“I can’t believe how many people are negative on tariffs that are actually smart people,” President Donald Trump told Bloomberg in a June 25 interview.
“Economically, they’re phenomenal.”
Since then, a lot of smart people have rushed to the American media to say that, on the contrary, high tariffs are horrible.
Trump is right. Although these levies would increase costs to American consumers, the costs would not be nearly as great as experts say. Moreover, there are other considerations, both economic and national security, favoring raising tariffs now.
“As president, Trump shattered the long-standing Republican orthodoxy of favoring free trade,” Bloomberg noted in commentary accompanying the interview, released on July 16th: “He says he’ll go further if reelected.” Trump talked about increasing tariffs on, among others, China.
Trump happens to be right about China. In February, speaking to Maria Bartiromo on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures, he suggested he might impose tariffs greater than 60% on Chinese imports.
Critics from the American elite howl. “This is going to add price inflation across the board, all in the name of ‘tough guy’ election-year politics,” said Yael Ossowski of the Consumer Choice Center, in comments carried by Bloomberg.
“The long historical record demonstrates these are borne not by other countries, as Mr. Trump keeps insisting, but by American consumers and industries,” writes Steven R. Weisman of the Washington, D.C.-based Peterson Institute for International Economics, about tariffs.
The long historical record might show that, but not the immediate one. In 2018, Trump imposed additional tariffs on China and analysts warned that prices in America would rise. Smart people in America, however, forgot that China had an incentive to effectively pay the tariffs: The Chinese government and exporters absorbed 75% to 81% of the cost of the additional levies. They did so primarily through the government increasing export and other subsidies and factories accepting lower profit margins.
“The Trump tariffs were barely noticed by U.S. businesses or consumers,” long-time trade expert Alan Tonelson told Gatestone. “They certainly did not raise inflation, and they certainly did not cut growth.”
Trump’s additional tariffs topped out at 25%. Now, he is proposing even higher levies. The hit to the American consumer will undoubtedly be greater this time. “The higher tariffs are raised from current levels, the more likely disruptions will occur,” says Tonelson, also the founder of public policy blog RealityChek.
At the same time, however, the Chinese have even greater reason to shield consumers from increased costs. The problem for Xi Jinping is that China’s growth model is exhausted, and after rejecting stimulating domestic consumption, he is entirely dependent on increasing exports.
Chinese factories, from all indications, are struggling and need to keep customers. For instance, China’s Producer Price Index, which measures factory-gate prices, declined for the 21st consecutive month in June. The Wall Street Journalreports low prices have pushed many factories in China “to the brink.” With prices declining in China, American consumers will not feel the pinch of new tariffs.
Furthermore, there is one more reason why U.S. consumers will not suffer. High American tariffs will encourage factories to move out of China. When they do, any pressure on consumer prices will disappear.
This is a contest that the United States cannot lose.
In short, trade-surplus countries, such as China, cannot prevail over trade-deficit ones, such as America.
That is why, ultimately, China will have to pay the cost of tariffs that Trump — or any other American leader — may impose. Clearly, China’s regime knows this. People’s Daily, the Communist Party’s self-described mouthpiece and therefore the most authoritative publication in China, this month is arguing that America should not raise tariffs.
Yet even if American consumers were to pay more because of the tariffs, let us remember why they were imposed in the first place. Trump in 2018 invoked Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and raised tariffs as a remedy for Chinese theft of U.S. intellectual property. China steals each year somewhere in the neighborhood of a half trillion dollars of American intellectual property. Critics of tariffs, whether they make valid points or not about increased costs, have an obligation to say how they would eliminate or reduce this criminal practice through other means.
On a broader point, Americans, after more than four decades of misguided policy, have to realize that they cannot fix their lopsided trade relations with China without bearing pain. Unless they agree to become subservient to the militant Chinese state, they will have to accept the costs of remaining sovereign.
Trump’s 60% tariffs would “drastically slow” the Chinese economy, as Fortunereported this month. The hit to China would be far greater than any collateral effects in America. Experience with the 2018 tariffs is a guide. “Overall, the damage to China’s gross domestic product from the trade war was three times as high as the hit to the U.S., according to some Chinese economists,” the Wall Street Journalreported in May.
Why should Americans want to decimate the Chinese factory sector? The Communist Party of China sees the U.S. as an enemy and seeks the destruction of the American republic. The struggle, in short, is existential. China’s regime cannot wage the fight against America without American money.
So why should Americans supply the cash to their enemy?
Cattle Market Rattled By Recession Risks As Cash-Strapped Consumers Pull Back
Is a meat recession coming?
The dismal US jobs report has ignited recession fears, with some major Wall Street banks forecasting at least three 25bps interest rate cuts this year, with the first one starting in September. Recessions typically reduce household incomes and alter diets.
One major issue with this consumer downturn is that households have already been financially crushed by elevated inflation and high interest rates over the last few years. A weakening labor market and a downshifting economy are just icing on the cake as the consumer has depleted personal savings and maxed out credit cards.
As previously noted, the United States Department of Agriculture recently reported beef prices at the supermarket reached a record high of $5.472 a pound in June. This one-way ticket up in prices has been primarily based on a shrinking US cattle herd to the smallest size in 73 years.
Besides the US main equity indexes getting blasted on Friday by recession fears, cattle futures in Chicago were rattled by the slowdown, sending contracts down as much as 4% – but still trading near record highs.
Fears over a “meat recession” are growing as traders see high prices and a consumer downturn as a perfect recipe for stoking demand destruction.
Here’s more from Bloomberg:
Cattle futures are dropping as a falling stock market prompts worries that consumers will pull back from high-priced beef. Sales of steak typically increase when equity markets rise and with stocks selling off after a weak US jobs report, prices for cattle are tracking the downturn.
Commodity research firm Hightower Report wrote in a note Friday, “There is no question the cattle market is sensitive to economic fears,” adding, “Consumer beef demand is in question.”
“Each teacher shall endeavor to impress upon the minds of the pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism, and a true comprehension of the rights, duties, and dignity of American citizenship, and the meaning of equality and human dignity, including the promotion of harmonious relations … to teach them to avoid idleness, profanity, and falsehood, and to instruct them in manners and morals and the principles of a free government,” according to California Education Code 233.5.
California’s Education Codes were adopted in 1943. Over the last half century, they have varied in content and meaning as the laws of the United States, cultural attitudes, and our western civilization’s ethos have changed. As historical events direct and influence our future, however, each generation examines quintessential questions that defines our common purpose as Americans, and how we should live according to the laws created by our constitutional republic.
In March 2024, Sacramento politicians originally introduced a sensible legislative bill to help students with mental health related issues. This bill in its original language authorized the California Department of Education to support school districts to increase mental health screenings and support school districts to boost mental health programs for children in public K-12 schools.
This new law, AB 1955, will have a widespread impact on families, children, and public education. It overrides parental notification policies enacted by local schools boards that require school employees to inform parents about the wellbeing and emotional and mental health of their students.
In practice, this law prohibits all public schools from disclosing to a student’s parents’ critical gender and mental health related information. It forbids school officials in public and charter schools from disclosing information to a student’s mother and father that is related to a child’s perception of their gender identity, gender expression, or related mental health issues.
The original intent of parental notification policies were to strengthen family interpersonal dynamics and support the rights of parents. With an observed increase in child and adolescent mental illnesses, including gender dysphoria and its new subcategory Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, our society is in a mental health watershed moment, and parents need support and help. Not surprisingly, many researchers have connected these epidemiological observations to the impact of social media and social contagion. This acute mental health crisis adversely impacts family dynamics and strains interpersonal relationships in the family unit.
Unfortunately, with the new law, parental notification policies are now illegal, with school staff, teachers, administrators, and principals required to exclude from parents knowledge of their child’s serious mental health condition.
Undermining parents even more, a narrative has emerged that children with gender dysphoria are under attack by their parents and school boards. Allowing parents to be involved in their child’s gender identification, gender incongruence, and mental health concerns has been said to put these students’ lives at risk.
Californians and parents on both sides of the political spectrum disagree with this assessment. They argue that AB 1955 undermines and removes the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children and is in violation of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws.
In 2000, in the Troxel v. Granville case, one of many cases involving the U.S. Supreme Court that guarantees parental rights, the court pronounced, “the custodial parent has a constitutional right to determine, without undue interference by the state, how best to raise, nurture, and educate the child. The parental right stems from the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
In 1979, the U.S. Supreme court decision in Parham v. J.R., concluded “jurisprudence historically has reflected Western civilization concepts of the family as a unit with broad parental authority over minor children.” Numerousother United States Supreme Court opinionsconsistently support the inalienable rights to parents and the parental-rights doctrine.
