Today’s News 3rd May 2023

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“There are instruments so dangerous to the rights of the nation and which place them so totally at the mercy of their governors that those governors, whether legislative or executive, should be restrained from keeping such instruments on foot but in well-defined cases. Such an instrument is a standing army.”

– Thomas Jefferson, 1789

What does it say about the state of our freedoms that there are now more pencil-pushing, bureaucratic (non-military) government agents armed with weapons than U.S. Marines?

Among the agencies being supplied with night-vision equipment, body armor, hollow-point bullets, shotguns, drones, assault rifles and LP gas cannons are the IRS, Smithsonian, U.S. Mint, Health and Human Services, FDA, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Education Department, Energy Department, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and an assortment of public universities.

Add in the Biden Administration’s plans to swell the ranks of the IRS by 87,000 new employees (some of whom will be authorized to use deadly force) and grow the nation’s police forces by 100,000 more cops, and you’ve got a nation in the throes of martial law.

We’re being frog-marched into tyranny at the end of a loaded gun.

Make that hundreds of thousands of loaded guns.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the number of federal agents armed with guns, ammunition and military-style equipment, authorized to make arrests, and trained in military tactics has nearly tripled over the past several decades.

As Adam Andrzejewski writes for Forbes, “the federal government has become one never-ending gun show.”

While Americans have to jump through an increasing number of hoops in order to own a gun, federal agencies have been placing orders for hundreds of millions of rounds of hollow point bullets and military gear.

For example, the IRS has stockpiled 4,500 guns and five million rounds of ammunition in recent years, including 621 shotguns, 539 long-barrel rifles and 15 submachine guns.

The Veterans Administration purchased 11 million rounds of ammunition (equivalent to 2,800 rounds for each of their officers), along with camouflage uniforms, riot helmets and shields, specialized image enhancement devices and tactical lighting.

The Department of Health and Human Services acquired 4 million rounds of ammunition, in addition to 1,300 guns, including five submachine guns and 189 automatic firearms for its Office of Inspector General.

According to an in-depth report on “The Militarization of the U.S. Executive Agencies,” the Social Security Administration secured 800,000 rounds of ammunition for their special agents, as well as armor and guns.

The Environmental Protection Agency owns 600 guns. The Smithsonian now employs 620-armed “special agents.”

Even agencies such as Amtrak and NASA have their own SWAT teams.

Ask yourselves: why are government agencies being turned into military outposts?

What’s with the buildup of SWAT teams within non-security-related federal agencies? Even the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department have their own SWAT teams. Most of those officers are under the command of either the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Justice.

Why does the Department of Agriculture need .40 caliber semiautomatic submachine guns and hollow point bullets? For that matter, why do its agents need ballistic vests and body armor?

For that matter, why do IRS agents need AR-15 rifles?

Why do local police need armored personnel carriers with gun ports, compact submachine guns with 30-round magazines, precision battlefield sniper rifles, and military-grade assault-style rifles and carbines?

Why is the federal government distributing obscene amounts of military equipment, weapons and ammunition to police departments around the country?

Why is the military partnering with local police to conduct training drills around the country? And what exactly are they training for? The public has been disallowed from obtaining any information about the purpose of these realistic urban training drills, other than that they might be loud and to not be alarmed.

We should be alarmed.

As James Madison warned, “We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.”

Unfortunately, we’re long past the first experiment on our freedoms, and merely taking alarm over this build-up of military might will no longer suffice.

Nothing about this de facto army of bureaucratic, administrative, non-military, paper-pushing, non-traditional law enforcement agencies is necessary for national security.

Moreover, while these weaponized, militarized, civilian forces which are armed with military-style guns, ammunition and equipment; trained in military tactics; and authorized to make arrests and use deadly force—may look and act like the military, they are not the military.

Rather, they are foot soldiers of the police state’s standing army, and they are growing in number at an alarming rate.

This standing army—a.k.a. a national police force—vested with the power to completely disregard the Constitution and rule by force is exactly what America’s founders feared, and its danger cannot be overstated or ignored.

This is exactly what martial law looks like—when a government disregards constitutional freedoms and imposes its will through military force, only this is martial law without any government body having to declare it: Battlefield tactics. Militarized police. Riot and camouflage gear. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Drones. Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force. Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Concussion grenades. Intimidation tactics. Brute force. Laws conveniently discarded when it suits the government’s purpose.

The militarization of America’s police forces in recent decades, which has gone hand in hand with the militarization of America’s bureaucratic agencies, has merely sped up the timeline by which the nation is transformed into an authoritarian regime.

Now we find ourselves struggling to retain some semblance of freedom in the face of administrative, police and law enforcement agencies that look and act like the military with little to no regard for the Fourth Amendment, laws such as the NDAA that allow the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens, and military drills that acclimate the American people to the sight of armored tanks in the streets, military encampments in cities, and combat aircraft patrolling overhead.

This quasi-state of martial law has been helped along by government policies and court rulings that have made it easier for the police to shoot unarmed citizens, for law enforcement agencies to seize cash and other valuable private property under the guise of asset forfeiture, for military weapons and tactics to be deployed on American soil, for government agencies to carry out round-the-clock surveillance, for legislatures to render otherwise lawful activities as extremist if they appear to be anti-government, for profit-driven private prisons to lock up greater numbers of Americans, for homes to be raided and searched under the pretext of national security, for American citizens to be labeled terrorists and stripped of their rights merely on the say-so of a government bureaucrat, and for pre-crime tactics to be adopted nationwide that strip Americans of the right to be assumed innocent until proven guilty and creates a suspect society in which we are all guilty until proven otherwise.

Don’t delude yourself into believing that this thinly-veiled exercise in martial law is anything other than an attempt to bulldoze what remains of the Constitution and reinforce the iron-fisted rule of the police state.

This is no longer about partisan politics or civil unrest or even authoritarian impulses.

This is a turning point.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we are sliding fast down a slippery slope to a Constitution-free America.

If we are to have any hope of salvaging what’s left of our battered freedoms, we’d do well to start by disarming the IRS and the rest of the federal and state bureaucratic agencies, de-militarizing domestic police forces, and dismantling the police state’s standing army.

A team of artificial intelligence engineers equipped a Boston Dynamics robot dog with OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Text-to-Speech voice, creating what could be a real-life Skynet-like robot. 

In a recent video posted to Twitter, machine learning engineer Santiago Valdarrama showed how the robo-dog can interact with humans via a voice interface faster than control panels and reports.

“These robots run automated missions every day,” Valdarrama said in a Twitter thread, noting that each mission could be “miles-long, hard-to-understand configuration files” and “only technical people can handle them.” When paired with ChatGPT and Google’s Text-to-Speech voice, a user can ask simple questions to the robot about “configuration files and the mission results.” 

“We can now ask the robots about past and future missions and get an answer in real time. ChatGPT interprets the question, parses the files, and formulates the answer,” he said. 

The ChatGPT brain means anyone can talk to the robo-dog. 

We integrated ChatGPT with our robots.

We had a ton of fun building this!

Read on for the details: pic.twitter.com/DRC2AOF0eU

— Santiago (@svpino) April 25, 2023

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

In the short term, integrating a ChatGPT brain into robots may appear harmless. However, there’s a dark risk to artificial intelligence, giving rise to intelligent robots in a Skynet-like scenario. 

Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

Last September– a bit more than seven months ago– my father died. Technically he was my step-father, but he was every bit my dad, and I loved him. The loss was hard.

We didn’t do a memorial service right away, though. My mother understandably just wasn’t in the right frame of mind. So we waited… until last weekend, and held the memorial service at the George Bush Presidential Center at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

It was a good thing my mother booked such a large venue; the memorial service was incredibly well attended, and nearly 500 people came to pay their respects.

After the service was over, I wanted to get my mind off the day’s events, so some friends and I popped upstairs to check out the Bush presidential museum… which was currently presenting an exhibit aptly named “Freedom Matters”.

I couldn’t agree more.

