Dec 07

Today’s News 7th December 2023

  • The Navy: Dead In The Water?
    The Navy: Dead In The Water?

    Authored by Brent Ramsey via RealClear Wire,

    “Mission:  The United States is a maritime nation, and the U.S. Navy protects America at sea. Alongside our allies and partners, we defend freedom, preserve economic prosperity, and keep the seas open and free. Our nation is engaged in long-term competition. To defend American interests around the globe, the U.S. Navy must remain prepared to execute our timeless role, as directed by Congress and the President.” 

    The preceding statement is from the U. S. Navy’s website.

    There are many indicators that the Navy is at increasing risk of mission failure.

    1. Missing recruiting goals by thousands for two years in a row, missing its goal for FY 2023 by over 7000 new recruits. The impact of missing recruiting goals is cumulative. Its impact does not subside if in subsequent years deficits are not made up. Lack of manpower adds to the strain of a Navy struggling to meet its national priorities overseas. Failing to recruit enough people to man the Navy is a result of many factors. Since the Afghanistan debacle, the public’s faith in the military has plummeted to new lows. With relatively low unemployment, the competition for young people is high. American youth are less fit, less capable of serving in the military than at any time in our history. Fewer young people want to serve as the political left teaches them to hate our country, academia promotes socialism, and race hustlers malign our country for its supposed racism and white supremacy. Divisive ideologies like Critical Race Theory and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion are now promoted vigorously up and down the chain of command in the Navy. These ideologies alienate the youth of what for generations was the most fertile recruiting grounds, white, southern, Christian Americans. This demographic is now increasingly averse to serving in our new politically correct Navy of DEI, Pride month, correct pronouns, drag queens, and transgender people. If the Navy cannot recruit now for the existing numbers of ships we have, we have no hope whatsoever of filling out the ranks of a Navy with much higher numbers of ships.

    2. Recently, due to the international wars simultaneously in Ukraine and Israel, and high tension in the Taiwan strait/South China Sea, the U.S. Navy had an almost unprecedented 8 Carriers at sea at the same time. The only three not at sea were unavailable due to long-term maintenance. Normally, the Navy might have three or four carriers at sea at one time. Navy ships and crews continually operating wear out rapidly. Typical deployments last 6 months. The USS Ford has been deployed for 7 months and SECDEF just extended its deployment in the eastern Med for the second time. The longer the deployment the more worn out the crew and the higher rates of equipment failures become. As deployments go on for longer and longer, the size of the crew shrinks due to illness, pregnancy, injury, and suicides. Typically ships returning to home port after a lengthy deployment are missing a substantial number of the deploying crew. This puts much more stress and strain on the remaining crewmen. The international situation with multiple wars demanding our attention simultaneously is eroding our Navy’s readiness at a high rate. When the ships and their crews wear out, there will be no alternative but to return them to port for re-fit and rest for the crews regardless of whatever pressing mission the ship is on. That the Navy does not have enough ships is now obvious to even the most casual observer when multiple hot spots in distant seas occur. When the proverbial stuff hits the fan, the very first question everyone, including the President asks is, “Where is the nearest carrier?”

    3. The Navy’s high suicide rate over a lengthy period demonstrates the leadership’s tragically being unable to ameliorate the problem. The higher the OP tempo, the longer the deployments, the more arduous the maintenance periods are, the more inadequate berthing arrangements are for ships in long term overhaul, aggravate already high stress environments and seemingly make things unbearable for too many of our sailors. The Navy seems content to muddle along with scores of sailors killing themselves year after year and the heart-rending loss of life continuing as an unsolved problem. We Navy folk like to call ourselves warriors and most of us fit the description of selflessly putting ourselves in harm’s way for the benefit of others, for the benefit of our nation. But what does it say about our culture to have so many warriors who end their own lives because somehow our organization does not recognize their despair until it is too late, and they have taken the irreversible step and ended their own life? Considering how extremely selective the Navy is at screening those who volunteer to serve, why do such high numbers of exceptional citizens, with all that the Navy has to offer, choose to end their own lives? Are our leaders so overwhelmed by the work the Navy has them do that they cannot be close enough to their sailors to recognize those who are in extremis in time to help them?

    4. Notable institutional leadership failures in multiple major program areas and multiple high profile operational failures are now far too common. Examples include well documented cases such as the LCS and Zumwalt ship classes, the USS Ford class’s cost overruns, lateness, and multiple of its ship systems not being fully operational (EMALS, ammo elevators, arresting gear, etc.) even years after being in commission. An egregious example of a mammoth leadership failure was the loss of the USS Bonhomme Richard, a multi-billion-dollar capital ship that due to negligence was allowed to burn at the side of a pier, a $3B loss with no replacement. A total of 45 Navy leaders were disciplined due to this one incident. The grounding of the USS Connecticut with this vital attack submarine being out of commission for years for repairs. The USS Gettysburg has been out of commission for over 8 years undergoing modernization. Four of the seven cruisers selected for modernization will instead be de-commissioned after the Navy has spent billions on upgrades. The collisions of the USS McCain and USS Fitzgerald with commercial shipping were failures of leadership that led to the deaths of 17 sailors.

    5. In the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act the Congress established the size of the Navy to be 355 battle force ships. According to the United States Naval Institute as of 6 November 2023 there are currently 291 battle force ships in the Navy. The predictions from the Congressional Research Service are that the size of the Navy will stay relatively the same for the rest of this decade before it slowly starts to increase in size in the 2030’s. In 2022, then CNO Gilday announced that the requirement is actually much higher, in excess of 500 battle force ships. Multiple other experts’ analyses confirm those higher numbers. The PRC’s PLAN is already at 350 combatants and building at a rate at least four times that of the U.S..

    6. In the FY 2023 NDAA there was a provision to establish a Commission to study the Navy and its requirements. The report of the Commission is due to the Congress by July 1, 2024. As of this writing, the commission has not even been formed. The Secretary of the Navy and the CNO should be urgently pressing Congress to get this Commission up and running. Furthermore, the Navy should be proactive in suggesting Navy advocates serve on the Commission or serve on the staff of the Commission. It is vital for the defense of the nation to have the definitive knowledge of what the Navy’s true requirements are in 2023 in the face of multiplying threats all over the world.

    Conclusion:  All of these factors outlined above make it clear that our Navy is in extremis. There are not enough ships to do the mission nor enough manpower to man the ships optimally. Deployments are too long, and our people and ships are wearing out. Recruiting is stagnant. Too few ships, not enough people, not enough shipbuilding, or repair capacity have us on the brink of mission failure. To put the size of the Navy in perspective, when this officer went aboard ship in 1970 to conduct anti-submarine patrols looking for Soviet ballistic missile submarines, the Navy had 792 battle force ships in commission. We now have 291. Then we had a cold war against one adversary, the old Soviet Union. Today we have adversaries all over the world and are trying to perform the mission quoted above with a tiny fraction of the ships we had decades ago. As a maritime nation with treaty allies all over the world coupled with our dependence upon the sea for 90% of the commerce that keeps our economy running, it is a travesty that such neglect of the Navy has occurred. Who is at fault for this neglect? Congress is ultimately at fault as it holds the power of the purse. However, it is incumbent upon senior Navy leaders to make the case for the right size Navy. The CNO and every other Navy flag who testifies before Congress should be sounding the alarm about the imminent failure of the Navy to perform its mission now in “peacetime” with multiple hots spots in Europe, the Middle East, and in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea, and even more importantly in the next actual fighting war. Someone long since should have laid his stars on the table to make the point to politicians that we need more ships and more manpower for the survival of our nation. Our way of life and our very lives are at stake if we do not rebuild our Navy to an adequate size to perform its vital worldwide mission.

    CAPT Brent Ramsey, (USN, ret.) is a writer on Defense matters. He has been featured in Washington Examiner, Real Clear Defense, Armed Forces Press, CD Media, American Thinker, and Patriot Post. He is a  Vice President with the Calvert Group, a Board of Advisors member for the Center for Military Readiness and STARRS, and a member of the Military Advisory Group for Congressman Chuck Edwards (NC-11).

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 23:40

  • "A Marketplace For Predators": New Mexico Sues Meta, Mark Zuckerberg Over Child Exploitation Following Investigation
    “A Marketplace For Predators”: New Mexico Sues Meta, Mark Zuckerberg Over Child Exploitation Following Investigation

    The state of New Mexico has sued social media giant Meta and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg for “knowingly” exposing children to ‘sexual exploitation and mental health harm.’

    In a Tuesday court filing, New Mexico’s Attorney General’s (NMAG) Office revealed that it had conducted an undercover investigation, creating fake accounts of minors which were then used to fish for offending content, according to a press release reported by the Daily Caller.

    “Meta and its CEO tell the public that Meta’s social media platforms are safe and good for kids,” reads the lawsuit. “The reality is far different. Meta knowingly exposes children to the twin dangers of sexual exploitation and mental health harm. Meta’s conduct has turned New Mexico children who are on its platforms into victims. Meta’s motive for doing so is profit.”

    Meta is accused of  allowing Facebook and Instagram to become “a marketplace for predators in search of children upon whom to prey.”

    “Our investigation into Meta’s social media platforms demonstrates that they are not safe spaces for children but rather prime locations for predators to trade child pornography and solicit minors for sex,” said Democratic New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez in the press release. “As a career prosecutor who specialized in internet crimes against children, I am committed to using every available tool to put an end to these horrific practices and I will hold companies — and their executives — accountable whenever they put profits ahead of children’s safety.”

    A total of 33 state attorneys general launched a joint lawsuit against Meta related to its platforms’ alleged harmful effects on children, according to a court filing in October. Eight other states and Washington, D.C., launched distinct lawsuits against Meta the same day, according to The Washington Post.