In a more recent 2023 legal case (Mirabelli v. Olson) filed in the U.S. Federal District Court by two public school teachers, the court opined against a school district’s policy that restricted school staff and teachers from contacting parents about information believed to be critical to the welfare of students. The court issued a preliminary injunction and stated, “The United States Supreme Court has historically and repeatedly declared that parents have a right, grounded in the Constitution, to direct the education, health, and upbringing, and to maintain the well-being of their children.”
Thus, AB 1955 is in violation of California’s own Education Code 233.5, and historical legal precedence. Western culture and civilizations since the earliest societies have recognized that parents and not government are the final arbitrators and ultimate authorities of their children’s lives. Children require their parents’ presence in their interpersonal struggles and family challenges.
On July 16, one day after this controversial bill became law, litigation was filed, and a battle line was drawn in the Golden State over the question of who has the ultimate authority over children: parents or government agents?
The courts will decide the legal status, but I pray the American people will support and defend time-proven truths that make families strong and define our family values.
“Open War” On Police: NYC DA Lets Two Migrants Who Attacked, Bit Cops Free Without Bail
Two migrants who bit and attacked two New York City Police officers are…wait for it…back on the street, according to the New York Post.
Manhattan prosecutors reportedly agreed to set them loose back on the streets without bail after both were arrested on Sunday for fighting with traffic cops on Eighth Avenue.
Police confronted suspects outside the Row NYC Hotel at 700 Eighth Ave. after allegedly spotting one of them recklessly riding a moped without ID.
One migrant allegedly bit an officer while another “hurled a moped” at another officer, the report says.
The Post report says that when they were brought into court on Monday morning, prosecutors let them walk without bail.
The DA’s office said it “would be consenting to the defendant’s release on his own recognizance.”
One NYPD cop furiously told The Post: “What kind of message is this sending to the public? They are basically saying anyone in a blue uniform is a human piñata.”
Another officer called it “open war” on police, stating: “Today they bite and kick a cop and tomorrow they take a shot at cops. If there are no consequences they are only encouraging people to attack cops.”
A spokesman for the state Office of Court Administration said: “We don’t comment on bail decisions except to say that in cases like these in New York, Judges have discretion in making bail decisions in accordance with the law and based solely on an individualized assessment of a defendant’s risk of flight.”
Police Benevolent Association President Patrick Hendry responded: “We’ve seen dozens of significant assaults on police officers in Manhattan this year, and there’s a clear pattern in those cases — prosecutors and judges are only doing their job when they’re in the spotlight. We will keep turning out in court to show the entire justice system that their actions are getting cops hurt and putting all New Yorkers at risk.”
California drivers have the worst road rage, according to a new study by Forbes.
The study surveyed 10,000 licensed drivers and compared all 50 states in nine categories. Some of the categories included drivers who force other cars off the road, drivers who exit their cars to fight with others, tailgating, and honking—each weighted on a percentage basis to equal a total score of 100.
California received 100 percent, Forbes reported.
“California drivers ranked as the most confrontational drivers across all 50 states, with a high percentage of drivers experiencing some type of road rage, including being cut off, cursed at, and tailgating,” Forbes said in a report published July 22.
The Golden State had the third-highest percentage of drivers—47.5 percent—who said another driver had cut them off on purpose, and the fourth-highest percentage—32 percent—of drivers who had been yelled at, insulted, cursed, and threatened.
The state also ranked among the top 10 for tailgating, and drivers who reported people exiting their cars to fight with them.
Arizona took the top spot last year, but dropped to 14th place in 2024, while California rose from 13th place to first.
Missouri ranked second in the United States with 99.44 percent, reporting a high percentage of drivers who had been yelled at, insulted, or threatened by another driver. The state was also second-highest for the percentage of drivers who reported being cut off by another driver.
Utah and Oklahoma came in third and fourth place.
Hawaii is home to the most polite drivers in the United States.
Driving in the United States is getting more dangerous as drivers become more confrontational. The number of violent road rage shootings across the country has surged since 2014, according to analysis of data from the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive.
Between 2014 and 2023, road aggression that involved shootings increased from 92 to 481—an increase of more than 400 percent, according to the archive.
The Forbes 2024 study also reported 41 percent of drivers witnessed an act of road rage in the past 12 months, and 32 percent experienced road rage from another driver.
“Aggressive driving and road rage are not only dangerous, but they can also lead to an increase in car insurance rates if they result in a serious crash or injury,” Forbes reported.
The average cost of car insurance is $2,150 a year, according to a Forbes Advisor analysis.
The survey considered 10,000 licensed U.S. drivers—at least 200 in each state—who were at least 18 years old and owned or leased at least one vehicle.
Graham Pushes Senators To Commit To War On Iran If Israel Attacked
South Carolina Republican Senator and well-known hawk Lindsey Graham is salivating over the prospect of war with Iran at a moment regional tensions are boiling in the wake of Israel assassinating Hamas’ political leader in Tehran and Hezbollah’s senior military commander in Beirut.
Graham on Wednesday introduced a bill that if passed would authorize military action against Iran if Hezbollah attacks Israel. The resolution says that the Senate “asserts that efforts to deter Hezbollah and the Islamic Republic of Iran are most credible when the President keeps all options on the table, including military force.”
Via Iran
It would consider an all-out assault by Hezbollah to have the direct backing of Iran, and would thus authorize direct US counterattack on the Islamic Republic.
The bill further authorizes military action against Iran if the country is deemed on the cusp of achieving a nuclear bomb. Iranian officials have lately signaled a major boost in its nuclear program at key sites. Though Iran’s leaders have yet to change the country’s official nuclear doctrine of seeing the bomb as ‘unIslamic’ (while long claiming the program is only for peaceful nuclear energy purposes), Tehran’s rhetoric has shifted of late to issuing warnings that it could produce a nuke if it wanted to.
The resolution further underscores that Iran and Hezbollah shall be held responsible for “any adverse impacts on the people of Lebanon that result from an attack on the State of Israel by Hezbollah” while also urging the US governemnt to use “all diplomatic tools and power projection capabilities” to punish Israel’s fiercest regional enemies.
As for the nuclear aspect, Graham has sought to invoke an Authorization for Use of Military Force which would greenlight a Washington military response if Iran’s nuke program is developed to the point of becoming a direct national security threat to the United States.
“Iran will keep going until somebody tells them to stop,” Graham said in a press briefing this week. “It is time to put red lines on their nuclear program.”
He asserted that it is “a certainty” that if the US doesn’t quickly get tougher on Iran, it will only be a matter of weeks or months more the country achieves nuclear weapons status. “Their ability to enrich to weapons grade is now a matter of weeks, not months,” Graham said. “Their ability to weaponize the material has advanced, and it is now time for Congress to lend their voice to the proper response.”
Call me if there is ever a day when Lindsey Graham wakes up and does not want to bomb Iran. https://t.co/5Vj5Ry0K51
“If Hezbollah attacks Israel, my hope is that they will have one less refinery than they do today,” he continued. “It is time to hit the Ayatollah in the pocketbook. Oil refineries are the lifeblood of his regime. Without those refineries, they would not be able to fund terrorism.”
Revealingly, nothing of what Graham said urged immediate and robust peace or diplomatic efforts in the region. Congressional hawks and neocons have long had Iran in their crosshairs, in a policy effort that goes back to at least the 1990s.
Is your favorite dark chocolate bar harboring a hidden health risk?A new study published on July 31 in Frontiers in Nutrition suggests that some popular dark chocolate products may contain concerning levels of heavy metals, particularly lead and cadmium.
The study, conducted by researchers from The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences and ConsumerLab.com, analyzed 72 dark chocolate and cocoa products sold in the United States from 2014 to 2022. Their findings shed light on a potential health concern that has been bubbling beneath the surface of the chocolate industry for years.
Why Study Heavy Metals in Chocolate?
Dark chocolate, long touted for its potential health benefits due to its high antioxidant content, has faced scrutiny in recent years due to reports of heavy metal contamination. Consumer media outlets and independent testing agencies, including Consumer Reports and As You Sow, have previously highlighted this issue.
Consumer Reports found heavy metals in popular chocolate brands including Hershey’s, Theo, Trader Joe’s, Godiva, Hu, and Equal Exchange, according to their 2022 report. A report by As You Sow also revealed elevated heavy metals in various chocolate products tested between 2014 and 2017. These earlier reports raised concerns about the safety of dark chocolate consumption, particularly for vulnerable populations such as children and pregnant women.
Given these concerns, Leigh Frame, director of integrative medicine at George Washington University and co-lead of the study, aimed to explore the significance of this contamination.