Access to the museum, however, is tightly controlled. And you can only enter after going through an airport-style security checkpoint. You know the drill– empty your pockets, take off your clothes, and submit to an angry authority who treats you like you’ve just been booked at the county jail.

My friend Jim was lucky enough to receive extra screening; after setting off the metal detector, he was pulled aside and assumed the “I surrender” pose while gruff security personnel waved a magnetic wand near his genitals.

Curiously the security wand kept going off, prompting the increasingly irate guard to demand “what is this? What’s in here?”

I couldn’t help myself and shouted, “It’s his dignity!” Apparently Jim forgot to remove it before going through security.

The irony seemed to be lost on the guards, whose brusque treatment of museum visitors was taking place directly in front of an exhibit literally called “Freedom Matters”.

At the front of the exhibit was a large banner– I snapped a photo– defining freedom, according to a former Soviet dissident:

“Can a person walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm? If he can, then that person is living in a free society. If not, it’s a fear society.”

I thought about this quote for a few moments, glanced back at the security guards wanding another unlucky visitor, and quickly realized– based on this definition– that the US is quickly becoming a fear society.

You can no longer freely express views without fear of reprisal anymore– especially if those views conflict with the radical woke left.

Personal opinions can easily be viewed as hate speech, misinformation, violence, etc. And we’ve all seen too many instances of people’s lives being ruined by cancel culture. But I’ll come back to this.

After wandering around the museum for a while and enjoying some jokes with my friends, I finally returned home to the AirBnb I’m renting with my family, very close to where I grew up in the Dallas area.

It’s the quintessential American suburb: clean, quiet, safe, and stable. The house where I’m staying is at the end of a picturesque tree-lined cul-de-sac, and on the other end of the street is a large park where small children were playing organized sports in the afternoon.

Parents chatted with each other on the playground while their kids bounced around the jungle gym. Retirees were out walking their dogs. Even the postman drove by and greeted some of the residents by name. Everyone was happy… and it was basically perfect.

This isn’t the famous ‘American Dream’. It’s not a dream. This is real life as it’s supposed to be… the pinnacle of civilization, the product of more than two centuries of hard work and responsibility. It is the American Reality.

That’s why it’s so frustrating to watch the people in charge dismantle it. Brick by brick, neighborhood by neighborhood, they’ve been chipping away at this vast, enviable middle class prosperity, ripping it away in front of our very eyes.

They’ve encouraged “mostly peaceful” violence and caused an alarming rise in crime as a result of their soft “criminal first” policies.

They’ve sent the cost of living to record highs, and yet have no understanding how their spending practices could have possibly contributed to inflation. They’ve expanded the national debt to a record high $31.5 trillion and plan to keep overspending tax revenue by trillions of dollars every year.

They’ve worked hard to re-engineer childhood education (and have succeeded in many school districts). Biology has been rewritten to conform to new woke ethics. Math is racist. And parents who complain about the decline in educational standards are threatened by the federal government.

The most comical part of this suffering is the abject political dysfunction that’s on display every single day of our lives.

Consider that, amid deadly and toxic train derailments, airplanes around the country that have been grounded, total chaos at the national seaports, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s priority right now is ensuring that Ford and General Motors use female crash test dummies.

It’s so ridiculous it almost sounds made up. And yet it’s completely true.

Or consider that the Treasury Department is now weeks away from defaulting on the national debt, once again, having reached its statutory debt limit. Congress is required to pass a law to raise the debt ceiling.

Yet the President of the United States refuses to negotiate a single penny in spending cuts in order to reach a compromise with the House of Representatives. Not a penny.

Simultaneously the guy was shown on video recently unable to remember how many grandchildren he has, or even the fact that he had recently returned from a trip to Ireland.

These examples of extreme incompetence never end. It’s so aggravating. Even terrifying.

That’s why I write so much about taking simple, sensible steps to reclaim control.

For example, if you think Pete Buttigieg is doing a great job as Transportation Secretary, then by all means, please continue to overpay your taxes and give him as much of your money as possible.

If, on the other hand, you recognize that he is demonstrably incompetent, completely unqualified to be Transportation Secretary, and was only given the position because he checks a diversity box (and agreed to endorse candidate Biden in 2020) then you might want to consider the multitude of completely legal ways to reduce your tax bill… and stop giving Pete so much money to waste.

It’s perfectly normal to feel angry or disgusted with America’s terrible leadership. But it’s a lot more effective to channel some of that energy into reducing their impact on your life.

There absolutely are ways to reduce your tax bill, to mitigate the effects of inflation, to still make phenomenal investments, to fund your retirement, and to ensure that you’re in a position of strength no matter how destructive they become.

There’s no downside in doing this. If this decline reverses and America starts to dig its way out of this hole, you won’t be worse off for putting yourself in a stronger position.

And that is actually still a possibility. This country has so much potential upside from its entrepreneurial brilliance, talented workforce, immense resource wealth, and more. That’s why it’s so bewildering to see how badly the people in charge are screwing it up.

At the moment, though, it’s difficult to see any real change on the horizon. As President Biden said in his re-election announcement, he wants to “finish the job”. By that I presume he means completely destroying the country.

This is nothing new; history is full of superpowers who eradicate themselves from within. They lay waste to the very ideals that made them strong and prosperous to begin with, they create divisions and disunity, and they subject themselves to horrendous, weak leadership.

But it’s one thing to understand the decline of empires and civilizations through the lens of history. It’s quite another to watch it happen from your living room window.

*  *  *

If you can see what is happening, and where this is all going, you understand why it is so important to have a Plan B. That’s why we published our 31-page, fully updated Perfect Plan B Guide, which you can download here.

The only reason to vote for Biden?  He’s not Trump.  This is the sentiment repeated across America as millions of Democrats say they would rather opt out of the Biden train and find a different candidate by 2024.  Of course, this was the same view many leftists vocalized in 2020, but they voted for him anyway.  

Whether or not you believe that federal elections matter in the slightest, it’s important to point out that Biden is perhaps one of the least liked presidents in recent memory, and one that sparks zero enthusiasm from his political base.  Despite an increasing woke fanaticism among leftists in terms of ideology and Biden doing everything in his power to push their agenda, a majority of Democrat voters (52%) still do not want Biden to run for office again next year.

It appears that the embarrassment is becoming too much for them…

Voters seem to be excited about Joe Biden running again

pic.twitter.com/idqVOPm6S9

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 2, 2023

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

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has warned that the employment landscape will change drastically over the next five years amid increasingly widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI), the transition to green energy, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards, and slower economic growth.

According to WEF’s “The Future of Jobs Report 2023,” roughly 23 percent of jobs are expected to change by 2027, with around 69 million new jobs to be created and 83 million eliminated, resulting in a decrease of 14 million jobs, or 2 percent of current employment.

The report (pdf) surveyed 803 companies collectively employing more than 11.3 million workers in 27 industry clusters and 45 economies from across the globe, on macro and technology trends and their impact on jobs and skills, as well as the “workforce transformation strategies” that businesses plan to implement between now and 2027.

It found that clerical or secretarial roles, including bank tellers, cashiers and ticket clerks, data entry clerks, postal service clerks, and administrative and executive secretaries will likely see the fastest decline in roles over the next five years relative to their size today, with roughly 26 million fewer jobs by 2027.

Meanwhile, certain tech jobs, including those focused on AI and machine learning, sustainability specialists, business intelligence analysts, information security specialists, and fintech engineers, are expected to see an increase in employment.

Overall, the biggest job growth will likely be seen across the fields of education (10 percent, leading to 3 million additional jobs), agriculture (30 percent, or 3 million additional jobs), and digital commerce and trade (4 million additional jobs), according to the report.

Renewable Energy, ESG Pushing Job Changes

The WEF cites trends such as the transition to renewable energy, ESG standards—which are used by companies in the investment decision-making process to measure sustainable and ethical impacts—advancing technology adoption, and localization of supply chains as the “leading drivers of job growth,” while economic challenges such as ongoing high inflation, slower economic growth, and supply shortages pose “the greatest threat” to job creation.

