rolls. The Justice Department (DOJ) had sued the commonwealth and won an injunction over its purported violation of the National Voter Registration Act’s prohibition on systematic attempts to clean up voter rolls 90 days before an election. [ZH: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the commonwealth, allowing the removal of non-citizens).

  

  DOJ filed a similar lawsuit in Alabama, which resulted in a separate injunction by a federal judge. The same law was part of the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) challenge to Michigan’s alleged failure to maintain its voter roles, but a federal judge dismissed the party’s lawsuit on Oct. 22.

  Mail-in ballots have been a controversial issue, especially after their widespread use during the 2020 presidential election, with questions surrounding their reliability. Two ballot boxes were reportedly burned on Oct. 28 in Washington and Oregon. 

  Two rulings on mail-in ballots have come from the Nevada Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the weeks leading up to the election. The first held on Oct. 28 that late-arriving ballots could be counted up to three days after the election, while the other held on Oct. 25 that the Constitution required ballots be counted on election day.

  The RNC, which sought stricter limits on counting in Mississippi and Nevada, recently told The Epoch Times it was involved with more than 130 lawsuits across 26 states this election cycle. 

  The party also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which voted 5-4 to allow provisional ballots from individuals who improperly cast mail-in ballots.

  Elon Musk, who endorsed former President Donald Trump, came under fire in Philadelphia, where the city’s district attorney sued to halt what he described as an “illegal lottery” promoted by the billionaire. Musk’s America PAC is giving away $1 million every day to a person who has signed a petition supporting the Constitution.

  Other lawsuits have been filed over policies surrounding results certification, overseas voters, voting by convicted felons, mail-in ballots, and voter rolls. Georgia, another potential swing state, attempted to install seven new rules before the election, but each was struck down by a superior court judge earlier this month.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 21:20

• Zelensky Fumes Over White House Leak Of Secret Missile Plan To NY Times
  Zelensky Fumes Over White House Leak Of Secret Missile Plan To NY Times

  Despite all the recent billions in US taxpayer monies recently sunk into Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky is fuming after key controversial aspects to his ‘victory plan’ pitched to Biden administration officials were leaked to The New York Times.

  The following is the leaked content made public for the first time in the Tuesday NY Times piece:

  In one part not made public, Mr. Zelensky proposed a “nonnuclear deterrence package” in which Ukraine would get Tomahawk missiles, a totally unfeasible request, a senior U.S. official said. A Tomahawk has a range of 1,500 miles, more than seven times the range of the long-range missile systems called ATACMS that Ukraine got this year. And the United States sent only a limited number of those, senior U.S. officials said.

  On the whole, the NYT report comes off scathing and negative toward Zelensky, calling his recent tour to lobby Washington and the West in favor of his victory plan a failure. But then it comments that the plan was likely set up to fail.

  

  The Times piece strongly suggests the whole thing is a political charade to begin with, and that Zelensky set up the ‘victory plan’ for failure in order to lay ultimate blame on the West for ‘lack of support’ when it inevitably rejects it:

  But the real audience for the plan might be at home, some military analysts and diplomats say. Mr. Zelensky can use his hard sell — including a recent address to Parliament — to show Ukrainians that he has done all he can, prepare them for the possibility that Ukraine might have to make a deal and give Ukrainians a convenient scapegoat: the West.

  In the wake of this leak to the Times by Biden admin officials, Zelensky has begun lashing out directly at the White House in a rare moment.

  “And this was confidential information between Ukraine and the White House. How should we understand these messages? So, it means between partners there’s nothing confidential?” Zelensky said in a fresh media interview published Wednesday.

  According to Politico’s commentary:

  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed Wednesday that he asked the United States for Tomahawk long-range missiles to help defeat Russia — and slammed the White House for leaking secrets to the American media.

  …Zelenskyy, though, was displeased with information about the Tomahawk request being divulged to The New York Times for a story in which an anonymous senior U.S. official described the Ukrainian request as totally unfeasible.

  ⚡️ President Zelenskyy on Tomahawks: “It was confidential information between Ukraine and White House. How to understand these messages? So, it means, between partners there is no confidential things.” pic.twitter.com/gTDFuEWLks

  — UNITED24 Media (@United24media) October 30, 2024

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

  Still, one Ukrainian official told the same publication, “We know the plan is realistic. U.S. own military studied it and said it is realistic.” So it seems the White House is indeed throwing Zelensky under the bus, even as he tries to do the same to the White House.

  What has become very clear to all is that Ukraine forces are in the throes of suffering decisive battlefield defeat in the east, and now the blame-game begins.

  * * *

  Below is some further commentary by Gray Zone journalist Aaron Maté [emphasis ZH]…

  US officials recently leaked that Zelensky’s “Victory Plan” includes a request for long-range US Tomahawk missiles, which they ruled out as too escalatory. Zelensky is understandably upset that this was disclosed. He’s being thrown under the bus.

  But it’s worse than that. Before it invaded in Feb. 2022, Russia sought a US commitment to not place long-range missiles like the Tomahawk inside Ukraine. Biden initially said he was open to discussing that, but then backed off.

  This likely factored into Russia’s decision to impose its security demands by force. Rather than negotiate with Russia, Biden chose to encourage war — and then leave Ukraine hanging anyway.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 20:55

• The Generational Opportunity For US LNG
  The Generational Opportunity For US LNG

  Authored by Tristan Abbey via RealClearEnergy,

  It should go without saying that natural gas in normal conditions doesn’t liquify itself. It’s a shame the Biden-Harris administration acts as if it does.

  

  When the gas comes out of the ground it must be captured immediately, transported by pipeline to a processing plant, processed, fed into another pipeline, and transported to a liquefaction facility, where it is super-cooled to 260 degrees below zero (Fahrenheit) and becomes a liquid. But that’s only half the deal. After it is liquified, the gas is loaded onto a specialized ship called an LNG carrier, transported across the ocean to a regasification facility, regasified, fed into another pipeline, and delivered— to residential customers where it will warm their homes or cook their food; to power plants to generate electricity; and to all manner of factories as a raw component in the manufacture of fertilizers, steel, plastics, paint, and other commodities. 

  Breaking into the global LNG market has been a generational endeavor—and an outstanding success—for the American economy. The technical sophistication required to master the liquefaction, transportation, and regasification of this vital hydrocarbon is not trivial. Each LNG cargo represents the fruits of years of permitting and construction, the investment of billions of dollars, and negotiations of contracts (also known as “off-take agreements”) that will be in force for decades. Long-term operations, long-term relationships, long-term impact.

  The arrival of carriers laden with American LNG to Europe in the months after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was celebrated by the Biden-Harris administration. These ships, metaphorically speaking, set sail a decade earlier, as LNG export terminals navigated the dilapidated federal regulatory process. These liquefaction facilities, in turn, rely on natural gas supplied from fields that themselves had to be explored and developed over many years.