“We know chocolate is a plant that is particularly good at absorbing heavy metals from the soil and is grown in areas where there are heavy metals in the soil. So, it seemed like a logical area of concern. Also, often people think of chocolate as a supplement—like I’m getting my daily dose of chocolate because it’s good for me, right? We were interested to see if people consuming chocolate for health benefits really do get those benefits because there is also potentially heavy metal exposure,” Frame told The Epoch Times in an interview.
Study Design
The researchers analyzed popular cocoa-containing products from 2014 to 2022, including Ghirardelli, Hu, Lily’s, 365 Whole Foods Market, Nestle, Now Real Food, Baker’s, and Good & Gather.
All products were produced in the United States or Europe but sold only in the United States. The products were divided into four cohorts based on the year of purchase: 2014, 2016, 2019, and 2022. All products were tested for lead, cadmium, and arsenic content. Two primary standards were used to assess the levels of contamination:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) established interim reference levels (IRLs) with the following allowable intake levels:
Lead: 2.2 micrograms (mcg) per day for children under 7 years old
Lead: 8.8 mcg per day for women of childbearing age
While the FDA has established IRLs for lead, it has not set official limits for cadmium or arsenic in food products.
California Proposition 65 (Prop 65) is a more stringent state-level regulation that established the following maximum allowable dose levels (MADLs):
Lead: 0.5 mcg per day
Cadmium: 4.1 mcg per day
Arsenic: 10 mcg per day
Study Findings
The new study’s findings paint a complex picture of heavy metal contamination in dark chocolate:
Lead: 43 percent of products tested exceeded Prop 65 limits, but 97.2 percent of the products fell below FDA IRL limits.
Cadmium: 35 percent of products exceeded Prop 65 limits.
Arsenic: No products exceeded Prop 65 limits.
For all products tested, mean concentrations of both lead (0.615 micrograms/serving) and cadmium (4.358 mcg per serving) exceeded Prop 65 standards. However, median concentrations of lead (0.375 mcg per day) and cadmium (3.03 mcg per day were below Prop 65 standards, suggesting that a few highly contaminated products may have skewed the overall results. 97.2 percent of all products tested fell below the FDA IRLs for lead.
Trade certifications (such as Fairtrade or Non-GMO) did not significantly affect heavy metal levels. Organic-labeled products showed significantly higher concentrations of cadmium and lead. They were 280 percent more likely to exceed Prop 65’s cadmium limit and 14 percent more likely to exceed its lead limit.
“Our hypothesis was that organic products would be lower in heavy metals because they were not going to have fertilizers or pesticides used on them that were contaminated with heavy metals. But it’s exactly the opposite,” Frame said.
Why organic products had higher levels of heavy metals is unclear. Frame questioned if fertilizers and pesticides may not be adding as many heavy metals to food as previously thought.
“Also, someone that is growing an organic product is likely to treat it more carefully and gently. Perhaps the more gentle processing is allowing more residual heavy metals, compared to being extracted through some of the harsher processing methods that other companies are using. But that is purely a hypothesis” Frame added.
Health Concerns: Lead and Cadmium
There is no known safe level of lead in the blood since even low levels can produce toxic effects, according to a 2021 article in Toxics. The central nervous system is particularly vulnerable to lead, potentially resulting in cognitive decline, fine motor control impairment, and attention-related issues in both children and adults, according to the article.
IQ test scores were lower among children exposed to lead, according to a 2022 review in Systematic Reviews. The authors stated that lead exposure “can have irreversible effects on children’s mental performance.”
While less notorious than lead, cadmium exposure can also pose significant health risks. Cadmium exposure is a “cardiovascular risk factor” that may initiate and promote the progression of atherosclerosis, according to a review in Current Atherosclerosis Reports. Cadmium may also increase blood pressure and risk of kidney damage, according to the review. Increase risk of fracture may also increase following cadmium exposure, according to a 2016 review in Medicine.
Frame and her research team question whether the proposed benefits of cocoa outweigh the possible risk of heavy metal exposure. “It’s hard to say whether these benefits are really truly beneficial for the average human,” she said.
According to Frame, while dark chocolate has been associated with improved cardiovascular health, cognitive performance, and reduced chronic inflammation, these potential health benefits have been modest.
For example, a 2021 review in Nutrients concluded that cocoa products improved triglycerides, however, there was no effect on blood pressure, blood glucose, cognitive function, skin, anthropometry, or quality of life regardless of form, dose, or duration when consumed among healthy people.
“As with anything, it has to do with what is the background diet. So, you have someone that has a very low polyphenol, low flavonoid diet, and chocolate is one of their predominant sources. Then in terms of the flavonoids, it may be very beneficial. That’s why coffee is so beneficial for the average American because their diet is very low in polyphenols. And coffee is very rich in polyphenols and so it’s a really important source,” Frame said.
Frame suggests that potential benefits from cocoa may be similar. “If you have someone who already has a rich source of polyphenols in the diet, the contribution of chocolate is going to be pretty minimal. And then that person is exposing themselves to more heavy metals from the chocolate without getting the health benefits.”
Moreover, the potential risks associated with heavy metal exposure have not been fully accounted for in previous studies promoting the health benefits of dark chocolate, according to Frame. She suggests a better approach is to look at the individual and ask if they are meeting their flavonoid levels and then use chocolate to increase those levels.
For those concerned their love of dark chocolate could be at risk, it is also worth nothing that any risk is a matter of moderation. The GWU study concludes that “ if contaminated products as a whole are consumed in small amounts and infrequently by most, these contaminants may not be a public health concern (though, perhaps still an individual concern); in contrast, if many such products are consumed fairly regularly by the average consumer, the additive exposure may be a public health concern.”
The Epoch Times reached out to Lily’s, 365 Whole Foods Market, Nestle, Now Real Food, Baker’s, and Good & Gather, but they did not respond by publication time. Responses from Ghirardelli and Hu can be found in an update at the bottom of this article.
Christopher Gindlesperger, senior vice president of public affairs and communications for the National Confectioners Association, told The Epoch Times that “Chocolate and cocoa are safe to eat and can be enjoyed as treats as they have been for centuries. Food safety and product quality remain our highest priorities and we remain dedicated to being transparent and socially responsible.”
Where Are the Heavy Metals Coming From?
Cocoa trees can absorb heavy metals that naturally occur in the soil, as well as heavy metals from environmental contamination. The main sources of heavy metal contamination in the soil are livestock manure, irrigation with wastewater or polluted water, application of sewage sludge, use of metallo-pesticides or herbicides, phosphate-based fertilizers, and atmospheric deposition, according to a 2019 review in Environment International.
“We undervalue the soil as a source of heavy metals, particularly in certain regions. There is a huge variation in regions. But, right now, when you buy a chocolate bar, you have no way of knowing where those beans came from because it’s not labeled,” Frame told The Epoch Times.
The presence of heavy metals in chocolate is partly attributed to post-harvesting contamination as well. For example, after fermentation, the cocoa beans are typically spread out to dry in the sun for several days. During this time, they are exposed to environmental contaminants, including lead-laden dust and dirt, according to Consumer Reports. This lead can come from industrial pollution in nearby areas, residual lead in soil from past use of leaded gasoline, or airborne particles containing lead.
As the beans dry, this lead-containing dust can settle on and adhere to their surface. Unlike cadmium, which is thought to be absorbed into the beans through the plant’s root system, lead contamination may be largely a surface-level issue that occurs after the beans have been harvested, according to Consumer Reports.
Frame and her team are advocating for enhanced surveillance of heavy metal contamination in cocoa products and suggest that better quality control practices during harvesting and manufacturing could help mitigate the problem. “Ideally they would test every batch.”
For consumers, Frame envisions a voluntary labeling system that is simple to understand. “The average person needs a stoplight type label that says, this is a moderate risk chocolate versus this is a high-risk or low-risk product. What I hope would happen is the companies that start putting it on there will see that people are more likely to buy their products, and then maybe other companies will follow suit.”
Implications and Takeaways
For most people, eating a single serving (one ounce) of dark chocolate is unlikely to pose a significant health risk, according to Frame.
“The reason we recommend one ounce is because that quantity is often studied for health benefits and you have to imagine that the heavy metals in one ounce are not reaching a level that’s becoming problematic,” she said.
However, consuming multiple servings could lead to excessive exposure.
“It’s very easy to over-consume chocolate. It’s something that can easily go from one to five or six servings. If people are having one ounce a day, maybe it’s okay. But if they’re having five servings a day and are getting astronomical levels of heavy metals, that’s a concern.”
Another potential concern is combining chocolate consumption with other food sources of heavy metals, such as teas and spices, Frame added.