“The largest job creation and destruction effects come from environmental, technology, and economic trends. Among the macro trends listed, businesses predict the strongest net job-creation effect to be driven by investments that facilitate the green transition of businesses, the broader application of ESG standards, and supply chains becoming more localized, albeit with job growth offset by partial job displacement in each case,” the report states.

U.S. Republican lawmakers have repeatedly warned that companies embracing ESG standards risk slashing investment returns and hampering economic growth, which could have ripple effects across the economy.

“Climate change adaptation and the demographic dividend in developing and emerging economies also rate high as net job creators,” the WEF report adds. “Technological advancement through increased adoption of new and frontier technologies and increased digital access are expected to drive job growth in more than half of surveyed companies, offset by expected job displacement in one-fifth of companies,” it continues.

The report also cites the increasing cost of living for consumers as another factor that will likely pose the greatest threat to the job market in the next five years and will significantly displace jobs.

Firms ‘Need to Be Ready for the Disruptions Ahead’

Elsewhere, the WEF found that the ongoing impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, increased geopolitical divisions, and demographic dividends in developing and emerging economies ranked lower as drivers of business evolution by respondents.

The latest report comes shortly after Goldman Sachs economists forecast two-thirds of occupations across America could be partially automated by AI, which has exploded in use in recent years, despite concerns over its potential risks to society and humanity.

However, economists also noted that its use in both business and society could lead to an almost $7 trillion increase in global GDP owing to increased productivity and manufacturing, among other factors.

According to the WEF report, nearly 75 percent of companies surveyed plan to adopt AI, big data, and cloud computing within the next five years, which around 50 percent of firms believe will create job growth and 25 percent expect will lead to job losses.

Elsewhere, the report found that organizations estimate roughly 34 percent of all business-related tasks are currently performed by machines, with the remaining 66 percent performed by humans.

“The latest findings in the Future of Jobs Report renew calls for action from all labor market stakeholders,” said Sander van ‘t Noordende, CEO of the human resource consulting firm, Randstad.

“Acceleration in digitalization, AI, and automation are creating tremendous opportunities for the global workforce, but employers, governments, and other organizations need to be ready for the disruptions ahead. By collectively offering greater skilling resources, more efficiently connecting talent to jobs, and advocating for a well-regulated labor market, we can protect and prepare workers for a more specialized and equitable future of work,” he added.

More rocket fire between Israel and the Gaza strip erupted Tuesday, following news of the death of Khader Adnan Mohammad Musa, a 45-year-old Palestinian prisoner who was a leader of the Islamic Jihad. He died after an 86-day hunger strike in Israeli jails, and is said to be the first Palestinian prisoner to die of a long term hunger strike.

At least three on the Israeli side have been injured after an initial barrage of 22 rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip, setting off air raid sirens across southern Israel. Four of the projectiles were reported intercepted by anti-air defense systems. Israel has responded with tank fire, and further escalation in strikes on the strip is likely. Later into the evening, Israeli officials and media tallied over 30 rockets fired. Gaza militants are vowing further retaliation for their “martyr”. 

The “Joint Command of Resistance Groups”, which makes up multiple militant factions operating in Gaza, has vowed more action to come, stating that the first wave of rockets was a “a first response”.

Protests have broken out in the West Bank, including in the large town of Ramallah, putting already high tensions with Israeli military and police further on edge.

Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh called the death of Khader Adnan a “deliberate assassination”. He had been arrested by Israeli forces in the West Bank for alleged security-related crimes. 

Shtayyeh blamed Israel for his death “by rejecting his request for his release, neglecting him medically and keeping him in his cell, despite the seriousness of his health condition,” according to a statement.

Footage shows a rocket impact in Sderot pic.twitter.com/wXpBO9K3xw

— Emanuel (Mannie) Fabian (@manniefabian) May 2, 2023

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

Based on the latest description of the deteriorating situation in The Associated Press, things are teetering on the brink of a possible new outbreak of large-scale clashes between Palestinians and Israeli authorities, including in prisons where thousands of Palestinians are held, sometimes without charges:

Palestinians called for a general strike in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and protesters rushed to Israeli military checkpoints in the occupied territory, slinging stones at Israeli soldiers. Israeli forces fired tear gas and rubber bullets at crowds gathered at the northern entrance to the West Bank city of Ramallah. Early Tuesday, Palestinian militants in Gaza fired another volley of rockets that landed in empty fields in Israel. Islamic Jihad said that its “fight continues and will not stop.”

Palestinian prisoners are overseen by Cabinet minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, an ultra-nationalist politician who has tightened restrictions on the Palestinian inmates, including shortening their shower time and closing prison bakeries.

Ben-Gvir said Tuesday that prison officials must exhibit “zero-tolerance toward hunger strikes and unrest in security prisons” and ordered prisoners be confined to their cells.

Footage shows the rocket fire from the Gaza Strip on southern Israelpic.twitter.com/6xxdHSnUwm

— Emanuel (Mannie) Fabian (@manniefabian) May 2, 2023

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

International reports say Adnan had been arrested 12 times and spent a total of eight years in Israeli prisons, with most of that time having been spent in administrative detention, meaning he was held without trial.

Israel has defended the controversial practice of raiding West Bank homes and then holding people without trial as necessary to root out dangerous militants who pose a threat to Israeli security.

Authored by Michael Clements via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden may have paid the mother of his 4-year-old daughter up to $750,000 in child support since March 2020, said one of his attorneys at a hearing.

Hunter Biden appeared in Independence County Circuit Court in Batesville, Arkansas, on May 1 as ordered by the judge overseeing the child support dispute between the president’s 53-year-old son and Lunden Roberts. Roberts is the Arkansas woman who, according to court filings, had a relationship with Hunter and gave birth to a baby girl in August 2018. She sued for support in 2019.

At first Hunter Biden denied that the child was his, but a DNA test confirmed he is the father.

On March 12, 2020, he and Roberts agreed to an undisclosed amount in monthly child support to begin on April 1, 2020. Terms of the agreement are sealed because they contain sensitive personal information, including the amount of monthly support and each party’s source of income.

Hunter Biden asked the court to review the child support arrangement the following September because his financial status had changed.

Lawyer Reveals Monthly Payment

During a discussion of the discovery process, Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe David Lowell, said his client has been paying $20,000 monthly, more than $700,000 since the support order was signed.

Judge Holly Meyer clarified during the May 1 hearing that any information discussed in open court was a matter of public record.

Lowell’s remarks came after he and attorney Brent Langdon of Dallas, Texas, complained that news outlets had published information from sealed court files. He said news reports referenced tax files, information on Hunter Biden’s cars, and other things that had been redacted.

“How is it that things that are redacted in the file are released to the Daily Mail? There are matters that are being redacted that are getting out to the daily news,” Langdon said.

Meyer said that, without proof someone was illegally releasing information, there was little she could do. Journalists and the public often speculate on matters and may come close to guessing what is in a sealed file, she added.

‘Can’t Gag the World’

“If the press comes up with those things, I can’t control that. I can’t gag the world,” Meyer said.

The judge ordered Hunter Biden to provide information on his income from his artwork, investments, employment, gifts from friends, and other sources. She also ordered Roberts to provide information on the value of her property and income while working with her father’s business.

The dispute until now has been mostly a battle of lawyers, with neither of the litigants appearing in court. Hunter Biden’s lawyers have filed at least five motions to delay the process including a last-minute attempt to delay the May 1, 2023 hearing.

Meyer denied that motion.

“All parties are to physically appear for all future court hearings in this matter. The parties will no longer have their appearances excused,” Meyer wrote in her order.

Motions Must Be Filed Correctly

Roberts’ lawyers have asked the court to find Hunter Biden in contempt and jail him for refusing to comply with previous orders, and provide requested discovery information.

Meyer wrote that those matters would be dealt with once everyone was in the courtroom.

In subsequent filings, Roberts’ attorneys complained that the Biden team was dragging its feet in the discovery process. They claim Hunter Biden is living a “lavish lifestyle.”