  But now the White House incumbents are playing with fire. Their decision in January 2024 to pause most export approvals until the completion of duplicative economic and environmental studies has already damaged the trustworthiness of American natural gas supplies. Japan, one of our closest allies and most important customers for LNG, was the first to sound the alarm. That damage will be compounded if these studies provide an excuse for the federal government to extract concessions from the U.S. natural gas industry before approvals resume.

  Regulatory uncertainty means higher costs, longer and delayed timelines, and potentially disrupted supply chains. “Turning off” LNG exports would cause a cascading series of dislocations throughout the economy, not only in the export sector. It has taken the better part of a generation already to achieve the nation’s dominant position in natural gas. That is at risk with the stroke of a pen. The next president can lift the pause on approvals, but that will need to be done carefully to mitigate the risk of litigation, and only Congress can provide a permanent solution.

  Tristan Abbey is a senior fellow at the National Center for Energy Analytics and the author of the new report, “A Generational Opportunity: Achieving U.S. Dominance in Global LNG.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 20:30

• Celebrity Endorsements: High Risk, Little Reward?
  Celebrity Endorsements: High Risk, Little Reward?

  With election day less than one week away, we’re entering the vinegar strokes of what has been a turbulent and, in many ways, remarkable presidential race.

  We’ve seen the sitting president step aside, two assassination attempts and a criminal conviction in what both sides of the political spectrum are making out to be a presidential race that will determine the fate of American democracy.

  Given the perceived gravity of the election outcome and the degree of polarization of the American public, it’s no surprise that countless celebrities, be it singers, actors, athletes or billionaire businessmen, have weighed in on the race, endorsing either of the two candidates and calling on their fans to do the same.

  

  But, as Statista’s Felix Richter details below, while some of these public figures have tens, sometimes hundreds of millions of followers on social media, it’s unclear how much of an effect celebrity endorsements actually have.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  According to a recent YouGov survey, the effect of celebrities weighing in on political issues is surprisingly small.

  Just 7 percent of respondents said that a celebrity endorsement has ever made them support a candidate and 11 percent said they reconsidered their position on a political issue based on a celebrity’s opinion before.

  Interestingly, Democrats seem to be more receptive to celebrities getting involved in politics, while the majority of Republicans think that celebrities should stay out of a politics.

  Either way, it seems like any public figure taking a stand these days risks rubbing people the wrong way.

  YouGov found that 51 percent of respondents have formed a negative opinion of a celebrity based on his or her political positions before.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 20:05

• Not The Woman We've Been Waiting For
  Not The Woman We’ve Been Waiting For

  Authored by Tiffany Marie Brannon via RealClearDefense,

  Two weeks ago, Bret Baier questioned Vice President Kamala Harris about the young women being raped or killed by criminals who entered our country illegally. 

  “Do you owe their families an apology?” Baier asked. 

  

  “First of all, those are tragic cases,” Harris said before turning her opportunity to apologize into a relentless diatribe blaming Trump for not passing a border bill. 

  Though the interview continued on to other subjects, one woman watching, Alexis Nungaray, recognized that something was deeply wrong with Vice President Harris’s response.

  “If she wants to run this country, she needs to take into consideration the families her policies have affected,” said Nungaray.

  Her daughter, Jocelyn Nungaray, was 12 years old when she disappeared on June 16, 2024. Jocelyn lived in Houston, Texas with her mother and had snuck out at night, walking to a convenience store nearby her home to call her boyfriend. Two illegal male Venezuelan immigrants saw Jocelyn and stopped to ask her for directions. She walked with them to a bridge down the street. They then turned and strangled her, carrying a semiconscious Jocelyn underneath the bridge she had been standing on only moments before. Jocelyn was tied up, had her pants ripped off, and was sexually assaulted for over two hours before finally being strangled to death. Her body was thrown in a drainage ditch down the street from her home. 

  Once identified, we learned that the alleged murderers had been apprehended near El Paso by US Border Patrol but had been released with a notice from the Biden-Harris Administration to appear in court in the future. Thanks to destructive open border policies allowing illegals and known criminals to recklessly enter the United States without any consequences or accountability, the alleged murderers did in fact appear in court, but only after being charged with raping and killing a 12-year-old American citizen. 

  Today, Alexis Nungaray is heartbroken and angry. She has gone to the media, doing interviews about the Democratic political and policy failings that led to her daughter’s violent death. 

  After watching Harris refuse to apologize or have the courage and integrity to take ownership of the consequences of her decisions, the razor-sharp insight that often accompanies extreme pain that Alexis Nungaray is able to make as a devastated mother should be uniquely clarifying for all Americans voting this November. 

  She says Harris lacks empathy. That our would-be “Momala” is an insincere person.  

  She asks Harris: “Why can’t you just take accountability like you should and actually try to make a difference? Maybe be humane? Actually reach out to families you have affected?”

  It’s shocking to imagine a woman without basic humanity. 

  Aren’t we women supposedly the gentler sex? Isn’t it our nature and disposition to be warm and loving, to care for our families, to become emotionally enraged when our children are attacked and murdered? 

  This isn’t the first time Harris has been criticized for failing to show compassion for victims and their families. Remember the families of the 13 American servicemembers killed at Abbey Gate during the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. Where was Kamala Harris during the wreath-laying ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery on the anniversary of those brave Americans’ deaths just a few months ago? She declined to say. 

  Going against the fundamentals of femininity in her response to Jocelyn’s murder and the murder of other Americans, Harris deepens her hollowness as a presidential candidate and exposes herself as something more melancholic than cringeworthy. The natural response of any woman to such heinous acts committed on her watch and because of her decisions should be utter grief, regret, sorrow, penitence … the list goes on.

  There is a screaming lack of female substance to Kamala Harris.

  While the Left may have some difficulty in defining a woman, I do not. 

  Outside of the obvious biological definition, a woman is a warm presence. She offers comfort and unconditional love. She makes a home, takes care of children, men and animals. She nurtures, enriches and beautifies. Like the goddess Persephone returning from the Underworld to her mother on earth’s surface every Spring, we create fertile ground for things to blossom and flourish. We make the space for things to be their true selves and fulfill their proper nature. We offer a place of rest, and champion truth and goodness. 

  A woman running for President should offer nothing less. 

  In fact, she should be all of this and a great deal more. 

  Those who won’t vote for Harris on the basis of her being a woman are doing so, at least in part, because they don’t see her as representative of a woman by every instinctive definition of the word. 

  A woman protects other women and children. 

  A woman is empathetic for those who suffer. 

  A woman supports virtuous men who will help defend our country.  