    Zuckerberg and other Big Tech CEOs are scheduled to testify about child exploitation in January, according to The Verge. -Daily Caller

    “Mark Zuckerberg and Meta … have misled the public and failed to make changes to Meta’s platforms that would protect children and teens,” Torrez told the Caller. “In addition to seeking civil penalties to deter Meta from continuing to jeopardize children’s safety, the NMAG is petitioning the court to permanently stop Meta’s harmful practices and demand a change.”

    The lawsuit comes approximately one week after Meta-owned Instagram allowed pedophiles to search for content with explicit hashtags such as #pedowhore and #preteensex, which were then used to connect them to accounts that advertise child-sex material for sale from users going under names such as “little slut for you.” And according to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, Meta accounted for more than 85% of child pornography reports, the Wall Street Journal reported.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 23:20

  • Dodgy Dick: Top Democrat Won't Commit To Subpoenaing Jeffrey Epstein Flight Logs
    Dodgy Dick: Top Democrat Won’t Commit To Subpoenaing Jeffrey Epstein Flight Logs

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    A powerful Democrat is refusing to commit to issuing a subpoena for more transparent versions of Jeffrey Epstein’s flight logs.

    U.S. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) in Washington on April 18, 2023. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

    Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, declined to tell a reporter or Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who wants the subpoena issued, that he would support the effort.

    Ms. Blackburn, in late November, tried bringing forth an amendment for a vote that would authorize the subpoena but was blocked by GOP colleagues, who invoked a rule that led to the hearing ending after about two hours.

    When Mr. Durbin was asked on Dec. 5 whether he’d issue the subpoena, he demurred.

    “I don’t know anything about his flight logs. I know who Epstein was but I certainly don’t know anything about the issue,” he told a Fox News reporter in Washington.

    Mr. Durbin also falsely said that the matter “has never been raised by anyone.”

    After entering a committee hearing in which members questioned the FBI’s director on various topics, Mr. Durbin told Ms. Blackburn that he was not aware that one of her amendments was a subpoena for Mr. Epstein’s flight logs.

    “I do not know anything about this request,” he said.

    An aide for Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month acknowledged that Ms. Blackburn’s attempt to issue the subpoena was blocked during the Nov. 30 committee hearing before noting that Republicans, led by Ranking Member Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) invoked a rule that ended discussion on amendments for the subpoenas that were ultimately approved for a billionaire and conservative activist linked to Supreme Court justices.

    Mr. Graham’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

    Mr. Durbin “falsely claimed he was not aware of Senator Marsha Blackburn’s amendment to subpoena Jeffrey Epstein’s flight logs,” Ms. Blackburn’s office said in a statement.

    Ms. Blackburn was prevented from speaking in the November hearing by Republicans after Mr. Durbin asked her to kick off the amendment process. But in an earlier hearing in November, she said she’d filed for a subpoena for Mr. Epstein’s flight logs.

    “Given the numerous allegations of human trafficking and abuse surrounding Mr. Epstein, we’ve got to identify everyone who could have participated in his horrific conduct,” she said at the time.

    Ms. Blackburn blamed Mr. Durbin and other Democrats for there not being a vote yet on the proposal.

    “It’s perplexing why Chairman Durbin blocked Senator Blackburn’s amendment request to subpoena Jeffrey Epstein’s estate,” a spokesperson for Ms. Blackburn told The Epoch Times via email.

    “I think you are fully aware that I had two amendments, one dealing with Epstein,” Ms. Blackburn said on Tuesday. Mr. Durbin said he was not aware. “I brought it up previously,” Ms. Blackburn said. Mr. Durbin said she did not.

    The subpoena “should be at the top of this committee’s to-do list,” she also said.

    A request for comment to a spokesperson for Mr. Durbin was not returned.

    “I did not know that you offered that amendment. I want a point on the record you and I have never personally discussed this, have we?” Mr. Durbin said.

    Ms. Blackburn said they spoke briefly after the abrupt end to the late November hearing.

    “You never mentioned what subject matter your amendment was,” Mr. Durbin said.

    “In committee, I brought up the subject matter of my amendment three weeks prior,” Ms. Blackburn said.

    “Not in my presence,” Mr. Durbin said.

    “I will pull the transcript for you,” Ms. Blackburn said.

    Then-President Bill Clinton welcomes Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to the White House in a 1993 file image. (William J. Clinton Presidential Library)

    FBI Director Questioned

    Ms. Blackburn also told Christopher Wray, the FBI’s director, that she wanted more information from the bureau regarding Mr. Epstein, a convicted sex offender who died in prison while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

    “There are disturbing allegations that the FBI failed to investigate the sex trafficking allegations,” Ms. Blackburn said, noting that one woman who said she was sexually abused by Mr. Epstein has said she took evidence to the FBI, but the bureau refused to investigate.

    Mr. Wray said the FBI worked together with prosecutors to bring the sex trafficking charges and that it has been a while since he looked at the case.

    “What we need from you is a complete investigation. Why the FBI did not take this on, and then getting to the bottom of what is an enormous sex trafficking ring and listening to the survivors,” Ms. Blackburn said.

    While the flight logs have been released before, that version was heavily redacted. Ms. Blackburn wondered whether a more transparent version could be released.

    “Let me offer to get with my team and figure out if there is more information we can provide,” Mr. Wray said.

    The FBI’s national press office told The Epoch Times in an email on Dec. 6 that it did not have anything to add, after being asked what Mr. Wray and his team had figured out.

    RFK Jr. on Flights

    Some of the most powerful people in the world flew on Mr. Epstein’s private plane, according to the logs and witness testimony, including former President Bill Clinton and former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell.

    Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is running as an independent in the 2024 race, said this week he was on the plane twice.

    Mr. Kennedy said on Fox that his now-former wife had “some kind of relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell,” an associate of Mr. Epstein who has been convicted of sex trafficking of minors.

    Mr. Kennedy said one of the flights took place in 1993 and that he flew to Florida with his wife and some of his children.

    “I went then, and another occasion, I flew again with my family with, I think, four of my children,” Mr. Kennedy said. “I have been very open about this from the beginning. This was in ’93, so it was 30 years ago. It was before anybody knew about Jeffrey Epstein’s, you know nefarious issues. And I agree with you that all of this information should be released. We should get real answers on what happened to Jeffrey Epstein and any of the high-level political people that he was involved with. All of that should be open to the public.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 23:00

  • 'Dark Gina' Elicits Blistering Rebuke From China, Which Vows To Circumvent Tech Curbs
    ‘Dark Gina’ Elicits Blistering Rebuke From China, Which Vows To Circumvent Tech Curbs

    So much for the ‘stabilizing ties’ narrative… China is blistering angry after weekend remarks by US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, who labeled Beijing “the biggest threat we’ve ever had” while lauding efforts that seek to block it from cutting-edge semiconductors.

    China’s response was swift at the start of this week: “The US should stick to the right perception and work with China to deliver on the common understandings reached in the San Francisco meeting,” foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin had said Monday. America must “stop seeing China as a hypothetical enemy and saying one thing but doing another,” the spokesman continued. 

    AP file image

    Raimondo called for tighter export controls on advanced tech at the annual Reagan National Defense Forum in California.

    “On matters of national security, we got to be eyes wide open about the threat. This is the biggest threat we’ve ever had,” she said. “We can’t let China get these chips. Period,” she said at one point.

    She agreed with the Biden administration line about cooperation and managing competition in certain spheres but ultimately concluded, “Make no mistake about it, China’s not our friend.”

    But China says its ability to circumvent the US tech curbs is a sure thing: 

    Wang, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, said that stance exposed the “Cold War mentality” of the US and its desire for hegemony. He also indicated that his nation would get around the tech curbs eventually.

    “The violation of the rules and regulations of the free-trade market is just like building a dam with a sieve,” he said. “No matter how hard you try, the water will just flow through it.”

    See more of Raimondo’s remarks at the Reagan National Defense Forum below…

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

    Some highlights from Raimondo’s remarks:

    * * *

    Host: “Huawei released their new smartphone…” Raimondo: “[China’s] capable of doing very bad things, and we’re gonna deny the entire country this class of equipment. We can’t let China get these chips. Period.”

    “Listen, America leads the world in artificial intelligence. Period. Full stop. We’re a couple years ahead of China. No way are we going to let them catch up. We cannot let them catch up. So we’re going to deny them our most cutting edge technology.”

    She’s fed up with semiconductor firms whining: “newsflash: democracy is good for your business. Rule of law, here and around the world, is good for your businesses. It might make for a tough quarterly shareholder call, but in the long run, it’s worth you working for us to defend our national security.” More export controls are coming…

    “Host: Are there other U.S. origin products or types of technologies that you are looking at in a similar fashion right now. Raimondo: Absolutely, in biotechnology, AI models, AI products, cloud computing, supercomputing. So short answer is yes.”

    On US-China dialogue: “I would say communication is a good thing but don’t confuse communication with weakness or softness. On matters of national security, we’ve got to be eyes wide open about the threat. This is the biggest threat we’ve ever had, and we need to meet the moment. The world needs us to manage our relationship with China responsibly. To avoid escalation, we’ve got to do all that, but make no mistake about it, China’s not our friend, and we need to be eyes wide open about the extent of that threat.

    “I am ready to win, and I’m ready to do that with all of you, but it’s time to open our aperture and challenge the way we’ve done business in every way if we’re going to meet the threat China poses. And if we’re going to do what needs to be done with this technology.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 22:40

  • Micro- And Nanoplastics Linked To Parkinson’s And Dementia
    Micro- And Nanoplastics Linked To Parkinson’s And Dementia

    Authored by George Citroner via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    That plastic water bottle you regularly drink from could one day decompose into tiny particles that wreak havoc in your brain.

    (Andrzej Rostek/Shutterstock)

    New research shows that nanoplastics—microscopic particles broken down from everyday plastic items—bind to proteins associated with Parkinson’s disease and Lewy body dementia.

    These stealthy nanoparticles have already infiltrated our soil, water, and food supply. Now, they may pose the next great toxin threat, fueling a wave of neurodegenerative disease.

    Plastic Cups and Utensils Identified as Risk Factors

    Polystyrene nanoparticles, commonly found in plastic cups and utensils, bind to alpha-synuclein, a protein linked to Parkinson’s disease and Lewy body dementia, the new study from Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment and the Department of Chemistry at Trinity College of Arts and Sciences found. The plastic-protein accumulation was seen in test tubes, cultured neurons, and mouse models.

    The most surprising finding was the tight bonds formed between the plastic and protein within neuron lysosomes, according to Andrew West, the study’s principal investigator. Lysosomes are digestive organelles within cells that use enzymes to break down waste materials and cellular debris.

    “Our study suggests that the emergence of micro and nanoplastics in the environment might represent a new toxin challenge with respect to Parkinson’s disease risk and progression,” Mr. West said in a press statement. This is especially concerning given the expected increase of these contaminants in our water and food, he added.

    Growing evidence indicates that nanoplastics circulate in the air, especially indoors. When inhaled, they can travel from the respiratory tract directly to the blood and brain, increasing cancer risk.

    Change Environment Now to Prevent Disease Later: Expert

    Our health today is largely a function of our environment in the past, Dr. Ray Dorsey, a professor of neurology at the University of Rochester in New York and an author of “Ending Parkinson’s Disease,” told The Epoch Times.

    “For example, the risk of lung cancer is a function of our past smoking habits,” he said. “If we want to live lives free of Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and cancer in the future, we should pay attention to our environment today.”

    The Duke study adds to evidence that common toxic pollutants may contribute to Parkinson’s disease, Dr. Dorsey said. More research is needed, but evidence from both laboratory and epidemiological studies suggests our environments are fueling Parkinson’s incidence increase.

    “Much, if not most” of Parkinson’s cases may be preventable, he added.

    Besides reducing our use of plastic, there are other effective precautions we can take to limit our exposure to this environmental toxin, Dr. Dorsey pointed out. These include the following:

    • Using carbon filters to protect ourselves from chemicals in the water.
    • Purchasing organic food.
    • Thoroughly washing all fruits and vegetables.
    • Using air purifiers if you live in areas with high air pollution.

    Parkinson’s-Linked Pollutants, Pesticides Still Legal Despite Risks

    Besides nanoplastics, other toxins like organic pollutants known as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), banned since 1979 yet still found in 30 percent of U.S. schools, have been linked to Parkinson’s. Researchers have found high concentrations of this pollutant in the brains of deceased people who had Parkinson’s.

    “We need to know the full extent of this toxic threat in our classrooms so that we can test for PCBs, remediate it and inform families that their students may be at risk of exposure to these dangerous chemicals,” Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) said in a press statement.

    Other toxins linked to Parkinson’s in our environment have yet to be removed from use. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed bans on dry cleaning chemicals and pesticides associated with a 500 percent increased risk of Parkinson’s disease, but there has been no action yet.

    Toxic Pesticides Harming Health but ‘Political Will’ Lacking

    The EPA banned the pesticide chlorpyrifos (CPF) in 2021, but a court reversed that decision in November 2022. Research identifies CPF as a likely Parkinson’s disease risk factor.

    Another pesticide, paraquat, has allegedly been linked to Parkinson’s by its manufacturer Syngenta’s own research, per The Guardian’s report. Syngenta reportedly created a “paraquat SWAT team” to criticize evidence and shift focus to other environmental factors.

    “We increasingly know that environmental toxicants from plastics from pesticides are harming our health,” Dr. Dorsey said. “Almost all of these are addressable; the only question is whether we have the political will to do so.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 22:20

  • Chinese Stocks Are Trading Near A Record Discount To Peers
    Chinese Stocks Are Trading Near A Record Discount To Peers

    By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

    While stocks in India make new all-time highs, investors in Chinese stocks are staring down a dismal year of losses. In fact, equities from the world’s No. 2 economy have hardly ever traded at such a deep discount to emerging-market peers.

    There’s no shortage of negative headlines in China these days. Moody’s Investors Service’s downgrade of China’s credit outlook this week is just another example, underlying the nation’s structural problems of a heady debt load, an aging population and a decline in the potential growth rate.

    These structural issues are manifested in the stock market. The MSCI China Index has lost 15% this year, compared with a 2% increase in the gauge for emerging-market shares and a 15% gain in the MSCI India Index and  In fact, the MSCI India Index has outperformed the China gauge by 100% since the beginning of 2021.

    It may not be just a flash in the pan. According to Morgan Stanley, China’s underperformance versus India could be just “the beginning of a new long-run trend.”

    The MSCI China Index is trading at 8.9 times of earnings over the next 12 months, compared with 11.4 of MSCI Emerging Markets Index. Apart from a brief period at the onset of the pandemic, the 22% discount marks the biggest since Bloomberg started to compare the data in 2006.

    The stocks are trading cheaply for a reason. Chinese companies’ return on equity has been persistently declined since 2011, reflecting deteriorating investment opportunities.

    They have missed earnings estimates for nine consecutive quarters, and bottoming isn’t likely in the first quarter, according to Morgan Stanley’s strategists including Laura Wang. The strategists expect the MSCI China to return 7% next year, with an upside potential of 25%, and a downside risk of 34%.

    Investors are turning to the upcoming Central Economic Work Conference for clues on how Beijing will set the economic agendas for next year. So far, China hasn’t done enough to boost confidence. And “Incremental and baby-step support are not enough to turning around the sentiment,” said Jason Hsu, chief investment officer at Rayliant Global Advisors.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 21:40

  • Hunter Biden Threatened With Contempt Of Congress If He Bails On Testimony
    Hunter Biden Threatened With Contempt Of Congress If He Bails On Testimony

    Hunter Biden will be slapped with contempt of congress if he skips out on his Dec. 13 closed-door deposition, according to a Wednesday letter from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Hunter’s defense attorney, Abbe D. Lowell.

    “Contrary to the assertions in your letter, there is no ‘choice’ for Mr. Biden to make; the subpoenas compel him to appear for a deposition on December 13. If Mr. Biden does not appear for his deposition on December 13, 2023, the Committees will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,” reads the letter, issued a week after Lowell suggested that Hunter should instead be allowed to testify publicly.

    Hunter was subpoenaed on Nov. 8 to appear for a deposition before the committee. In response, Comer said: “Hunter Biden is trying to play by his own rules instead of following the rules required of everyone else,” adding “Our lawfully issued subpoena to Hunter Biden requires him to appear for a deposition on December 13.”

    Comer and Jordan are investigating extensive evidence that the Biden family was running an international influence peddling scheme, raking in tens of millions of dollars from foreign business partners despite no obvious product or service in exchange.

    House lawmakers are also seeking testimony from Hunter’s uncle James Biden, as well as multiple former business associates.

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 21:20

  • Here's The 'Jan. 6 Jurisprudence' About To Be Unleashed On Trump: Julie Kelly
    Here’s The ‘Jan. 6 Jurisprudence’ About To Be Unleashed On Trump: Julie Kelly

    Authored by Julie Kelly via RealClear Wire,

    Defense attorneys have coined the term “January 6 Jurisprudence” to describe the treatment received by the more than 1,200 defendants arrested so far in connection with the events of Jan. 6, 2021. This carve-out legal system involves the unprecedented and possibly unlawful use of a corporate evidence-tampering statute; excessive prison sentences and indefinite periods of pretrial incarceration; and the designation of nonviolent offenses as federal crimes of terrorism.

    A universal feature is the requirement that a Jan. 6 defendant, usually a supporter of Donald Trump, face trial in Washington, D.C., a city overwhelmingly populated by Democrats. Federal judges have denied every change of venue motion filed in Jan. 6 cases, arguing those who protested at the Capitol can get a fair trial in the nation’s capital.

    The results so far appear to contradict the court’s collective conclusion. Court records show the jury selection process has repeatedly revealed a strong degree of bias against anyone tied to Jan. 6. At least 130 defendants have been convicted at trial – not one has been acquitted by a jury – and hundreds have been sentenced to prison time ranging from seven days to 22 years. Defense lawyers say this track record helps explain why the vast majority of defendants have opted for a plea deal rather than go to trial.

    This is the same environment that now awaits the former president as he prepares to stand trial in Washington on March 4, 2024 for election interference, in addition to an array of criminal and civil cases against him elsewhere.

    While Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team and Trump’s counsel spar over a number of issues, perhaps the biggest dispute will concern whether it will be possible to seat an impartial jury for the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee in a city that voted 92% for Joe Biden in 2020.

    After Smith indicted Trump in August, a Jan. 6 defense attorney who is not representing the former president, J. Daniel Hull, told the New York Times that Washington “is the worst possible place for any Jan. 6 defendant, but especially Donald Trump, to have a trial.”

    U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan recently set a jury selection schedule for Smith’s four-count indictment against Trump for the events of Jan. 6. She ordered both parties to begin developing a questionnaire, due Jan. 9, 2024, that hundreds of D.C. residents will be asked to complete so the court can begin the initial step of weeding out unqualified jurors.

    Stakes are high for both sides. Trump’s lawyers must navigate constraints on how many jurors can be stricken from consideration to ensure their client gets a fair trial. The Department of Justice must convince the American people that a case brought by a Democratic administration and handled by a Democratic-appointed judge with a record of inflammatory statements about the former president will be heard by unbiased jurors.

    The Sixth Amendment guarantees, among other rights, “the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” In extreme cases, criminal defendants can petition to move their trial out of the prosecuting jurisdiction for a number of reasons, not the least of which is sustained, negative press coverage that taints the jury pool.

    Trump’s lawyers are not discussing their strategy publicly, but sources have indicated to RealClearInvestigations that the defense will file a change of venue motion in the next month or two. Given the partisan composition of Washington, saturation coverage of the former president’s ongoing legal woes, and the city’s relatively small population, Trump will have a strong argument in favor of moving the trial outside of the nation’s capital.