During the May 1 hearing, Meyer said the contempt request needed to be appropriately filed. She added that she couldn’t rule on the amount of child support because neither side provided enough information in the discovery process to move ahead.

The judge went through a to-do list so each side knew what they were expected to do in order to proceed.

One issue has been the role Hunter Biden’s laptop would play in the process. Roberts’ lawyers reportedly believe the laptop contains important financial information. The Biden lawyers have refused even to acknowledge that the computer belongs to their client. Meyer said all these issues would be addressed as long as each side does what it needs to do to advance the case.

Warning the lawyers that her patience had worn thin, Meyer said she would hold them to the agreed-to schedule.

“I expect this case to move. I will ride herd on you, gentlemen.”

The billionaire head of Vornado Realty Trust is facing an uncertain future regarding his multi-billion dollar investment plan to build “gleaming office skyscrapers around Manhattan’s universally hated Penn Station,” according to Bloomberg. The uncertainty comes as the regional banking crisis has sparked a painful credit crunch already battering commercial real estate. 

“We’re going to take a breath,” stated Chief Executive Steven Roth during Vornado’s quarterly earnings call on Tuesday. He maintained the plan to continue investing upwards of $2 billion in redeveloping over 5 million square feet in what he calls “Penn District.” Vornado’s redevelopment plan to build new office buildings and refurbish older ones is a bet to capitalize off the modernization of Penn Station. 

Roth has spent the last two decades acquiring plots of land around the train station in Manhattan. The billionaire saw the potential for an area of the city to flourish once redevelopment projects were completed, but have since been overshadowed by high office vacancy rates in a post-Covid environment, along with a regional banking crisis that has spread to commercial real estate. 

Shares of his Vornado plunged to a 27-year low last week when the tradeable REIT of office, retail, and residential buildings surprised investors with an announcement about delaying its dividend to preserve cash. 

We have repeatedly shown readers big banks such as JPM, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs have all joined our CRE gloom parade as rumblings in the office space market emerge. 

It is an unfavorable time for office property owners, particularly for those like Roth’s company, which is constructing office skyscrapers. Amid all of the gathering storm clouds in the office space market, a critical question arises if the real estate mogul can still deliver on the Penn District project. 

“Roth has missed the bus, and the bus isn’t coming back until 2030 or beyond,” said Mitchell Moss, a professor of urban policy at New York University, referring to the downturn in the CRE space, primarily office buildings. 

It was only last year when Roth told analysts on an earnings call he was “doubly and triply excited about the Penn District.” But that excitement has evaporated in a rising interest rate environment and tightening credit conditions over the past year. Roth said earlier this year that new construction is “almost impossible” because of tight lending. 

Meanwhile, office space vacancy rates in New York remain at alarming highs, while companies are reducing headcount and footprint to save on costs, subsequently reducing their demand for office space. 

Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Jeffrey Langbaum said Vornado’s Penn District buildings will need to “sustain leasing demand by creating space that appeals to tenants looking to migrate to newer, higher-quality properties.” 

According to Alexander Goldfarb, an analyst at Piper Sandler, Vornado faces a series of challenges, including high debt costs and low rent prospects that could present challenges in the completion of Penn District.  

Here’s an idea: Vornado might want to consider constructing apartment buildings instead of office space amid the CRE downturn. 

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Cities governed by Democrat mayors have seen the largest increases in homicide rates over the past year as well as registered the highest homicide rate per capita in Q1 out of 45 cities, according to a new report.

Homicide rates in 45 of the most populated American cities rose by approximately 10 percent on average between Q1, 2021 and Q1, 2023, and continue to rise, according to an April 26 report by WalletHub. Blue cities were found to have a higher increase in homicide rates compared to red cities. The report designated a city as red or blue based on the mayor’s political affiliation.

The top five cities that saw the greatest increase in per capita homicide are Richmond, Virginia; Memphis, Tennessee; Durham, North Carolina; Garland, Texas; and Washington, D.C.

Except for Garland, where Mayor Scott LeMay is a Republican, the remaining four cities have mayors who are affiliated with the Democratic Party.

The highest homicide rate per capita in the first quarter of 2023 was in Memphis at 14.19 per 100,000 residents. New Orleans, Louisiana, came in second at 12.76, followed by Baltimore, Maryland, with 10.47, St. Louis, Missouri, with 9.91, and Detroit, Michigan, with 8.52.

Excluding St. Louis, the other four cities have mayors affiliated with the Democratic Party. The mayor of St. Louis, Tishaura Jones, was a former Democrat member of the Missouri House of Representatives.

Political Reason Behind Spiking Homicides

Gregg W. Etter, a professor at the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Central Missouri, blamed the tendency of politicians to seek “simplistic, one-size-fits-all solutions to complex problems” as a reason behind the spike in homicides across the nation.

Politicians offer such solutions to gain favor with political interest groups during elections, he pointed out. For instance, when faced with the issue of police using force in isolated instances, such politicians might support defunding the police rather than dealing with problematic officers.

This ends up resulting in a less-effective police force, higher response times, lower morale among officers, and an “increasing unwillingness” to engage in proactive policing, he said.

“This has left many police forces in a strictly reactive mode, only responding to crimes that have already occurred. In addition, no-cash bail rulings have put many dangerous criminals back onto the streets even though they are arrested several times for violent crimes,” Etter said.

“In cities where these two things are happening, the crime rate has spiked. You have less police officers and more dangerous criminals at large.”

Countering the rising homicide trend will require boosting police funding and improved police training to avoid some of the problems resulting from the use of force, he added.

Read more here…

Authored by Dorothy Li via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Fox News executives miscalculated in their sudden decision to oust the network’s most popular prime-time host, Tucker Carlson, according to Victor Davis Hanson, a historian and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

“One of the messages the Murdochs are not quite understanding [is] that when you take away somebody who had a greater potential elsewhere and was a precious asset that anchored your whole evening lineup, and you fired him in a fit of pique, or anger, without thinking it through, you’ve gotta be very careful, because you’re not gonna be able to replace a guy like that,” Victor Davis Hanson told The Telegraph on April 29.

A week after Carlson’s abrupt exit, why the popular prime-time host left the network remains a mystery.

A brief statement issued by Fox News said only that the two “have agreed to part ways” and “We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor.”

Carson’s last broadcast was on April 21. During his final on-air segment, Carlson told his audience that he would be back on Monday.

While the network has parted with several popular news personalities like Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly, the case for Carson was different, according to Hanson.

“Before they fired him, they thought ‘Fox is bigger than any one anchor: We fired Bill O’Reilly. And guess what? Tucker showed up, and he has the same size of audience or bigger,’” he said. “We can do that because people tune into us because [of] the brand.

“But I don’t think they understand it’s not quite like that. It’s cumulative: It’s like a cut, a cut, a cut, and each one magnifies the prior one. So when you get rid of Bill O’Reilly, and you get rid of Megyn Kelly … you go up and down, and Newsmax and competitors creep in and grab your audience.

“I don’t think that there was a serious cause of firing him other than an emotional one,” Hanson said.

On April 26, Carlson broke the silence with a video posted on Twitter that drew some 23 million views, exceeding the number of viewers of his old prime-time show on the cable news channel.

Hanson suggested Carlson doesn’t really need to go on television. Instead, the media figure, like his former colleague Megyn Kelly, could pursue an independent route.

“Even though Tucker was supposedly getting two more years at $20 million a year, given his appeal and talents, he could probably make more than that with his own venue,” he said, adding that the media business is “fragmented.”

But Fox News “needed Tucker Carlson to appeal to the new Republican Party,” Hanson noted.

“What do I mean by that? He was talking about the absurdity of woke, and I don’t where you find somebody like that, who has the ability to articulate those positions but is not crazy,” he continued.

“Tucker came from one of the wealthiest families in California. He was an aristocrat … So for him, brought up like that as an aristocrat, to become a populist and yet know how the aristocratic mind works, is very unusual.”