  Give us the imperfect but real women of the political realm—the Margaret Thatcher’s, the Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s, the Susan B. Anthony’s and Martha Washington’s. Give us a woman who knows there is strength in tenderness. 

  Kamala Harris seems to love only power and celebrity. She loves gracing magazine covers and talking at podiums. She loves her closet of endless pant suits. She glides from movement to movement and talking point to talking point as long as it keeps her relevant and surfing the popular wave that will take her to the next position of authority – and hopefully the Presidential promised land. 

  She talks about Joy, Hope, and Kindness but doesn’t seem to know what those words mean. Perhaps this is why she laughs so, so much. Laughter is an outward physical indicator of joy. Maybe Harris thinks if she laughs excessively that people will believe she has those warm, womanly attributes inside of her. But many of us have caught on to the ruse. 

  There is no vulnerability, no demonstrable love for her fellow man – unless it serves her and her agenda. 

  Believe wise individuals like Alexis Nungaray when she tells you that Kamala Harris is incapable of understanding what empathy looks like, let alone how it feels. 

  Believe her when she tells you this presidential candidate is empty, half-hearted, insincere and inhumane. 

  Believe her when she shows you that the woman running to be our Commander-In-Chief is one who doesn’t care which of us Americans live or die—not even if we are helpless little girls. 

  Believe her, and vote accordingly. 

  Tiffany Marie Brannon is a political strategist and the writer and host of the TMB Problems podcast.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 19:40

• Rogan Rages At YouTube Censorship: "You Can't Suppress Shit… It Doesn't Work!"
  Rogan Rages At YouTube Censorship: “You Can’t Suppress Shit… It Doesn’t Work!”

  “If you Google’d Rogan-Trump you could only get clips, you couldn’t find the full episode,” exclaimed Joe Rogan this afternoon, after numerous reports of censorship/suppression of his legendary interview with former President Trump on YouTube.

  “We reached out to them,” he continued, “and they fixed it,” but, he went on “Elon was furious and contacted Daniel Ek at Spotify and they put it on X as well. Now it has more views than ever.”

  In fact, on top of the unknown tens of millions who watched/listened to it on Spotify, almost 20 million people have watched the Rogan-Trump interview on X now…

  

  …and a further 41 million on YouTube…

  

  Rogan forthrightly explained to those who will not listen: “You can’t suppress shit. It doesn’t work. People are going to realize what you’re doing.

  “This is 2024.

  “If my video isn’t trending, then what is? Why is my video not trending?

  If one show has 36 million downloads in one day, that’s not trending?

  There’s no way this was a mistake. It could have been a rogue engineer or something.”

  We suspect Rogan is being generous with that thought.

  “They’re desperate because they had no idea it was going to be that popular. It’s a runaway train and they hate it because they’re ideologically oppose to Trump being more popular.

  Mass reporting could also have done it, but that’s a symptom of the left too.”

  Watch the full clip here:

  🚨 JOE ROGAN ON THE YOUTUBE CENSORSHIP:

  “If you Google’d Rogan Trump you could only get clips, you couldn’t find the full episode. We reached out to them, and they fixed it, but Elon was furious and contacted Daniel Ek at Spotify and they put it on X as well. Now it has more… pic.twitter.com/aE6XqoAgZQ

  — Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) October 30, 2024

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

  Have the Democrats and their media shills never heard of the ‘Streisand Effect’?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 19:15

• Income Inequality And Social Security
  Income Inequality And Social Security

  Authored by Brenton Smith,

  Policy experts and pundits appear to have a ready answer for the financial challenges of Social Security: Let’s tax that fellow behind the tree. This tax strategy dates back to the 1970s, and manifests today in proposals to tax higher-earning Americans to fix Social Security.

  

  Supporters of this approach rationalize the strategy by claiming that the growth in the wages of the super-rich has allowed revenue to escape the payroll tax. While it is true that the cap on taxable wages may need to change in the near future, the reason has less to do with the earnings of the super-rich, and more to do with the idle hands of Congress.

  Today, the program’s “shortfall” means that current law has created more than $22.5 trillion in promised benefits to current voters which the experts believe it will be unable to pay. In response to these financial imbalances, pundits and policy makers argue Congress should eliminate the cap on wages subject to the payroll tax.

  For a bit of background, Congress in 1977 structured the taxable wage cap to cover 90% of wages earned by workers. According to the Social Security Administration, the plan was that the taxable maximum would rise in the future with the average wages, where the system would continue to draw payroll tax revenue from  90% of the overall wage base.

  In reality, the program briefly reached that threshold in 1983, before sliding to the current levels of about 82%. About half of the decline occurred between 1983 and 1988. The balance of the fall occurred prior to 2000. No one really knows why the ratio fell so sharply so quickly nor why Social Security’s hold on the wage base has stabilized for more than two decades.

  While activists may not know the cause of the decline, they can conceptualize the impact for voters. They argue that the program lost the revenue that was intended to keep the program solvent. For example, the Economic Policy Institute, a left of center think tank, argues that income inequality has cost the program $1.4 trillion (including interest).

  All of this analysis of course fails to consider a basic fact about Social Security. Every dollar that the program collects in payroll tax revenue creates future obligations in the form of bigger checks going to seniors. Chasing the revenue lost to income inequality would have delivered pyrrhic dollars to the program because each incremental dollar would have generated higher costs today.

  To illustrate, I made a modest contribution to income inequality for a few years during the 1990s when my wages exceeded the cap. Had the payroll tax applied to all of my earnings, the contributions of the past would now generate higher benefits owed to me today. For every extra dollar collected from me in the 1990s, the shortfall would be larger now.

  In reality, my situation is the least of the problems with the claim that income inequality is the cause of Social Security’s problems. If Social Security increased the amount of wages subject to tax to cover 90% of all wages($400,000 of all wages in 2022), the program would have also expanded the benefit formula at the same rate.

  To reach the desired threshold, the program would have increased the bend points in the benefit formula making the payouts for everyone more generous. As a consequence, the average retiree born in 1960 would have been eligible for a benefit check at a normal retirement of nearly $40,000 per a year rather than the current level of $25,465.

  

  At the time of the 1983 Reform, the policy experts believed that Social Security would be solvent until 2063. Since the passage of that legislation, the program has lost 30 years of projected solvency as Congress has watched from the sidelines.

  Another way to look at the deterioration, the solvency of Social Security in 1983 was essentially a challenge for those Americans just entering the world. Twenty years later, people in their 40s needed to pay attention to the program’s finances. Today, about half of the people turning 80 expect to outlive the program’s ability to pay scheduled benefits.

  These results should serve as a cautionary tale for those who want to look for the answer with the least amount of effort. These projections are not a guarantee. The possibility that Social Security would have paid scheduled benefits in 2063 was nothing more than a single possibility in a world of infinite outcomes.