The Bigger Picture: Cumulative Exposure
Dark chocolate is just one potential source of heavy metal exposure in our diets. According to a 2019 review in Environmental International, a growing body of research has identified concerning levels of heavy metals in various food crops, including:
Fruits
Leafy vegetables—green cabbage, spinach, cauliflower, lettuce, kale
“Additional research into cumulative heavy metal exposure from the whole diet is needed. It’s not about excluding any of these foods. There is no zero exposure to heavy metals. You cannot completely exclude them from your diet. What you want to do is make sure your exposure is not too high,” said Frame.
What Can Consumers Do?
This new study serves as a reminder that even seemingly healthy foods can harbor possible hidden dangers. While dark chocolate has been associated with potential health benefits, it faces scrutiny for its heavy metal content. As consumers, we can balance the potential benefits against these risks. According to Frame, chocolate enthusiasts can still savor their favorite treat while reducing heavy metal exposure by considering these strategies:
Be aware that “organic” or other certifications do not necessarily mean lower heavy metal content. In fact, organic products may have higher concentrations, according to the study.
Enjoy dark chocolate in moderation as part of a balanced diet. Frame’s suggested serving size is no more than one ounce per day.
Vary sources of dark chocolate and cocoa products.
Alternate between dark and milk chocolate if you can tolerate lactose. While dark chocolate offers more antioxidants and less sugar, it may contain higher levels of heavy metals due to its higher content of cocoa solids (where heavy metals tend to accumulate). White chocolate has no cocoa solids, making it another good option.
Locate specific cacao brands that regularly test for heavy metals using third-party laboratories and have shown lower contamination levels. Organizations like Consumer Reports and As You Sow provide test results from common chocolate products. Although these results are snapshots in time, they may help identify which products might be safer choices.
Diversify your diet to help minimize the risk of excessive exposure to heavy metals from any single source.
Be particularly cautious with cocoa products if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or feeding young children.
UPDATE
The Epoch Times received statements from two companies mentioned in the report.
Ghirardelli provided the following statement:
“Food safety and high quality are paramount for Ghirardelli and the entire Lindt & Sprüngli Group. For more information on the issue, you’re inquiring about, please see the statement issued by The National Confectioners Association and additional background the organization has shared here.”
Hu also responded with a statement:
“In regard to both media articles that have been published, we confirm that we comply (by a very large margin) with all applicable standards, including those in the California State Consent judgment, which are far-stricter than both the FDA and European Regulations. In addition, we have testing protocols in place to monitor the naturally-occurring trace amounts of heavy metals found in chocolate to ensure we are only bringing product to the market that is well below any applicable standard’s limit and is safe to consume. We have a more detailed response that is available to read on our website. Here is the link – https://hukitchen.com/pages/response.”
The 2022 statement issued by The National Confectioners Association notes efforts chocolate makers take to ensure the quality and safety of their products:
“An expert investigation conducted through our prior California Proposition 65 settlement concluded that cadmium and lead are present in cocoa and chocolate due to soil and that bean cleaning during processing cocoa beans reduces lead and cadmium in chocolate products,” noted that statement.
This story has also been updated to include comments from The National Confectioners Association.
Beijing Helicopter Taking Off: China Central Banker Calls For Direct Money Transfers To Households
When the US economy crashed in a deflationary vortex during the global financial crisis (and just after the time giant yen carry trade imploded), it seemed to many that another great Depression was assured. However, after a brief period of pain, both the US and the world economy staged a remarkable rebound which, we learned after the fact, was thanks to a unprecedented releveraging undertaken by China, which issued trillions in new debt and used the proceeds to not only build countless ghost cities, but to spark an inflationary tsunami around the world which helped the world economy recover from its depression on very short notice.
Fast forward 17 years when, with another massive yen carry trade collapsing, the world on the verge of a deflationary tsunami, central banks are either cutting rates or preparing to do so, and global growth starting at another recession (if not depression) in the face. “Deja “vu some would say (it would have been even more symmetric if the bank failures from last March been delayed until now) , but there is one major difference: unlike 2008, this time China is not coming to save the world. The reason why is the same reason why China’s economy and markets have been in a downward spiral for the past 5 years: the world’s second largest economy (soon to be overtaken by India’s economy just as it recently lost the crown for most populous nation) simply has too much debt, and unlike 2008, Beijing has no more capacity to taken on the unlimited debt need to bootstrap the global economy (as discussed last year in “China’s 300% Debt And Dilemmas“).
Or maybe we – and consensus – are dead wrong: maybe despite pessimism that China simply has too much debt to do stimulate with even more new debt, this time Beijing will do what the Fed did in 2009 and launch helicopter money.
We bring this up not because this is some “hare-brained” conspiracy theory, but because an influential Chinese central bank adviser delivered a rare critique of his nation’s economic policy, urging the government to set a compulsory target for inflation, step up spending to address weak consumption and even start helicopter money
In an article published this week, which cited his earlier speech in May, Huang Yiping – a prominent member of the People’s Bank of China’s monetary policy committee – said that authorities should change their strategy of “focusing on investment and neglecting consumption,” shift policy preference from investment to consumption, set a hard CPI target of 2-3%, adopt fiscal measures to support consumption (such as allowing migrant workers to settle in cities, something which would spark a new Chinese housing bubble overnight) and last but not least, directly send money to households!
Huang Yiping, a member of the PBoC’s monetary policy committee, just made a bold statement. Although this committee is an advisory and not a decision-making body, his comment was still significant:
“If the Chinese economy falls into the trap of low inflation, the consequences… pic.twitter.com/Xhru04uyjV
— Shanghai Macro Strategist (@ShanghaiMacro) August 1, 2024
“The economy has entered a new stage and the total demand — including consumption, exports and even investment — is no longer as strong as before,” said Huang. “This actually poses new challenges to macroeconomic policies.” Meanwhile an excessive focus on fiscal health – such as maintaining the budget deficit below 3% of gross domestic product even when growth is weak – is now hindering China’s economy and eroding room for future policy action, he said.
The reason for the sudden scramble: Huang believes that if the Chinese economy falls into the trap of low inflation (like Japan) “the consequences will be severe”, and here we agree wholeheartedly. In fact, we are surprised that amid growing social discontent, record youth unemployment and a tendency for China’s middle class to revolt, Beijing hasn’t done this already. Maybe it will – soon – and in doing so would spark an inflationary shockwave around the globe.
Rebalancing China’s two-speed economy has been a challenge as authorities lean on manufacturing to propel growth while risking a backlash by creating a global glut of exports.
The transcript of Huang’s speech was only released in the wake of the Communist Party’s twice-a-decade meeting on reforms that left investors disappointed and pushed Chinese stocks sharply lower. The Third Plenum proposed few solutions to the economy’s most pressing problems, as top leaders reaffirmed manufacturing as the centerpiece of the economy, despite rising trade tensions, while pushing the same worn out policies that have failed to kickstart China’s sinking economy.
Huang’s frank assessment comes as public critiques of Chinese government measures have become increasingly fraught as policymakers struggle to arrest a slowdown. Analysts have been advised to avoid discussing sensitive terms such as “deflation” or expressing views deemed overly negative for the economy.
Hu Xijin, the former editor-in-chief of China’s state-backed Global Times, was banned from posting on social media after he wrote controversial comments about the economy, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing a person familiar with the matter.
Having learned how not to trigger his overlords, Huang highlighted falling prices – without using the word “deflation ”- as the key issue requiring greater attention, and advocated for setting a hard target for China’s consumer price index to increase by 2%-3%. Policymakers have consistently aimed for inflation at 3% in the past, but it’s regarded as a celling, not necessarily something that must be achieved. In light of recent CPI prints that have stuck around 0% for much of the past year, Beijing will be delighted to recover 3% CPI. Or even 2%.
“The economy is now easy to cool but difficult to heat up,” said Huang, who’s also dean of the National School of Development at Peking University. “If it really falls into the low inflation trap, the consequences will be serious” said the central banker having learned from Japan’s catastrophic experience.
After China extended its longest deflationary streak since 1999 last quarter, Huang raised the question of whether the world’s No. 2 economy could fall into the same cycle as Japan, which suffered decades of deflation and was referenced more than a dozen times in his remarks.
Huang was careful to strike a constructive tone in his lengthy speech, with the government’s policies only characterized as being “mild” and “new conditions emerging in the economy” blamed for measures having a weaker effect than desired. China’s home sales slumped again in July, despite Beijing unveiling this year its most forceful efforts yet to support the property market that’s suffering a prolonged crisis.