Hanson estimated the “big vacuum” created by Carlson’s departure was about 3.5 million viewers, breathing life into rival conservative networks.

Following Carlson’s exit, Newsmax drew doubled viewers at the 8 p.m. EST slot, Hanson said, adding that Fox News’ parent company lost $800 million in market value after the April 24 announcement.

“I’m not sure that they can find somebody like that to come in … that is funny and affable and knowledgeable.”

Now that the network is taking rating hits after Carlson’s exit, leftists are celebrating.

“They’re in celebration now. AOC [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] and people are saying things like, ‘We don’t believe in cancel culture, but we got him canceled.’ That’s what they’re saying. They think they took him down.

“They criticize him every day. They said he was a racist. They said he was a transphobe, homophobe, and they think that eventually they got … For that slot should have been making hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising, but they were able to cut his revenues by 30 or 40 percent, by boycotts, pressuring corporations that they were going to boycott them if they bought time.

“They feel that that’s a paradigm that now is successful. And they’re going to use it.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Fox News for comment.

Thousands of Hollywood writers are putting down their pens and shutting down their laptops today as they join the picket line in a major labor action. This comes after their union was unable to reach agreements with movie and TV studios to secure higher wages. 

The Writers Guild of America, representing about 11,500 Hollywood writers, decided to strike Tuesday following six weeks of failed labor negotiations with Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Disney, Discovery-Warner, NBC Universal, Paramount, and Sony. 

“The companies’ behavior has created a gig economy inside a union workforce, and their immovable stance in this negotiation has betrayed a commitment to further devaluing the profession of writing,” WGA wrote in a press release. 

“From their refusal to guarantee any level of weekly employment in episodic television, to the creation of a “day rate” in comedy variety, to their stonewalling on free work for screenwriters and on AI for all writers, they have closed the door on their labor force and opened the door to writing as an entirely freelance profession. No such deal could ever be contemplated by this membership,” the union continued. 

WGA has been advocating for better pay and adjustments to a business model they argue has made earning a living wage more challenging over the last several years. According to the union, soaring content creation by streaming platforms like Netflix and Disney+ has led to a drop in the median pay for producers and writers. 

The last time WGA went on strike was in November 2007, causing a bottleneck in Hollywood’s content production process. The labor dispute lasted for 100 days, finally ending in early 2008. 

One immediate disruption will be the production of late-night talk shows, including Jimmy Kimmel Live and The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. Depending on how long the work stoppage last, this could impact television shows and movies. 

The labor action might not be a terrible thing considering an increasing number of Americans are fed up with ‘woke’ content pushed by Hollywood elites. This was evident last year when a series of films, books, and other media projects with progressive messaging failed to resonate with audiences and consumers.

WGA also called for the regulation of artificial intelligence within scriptwriting. 

The WGA’s proposal to regulate use of material produced using artificial intelligence or similar technologies ensures the Companies can’t use AI to undermine writers’ working standards including compensation, residuals, separated rights and credits. #WGAStrong
🧵 1/7

— Writers Guild of America, East (@WGAEast) March 22, 2023

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

During a recent interview on “NBC Nightly News,” Raphael Bob-Waksberg, the creator of Netflix’s animated series “BoJack Horseman,” said writers’ demands are clear and concise: 

“We want more money. We want enough money to make a basic living doing what we love.”

“I think we’re getting to the point where it’s going to be that the only people who can afford to try to start a career in television or movies are going to be people who are independently wealthy already, which I don’t think is good for television or movies. I don’t think we want that.”

Recall we penned a recent note titled “Get Woke, Go Broke: Hollywood Is Dying And They Deserve It.” 

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

Pornhub has disabled access to its website in Utah in response to a new law requiring companies publishing adult content to verify users’ ages before allowing them to view the X-rated material on their platforms.

The pornography website confirmed in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times that it completely disabled its websites for individuals located in the state on May 1.

Individuals in Utah attempting to access Pornhub’s site are now greeted with a lengthy video message from the adult entertainer and member of the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee, Cherie DeVille, explaining that they are unable to do so because of the new age-verification law.

“As you may know, your elected officials in Utah are requiring us to verify your age before allowing you access to our website,” DeVille says.

“While safety and compliance are at the forefront of our mission, giving your ID card every time you want to visit an adult platform is not the most effective solution for protecting our users, and in fact, will put children and your privacy at risk.”

“In addition, mandating age verification without proper enforcement gives platforms the opportunity to choose whether or not to comply. As we’ve seen in other states, this just drives traffic to sites with far fewer safety measures in place. Very few sites are able to compare to the robust Trust and Safety measures we currently have in place. To protect children and user privacy, any legislation must be enforced against all platforms offering adult content,” DeVille continued.

The adult entertainer goes on to state that Pornhub, which is owned by Montreal-based company Mindgeek, places great emphasis on user safety, but that it ultimately believes the most effective way to protect children and adults using the site is to identify them via their devices, allowing them access to age-restricted materials and websites based on that identification.

Until a real solution is offered, we have made the difficult decision to completely disable access to our website in Utah,” DeVille continued. “Please contact your representatives before it is too late and demand device-based verification solutions that make the internet safer while also respecting your privacy.”

Utah Bill Tackles Harmful Materials

The move by Pornhub comes after Utah Gov. Spencer Cox last month signed into law Senate Bill 287, also known as the “Online Pornography Viewing Age Requirements.”

Under that bill, commercial entities that provide pornography or other materials harmful to minors are required to verify users’ ages through “reasonable age-verification methods” before they can access such material.

Such methods include “digitized information cards” or third-party age-verification services that compare the personal information entered by the individual seeking to access the website to material available from either a commercially available database or an aggregate of databases, used by the government agencies to confirm identities or age.

Adult content companies can also use “any commercially reasonable method that relies on public or private transactional data” to confirm the individual’s identity when they attempt to access the material, the bill states.

Commercial entities that “knowingly and intentionally” publish or distribute a “substantial portion” of material that is harmful to minors online without performing reasonable age verification methods to ensure users are of age may be held liable under the law, including for damages and court costs resulting from the minor accessing the material.

The law defines harmful material as “material that exploits, is devoted to, or principally consists of descriptions of actual, simulated, or animated display or depiction of any of the following, in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors: (i) pubic hair, anus, vulva, genitals, or nipple of the female breast; (ii) touching, caressing, or fondling of nipples, breasts, buttocks, anuses, or genitals; or (iii) sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation, excretory functions, exhibitions, or any other sexual act.”

The age verification legislation is set to take effect on May 3.

Porn a ‘Public Health Crisis’

Pornhub’s terms of service state that users must be 18 years or older, or the age of majority in the jurisdiction they are accessing the website from in order to use the site.

“If you are under 18 or the applicable age of majority, please do not use the Website. You also represent that the jurisdiction from which you access the Website does not prohibit the receiving or viewing of sexually explicit content,” it states.

However, the state of Utah in 2016 declared porn a “public health crisis” that was creating a “broad spectrum of individual and public health impacts and societal harms.” A string of other states, including Arizona, have since followed suit.

Last year, lawmakers in Louisiana passed similar legislation requiring publishers of online material that could be harmful to minors to verify user ages.

Unlike Utah, Louisiana provides a mobile app that allows users to create a digital replica of their driving license which can then be scanned to verify their age, according to Ars Technica.

This is not the first time that Pornhub has found itself at the center of controversy. In 2021, the website came under fire after The New York Times reported that it hosted unlawful content, including nonconsensual pornography and videos of child sexual assault.

While the adult website initially denied the allegations, it later pledged to crack down on illegal content and said it will only allow properly identified users to upload such materials.

The Epoch Times has contacted Pornhub for comment.

By Joseph Lord of The Epoch Times

The United States will be sending troops to the southern border with Mexico, the White House announced on May 2. The move was unveiled ahead of an expected surge of illegal immigrants as pandemic restrictions, known as Title 42, are set to lift on May 11.