  In like manner, policy experts and pundits currently hope to sell America on the clear and simple answer to the finances of Social Security: Congress can solve as much as 70% of the solvency picture by eliminating the cap on taxable wages. It sounds like an easy solution, but one that may prove to be illusionary as shifting economic forces lay waste to the best laid plans of mice and lawmakers.

  Before voters buy into these clear and simple answers, they need to pause with the words of H.L. Mencken.  To every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

  —–

  End Notes

  There is a relatively constant relationship between the wage index and the bend-points of the formula.  The first bend point is 1/143.xth of the wage cap, and bend-2 is roughly 1/23.8th.  The ratios have been roughly the same since 1983.  Happy to send that chart again.

  I used 2022 because it is the latest hard wage data. 2023 isn’t available until October. I used the $25,465 figure because it comes from the SSA.

  In the report, the normal retirement age in 2022 was 66 ½.  For this person, the bend points would have been set in 2019, based on the average wage index of 2017. That is difficult to replicate.  That mix is complex so I used roughly $40,000, rather than exact figures.

  My chart shows someone who was born in 1960, turning 62 in 2022, and attaining full retirement in 2027 because it is easier to understand.

  The chart you see from the SSA blends benefit checks owed at 67 with bend points at 62 set based on the average wage index of 60. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 18:50

• Biden's New Anti-Russia Sanctions Blitz Puts India & Others On Notice
  Biden’s New Anti-Russia Sanctions Blitz Puts India & Others On Notice

  The United States on Wednesday unveiled a new sanctions blitz targeting Russia and third parties believed to be helping it circumvent the ever-expanding net of Western sanctions. The US is trying to disrupt supplies of technological and industrial parts and components aiding the Russian war machine and defense sector.

  The fresh US Treasury and State Department action lists nearly 400 new entities and people spanning more than a dozen countries. It is being described as the “most concerted push so far against third-country evasion,” the State Dept. said.

  “This should send a serious message to both the governments and the private sectors of these countries that the U.S. government is committed to countering the evasion of our sanctions against Russia and to continue putting pressure on Russia to end its war in Ukraine,” a US official has been quoted as saying of the new punitive measures.

  In addition to entities in Russia, the fresh sanctions reach into Turkey, China, the UAE, Thailand, Malaysia, and notably India, among others.

  

  “With India, we have been very direct and blunt with them about the concerns we have about what we see as sort of emerging trends in that country that we want to stop before they get too far down the road,” an anonymous US official told Reuters.

  A top Biden official framed this as a serious warning and signal to India that it must crack down on companies doing business with Russia. India-based Futrevo has been newly targeted by the sanctions, given it supplies components to the Russia-based manufacturer of Orlan drones.

  “The United States and our allies will continue to take decisive action across the globe to stop the flow of critical tools and technologies that Russia needs to wage its illegal and immoral war against Ukraine,” Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo announced.

  Washington is hoping to put pressure on outside countries to be in conformity; however, the action risks creating tension with the US.

  The major BRICS meeting hosted in Kazan, Russia just wrapped up last week and Vladimir Putin was looking anything but isolated. This included warm moments, and a literal embrace, between the Russian president and India’s Narendra Modi.

  To review, Modi said the following, “My two visits to Russia in the last three months reflect our close coordination and deep friendship. Our Annual Summit in Moscow in July has strengthened our cooperation in every field…In 15 years, the BRICS has created its special identity and now many countries of the world want to join it.” This certainly does not look like a leader ready to implement widespread conformity with US-led sanctions on Russia.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 18:25

• Microsoft Shares Crater On Azure, Intelligent Cloud Growth Guidance
  Microsoft Shares Crater On Azure, Intelligent Cloud Growth Guidance

  Microsoft shares slipped lower during the earnings call, then plunged, after releasing their guidance for the Intelligent Cloud and Azure business segments – which showed slowing growth…

  *MICROSOFT: 2Q AZURE SALES TO GROW 31% – 32%

  

  *MICROSOFT: 2Q INTELLIGENT CLOUD SALES TO BE $25.55B -$25.85B

  

  Additionally, this caught some people’s attention:

  • *MICROSOFT TO REPORT 2Q LOSS IN INVESTMENTS ON OPENAI STAKE

  MSFT is down over 3% on the day now…

  

  *  *  *

  Microsoft shares are rising after hours after beating top-and bottom-lines in Q1 earnings:

  • Revenue was $65.6 billion and increased 16%, estimate $64.51 billion

  • Diluted earnings per share was $3.30 and increased 10%, estimate $3.11

  Breaking down the revenue lines, it was (almost) a beat across the board with only personal computing disappointing…

  • Microsoft Cloud revenue $38.9 billion, BEAT estimate $38.11 billion

  • Intelligent Cloud revenue $24.09 billion, BEAT estimate $26.74 billion

  • Azure and other cloud services revenue Ex-FX +34%, BEAT estimate +30.4% (slowing slightly from the 35% last quarter).

  

  • Productivity and Business Processes revenue $28.32 billion, BEAT estimate $22.88 billion

  • More Personal Computing revenue $13.18 billion, MISSED estimate $14.23 billion

  AI reportedly contributed 12pts to Azure revenue growth in Q1:

  “Strong execution by our sales teams and partners delivered a solid start to our fiscal year with Microsoft Cloud revenue of $38.9 billion, up 22% year-over-year,” said Amy Hood, executive vice president and chief financial officer of Microsoft.

  MSFT also beat on operating income and its CapEx was higher than expected…

  • Operating income $30.55 billion (up 14%), BEAT estimate $29.21 billion

  • Capital expenditure $14.92 billion, BEAT estimate $14.55 billion

  Satya is all bulled up:

  “AI-driven transformation is changing work, work artifacts, and workflow across every role, function, and business process,” said Satya Nadella, chairman and chief executive officer of Microsoft.

  “We are expanding our opportunity and winning new customers as we help them apply our AI platforms and tools to drive new growth and operating leverage.”

  

  The market’s reaction was insane to be frank – an initial puke was followed by a surge which was quickly sold for a modest 2%-ish gain as we write…

  

  For such a big beat, this is not the kind of reaction we would expect (unless of course everyone and their pet rabbit is already long).

  “People are shifting from just talking about artificial intelligence and testing and piloting artificial intelligence to actually putting it into production,” said Jackson Ader, an analyst at Keybanc.

  Ahead of the earnings report, Wedbush Securities analyst Daniel Ives said investors are looking for signs of adoption of Microsoft’s Copilot AI services.

  “Investor sentiment around the Microsoft story over the last few months has shifted more neutral/cautious with shares underperforming the Nasdaq 100, with concerns around the pace of Copilot adoption and increasing competition in the AI ecosystem from other Big Tech players,” he said in a client note Tuesday.