According to Huang, two popular but flawed views were hindering policies. One was the belief that only structural reform can lift productivity, and the second was an aversion to adopting the more aggressive policies taken by Western countries.
Massive stimulus unleashed by the US and Europe in recent years had effectively supported those markets, without triggering significant negative consequences, added Huang, who has worked at investment banks including Citigroup and Barclays, and who clearly has someone do his shopping for him with a corporate card. Yes, his assessment is idiotic – the massive stimulus has unleashed even more massive inflation – but for China and its 1.3 billion citizens, deflation is even more dangerous than inflation.
Huang returned as a PBOC adviser this year after serving in that role between 2015 and 2018. He’s previously called for the PBOC to cut interest rates even as the US Federal Reserve began to hike, and flagged the risk of overseas push-back on China’s industrial policies, something which will be in full force once Donald Trump returns to the White House.
Huang said both the central bank and the Finance Ministry were trying to preserve future policy space, but what are they waiting for when the country desperately needs to reboot its economy here and now, and waiting too long threatens the very stability of the social fabric. Too conservative measures could threaten longer-term economic stability, he added.
Pressure on the balance sheets of households, businesses and local governments is feeding the economy’s weakness, according to Huang. This means the central government needs to shoulder more responsibility and stabilize confidence, he said.
“If the deteriorating trend is not stopped, it can lead to very serious consequences.”
While it is unclear of Huang speaks for others beside himself (it is no secret that lately Chinese social media has seen a tidal wave of censorship seeking to counter angry complaints about the slowing economy), one thing is certain: if the US slides into a recession, which now seems inevitable, China will have no choice but to do what the PBOC advisor suggests, as the only remaining pillar propping up China’s economy – US imports – slowly fades away. Should that happen, and should Trump implement the reflationary tariffs (up to 100%) he hopes to put in place once elected, the inflationary tsunami that awaits in 2025 will make the galloping inflation from the early 1980s seem like a very gentle rise in prices by comparison.
Many aspects of everyday life were transformed during the COVID-19 pandemic and the government’s response to it.
(Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock)
Lockdowns quickly created a remote working environment that hasn’t fully reversed.
Despite some employers’ efforts to cajole their employees back into the office, a majority (52 percent) of U.S. workers still say they prefer working remotely at least some of the time, according to an April survey from Morning Consult.
And while attitudes are still changing in the evolving post-COVID era, many workers and businesses are beginning to realize that the future of the workforce may not be fully in-person or remote, but somewhere in between.
Allie Clough of Columbus, Ohio, has worked remotely for most of her full-time career.
Having earned her graduate degree at the height of the pandemic, Clough only worked briefly in an office environment before shifting into her current role as a freelance writer. And although she hasn’t started a family yet, she said she believes the flexibility of working from home will be invaluable to her when she does.
“As a woman in my 20s, one of the biggest benefits that I see to remote work is the fact that it seems like it’ll be much friendlier to family life,” she told The Epoch Times.
Clough recently made the move from Washington to Columbus to be closer to her partner. While she works remotely full-time, he works a hybrid schedule—a combination that she said has strengthened their relationship.
“I don’t think we would have been able to really date at all if we didn’t both work remote to some degree,” she said. “It has really afforded us the ability to not have to miss a beat with our jobs while still being able to be near one another. And when the workday is over, we can be together.”
Before the pandemic, Clough said she found the idea of juggling motherhood and a career to be “intimidating.” But now, with the rise of remote work, she no longer fears that she will have to give one up for the sake of the other.
“It makes me much more bullish on the idea of starting a family and having children when I see that the women that I work with, even if they take time off when their kids are little, there is a lot more flexibility for them to roll back into the workplace and even be in management or leadership roles,” she said.
That’s a benefit that Katie Bridge of College Station, Texas, has also realized in the wake of the pandemic.
Bridge was a stay-at-home mother of two before COVID-19 transformed the workforce and the world. Now a communications strategist at Lockheed Martin, she works from home four days a week, 10 hours a day.
Katie Bridge visits the Messina Hof Winery with her family in Bryan, Texas, on Aug. 12, 2023. (Courtesy of Timothy Bridge)
“I love it,” she said of her working conditions. “The kids know that I don’t work Fridays, so that’s the day that they get to plan what they want to do with me.”
Bridge, a U.S. Army veteran, put her career on hold for six years so she could raise her children at a time when working from home wasn’t as common.
Before, she noted, remote options were typically only available for call center representatives—a job that typically requires a quiet work setting.
“As someone with two babies, there’s no such thing as a quiet place for eight hours a day,” she said.
But amid the global shift toward remote work during and after the pandemic, Bridge found the courage to reenter the workforce through a job that began as a hybrid role but has since evolved into a fully remote position.
“One of the things that was on my resume was my time as a stay-at-home mom. Because there is no job that requires as much as a stay-at-home mom,” she said.
“The amount of logistical hula hooping you do as a parent is leaps and bounds beyond what I’ve ever experienced, either in the Army or here at Lockheed.”
Varying Perspectives
Remote work’s family-friendly reputation could be the reason women are still pursuing such opportunities at higher rates than men.
An Indeed Job Search survey conducted between July 2021 and December 2023 found that women were nearly 25 percent more likely than men to cite a desire for remote work as a motivation for their job search.
That finding tracks with the results of a 2021 LinkedIn study, which found that women were 26 percent more likely than men to seek out remote jobs.
And to Ryan Niddel, CEO of wellness company MIT45, that all makes perfect sense.
“I believe that men still have something inside of them that is that hunter-gatherer protector somewhere inside,” he said. “And I believe that women still have a sense of, you know, creating family and nesting.”
Staff at work in the Boatsetter office, a boat-renting tech company in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on Aug. 7, 2019. Women are 26 percent more likely than men to seek out remote jobs, according to a 2021 study. (Gianrigo Marletta/AFP via Getty Images)
From that perspective, Niddel said it only stands to reason that women would feel more productive in a home environment. But in his case, he said he is more productive in an office setting—about 20 percent more productive, to be exact.
“I just quantified it using a series of time management platforms on my computer to see where my focus and attention was going,” he said.
While working from home proved “a distraction” for Niddel, at the office, he was able to focus on the tasks at hand. Meanwhile, he found that keeping his work and personal lives separate allowed for stronger relationships and productivity in both spheres.
Describing the pursuit of work-life balance as “a fool’s errand,” the executive said his goal is not to strike a balance between the two but rather to be fully attentive to each at the appropriate times.
“It’s to be 100 percent committed to where I’m at in the time and place that I’m there. And that requires an inherent lack of balance,” he said.
Biden Pledges New Military Deployments To Defend Israel In Netanyahu Call
President Biden in a Thursday phone call with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged that the United States would help defend Israel in the event of reprisal attacks from Iran in the wake of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh’s assassination in Tehran.
“The President reaffirmed his commitment to Israel’s security against all threats from Iran, including its proxy terrorist groups Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis,” the White House call readout stated.
Alarmingly, Biden also informed the Israeli prime minister that he is readying new deployments to the Middle East. This even as the US Commander-in-Chief was essentially forced to bow out his campaign for reelection due to health and mental acuity concerns, including speculation over dementia.
US Navy file image
And all of this is happening with basically zero Congressional input, meaning a somewhat senile and elderly President Biden could be taking the nation into yet another war and Middle East quagmire with no additional oversight or Constitutional checks and balances whatsoever (of course, this is the entire legacy of the GWOT as well).
“The President discussed efforts to support Israel’s defense against threats, including against ballistic missiles and drones, to include new defensive US military deployments,” the readout continued.
The White House confirmed that Vice President and presumed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris was on the call. Previously the administration and the Dems touted here supposed foreign policy experience and credentials.
On Wednesday, within hours after the Haniyeh assassination, Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was the first to announced that the Pentagon would play an active role in any potential Iranian attack on Israel:
“If Israel is attacked, we certainly will help defend Israel,” U.S. Defense Secretary, Lloyd Austin, told the media aboard the USNS Millinocket during a visit to the Philippines. “You saw us do that in April; you can expect to see us do that again,” he said.
The U.S., along with other Israeli allies like the U.K. and France, were involved in intercepting an unprecedented Iranian drone and missile barrage fired at Israel from Iran, Iraq, Syria and Yemen in mid-April. “We helped Israel take down nearly all of the incoming drones and missiles,” U.S. President Joe Biden said at the time.