The southern border has been hammered over the past two years by an unprecedented influx of illegal immigrants, leaving border control authorities struggling to keep up with limited resources.

Pentagon Press Secretary Gen. Pat Ryder confirmed in a Tuesday press conference that the Pentagon would be sending 1,500 U.S. military personnel “to supplement” Border Patrol resources for 90 days. Ryder suggested this could be extended as the need arises.

These 1,500 troops “will fill critical capability gaps, such as ground-based detection and monitoring, data entry, and warehouse support until CBP [Customs and Border Protection] can address these needs through contracted support.”

“Military personnel will not directly participate in law enforcement activities,” Ryder added.

While the first wave of troops will be drawn from active-duty personnel, Ryder said that the Pentagon was looking into other options, including potentially pulling from reserves.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Tuesday that the move was made in the hopes of freeing Border Patrol agents up to focus on apprehending illegal immigrants crossing the border.

Under President Donald Trump, military servicemembers performed similar functions at the border. When Trump deployed troops to the border in 2018, Democrats blasted the move as a “politicization” of the military. This time however, in comments to reporters, Jean-Pierre said that the deployment was “common practice.”

“DoD personnel have been supporting [Customs and Border Protection] at the border for almost two decades now,” she said, referring to the Department of Defense.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in a statement Tuesday, said the additional forces would help “to reduce irregular migration, ensure safe, orderly, and efficient processing, and promptly remove individuals without a legal basis to remain in the United States.”

Currently, 2,500 troops are serving in some capacity along the border. The addition of 1,500 new troops, nearly a twofold increase, comes days ahead of the end of Title 42, a COVID-era immigration rule making it easier for illegal aliens to be turned away at the border.

DHS added that Customs and Border Protection’s investment in new technology and personnel will reduce the need for such assistance moving forward.

Despite an unprecedented flow of illegal migrants across the border, the administration has long refrained from using the word “crisis” to describe the situation.

President Joe Biden and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas have each insisted that the border is secure and under operational control.

The decision to send troops to the border comes as Republicans prepare a series of legislation addressing immigration problems along the border.

Read more here.

By Philip Marey, Senior Strategist at Rabobank

Summary

• Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a new letter to the Congressional leadership, with the message that the X-date could arrive as soon as June 1.

• With the adoption of the Limit, Save, Grow Act in the House of Representatives and President Biden’s unwillingness to negotiate about conditions for a raise in the debt limit, a game of chicken between Republicans and Democrats has started.

• So far, markets reacted to the possibility of a US federal government default with a revealed preference for one month treasury bills over longer dated T-bills. However, we are still far from the panic needed to break the stalemate between Republicans and Democrats. This is likely to occur closer to the X-date.

• Either this game is over within a few weeks or we are going to see a suspension of the debt limit until later this year. In both cases, we are not likely to see any solution until financial markets start to panic.

Introduction

Although the midterm elections in November turned out better for the Democrats than could have been expected based on the high inflation rate and President Biden’s low approval rating, they lost their majority in the House of Representatives. With the 118th Congress in session since early January, the balance of power in Washington DC has shifted. After two years of Democratic Control, with Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress and a Democratic President, the Republicans are now able to shoot down any bill on the House floor in the next two years. This means a regime shift has taken place in US politics this year to Divided Government, where legislation requires bipartisan cooperation. The first of the fiscal standoffs that we warned for in Midterm implications is already taking shape and it is the most dangerous one, the debt limit.

McCarthy’s move

On April 26, the House of Representatives adopted the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, presented by House Speaker McCarthy a week earlier, with a 217-215 vote. All Democrats voted no, so did four Republicans. The bill, drafted by the leadership of the House Republicans, in consultation with various members, raises the debt limit by $1.5 trillion or until March 31, 2024, whichever comes first. Note that the current debt limit of $31.381 trillion was reached on January 19, after which the Treasury Department started extraordinary measures, postponing the X-date, when the Treasury will be unable to meet all of its debt obligations. In exchange for the higher debt ceiling, the House Republicans want to limit government spending. The bill sets discretionary spending for fiscal year 2024 (October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2024) at the level of fiscal year 2022 and then limits growth in discretionary spending to no more than 1% a year in the next decade. The bill also rescinds unspent COVID relief funds, and make changes to energy, regulatory and permitting policies. However, the plan also cuts the increased funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). What’s more, it will prevent implementation of President Biden’s student debt cancellation and Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) expansion, and impose or expand work requirements in several federal safety net programs. This means serious concessions by the Democrats, which they are not likely to agree to. In fact, President Biden has made clear repeatedly that he does not want to negotiate at all. His position remains that he wants a “clean” debt limit raise, i.e. without any condition.

Biden’s game of chicken

With the adoption of Limit, Save, Grow Act by the House of Representatives, and Biden’s demand for a “clean” raise of the debt limit, a game of chicken has started between Republicans and Democrats. Both parties want to avoid a government default, which would cause significant damage to the financial markets and the economy. Consequently, the so-called X-date, when the extraordinary measures are exhausted, is the deadline for the game of chicken. In the time before the deadline, we are not likely to see any party blink, unless a financial market panic breaks out. Once the deadline passes, neither party has an interest in keeping the US in default. By this time, financial markets will definitely be in turmoil.

It could be argued, especially by Democrats, that as the Republicans are the party attaching conditions to the debt limit increase necessary to avert or end the default, they are likely to bear most of the pressure to concede. This argument frames the current game as a repeat of 2011 and 2013. However, the crucial difference is that the Limit, Save, Grow Act is actually a bill to raise the debt ceiling! So it is misleading to claim that “House Republicans are holding our economy hostage and threatening default” as the White House press secretary did on April 27. In fact, it could be argued, in particular by Republicans, that the Democrats are the obstacle to a raise in the debt ceiling. After all, if the Senate – where Democrats are needed to get the 60 necessary votes – adopts this bill and President Biden signs it into law, the debt ceiling is lifted. The truth is that after the difficult process to confirm McCarthy as the new House Speaker in January, the Democrats hoped that the House Republicans would not be able to agree on what they wanted in exchange for a raise in the debt limit. That would have strengthened the Democrats’ demand for a clean raise, i.e. without conditions. Now, it seems reasonable to start negotiations about spending cuts attached to the raise in the debt ceiling. However, a game of chicken with financial market turmoil as leverage is more likely to unfold. In the end, i.e. close to the X-date, the game of chicken is likely to be resolved under pressure from financial markets. So how are markets reacting to the developments regarding the debt ceiling so far?

Markets looking for near-term safety

On January 13, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a letter to the Congressional leadership, noting that it was unlikely that cash and extraordinary measures would be exhausted before early June. To avoid the risk of holding a treasury bill that may not be repaid investors have shown a preference for near-term treasury bills in recent weeks. The yield on one month bills has clearly moved away from the yield on three, six or twelve month bills. While the yields on the latter three maturities continue to move together, the one month yield tanked after McCarthy’s presentation of the Republican plan brought the debt limit to the forefront. Demand from money market funds likely played a major role in the decline in the one month yield. Recently, money market funds have received large inflows from depositors concerned about the safety of their holdings at small banks or their modest returns at large banks. At the same time, the supply of near-term T-bills has fallen as the Treasury has already hit the debt ceiling and is trying to delay the X-date. So far, markets reacted to the possibility of a US federal government default with a revealed preference for one month T-bills over longer dated T-bills (This should subside as early June enters the one month horizon). However, we are still far from the panic needed to bring Democrats and Republicans together. This is likely to occur closer to the X-date

X-date in June?

On May 1, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a new letter to the Congressional leadership, with the message that “After reviewing recent federal tax receipts, our best estimate is that we will be unable to continue to satisfy all of the government’s obligations by early June, and potentially as early as June 1, if Congress does not raise or suspend the debt limit before that time.” This means that the X-date could arrive sooner than previously expected, due to disappointing tax receipts. Shortly after Yellen’s announcement, President Biden invited top Republicans and Democrats for a meeting next week about raising the debt limit. However, a White House official said that Biden will repeat his view that Congress should pass a stand-alone increase in the debt limit, but that he is open to a discussion on the budget that is not linked to raising the debt limit. In other words, the Democrats are not blinking, neither are the Republicans.