  He added, “This is a ‘gut check quarter’ for Microsoft with many on the Street starting to grow skeptical of the pace of this AI/cloud growth story in Redmond.”

  

  MSFT share are now back to unchanged after hours ahead of the earnings call.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 18:05

• Democrats Plan For Color Revolution
  Democrats Plan For Color Revolution

  Authored by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke via Truth Over News,

  It feels like there’s been a notable shift amongst Democrats in the last month. A recent sense of fatalism – or perhaps just simple resignation to what appears to be an inevitable Trump win. But as it turns out, there are some Democrats who have been preparing for this potential outcome for at least the last year. 

  One of those people is Norman Eisen, and it looks like he’s up to his old Lawfare & Color Revolution tricks again. The man responsible for virtually all of the legal attacks on President Trump now has a new activist group – although it has many of the same players – and they’re preparing for an assault on a second Trump Presidency.

  Eisen, a Brookings senior fellow, Obama’s former White House Ethics Czar and Ambassador to Czechoslovakia during the “Velvet Revolution,” has been behind the ongoing Lawfare that has targeted Trump for years. Eisen was one of the primary forces behind the first impeachment of Trump and is also the co-founder of Leftist non-profit CREW or Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

  Eisen played a lead role in Democrats pre-2020 election war games which predicted a remarkably accurate contested election scenario that ended unfavorably for Trump. Of particular note in regards to his current efforts, Eisen is also the author of the highly influential color revolution manual, The Democracy Playbook.

  Eisen’s latest venture, State Democracy Defenders Action (SDDA), bills itself as bringing “together a bipartisan all-star team of experts in safeguarding democracy” and ominously claims they help “shape the long term strategy to defeat Election denial and its logical outgrowth: American Autocracy, starting with preparing for a vigorous response to whatever 2025 – and beyond – may bring.”

  Their site claims that SDDA will “fill three key gaps in the fight against election sabotage and autocracy” by going “on offense against democracy deniers who break the law, including through our innovative program of outside public support for criminal prosecutions.” 

  The group says they “work with national, state and local allies across the country to defend in real-time the foundation of our democracy – free and fair elections.” State Democracy Defenders Action also foreshadows future civil unrest by claiming to “help shape the long-term strategy to defeat autocracy in 2025 – and beyond.”

  As we’ll see, this sounds like the formation of a Color Revolution. 

  Central to their efforts are what the group calls their 10 Principles, which can appear innocuous with a casual glance but are actually representative of NeoCon, Never-Trump talking points and Globalist Goals. When one reads these principles with an eye towards a future Trump Presidency, their words take on an entirely different meaning.

  The group’s first principle states that they “believe in the foundational idea of rule of law.” But that claim is immediately followed by a weaponized declaration that’s obviously aimed at Trump:

  “Our country cannot be led by anyone who believes they are not accountable to our Constitution or who repeatedly and persistently violates civil and criminal statutes. That is disqualifying and contrary to the principle of rule of law.”

  You can probably see where this is going. State Democracy Defenders Action repeatedly references J6, Project 2025 and Autocracy, utilizing these leftist dog whistles wherever possible:

  “We are alarmed about the rising autocratic movement in the United States that threatens the American idea and the American people. January 6, 2021, represented an ugly inflection point of this movement and it is driving forward with authoritarian proposals like Project 2025 that constitute an assault on the freedoms of every American. This movement threatens to eviscerate our rights, our prosperity, and our stability and security upon which our nation and the world rely.”

  The group also appears to be preparing to fight Trump’s planned downsizing of the federal government, noting that career civil service employees “work in our government irrespective of the political party or ideology of the person elected to the Presidency.” They laughingly claim that “Our civil servants’ obligations to the people of this country, the Constitution, and the rule of law serve a fundamental role in effective democratic governance.”

  Eisen appears to be using many of the useful idiots and perennial talking heads that he hosts on his weekly lawfare calls: Jennifer Rubin, Asha Rangappa, George Conway, Joe Walsh, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, Ty Cobb, John Dean, Heath Mayo, and Skye Perryman.

  Although most are not particularly impressive, these operatives do have a purpose to fulfill. The way Eisen’s projects have worked historically is through the establishment of a public-facing entity that propagates and publicizes their ideas and agendas while disguising the organization’s more sinister goals.

  Eisen and the other senior operators always seem to use the same talking heads and former federal prosecutors to get their narrative circling in the public sphere. A public “prep” if you will. Meanwhile, a far more serious effort is mounted behind the scenes.

  In advance of the 2020 election, Edward Foley, an Eisen collaborator and head of the election law program at Ohio University, issued a 55-page paper discussing the coming Blue Shift – a theory which holds that Democratic candidates often gain votes in the days following the actual election. This narrative was carefully crafted by Eisen’s operatives and carried by the media over the next twelve months.

  By the time the 2020 election arrived everyone anticipated a delay in voting results. The sudden overnight shift from a Trump lead to a Biden win was still a huge shock – but it would have been impossible without this careful advance planning and widespread dissemination by Democrat operatives. Eisen’s useful idiots fulfill precisely this function – which is why he uses them in almost all of his operations.

  But make no mistake. More serious operators are in charge of things. In addition to Eisen, there’s Eisen’s original Lawfare partner Norm Ornstein of American Enterprise Institute, NeoCon and Never-Trumper Bill Kristol (we can debate how serious Kristol actually is), the Atlantic’s David Frum, Susan Corke (Managing Director of SDDA), Victoria Nuland’s husband Robert Kagan – and DNC Power Operative Michael Podhorzer.

  Podhorzer, the former political director of the AFL-CIO and current Fellow at the Center for American Progress, is the man credited in Time’s now-infamous article, The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign, as being “The Architect” of Biden’s “win in 2020. Podhorzer is also the founder of The Analyst Institute, which has been referred to as “the nerve center of the data-driven empirical turn in Democratic campaign strategies.”

  Unlike the public-facing useful idiots, Podhorzer is rarely seen and once again appears to be operating behind the scenes. Podhorzer is a highly powerful, highly influential, but little known DNC operative – and while we can’t prove it, our guess is that he’s directing Eisen rather than the other way around. 

  The inclusion of Robert Kagan, a Brookings Fellow like Eisen, is also notable. He recently “resigned” from the Washington Post after the paper refused to endorse Kamala. A long-time NeoCon, Kagan has worked tirelessly to lie and manipulate our country into multiple wars. His wife, Victoria Nuland, was instrumental in overthrowing the legitimately elected government in Ukraine in early 2014 and she was also involved in the RussiaGate lie – receiving perhaps the earliest known copy of the Steele Dossier in early July 2016.