    Yet a review of Jan. 6 cases to date suggests the odds are against that. Not a single judge on the D.C. District Court has granted a change of venue motion even for high-profile trials such as those for members of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, the so-called “militia” groups involved in the Capitol protest.

    Despite nonstop local news coverage and nationally televised proceedings of the Democrat-run January 6 Select Committee that, in some instances, mentioned the defendants by name, Judge Timothy J. Kelly repeatedly rejected motions to move the Proud Boys’ seditious conspiracy trial out of Washington. 

    One month before jury selection began, Kelly acknowledged in a November 2022 order that the five defendants “have been the subject of more particularized and extensive media coverage than most January 6th defendants, in part because of the House Select Committee’s hearings this summer.” Nonetheless, Kelly, a Trump appointee, denied the defendants’ last-minute attempt to seek relief in another venue by noting, “the brighter spotlight on Defendants does not support transfer, mainly because the pretrial publicity here is national in scope, available to anyone across the country with access to a television or the internet.”

    Jury selection lasted several days, an anomaly for Jan. 6 trials. Despite the lengthy process, the panel still included several D.C. residents who disclosed participation in Democratic protests, including Black Lives Matter and the Women’s March, according to one court observer’s report.

    After a four-month trial and six days of deliberation, the jury convicted the defendants in May on multiple charges while returning not-guilty verdicts on a handful of other offenses, including impeding police officers. One juror told Vice News that he and his cohorts unanimously concluded in less than a day that four of the five defendants were guilty of seditious conspiracy, an exceedingly rare charge traditionally reserved for individuals tied to foreign terror groups.

    “[The jury] hated us with a passion,” Joseph Biggs, one of the Proud Boys found guilty of seditious conspiracy and other charges, told RCI in an interview from his jail cell in September. “They wanted to see us die. One of them said he wanted to see us buried under the jail.” Despite the individual’s stated desire to see the defendants dead, he was seated on the panel. 

    Judge Chutkan’s handling of her first jury trial for a Jan. 6 defendant, Russell Alford, also indicates how Trump might fare. Alford was charged in March 2021 with four misdemeanors for his 11-minute nonviolent walk through the Capitol.

    In rejecting Alford’s bid to move his trial, Chutkan downplayed the partisanship of D.C. residents and surveys that indicated higher-than-average prejudice against Capitol protesters. In her April 2022 order, Chutkan insisted that “jurors’ political leaning are not, by themselves, evidence that those jurors cannot fairly and impartially consider the evidence presented and apply the law as instructed by the court.” She also claimed an “expanded examination will effectively screen for prejudice among potential jurors in this case.” 

    A review of court transcripts, however, raises questions as to whether Chutkan fulfilled her promise. A jury questionnaire exposed a bias so strong against Jan. 6 protesters that half the respondents were automatically eliminated from consideration. Many who remained were also problematic.

    After one day of voir dire, which is the direct questioning of potential jurors, Chutkan still allowed individuals who expressed critical views about anyone involved in Jan. 6 to serve on the panel. One juror said people who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6 “were probably guilty.” Another who worked as an investigator for federal agencies, including DHS and TSA, admitted he had “strong feelings about the individuals who gathered at the Capitol on January 6.” 

    Chutkan rejected a defense attorney’s request to remove that juror from consideration. “I’m going to deny it because he said he has training; he’s by nature trained to be skeptical. He has an opinion, but it appears that he is willing to confine his verdict to the evidence presented in the case.”

    Did People Lie to Get on Jan. 6 Juries?

    A staffer for Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, a Democrat from New Mexico, also got the nod, despite telling Chutkan he knew many Capitol police officers – several of whom are routinely called as government witnesses in Jan. 6 trials – and his confession that the day was “pretty impactful” on him.

    On several occasions, Chutkan reassured the skeptical defense team that the selected jurors would set aside personal feelings to objectively weigh the evidence.

    The jury returned unanimous guilty verdicts on all counts in less than four hours.

    Alford now wonders whether jurors were being honest. “They told us what we wanted to hear so they could get on the panel,” Alford told RCI by phone from a halfway house last month. He had just finished serving 176 days of a 12-month prison sentence imposed by Chutkan. “In any other jurisdiction, we would have won. We thought we could get a fair shake, but they all were connected to the government.”

    Alford’s experience is not an outlier. Post-trial interviews with jurors have often revealed bias. In a lengthy discussion with C-SPAN’s Brian Lamb following her service on an Oath Keepers’ trial earlier this year, a woman named Ellen, a former co-worker of Lamb, described how she desperately tried to get selected as a juror. When she finally was selected, Ellen admitted she “was shocked beyond belief.”

    Over the course of several days of deliberations, Ellen said she successfully persuaded reluctant jurors to render guilty verdicts against the six defendants, including a 72-year-old who didn’t enter the Capitol and an autistic young man. She worked in tandem with a juror who had worked as a lawyer for the Department of Justice, the same government agency prosecuting the defendants. “How that was allowed, I’ll never know,” Ellen told Lamb. “He couldn’t believe it.”

    Ellen also expressed disdain for the people on trial. “They weren’t even from big cities. These were people from, living, on farms in rural places, most of them had no concept of Washington, D.C.,” she told Lamb.

    Democrat Mosby’s Change of Venue 

    The situation was quite different, however, for a former Democratic elected official recently on trial in neighboring Maryland. A grand jury indicted Marilyn Mosby, the former state’s attorney for the city of Baltimore, in 2022 on four counts of perjury related to COVID fraud. Her lawyers asked the judge to move the trial, set to begin on Oct. 31, 2023, out of the Baltimore area to the southern district of Maryland based on studies that uncovered higher levels of bias among prospective jurors in the northern district, the location where the trial was set to take place.

    The analysis, conducted by Trial Innovations, Inc., evaluated “relevant newsprint, television, and social media coverage” and determined that “the Northern Division jury pool has been saturated with prejudicial coverage surrounding the Defendant.” Telephone interviews of eligible residents in the two districts also revealed distinct disparities. For example, 62% of respondents in the northern district had read, seen, or heard of Mosby compared to 42% in the southern district.

    Nearly half of the respondents in the northern district considered Mosby “somewhat” or “very” corrupt compared to roughly one-quarter who had the same response in the southern district.

    In granting Mosby’s motion in September, Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby concluded that “pre-trial publicity about this case has, to a degree, negatively impacted the views held about the Defendant by potential jurors residing in the Court’s Northern Division more so than their counterparts in the Southern Division.” (Mosby was convicted on all counts on Nov. 9.)

    Defense surveys in Jan. 6 cases point to the same, if not higher, level of prejudice among D.C. residents. A May 2022 survey compared attitudes between Washington residents and those living in areas of Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. While 85% of D.C. residents consider Jan. 6 an “insurrection, attack, or riot,” only 41% of Florida residents agreed with the description. Seventy-two percent of D.C. respondents were more likely than not to find a Jan. 6 defendant guilty, as opposed to 48% of respondents in Virginia and North Carolina and 37% of Florida respondents.

    Forty percent of D.C. residents believe the events of Jan. 6 were racially motivated, while less than 20% of the respondents in the three other states believed so.

    Unlike the judge overseeing the Mosby matter, D.C. judges are unmoved by such disparities.

    While overall public interest in Jan. 6 has waned nearly three years later, it remains a campaign issue for Democrats and a top news story in the nation’s capital. The Washington Post maintains a “January 6 Insurrection” portal on its website, providing updates on Trump’s trial and other proceedings related to the Capitol protest. CBS News’ Washington affiliate has a full-time reporter assigned only to cover the events of Jan. 6.

    Jury selection for a November 2023 trial indicated little change in prospective jurors’ intensely negative views about Jan. 6. Voir dire for the trial of Taylor Johnatakis, a man from Washington state charged with multiple offenses for his participation in the Capitol protest, showed a sustained level of prejudice against Jan. 6 defendants. Five of the first 10 individuals were excused after confessing they could not fairly assess the evidence or follow the judge’s instructions to set aside their opinion to reach a verdict.

    One man, a historian for the American Historical Association, admitted he had written columns describing Jan. 6 as an “insurrection.” A public school teacher told the judge she uses Jan. 6 as a “teachable moment” for her special needs students and that she still discusses the issue with her fellow educators. Another woman works for a provider that offered mental health services for who she described as “traumatized” police officers who were “victims” of Jan. 6. (All were struck for cause.)

    Some seated jurors recalled their emotional reaction to that day. One woman, who has been on disability for 13 years, said she “burst out crying” when she watched events unfold at the Capitol. (Johnatakis, who represented himself, was convicted on all counts after just a few hours of deliberation.)

    Court watchers say such attitudes will make it especially hard to seat a fair jury for the most controversial figure in America, Donald Trump.

    It is difficult to contemplate how the government and Chutkan will get around years of hyper-critical coverage of Trump – not just related to Jan. 6 but stretching back to claims Trump illegally colluded with Russia to rig the 2016 election and every investigation in between.

    Still, it is highly unlikely that Chutkan will consent to Trump’s request to move the trial to another jurisdiction. She will, as she did in Alford’s case, note that court-ordered venue changes are rare, even in trials of wide public interest. (She compared Alford’s trial to that of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, where the judge refused to move his trial out of the city.)

    There are, however, exceptions. In 1996, a federal judge moved the trial of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols to Denver. After considering intense news coverage of the deadly attack and its impact on the community, Judge Richard Matsch concluded: “There is so great a prejudice against these two defendants in the State of Oklahoma that they cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial at any place fixed by law for holding court in that state.”

    The change of venue request was not opposed by the lead prosecutor in that case – Merrick Garland, who now oversees the DOJ as Attorney General of the United States.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 21:00

  • Citi Sees Senate Flipping, Ponders 'Red Wave' In 2024
    Citi Sees Senate Flipping, Ponders ‘Red Wave’ In 2024

    As the 2024 U.S. election cycle kicks into gear, Citigroup ponders the potential fiscal implications under different election outcomes.

    Perhaps most interesting is their prediction of a high likelihood of Republicans gaining control of the Senate, although falling short of a 60-vote filibuster-proof majority​​. This, however, does not guarantee smooth sailing for the GOP. With the Democrats’ current grip on the Senate (51-49), Republicans would need to not only retain competitive seats but also snatch at least one from key states like Florida or Texas​​.

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

    House Dynamics: Democrats’ Favorable Map

    According to the report, Democrats are in a favorable position when it comes to regaining control of the House – needing to net just five seats. This contrasts with the 16 Republican districts classified as “toss-ups,” implying yet another shakeup which would cast all sorts of GOP investigations into disarray.

    Presidential Race: Trump’s Lead and Third-Party Wildcards

    Donald Trump’s enormous lead over the GOP field means he’s almost guaranteed the Republican nomination, absent​. That said, the presence of a third-party candidate like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. could throw a wrench in the works (theories on just who RFK Jr.’s run will most negatively affect vary). Although his current impact seems neutral, pulling votes from both Trump and Biden, his influence cannot be ignored​.

    Trump is currently smoking the entire GOP lineup, and has recently overtaken President Biden in hypothetical match-ups.

    Fiscal Policy: A Divided Government’s Dilemma

    According to Citi, under two of the three most likely election outcomes, the U.S. would see a split legislature. This division would mean further gridlock, with bipartisan cooperation required to pass any fiscal legislation – a feat that has proven challenging in recent times​​. Potential areas of agreement could include defense and infrastructure spending, as well as industrial policy through legislated subsidies, similar to those in the bipartisan CHIPS Act​.

    “Red Wave” Scenario: Tax Cuts and Deficit Concerns

    Should a “red wave” occur, giving Republicans control of both the presidency and the legislature, Citi believes that the reconciliation process to brute-force policy could be a game-changer. It would allow the GOP to pass legislation on taxes, spending, and the debt limit with just a simple Senate majority.

    Another likely outcome of a red wave would be the likely renewal of Trump-era individual tax cuts, which could significantly increase the deficit​.

    According to the Congressional Budget Office, if Trump’s 2017 Tax Act provisions are extended, it would increase the deficit by $134 billion in 2026 and $346 billion in 2027.

    Even in a divided government, some of the Trump tax cuts could be extended, which Congress did in 2011 in a bipartisan vote to extend Bush-era tax policies.

    Fiscal Restraint Amid Growing Deficits

    Citi’s analysis also emphasizes an increased focus on fiscal restraint due to growing deficits, which could be larger than anticipated in 2023. According to the report, “The 2024 deficit is boosted in part because of automatic stabilizers that would kick in during a recession.”

    With deficits projected to remain elevated in 2024 and 2025, there will likely be a reduced appetite for additional fiscal stimulus, especially in an election year with ongoing concerns about inflation​

    The key takeaway? Brace for uncertainty and keep a close eye on the evolving political landscape.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 20:40

  • Americans 'Should Be Worried' About Potential Chinese Invasion Of Taiwan: Joint Chiefs Of Staff Chairman
    Americans ‘Should Be Worried’ About Potential Chinese Invasion Of Taiwan: Joint Chiefs Of Staff Chairman

    Authored by Aaron Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., expressed concern about the potential invasion of Taiwan by communist China, stating that Americans “should be worried.”

    J15 fighter jets on China’s sole operational aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, during a drill at sea on April 24, 2018. (AFP via Getty Images)

    When asked about the possibility of such an invasion during an interview at the Reagan National Defense Forum on Dec. 2, Gen. Brown pointed to Hong Kong as an example, stating: “Just think about what happened in Hong Kong. … We all should be worried whether it’s going to happen or not. And part of the reason why deterrence is so important is so that conflict does not occur.”

    Since Beijing enacted the national security law in Hong Kong in 2020, the city has seen a significant erosion of the freedoms promised by the Chinese communist regime when the former British territory was handed over to the mainland in 1997. Authorities have suppressed protests, imprisoned pro-democracy activists, and banned gatherings, including the annual Tiananmen Square massacre vigil.

    Gen. Brown also said that Beijing is putting pressure on Taiwan and other countries in the Indo-Pacific region for “their own gain.”

    His remarks align with the recent findings of the Reagan National Defense Survey that host Shannon Bream presented during the interview, in which 73 percent of respondents said they were somewhat concerned about a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

    The survey found that a growing number of Americans support Taiwan, with 46 percent in favor of sending U.S. forces to defend the self-ruled democratic island if invaded, up from 39 percent in 2019. To deter the possibility of Chinese invasion, 60 percent of Americans supported increasing the presence of U.S. troops near the island.

    The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has ramped up pressure against Taiwan in recent years, consistently deploying military aircraft and vessels close to the island on an almost daily basis, aiming to erode Taipei’s defenses.

    Chinese leader Xi Jinping has vowed to achieve the “reunification” of Taiwan, which the CCP has never ruled. He has explicitly stated his willingness to use force to achieve this goal.

    China’s ‘Internal Challenges’

    Earlier this year, CIA Director William Burns said that U.S. intelligence was aware that Xi directed the Chinese military to be ready for an invasion by 2027. While the timeline may not represent an actual invasion, it shows Xi’s determination to achieve this goal. Last year, top Pentagon officials warned a possible war across the Taiwan Strait could happen by 2024.

    However, China’s economic slowdown could make it difficult for the regime to launch an attack on Taiwan, and the timeline may be delayed further. In September, during a visit to Vietnam, President Joe Biden said that China’s “difficult economic problem” makes it unlikely for the regime “to invade Taiwan. And [as a] matter of fact, the opposite—it probably doesn’t have the same capacity that it had before.”

    Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen expressed the same views during an interview with The New York Times that was broadcast at the DealBook Summit on Nov. 29. “I think the Chinese leadership at this juncture is overwhelmed by its internal challenges,” she said. “And my thought is that perhaps this is not a time for them to consider a major invasion of Taiwan.”

    In an interview with Bloomberg in September, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that due to the Russian economy being hit by sanctions from the West for its invasion of Ukraine, China’s timetable for a war with Taiwan might be pushed back. She said that before the Russia–Ukraine war, Xi had wanted to invade the island within two or three years.

    In September, two senior officials from the Defense Department told Congress that the Chinese regime would likely fail if its military attempted to blockade Taiwan. Army Maj. Gen. Joseph McGee noted at the hearing that it would be “absolutely nothing easy” for the regime to invade Taiwan. He said that a frontal attack, a surprise attack, or a combined amphibious and air attack would all be very challenging for the Chinese military due to the long distance across the strait, the terrain of Taiwan, and the large numbers of troops needed to deploy for such a large-scale attack.

    According to a wargame report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) earlier this year, China would be defeated in a conventional amphibious invasion of Taiwan. However, the victory would come at a cost to the U.S. Navy and Taiwan’s economy.

    CSIS noted that the Chinese regime lost the hypothetical war heavily, which “might destabilize Chinese Communist Party rule.”

    Even in winning the battle, “the United States and its allies lost dozens of ships, hundreds of aircraft, and tens of thousands of service members. Taiwan saw its economy devastated. Further, the high losses damaged the U.S. global position for many years,” the report said.

    CCP Could Be Preparing for War

    In an event hosted by the Hudson Institute in July, Kyle Bass, a hedge fund manager and a China expert, warned that the Chinese regime is ramping up its preparation for an upcoming war.

    Mr. Bass, founder and chief investment officer of Hayman Capital Management, said he noticed many indicators are “headed in one direction,” indicating that Xi will likely invade Taiwan soon.

    These indicators include Xi having made multiple key orders and speeches calling for war preparation and “struggle” against “hostile forces.”

    Mr. Bass noted a series of financial measures made by Xi to prevent China’s economy from being hit by U.S. sanctions. These include ordering Chinese banks to assess the risk of “severe U.S. sanctions,” letting offshore dollar bond defaults, and increasing gold holdings while reducing U.S. treasuries, among others.

    “U.S. capital markets are the deepest, most liquid markets in the world and also currently have the highest interest rates in the developed world. China would be expected to be buying U.S. Treasury bills and bonds with said surpluses,” Mr. Bass said. “Instead, they have been selling.”

    Furthermore, he pointed out that China has accelerated its purchase of natural resources and energy, which has increased significantly. This has positioned China as the world’s leading importer of crude oil, accompanied by a substantial increase in grain stockpile reserves.

    Mr. Bass said that the CCP is going to seize Taiwan because it believes China is “strong enough now to withstand U.S. sanctions.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 20:20

  • Biden Tells Israel To Wrap Up War By January As An Estimated 80% Of Gazans Displaced
    Biden Tells Israel To Wrap Up War By January As An Estimated 80% Of Gazans Displaced

    With a ground war now raging in the Gaza Strip’s second largest city of Khan Younis in the south, civilians have nowhere left to go. The Strip’s southern half was initially declared a ‘safe zone’ by Israel’s military, but it now says top Hamas commanders are hiding out there.

    The United Nations has issued a fresh statement estimating that more than 80% of Gaza’s population has been displaced. The UN issued a figure of 1.87 million people who have been driven from their homes.

    Further the AP cited that UN as saying “fighting is now preventing distribution of food, water and medicine outside a tiny sliver of southern Gaza” and that the latest military evacuation orders are “squeezing people into ever-smaller areas of the south.”

    Via CNN/Getty Images

    And the ground war and aerial bombardment is expected to continue with great intensity through at least January. “We are in a high-intensity operation in the coming weeks, then probably moving to a low-intensity mode,” an Israeli official told CNN.

    The Biden administration last week reportedly warned Israel that the clock is ticking on its military operation, and that it’s unlikely to have even “months” to fight given domestic and international pressure is ratcheting in response to the soaring death toll (which according to Palestinian sources has surpassed 16,000 killed in Gaza).

    According to details of the message delivered to Israeli leaders:

    Officials from the Biden administration have marked the start of 2024 as the target date for ending Israel’s massive military campaign against terror group Hamas.

    Officials have told their Israeli counterparts that this is not a deadline but a target. According to the administration, Israel is close to exhausting the extensive ground invasion it launched in late October in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 massacre and should switch to more focused efforts to bring down Hamas.

    “The gap between us and the Americans is around three weeks to a month — nothing that cannot be resolved,” an Israeli diplomatic source told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity.

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

    Israel reportedly wants a timeline of at least till the end of January and not the month’s start. Some observers have warned it could in reality take “years” to fully dismantle Hamas.

    According to analysis in The Washington Post, Hamas is still intact and its numbers have been barely dented. “At least 5,000 Hamas militants have been killed, according to three Israeli security officials, leaving the majority of the group’s estimated 30,000-strong military wing intact,” the report says based on Israeli defense sources.

    Scenes of Rashid Street west of Gaza City show an entire large area obliterated…

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

    “This is going to be a long haul,” a spokesman for the Israeli military, Lt. Col. Richard Hecht, told the Post. “We need the time,” he said while acknowledging the growing international pressure.

    But as WaPo underscores, “The cost has already been devastating, with nearly 16,000 Palestinians killed, including more than 5,000 children, according to Gaza’s Ministry of Health.” By comparison there hasn’t been this many civilian deaths in all of the Ukraine war, which is approaching two years of fighting.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 20:00

  • Gun Business Challenges Arizona City's Refusal To Renew Advertising Contract
    Gun Business Challenges Arizona City’s Refusal To Renew Advertising Contract

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

    The owner of a Flagstaff, Arizona, firing range and gun store says the city is violating his First Amendment rights by refusing to renew an advertising contract he’s had since 2019.

    A recreational shooter fires his gun at the Lynchburg Arms & Indoor Shooting Range in Lynchburg, Va., on Oct. 20, 2017. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

    City officials did not respond to emails and telephone messages seeking comment for this story before press time.

    During a recent city council meeting, a deputy city attorney said city leaders are reviewing advertising policies. He took issue with how the dispute was portrayed in news reports.

    “The city is not abusing its power to advance an anti-gun agenda,” deputy city attorney Kevin Fincel told the council.

    Rob Wilson owns Timberline Firearms and Training. He purchased ad time on the video monitors over the baggage carousels in the Flagstaff Pulliam Airport, along with other Flagstaff businesses, in 2019.

    He decided to advertise in the airport while traveling for his other job as a consultant with the U.S. Navy when he saw how many tourists pass through the airport.

    Mr. Wilson contacted Clear Channel, the company that handled advertising at the airport at the time. Clear Channel presented the ad to the city, which approved it, and it ran during tourist season.

    According to Mr. Wilson, last April, he applied to run the ad again this year, hoping for a post-pandemic boost to his business. Instead, he was told the ad was no longer acceptable. He was told the city had a policy against promoting violent or anti-social messages.

    The Timberline ad shows a photo of people holding semi-automatic rifles and a short video of a firearms instructor working with a person who appears to be firing a fully automatic rifle on an indoor range. He was not told which part of the 10-second spot violated the policy.

    He also pointed out that an ad for a laser-tag business in which people chase and shoot at one another with toy pistols was apparently deemed acceptable.

    Mr. Wilson said he protested the decision and asked how he could appeal.

    “I was told that there was no appeal process and, oh by the way, they were going to instead rewrite their entire advertising policy, and that was going to take all summer,” he told The Epoch Times.

    So, Timberline’s advertisement was effectively shut out of the ad rotation at the airport, Mr. Wilson said.

    According to Mr. Wilson, since 2019, Clear Channel has stopped handling advertising for the city, and there has been an almost complete turnover in the airport and city staff involved in the process.

    The council held a working meeting on Sept. 12 to discuss a draft policy. During that meeting, Heidi Hansen, the economic vitality director, who oversees the promotion of the city’s businesses, said the policy is meant to promote tourism.

    “Keep in mind that we want to have a welcoming and comfortable environment for our visitors,” she told the council.

    The policy she outlined included prohibitions on tobacco and vaping, nudity, political ads, and firearms and ammunition, among others. Mr. Wilson pointed out that the firearms language included gun rentals.

    He said this is proof that his business was being singled out since he is the only business in Flagstaff that offers gun rentals.

    He said that was not the only issue with the proposed policy. He pointed out that the policy also prohibits “false and deceptive” ads.

    Who Is The Arbiter?

    “Who’s the arbiter of false and deceptive?” he asked.

    A lobbyist for the Arizona Citizen’s Defense League warned the council this is not the first time this issue has come up in Arizona.

    Michael Infanzon reminded the council of the 2013 case of Korwin vs. Phoenix. In that case, the Arizona Court of Appeals held that a firearms business in the City of Phoenix had the same First Amendment right to advertise on city bus shelters as any other business. Like the Phoenix case, Mr. Infanzon said the Timberland case has nothing to do with guns or violence.

    “This is strictly a free speech issue,” Mr. Infanzon said. “This policy change imposes a viewpoint-based restriction on speech in a public forum which implicitly violates not only the First Amendment but Article 2 Section 6 of our state constitution.”

    Mr. Wilson has turned to the Goldwater Institute, which was involved in the Phoenix case, for help. On its webpage the Goldwater Institute describes itself as “a free-market public policy research and litigation organization dedicated to advancing the principles of limited government, economic freedom, and individual liberty.”

    John Thorpe, an attorney from the Goldwater Institute, warned Flagstaff City attorney Sterling Solomon in a letter dated Oct. 24, that the policy could result in litigation.

    “The new policy currently under consideration is unconstitutional, both as applied to Mr. Wilson … and on its face (as it bans broad, poorly-defined categories of speech and discriminates based on content and viewpoint),” Mr. Thorpe wrote.

    Legal Fight Could Be Costly

    At a Nov. 14 City Council meeting, Mr. Fincel denied any attempt to violate Mr. Wilson’s First Amendment rights. He said the city has a responsibility to oversee advertising on city property. And, under the law, it has the authority to do so.

    He said the First Amendment doesn’t “allow all speech anywhere.” For example, he pointed out that the city can close certain areas to advertising altogether.

    “We have to follow certain rules when we regulate content,” Mr. Fincel said.

    Mr. Wilson told The Epoch Times the dispute has had a severe impact on his bottom line.

    “It absolutely has injured us as a business,” Mr. Wilson said. “We lost a significant portion of our potential customers throughout the summer when we weren’t able to advertise.”

    During the Nov. 14 meeting, City Manager Greg Clifton recommended ending the advertising program. He said the ads don’t generate enough revenue to make a legal battle worth the effort and expense.

    In his letter to the city attorney, Mr. Thorpe indicated that may be true.

    “If we do not receive written assurance from the City that Mr. Wilson may continue to run his ads at the Airport, we will seek legal remedy,” Mr. Thorpe wrote.

    “If we are forced to obtain relief in court, we will also seek costs and attorneys’ fees.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 19:40

  • Tiger Woods Past The Peak? Reports Say Longtime Nike Partnership May End
    Tiger Woods Past The Peak? Reports Say Longtime Nike Partnership May End

    A major shakeup might hit the golf world as early as next week, with reports suggesting that Tiger Woods’ nearly 30-year sponsorship deal with Nike may end following the PNC Championship in Orlando, Florida.

    Since 1996, Woods has been the face of Nike’s golf business. Over the years, he has made hundreds of millions of dollars from the lucrative partnership. 

    But as the 47-year-old golfer has likely peaked, sports news website Front Office Sports, citing the No Laying Up golf podcast – which tends to provide early insight into significant developments in pro golf – reveals he “could split with Nike as early as this month.” 

    On Monday, the No Laying Up podcast said next week’s PNC Championship at the Ritz-Carlton Golf Club could be Woods’s last tournament wearing the Nike Swoosh logo. 

    Front Office Sports said, “Woods leaving Nike would be a major brand shift.” However, they noted this might not be uncharted territory in the sports world, considering these prior shifts:

    • Messi left Nike for Adidas in 2005
    • Kobe Bryant switching from Adidas to have his own line with Nike
    • Simone Biles moving from Nike to new-age brand Athleta

    In recent years, Woods has worn FootJoy shoes and used TaylorMade clubs.  

    Nike has supported Woods during both his victories, such as winning five Masters Championships, and dark times, including marital problems, substance abuse issues, and car accidents.

    It remains uncertain whether Nike is ending its relationship with Woods or if the decision to part ways is mutual.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 19:20

  • Moms For America Endorses 'Proven Leader' Trump For 2024 Presidency
    Moms For America Endorses ‘Proven Leader’ Trump For 2024 Presidency

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

    Conservative family advocacy Moms for America announced support for former President Donald Trump in the upcoming 2024 presidential election, citing the need for “leaders who are not afraid to fight for what’s right.”

    Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at a commit to caucus campaign event at the Whiskey River bar in Ankeny, Iowa, on Dec. 2, 2023. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

    “We are in the midst of a cultural crisis, and the American family has never been at greater risk. Our God-given rights are under attack, and our children are being taught to disdain the very values that have always made America the freest, most prosperous nation on Earth,” Kimberly Fletcher, the president of Moms for America, said in a Nov. 28 announcement.

    “What we need most right now are leaders who will protect our nation and the United States Constitution, defend the family, and stand for truth and common sense, even when it isn’t popular to do so. We need leaders who are not afraid to fight for what’s right and who will put America first.”

    “That is why Moms for America Action is endorsing Donald Trump for President.”

    Moms for America listed the following steps President Trump had taken during his presidency for the betterment of the country:

    • In his first week, President Trump took action to protect American children in schools “by rescinding Barack Obama’s dangerous bathroom policy that allowed boys to use girls’ bathrooms.”
    • He kept his 2016 “campaign promise” to stop Common Core academic standards and blocked efforts to nationalize the K-12 curriculum.
    • “President Trump also took executive action to keep critical race theory out of the federal government, and he opposed left-wing efforts to radicalize civics education.”
    • He established the 1776 Commission, which published a report calling for a “renewed commitment to our country’s founding principles of liberty and equality and genuine appreciation for our country’s heroes as the only true path for us as a people to unify.”
    • In his first year, President Trump cut taxes and regulations to ease the burden on hard-working Americans.
    • Under his presidency, mothers “were not forced to choose between a gallon of milk and a gallon of gas because his policies made both affordable.” He instituted policies that enabled the United States to achieve “true energy independence” for the first time in half a century.
    • “President Trump has also been a dependable ally of the courageous men and women in law enforcement and worked tirelessly to keep crime off our streets and our families out of harm’s way.”
    • The Trump administration took a “bold stand” on the border crisis, taking “decisive action” to secure the southern border while refusing to ignore threats posed by sex trafficking and the fentanyl crisis. “That is the kind of committed leadership we need now more than ever.”
    • He was the first sitting president ever to attend the March for Life, an annual pro-life rally against abortion.

    “In all these ways, President Trump is a warrior, both for American Moms and for the American Dream, and he will continue to be as the 47th President of the United States,” Ms. Fletcher said.

    “He is a proven leader who has already demonstrated that he will stand up for freedom and fight for American values, even as he is viciously attacked for doing so.”

    Leader of Polls

    Moms for America’s endorsement of President Trump comes as he also received endorsement from the Ohio Republican Party for the upcoming 2024 election.

    Alex Triantafilou, chairman of the Ohio GOP, praised President Trump’s accomplishments, citing his efforts to make America energy independent, renegotiate trade policies, and broker peace deals. The former president’s track record demonstrated his ability to “get things done,” he said while encouraging Republicans to unite behind the presidential candidate.

    “President Trump has proven time and again that despite the unhinged and relentless attacks from the radical left, he will never give up on fighting for Ohio’s workers, businesses, and families,” Mr. Triantafilou stated.

    “His unapologetic leadership and commitment to putting America First is exactly what we need to reverse course from the failed policies of Joe Biden and Sherrod Brown.”

    President Trump currently has a significant lead in the GOP primary polls. According to Morning Consult, the former president has the support of 64 percent of potential Republican primary voters, which is far higher than the second-place candidate, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who has only 14 percent support.

    The former president also has a lead over President Biden, based on a recent Emerson College Polling. While President Trump received the support of 47 percent of voters, President Biden was only supported by 43 percent of voters.

    “Last November, Biden led Trump by four points, whereas this November, he trails Trump by four. Several key groups have shifted in the past year: Biden led at this time last year among women by seven points, which has reduced to a point this year,” said Spencer Kimball, Executive Director of Emerson College Polling.

    A Nov. 28 update from Morning Consult shows President Trump trailing President Biden by one percentage point overall. However, the former president had a four percentage point lead among Independent voters.

    “For much of the past year, Biden has maintained a consistent edge in popularity over Trump, but that’s changed recently,” Morning Consult said.

    “Over the past four surveys, Trump’s net favorability rating—the share of voters with a favorable view minus the share with an unfavorable view—has been higher than Biden’s.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 19:00

  • "Let Me Be Clear": Harvard Backpedals After Donors Slam 'Insane' Protections For Pro-Genocide Students
    “Let Me Be Clear”: Harvard Backpedals After Donors Slam ‘Insane’ Protections For Pro-Genocide Students

    Harvard University has issued a statement on Wednesday in a furious attempt at damage control, after President Claudine Gay refused to condemn students calling for the genocide of Jews.

    During Tuesday testimony in front of the US House Education and the Workforce Committee, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), a Harvard grad, asked the presidents of Harvard, Penn, and MIT whether “calling for the genocide of Jews” violates their schools’ code of conduct or constitutes bullying or harassment, referring to calls for “intifada” chanted during several school protests.

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

    In response, MIT President Sally Kornbluth said that they would be “investigated as harassment if pervasive and severe,” while Penn’s Liz Magill said “it is a context-dependent decision” that could be considered harassment “if the speech becomes conduct.”

    Harvard’s Gay echoed Magill, saying that it depends on context, such as being “targeted at an individual.”

    Major donors rage

    In response to the comments, activist investor and Harvard alum Bill Ackman said “They must all resign in disgrace,” adding “if a CEO of one of our companies gave a similar answer, he or she would be toast within the hour.”

    “There’s certain speech that is certainly permissible under the First Amendment,” Ackman later told The David Rubenstein Show on Bloomberg TV. “People can be critical of Israel, the Israeli government. But, sadly, there are kids who have been spat on or been roughed up, or have been harassed, or antisemitic statements have been put on Slack message boards on campus.”

    Billionaire Dan Loeb also weighed in – saying in reply to Ackman: “The cowardly and unprincipled responses show them each to be unfit to lead.”

    Meanwhile, Penn alumnus and founder of AQR Capital Management Clif Asness said “I wish I could quit giving twice,” in a post on X, adding “This is just insane. Insane.”

    “Let me be clear”

    In response to the outrage, Gay said that “There are some who have confused a right to free expression with the idea that Harvard will condone calls for violence against Jewish students,” adding “Let me be clear (as if it’s our fault for understanding her galaxy brain statements on Tuesday): Calls for violence or genocide against the Jewish community, or any religious or ethnic group are vile, they have no place at Harvard, and those who threaten our Jewish students will be held to account.”

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

    Why not just say that during testimony, Gay?

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

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 18:40

  • House Passes Resolution Stating 'Anti-Zionism Is Antisemitism'
    House Passes Resolution Stating ‘Anti-Zionism Is Antisemitism’

    Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

    The House on Tuesday passed a resolution that says “anti-Zionism is antisemitism,” the chamber’s latest piece of legislation conflating criticism of Israel with antisemitism.

    The resolution, which is presented as a resolution condemning antisemitism, passed in a vote of 314-14-92. Only thirteen Democrats and one Republican voted against the legislation, while 92 Democrats voted “present” in protest of a line buried in the bill that explicitly claims anti-Zionism is antisemitism.

    Anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews protest outside U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer’s Manhattan offices, Getty Images

    The Republican-drafted resolution declares that the House of Representatives “clearly and firmly states that anti-Zionism is antisemitism.”

    Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), the most senior Jewish member of the House, criticized the language of the bill ahead of the vote. “The resolution suggests that ALL anti-Zionism is antisemitism. That is either intellectually disingenuous or just factually wrong. And it unfairly implicates many of my orthodox former constituents in Brooklyn, many of whose families rose from the ashes of the Holocaust,” he said.

    Nadler claimed that “most anti-Zionism is antisemitism” but added that if authors of the bill “were at all familiar with Jewish history and culture, should know about Jewish anti-Zionism that was, and is, expressly NOT antisemitic.”

    “This resolution ignores the fact that even today, certain orthodox Hasidic Jewish communities—the Satmars in New York and others—as well as adherents of the pre-state Jewish labor movement have held views that are at odds with the modern Zionist conception,” he said.

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

    While coming out strongly against the language, Nadler voted “present” instead of “no.” The thirteen Democrats who voted against the bill include Reps. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), Cori Bush (D-MO), Gerald E. Connolly (D-VA), Jesús García (D-IL), Raúl M. Grijalva (D-AZ), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Summer Lee (D-PA), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Delia Ramirez (D-IL), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).

    Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) was the only Republican to vote against the bill. Last week, he was the lone member of Congress to vote against a resolution that claimed “denying Israel’s right to exist is a form of antisemitism.”

    Massie and Schumer sparred on X in the aftermath…

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

    Schumer accused the rep. from Kentucky of posting an “antisemitic” meme and demanded that he remove it…

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

    Explaining his opposition, Massie said the resolution also equated anti-Zionism with antisemitism, although not as explicitly as the bill passed on Tuesday.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 18:20

  • Senate Republicans Block Biden Ukraine Aid Despite Warning Over 'Direct Conflict With Russia'
    Senate Republicans Block Biden Ukraine Aid Despite Warning Over ‘Direct Conflict With Russia’

    Update (1810ET): Nope…

    On Wednesday President Joe Biden suggested that if Congress doesn’t send Ukraine more money, now, it may ’embolden’ Russian President Vladimir Putin to invade a NATO ally, which would precipitate “American troops fighting Russian troops.”

    The threat was not persuasive.

    In response, Senate Republicans channeled Elon Musk (G…F…Y…), blocking Biden’s $111 emergency supplemental package that would also include aid for Israel, humanitarian aid for Gaza, and a smattering of border funding.

    The Senate voted 49-51, failing to reach the 60-vote threshold required to allow the proposal to come up for consideration. Notably, Bernie Sanders (I-VT) voted against the measure, while Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) flipped his vote to ‘no’ to preserve the option of revisiting the bill at a later date.

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

    *  *  *

    President Joe Biden has raised the possibility of “American troops fighting Russian troops” in a speech urging Congress to put aside “petty, partisan, angry politics” which is holding up his multibillion-dollar aid package for Ukraine. He said that he’s willing to make “significant compromises” with Republicans but that it’s they who’ve been unwilling to back down from their “extreme” demands. 

    “This cannot wait,” Biden stressed in the televised remarks from the White House. “Congress needs to pass supplemental funding for Ukraine before they break for the holiday recess. Simple as that. Frankly, I think it’s stunning that we’ve gotten to this point in the first place. Republicans in Congress are willing to give Putin the greatest gift he can hope for and abandon our global leadership.”

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

    “I’m willing to make significant compromises on the border. We need to fix the broken border system. It is broken. And thus far I’ve gotten no response,” Biden pleaded. He made the speech after speaking with G7 leaders, who are reportedly alarmed that US funding to Ukraine is set to run dry in a mere three weeks.

    “If we walk away, how many of our European friends are going to continue to fund and at what rates are they going to continue to fund?” he posed.

    And that’s when the fear-mongering really kicked into overdrive. He went so far as to say that if Ukraine’s defense isn’t funded, this will lead to the country being steamrolled by the Russian military machine, and an emboldened Putin will then seek to gobble up more territory. Here’s what the US president said, as reported in The New York Times: 

    The president even raised the prospect that an emboldened Mr. Putin would pose a threat to NATO allies, requiring the United States to come to their assistance with troops on the group. “If Putin takes Ukraine, he won’t stop there,” Mr. Biden said. “It’s important to see the long run here. He’s going to keep going. He’s made their pretty clear.”

    “If he keeps going and then he attacks a NATO ally” to which the United States is bound by treaty to help, “then we’ll have something that we don’t seek and that we don’t have today — American troops fighting Russian troops,” Mr. Biden said.

    “Make no mistake,” he added. “Today’s vote is going to be long remembered and history’s going to judge harshly those who turn their back on freedom’s cause. We can’t let Putin win. I’ll say it again, we can’t let Putin win.”

    Of course, this shaky “logic” is the opposite of reality. It is the nearly two years of ‘blank check’ spending which has only served to ever-deepen American military involvement in the war, and this is what has gotten Washington into yet another foreign quagmire. 

    The soon to emerge narrative will also inevitably be that these hold-out Republicans “lost” the Ukraine war, as Biden’s Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has already been saying. The MSM will also help the administration float this as a key 2024 election talking point… wait for it to be on an endless CNN/NPR loop headed into next November.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 18:10

  • Putin Trots Around Middle East, All Smiles With MbS, While US Can't Secure Ukraine Funding
    Putin Trots Around Middle East, All Smiles With MbS, While US Can’t Secure Ukraine Funding

    It was no mere awkward fist bump, but instead Russian President Vladimir Putin’s reception in Riyadh Wednesday was clearly very warm and enthusiastic.

    From the moment Putin walked out onto a royal purple carpet-bedecked airport tarmac to later being officially greeted by crown prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS), it was chummy handshakes, back slaps and smiles all the way around. 

    Mohammed bin Salman welcomes Vladimir Putin to Riyadh on Wednesday, AFP via Getty Images

    “Nothing can prevent the development of our friendly relations,” Putin told MbS, and invited him to visit Moscow in return.

    “It is very important for all of us to exchange information and assessments with you on what is happening in the region. Our meeting is certainly timely,” Putin said.

    Below is the moment of Putin’s being received and welcomed by a glowing MbS, ironically at the very moment President Biden gave a White House speech bemoaning the inability of Congress to pass Ukraine defense funding, which runs out in three weeks…

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

    As Deutsche Welle reviews, the discussions likely centered on the planned OPEC+ output cuts and the Gaza War and regional crisis in the wake of the Oct.7 Hamas attack:

    The Kremlin said talks in Saudi Arabia would involve discussions on energy cooperation, including as part of OPEC+, whose members pump more than 40% of the world’s oil.

    Other items on the agenda include Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, the situation in Syria and Yemen, and broader issues of stability in the Gulf, as well as the war in Ukraine, the Kremlin said.

    Prior to his arrival in Saudi Arabia, Putin’s visit to neighboring UAE also had much fanfare. This is a man still under a Hague-based ICC warrant — but you would never guess it based on the below impressive state reception…

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

    He had met with the President of the United Arab Emirates Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan—with the Israel-Hamas war high on the agenda. Of course, neither Gulf leaders have signed the founding ICC treaty, and their warm embrace of Putin is sure to greatly annoy Washington and European leaders.

    Meanwhile, to make matters worse from the West’s perspective and its apparently failed and blunted sanctions on Moscow…

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

    Was Wednesday’s very brief Middle East tour by Putin for the purpose of doing a victory lap? Biden might be able to console himself with the current state of cheaper oil markets for the time being, but one wonders how long that will last.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 18:00

  • Texas, The Daily Wire, & The Federalist Sue US State Dept For Conspiring With Newsguard To Censor American Media Companies
    Texas, The Daily Wire, & The Federalist Sue US State Dept For Conspiring With Newsguard To Censor American Media Companies

    Following bombshell censorship revelations exposed over the last year, beginning with the Twitter Files, the state of Texas, The Daily Wire, and The Federalist have filed a lawsuit against the US State Department on Tuesday, alleging that the government agency funded censorship technology designed to bankrupt domestic media outlets which have disfavored political opinions.  Read the 67-page complaint here.

    According to the Daily Wire‘s Luke Rosiak;

    The State Department is tasked with foreign relations and has no authority over domestic affairs, yet it took a government office designed for countering foreign terrorist propaganda, the Global Engagement Center (GEC), and unleashed it against Americans engaged in what it claimed was “disinformation,” according to the lawsuit, filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas on Tuesday night by the New Civil Liberties Alliance.

    It was “one of the most audacious, manipulative, secretive, and gravest abuses of power and infringements of First Amendment rights by the federal government in American history,” said the suit, which also names Secretary of State Antony Blinken and five other officials as defendants.

    Of note, the GEC, founded in 2011 under a different name to combat foreign propaganda in a counterterrorism capacity. In establishing the entity, Congress made clear that “none of the funds authorized” for the program “shall be used for purposes other than countering foreign propaganda.”

    They of course ignored all that, and turned its focus on Americans according to the complaint, using taxpayer funds to finance and promote censorship shops such as NewsGuard and the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), which target conservative outlets – ZeroHege included – with the stated goal of killing ad revenue.

    “Through its Global Engagement Center, the State Department actively intervened in the news-media market to limit the reach and business viability of domestic news organizations by funding censorship technology and private censorship enterprises,” reads a Wednesday press release from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

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

    “The State Department’s mission to obliterate the First Amendment is completely un-American. This agency will not get away with their illegal campaign to silence citizens and publications they disagree with.”

    As the lawsuit explains, The Daily Wire, The Federalist, and other conservative news organizations were “branded ‘unreliable’ or ‘risky’ by the government-funded and government-promoted censorship enterprises… starving them of advertising revenue and reducing the circulation of their reporting and speech—all as a direct result of [the State Department’s] unlawful censorship scheme.”

    The outlets are being represented by The New Civil Liberties Alliance’s Mark Chenoweth, who said that “the federal government cannot do indirectly what the First Amendment forbids it from doing directly.“

    As Rosiak notes in the Wire, GDI’s primary product is a “Dynamic Exclusion List” of media outlets that it warns presents a “high risk for disinformation.” For example:

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

    It then licenses that list to advertisers, who use it to avoid boycotts from the left.

    That playbook was deployed last month against Elon Musk, when blue-chip advertisers were persuaded to stop advertising on the platform because the Left-wing Media Matters group claimed that big companies’ ads occasionally appeared near objectionable content.

    GDI says it aims to destroy “the incentive to create [disinformation] for the purpose of garnering advertising revenues.”

    GDI keeps its main blacklist secret, but publicly published its top 10 “riskiest” outlets, which was essentially a list of America’s most prominent and mainstream conservative media publications, including both The Daily Wire and The Federalist, as well as the New York Post, and Reason Magazine. -Daily Caller

    According to the lawsuit, GDI “was funded and promoted by State Department Defendants,” which adds that the “State Department Defendants’ active intervention in the news media market to make disfavored media unprofitable thus had devastating consequences to Media Plaintiffs.”

    NewsGuard

    The State Department also funded the for-profit entity NewsGuard, which says its goals is to “cut off revenues to fake news sites” via a whitelist that purports to promote only ‘legitimate’ news outlets. NewsGuard ranks The Federalist as “unreliable,” and the Daily Wire as “credible with significant exceptions.”

    Last month, journalist Lee Fang uncovered that NewsGuard’s largest investor is a Pfizer partner.

    As Fang writes;

    Founded in 2018 by Crovitz and his co-CEO Steven Brill, a lawyer, journalist and entrepreneur, NewsGuard seeks to monetize the work of reshaping the Internet. The potential market for such speech policing, NewsGuard’s pitch to Twitter noted, was $1.74 billion, an industry it hoped to capture.

    Instead of merely suggesting rebuttals to untrustworthy information, as many other existing anti-misinformation groups provide, NewsGuard has built a business model out of broad labels that classify entire news sites as safe or untrustworthy, using an individual grading system producing what it calls “nutrition labels.” The ratings – which appear next to a website’s name on the Microsoft Edge browser and other systems that deploy the plug-in – use a scale of zero to 100 based on what NewsGuard calls “nine apolitical criteria,” including “gathers and presents information responsibly” (worth 18 points), “avoids deceptive headlines” (10 points), and “does not repeatedly publish false or egregiously misleading content” (22 points), etc. 

    Critics note that such ratings are entirely subjective – the New York Times, for example, which repeatedly carried false and partisan information from anonymous sources during the Russiagate hoax, gets a 100% rating. RealClearInvestigations, which took heat in 2019 for unmasking the “whistleblower” of the first Trump impeachment (while many other outlets including the Times still have not), has an 80% rating. (Verbatim: the NewsGuard-RCI exchange over the whistleblower.) Independent news outlets with an anti-establishment bent receive particularly low ratings from NewsGuard, such as the libertarian news site Antiwar.com, with a 49.5% rating, and conservative site The Federalist, with a 12.5% rating.

    …

    Publicis Groupe, NewsGuard’s largest investor and the biggest conglomerate of marketing agencies in the world, which has integrated NewsGuard’s technology into its fleet of subsidiaries that place online advertising. The question of conflicts arises because Publicis represents a range of corporate and government clients, including Pfizer – whose COVID vaccine has been questioned by some news outlets that have received low scores. Other investors include Bruce Mehlman, a D.C. lobbyist with a lengthy list of clients, including United Airlines and ByteDance, the parent company of much-criticized Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok.

    *  *  *

    NewsGuard was sued in October by Consortium news.

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

    Read more here via the Daily Wire. We will be following this closely.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 12/06/2023 – 17:55

Digest powered by RSS Digest