Already according to The Washington Post the US has assembled 12 warships in Middle East regional waters prepared to respond to any attack on Israel. Currently the USS Theodore Roosevelt and six US Navy destroyers are in the Persian Gulf. An additional five Navy ships are already patrolling the Eastern Mediterranean, including two destroyers.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have said the military is on “high alert”, also as it monitors threats from Iranian-linked group Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Biden is weighing deploying more troops to the Middle East to fight a war on Israel’s behalf
This week also saw the assassination of Hezbollah’s military chief in Beirut, for which the group’s leader Hassan Nasrallah is vowing a severe response. However, neither side appears to have the appetite for a bigger all-out war at this point which would plunge all of Lebanon into greater suffering.
Kamala Harris’s sudden ascendancy within the Democrat Party, with nary a peep from other ambitious Democrats, spotlights the uncomfortable contradictions of identity politics and the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) movement.
Americans universally believe that everyone should have a fair shot at opportunities regardless of sex or race, which is why the kind of racism and sexism that was once so prevalent is so rare today.
Americans in 2024 embrace multiculturalism and diversity. This is the reason diversity and inclusion programs became ubiquitous. There’s virtue and no harm in gentle reminders to be sensitive and inclusive in light of our diversity. After all, our national motto is e pluribus unum.
Today’s Democratic Party, however, rejects this positive view of American progress. Democrats claim that America remains institutionally racist and paternalistic – a credo that provides the intellectual justification for identity politics and the grievance-based race-conscious demand for equity that animates the DEI movement.
Employers sensitive to the left’s narrative on race and sex and leery of claims made in litigation seek to prove and protect their own virtue by hiring on the basis of race or sex. But doing so not only disadvantages whites or males wholly blameless for the sins of the past, it also diminishes the minority hire whose qualifications are doubted by some of their peers – even when they are the best person for the job.
The disconnect between the DEI narrative and the modern cultural reality regarding racism and sexism creates the DEI trap: DEI injects racism and sexism into a culture that rejects racism and sexism, making things worse and hurting those it purports to help.
Joe Biden’s 2020 selection of Kamala Harris as his running mate and his appointment of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the U.S. Supreme Court only highlighted the DEI trap.
“I commit that if I’m elected president and I have an opportunity to appoint someone to the courts, I’ll appoint the first black woman to the court,” Biden vowed. “If I’m elected president, my cabinet and my administration will look like the country, and I commit that I will in fact pick a woman to be vice president. There are a number of women who are qualified to be president tomorrow. I would pick a woman to be my vice president.”
He didn’t say he would pick the best person – he said he would pick a woman and that there are a number of women who are “qualified” to be president.
Biden burnished his own “antiracist” credentials at the expense of his choice. He implicitly diminished her, whoever she might have been, in order to prove that he’s neither a racist nor a sexist.
Then, after securing the nomination, Biden chose Sen. Kamala Harris, whose own campaign for president was a surprising disappointment and unambiguous failure. A star in her home state of California, she turned out to be a bust as a national candidate.
Choosing her over Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar, both of whom performed better in the 2020 primaries, had the perverse effect of highlighting the importance of race and sex in Biden’s selection, further bolstering his image with those in his party who value DEI, at the expense of further diminishing Harris.
Now, the liberal legacy media would have us all make believe that none of this happened – and make believe that Kamala Harris is the next great Democratic Party leader, despite a lackluster record as vice president and without competing against other rising stars in her party.
Now, Harris further diminishes herself as she conducts her own search for a running mate: Democrats have quietly made it known that only white males are under consideration. Really? Kamala, who should not be called a DEI candidate, needs a white guy by her side to win? Is this really where Democrats want to be?
This is the reductio ad absurdum of DEI: Kamala Harris recreating the “glass ceiling” she “broke,” taking a bow to “white privilege” and “the patriarchy.” For what reason? Why isn’t Klobuchar under consideration? Or Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer? Don’t hold your breath in hope that the Democrat-friendly media will ask these obvious questions of their new darling. There are two ways out of the DEI Trap: Make believe it’s necessary because we are all irredeemably racist and sexist, or embrace the reality that we are not.
Democrats and their friends in the media are deep into make believe, seeking to make any criticism of DEI akin to cross-burning. On the other hand, all of us could embrace the reality of what America is today and consign racism and sexism to the dustbins of history. Everyone is different; we each bring different strengths and weaknesses to the table.
Joe Biden labeled Kamala on the basis of race and sex to make himself look good. But you can’t promote DEI without living with the implications of DEI in an open culture. So, Democrats, step out of the trap and march into the sunshine by ditching DEI.
This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.
Richard Porter is a lawyer in Chicago and National Committeeman to the RNC from Illinois.
Cocoa Prices Slide To Five-Month Low On Demand Destruction Fears From Hershey
US chocolate maker Hershey slashed its sales and earnings outlook on Thursday, citing higher cocoa prices that have resulted in demand destruction among cash-strapped consumers. This development spooked cocoa futures, sliding to a five-month low at the end of the week.
Cocoa futures in New York fell as much as 6% to $6,574 a ton, hitting their lowest level since early March following the dismal earnings report from Hershey. Prices, which peaked at $12,000 a ton in mid-April, have nearly halved and have been oscillating within a triangle formation ever since.
Bloomberg noted, “Market watchers are closely monitoring company earnings for signs that consumers are buying less as costs rise.” It added, “Many expect volatility to continue as uncertainty also lingers on the supply side.”
On Thursday, Hershey CEO Michele Buck told investors that current cocoa prices are not sustainable. She noted, “We believe that the future prices will be higher levels than we’ve seen before this kind of recent historic pricing cycle.”
Bloomberg cited a weather forecast from Maxar that shows improved crop conditions across West Africa over the weekend, especially for the Ivory Coast and Cameroon. This area is the mecca of cocoa farming. Despite improving crop conditions, many analysts are still concerned about dwindling global supplies.
“Even though the futures are down, wide swings are the norm these days because nobody in the market is sure about the future output,” said Michael McDougall, managing director at Paragon Global Markets.
McDougall said, “The market appears undecided as to which direction it wants to take.” And hence, for the triangle formation – and usually out of technical patterns – comes direction.
Buck also warned investors that “consumers are pulling back on discretionary spending.”
Despite these price swings, oil trader Pierre Andurand remains bullish on the view that the stocks-to-grinding ratio for the world at the end of the year will be at its lowest ever “and potentially run out of inventories late in the year.”
A California judge has thrown out the $4.7 billion verdict against the National Football League (NFL), which resulted from a lawsuit alleging antitrust violations in its “Sunday Ticket” programming.
The NFL logo is displayed on the turf at Sports Authority Field at Mile High in Denver, on Sept. 14, 2014. (Doug Pensinger/Getty Images)
In June, a Los Angeles federal jury ordered over $4.7 billion in damages be awarded to residential and commercial “Sunday Ticket” subscribers, which included restaurants and bars.
That verdict came after the jury found the NFL had violated antitrust laws by restricting the availability of “Sunday Ticket,” which allows viewers to watch out-of-market games but requires them to purchase access to a bundle of games to do so.
However, in an Aug. 1 ruling, Los Angeles-based U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez pointed to testimonies from two key witnesses for the subscribers in the June trial, noting they contained flawed methodologies that should have been excluded.
The jury’s damages verdict was otherwise unsupported by the evidence, he said.
“The Court agrees that Dr. Rascher’s and Dr. Zona’s testimonies based on their flawed methodologies should be excluded,” the judge wrote. “And because there was no other support for the class-wide injury and damages elements of Plaintiffs […] claims, judgment as a matter of law for the Defendants is appropriate.”
The jury’s damages awards “were not based on the ‘evidence and reasonable inferences’ but instead were more akin to ’guesswork or speculation’” he said.
“For the forgoing [sic] reasons, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ judgment as a matter of law as, without the testimonies of Dr. Rascher and Dr. Zona, no reasonable jury could have found class-wide injury or damages,” the judge concluded.
The NFL welcomed the ruling in a statement on X, saying it was “grateful” for the judge’s decision in the class action lawsuit.
“We believe that the NFL’s media distribution model provides our fans with an array of options to follow the game they love, including local broadcasts of every single game on free over-the-air television,” the statement said. “We thank Judge Gutierrez for his time and attention to this case and look forward to an exciting 2024 NFL season.”
Package Violates Antitrust Laws, Lawsuit Alleged
Restricting availability allowed DirecTV to charge artificially higher prices as its former sole distributor, a jury found in June.
The ruling stemmed from a class action lawsuit filed in 2015 by the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco alleging the league “conspired” with distributor DirecTV to raise prices for the “Sunday Ticket” package.
The lawsuit covered 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses who paid for the “Sunday Ticket” package from DirecTV, or its subsidiaries, at any time between 2011 and 2022.
DirecTV was not on trial on the matter.
Plaintiffs argued the package violated antitrust laws because it effectively “results in the blackout or unavailability of out-of-market games” unless consumers bought the “Sunday Ticket” package at inflated prices.
They further argued that the deal “results in substantial injury to competition.”
Defending their actions in the lawsuit, attorneys for the NFL had argued the “Sunday Ticket” program was exempt from antitrust scrutiny under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961.
That act allowed the NFL to sell its TV rights as a group, despite the league consisting of 32 team owners who collectively own all the big TV rights, attorneys said.
Following the June verdict, the league said it planned to appeal.
The Epoch Times has contacted attorneys for the plaintiffs for comment.
Biden Angry Over Being Kept In The Dark On Israel’s Operation To Kill Hamas Chief
Fresh reporting by Barak Ravid of Axios has revealed that President Biden held a “tough” phone call with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Thursdsay wherein the Israeli leader was urged to stop stoking tensions in the region which puts any potential hostage deal in extreme jeopardy.
Israel’s Wednesday assassination of Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh has put the whole region on a war footing. But Netanyahu and his government without doubt sees this as justified and necessary revenge for the Oct.7 terror attacks on southern Israel. Biden officials are said to be deeply frustrated at the ripple effects from both the Haniyeh killing and the assassination of Hezbollah’s top military commander in Beirut this week.
Via AFP
The White House, through Secretary Antony Blinken, has insisted that it was kept in the dark concerning the Israeli Mossad operation to kill Haniyeh. This after Iran issued a formal condemnation alleging Washington’s involvement in the plot.
The whole Axios report paints a picture of Biden being played by America’s closest Mideast ally, even after Washington has injected billions into Israel’s defense.
Biden and his officials “feel that Netanyahu kept Biden in the dark over his plans to carry out the assassinations, after leaving the impression last week that he was attentive to the president’s request to focus on getting a Gaza deal.”
Or to translate: the White House is belatedly catching up to what most of the world including the Israeli domestic opposition already understood very well – that Netanyahu has prioritized the military fight to eradicate Hamas over the return of the hostages.
According to Ravid’s reporting, “One U.S. official said Biden complained to Netanyahu that the two had just spoken last week in the Oval Office about securing the hostage deal, but instead Netanyahu went ahead with the assassination in Tehran.”
And apparently Biden got angry: “At the end of the meeting with Netanyahu in the Oval office last Thursday, Biden became emotional, raised his voice and told Netanyahu he needs to reach a Gaza deal as soon as possible, three Israeli officials with knowledge of the meeting told Axios,” per the report.
Yet once again this is a US administration pursuing two contradictory polices at once, allowing the US to get bogged down in escalation messes of Israel’s own making. On the one hand Biden is angrily demanding that Tel Aviv get serious about a ceasefire and hostage exchange, but on the other is vowing to defend Israel if it gets attacked by Iran.
In addition to a potential Iran conflict, it remains to be seen if and when PM Netanyahu orders an attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon amid the ratcheting daily tit-for-tat:
Israeli ministers authorized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defense chief Sunday to decide on the “manner and timing” of a response to a rocket strike in the Golan Heights that killed 12 children and teens, and which Israel and the United States blamed on Lebanese terror group Hezbollah.
According to The Washington Post the US has already assembled 12 warships in Middle East regional waters prepared to respond to any attack on Israel. Currently the USS Theodore Roosevelt and six US Navy destroyers are in the Persian Gulf. An additional five Navy ships are currently patrolling the Eastern Mediterranean, including two destroyers.
“shouldn’t count on the US to bail him out…”
“@POTUS told @IsraeliPM the US will help defeat an Iranian attack, but that he expects no more escalation from Israel & immed movement toward a hostage deal…and that if Netanyahu escalates again, he shouldn’t count on the US to bail him out.” @BarakRavidhttps://t.co/Luf2xbXDOu
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have said the military is on “high alert”, also as it monitors threats from Iranian-linked group Hezbollah in Lebanon. The US ships are on standby also in case there needs to be an emergency evacuation of US nationals from Lebanon, which has yet to be initiated at this point.
An inspector general’s report has accused the Biden-Harris Administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of covering up a significant report regarding the Secret Service’s response to the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th.
As reported by the Daily Caller, Inspector General Joseph Cuffari, who was originally appointed by former President Donald Trump, has launched two investigations into the Secret Service’s role during the peaceful protests on January 6th, 2021. As the Secret Service is under the jurisdiction of DHS, it is that agency which makes the final determination on which reports to release or withhold.
Jonathan Meyer, the current head lawyer for DHS, issued a statement denying Inspector General Cuffari’s claims, saying that DHS will only redact “security sensitive” information, but otherwise will not prevent Congress from seeing any report they want to see.
Speaking to Politico, an anonymous source from within DHS said claimed that it is the inspector general who “has exclusive authority to determine when to release a report to Congress.”
The report in question is titled “USSS Preparation for and Response to the Events of January 6, 2021.” Sources from within Congress told Real Clear Investigations that the report has been in Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ possession “since at least April.”
NEW: DHS IG confirms in report that the Biden/Mayorkas DHS significantly stonewalled his J6 investigation.
Texts deleted, cell phones of top officials presumably including Kim Cheatle were wiped.
Similarly to the security failures that led to the assassination attempt against President Trump on July 13th, it has been reported that people with weapons were spotted outside the White House on January 6th. In another security failure, the car in which then-Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) was traveling drove right by the alleged pipe bomb that was found outside the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters.
In July of 2022, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) sent a letter to the House and Senate Homeland Security Committees revealing that “many [Secret Service] text messages, from January 5 and 6, 2021, were erased as part of a device-replacement program.” Cuffari’s office had previously requested that those exact messages be handed over, only for them to be deleted.
Rep. Massie suggests the deletions–made between Feb and April 2021 under Sec Mayorkas–represented criminal obstruction of Congress since Democrats had sent preservation notices to all agencies prior to the alleged “device migration” process.
These revelations add to a growing sense of strong dissatisfaction with the Secret Service in the wake of the July 13th assassination attempt, with numerous security failures, lack of preparedness, and overall incompetence being blamed for the incident which cost one rallygoer his life and injured two others, with President Trump narrowly dodging a bullet himself. Director Kimberly Cheatle ultimately resigned after receiving bipartisan backlash for her role in the decline in the quality of the Secret Service.
Tonight? Iran State TV Suggests Attack On Israel Is Just ‘Hours’ Away
It is well after midnight in the Iranian capital of Tehran and there are two significant developments that suggest an Iranian and Hezbollah major strike against Israel could come at any moment.
First, Iranian state TV is strongly signaling that an attack could come in the overnight and early morning hours of Friday/Saturday – which we should note also marks Jewish shabbat in Israel.
A News Anchor with Iranian Channel 3: “In coming hours, the World will witness Extraordinary Scenes and Very Important Developments.” pic.twitter.com/r5vQsxcGo1
“In coming hours, the world will witness extraordinary scenes and very important developments,” an Iranian state news anchor reported said. Iran Internationaland other regional publications have highlighted the alarming clip as well.
While it is unlikely that a news anchor would be directly privy to such state secrets concerning the timing of a major strike on Israel from Iran, it does point to growing anticipation and belief among the Iranian population that retaliation is near.
It is also the case that following memorials and funerals in Tehran and Doha for slain Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, he has finally been laid to rest, and Tehran might now be readying its response given that foreign dignitaries have now safely exited the country.
At the same time Israeli media has reported on another big development related to Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. “Hezbollah is evacuating its senior personnel from the terror group’s strongholds in the southern suburbs of Beirut, in anticipation of potential Israeli strikes, Arabic media sources reported Friday,” writes Times of Israel.
“The Iran-backed group has also reportedly moved the military equipment it stored to areas further away from the Lebanese capital,” the report adds.
An anonymous US official has also been cited as saying, “Tehran will take time to decide on the type of response it launches, and it will take time to prepare the response.”
Via AFP
The prior April 13 ballistic missile and drone attack from Iran on Israel took several days to happen after Iran leaders first said they would hit back. But that was highly telegraphed to be limited in nature, to ensure a broader regional war would be avoided. Any new attack in revenge for killing Haniyeh on Iranian soil is likely to come quicker, and be less predictable – given Iran feels pressure to up the escalation in order to establish greater deterrence.
Iran has continued putting Israel on notice, even crafting messages concerning Lebanon, warning against “full-scale military aggression” against Hezbollah, saying it will lead to “obliterating war” – according to a fresh statement the Islamic republic’s United Nations mission. “All options, [including] the full involvement of all Resistance Fronts, are on the table,” the mission wrote in a post on X late in the day Friday.
Finally, there is another breaking development: US Defense Secretary orders navy cruisers, destroyers and an additional fighter squadron to the Middle East, Pentagon says according to Reuters. This includes the following new readiness posture:
USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group to replace the USS Theodore Roosevelt, currently in the Gulf of Oman
An additional fighter squadron to the Middle East
Additional ballistic missile defense-capable cruisers and destroyers to the Mediterranean and Gulf regions
Steps to ready deployment of additional land-based ballistic missile defenses
A Texas rancher has filed a lawsuit against President Joe Biden and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) accusing them of adopting policies that have resulted in “the biggest influx of illegal aliens into America in our history.”
President Joe Biden walks along the U.S.–Mexico border fence in El Paso, Texas, on Jan. 8, 2023. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on July 31 by the Immigration Reform Law Institute on behalf of the rancher, identified in the filing as Michael Vickers, along with Kinney County Sheriff Brad Coe and Atascosa County, Texas.
It also lists DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Acting Commissioner Troy Miller, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Patrick J. Lechleitner, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Ur M. Jaddou as defendants.
“With full awareness of the likely consequences, Defendants have adopted unlawful policies that, working in concert, have frustrated Congress’s purposes in the immigration laws,” the lawsuit states.
According to the legal filing, Vickers—who is also a veterinarian—lives with his wife on a 1000-acre ranch in Brooks County, Texas.
The ranch is located about 70 miles north of the international border with Mexico, according to the lawsuit.
“Because of Defendants’ policies, tens of thousands of illegal aliens have been released into the interior who thereafter travel cross country across the grasslands of Plaintiff’s ranch,” the filing reads.
Ranch Suffered ‘Thousands of Dollars in Damage’
In so doing, the illegal immigrants “routinely cause thousands of dollars in damage to fences or gates as they pass through the ranch,” and leave “tons of trash and litter,” the lawsuit states.
In some cases, Vickers has found plastic bags and trash inside the stomachs of his cows, according to the lawsuit.
At other times, his cattle have escaped through cut fences and gates torn down by illegal immigrants, the filing alleges.
As a result, since early 2021, Vickers has incurred “more than $50,000 in fence and gate damages alone” and has been forced to spend thousands of dollars to mitigate environmental damage, according to the lawsuit.
The legal filing also notes that Vickers and his wife have to keep dogs on their ranch for security.
The dogs have caught “hundreds of criminal trespasses,” many of whom are members of various gangs including the notoriously violent MS13, Tangoblast, Pistoleros, and the Mexican Mafia, among others, the lawsuit states.
Because of the presence of criminal groups facilitating illegal immigration, Vickers must always carry a pistol to feel safe, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit argues that the defendants’ actions amount to a violation of the take care clause of the U.S. Constitution that is “conceptually clear, historically unique, and actionable by those it especially harms,” the lawsuit states.
The take care clause requires the president to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”
The U.S. flag flies at half-staff at a port of entry at the U.S.–Mexico border in Brownsville, Texas, on Feb. 24, 2021. (John Moore/Getty Images)
Illegal Border Crossings Decline
“Congress has passed numerous laws aimed at achieving operational control of the border, defined as zero illegal entries. But Defendants’ policies, issued under the authority of these laws, are calculated to result in, and have resulted in, the current, massive flood of illegal entries by foreign nationals from around the world,” the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit asks the court to declare the federal government’s various border policies unconstitutional, including parole programs for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans; family reunification parole processes; and the memorandum terminating Migrant Protection Protocols, also referred to as the “Remain in Mexico” program.
The plaintiffs are also seeking unspecified costs and attorney’s fees.
Since taking office, Biden has sought to expand lawful pathways into the United States as part of efforts to slash illegal crossings while trying to address the root cause of what he says is a “broken” immigration system.
In June, his administration enacted restrictions on asylum claims at the southern border, which led to a drop in illegal border crossings.
In a July 31 statement, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) said the government’s policies have resulted in the “biggest influx of illegal aliens into America in our history.”
“This is no mere policy failure, or just a violation of statutes, but flagrant disobedience to the Constitution,” Dale L. Wilcox, IRLI’s executive director and general counsel, said. “We hope the court sees Biden’s war on the laws he is supposed to be enforcing as the constitutional offense it is, ends these policies, and grants an injunction.”
The Epoch Times contacted the White House for comment but didn’t receive a reply by publication time.
‘Accidentally Posted’ Campaign Ad Suggests Harris To Pick Shapiro For VP
A staffer for Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker ‘accidentally posted’ a video meant to be released next week which reveals Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro as Kamala Harris’ running mate.
Lmfao there is a 100% they were supposed to schedule this post for next week but some dumb staffer for the Mayor of Philadelphia accidentally just revealed that Kamala Harris is picking Shapiro as her VP https://t.co/vTyFHuUUnK
“Philly political sources have told me that a staffer connected with Mayor Cherelle Parker’s team accidentally posted the video today,” posted journalist Ernest Owens on X.
“The video was scheduled for Monday…after VP Kamala Harris was expected to announce her pick.”
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsOr, as Owens also suggested – this could be an ‘accident’ which serves as a trial balloon, and Harris could go in a different direction.
THINKING OUT LOUD: With all of these odd moves coming from Pennsylvania and Philly Democrats right now in pushing Kamala Harris to pick Josh Shapiro as her VP, I wonder if all this backfires and she goes in a completely different direction altogether.
Shapiro notably canceled fundraising events in New York this weekend and “is likely to meet with Vice President Kamala Harris as she works to pick a running mate,” reported WHTM earlier in the day.
Meanwhile, Shapiro has come under fire from women’s groups after his administration settled a sexual harassment claim against one of his longtime aides for $300,000.
In a statement headlined “Gov. Shapiro’s Failures Enabled Sexual Harassment,” the National Women’s Defense League said that the Harris vetting team should “consider the handling of past complaints of sexual harassment inside the Pennsylvania Governor’s office.” The group claims to be a nonpartisan organization dedicated to preventing sexual harassment. -Daily Beast
We’re guessing said women’s groups will promptly fade into the bushes.
Illinois progressives are all over the media congratulating themselves on passage of The Illinois Worker Freedom of Speech Act, signed into law by Gov. JB Pritzker on Wednesday. It passed both houses in the General Assembly along strict party lines, with Republicans opposed.
It has nothing to do with worker freedom of speech, creates a nightmare for employers and is yet another measure by the state that flagrantly ignores the First Amendment’s right to free speech.
Under the Act, most every employer in the state faces mandatory fines of $1,000 per employee plus civil lawsuits if they discuss “religious or political matters” at meetings where worker attendance is mandatory.
Think about that – no discussions allowed on political matters.
So, say you work for a company that makes a renewable energy product of some kind. Your employer would be fined for a meeting discussing the importance of government subsidies for your product and your job . Likewise, a company making conventional gasoline powered vehicles could not tell its employees about the impact of government efforts to replace them with electric vehicle makers.
The list of similar examples is endless. Most every company today has matters pending in government that could impact the company, its capacity to hire people, how much it can afford to pay them and even matters outside of the company’s business that may be important to workers. Employers obviously should have the right to communicate their views on that and hope their workers will support them, and they do under the First Amendment.
Some companies are particularly political. Take a look, for example, at some of Google’s leaked “all hands meetings.” Many brim with discussion of political matters. Here’s a clip from one where Google execs melted down, some choking up, while discussing Donald Trump’s election and how they should counteract it.
I don’t know whether attendance was required at those meetings, but if it was and such a meeting was in Illinois, the company would be fined a thousand bucks under the Act for every Illinois employee there. That’s wrong. Giggle if you want but they should be free to discuss those things as they choose.
The list of exemptions from the Act is very narrow. Even nonprofit 501(c)(3) companies are covered. Most think tanks and many political policy operations on the left and right are 501(c)(3)s, including Wirepoints. We and others like us now can’t discuss government matters at our internal meetings?
Good luck trying to force us to comply. The Act is as brazen a First Amendment violation as you will find. At least six other states have passed or are considering similar legislation, called “captive audience bans,” and they are already being challenged in court on First Amendment grounds.
The main purpose of the Act was to ban meetings where management discourages union activity. The Act does that, but to say it’s overbroad would be a monumental understatement. Even that purpose is legally questionable. Other captive audience bans are being challenged on the grounds that the field is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, making the state laws impermissible.
Illinois has now firmly established itself as the state most hostile to freedom of speech. A list of examples is below.
In one case last year, the state’s First Amendment violation was so extreme that a federal judge ridiculed it as “stupid” as well as unconstitutional. That forced Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul to give up trying to defend the law at issue.
Let’s hope this new law gets taken to court fast. It, too, is stupid as well as unconstitutional.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here:
Cookie Policy
Saving...