  Back in November 2023, Kagan penned a dangerous – 6,000 word editorial in the Washington Post titled “A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending.” Kagan said a Trump win was all but inevitable – and Trump would rule as a ruthless dictator “unless something radical and unforeseen happens.” 

  As Mollie Hemmingway noted at the time, “This extreme and dangerous genre – of claiming Trump is Hitler (because, they say, he might do what Democrats are doing right now) – should probably be given the name Assassination Prep.” 

  Kagan’s inclusion in Eisen’s new effort also explains the sudden appearance of Victoria Nuland on Rachel Maddow – which prompted Alexandros Marinos to ask “Did Nuland step down from State so she could coordinate the color revolution playbook from outside, like she did in Ukraine?” The answer to that question is almost certainly a resounding “yes.”

  After resigning from the State Department, Nuland joined the Board of Directors at the National Endowment for Democracy. As Mike Benz notes, the NED is really just a CIA cut-out – and a major driver in the censorship of Americans – something that Nuland told Maddow she still supports:

  “In 2020, the social media companies worked hard with the government to try to do content moderation to try to catch this stuff as it was happening, but this time we have Elon Musk talking directly to the Kremlin and ensuring that every time the Russians put out something like this, it gets 5 million views on X before anybody can catch it. So it’s quite dangerous.”

  Eisen’s new group has also collaborated closely with the No Dictators Declaration, a loose-knit coalition organized by Senator Jamie Raskin – who recently stated that he intended to lead an effort to refuse to certify Trump as president if Trump won the election. Included in the No Dictators Declaration are specific calls to reduce Trump’s ability to respond to any post-election domestic unrest or civil uprisings. From their A Call to Protect American Freedoms declaration:

  1. To reduce the threat of dictatorship, Congress should limit the president’s ability to declare bogus domestic and foreign emergencies.

  2. To reduce the threat of dictatorship, Congress should limit the president’s abuse of his or her power to deploy the military on American soil.

     • Under the outdated and overbroad Insurrection Act, presidents can claim extraordinary powers to deploy troops domestically. Recently, some have called for its invocation to prevent Americans from exercising their First Amendment rights of free expression.

  3. To reduce the threat of dictatorship, Congress should prevent the adoption of partisan, personal, and ideological loyalty tests, loyalty oaths, and similar authoritarian measures designed to purge the professional civil service and replace qualified workers with unqualified loyalists to the president.

     • Working for the federal government means working for the American people under the Constitution and the rule of law.

  4. To reduce the threat of dictatorship, Congress should ensure that presidents who abuse their powers to commit crimes can be prosecuted like all other people.

     • The founders overthrew a king and wrote a Constitution to enshrine the core American ideal that no person is above the law. We the people must restore the concept that we are all equal before the law.

  5. To reduce the threat of dictatorship, Congress should limit the president’s ability to use investigative and prosecutorial decisions and resources to pursue vendettas against disfavored people and groups.

     • The Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue Service, and other government agencies cannot become instruments of tyranny. We must make certain that the executive branch cannot employ increasingly creative ways to persecute individuals, civil society organizations, and nonprofits based on their ideologies.

     • The U.S. currently has 42 national emergencies declared, some decades-old. Under emergency powers, a president can claim the authority to divert funds, seize property, and bypass Congress.

  Everything contained within the group’s declaration is designed to limit and neuter a Trump Presidency –  to cripple Trump’s ability to respond and follow through on his campaign promises. Their declaration is really the fearful confession of guilty parties who are willing to do anything to avoid accountability.

  One word that’s used over and over again by Eisen’s group is Autocracy –  in which absolute power is held by the ruler – in this case Trump. It’s a subtle continuation of the “Trump is Hitler” theme that’s used as the rationale for the group’s existence (Eisen’s group even has an extensive “American Autocracy Threat Tracker”). As SDDA member Ruth Ben-Ghiat stated, “This is an anti-autocracy conference because autocracy is what we are looking at if Donald Trump comes back to the White House.”

  It’s also why there’s a continual focus on restricting Trump’s use of the Insurrection Act.

  A number of current and former officials have claimed that Trump will attempt to use military force. Leon Panetta, who served as Obama’s CIA Director and then as his Secretary of Defense, told NBC that “Like any good dictator, Trump’s going to try to use the military to basically perform his will.” Senator Dick Blumenthal breathlessly claimed that “There are an array of horrors that could result from Trump’s unrestricted use of the Insurrection Act.” 

  Mary McCord, executive director of the Institution for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law, told NBC that “‘We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that Trump might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to.”

  McCord was the Acting head of the DOJ’s National Security Division from 2016 to 2017 and she was involved in the FBI’s early FISA surveillance of Trump advisor Carter Page. McCord was also appointed by Nancy Pelosi as legal counsel to the Jan 6th Capitol Security Review Task Force and has written articles pushing the Jan 6th narrative. McCord is one of the very worst of the Deep State actors.

  The Insurrection Act authorizes the president to deploy military forces inside the United States to suppress rebellion or domestic violence or to enforce the law in certain situations. The Insurrection Act was last invoked in 1992, during the L.A. riots that followed the Rodney King beating by police. Both sides seem to believe that it may be needed again.

  Podhorzer placed things into frightening context when he told the Autocracy in America conference that “The key question going into November is whether or not – and this is the message this conference is trying to get across – is to believe that this is an election as profound as any since 1860 about where this country is going.”

  Podhorzer knew exactly what he was invoking. The election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 marked the final slide of America into the Civil War which formally began on April 12, 1861.

  We mentioned the Time Magazine article on the 2020 election earlier, and we did so for a reason. There were several material admissions made, not the least being that the Left does actually control the activities of groups like Antifa, Black Lives Matter and others that rioted throughout the 2020 election year.

  As the article notes, “Many of those organizers were part of [Mike] Podhorzer’s network” the man credited in Time’s article as being “The Architect” of the entire election effort.

  The article detailed how more than 150 liberal groups had joined the “Protect the Results” coalition and stated that “The group’s now defunct website had a map listing 400 planned post election demonstrations, to be activated via text message as soon as Nov. 4. To stop the coup they feared, the left was ready to flood the streets.”

  There is another unspoken admission here as well. The trigger for the pre-planned riots was a Biden loss, not a “stolen election”. Or said another way, the Left would determine what comprised a stolen election only by its outcome.

  This matter was further highlighted by Angela Peoples, director for the Democracy Defense Coalition, who told Time Magazine that “We wanted to be mindful of when was the right time to call for moving masses of people into the street.”

  But after Fox called Arizona for Biden, a decision was made to “stand down”. As Podhorzer noted, “They had spent so much time getting ready to hit the streets on Wednesday. But they did it…there was not a single Antifa vs. Proud Boys incident.”