Also on May 1, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a nonpartisan budget agency, updated its budget projections and concluded that lower-than-expected tax receipts this year create a significantly greater risk that the Treasury will run out of funds in early June. Earlier, they forecasted that the default could occur as soon as July. While, prior to May 1, markets had a wide range of forecasts regarding the X-date, from June to September, and even beyond, it looks like the probability of the X-date being located in June has increased substantially.

This would increase the pressure on the players of the game of chicken rapidly in the coming weeks. Alternatively, or  because of this, we could see a temporary suspension of the debt limit to buy more time to negotiate (the Republicans are likely to want something in exchange for that, probably something from the Limit, Save, Grow Act they adopted last week). For example, Congress could delay the deadline to the end of the fiscal year, September 30. This would bring the deadline for the budget for fiscal year 2024 and the deadline for the debt limit together, allowing for a comprehensive solution. However, it would also add to the pressure at the new X-date, because failure to reach a deal would lead to both a government shutdown and a government default.

Conclusion

The game of chicken between Democrats and Republicans has really kicked off after the House of Representatives voted for the Limit, Save, Grow Act, Treasury Secretary Yellen sent a letter indicating that the X-date could arrive as soon as June 1, and Biden’s repeated dismissal of any conditions attached to a raise in the debt limit. Either this game is over within a few weeks or we are going to see a delay until later this year. In both cases, we are not likely to see any solution until financial markets start to panic.

For the second consecutive day, a Russian freight train has been derailed not far from the Ukrainian border, in what appears to be another sabotage attack. These cross-border irregular warfare attacks seem to be stepping up simultaneous to the so-called Ukrainian Spring counteroffensive being stalled.

Reuters is reporting based on local sources that “An explosion derailed a freight train for the second day in a row in a Russian region bordering Ukraine on Tuesday, sending both the locomotive and some cars off the tracks, authorities said.”

Bryansk regional governor Alexander Bogomaz confirmed in a Telegram statement, “An unidentified explosive device went off near the Snezhetskaya railway station. There were no casualties.” He described that “As a result of the incident, a locomotive and several wagons of a freight train derailed.”

The Bryansk region borders both Ukraine and Belarus, and this second sabotage incident happened just to the southeast of Bryansk. With this latest freight disaster, which occurred mid-evening local time, some 20 cars derailed, according to Russian media.

The day prior (Monday), a section of track in the same oblast but which lies even closer to the border with Ukraine was blown up, derailing a train carrying fuel and timber.

Another train sabotage reported in Bryansk region in Western Russia, with 20 cars going off rails after a series of explosions. Russian Railways called it “illegal interference,” per RBC. This is a second incident in two days — yesterday another train carrying fuel was blown up. pic.twitter.com/itpUVN32kC

— Mary Ilyushina (@maryilyushina) May 2, 2023

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

Bryansk has been a region which has seen frequent cross-border attacks throughout the conflict. Over the weekend, projectiles fired from Ukraine killed four people in a Russian village which lies just 10km from the border.

All of this has resulted in speculation over whether the delayed Ukrainian counteroffensive could turn into a focus on irregular cross-border guerrilla tactics.

Another bomb causes a second train derailment in two days in Russia’s Bryansk region. https://t.co/A2bk3bi56L pic.twitter.com/nfEqR6WGel

— Kevin Rothrock (@KevinRothrock) May 2, 2023

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

Already there’s been multiple drone attacks, sabotage bombings, as well as assassinations of high-profile Russians. If Ukrainian frontlines collapse, this could unleash more “punishment” inside Russian territory by covert operatives. The Kremlin has frequently also alleged that the US and other NATO countries have supported Ukraine in these black ops.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

In 2021 I published an article titled ‘The Fed’s Catch-22 Taper Is A Weapon, Not A Policy Error’ in which I outlined the deliberately engineered trap the Federal Reserve has created for the American economy. Specifically, I confronted the issue of strangled liquidity through increasing debt costs vs continued money printing and inflation.

It’s an issue that Jerome Powell warned about in 2012, years before he became Fed Chairman; the consequences of creating a stimulus dependent system and then abruptly cutting off the life support. As soon as he was installed as the head of the central bank he implemented the very policies he predicted would cause a crash.

The result? We just saw the beginning of the end with the latest banking crisis involving companies like SVB, First Republic and Credit Suisse – It’s not just US finances, but banks around the world that rely on liquidity injections from the Fed to stay afloat. The central bankers addicted the system to cheap easy debt and now they are taking away the drugs.

In other words, no one can honestly argue that the central banks are ignorant or unaware of the threat. They KNOW what’s about to happen and they do not care. But why does the establishment want a crisis now instead of five years ago, or five years in the future?

Thankfully, much of the public is becoming aware of the various programs to introduce CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies), but what they may not understand is the manner in which such massive economic changes usually happen. Generally speaking, in order to institute a new economic system the banks have to take down the old system.

The last time we saw this happen was just after the Great Depression and WWII. The deflationary crash and the war conjured the proper amount of global chaos and before the dust settled western nations instituted the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944, making the dollar the defacto world reserve currency while locking down the price of gold.. Then they established the globalist International Monetary Fund (IMF) the same year and the United Nations in 1945. The world was centralized dramatically in a little over a decade.

I believe we are fast approaching another engineered singularity, a controlled demolition of existing systems to make way for a cashless society, a one world currency and global governance. I believe this because it’s all the globalists can talk about these days; it’s not as if they’re trying to hide it anymore.

The BIS and IMF are actively fielding one-world digital currency mechanisms right now; structures that would combine all national CBDCs under one umbrella. In the meantime, globalist think-tanks like the WEF (World Economic Forum) are ranting excessively about the coming era of an AI controlled economy and a “4^th Industrial Revolution” in which you will “own nothing, have no privacy” and will be forced to adapt to a cashless socialist sharing system.

All they need is a scapegoat to complete their crisis formula. War seems to work well in distracting the masses from the true culprits behind any financial calamity, and numerous institutions are hard at work to convince the public that countries like Russia are to blame for ongoing stagflation problems. Of course, the stagflation crisis started well before the war in Ukraine and many Americans are not buying the spin.

China, a dedicated partner to the globalist project, has shown consistent fealty to the IMF and is a key player in the move towards a one-world currency system. Because they are the largest importer/exporter on the planet and have considerable leverage over the US dollar, they have the ability to strike the final blow against the dollar’s world reserve status. A heightened conflict with China would be a perfect cover for the dumping of the Greenback, making way for the IMF’s new global currency, called the UMU (Universal Monetary Unit).

However, foreign conflagrations will not be enough for the establishment to keep the American public from scrutinizing the narrative. They need a domestic enemy, a frightening threat that lives right next door. That is to say, they need to find a way to blame conservatives and liberty activists for the impending crash that they caused.

Keep in mind that the Biden Administration and the leftist media have been pumping out propaganda asserting that all our fiscal problems including our national debt are somehow rooted in conservative policies. This is nonsense.

At bottom, the majority of our economic threats can be traced directly back to the Federal Reserve as well as large international banks, and these institutions enact policy REGARDLESS of the political party that is in control of the government. But, if we’re going to talk about the political group that has most helped the central bankers set the calamity in motion, the Democrats win the prize.

It was Barack Obama and Joe Biden that doubled the US national debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the span of 8 years. Trump didn’t help matters and did not institute spending cuts at the level he should have, but the bulk of his debt contributions occurred because of the covid response. There are a number of issues to criticize Trump for, including the kinds of people he brought into his cabinet, but the current economic chaos is not rooted in anything Trump did.

It was the Biden White House that pressed for covid lockdown policies to stay in place for years when they should have been ended within months as soon as it became clear the covid virus was a non-threat to 99.8% of the population. Biden and the Democrats made it impossible for the country to continue functioning without trillions in covid helicopter money, and it was those fiat measures that finally broke the camel’s back. Prices on everything skyrocketed under Biden, not Trump.

The majority of our national debt problems were piled up during the reign of Democrats, and they CONTINUE to demand trillions more in spending without conditions. This brings us to the debt ceiling.

In the past, the debt ceiling debate has been a predictable farce. Republicans demand cuts, they haggle with the Democrats who want a blank check, nothing is ever really resolved and the debt ceiling gets raised yet again with no noticeable reductions in spending. The government keeps stealing from the American public at an exponential rate while also triggering more inflation.

It’s a Catch-22 for conservatives. No one in the mainstream criticizes the Democrats for wanting to spend more because most people don’t understand how inflation works. All the Dems have to do is agree to reasonable budget cuts, but they refuse. When they don’t allow cuts, the Republicans are forced to either cave in, which makes them look weak, or, they’re forced to stand their ground and be accused of reckless disregard for American debt obligations.

Democrats claim that ANY cuts to the budget will lead to economic crisis. They have no intention of negotiating to reduce US debt. They don’t have to – All the blame falls on conservatives regardless.

To be sure, there are multiple Neocon politicians that support the Democrats at every turn, but there are also some Republicans trying to pull the country back from the brink. We should give these people credit.  It’s easy to accuse all political participants of being part of the “false left/right paradigm,”, and maybe that was true ten years ago, but now I suspect this mantra is being exploited to divide conservatives and liberty proponents from any alliances at the government level.

The leftist argument on the debt ceiling is essentially this: “We must keep spending more to fix the problems created by spending too much.”

It’s a circular con job. Pursuing budget cuts is portrayed as an act of terrorism by the corporate media. Saving taxpayer money is considered evil, and conservatives who entertain the notion are painted as insurrectionists. Why is no one criticizing the Democrats and their all-or-nothing philosophy? After all, budget cuts can be made while ALSO paying off the national debt, right?

The tactic makes sense if you look at it from a villain’s perspective. All the Democrats have to do is not allow any cuts and continue to demand more spending without conditions. Then, when the contingent of Republicans in Congress that actually care about fiscal responsibility refuses to back down, the White House, the media and the majority of leftists initiate a propaganda wave; an artificial outcry suggesting that “radical” conservatives are destroying the economy.

If the conservatives give in, then the public blames them for bowing to the “Uniparty.” If they don’t give in, the establishment wraps up the stagflationary collapse and lays it right in our laps. They may try to force the issue of a debt ceiling impasse just to hide the crash that is happening anyway.

Or, maybe not. Maybe this time is like all the other times and Republicans will back down yet again and the ceiling is raised by another couple trillion dollars. The talking points I’m seeing in the media and on social media, though, suggest to me that something very strange is about to happen in the debt fight. If it goes down the way I suspect, then it will be vitally important to disrupt the narrative.

The economy is crashing for a lot of reasons and none of them have anything to do with the government trying to spend less.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott migrant bus service to is ramping back up in a big way — and mayors in destination cities are fuming, especially New York City’s Eric Adams and Chicago’s outgoing Lori Lightfoot. 

“More than 57,000 migrants, mostly hailing from Latin America, have arrived in [New York City] since last spring, while Chicago has fielded more than 8,000 newcomers,” Politico reports.

In a statement issued Monday, Adams accused Abbott of targeting cities based on the skin color of their elected officials: 

“This weekend, we learned that Governor Abbott is once again deciding to play politics with people’s lives by resuming the busing of asylum seekers to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Denver, and Washington, D.C.

Not only is this behavior morally bankrupt and devoid of any concern for the well-being of asylum seekers, but it is also impossible to ignore the fact that Abbott is now targeting five cities run by Black mayors. Put plainly, Abbott is using this crisis to hurt Black-run cities.”

We pause to note that, where America’s largest metropolises are concerned, “black-run cities” is increasingly a redundancy. 

Moving on from his implicit accusation of racism, Adams went on to accuse Abbott of shipping migrants to New York against their will, and having security guards “hold them hostage” when they tried to get off in other cities.

He also blamed border states for the overload of immigrants while asking President Biden for help. “With a vacuum of leadership from border states, we need the federal government to step in and provide us with support and to prevent this cruelty from continuing.” That’s an interesting angle, given the federal government routinely opposes states taking border security into their own hands. 

Even Adams has been increasingly critical of the Biden administration’s immigration policies. In April, he said, “The city is being destroyed by the migrant crisis…The national government has turned its back on New York City…This is in the lap of the president of the United States.” Reiterating that desperate messaging on Monday, Adams said, “This crisis is more than one city can handle.”

Adams isn’t the only mayor attacking Abbott for sharing the wealth of northbound diversity pouring into the country. On Sunday, Chicago’s Lightfoot, who will exit office on May 15 after a losing reelection bid, sent a letter to Abbott asking him to “stop this inhumane and dangerous action.” 

Like Adams, Lightfoot also painted a picture of desperation, saying that, although “Chicago is a Welcoming City…we simply have no more shelters, spaces, or resources to accommodate an increase of individuals at this level.” 

She wrote that many migrants shipped from the Lone Star State “needed extensive medical care. Some of the individuals you placed on buses were women in active labor, and some were victims of sexual assault. None of those needs were addressed in Texas.” 

When Abbott wrote back to Lightfoot on Monday, he didn’t address those allegations. He did, however, point out that that the immigration situation is about to get much worse: 

“With Title 42 expulsions set to end next week, the federal government has estimated that we could have up to 13,000 illegal immigrants cross the U.S.–Mexico border every single day…. If Chicago can’t deal with 8,000 in less than a year, how are small Texas border communities supposed to manage 13,000 in just one day?” 

Abbott told Lightfoot to shift her fire, and urge the Biden administration to “do its job by securing our border [and] repelling the illegal immigrants flooding into our communities.” 

When Lightfoot says shipping people to Chicago is “inhumane and dangerous,” she might just have a point: 

🚨#BREAKING: Chaotic Scene Unfolds in Downtown Chicago as Teenagers Vandalize Cars and Gunfire Erupts

📌#Chicago | #Illinois ⁰
There is currently a significant police response taking place in downtown Chicago due to a large group of teenagers causing chaos. They have been… pic.twitter.com/n7xhBpsTKs

— R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) April 16, 2023

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

Chicago pic.twitter.com/9kNes6Tegn

— Clown World ™ 🤡 (@ClownWorld_) April 17, 2023

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

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation Monday that will allow convicted child rapists to be given the death penalty, a move that will likely trigger a confrontation in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Florida lawmakers passed HB1297 last month, paving the way for rapists of children under the age of 12 to be sentenced to execution without jury unanimity.

It means that the approval of only 8 jurors out of 12 would be needed to go ahead with a sentence of capital punishment for those who sexually abuse kids in the State.

As we highlighted, pedos were not happy about it.

Florida Enables Death Penalty For Child Sexual Abuse

<!–

<!–

<!–

<!–
!function(c,d){"use strict";var e=!1,n=!1;if(d.querySelector)if(c.addEventListener)e=!0;if(c.wp=c.wp||{},!c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage)if(c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(t)if(t.secret||t.message||t.value)if(!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var r,a,i,s=d.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),n=d.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=0;o<n.length;o++)n[o].style.display="none";for(o=0;o<s.length;o++)if(r=s[o],e.source===r.contentWindow){if(r.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message){if(1e3<(i=parseInt(t.value,10)))i=1e3;else if(~~i<200)i=200;r.height=i}if("link"===t.message)if(a=d.createElement("a"),i=d.createElement("a"),a.href=r.getAttribute("src"),i.href=t.value,i.host===a.host)if(d.activeElement===r)c.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)c.addEventListener("message",c.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),d.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",t,!1),c.addEventListener("load",t,!1);function t(){if(!n){n=!0;for(var e,t,r=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSIE 10"),a=!!navigator.userAgent.match(/Trident.*rv:11\./),i=d.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),s=0;s