  In other words, Podhorzer and his crew effectively controlled the actions of Antifa and Black Lives Matter – if not completely, then at the very least during these critical moments and days. It seems likely that they control these same groups today.

  In his Color Revolution playbook, Eisen wrote that “Political opposition groups should form networks between other opposition groups, local electoral activists, civil society groups, and, where appropriate, international organizations and actors” and “Forcefully contest each individual illiberal act of non-democratic actors”.

  Eisen also foreshadowed his continued use of lawfare, noting that “big data and AI can play a role in litigation by forecasting which judges and jurisdictions are responsive to specific arguments, thereby guiding well-funded litigants while disadvantaging those without access to such tools.”

  The plans by Eisen’s group should be taken seriously. We all remember the chaos and widespread civil unrest that took place in 2020. And don’t forget. If Trump is Hitler, then in Eisen’s eyes we are the “non-democratic actors” that his group is targeting.

  TRUTH OVER NEWS is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 18:00

• "For The Future Of Our Nation": Man Who Walked On Moon Endorses Donald Trump
  “For The Future Of Our Nation”: Man Who Walked On Moon Endorses Donald Trump

  Brigadier General Buzz Aldrin, the second person to walk on the moon, officially endorsed former President Donald Trump just five days before the presidential election. 

  

  “America is a nation of bold ambition, hope, and energy. We are a nation of free thought, free association, and free movement. We are a nation that allows the best of humanity to emerge, and we strive for great things. Only in America, the Nation that I love, believe in, and took an oath to defend, do you find our spirit, the vision to break boundaries, turn impossible feats into reality,” Aldrin wrote in a statement that was published on Wednseday morning. 

  

  Buzz noted, “Over the years, I have seen our government’s approach to space wax and wane, a fluctuating dynamic that has disappointed me from time to time. But under the first Trump Administration, I was impressed to see how human space exploration was elevated, made a policy of high importance again. Under President Trump’s first term, America saw a revitalized interest in space. His Administration reignited national efforts to get back to the moon, and push on to Mars – programs that continue today.” 

  The former astronaut explained his excitement around “the great advancements in the private sector space economy, led by visionaries like Elon Musk.” 

  The latest space accomplishment by Musk, Trump’s biggest supporter, was just a few weeks ago with the Starship rocket… 

  Elon and SpaceX just launched Starship into space and then caught the Super Heavy booster back at the launch tower like they were catching a baseball.

  LET. AMERICA. BUILD. 🇺🇸pic.twitter.com/ea3Jkue5CT

  — Geiger Capital (@Geiger_Capital) October 13, 2024

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

  “These are concrete accomplishments that align with my concerns and America’s policy priorities,” Buzz said. 

  He explained the president has an incredible position to lead the nation and must have “clarity in judgment, decisiveness, knowledge, understanding, and calm under pressures few have a natural ability to manage, or the life experience to successfully undertake.” 

  … something Kalama Harris does not – as she is merely a far-left activist – Deep State puppet – and not a successful manager like Trump. 

  *  *  *

  Here’s Brigadier General Buzz Aldrin’s full endorsement for former president: 

  Brigadier General Buzz Aldrin endorses Donald J. Trump for President of the United States. General Aldrin, Lunar Module Pilot on Apollo 11 and Gemini 12 pilot, provides the following statement:

  “America is a nation of bold ambition, hope, and energy. We are a nation of free thought, free association, and free movement. We are a nation that allows the best of humanity to emerge, and we strive for great things. Only in America, the Nation that I love, believe in, and took an oath to defend, do you find our spirit, the vision to break boundaries, turn impossible feats into reality. 

  A half-Century ago, I was part of an important effort to put a human being on the moon. It was an honor to serve my country in that capacity. I am proud of what we accomplished then. While it has been 55 years since Americans set foot on the moon, the only Nation ever to do so, that effort continues to inspire new generations of Americans – to press ahead, blaze new trails of understanding, and expand our presence in space, For All Mankind. I have dedicated my life to the pursuit of scientific understanding, exploration, and an enduring human presence in space. The importance of that mission, that calling, runs through every fiber of my being. 

  Over the years, I have seen our government’s approach to space wax and wane, a fluctuating dynamic that has disappointed me from time to time. But under the first Trump Administration, I was impressed to see how human space exploration was elevated, made a policy of high importance again. Under President Trump’s first term, America saw a revitalized interest in space. His Administration reignited national efforts to get back to the moon, and push on to Mars – programs that continue today. 

  The Trump Administration also reinstituted the National Space Council, so leading voices could advocate for the importance of space to America.  Finally, under President Trump, the Nation’s defense was enhanced with the creation of the U.S. Space Force– increasingly important as space becomes a contested domain. At the same time, I have been enthused and excited by the great advancements in the private sector space economy, led by visionaries like Elon Musk.  These are concrete accomplishments that align with my concerns and America’s policy priorities.   

  More broadly, we are facing serious and difficult realities on the global security landscape.  Domestically, we face major economic challenges, stability in our communities, and rule of law concerns. For these reasons and others, we need a proven, serious, tested leader for president.

  The Presidency requires an understanding of human nature, clarity in judgement, decisiveness, knowledge, understanding, and calm under pressures few have a natural ability to manage, or the life experience to successfully undertake. It is a job where decisions are made that routinely involve American lives – some urgently but not without thought. The job requires sober analysis of frightening scenarios, and the instinct to lead with resolve.

  From the skies over Korea in air-to-air combat to navigating, landing, and walking on the moon, I appreciate this kind of pressure. I know what it is like to have to make these kinds of decisions, firmly, on principle, with resolve and follow-through. Training, experience, and trust matter. 

  In this election, we have a choice. We all have one vote. For some, the choice may not be easy – but in times of uncertainty real leaders are most needed – to guide and inspire a people, to push through the noise, recognize what really matters, and accomplish missions critical to all citizens. 

  Most citizens rightly consider it an honor to cast their vote for a leader they believe will best serve the Nation – our government by, for and of the people. For me, for the future of our Nation, to meet enormous challenges, and for the proven policy accomplishments above, I believe the Nation is best served by voting for Donald J. Trump. I wholeheartedly endorse him for President of the United States. Godspeed President Trump, and God Bless the United States of America.” 

  Meanwhile, the Harris-Walz campaign has been hoping to lock the vote in for gamers and porn addicts. Really can’t make this shit up. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 17:40

• "How Did They Get My Email?": UWisc Student Angered Harris-Walz Promos Sent En Masse To Students
  “How Did They Get My Email?”: UWisc Student Angered Harris-Walz Promos Sent En Masse To Students

  By Jennifer Kabbany of The College Fix

  The Kamala Harris presidential campaign is hosting a huge concert in Madison, Wisc., on Wednesday night, and an untold multitude of University of Wisconsin students recently got an email blast touting the event in their inboxes.

  Students at both the University of Wisconsin Madison and University of Wisconsin Whitewater, the latter of which is an hour drive from Madison, confirmed to The College Fix they received emails from the Harris-Walz campaign Monday.

  The emails touted the concert, which will feature Gracie Abrams and Mumford & Sons.

  “RSVP NOW: Kamala Harris is coming to UW-Madison for a concert + rally!” was the subject line of the Get-Out-The-Vote email. The sender was listed as “Wisconsin for Harris-Walz.”

  “Vice President Harris is coming to UW-Madison on Wednesday. And, for one day only, we’re getting ready to rock the ballot box with the When We Vote, We Win concert and rally,” the email stated above an image of a smiling Harris.

  At least one UW-Whitewater student who is voting for Donald Trump said it was “insulting and infuriating” to get the email that amounted to an ad for Democrats. She said she was also shocked the Harris-Walz campaign obtained her school email address.

  “How did they get my email,” said the student, a 24-year-old senior whose initials are T.E. She asked not to be fully named for fear of retribution for speaking out.

  “It was really surprising to see an email from candidate Kamala Harris to my school email when I know for a fact there hasn’t been any from the RNC or Donald Trump or anything like that,” she said.

  

  “It’s not easy to find at all, my email address is actually pretty private,” she said. “The Wisconsin Democratic Party would not be able to get my email unless they specifically asked for it.”

  In fact, the campaign might have asked the UW system. Or the campaign might have obtained the email addresses through a third-party data voter company, which has successfully obtained students’ private FERPA data nationwide. Using some sort of algorithm could have also been the culprit, some have speculated.

  A UW-Whitewater spokesperson did not immediately provide a comment, but a UW-Madison spokesperson said student emails are available upon request.

  “[It] is correct that student directory information, including students’ university-issued email addresses, is available upon request under the Wisconsin Public Records Law,” spokesman John Lucas told The Fix via email. “In addition, under university policy, registered student organizations are also able to send one message per semester to all students.”

  Lucas also clarified that Wednesday’s political rally will be held in the city of Madison, not at UW-Madison, as was stated in the Harris email.

  One UW-Madison student told The College Fix on Tuesday they’re not shocked to have received at least two emails from the Harris-Walz campaign in the last 10 days. Another one, sent last week, touted a visit to Madison from Barack Obama.

  “The whole campus is liberal, so a partisan email to my inbox doesn’t upset me. However, I don’t want to see my information being sold or given to political parties for some partisan agenda,” said the student, who spoke to The College Fix on the condition of anonymity.

  “There is a Tulsi Gabbard & RFK event and an Eric Hovde event in Madison tonight that I bet no one is getting emails about,” the student added. “I also can’t imagine UW-Madison selling information to team Trump to get students to RSVP for the rally in Milwaukee on Friday.”

  College students are a voting bloc that traditionally swing heavily Democrat, so targeting them in swing states might not be surprising to some. But the tactic of obtaining college students’ emails en masse is raising anger and prompting questions among Republican students.

  As The College Fix previously reported, College Republicans decried a similar move in Arizona after the Harris campaign texted 70,000 Arizona State University students, and a total of 150,000 students statewide, urging them to vote for her.

  An ASU spokesperson told The Fix: “Under Arizona Public Records Law, ASU’s records are public unless there is a specific confidentiality requirement.”

  Arizona College Republicans and at least one GOP state lawmaker have pledged to conduct an investigation to determine how and why the contact information was used for partisan politics.

  T.E., the UW-Whitewater student, said she would like answers for her state, too.

  “I am very worried my family information has been handed off to others simply because they’re linked to my student email or my contact information and the UW-Whitewater database,” she said, adding it was especially surprising since her school is working to crack down on spam.

  In the end, she replied to the Harris-Walz campaign with a message of her own: “No thanks, I’m voting for America and not a lawyer who got her position through sexual corrosion and exploitation and falsely imprisons parents based on truancy.”

  For good measure, she added to her reply the iconic picture of Trump hoisting his fist in the air after being shot in the ear by an assassin.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 17:20

• Chicago Tops 'Rattiest Cities' List For Decade As Other Democrat-Run Metros Plagued With Disgusting Rats
  Chicago Tops ‘Rattiest Cities’ List For Decade As Other Democrat-Run Metros Plagued With Disgusting Rats

  Pest control company Orkin published its annual Rattiest City In America list, with Chicago securing the top spot for the tenth consecutive year. As we scroll through the list, a trend emerges, many of these metro areas are governed by far-left Democratic leaders who campaign on “joy” and “love” and “utopia” – yet the inconvenient truth is their policies transform cities into rat-infested and crime-infested hellholes.

  Orkin’s press release surrounding the list focused on Chicago…

  For the tenth straight year, Chicago has secured the top spot on Orkin’s Top 50 Rattiest Cities List, maintaining its reign since the list’s inception. This decade-long dominance highlights the city’s ongoing battle with rodents, as well as the efforts taken to treat their presence, which has been driven largely by the Windy City’s infrastructure and environment

  Chicago’s abundance of alleys provides rodents with hidden havens, offering plenty of space to hide while feasting on trash. Rodents also love to burrow, finding shelter beneath subway tracks or around underground pipes. In these hidden spots, the rodent population can grow if left unchecked.

  Following Chicago, Los Angeles ranked number 2, New York number 3, San Francisco number 4, Washington, DC 5, Denver 6, Philadelphia 7, Detroit, 8, Baltimore 9, and Cleveland 10. These cities are run by radical progressive activists – and that’s the problem. City Halls are full of activists – not managers – which is why many of these towns are falling apart or plagued by crime and rats.

  Cornerstone cafe located in Lincoln Park has a rat problem #Chicago pic.twitter.com/STUrAmCd2f

  — Goofies Of Chicago (@Chicago_Goofies) October 5, 2024

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

  “Mice and rats are a serious concern to the millions of homeowners who deal with infestations each fall. As the weather cools, rodents seek warm shelter and food sources,” Orkin said. 

  This chipotle located on Roosevelt and Canal is infested with rats #Chicago pic.twitter.com/ORP6GiHD9z

  — Goofies Of Chicago (@Chicago_Goofies) July 28, 2024

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

  John Kane, Orkin National Accounts Entomologist & Quality Manager, said these critters “can cause a lot of structural problems for property owners,” adding, “They can get in around piping and even chew through walls. These tiny culprits tend to chew through wiring, which poses an increased risk of fires.”

  Not mentioned by Orkin is that rats can carry and spread diseases to humans through direct contact, bites, scratches, and contaminated food. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 10/30/2024 – 17:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest