transition Archives - The Automatic Earth

Elon Musk: The laptop class is living in La La Land.

“The laptop class is living in La La Land.

Look at the cars. Are people working from home here? Of course not.

People who are building cars, servicing the cars, building houses, fixing houses, making the food, making all… pic.twitter.com/NFrNJEoXO4

— ELON CLIPS (@ElonClipsX) December 19, 2024

Sen. Kennedy

Senator Kennedy Urges Trump to Take Charge of House GOP After Speaker Johnson’s CR Debacle

SENATOR KENNEDY: "I saw what you saw. I mean, it's a multiple vehicle pileup. I knew as soon as I saw the bill, it was going to be trouble. The thing was as big as a Costco. And Speaker… pic.twitter.com/DCxDqcPtII

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) December 19, 2024

Watters Biden

Bad news: @JoeBiden is delaying his retirement to clean up his legacy. But with the election lost and Biden out to pasture — Democrats are leaking like a busted sink. In a bombshell report, over 50 Biden insiders told the @WSJ that Joe was even worse than we thought… Biden… pic.twitter.com/GgC8Fu7n1M

— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) December 20, 2024

Durbin

🚨The Dems are eating themselves alive:

CNN Reporter: “People look at the performance of Congress and say ‘Why should we give them more money?’”

Senator Durbin: “What about the media?… Half of your listeners are not there anymore and you’re still getting the same paycheck.” pic.twitter.com/m7k4q8euRG

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) December 18, 2024

Jennings

NOW – Scott Jennings Goes Scorched Earth on Dems Calling Biden's Decline Cover-Up: 'The Biggest Scandal in America' | @ScottJenningsKY

Finally.🔥

Scott Jennings just exposed the cover-up of Biden's cognitive deterioration, forcing his CNN colleagues to listen to the evidence… pic.twitter.com/IUHwtm2xHh

— Overton (@overton_news) December 20, 2024

O’Leary
https://twitter.com/i/status/1869549028200808482

“There are probably dozens of Republicans who have never voted for raising the debt ceiling. Now Trump is forcing them to do so.”

• Trump-Backed Funding Bill Fails House Vote As 38 Republicans Say ‘No’ (ZH)

Update (1752ET): The first vote to kick the can down the road until 2027 has failed the House, by a vote of 174-235-1, with 38 Republicans voting ‘no’. The bill required 2/3 of the vote under a fast-track method, yet didn’t even clear a simple majority. Polymarket odds of a shutdown have spiked to 76% as of this writing * * * Update (1752ET): In what comes as a surprise to nobody, Democrats want their pork – and have said “Hell no” to the massively reduced spending package that Mike Johnson rolled out after conferring with the Trump team. “The Musk-Johnson proposal is not serious. It’s laughable. Extreme MAGA Republicans are driving us to a government shutdown,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters as he walked into a closed-door caucus meeting Thursday afternoon. In short, it’s doomed. “I’m not simply a no. I’m a hell no,” Jeffries then said at the closed-door meeting, Politico reports, citing three people familiar with the meeting.

That’s 38 Republicans voting to express no confidence in Mike Johnson as Speaker of the House. A stunning rebuke for a guy who won unanimous support in conference just weeks ago. What a turnaround. He’s in very big trouble. https://t.co/bcOHiNWCTn

— Matthew Boyle (@mboyle1) December 20, 2024

[..] With Friday’s government shutdown looming – and odds spiking after everyone figured out that the 1,547-page Continuing Resolution (CR) was full of Orwellian bullshit and other malarkey, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has gone to Donald Trumps team with hat in hand. The new plan will be a federal funding stopgap plan that includes disaster aid, pushing off the debt limit fight for two years, and a one-year farm bill extension, Politico reports, citing Republicans familiar with the discussions. No word on how close this comes to a “clean” bill, or how much of the aforementioned bullshit is gone – such as funding the Global Engagement Center, shielding the Jan. 6 committee from subpoenas, and funding new biolabs, but we guess we’ll find out. Also unknown is whether Democrats will support the plan.

“But Trump had made an 11th hour public demand that any stopgap bill should deal with the debt limit. Trump’s team is pushing for at least a commitment to lift the debt limit before Jan. 20. The level of disaster aid and whether it’s completely paid for is still unclear. The package would also likely include some additional economic aid for farmers, amid threats from rural Republicans to oppose any stopgap that doesn’t include the funding”. -Politico. In a closed door meeting on Thursday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) told Democratic lawmakers: “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate,” citing JFK. Polymarkets odds of a government shutdown went from 15% yesterday to 49% this morning. According to Punchbowl News, here’s what happened, and what’s next;

At some point today, House Republicans and Democrats will likely have separate party meetings to chart their path forward. Democrats have announced their meeting for 9 a.m. We’ll talk more about them below. But make no mistake — this is Johnson and Trump’s mess to solve. And we’re inching toward a shutdown as government funding runs out at midnight Friday. Johnson was mostly MIA Wednesday, holed up in his Capitol office for hours without showing his face. Even the House GOP leadership team felt like they were being kept in the dark about what was happening. Late in the evening, Johnson met with Vance, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) and Rules Committee Chair Michael Burgess (R-Texas). Jordan and Roy are conservative hardliners. Diaz-Balart is a senior appropriator.

As Scalise left around 10 p.m., he told reporters “We’re not there yet” when asked whether the debt-limit boost would be part of any new government-funding plan. “A lot of things have come up,” Scalise added.A somewhat obvious play may be a funding bill with a two-year debt-limit extension. Why? Because Trump supports increasing the debt limit now. Given how volatile Trump was during his first term, there’s no guarantee he’ll do this again. (For what it’s worth, Biden administration officials estimate the debt limit won’t be reached until sometime next summer. GOP leaders were planning to handle it in a reconciliation bill). Trump is giving Johnson cover for the time being. It’s limited, however. Because Trump, once again, has put his party in a bind. There are probably dozens of Republicans who have never voted for raising the debt ceiling. Now Trump is forcing them to do so.

“If Democrats threaten to shut down the government unless we give them everything they want, then CALL THEIR BLUFF..”

• Trump and Musk Sink US Government Spending Bill (RT)

The US government is facing a partial shutdown after a stopgap spending bill pitched by lawmakers earlier this week was scrapped under pressure from President-elect Donald Trump and Elon Musk. The current funding expires on Friday, and unless a bill is passed before that deadline, millions of US federal workers will be left without paychecks. The text of the new spending plan, known as a continuing resolution (CR), was released on Tuesday just days before the deadline. The package largely provides for the government to continue to spend at current levels for the next three months, giving the newly elected Congress time to work on more permanent federal funding. The 1,547-page bill includes a pay raise for lawmakers, $100 billion for disaster relief funding and $10 billion in economic assistance for farmers, numerous provisions including foreign investment restrictions and new health care policies, among other authorizations.

US Republicans balked at the proposed package right after its release, slamming it as being too bloated and full of Democratic policy priorities. Tesla and SpaceX owner Elon Musk – pitched by Trump as the head of his new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a panel charged with finding ways to slash federal spending – launched an entire campaign against the package on X. “This bill should not pass,” Musk wrote early on Wednesday, repeatedly posting different versions of this call throughout the day and late into the night, making a total of more than 60 updates. He decried the bill as “criminal,” “outrageous,” “unconscionable,” and ultimately “one of the worst bills ever written.” Musk’s tirade sparked a virtual flashmob of disapproving statements regarding the bill, which culminated with condemnation by Donald Trump, who called it full of “Democrat giveaways.”

“Republicans must GET SMART and TOUGH. If Democrats threaten to shut down the government unless we give them everything they want, then CALL THEIR BLUFF,” he said in a joint statement with Vice President-elect JD Vance, posted on his TruthSocial account. Many observers noted that it was unusual for the incoming president and his team to tip the scales on legislation before officially coming into power. CNN and The Washington Post reported late on Wednesday that the bill had been killed, with Musk confirming it in yet another post on X.

“Your elected representatives have heard you, and now the terrible bill is dead. The voice of the people has triumphed!” he wrote, adding in another post that “no bills should be passed Congress until January 20,” when Trump takes office. It is currently unclear whether House Speaker Mike Johnson, who spearheaded the failed bill, will be able to come up with an alternative before Friday’s deadline. According to The Hill’s sources, Johnson could propose a “clean” CR, which would entail dropping the additional provisions included in the package, such as disaster aid and assistance for farmers. However, Johnson has not yet scheduled a vote on the bill.

I'm not sure if people have truly grasped the power of X.

The House was set to pass a BS spending bill.

After just a few hours of posting on X by Musk & X users, the bill was effectively killed… potentially saving the US taxpayer billions of dollars.pic.twitter.com/TbvGfLVFJ8

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) December 18, 2024

“What can we do right now, and then what can we do next? Let’s just focus on what we can do right now.”

• DOGE Insider: ‘A Lot of Stuff Ready For Day One’ (ZH)

Billionaire entrepreneur and investor Joe Lonsdale expressed strong optimism for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative during his appearance on the Shawn Ryan Show. The Palantir co-founder highlighted the “very bold” reforms being planned by co-heads Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, revealing that the DOGE team is already hard at work on strategic priorities. With over 100 people on board, the team is preparing to enact immediate changes, including staff removals and regulatory rollbacks.

SHAWN RYAN: We’re both pretty fired up about the [Trump administration]. Who are you most excited about? Do you have anybody in particular?

JOE LONSDALE: I’m most excited about Elon, Vivek and the DOGE effort because this is something I’ve wanted to see for forever. I’m probably like one of the only guys in tech that’s done a lot in policy on the right, on the small government side for the last 10-20 years, and it’s like the world just shifted this way—like the vibe shift is exactly in line with stuff I’ve been thinking and talking about for a decade. I’m so excited about this.

SHAWN RYAN: How fast do you think they’re going to start cleaning this stuff up?

JOE LONSDALE: They’re already doing it, man. They can’t really officially do it yet, but they’re already making all the plans. There’s people working hard there. There’s guys picking me, ‘Joe, we need another engineer for this,’ ‘We’re trying to map this out,’ ‘We need more lawyers for this. They’re going right now as hard as they can and getting ready. It’s going to be really bold. I think the way Elon works in general is just like, “What can we do right now, and then what can we do next? Let’s just focus on what we can do right now.” So they have what’s called their ‘Day One priorities,’ and they’re just focusing and sprinting on everything they could do day one. I think they’re going to have a lot of stuff ready for day one.

They’re bringing in at least well over 100 people for the DOGE effort, and they’re going to put a few of them directly into each agency. A lot of the transition team itself is hiring people to put into these jobs. There’s these policy placements that are all working with DOGE and being liaisons with DOGE. They’re going to come out of the gate with a bunch of general things—removing certain people, removing certain regulations. I can’t go into the details exactly of what they’re going to be doing, but it’s going to be really aggressive right from the start.” Meanwhile, Lonsdale stressed the need to rebuild America’s manufacturing base.

“I’m concerned in general that we don’t have an advanced manufacturing base that’s nearly as big as it needs to be. I think from a geopolitical perspective it’s extremely dangerous and if we want to be ready—so in World War II it wasn’t that we had like a bunch of big defense contractors that we had a bunch of big industrial manufacturers and powers that were able to be shifted to do things for the war.” “If we’ve basically gotten rid of a lot of that base and we need it back if we want to defend ourselves. So I think Trump is very good on this; he shifted it back. I think even his first term actually kind of turned the whole conversation in our country where a lot of people on both sides now agree we need to fix this. But this is where the tariffs against China, if they’re done correctly, are not totally insane at all. It makes a lot of sense to me,” he continued.

.@JTLonsdale to @ShawnRyan762: U.S. Must Rebuild Manufacturing Base to Counter China Threat

"I'm concerned in general that we don't have an advanced manufacturing base that's nearly as big as it needs to be. I think from a geopolitical perspective it's extremely dangerous and if… pic.twitter.com/hd4q3wRrIP

— CAPITAL (@capitalnewshq) December 19, 2024

“.. it makes no sense for the machinery that the incoming administration wants to overthrow to be in charge of the transition..”

• A Very Different Transition (Jeffrey A. Tucker)

The transition from Barack Obama to Donald Trump in 2016 went like every other presidential transition in modern history. The old administration had extended meetings with the new, and old agency heads and their staff trained the new ones. It was managed by Chris Christie and then-Vice President-elect Mike Pence. It was funded by the General Services Administration and the incoming team received emergency drills, confidential documents, security briefings, and training sessions on emergency protocols. The FBI was brought on board to vet all new hires. That’s because the incoming administration believed that the system worked. It had won and therefore would be in charge. That’s how it is supposed to work in the United States. The idea of this process is to ensure continuity in government from one administration to the other.

In normal times, all of this would be a good idea. The Founders set up a structural system of government with minimal functions, stable law, checks and balances, and established elections for president every four years to ensure that the chief executive served with the people’s consent. Most functions of government were handled by the states, in any case. There was never supposed to be a need for a fundamental regime change. We merely changed administrators and members of Congress. The rest was supposed to take care of itself, which is why it would seem to make sense that the old administration trains the new one, and a permanent staff of experts and civil service employees helps the new kids learn the ropes from those with experience. And yet here we are. The Trump administration’s mandate from voters is not just for a change in personnel.

The mandate is in fact for fundamental regime change within the framework of democracy. The administrative state, which is nowhere found in the Constitution, has over time developed far more power than elected leaders. That absolutely must change, as voters made clear in November 2024. It was yet another case, just like in 2016, of the candidate winning whom nearly the whole of mainstream media believed would not win, and of the whole of what anyone would call the establishment disfavoring the result. The victory was so overwhelming as to amount to a primal scream against government as usual. In this case, it makes no sense for the machinery that the incoming administration wants to overthrow to be in charge of the transition. Remember that this is not Team Trump’s first rodeo. Last time, it went along with all the protocols, funding, systems, and sessions.

The White House staff members went through day after day of lectures from government experts on how Washington works. They sat through intelligence briefings. They were schooled in protocols for the management of nuclear war, biological warfare, natural disasters, and pandemics. They put up with all the PowerPoint presentations, exhortations, manuals, lists, and introductions to people who really run the government. They assumed that once the president was sworn in, he would in fact be the president and those whom he appointed would be in charge.

[..] After leaving office in January 2021, the Trump team went to work trying to figure out what the heck had happened in the first term to cause everything to go so wrong, or, more specifically, what enabled the administration’s authority to be so thoroughly subverted from within. It concluded that the real problem began with the transition itself. That was when the permanent bureaucracy first asserted its power over the incoming administration. That’s when the deep state got its hooks in. This time, the team has a very different plan. It is being managed by trusted members of Trump’s inner circle. They have not allowed the General Services Administration to manage any aspect of the transition. They have done this by refusing to accept any money from any government source.

Instead, the transition has been entirely privately funded, with methods deployed to make sure that the funding sources are not tainted by deep state contacts. The explicit purpose has been to avoid subversion. It’s been the same with FBI vetting. The incoming Trump administration simply does not trust the process and for good reason. It was the FBI that had spied on the campaign and even raided Trump’s own home. Furthermore, it worked with other agencies to deploy myriad forms of lawfare for years.

This transition is without precedent. The permanent staff of government itself only became the U.S. norm starting in 1883, and it has grown every decade since. At some point in the past, the elected leaders became more like decorations than real rulers of government. The Trump administration cannot achieve its objectives with this status quo. This is the reason for this very different transition. It is a good sign and symbol of what might be coming. We might in fact experience a much-needed change of regime in Washington through exactly the system and process that the Founding Fathers set up. The second term of Trump seems determined to avoid repeating the obvious errors of the last time around.

“..even some Democrats are even admitting that the slew of legal cases against him were either unfounded or a strategic blunder..”

• Trump Notches Several Court Victories On Eve Of Return To The White House (JTN)

The legal system has been very good to Donald Trump as he prepares to return to the White House, removing perceived enemies as prosecutors, dismissing charges and even awarding defamation damages. A Georgia appeals court decision to disqualify Fani Willis, the anti-Donald Trump Fulton County district attorney from prosecuting an election interference case against the once and future president marks only the latest victory for Trump in lawfare battles since the 2020 election. Recently, Trump also obtained a $15 million defamation settlement from ABC News after an anchor inaccurately and repeatedly claimed he was found civilly liable for “raping” E. Jean Carroll. The New York Post reported that George Stephanopoulos was repeatedly told by his executive producer not to “use the word ‘rape’” before going on the air to discuss Donald Trump but the ABC News anchor ignored the warning.

Early on in the Republican primary, Trump had to grapple with five cases brought by state and federal prosecutors that tied the former president to courtrooms as the election season kicked off. Now, with Trump still standing as the president-elect for the second time, the state-level cases appear to be embroiled in death throes and delays while the Justice Department’s special prosecutor moved last month to dismiss the two pending federal cases. As the cases die down and Trump prepares to take office in January, even some Democrats are even admitting that the slew of legal cases against him were either unfounded or a strategic blunder. “The Trump hush money and Hunter Biden cases were both bullshit, and pardons are appropriate,” Senator John Fetterman, D-Penn., wrote in his first post to Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social.

“Weaponizing the judiciary for blatant, partisan gain diminishes the collective faith in our institutions and sows further division,” he continued. Before the election, former Democratic presidential candidate and Congressman Dean Philipps called on New York Governor Kathy Hochul to pardon Trump in his state cases “for the good of the country.” Trump latest win came in the Georgia election interference case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. On Thursday, an appeals court ruled that Willis and her deputies should be disqualified from prosecuting Trump due to the “appearance of impropriety.” “We reverse the trial court’s denial of the appellants’ motion to disqualify DA Willis and her office. As we conclude that the elected district attorney is wholly disqualified from this case the assistant district attorneys — whose only power to prosecute a case is derived from the constitutional authority of the district attorney who appointed them — have no authority to proceed,” the Georgia appeals court wrote in the decision.

During several hearings on the case, Willis faced accusations of financial mismanagement and of carrying on an improper relationship with her chief prosecutor on the case, Nathan Wade. The Fulton DA also laid the groundwork for prosecuting Trump before she had even taken office, according to Wade’s testimony to the House Judiciary Committee earlier this year. The judges wrote that the “remedy crafted by the trial court to prevent an ongoing appearance of impropriety did nothing to address the appearance of impropriety that existed at times when DA Willis was exercising her broad pretrial discretion about who to prosecute and what charges to bring.” This decision indicates that the proceedings in the case are likely to drag out even longer, already significantly delayed by the Willis accusations. Trump and his co-defendants have raised several other legal challenges on appeal including over the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling.

“The case against Trump was deeply flawed. It read like a legal version of six degrees from Kevin Bacon..”

• Georgia Appellate Court Disqualifies Fani Willis (Turley)

Today, the Georgia Court of Appeals disqualified Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her team in the prosecution of President-elect Donald Trump. The final collapse of the House of Willis came after months of her spending enormous amounts of time and money to try to stay at the lead of the high-profile case. Lawfare holds little value unless you are the lead warrior. For over a year, some have criticized Willis for her refusal to recuse herself. When her hiring of her former lover was first disclosed, Willis could have done the right thing for her office, the case, and the public. She could have recused herself and may have preserved her office’s ability to continue with the case. She was then given a further opportunity to do the right thing by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee who disqualified her former lover, Nathan Wade, and found an “appearance of impropriety.”

He, however, left it up to Willis to recuse herself after criticizing her conduct. Some of us noted that the finding did not jive with the order. If there was an “appearance of impropriety,” it would obviously continue with Willis remaining at the lead in the case. However, Willis let the case go dormant and committed her office to the fight to preserve her role. Now, the appellate court has forced her off the case and ordered a new office to take over any prosecution. The court ruled that “[a]fter carefully considering the trial court’s findings in its order, we conclude that it erred by failing to disqualify DA Willis and her office. The remedy crafted by the trial court to prevent an ongoing appearance of impropriety did nothing to address the appearance of impropriety that existed at times when DA Willis was exercising her broad pretrial discretion about who to prosecute and what charges to bring.”

The court admitted that Willis had forced the hand of the court by her refusal to do the right thing in the lower court. It recognized that “an appearance of impropriety generally is not enough to support disqualification, this is the rare case in which disqualification is mandated and no other remedy will suffice to restore public confidence in the integrity of these proceedings.” Accordingly, it reversed McAfee and found that if “the elected district attorney is wholly disqualified from this case, ‘the assistant district attorneys — whose only power to prosecute a case is derived from the constitutional authority of the district attorney who appointed them — have no authority to proceed.’” The opinion made clear that these cases cannot become the vanity projects of prosecutors. They are expected to do the right thing, even when the right thing does not come easily personally or politically.

The center of the case now shifts to another prosecutor who will have to decide whether it wants to continue the case and what (and who) to prosecute. As I have previously written, the Georgia case has viable crimes against others for offenses such as unlawful entry into restricted areas. The case against Trump was deeply flawed. It read like a legal version of six degrees from Kevin Bacon. As my friend and fellow analyst Andy McCarthy noted, this is the first racketeering case that any of us have seen where the strongest connection between the parties was being named in the charging documents.

A new prosecutor should drop the Trump charges and end this ridiculous lawfare enterprise. If not, the case will likely collapse by its own weight due to the attenuated racketeering theory or other legal problems, including the use of evidence barred under the recent presidential immunity decision. In the end, Willis was reelected by the voters of Atlanta who clearly accepted or supported the weaponization of the criminal justice system to target political opponents. The millions spent in the case were just treated as a cost of doing the business of lawfare. Hopefully, a new prosecution office will restore a modicum of integrity to the Georgia legal system. It is now time to end this circus as the ringmaster leaves the center ring.

What did Bezos pay? Not much of that is left. The $1 million for Trump comes way too late. Nobody reads WaPo anymore.

• Top Editors Stiff WashPost (Axios)

The situation at The Washington Post is so dire that two candidates to run the paper — Cliff Levy of The New York Times and Meta’s Anne Kornblut, a former Post editor — both withdrew from consideration for the top newsroom job over the paper’s strategy, sources involved in the process tell us. The Post is scrambling to find a new executive editor, the chair once held by Ben Bradlee, amid shrinking paid readership and revenue. Publisher and CEO Will Lewis, handpicked by owner Jeff Bezos to save The Post, hasn’t impressed the candidates with his vision for the future, the sources tell us. One person involved in the search told us Lewis’ pitch was foggy and uninspiring. Levy, who pulled out last week, and Kornblut, whose conversations ended in September, declined to comment. Other candidates include current interim executive editor Matt Murray.

But it’s hard to imagine this monthslong process unfolding so publicly — only to end with the same guy in charge. A few candidates were asked to write six-page memos — a hallmark of Amazon culture — about their journalistic vision for the paper, using AI and how to grow The Post’s audience. Levy is a two-time Pulitzer winner who was an early advocate for digital innovation, and now is deputy publisher of two prized Times properties, The Athletic and Wirecutter. He started talking to The Post in August after the paper’s search firm, Egon Zehnder, reached out. Kornblut, who declined to move forward with the process after initial conversations, is Meta’s VP of global product content operations. She had a formidable newspaper career before moving to the Bay Area as a tech executive: She was a Washington correspondent for The Boston Globe and The New York Times before becoming a Washington Post reporter and editor for eight years.

Kornblut rose to deputy assistant managing editor for national news, where she was the lead editor on Pulitzer-winning coverage of Edward Snowden’s NSA revelations. Matea Gold — a respected, popular managing editor many reporters wanted in the top job, and who conceived of and ran The Post’s Pulitzer-winning investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol — announced last week that she’s moving to The New York Times as Washington editor, making her deputy to the bureau chief. There’s lots of anxiety in The Post newsroom right now about whether the paper is still committed to that kind of fearless accountability reporting. Axios confirmed that the search firm also reached out to Kevin Merida and Steven Ginsberg, two former Washington Post managing editors. Neither expressed interest in the role.

The big picture: Bezos has said little about what he wants for a revived Post. He is scheduled to dine with President-elect Trump at Mar-a-Lago this week — two months after killing a Post endorsement of Trump’s rival, Vice President Harris. Bezos’ various business interests — Amazon and the Blue Origin space company — stand to gain or suffer from Trump’s presidency. The Post has announced no major shifts or innovations under the Lewis regime. Toss in a demoralized staff and invigorated labor unions, and you have a mighty challenge for the next top editor.

Between the lines: The Post has lost a ton of talent this last year, and several stars are talking to competitors about leaving soon. One hot rumor inside The Post: The Atlantic is licking its chops over political writers who are increasingly poachable. Other Posties are eying The New York Times, long known at the Post as “Brand X.” People involved in the process say Bezos has been mostly MIA at the Post, leaving matters to Lewis, who is unpopular in the newsroom.
Several people familiar with The Post’s search were baffled by the apparent absence of editorial vision or business strategy. “I’m not sure it’s salvageable,” one of them said.

“..forcing Trump to make critical choices between his transactional instincts and the harsh ideological bent of his advisers.”

• Trump Confronts a Rising China (Michael Klare)

Gaza, Haiti, Iran, Israel, Lebanon, Russia, Syria, Ukraine, and Venezuela: President-elect Donald Trump will face no shortage of foreign-policy challenges when he assumes office in January. None, however, comes close to China in scope, scale, or complexity. No other country has the capacity to resist his predictable antagonism with the same degree of strength and tenacity, and none arouses more hostility and outrage among MAGA Republicans. In short, China is guaranteed to put President Trump in a difficult bind the second time around: he can either choose to cut deals with Beijing and risk being branded an appeaser by the China hawks in his party, or he can punish and further encircle Beijing, risking a potentially violent clash and possibly even nuclear escalation. How he chooses to resolve this quandary will surely prove the most important foreign test of his second term in office.

Make no mistake: China truly is considered The Big One by those in Trump’s entourage responsible for devising foreign policy. While they imagine many international challenges to their “America First” strategy, only China, they believe, poses a true threat to the continued global dominance of this country. “I feel strongly that the Chinese Communist Party has entered into a Cold War with the United States and is explicit in its aim to replace the liberal, Western-led world order that has been in place since World War II,” Representative Michael Waltz, Trump’s choice as national security adviser, declared at a 2023 event hosted by the Atlantic Council. “We’re in a global arms race with an adversary that, unlike any in American history, has the economic and the military capability to truly supplant and replace us.”

As Waltz and others around Trump see it, China poses a multi-dimensional threat to this country’s global supremacy. In the military domain, by building up its air force and navy, installing military bases on reclaimed islands in the South China Sea, and challenging Taiwan through increasingly aggressive air and naval maneuvers, it is challenging continued American dominance of the Western Pacific. Diplomatically, it’s now bolstering or repairing ties with key U.S. allies, including India, Indonesia, Japan, and the members of NATO. Meanwhile, it’s already close to replicating this country’s most advanced technologies, especially its ability to produce advanced microchips. And despite Washington’s efforts to diminish a U.S. reliance on vital Chinese goods, including critical minerals and pharmaceuticals, it remains a primary supplier of just such products to this country.

For many in the Trumpian inner circle, the only correct, patriotic response to the China challenge is to fight back hard. Both Representative Waltz, Trump’s pick as national security adviser, and Senator Marco Rubio, his choice as secretary of state, have sponsored or supported legislation to curb what they view as “malign” Chinese endeavors in the United States and abroad. Waltz, for example, introduced the American Critical Mineral Exploration and Innovation Act of 2020, which was intended, as he explained, “to reduce America’s dependence on foreign sources of critical minerals and bring the U.S. supply chain from China back to America.” Senator Rubio has been equally combative in the legislative arena. In 2021, he authored the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which banned goods produced in forced labor encampments in Xinjiang Province from entering the United States.

He also sponsored several pieces of legislation aimed at curbing Chinese access to U.S. technology. Although these, as well as similar measures introduced by Waltz, haven’t always obtained the necessary congressional approval, they have sometimes been successfully bundled into other legislation. In short, Trump will enter office in January with a toolkit of punitive measures for fighting China ready to roll along with strong support among his appointees for making them the law of the land. But of course, we’re talking about Donald Trump, so nothing is a given. Some analysts believe that his penchant for deal-making and his professed admiration for Chinese strongman President Xi Jinping may lead him to pursue a far more transactional approach, increasing economic and military pressure on Beijing to produce concessions on, for example, curbing the export of fentanyl precursors to Mexico, but when he gets what he wants letting them lapse.

Howard Lutnick, the billionaire investor from Cantor Fitzgerald whom he chose as Commerce secretary, claims that Trump actually “wants to make a deal with China,” and will use the imposition of tariffs selectively as a bargaining tool to do so. What such a deal might look like is anyone’s guess, but it’s hard to see how Trump could win significant concessions from Beijing without abandoning some of the punitive measures advocated by the China hawks in his entourage. Count on one thing: this complicated and confusing dynamic will play out in each of the major problem areas in U.S.-China relations, forcing Trump to make critical choices between his transactional instincts and the harsh ideological bent of his advisers.

Puti did his annual “ask me anything” gathering. 4.5 hours. Off the cuff.

• Putin Says He Hasn’t Spoken To Trump For More Than Four Years (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin stated during his annual end-of-year press conference on Thursday that he has not spoken to US President-elect Donald Trump in over four years, and thus expects “there will be plenty to discuss” when their next conversation takes place. The comment came in response to a question from Keir Simmons of NBC News, who asked about the potential dynamics of a future meeting between the two leaders, suggesting that Russia’s position on the global stage has weakened and that Trump would have the upper hand in any talks. “I don’t know when we will meet because he has not said anything about it,” Putin said. “I have not talked to him for more than four years. Of course, I’m ready to talk anytime; I will be ready to meet with him if he wishes.”

The Russian leader went on to refute the notion of a weak Russia, saying that the US journalist and those paying his salary “really want to see Russia in a weakened state,” but as a “well-known writer once remarked: ‘The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.’” “I believe that Russia has become significantly stronger in the past two or three years. Why? Because we are becoming a truly sovereign country, and we barely depend on anybody. We are capable of firmly standing on our own feet when it comes to the economy,” Putin said. The president highlighted Russia’s economic resilience and stated that the combat readiness of the Russian Armed Forces is among the highest in the world, with the defense industry rapidly expanding and producing essential military equipment.

“That is why I believe that Russia has largely achieved the state we wanted to achieve. It has grown stronger and become a truly sovereign state, and we will make decisions without regard to other people’s opinions, only with our national interests in mind,” he added. During a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate on Monday, Trump declined to say whether he had spoken to Putin since winning last month’s presidential election, but indicated that he intends to do so at some point.

“We’ll be talking to President Putin, and we’ll be talking to representatives Zelensky and others from Ukraine,” he said. “We’ve got to stop it. It’s carnage,” referring to the almost three-year conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Trump has repeatedly claimed that he could end the Ukraine conflict within “24 hours” of taking office by forcing “peace through strength,” but has not provided specifics on how he would do this. Putin previously stated that Trump’s remarks on ending the conflict “deserve attention” and expressed openness to talks with the president-elect. “Should there be an opportunity for a meeting with the newly elected President Donald Trump, I am confident there will be plenty to discuss,” Putin said on Thursday.

“Let them identify a target in Kiev, concentrate all their air defense and missile defense systems there, and then we will strike it with an Oreshnik..”

• Putin Challenges West To ‘Technological Duel’ With Oreshnik (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has challenged the West to put their modern air defense systems up against Moscow’s new hypersonic Oreshnik missile in what would be a “technological duel.” During his annual end-of-year press conference on Thursday, Putin was asked to comment on opinions expressed by some foreign military experts suggesting that the Oreshnik can easily be shot down by Western missile defense systems. “Well, if those Western experts you mentioned believe that, they should suggest to their employers in the West and the US to conduct a technological experiment. For instance, a high-tech duel of the 21st century. Let them identify a target in Kiev, concentrate all their air defense and missile defense systems there, and then we will strike it with an Oreshnik. Let’s see what happens. We are ready for such an experiment. Is the other side ready?” Putin asked.

The president explained that given the technical characteristics of the Oreshnik and the current missile defense systems deployed by the West, it would be impossible to stop the missile or its hypersonic warheads after it had been launched. Putin suggested that the results of such a “duel” would be of great interest to both Russia and the US, whose air defense systems are currently operating in Ukraine. Putin was also asked why the Oreshnik is named the way it is, to which he confessed that he doesn’t actually know.

The Russian military carried out the first-ever combat test of the Oreshnik on November 21, using it to destroy a Ukrainian military industrial facility in Dnepr with multiple hypersonic warheads. Putin said at the time that the decision to unveil the Oreshnik was made in response to Ukraine’s long-range strikes on internationally recognized Russian territory made with Western permission. Putin had previously explained that the Oreshnik can carry both nuclear and conventional warheads, which travel at ten times the speed of sound, making it impossible for Western air-defense systems to intercept them.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1869695854459912571

“The US not only does not have a hypersonic offensive system – it doesn’t even have a defensive system that has any hope of stopping Oreshnik..”

• Russia’s Invincible Oreshnik Has Left West in The Dust – Ex-DoD Analyst (Sp.)

Russia’s Oreshnik medium-range hypersonic ballistic missile grabbed the attention of military observers the world over after it was fired at a major defense-related enterprise in Dnepropetrovsk days after the US and the UK okayed the launch of ATACMS and Storm Shadow missiles at targets deep inside Russia.The West is in denial about Russia’s Oreshnik missile that defense systems are powerless to counter, Michael Maloof, former senior security policy analyst in the Pentagon, told Sputnik.He pointed out that Russia’s multi-warhead, nuclear-capable Oreshnik has left the United States far behind.“The US not only does not have a hypersonic offensive system – it doesn’t even have a defensive system that has any hope of stopping Oreshnik and the new class of missiles that are coming out,” the veteran analyst maintained. While the US scrambles to be in the vanguard of such cutting-edge weapons systems, in effect it tends to “put all the bells and whistles on a system, overprice it and then fall behind,” said Maloof.

Washington is reluctant to acknowledge that both Russia and China have weapons systems that the US does not have, namely, hypersonic missiles. The pundit speculated that if the United States had remained in the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a missile like the Oreshnik might not exist today. He observed that Russia’s clear demonstration of the missile’s unmatched capabilities serves as “another way of Putin telling Trump to maybe reconsider.”“I think in order to lessen the threshold of war […] and this would be a good start and, at least, beginning with the United States and Russia. And the other countries can follow suit,” said Maloof, adding: “It’s something that the world needs to really focus in on, recognize, and deal with constructively.”

“..the “West pulled the plug on the negotiations which were on course to produce a ceasefire.”

• ‘Deeply Immoral’ Anglo-Americans Sabotaged Ukraine Peace – Ex-Swiss Envoy (RT)

Veteran Swiss diplomat Jean-Daniel Ruch has alleged that the US and UK “immorally” prevented Ukraine and Russia from sealing a truce back in April 2022 in the hope of dealing a blow to Moscow. The former official, who at the time served as Swiss ambassador to Türkiye, was in the country when peace talks were taking place. In Istanbul, Ukraine and Russia preliminarily agreed to a draft truce under which Kiev would have renounced its NATO membership aspirations, declared neutrality, and limited the size of its armed forces in exchange for international security guarantees. However, Ukrainian negotiators abruptly pulled out, with Moscow later claiming that then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson had urged the Ukrainian leadership not to sign any accord and to “just continue fighting.”

While David Arakhamia, the Zelensky-allied MP who led the Ukrainian delegation, confirmed this in November 2023, Johnson still insists that the allegation is an “absolute steaming, stinking lie.” In an interview with the French-speaking Anti These media outlet on Sunday, Ruch recounted how the “West pulled the plug on the negotiations which were on course to produce a ceasefire.” According to the diplomat, it was clear already in April 2022 that “if the war continued… the dead would be counted at least in tens of thousands, more probably in hundreds of thousands.” Nevertheless, the “Americans and their British allies” intervened in the Istanbul peace talks and scuttled a ceasefire that “was within reach,” insisting on weakening Russia further instead, Ruch claimed.

The former ambassador described the move as “deeply immoral,” suggesting that Kiev is now unlikely to be offered terms as favorable as the ones proposed in 2022 in Türkiye. Speaking on Johnson’s role in those events, the veteran diplomat alleged that the former British leader “was in [Istanbul] on duty for the Americans” as he “doesn’t make this kind of decisions all by himself.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly expressed readiness to engage in dialogue with Kiev based on the draft agreement prepared in Istanbul in the spring of 2022, plus recognition of the “new territorial realities” that have taken shape since. According to the Russian leader, “the document did not come into force only because the Ukrainians were ordered not to do this. The elites in the US and some European countries felt the desire to seek Russia’s strategic defeat.”

The Ukrainians were merely the henchmen. They had to get the OK first.

• It’s The Biolabs, Stupid: Is This Why Ukraine Murdered A Russian General?

The shocking assassination of Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the head of Russia’s Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Protection Forces, reverberates far beyond the streets of Moscow. On December 17, 2024, Kirillov was killed in a brazen bombing, an act the Russian government has denounced as terrorism. While the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) – Kiev’s successor to the Soviet KGB – via ‘anonymous sources’ cited in multiple media outlets, has claimed responsibility, labeling Kirillov a war criminal, the truth about his death is likely far more complex – and far more chilling. Kirillov’s death was not just an attack on a prominent Russian official; it was an attack on the truth. For years, he had been at the forefront of investigating and exposing alleged US-funded biolabs in Ukraine, claiming they were part of a broader Western biological warfare agenda.

His assassination raises a deeply unsettling question: Was this a deliberate effort to silence him and prevent his revelations from coming to light? Kirillov’s work was controversial, but his allegations deserved scrutiny. He repeatedly accused the United States of funding clandestine biological laboratories in Ukraine, purportedly operating under the guise of public health initiatives. According to Russian reports, these labs were involved in the development of pathogens that could potentially target specific populations, a claim Washington and Kiev vehemently denied. Throughout the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Kirillov presented what he claimed were classified documents and intercepted communications proving the existence of such facilities.

He argued that the labs represented a serious threat not only to Russia but to global security. Though his assertions were often dismissed in the West as propaganda, they stirred debate and distrust among nations already skeptical of US military and scientific activities abroad. The timing and method of Kirillov’s assassination are too conspicuous to ignore. A bomb concealed on an electric scooter detonated as he left for work, killing him and his assistant. The sophistication of the attack suggests involvement by professionals with substantial resources. The SBU’s admission of responsibility and Russia’s subsequent arrest of an alleged Ukrainian agent may seem to provide a tidy explanation. However, there are reasons to believe that more powerful actors had a vested interest in Kirillov’s demise.

Kirillov’s investigations threatened to unveil a shadowy intersection of science, warfare, and geopolitics. If even a fraction of his claims about the US biolabs in Ukraine were accurate, they would implicate powerful institutions in serious breaches of international law, including violations of the Biological Weapons Convention. Such revelations would have provoked outrage among non-aligned nations and could have seriously undermined the credibility of the United States and its allies.

National identities are a threat to Brussels.

• EU Suffers By Suppressing National Identities – Putin (RT)

People in the European Union are being negatively affected by the marginalization of their national identities, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday, arguing that a lack of national sovereignty affects all aspects of life in a state. Speaking during his year-end marathon Q&A session, Putin cited economic stagnation in Germany, claiming Russia’s economy is stable in comparison. One of the event’s co-hosts brought up a story that Putin told recently about a visit to Germany and how all songs performed at an event he was attending were in English. Putin said it was not completely true, since he brought a Russian band with him to be part of the entertainment at the birthday of former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. The visiting singers learned a native song on their way to Hanover as a gesture of respect to the host, he said.

”Sovereignty is a very important thing. It has to be on the inside, in the heart. I believe that the German people had this feeling of belonging to a homeland and sovereignty eradicated in them during the post-war period,” he mused. ”Who are the Europeans? They are all proud to be European. But they are first of all French, Germans, Italians, Spaniards, and Europeans secondly,” he added. Attempts to tone down national differences in the bloc are affecting everything, including the economy, Putin argued. Russia puts a premium on its sovereignty and enjoys the benefit of deciding its own policies, he concluded.

Hot air.

• Russia Expresses Concern Over Gaza ‘Recolonization’ (RT)

Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has raised the alarm over Israeli officials floating the idea of replacing Palestinians with Jewish settlers in Gaza. The diplomat also accused the US of shielding Israel through its vetoes in the UN Security Council. Israel has been occupying the West Bank since 1967 in defiance of the international body’s decisions. Israel launched a massive military operation in Gaza following a deadly attack by Hamas militants on the country on October 7, 2023, which left 1,200 people dead and over 250 abducted. The heavy aerial bombardment and ground offensive by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has killed 45,000 Palestinians in the densely populated enclave, according to local Hamas-controlled health officials.

Speaking at a UN Security Council session on Wednesday, Nebenzia stated that the “Israelis continue to further their plans on building new [illegal] settlements in the West Bank,” as well as razing Palestinian homes on made-up pretexts. This, according to the Russian envoy, is precluding any chance of a negotiated settlement to the decades-long conflict. He also noted multiple instances of harassment and violence by Jewish settlers toward Palestinians, with the Israeli authorities allegedly turning a blind eye. “Against this backdrop, Israeli officials’ remarks on forcibly changing the demographics of Gaza with a view to ‘recolonizing’ the enclave are causing particular concern,” Nebenzia said. He went on to claim that Israel is abusing its legitimate right to self-defense by conducting indiscriminate military actions in Gaza, the West Bank, as well as Lebanon and Syria.

“To our huge regret, all efforts by the UN Security Council to impose a ceasefire and free the hostages have so far been blocked by the US,” Nebenzia said, citing Washington’s repeated vetoes of resolutions. As recently as this October, several Israeli ministers and settler activists held a rally near the Gaza border, with attendees calling for the removal of Palestinians from the enclave and repopulating it with Jews. Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, leader of the far-right Jewish Power party, said during the event: “What we have learned this year is that everything is up to us. We are the owners of this land.” May Golan, the minister for social equality and women’s rights, echoed this sentiment, pledging that “anyone who uses their plot of land to plan another Holocaust will receive from us… another Nakba” – a term used to describe the mass exodus of more than 750,000 Arabs from Palestine in 1948.

“Per a 2018 U.N. investigation, “universal, free healthcare” was extended to all Syrian citizens, who “enjoyed some of the highest levels of care in the region.” Education was likewise free..”

• US Plans to Sell Off Syria’s Wealth After Assad (Klarenberg)

In the immediate wake of the Syrian government’s abrupt collapse, much remains uncertain about the country’s future – including whether it can survive as a unitary state or will splinter into smaller states as did Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, a move that ultimately led to a bloody NATO intervention. Moreover, who or what may take power in Damascus remains an open question. For the time being at least, members of ultra-extremist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) appear highly likely to take key positions in whatever administrative structure sprouts from Bashar Assad’s ouster after a decade-and-a-half of grinding Western-sponsored regime change efforts. As Reuters reported on December 12, HTS is already “stamping its authority on Syria’s state with the same lightning speed that it seized the country, deploying police, installing an interim government and meeting foreign envoys.”

Meanwhile, its bureaucrats – “who until last week were running an Islamist administration in a remote corner of Syria’s northwest” – have moved en masse “into government headquarters in Damascus.” Mohammed Bashir, head of HTS’ “regional government” in extremist-occupied Idlib, has been appointed the country’s “caretaker prime minister.” However, despite the chaos and precariousness of post-Assad Syria, one thing seems assured – the country will be broken open to Western economic exploitation, at long last. Multiple reports show that HTS has informed local and international business leaders that when in office, it will “adopt a free-market model and integrate the country into the global economy, in a major shift from decades of corrupt state control.”

As Alexander McKay of the Marx Engels Lenin Institute tells MintPress News, state-controlled parts of Syria’s economy may have been under Assad, but corrupt it wasn’t. He believes a striking feature of the ongoing attacks on Syrian infrastructure from forces within and without the country is that economic and industrial sites are a recurrent target. Moreover, the would-be HTS-dominated government has done nothing to counter these broadsides when “securing key economic assets will be vital to societal reconstruction, and therefore a matter of priority”: We can see clearly what kind of country these ‘moderate rebels’ plan to build. Forces like HTS are allied with U.S. imperialism, and their economic approach will reflect this.

Prior to the proxy war, the government pursued an economic approach that mixed public ownership and market elements. State intervention enabled a degree of political independence [that] other nations in the region lack. Assad’s administration understood without an industrial base, being sovereign is impossible. The new ‘free market’ approach will see all of that utterly decimated.” Syria’s economic independence and strength under Assad’s rule and the benefits reaped by average citizens, as a result, were never acknowledged in the mainstream before or during the decade-long proxy war. Yet, countless reports from major international institutions underline this reality – which has now been brutally vanquished, never to return. For example, an April 2015 World Health Organization document noted how Damascus “had one of the best-developed healthcare systems in the Arab world.”

Per a 2018 U.N. investigation, “universal, free healthcare” was extended to all Syrian citizens, who “enjoyed some of the highest levels of care in the region.” Education was likewise free, and before the conflict, “an estimated 97% of primary school-aged Syrian children were attending class, and Syria’s literacy rates were thought to be at over 90% for both men and women [emphasis added].” By 2016, millions were out of school. A U.N. Human Rights Council report two years later noted pre-war Syria “was the only country in the Middle East region to be self-sufficient in food production,” its “thriving agricultural sector” contributing “about 21%” to GDP 2006 – 2011. Civilians’ daily caloric intake “was on par with many Western countries,” with prices kept affordable via state subsidy. Meanwhile, the country’s economy was “one of the best performing in the region, with a growth rate averaging 4.6%” annually.

“All essential goods and services have been successfully replaced by Russian manufacture, or from what are now known as ‘friendly’ nations..”

• Russia Owes Growing Economic Strength to West’s ‘Sanctions on Steroids’ (Sp.)

President Putin commented on the state of the Russian economy at his traditional year-end press conference Thursday, projecting GDP growth of 2-2.5% in 2025, and attributing the economy’s growing strength to “sovereignty.” Sputnik asked a leading financial observer to list off the measures Russia has taken to survive the West’s sanctions onslaught. “To a large extent,” Russia’s economic stability “is the result of the strengthening of sovereignty, including projected onto the economy,” Putin said at Thursday’s annual Q&A session. “Sovereignty comes in different forms, including defense, technological, scientific, educational, cultural. This is especially important for our country, because when we lose our sovereignty, we lose statehood. That’s the most important thing,” Putin added.

Russia’s path toward economic sovereignty goes back over a decade, owing its success largely to the unprecedented sanctions war the West launched against Moscow in 2014, at the start of the Ukrainian crisis, veteran financial analyst Paul Goncharoff says. “Back in 2014 the ‘sanctions on steroids’ era began against Russia. With each following year the dose only increased,” with Russia eventually becoming “the most sanctioned country in history,” Goncharoff, general director of consulting firm Goncharoff LLC, recalled in an interview with Sputnik. Russia was able to overcome the sanctions pressure through baby steps, starting with timely investments in agricultural self-sufficiency to reduce dependence on imports, as well as “stimulating essential import replacements for machinery and technological items,” the observer explained.

Gradually, Moscow “realized that there were economically beneficial alliances to be made with countries that were to one or another degree impacted by restrictions from the West,” Goncharoff added, highlighting the priority eventually given to developing good economic relations with BRICS countries, the bloc’s expansion “and the use of sovereign currencies outside of the US dollar and Euro,” illuminating “the need and desire by many sovereign governments to get out of the ‘influence sphere’ of the G7, and their payments systems.” Russia’s strategy, particularly after its exclusion from the SWIFT banking system in 2022, proved correct, according to the analyst.

“Government fiscal income revenues from Russian imports have dropped in the West and increased in the East by tens of billions of dollars. Russia’s exports increased by US$31 billion after the West imposed the nastiest post 2022 trade sanctions. This has been a boon to the neighboring countries of Central Asia, Southeast Asia, India, MENA, Africa, and the Mercosur countries who now derive benefit from the Western-forced disengagement of Russia,” Goncharoff emphasized. Ultimately, Russia was able to find new partners outside the Western bloc by hitching its economic wagon to developing nations enjoying strong economic growth.

“All essential goods and services have been successfully replaced by Russian manufacture, or from what are now known as ‘friendly’ nations. The US Dollar is no longer used in settling international trade commitments, and with an understandably volatile transition, is gradually becoming systematized,” the observer said. “To sum it up: Import substitution, trade in local sovereign currencies, infrastructure changes toward the Global South and East, redirecting oil and gas to the Global South and East, and participating in the enhancement and expansion of BRICS as the new economic frontier all come together to have formed a successful series of strategic decisions which are ongoing and gathering strength,” Goncharoff concluded.

Eva

Tomorrow is a crucial day for the future of Europe. Matteo Salvini, who’s facing up to 6 years in jail for defending Italy’s borders and putting a stop to mass migration, will finally hear his sentencing.

The only fair verdict is acquittal but with our judiciary systems… pic.twitter.com/ymbiMvXeDO

— Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) December 19, 2024

Hecc

this golden retriever and german shepherd's conversation about how to help their human is just too funny
(max.and.murph IG) pic.twitter.com/MF1ei7GXqP

— theworldofdog (@theworldofdog) December 18, 2024

Beach

pic.twitter.com/L0Ipbf7CXe

— Doglover (@puppiesDoglover) December 19, 2024

Jingle

Who can relate to the dog? 😂 pic.twitter.com/KxCVXqOUG9

— Buitengebieden (@buitengebieden) December 20, 2024

Adopted

Kitten gets adopted by dog..🐈🐾🐶😍 pic.twitter.com/I3V3ljJWme

— 𝕐o̴g̴ (@Yoda4ever) December 19, 2024

Dinosaur

A cute child and her dinosaur friend ❤️ pic.twitter.com/ucRJJrnlcU

— Restoring Your Faith in Humanity (@HumanityChad) December 18, 2024

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

Debt Rattle November 18 2024

Nov 182024

November 18, 2024 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:49 am Finance Tagged with: ATACMS, deep strikes, Elon Musk, Jan 6, Ramaswamy, shadow government, transition, Trump, WWIII 71 Responses »

Rembrandt van Rijn Bathsheba at her bath 1654

• Biden Authorizes Ukraine’s Use Of US Missiles To Hit Targets Inside Russia (ZH)

• The Biden Administration Wants ‘World War III’ – Trump Jr. (RT)

• Musk Reacts To Biden Reportedly Allowing Deep Strikes On Russia (RT)

• Democrats Propose ‘Shadow Government’ To Oppose Trump’s Cabinet (ZH)

• It’s Trump’s Transition and He Calls the Shots (Wegmann)

• Beyond Victory and Defeat: A Vision for National Unity (ET)

• What Happens to Jan. 6 Defendants After Trump’s Election Win? (ET)

• Trump Not Even in Power Yet and Already Wreaking Havoc on European Markets (Sp.)

• Musk, Ramaswamy Seek Volunteers to Join New DOGE Department (ET)

• Harris Campaign Still Pleading With Donors for More Money (Sp.)

• Trump Faces An Economic Catch-22 His First Day In Office (ZH)

• EU Won’t Survive Without Russia And BRICS – Russian Senator (RT)

• RT Is ‘Only Station Where I Can Tell The Truth’ – RFK in 2020 (RT)

• Climate Summits “No Longer Fit For Purpose”, Experts Say (ZH)

• US Media Cheerleads ‘Killer Robots Filling Ukrainian Skies’ (Sp.)

• Left is a Vicious Wounded Tiger, They Want Us Dead – Larry Klayman (USAW)

Depopulation goes fast.

Trump

I will sit down with Putin and Zelensky to get this war solved. If Biden authorizes US-Supplied missiles for Ukraine to use on Russia, a nuclear World War III will start. Since Biden is incompetent , I will have to put an end to this killing and prevent WWIII myself. pic.twitter.com/KJ0VJiqLEq

— Donald J. Trump – Parody (@realDonParody) November 18, 2024

Bannon

WATCH: Bannon says it's 'march or die' with Trump cabinet picks; "This is not even a question. It's march or die and all of them get confirmed. If Trump puts em up, they get confirmed. If we have to have a showdown now with the Senate, let's have it now!" pic.twitter.com/H3uEoRLRoa

— Overton (@overton_news) November 16, 2024

Scharf
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857562938837520434

Gaetz
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857953928152752275

Casey Means

Dr. Casey Means Wows Liberal Audience and Gets Them to CHEER for RFK Jr.'s HHS Nomination

“If we were crushing it [at health], we would not be spending 2x every other country in the entire world and have the lowest life expectancy of any developed country in the entire world.”… pic.twitter.com/160GKOHQMh

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) November 16, 2024

Kai
https://twitter.com/i/status/1857888752963657828

We’ve been hinting at escalation for a while…

• Biden Authorizes Ukraine’s Use Of US Missiles To Hit Targets Inside Russia (ZH)

In a move straight out of Louis “After me, the flood” XV, the outgoing BIden admin, in a seemingly desperate move to destabilize the global geopolitical picture, has authorized the lifting of some restrictions on Ukraine’s use of western-made weapons to strike military targets inside Russia, according to reports from Bloomberg and the AP. The decision was reportedly shaped by North Korea ramping up support for President Vladimir Putin’s army and an increase in Russian missile and drone attacks on its neighbor. The approval represents a major U.S. policy shift and comes as the deep state-supported, dementia-ridden puppet Joe Biden is about to leave office and incoming President-elect Donald Trump has said he would bring about a swift end to the war and has expressed skepticism over continued support by the United States.

If approved, the capability would likely be used first in the Kursk region of Russia, where Ukraine is fighting against North Korean troops as well as Moscow’s forces, the people said. Still, any permission, if granted, is unlikely to go as far as Ukraine has requested, one of the people said. As the war in Ukraine heads into its third full winter, the US and its allies “have grown extremely concerned” about Pyongyang’s decision to deploy its forces in combat and assessments by some Group of 20 nations suggest North Korea could eventually send as many as 100,000 troops to Russia. The allies believe the deepening cooperation between Putin and Kim Jong Un could have consequences for the security balance in the Indo-Pacific region, Bloomberg has reported previously. Discussions between the allies over missile strikes have intensified since Donald Trump won US elections earlier this month, another Bloomberg source said.

Trump has said he will seek a quick deal between Ukraine and Russia to end the war, without specifying how. In other words, Biden’s puppet masters are urgently seeking to escalate the war in Ukraine to make the quick ceasefire sought by Trump impossible (after all, war is how the Deep State earns its income). Until now, Biden had remained opposed, determined to hold the line against any escalation that he felt could draw the U.S. and other NATO members into direct conflict with Russia. But what supposedly triggered the shift is not Trump’s desire to end the war, at least not according to Bloomberg’s deep state sources, but North Korea’s decision to deploy deployed thousands of troops to Russia to help Moscow reclaim land in the Kursk border region that Ukraine seized this year, and which Russia has already mostly regained even as Ukraine continues to cede territory in the Donetsk region. The introduction of North Korean troops to the conflict comes as Moscow has seen a favorable shift in momentum.

As many as 12,000 North Korean troops have been sent to Russia, according to U.S., South Korean and Ukrainian assessments. U.S. and South Korean intelligence officials say North Korea also has provided Russia with significant amounts of munitions to replenish its weapons stockpiles. Trump, who takes office in January, spoke for months as a candidate about wanting Russia’s war in Ukraine to be over. He also repeatedly slammed the Biden administration for giving Kyiv tens of billions of dollars in aid. His resounding election victory has Ukraine’s international backers worrying that any rushed settlement would mostly benefit Putin. Which is where the deep state’s World War 3 Hail Mary comes in, especially since the outgoing Biden administration has said it will send as much aid as possible to Kyiv before Trump takes office in January.

“..make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives..”

• The Biden Administration Wants ‘World War III’ – Trump Jr. (RT)

US President-elect Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., lashed out at the Democrats following reports that outgoing President Joe Biden has allowed Ukraine to use American-made long-range missiles to strike internationally recognized Russian territory. Trump Jr., who campaigned alongside his father during the 2024 presidential election and has been helping him pick members of his future cabinet, did not mince words on social media. “The Military Industrial Complex seems to want to make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives,” he wrote on X on Sunday. “Gotta lock in those $Trillions. Life be damned!!! Imbeciles!” The Biden administration previously restricted the use of ATACMS missiles by Ukraine, citing fears of possible retaliation by Russia. The White House, however, had decided to reverse its policy, according to reports by multiple news agencies.

The White House and the Pentagon have chosen not to comment on the matter. The reported decision is widely seen as a last-ditch effort to boost Ukraine’s military capabilities before Trump could assume office on January 20. During his re-election campaign, the president-elect cast doubt on the necessity of unconditional aid to Kiev and vowed to resolve the conflict by diplomatic means. His looming return to the White House made the Democrats, together with officials in Ukraine and the EU, worry that the new administration could abandon Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly stated that allowing Western weapons to be used deep inside Russia would be a signal of NATO’s direct involvement in the conflict. President Vladimir Putin said that Russia will take “appropriate decisions in response to the threats.”

“Libs [liberals] love war..” [..] “..war facilitates bigger government.”

• Musk Reacts To Biden Reportedly Allowing Deep Strikes On Russia (RT)

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, a close confidant of US President-elect Donald Trump, has weighed in on President Joe Biden’s apparent decision to officially sanction the use of American missiles on targets deep within Russian territory, agreeing with a post stating “libs love war.” With just two months left in office, Biden reportedly gave in to one of Ukraine’s long-standing demands on Sunday afternoon, authorizing Kiev to use its American-provided Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) in strikes on Russia’s Kursk Region. The decision was simultaneously reported by multiple US media outlets. Ukraine plans to conduct its first long-range attacks in the coming days, Reuters reported, citing “two US officials and a source familiar with the decision.” Biden’s decision marks a significant escalation in the conflict.

While Ukraine has possessed ATACMS missiles since April, the US president did not at that time give Kiev permission to use them on internationally recognized Russian territory. To date, they have been used in strikes on Russia’s Crimea, Donetsk, and Lugansk regions, which Washington considers Ukrainian. Responding to the news on X, Utah Senator Mike Lee, a Republican, declared that “Libs [liberals] love war,” adding: “war facilitates bigger government.” “True,” Musk replied. While SpaceX has provided the Ukrainian military with Starlink internet terminals, Musk has long argued that Kiev cannot hope to defeat Russian forces on the battlefield, and that the conflict must end in a negotiated settlement. The tech tycoon endorsed Donald Trump – who has vowed to bring a swift end to the fighting – earlier this summer, and following Trump’s defeat of Vice President Kamala Harris last week, he has emerged as one of the president-elect’s closest advisers.

Musk is not the only figure in Trump’s orbit to condemn Biden’s decision. Richard Grenell, a close adviser to the president-elect who served as acting director of national intelligence in 2020, accused Biden of “escalating the wars before he leaves office.” “The Military Industrial Complex seems to want to make sure they get World War 3 going before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives,” Trump’s son, Donald Jr., wrote on X. “Gotta lock in those $Trillions. Life be damned!!! Imbeciles!” Trump has vowed to bring the conflict to a speedy conclusion, and is expected to push Moscow and Kiev to agree to peace talks. Musk reportedly joined Trump on a phone call to Vladimir Zelensky last week, speaking directly to the Ukrainian leader at one point, according to reports in the US media.

Musk has not acknowledged taking part in the call, but wrote on X shortly afterwards that “the senseless killing will end soon. Time is up for the warmonger profiteers.” Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that Moscow would view any attacks on Russia’s internationally recognized territory with American-supplied weaponry as NATO entering the conflict directly. These actions, he suggested, would have severe repercussions, including retaliation against Western interests.

“The Dems can pretend like people are listening to them as they tell the world how they would would do each cabinet job better..”

• Democrats Propose ‘Shadow Government’ To Oppose Trump’s Cabinet (ZH)

If Democrats today are known for anything, it’s their uncanny inability to read the room and listen to people when they say “No”. It’s a typical trait of psychopaths; the assumption that when people refuse your ideals and your leadership they “don’t really mean it” and they “just”need a little more convincing”. Sorry leftists, but no means no. It doesn’t help that the most common argument coming from leftist pundits after their brutal election loss is that the only reason voters didn’t choose Kamala Harris and the woke cult is because most Americans are stupid. The progressives think they know what’s best for everyone else. They’re the smartest people in the room, after all… Despite the supposedly incredible intellectual power of the progressive elites, they still lost the election in a landslide and common sense would dictate that they should reconsider their political philosophy and align more with the needs of the general public. However, recent events suggest that’s not going to happen.

Donald Trump’s cabinet process is well underway and some of his picks have the Democrats (and some Neo-Cons) truly terrified. In particular, the establishment media machine is already pumping out endless propaganda in an attempt to undermine RFK Jr, Matt Gaetz, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, Pete Hegseth, etc. They are floating rumors of sexual misconduct, corruption, mental instability, conspiracy; desperately clamoring to stop these appointments no matter the cost. Why? Because these people will have the power to completely gut the status quo regime and they openly assert they will do so. Trump faces perhaps the most aggressive opposition to his cabinet appointments of any president in recent history, and it’s a sure bet that most Democrats and a number of GOP RINOs in the Senate will work together to sabotage the appointment process. But Trump has the ability to force the Senate into recess and make his appointments while lawmakers are out of session, which means Democrats and Neo-Cons might not have a choice in the matter.

In preparation for this outcome, some Democrats are calling for the creation of what they call a ‘Shadow Government’ or ‘Shadow Cabinet’. Democrat Wiley Nicol from North Carolina cites a similar dynamic used by the UK government; a kind of counter-body of political leaders that hound elected officials with policy criticism while offering their own policies as a better option. The idea is rather tone deaf. For Americans, the phrase “shadow government” has numerous negative connotations and inspires suspicions of corruption. In the UK it’s a bit more innocuous – Members of a shadow cabinet have no executive power. It is the shadow cabinet’s responsibility to apply scrutiny to the policies and actions of the sitting government, which doesn’t sound much different from what opposing politicians already do.

That said, a shadow government also represents a false alternative. It’s the government that the Democrats think should be in power instead of the government that the public actually voted for. It should be noted that the UK’s socialist system have become increasingly authoritarian in recent years, with punishments for thought crimes now widely enforced. There is no true opposition party to the globalist establishment in the UK, they barely know what a legitimate conservative is.

All parties essentially hover around the center left, and with each passing year the center left moves further to the extreme left. The idea that UK or European government methods should be emulated by the US shows just how detached from the American people Democrats have become. At best, this concept represents a sad attempt by Democrats to cling to the illusion of importance. The Dems can pretend like people are listening to them as they tell the world how they would would do each cabinet job better, but they never really do much beyond talk. At worst, the shadow government could be used as an alternative contact point for foreign governments, NGOs and other institutions that prefer not to engage with the Trump Administration and face the music.

If the latter is the ultimate goal, then it is utterly contrary to the constitution. There is no allowance for a “shadow cabinet”, it doesn’t exist as a legal edifice in the US for good reason. There is only one government, which Americans voted into office. No one wants to hear from Democrats on how they would govern; they had their chance and they blew it. Anyone who understands progressive government knows that their system is designed only to eat more and grow bigger. It’s not designed to shrink, or to give up power. What the Democrats greatly fear is a substantial downsizing of the bureaucracy. That is where they derive their true influence. A shadow cabinet might be the beginnings of an effort by leftists to pretend as if they still have a say in the overall course of the country.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1857495484534857996

“President-Elect Trump will begin making decisions on who will serve in his second Administration soon..” “Those decisions will be announced when they are made.”

• It’s Trump’s Transition and He Calls the Shots (Wegmann)

Since Election Day, the Trump transition has been copying and pasting the same quote again and again into emails to reporters seeking comment on this or that presidential appointment. “President-Elect Trump will begin making decisions on who will serve in his second Administration soon,” Trump transition spokesperson Karoline Leavitt always writes without fail. “Those decisions will be announced when they are made.” The boilerplate delivers an obvious truth that many in Washington, D.C., find uncomfortable or, in some cases, unimaginable: The president-elect alone, not his senior staff, and certainly not any outside organization, is calling the shots. Enter Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The famous vaccine skeptic is a new addition to the Trump orbit. He abandoned his own presidential campaign over the summer before backing the Republican candidate, delivering an unusual but no less invaluable endorsement in the final stretch of the election season. “It is a realignment,” Tucker Carlson later said of the coalition that included RFK Jr., whose addition he helped facilitate. “It is unbelievable.” The Kennedy apostate, it seemed at the time, was only there to deliver a bit of political capital. Kennedy is an environmental lawyer who believes in climate change and who sued oil companies. He is a Catholic but also a liberal who believes in abortion rights. He is a crusader against what he has described as “Big Banks” and “Big Data” and “Big Tech” and “Big Pharma.”

The one thing Kennedy would never be? The Health and Human Services Secretary. So said Howard Lutnick, the co-chair of the Trump transition committee. Just days before the election, he told CNN that Kennedy was “not getting a job for HHS.” Asked anchor Kaitlin Collins, “He would not be in charge of HHS?” Replied Lutnick, “No, of course not.” And then, nine days after the election, Trump announced his intent to nominate RFK Jr. to that HHS post. “I look forward to working with the more than 80,000 employees at HHS to free the agencies from the smothering cloud of corporate capture so they can pursue their mission to make Americans once again the healthiest people on Earth,” Kennedy said in a statement. Pharmaceutical stocks stumbled.

Democrats on Capitol Hill were aghast. Republicans were mostly silent. Asked for reaction, South Dakota Sen. John Thune, whom Republicans elected to serve as Senate majority leader in the next Congress, told reporters, “I don’t have one at this point.” Not all of Trump’s picks were so controversial. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, for instance, is well-respected among his colleagues on the Hill and is considered a shoo-in for secretary of state. Others reflected the realignment that Carlson referenced on the campaign trail, like former Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a lapsed Democrat whom Trump tapped to serve as his director of national intelligence.

And then there is former Rep. Matt Gaetz. RealClearPolitics first reported that the Florida Republican was about to resign after Trump announced his intent to nominate him to be attorney general. His hasty resignation likely precludes the House Ethics Committee from releasing a report that includes allegations he had sex with a minor. Gaetz denies the allegations. Some Republicans still find them disqualifying. Trump made the decision, according to Politico, after his longtime confidant Boris Epshteyn lobbied on Gaetz’s behalf the night before. Incoming White House chief of staff Susie Wiles was reportedly unaware and in a different part of the plane during the deal-making. The developments reflect a president-elect who is much more hands-on this time around and, perhaps, a transition chief unaware of how Trump operates.

“Trump avoided a fall into the abyss and instead reached new heights.”

• Beyond Victory and Defeat: A Vision for National Unity (ET)

The election is finally over, marking a stunning victory for former President Trump, who not only won all swing states but also, for the first time in 20 years, secured the popular vote. This required changing the opinions of 7 percent of all voters—a whopping 10 million people! With the Senate and, most likely, the House on his side, Trump now has a free hand to implement his policies. However, the nation remains deeply divided, with no signs of healing. Media platforms like YouTube, cable TV, and TikTok are filled with attacks and counter-attacks. While Republicans have indeed won the majority, they are unable to reach out to the other 48 percent of voters who chose differently. The election still feels like an “I can overpower you” contest. Does it have to be this way? Is there anything that can pull our nation together after such a bitterly fought election?

I still remember the moment former President Trump announced his presidential campaign at Mar-a-Lago in November 2022, just one week after the midterm election. It was a subdued event, a low point for Trump and his supporters, as they had just lost most of their battles—except for victories by J.D. Vance and Ron DeSantis, the latter of whom soon became Trump’s next political headache. When Gov. DeSantis announced his own campaign four months later, touting his impressive midterm election results, Trump’s path back to the White House grew even murkier. From then on, however, a stunning sequence of events unfolded. In March 2023, Trump was indicted by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg for alleged hush money payments to an adult film star. Outraged, Trump’s supporters rallied, and his poll numbers surged by five percentage points.

Next came the classified documents indictment in June, followed by the Jan. 6 election interference indictment, the Georgia election interference case, the high-profile Mar-a-Lago raid in August, and the New York bank fraud case in October. Yet each of these misfortunes turned into blessings, raising Trump’s poll numbers by five percentage points each time. Soon, DeSantis found himself unable to keep up, trailing in Trump’s wake. When Trump lost his bank fraud case and was hit with a nearly $500 million penalty, many thought it would bankrupt him. However, his Digital World Acquisition Corp. shareholders voted to acquire his Truth Social company and take it public, giving Trump a financial lifeline with nearly $2 billion in new wealth. Trump avoided a fall into the abyss and instead reached new heights.

The miracle continued. When he was shot at a rally in Butler in July 2024 but survived miraculously, rising to shout “Fight!” more than half the nation was awed by him, including former critics and foes like Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. It was another instance of misfortune transforming into fortune. Over the past two years, Donald Trump has repeatedly risen from the ashes, culminating in his landslide victory in November. What does this unbelievable sequence of events tell us? Now that the election is over, should it be reduced to the winning side laughing at the losing side and enjoying a four-year victory? What message might these sequence of events be trying to convey? I believe that, at this moment, conservatives should reach deeper into the issues that divide us and seek common ground that can unify the nation. That common ground lies in the values and principles of this country.

These values and principles are embodied in the Constitution and, more importantly, in the vision of the Founding Fathers who crafted it. Despite the divisions in our country, the Constitution still holds a place of reverence. Why don’t we engage in dialogue within the framework established by the Constitution to address our profound differences?

“I think there’s going to be a complete second look at all of the prosecutions..”

• What Happens to Jan. 6 Defendants After Trump’s Election Win? (ET)

After President-elect Donald Trump won a second term, multiple defendants charged for their roles in the events of Jan. 6, 2021, asked to delay their cases because they anticipate pardons from Trump. Many were denied, but each nonetheless raised questions about how Trump will handle the cases. According to data collected by NPR, more than 1,500 people have been charged in relation to Jan. 6, with nearly 1,000 pleading guilty. At least a dozen cases have been dismissed, while plenty remain with changes following Trump’s election. At the beginning of November, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia announced multiple sentences and guilty verdicts. Various factors could determine whether these individuals end up avoiding jail time, but perhaps the most important is Trump’s eventual control of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and who will lead that department.

On Nov. 13, Trump announced Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) as his pick for attorney general. Gaetz has been critical of the prosecutions and introduced a bill in July that was intended to prevent prosecutors from retaliating against Jan. 6 defendants for seeking resentencing. Gaetz has also questioned federal involvement, stating that Jan. 6 “wasn’t an insurrection” but that it “very well may have been a fedsurrection.” Assuming the presidency also grants Trump substantial pardon power under the Constitution: Trump has indicated that he’s open to pardoning those charged but left open the possibility that some would face punishment. “We will treat them fairly,” he said in January 2022. “And if it requires pardons, we will give them pardons, because they are being treated so unfairly.”

More recently, during an event in July, he was asked about individuals who assaulted officers. He said he would “absolutely” pardon the defendants “if they’re innocent” and added that “they were convicted by a very tough system.” More than 70 defendants have received a mixed verdict, and so far, more than 1,000 people have been sentenced, with 64 percent receiving prison time, according to NPR data. Some defendants have also taken plea deals. “I think there’s going to be a complete second look at all of the prosecutions,” Robert Ray, a former Trump impeachment attorney, told The Epoch Times, while noting the large number of cases brought.

He added that a second look wouldn’t “necessarily yield a favorable result with regard to each and every defendant, but I think there’s going to be a pretty strenuous exercise of the pardon and commutation power to deal with overreaching [by prosecutors].” John Pierce, an attorney who has represented Jan. 6 defendants, told The Epoch Times he expects a “blanket pardon,” while Trump–Vance transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said the president-elect “will make pardon decisions on a case-by-case basis.” It’s unclear which individuals Trump will consider for pardon.

“That’s the million-dollar question,” Lori Ulrich, an attorney with the public defender’s office, told The Epoch Times. She is currently representing Joseph Fischer, whose case made it to the Supreme Court this year. Fischer and other defendants face a myriad of charges, including an obstruction charge the Supreme Court addressed this summer in Fischer v. United States. It’s unclear how Trump’s DOJ will apply that ruling, but the president-elect’s pardons could be influenced by factors such as the politics surrounding his pardons. “If President Biden either pardons or commutes the sentences for Hunter Biden, that gives President Trump political cover to either pardon or commute the non-violent J6 offenders, [as well as] Peter Navarro, and Steve Bannon, if he chooses to,” John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both Bush administrations, told The Epoch Times.

“Investors fear that Europe will be in the front line of the coming trade war.”

• Trump Not Even in Power Yet and Already Wreaking Havoc on European Markets (Sp.)

Donald Trump’s expected return to the White House in January has been met with intense skepticism by both political and economic elites in Europe. European markets are trending downward and the euro has slid to its worst dip against the US dollar since the 2022 energy crisis in anticipation of Donald Trump’s return to the White House. The cause? Fears that Trump will make good on his campaign promises to level cross-the-board 10-20% tariffs on all foreign imports, including those coming from Europe. Barclays analysts cited by the Financial Times dubbed the Stoxx Europe 600’s poor performance compared to US markets – which soared on news of Trump’s reelection last week, a “Trump premium.” ING global markets head Chris Turner explained the situation in no uncertain terms: “Investors fear that Europe will be in the front line of the coming trade war.”

“Trump’s not messing around,” Markus Hansen, portfolio manager at Vontobel, a Zurich-based investment management firm, said. “His administration wants to get going on tariffs from day one” and the Europeans “will find themselves in the crossfire.” The president-elect appeared to confirm as much last week with his reported plans to rehire noted trade hawk Robert Lighthizer as his trade czar. During Trump’s first term, Lighthizer kicked off a trade war with China, strongarmed Canada and Mexico into renegotiating NAFTA, and slapped tariffs of up to 25% on steel and 10% on aluminum imports from much of the world, including Europe. FT says the specter of new Trump tariffs, combined with China’s growing industrial might, could push European manufacturers deeper into crisis.

The latter are already reeling from Brussels’ shortsighted 2022 decision to try to wean the EU off Russian energy, which thrust regional industrial powerhouses into recession and arguably the worst deindustrialization crisis since WWII. Jeffries investment banking chief European economist Mohit Kumar confirmed to FT that Europe’s poor performance is tied to the fact that its “cheap energy model has been broken” by the Ukraine crisis. The markets’ reaction to Trump’s victory echoed a string of pessimistic analyses on Europe’s prospects under Trump generally, expecting the president-elect to “test European solidarity on NATO, Ukraine and trade,” and prove “2025’s disaster” for a Germany lurching “from crisis to crisis.”

Representatives of Europe’s political class couldn’t help but express disdain for Trump following last week’s election, with outgoing EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell telling colleagues in Brussels this week that Trump’s victory “is going to have many geopolitical consequences.” “We have to show that we are not afraid or divided – although in reality we surely are, because the reception to President Trump’s victory has not been the same in all [European] capitals. In any case, the result will have profound consequences for our bilateral relations. Trump talks about imposing 10% tariffs on all European products. If such a thing were to happen, it would certainly affect our competitiveness,” Borrell said.

“Indeed, this will be tedious work, make lots of enemies, and compensation is zero. What a great deal!”

• Musk, Ramaswamy Seek Volunteers to Join New DOGE Department (ET)

Tesla CEO Elon Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy announced on Nov. 14 that they are looking for volunteers to join the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), calling for the top 1 percent of small-government revolutionaries.” We are very grateful to the thousands of Americans who have expressed interest in helping us at DOGE,” they announced on social media platform X. “We don’t need more part-time idea generators. “We need super high-IQ small-government revolutionaries willing to work 80+ hours per week on unglamorous cost-cutting. If that’s you, DM this account with your CV. Elon & Vivek will review the top 1% of applicants.” Musk further confirmed that DOGE work would be unpaid, stating on X, “Indeed, this will be tedious work, make lots of enemies, and compensation is zero. What a great deal!”

In response to that comment, Ramaswamy stated, “That stands in contrast to the many government bureaucrats who: (a) do little or no work, (b) tell people only what they want to hear, & (c) make more money than the value they create.” DOGE’s objective is in its name: to make government more efficient, with significant spending cuts being among the top expectations. “I look forward to Elon and Vivek making changes to the Federal Bureaucracy with an eye on efficiency and, at the same time, making life better for all Americans,” Trump said in a Nov. 12 statement announcing the new department and its leaders. “Importantly, we will drive out the massive waste and fraud which exists throughout our annual $6.5 Trillion Dollars of Government Spending. They will work together to liberate our Economy, and make the U.S. Government accountable to ‘WE THE PEOPLE.’”

Musk stated on X that all DOGE actions will be posted online to provide “maximum transparency.” This will include the creation of a leaderboard showcasing the “most insanely dumb spending of your tax dollars,” which he said would be “extremely tragic and extremely entertaining.” He also urged the public to be vocal about anything that is being cut that they think might be important. Trump said the initiative could be “‘The Manhattan Project’ of our time.” The request for volunteers followed Musk’s announcement in September that he was willing to forgo compensation.

“I look forward to serving America if the opportunity arises,” Musk said in a post on X. “No pay, no title, no recognition is needed.” DOGE will work with the Office of Management and Budget and is set to complete its work no later than July 4, 2026, America’s 250th anniversary. “Either we get government efficient or America goes bankrupt. That’s what it comes down to. Wish I were wrong, but it’s true,” Musk wrote on X, responding to Trump’s official announcement on Nov. 12.

Cui bono?

• Harris Campaign Still Pleading With Donors for More Money (Sp.)

The Democrats suffered a repeat of the 2016 presidential election last week, with Donald Trump returning to the White House, while Republicans flipped the Senate and maintained control of the House of Representatives – a government trifecta the GOP previously enjoyed between 2017 and 2019. Despite raking in over $2.3 bln in cash for her campaign and billions more in indirect support through the PAC-based campaign financing loophole, Vice President Kamala Harris and her campaign surrogates are reportedly still prodding donors for more money after her election loss. The Reason? The campaign reportedly spent more than it raised on an array of election-related content, from TV, internet and mail ads to lavish payments to social media influencers, concerts and rallies, and now wants supporters to help it climb out of the financial hole it has dug for itself.

Small-time supporters subscribed to Harris’s email donor list are reportedly facing a deluge of almost-daily donation appeals, while personal calls are being made to bigger donors (whose generosity measures beyond hundreds of dollars). Democrats say that despite losing the war, there’s still a battle to be fought over Donald Trump’s cabinet picks – many of whom will have to undergo grueling confirmation hearings in the Senate, and point to outstanding seats in the House of Representatives, the election results for which have yet to be called. US media reported last week that the Harris campaign had landed itself $20 mln in debt after the election. Donald Trump took to Truth Social to express “surprise” over the fact that Harris had run out of money, and urged Republicans, “for the sake of desperately needed UNITY,” to chip in to help the opposition pay back the debts. Media hinted at one big potential source of the debts, pointing to last-minute concerts in seven swing states featuring big name (and big bucks) artists like Bon Jovi, Christina Aguilera, Katy Perry and Lady Gaga.

“..one of their primary tasks should be to expose how the Biden Admin has been hiding the real economic data from the nation at large..”

• Trump Faces An Economic Catch-22 His First Day In Office (ZH)

The first thing Trump needs to do is set up an economic advisory board (Ron Paul would be a great candidate to lead such a project) and one of their primary tasks should be to expose how the Biden Admin has been hiding the real economic data from the nation at large. The temptation will be to keep this data under wraps for fear that it will destroy the country should everyone know the facts. I think the country has voted in great numbers for an end to the status quo and that they want transparency. We can handle the truth. If Trump doesn’t educate the public on how the Democrats and the establishment have been rigging the numbers, then the public will ultimately blame conservatives for any eventual crash. Also, when the public knows the truth, they will also understand why dramatic changes to policy need to be made.

A major pillar of Trump’s economic plan includes tariffs on foreign goods as a way to pay off the national debt, reduce taxes and fund the government. Leftists claim tariffs are actually a “tax on the American consumer” and will end in disaster as prices rise. They’re ignoring the fundamental point. Tariffs cause an increase in prices on foreign-made goods, not American made products. We simply need to manufacture more in the U.S. Why does the U.S. need to remain stuck as a consumer country only? Why can’t we also produce? First, tariffs are not just a tax, they are leverage. Europe is already talking about buying more commodities and goods from the U.S. so they can avoid high tariffs. China is likely to do the same.

The U.S. is the biggest consumer market in the world with 30% of global share. No other nation comes close. Producer nations would face economic disaster without access to U.S. customers. That said, it’s not enough. There needs to be a backstop of domestic production and I think this could also help reduce price increases. How? If the U.S. focuses on what I call the “quality economy” then prices will be higher for a time, but in the long run inflation will drop significantly. The key is that we produce goods with a high quality standard – products that last for many years and have a significant warranty attached.

If our goods are better than foreign products and they last longer, then people will buy less stuff over time. This means reduced spending, more savings, lower demand and ultimately lower prices. There’s a number of ways Trump could subsidize this domestic manufacturing boom while also greatly increasing American wages and the standard of living. Biden pretended he was going to do this with his so-called Inflation Reduction Act and his green energy programs. Trump could do it for real.

“..the EU has effectively trapped itself, which does not benefit its interests. “It is in a trap. And this does not work to the advantage of the European Union..”

• EU Won’t Survive Without Russia And BRICS – Russian Senator (RT)

The EU can’t survive without cooperating with Russia and the BRICS states, Russian Federation Council Deputy Speaker Konstantin Kosachev said in an interview with RT on Saturday. Russia, however, needs the EU far less, he said. Kosachev noted that the sanctions imposed on Russia create a significant barrier to any real cooperation with the EU. The bloc has imposed 14 rounds of sanctions against Russia following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. These measures have targeted Russia’s central bank reserves held abroad, major banks, various companies, entrepreneurs, politicians, and officials, along with bans on numerous imports and exports. The Russian Foreign Ministry has condemned the sanctions as illegitimate, while President Vladimir Putin has described them as irrational.

Kosachev pointed out that lifting these sanctions would require the unanimous approval of EU states, and that even if a majority supports removing them, dissent by just a few countries could derail such an initiative. He concluded that the EU has effectively trapped itself, which does not benefit its interests. “It is in a trap. And this does not work to the advantage of the European Union,” the deputy speaker emphasized. While he believes Russia will continue to thrive independent of the EU, he asserted that the EU’s survival hinges on its collaboration with Russia and other BRICS nations. “We will survive without cooperation with the European Union on our side. The European Union will not survive without cooperation with Russia and other member states in BRICS, this is for sure.” Earlier this month, Putin stated that Western efforts to isolate Russia economically and politically have ultimately failed.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko has claimed the EU’s total losses from sanctions imposed on Russia and restrictions on its economic activity are believed to be around $1.5 trillion, according to “the most conservative estimates.” Some EU nations contend that the sanctions have hurt the bloc more than Russia. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban cautioned on Friday that the EU’s sanctions regime “should be reviewed,” or else it risks “destroying” the European economy. Meanwhile, the well-attended annual BRICS summit that was held in October in Kazan, the first since the group’s expansion to include Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates, highlighted that Russia remains globally connected despite Western sanctions. Delegations from 35 countries participated in the event. More than 30 nations, including NATO member Türkiye, have expressed interest in joining the group. BRICS now accounts for an estimated 37.3% of global GDP versus 14.5% for the EU.

“If people knew the truth, people would have a lot of questions about what we’re giving to our children… Unfortunately we have to go to Russian TV to tell the truth..”

• RT Is ‘Only Station Where I Can Tell The Truth’ – RFK in 2020 (RT)

Americans are “not allowed” to talk freely about healthcare problems on US media and must go to Russian TV “to tell the truth,” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told RT DE in Berlin in August 2020. He singled out RT America as the “only station” where he was free to express his opinion on the US healthcare system and its inadequacies. Kennedy was an outspoken critic of the US Covid-19 response during the pandemic. Often accused of being an ‘anti-vaxxer’, he has brushed off the claims, stressing that the only thing he opposed was administering drugs that have not been safety-tested. Kennedy claimed that the entire US vaccine industry was “an artifact” of the old “quasi-military” public health system introduced during the Cold War as a “national security defense against biological attacks” by Russia.

According to him, the laws regulating vaccines were written with a “loophole” that allowed pharmaceutical companies to forgo time-consuming safety tests if they did not call a drug a medicine. This was done in order to deploy vaccines quickly and with no regulatory impediments, but resulted in a “gold rush to put more vaccines on the table” as pharmaceutical companies “took advantage of that old military loophole” to boost profits. “You know why people don’t know it? Because there’s censorship. I’m not allowed to talk about that on American TV… I do talk about it on RT America – it’s the only station that lets me talk about it,” he stated. Very paradoxical but it’s true: RT America is the only place where we can talk about many of these subjects.

Kennedy said it was “ironic” that a Russian TV station looked to be the most free in the US, but not surprising. “Unfortunately, US TV is owned by the pharmaceutical companies,” he stated, noting that ever since the US passed a law that made it legal to advertise prescription drugs on TV back in 1997, the influence of big pharma on media content has become all-encompassing. “If you look at the evening news in the US, out of twenty two advertisements on a typical news show seventeen are pharmaceutical. So they’re dictating content,” he claimed, adding that this was the reason behind Americans “consuming more drugs than any country in the world” while still having “the worst health outcomes.”

“Pharmaceutical drugs are now the number three killer in the US after heart attacks and cancer, but nobody talks about it…. If people knew the truth, people would have a lot of questions about what we’re giving to our children… Unfortunately we have to go to Russian TV to tell the truth,” he stated. Kennedy was nominated by US President-elect Donald Trump for the position of secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) earlier this week. If approved, he will oversee America’s major healthcare agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and National Institutes of Health (NIH). A longtime critic of these agencies, he has promised major reforms in order to “make America healthy again.”

The purpose is fear.

• Climate Summits “No Longer Fit For Purpose”, Experts Say (ZH)

It looks like experts are starting to realize that the litany of global ‘climate summits’, where participants fly in on private jets to wax poetic about the virtues of attempting to change thousand-year cooling and warming cycles on Earth, could need some reform. Leading climate experts, including Ban Ki-moon, Mary Robinson, Christiana Figueres, and Johan Rockström, are calling for significant changes to UN climate summits, according to a new report from The Guardian. They argue future conferences should only be hosted by nations demonstrating strong climate action and advocate for stricter controls on fossil fuel lobbyists. Over 1,700 industry lobbyists attended Cop29, raising concerns about undue influence. The group has urged the UN to streamline the annual summits, amplify the voices of developing countries, and increase meeting frequency to better address the climate crisis.

“It is now clear that the Cop is no longer fit for purpose. We need a shift from negotiation to implementation,” they wrote. “We need strict eligibility criteria to exclude countries who do not support the phase-out/transition away from fossil energy. Host countries must demonstrate their high level of ambition to uphold the goals of the Paris agreement,” they said. Cop29, held in Baku, Azerbaijan, is nearing its halfway point amid controversy. Azerbaijan, a major fossil fuel producer with oil and gas comprising half its exports, follows last year’s host, the UAE—a petrostate led by Sultan Al Jaber, who retained his role as head of Adnoc during the conference. At Cop29 in Baku, controversy surrounds the presence of 1,773 fossil fuel lobbyists, more than any nation except Azerbaijan, Brazil, and Turkey, and far exceeding the 1,033 delegates from the 10 most climate-vulnerable nations.

The Guardian wrote that former U.S. Vice President Al Gore criticized the fossil fuel industry’s influence and called for reforms in choosing host countries. Talks center on securing $1 trillion annually by 2030 to help poorer nations address climate challenges, but progress is slow, with disagreements over contributions from developed nations and emerging economies like China. Campaigners demand polluters pay, while a report suggests innovative funding options, including levies on cryptocurrencies, plastics, and air travel, or a 2% wealth tax, to bridge finance gaps. Negotiations will continue into next week.

Recall, just days ago we wrote about a how a senior COP29 official in Azerbaijan reportedly used his role as heading up the fight on climate change…to secure meetings with potential investors in the country’s oil and gas sectors. Energy production drives 60% of Azerbaijan’s economy. Elnur Soltanov, Azerbaijan’s deputy energy minister and COP29 chief, was covertly recorded discussing investment opportunities in the state-owned SOCAR, according to PJ Media. “SOCAR Trading is trading oil and gas all over the world, including in Asia. To me, these are the possibilities to explore. But in any case this is something that you need to be talking to SOCAR, and I would be happy to create a contact between yourself and them,” he was caught on tape saying. He added: “We have a lot of gas fields that are to be developed.”

“They are gnats. Gnats can be really annoying. That does not change what they are..”

• US Media Cheerleads ‘Killer Robots Filling Ukrainian Skies’ (Sp.)

NATO and Ukrainian officials and arms contractors have stated openly that the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is an “ideal testing ground” for Western weapons systems for the conflicts of the future against other potential adversaries. Now, media have begun championing turning the crisis into a forever war using cheap killer drones. The US military-industrial complex has reportedly begun literally embedding itself into Ukrainian-produced military hardware, with Virginia-based defense firm Auterion said to be preparing to deliver ‘tens of thousands’ of its small, cheap Skynode autopilot computers to Kiev to fuse with locally made UAVs to increase their lethality. The minicomputers reportedly provide guidance, targeting and networking functions, are capable of stabilizing drones and maneuvering around obstacles to targets, and cost about $300 apiece.

Oleksiy Babenko, CEO of Ukrainian UAV startup Vyriy Drone, says his company will build several thousand of the new autopilot-equipped drones this month. The Wall Street Journal reported on the development in a puff piece published Friday, with the story, titled ‘Killer Robots Are About to Fill Ukrainian Skies’, praising the fusion of US and Ukrainian military manufacturing capabilities, and suggesting the UAVs are the solution the Zelensky regime is looking for as Washington’s interest in fueling the Ukrainian crisis fades, undermining more conventional and expensive forms of military support. WSJ specifically touts the new drones as a fix to Ukraine’s increasingly dire manpower shortfall, and low cost compared to missiles and artillery shells, which NATO hasn’t been able to supply in sufficient numbers after being outproduced by Russia’s defense sector.

Russian electronic warfare tools, and advances in its own drone programs, pose a challenge to Ukraine’s UAV ambitions, the newspaper admitted, pointing to Russian EW systems’ ability to “drown out” the signal between enemy drones and operators at a rate of 80-90%, and Russian defense engineers’ creation of a new series strike drones attached to long fiberoptic cables, which makes them impervious to enemy jamming. Reading like a written version of the 2017 sci-fi short film ‘Slaughterbots’, WSJ’s story alarmed even its own readers – particularly its praise of systems that further ‘automate’ the conflict. “The drone/EW/AI arms race we see in the Ukraine war is Skynet’s nursery and preschool,” one reader wrote, referring to the main antagonist from James Cameron’s Terminator movies, which warned of the dangers of AI being allowed to take control of military decision-making.

“Robot armies, impersonal killing, will become the new norm. What could go wrong?” another person sarcastically asked. “So this is the latest magic bullet. Every day there are fewer Ukrainians able to fight…Do you really think these drones will change the tide of a war of attrition? They are gnats. Gnats can be really annoying. That does not change what they are. Continuing this is irresponsible and immoral,” another commentator wrote.

“He needs us to back him. We need to fight for him if necessary. Here’s the scary thing. God forbid, but I don’t think this is the last assassination attempt. I think there will be more..”

• Left is a Vicious Wounded Tiger, They Want Us Dead – Larry Klayman (USAW)

Renowned Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and later Freedom Watch, has been fighting government corruption and winning for decades. Today, the fight has turned into an all-out war and fight to the death. Klayman explains, “Bottom line is we have been in a war, but now we are at red alert…””The fact that Donald Trump has been reelected the 47th President of the United States with the popular vote and an overwhelming landslide in the Electoral College, the Left is on the run, but it’s stung. It’s like a wounded tiger. It’s vicious. It will fight back… You are going to see the Left in the streets, ultimately. It will probably be in days, if not weeks. You are going to see a repeat of what we saw with Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, radical Palestinians and others. They are going to be coming for us.

Frankly, and this sounds extreme, we saw the assassination attempts… and Kamala Harris and Biden calling Trump Hitler, calling them garbage and calling us garbage, they want us dead. Let me repeat that. They want us dead…They are like rats leaving the ship. The time to peacefully and legally crush them is now.” Klayman also sees that things may not stay peaceful. Klayman points out, “It’s only a matter of time because they are whipping up the hatred right now against all of us garbage men…” “It’s only a matter of time that he (President Trump) may have to declare martial law to reestablish order here. I hope it doesn’t get to that. But he (the President) has that authority as well. So, I want people to realize that there may be a calm in the storm right now, but the communists, the atheists, the radicals and the Left are coalescing. They are plotting, and they are planning.

This is like the ‘Force’ in ‘Star Wars’ and ‘Darth Vader.’ They intend to come back anyway they can. If they can’t do it peacefully and legally, which they can’t, they are going to get violent, and we better be prepared for that.” Klayman also points out that President Trump cannot turn America around without the help of millions of patriots. Klayman says, “He needs us to back him. We need to fight for him if necessary. Here’s the scary thing. God forbid, but I don’t think this is the last assassination attempt. I think there will be more. . . . This kid that took a crack at Trump in Butler, we don’t know what his motive was today. . . . We’ve never gotten the truth about anything. We don’t know who killed John F. Kennedy. Even Bobby Kennedy Jr. does not believe that Sirhan Sirhan killed his father. Martin Luther King’s family does not believe that James Earl Ray was the assassin of Martin Luther King. It was probably Edgar Hoover the FBI Director. . . .

We don’t know anything about the two people that tried to assassinate Donald Trump because our government is corrupt to the core, and that is why the Left is going to resist. Our government needs to be reconstituted. Embedded in government is the Deep State, and it is more powerful than the President.” Klayman is appealing to the incoming Trump Administration to make him the Czar in charge of picking judicial appointments. Klayman says too many RINO judges were put on the bench during Trump’s first Administration. Klayman is also representing Laura Loomer in a $150 million defamation lawsuit against HBO and Bill Maher. Klayman is also the lawyer of record on many other groundbreaking cases. Klayman also talks about the need for donations as the 2024 Election cycle took donations away from FreedomWatchUSA.org. Klayman makes an appeal for badly needed funds so he can continue his work for “We the People” against government corruption.

Tucker

Tucker Carlson: "Moscow has not been degraded by postmodern architecture that destroys your spirit"

Chris Cuomo: "You believe postmodern architecture is designed to kill your spirit?!"

Tucker: "Of course." Cuomo: "Why?"

Tucker's answer will blow your mind. A rant for the ages: pic.twitter.com/VHx7x4vpV1

— Jash Dholani (@oldbooksguy) November 17, 2024

Deer

This guy saved a deer and friendship began
pic.twitter.com/q1RVT0OM6O

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) November 17, 2024

Cats

Cats with other animals pic.twitter.com/etBouDC6XA

— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) November 17, 2024

Kingfisher

Ladies and gentlemen,I present to you the one and only:The Kingfisher ! pic.twitter.com/ThIYL4XjXk

— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) November 17, 2024

Catch

Possibly the greatest single male athletic performance of all timepic.twitter.com/5avGeFmy4d

— Interesting things (@awkwardgoogle) November 16, 2024

Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.

Debt Rattle November 24 2020

Nov 242020

November 24, 2020 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 10:08 am Finance Tagged with: AstraZeneca, Biden, Big Pharma, doses, Machiavelli, Oxford, profit, SOEs, Thanksgiving, transition, Trump 16 Responses »

Claude Monet Impression Sunrise 1872

• What Could be Better Than a Drug That Can Stop Covid? (CP)

• Successful Not-for-Profit Oxford Vaccine Threatens Big Pharma Profit (MPN)

• Oxford Covid Vaccine Hit 90% Success Rate Thanks To Dosing Error (G.)

• Analyst Warns AstraZeneca Vaccine Efficacy “Embellished” (ZH)

• Trump Tells GSA To Allow Biden Transition To Proceed (ZH)

• President-Elect Biden Is A Machiavellian’s Dream (GM)

• The Germans Are Back! (CJ Hopkins)

• Home Alone Thanksgiving (Jim Kunstler)

• Bond Defaults Show Bailouts Over For China’s State-Owned Enterprises (Caixin)

• OED Says 2020 Has Too Many Potential Words Of The Year (G.)

• Work From Home Until April If Possible, PM Tells England’s Workers (G.)

• Walmart Thanks Government For Completely Obliterating Small Business (BBee)

“How could some be making billions off the horror that’s killing millions?”

• What Could be Better Than a Drug That Can Stop Covid? (CP)

Who doesn’t like a race? A grand global race, like the competition to run the first mile under four minutes. Or the race to scale the world’s highest mountain. Or be the first to walk on the moon. Now we find ourselves in a race of much greater import: the dash to develop an effective vaccine for Covid-19. The world now watches with that fabled bated breath. Pfizer, a Big Pharma behemoth, is running neck-in-neck with Moderna, a lavishly funded corporate upstart. Pfizer, first to announce trial results, reports 90 percent effectiveness rates for its pandemic-stopper. Moderna, not to be outdone, reports 95 percent success rates. We actually hit that brass ring, too, retorts Pfizer. And ours even works with older people! What a race! How exciting! More to the point: How lucrative!

This race is minting billionaires. The founder of Pfizer’s partner company, BioNTech, achieved billionaire status earlier this year. Earlier this month, that founder and his two top investors saw their personal fortunes leap a combined $2 billion. At Moderna, three top players, including the CEO Stéphane Bancel, have become billionaires so far this year. Various other pharmaceutical industry movers and shakers — like the hedge fund behind Vaxart, a San Francisco concern — have made hundreds of millions. “Every day, Americans wake up and make sacrifices during this pandemic,” says Ben Wakana, the executive director at Patients for Affordable Drugs. “Drug companies see this as a payday.” The headlines that trumpet coronavirus boondoggles have become, in effect, the rain on our yes-we-now-have-a-vaccine! parade.

How could some be making billions off the horror that’s killing millions? The biggest tragedy of all: Things don’t have to be this way. Over a half-century ago, we conquered polio, and no one became fabulously rich in the process. We could have done the same with Covid-19.

Was the AstraZeneca stock price under presssure yesterday because investors figured this out?

• Successful Not-for-Profit Oxford Vaccine Threatens Big Pharma Profit (MPN)

The world is abuzz today after a team of medical researchers from Oxford University in the United Kingdom announced that advanced trials of their experimental coronavirus vaccine were a roaring success, with the vaccine possibly being rolled out before Christmas. Testing was done on 24,000 volunteers in the U.K, Brazil, and South Africa, with an average effectiveness of over 70%. However, when the vaccine was administered as a half dose, then patients were later given a full one, effectiveness increased to 90%. Encouragingly, there were no serious side effects registered among any of the volunteers, none of whom had to go to the hospital as a result of being immunized. The U.K. government has already ordered 100 million doses.

Professor Andrew Pollard, Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chief investigator of the experiment, was delighted, stating that: “These findings show that we have an effective vaccine that will save many lives. Excitingly, we’ve found that one of our dosing regimens may be around 90 percent effective, and if this dosing regimen is used, more people could be vaccinated with planned vaccine supply. Today’s announcement is only possible thanks to the many volunteers in our trial, and the hard working and talented team of researchers based around the world.”

Even better news is that the Oxford team developed the breakthrough vaccine with the explicit intention of supplying it around the world on a not-for-profit basis, meaning that the poorest nations on the planet will not have to worry about being shut out of a cure due to lack of funds. This was certainly not the case with other solutions developed by the likes of Moderna or Pfizer. Indeed, the world’s richest countries had already bought up the majority of their COVID-19 vaccines, whose secrets were being closely guarded, rather than shared widely to help the rest of humanity.

Large scale manufacturing of the vaccine has already begun in ten countries, according to a press release from the University of Oxford. “Today marks an important milestone in our fight against the pandemic. This vaccine’s efficacy and safety confirm that it will be highly effective against COVID-19 and will have an immediate impact on this public health emergency,” said Pascal Soriot of AstraZeneca, a bioresearch company that partnered with the 924-year-old educational institution on development and testing. “Furthermore, the vaccine’s simple supply chain and our no-profit pledge and commitment to broad, equitable and timely access means it will be affordable and globally available supplying hundreds of millions of doses on approval.”

“Scientists said they still could not fully explain why the half dose gave better protection, but said it may be that it triggers the immune system differently.”

• Oxford Covid Vaccine Hit 90% Success Rate Thanks To Dosing Error (G.)

The Oxford University and AstraZeneca vaccine trials reached 90% efficacy by accident thanks to the “serendipity” of an error that led to some participants receiving half doses, it has emerged. On Monday scientists revealed that the Oxford vaccine had an overall efficacy of 70%, but could be around 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose a month later. “The reason we had the half dose is serendipity,” said Mene Pangalos, executive vice-president of biopharmaceuticals research and development at AstraZeneca. When university researchers were distributing the vaccine at the end of April, around the start of Oxford and AstraZeneca’s partnership, they noticed expected side effects such as fatigue, headaches or arm aches were milder than expected.

“So we went back and checked … and we found out that they had underpredicted the dose of the vaccine by half,” said Pangalos. Instead of restarting the trial, he said researchers decided to continue with the half dose and administer the full dose booster shot at the scheduled time. About 3,000 people were given the half dose and then a full dose four weeks later, with data showing 90% were protected. In the larger group, who were given two full doses also four weeks apart, efficacy was 62%. Scientists said they still could not fully explain why the half dose gave better protection, but said it may be that it triggers the immune system differently.

Prof Sarah Gilbert from Oxford University, who led the research, said: “It could be that by giving a small amount of the vaccine to start with and following up with a big amount, that’s a better way of kicking the immune system into action and giving us the strongest immune response and the most effective immune response.”

How wrong was this analyst?

• Analyst Warns AstraZeneca Vaccine Efficacy “Embellished” (ZH)

AstraZeneca’s announcement that its adenovirus-vector vaccine is roughly 70% effective (which followed an announcement claiming the vaccine is safe and effective in the elderly) failed to impress investors, as Astrazeneca shares tumbled on the news in premarket. But AZ shares took a second leg lower on Monday when a health-care analyst dropped some damning commentary that has caught the market’s attention. SVB Leerink analyst George Porges said Monday that the company is likely to be roundly criticized for publishing its results without enough data on safety and other factors. The vaccine’s (known formally as ChAdOx1) safety disclosure simply stated that “no serious safety events related to the vaccine have been confirmed”, as well as for its results, which the company “tried to embellish” by highlighting a reported 90% efficacy in the relatively small sub-set of subjects in the study who received the modified initial vaccination followed by the “full dose” four weeks later.

Porges believes that this product will never be licensed in the US due to the design of the company’s trials, which don’t appear to match the FDA’s minimum criteria, and the occurrence of severe safety events that resulted in the extended clinical hold on enrollment in the US (remember when the US put the AZ-Oxford trial recruitment on hold for a month). The findings, according to Porges, confound his original thesis that “all spike protein vaccines are created equal”, which is manifestly not the case now. This raises questions about other adenovirus-vector vaccines, including the Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine.

On the other hand, Porges said “we remain optimistic about the outlook for adjuvanted protein sub unit vaccines such as those in development at Novavax and GSK/SNY, and these engineered synthetic virus vaccines may have a role long term in boosting, but it appears that the occurrence of pre-existing or post-vaccination immunity to the vector has a significant dampening effect on the efficacy of the vaccines (and may confer risk as well) and for this reason we believe these products are likely to be regarded as relatively marginal suppliers in the COVID vaccine market of the future.”

“Murphy also said that she had received “threats online, by phone, and by mail directed at my safety, my family, my staff, and even my pets..”

• Trump Tells GSA To Allow Biden Transition To Proceed (ZH)

In what is the closest words yet to a concession, President Trump agreed to let GSA proceed with the Biden administration transition. In a pair of tweets, Trump noted: “I want to thank Emily Murphy at GSA for her steadfast dedication and loyalty to our Country. She has been harassed, threatened, and abused – and I do not want to see this happen to her, her family, or employees of GSA.” Trump added that while the election litigation battle continues… “Our case STRONGLY continues, we will keep up the good fight, and I believe we will prevail!” … He will allow the transition to proceed: “Nevertheless, in the best interest of our Country, I am recommending that Emily and her team do what needs to be done with regard to initial protocols, and have told my team to do the same.”

[..] Trump’s tweets follow a letter from Emily Murphy (see below), the General Services Administration chief, in which she told Biden that “because of recent developments involving legal challenges and certifications of election results, I have determined that you may access the post-election resources and services described in Section 3 of the Act upon request,” which includes some $6.3 million in funding and other government resources, as well as access to current agency officials and briefing books. The biggest change now is that the Biden transition team will be able to flood federal agencies with officials focused on preparing the way for his administration. They will have access to agency staff and briefing books assembled earlier this year.

Until today’s GSA letter, the Biden transition team had worked informally to establish a new administration, including assembling a coronavirus task force and consulting with public health officials outside of the federal government, mimicking the approach former Vice President Dick Cheney took during the disputed 2000 election. In the letter, Murphy also said that she had received “threats online, by phone, and by mail directed at my safety, my family, my staff, and even my pets in an effort to coerce me into making this determination prematurely.” She added that she was not “directly or indirectly pressured by any Executive Branch official” into the making or timing of a decision on the presidential transition.

“This country, for what it is, takes itself too seriously. Have you ever considered the possibility that America has always been a joke? I’m sure most historians have.”

• President-Elect Biden Is A Machiavellian’s Dream (GM)

Though I did not put this in writing, not from responsibility but just out of cowardice, I did go around telling people IRL that my preferred outcome was “it looks like Trump wins, then it looks like Biden steals it from him.” Some mistook this for an “accelerationist” stance. It was only Machiavellian. I would also tell Trumpists that I was “so pro-Trump, I wrap all the way around to pro-Biden.” This did not raise many hackles and was also quite true. In any case I am delighted to hail, perhaps prematurely but I doubt it, the election of this elder statesman, this American Nestor, always a bridesmaid and now a bride, “China” Joe Biden. If the big guy ever needs to pull an Augustus, he knows who to call. (President-elect Biden has in fact kissed my own mother, not in a sexual way I think. My stepfather, a former Biden staffer from the ‘80s, is a gentleman of honor. So I hear only good things about America’s new cynosure. His teeth sure are looking great.)

It is useless to speculate on the details of a Philadelphia election. One need only say the words, “Philadelphia election,” and anyone on or near the grave of Mark Twain will experience a little earthquake. Has Philadelphia ever had a free and fair election? (This country, for what it is, takes itself too seriously. Have you ever considered the possibility that America has always been a joke? I’m sure most historians have.) The fundamental purpose of a democratic election is to test the strength of the sides in a civil conflict, without anyone actually getting hurt. The majority wins because the strongest side would win. Better to measure that by counting heads, than knocking heads; and counting heads produces a reasonable guess as to who would win a head-knocking contest. Same outcome, fewer concussions: a Pareto optimization.

But this guess is much better if it actually measures humans who are both willing and able to walk down the street and show up. Anyone who cannot show up at the booth is unlikely to show up for the civil war. This is one of many reasons that an in-person election is a more accurate election. (If voters could be qualified by physique, it would be even more accurate.) My sense is that in many urban communities, voting by proxy in some sense is the norm. The people whose names are on the ballots really exist; and almost all of them actually did support China Joe. Or at least, preferred him. The extent to which they perform any tangible political action, including physically going to the booth, is very low; so is their engagement with the political system. They do not watch much CNN.

”..these protesters were all “Corona Deniers,” “far-right extremists,” “conspiracy theorists,” “anti-vaxxers,” “neo-Nazis,” and so on, so they probably got what they deserved.”

• The Germans Are Back! (CJ Hopkins)

Break out the Wagner, folks…the Germans are back! No, not the warm, fuzzy, pussified, peace-loving, post-war Germans … the Germans! You know the ones I mean. The “I didn’t know where the trains were going” Germans. The “I was just following orders” Germans. The other Germans. Yeah…those Germans. In case you missed it, on November 18, the German parliament passed a law, the so-called “Infection Protection Act” (“Das Infektionsschutzgesetz” in German) formally granting the government the authority to issue whatever edicts it wants under the guise of protecting the public health.

The government has been doing this anyway — ordering lockdowns, curfews, travel bans, banning demonstrations, raiding homes and businesses, ordering everyone to wear medical masks, harassing and arresting dissidents, etc. — but now it has been “legitimized” by the Bundestag, enshrined into law, and presumably stamped with one of those intricate official stamps that German bureaucrats like to stamp things with. Now, this “Infection Protection Act,” which was rushed through the parliament, is not in any way comparable to the “Enabling Act of 1933,” which formally granted the government the authority to issue whatever edicts it wanted under the guise of remedying the distress of the people.

Yes, I realize that sounds quite similar, but, according to the government and the German media, there is absolutely no equivalence whatsoever, and anyone who suggests there is is “a far-right AfD extremist,” “a neo-Nazi conspiracy theorist,” or “an anti-vax esotericist,” or whatever. As the Protection Act was being legitimized (i.e., the current one, not the one in 1933), tens of thousands of anti-totalitarian protesters gathered in the streets, many of them carrying copies of the Grundgesetz (i.e., the constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany), which the parliament had just abrogated. They were met by thousands of riot police, who declared the demonstration “illegal” (because many of the protesters were not wearing masks), beat up and arrested hundreds of them, and then hosed down the rest with water cannons.

The German media — which are totally objective, and not at all like Goebbels’ Ministry of Propaganda in the Nazi era — dutifully reminded the German public that these protesters were all “Corona Deniers,” “far-right extremists,” “conspiracy theorists,” “anti-vaxxers,” “neo-Nazis,” and so on, so they probably got what they deserved.

“We’ll dare to have seven at the table here, and therefore not have to eat some reincarnation of turkey for three weeks afterward.”

• Home Alone Thanksgiving (Jim Kunstler)

One result of these final innings in the contest will be the delegitimizing of Ol’ White Joe Biden as president, should his forces finally prevail. Half of America will not only refuse to buy it, but it will incite a counter-resistance on the right as determined as Hillary’s pussyhat brigades and bureaucrat activists of the post-2016 era, and possibly more bloodthirsty, especially if the left makes a move to confiscate guns. The prospect of Joe Biden functioning as president is a joke, anyway. Have you forgotten his non-campaign campaign? The empty parking lots with the white circles? The pitiful gaffes? And lurking in this fog of war is the all that odious monkey business selling influence abroad involving crack-head son Hunter and the rest of the Biden family. Think that’s going away?

What you’d actually get with a Biden “victory” is a Deep State junta of malicious, coercive, and vengeance-crazed characters such as John Brennan, Andrew Weissmann, Nancy Pelosi, Susan Rice, and Adam Schiff, with Barack Obama hovering somewhere backstage, commanding this-and-that — even if President Ole White Joe is shoved aside on account of mental incompetence, leaving Kamala Harris in the Oval Office to giggle through the next four years while she orchestrates junior-high-school style mean girl campaigns against the enemies of Wokesterism. The DC “blob” has demonstrated that it doesn’t need no steenkin’ president to work its wicked will.

Meanwhile, have a lovely Home Alone Thanksgiving, if you are dutifully following the orders of Governors Cuomo, Pritzker, Whitmer, Murphy, and Newsom. We’ll dare to have seven at the table here, and therefore not have to eat some reincarnation of turkey for three weeks afterward. As a holiday bonus, I leave you with a little burlesque submitted by a reader wishing to remain anonymous for your amusement, as follows….

Wonder why Xi is allowing it.

• Bond Defaults Show Bailouts Over For China’s State-Owned Enterprises (Caixin)

“This might be a historic credit crisis,” a debt investor told Caixin, referring to a recent series of bond defaults by state-owned enterprises (SOEs). The bond market veteran’s employer holds AAA-rated bonds of two state-owned defaulters in the crisis: Brilliance Auto Group Holdings Co., a Shenyang-based automaker with links to BMW AG, and Yongcheng Coal and Electricity Holding Group Co. Ltd., a major coal mining company in Henan province. He has been trudging between Shenyang in the northeast and Zhengzhou in central China trying to collect the debts. Both bond issuers are profit-making companies backed by local governments, so their defaults caught investors off guard and set off a chain reaction affecting other debt issuers and local government financing vehicles.

Such bondholders counted on government bailouts to reduce the risk of default by SOEs. But amid a national policy change to shift risk to markets, local governments have been unresponsive. They are now coming under criticism for allowing SOEs to default and avoiding their own responsibility for debt taken on by government-backed businesses. “Default by SOEs is not a terrible thing,” one bond market participant said. “What we fear is that the government allows SOEs to evade repayment of debts in the name of marketized default.” Now the biggest challenge for the government is how to push forward the marketization restructuring of SOEs while avoiding local credit collapses that could spark a domino effect and weigh on the economic recovery.

Since China launched a massive deleveraging campaign in 2015 to curb excessive borrowing by local governments, financial institutions and businesses, private companies’ credit risks have been relatively fully exposed. That means even a large wave of defaults by private companies wouldn’t disturb the market. But the risks related to borrowing by SOEs have been largely an iceberg under the water, a senior bond market participant said. “Once the SOEs default their debt, it would turn the market upside down,” he said. The sell-off of corporate bonds triggered by the defaults of Brilliance Auto and Yongcheng has caused 60 billion yuan ($9.15 billion) of losses for bond investors, according to one brokerage estimate.

Many energy companies canceled or delayed bond issuance plans over the past two weeks. A coal mining enterprise in Shanxi had to pay a 5% coupon rate for an ultra-short-term bond issued Nov. 18, 1.1 percentage points higher than an earlier bond from the same issuer. As the default rate for Chinese private companies rose sharply to 5.34% in 2018 from 1.83% in 2017, defaults by SOEs amounted to only 0.02%, according to a calculation by Huatai Securities.”The deleveraging is like a storm that has drenched everyone,” one fund manager said. “How can only private firms get wet while SOEs get away with it?”

New riches.

• OED Says 2020 Has Too Many Potential Words Of The Year (G.)

For the first time, the Oxford English Dictionary has chosen not to name a word of the year, describing 2020 as “a year which cannot be neatly accommodated in one single word”. Instead, from “unmute” to “mail-in”, and from “coronavirus” to “lockdown”, the eminent reference work has announced its “words of an ‘unprecedented’ year”. On Monday, the dictionary said that there were too many words to sum up the events of 2020. Tracking its vast corpus of more than 11bn words found in web-based news, blogs and other text sources, its lexicographers revealed what the dictionary described as “seismic shifts in language data and precipitous frequency rises in new coinage” over the past 12 months.

Coronavirus, one of its words of the year, is a term that dates back to the 1960s, although it was previously mainly used by scientists. By March this year it was one of the most frequently used nouns in the English language. “Covid-19”, first recorded on 11 February in a report by the World Health Organization, quickly overtook coronavirus in frequency of use, noted the dictionary. One of the year’s most remarkable linguistic developments, according to the OED, has been the extent to which scientific terms have entered general discourse, as we have all become armchair epidemiologists, with most of us now familiar with the term “R number”. “Before 2020 this was a term known mainly to epidemiologists; now non-experts routinely talk about ‘getting the R down’ or ‘bringing R below 1’.

Other terms that have become much more common in everyday discourse this year include ‘flatten the curve’ and ‘community transmission’,” said the dictionary. Use of the phrase “following the science”, it added, has increased in frequency more than 1,000% compared with 2019. Other coronavirus-related language cited by the OED includes “pandemic”, which has seen usage increase by more than 57,000% this year, as well as “circuit breaker”, “lockdown”, “shelter-in-place”, “bubbles”, “face masks” and “key workers”. The revolution in working habits has also affected language, with both “remote” and “remotely” seeing more than 300% growth in use since March. “On mute” and “unmute” have seen 500% rises since March, while the portmanteaus “workation” and “staycation” increased by 500% and 380% respectively.

Other news events have also been reflected in language. In the early months of 2020, there were peaks in usage of “impeachment” and “acquittal”, and “mail-in” has seen an increase of 3,000%. Use of “Black Lives Matter” and “BLM” also surged, as did the term “QAnon”, up by 5,716% on last year. The phrase “conspiracy theory”, meanwhile, has almost doubled in usage between October 2019 and October 2020. Use of “Brexit”, however, has dropped by 80% this year.

The impact on society, communities will be huge. A Great Reset.

• Work From Home Until April If Possible, PM Tells England’s Workers (G.)

The government has told all workers in England they should work from home if possible until April 2021 as part of a move to a stricter tier system that is likely to be a further blow to businesses reliant on commuters in city centres. Boris Johnson on Monday confirmed that under every tier of new restrictions, workers in England who can work from home should continue to do so. The rules under the new three-tier system will last until at least the end of March if voted through by parliament. The government’s 64-page Covid-19 winter plan suggested that working from home was one of the three key areas highlighted by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage). The other policies apparently suggested by Sage included closing pubs that do not serve food in tier 2 areas and closing all hospitality venues in tier 3 areas.

The guidance said: “The previous tiered system had an impact on viral transmission, but Sage advised that stronger measures would be needed in some areas to prevent the epidemic from growing. The tiers therefore need to be strengthened to keep the virus under control.” England’s larger cities, such as Birmingham, Leeds, London and Manchester, and Scottish cities such as Glasgow have lagged behind their smaller counterparts in recovering from lockdowns because of their reliance on workers, according to the Centre for Cities, thinktank. Smaller cities are more reliant on leisure footfall, a disadvantage in normal times that has been flipped on its head by the pandemic. Paul Swinney, director of policy and research at the thinktank, said: “The prospect of them having to hang on to April may mean when city centre workers go back, their favourite restaurant or coffee bar may not be there.”

Central London has been particularly hard hit because of the vast number of people who previously commuted into it from other parts of the city or beyond. Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, told the Observer on Sunday that there was “potentially an existential threat to central London as we know it” because of the curbs on office workers. The City of London Corporation, the governing body of the Square Mile, which also advocates for the financial services sector, said UK ministers needed to provide a plan for a return to offices before a vaccine. “What we also urgently need from the government is a clear plan to allow office workers to return to Covid-secure workplaces in order to get as much of the economy operating as possible,” said Catherine McGuinness, the corporation’s policy chair. “This is vital to protect livelihoods.”

Not even funny anymore.

• Walmart Thanks Government For Completely Obliterating Small Business (BBee)

In an open letter addressed to state officials, Walmart leadership expressed gratefulness to the government for inflating their sales and stock price while completely pulverizing their small business competition. “Yeah, we know 2020 has been tough for the little people,” said one board member while shoveling piles of cash into his vault. “But it’s been super great for us! No longer do we have to worry about the baker down the street or the family-owned hardware store next door taking away some of our business. The government just blew them up! We didn’t even ask them to! Can you believe it? What luck!”

According to reports, Americans are really looking forward to giving all their business solely to giant mega-corporations like Walmart, Amazon, and McDonald’s until all local culture has disappeared. “This is my dream come true!” said Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. “Within 10 years, everyone will be wearing the same identical futuristic grey jumpsuit and eating Amazon-issued food cubes, just like in the movies! That will be so cool.” Sources indicate most powerful corporations are advocating at least one more year of lockdowns to make sure small business competition stays dead. “We have to make sure those uppity business owners never threaten us again,” said Bezos while sitting in a massive chair and stroking a white cat.

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site.

Click at the top of the sidebars for Paypal and Patreon donations. Thank you for your support.

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime, election time, all the time. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

Debt Rattle November 11 2020

Nov 112020

November 11, 2020 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:50 am Finance Tagged with: AI, Biden, Brennan, censorship, Covid19, encryption, Flynn, lockdowns, Logan Act, polls, SCOTUS, transition, Trump 31 Responses »

Hokusai VIews of Mount Fuji: Ejiri in Suruga Province 1831

• Does Lockdown Prevent COVID Deaths? (Rushworth MD)

• Brennan et al Spooked Over Suggestion Trump May ‘Declassify Everything’ (RT)

• Why Is The Supreme Court Involved In Pennsylvania? (Reeves)

• 49% In New Poll Say Biden Is Legitimate Winner Of Election; 34% SayTrump (JTN)

• Mathematical Evidence The Election Was Stolen (Lt. Col. James Zumwalt)

• Biden Camp is Already Working With Foreign Leaders, Like Flynn Did (Greenwald)

• Biden Team Considers Legal Action To Force Formal Transition Of Power (NYP)

• AI Software Verified Mail-In Ballots in Key Swing States (Whitney Webb)

• Fox Joins MSM, Forcing Millions Of Americans To The Media Fringes (Bridge)

• Biden Aide Signals Push For Greater Censorship On The Internet (Turley)

• EU Seizes on Vienna Attack to Enact Long-Desired Ban on Encryption (MPN)

• Zoom Lied To Users About End-to-End Encryption For Years – FTC (ArsT)

• EU Goes After Amazon For Breaching European Antitrust Rules (RT)

• Why Do Some People Get Hay Fever And What Can They Do About It? (SMH)

Headline:

Trump’s voter fraud lawsuits are not about contradicting the will of all the people — just the Black ones
Donald Trump is blaming his loss on Black workers—the same people who risked their very lives to count votes in the middle of a pandemic.

The Philadelphia Inquirer

Very large study, interpreted.: .. no correlation whatsoever between severity of lockdown and number of covid deaths. [..] there was no correlation between mass testing and covid deaths either, for that matter. Basically, nothing that various world governments have done to combat covid seems to have had any effect whatsoever on the number of deaths.

• Does Lockdown Prevent COVID Deaths? (Rushworth MD)

The study chose to limit itself to looking at the 50 countries with the most recorded cases of covid-19 as of the 1st of April 2020. My interpretation is that they chose the top 50 most affected countries, rather than looking at all 195 countries, due to resource constraints. Data was gathered up to the 1st of May 2020. All information gathered was in the form of publicly available facts and figures. Data gathered included information about covid, income level, gross domestic product, income disparity, longevity, BMI (Body Mass Index), smoking, population density, and a bunch of other things that the researchers thought might be interesting to look at. The authors received no outside funding and reported no conflicts of interest.

There are a few problems here that become apparent straight away. First of all, as mentioned, all the data in this study is observational, so no conclusions can be drawn about cause and effect. Second, May was relatively early in the pandemic, and it’s now November, so we’re missing about half a year’s worth of covid data. On the other hand, the pandemic had already peaked in much of the world by May 1st, and lockdown measures had at that point been in place for months in most countries, so it should be possible to get a pretty good idea about what effect lockdown has in terms of decreasing covid deaths, even using only the data available up to May 1st.

Third, the analysis builds on publicly available data, often provided by different governments themselves, with widely varying levels of trustworthiness, and with different ways of classifying things. As an example, data from Sweden is infinitely more reliable than data from China. And while certain countries have used quite inclusive criteria when deciding whether someone has died of covid or not, other countries have been much more strict. The countries with stricter definitions will tend to have lower covid death rates than the countries with more generous definitions. This lack of homogeneity in how things are defined can make it harder to see real patterns.

Fourth, the reseachers who put this study together gathered an enormous amount of data, pretty much everything they could think of under the sun that might in some way correlate with covid statistics. That means that this study amounts to “data trawling”, in other words, going through every relationship imaginable without any a priori hypothesis in order to see which relationships end up being statistically significant. When you do this, you’re supposed to set stricter limits than you normally would for what you consider to be statistically significant results. They didn’t do this.

[..] The factors that most strongly predicted the number of people who died of covid in a country were rate of obesity, average age, and level of income disparity. Each percentage point increase in the rate of obesity resulted in a 12% increase in covid deaths. Each additional average year of age in the population increased covid deaths by 10% . On the opposite end of the spectrum, each point in the direction of greater equality on the gini-coefficient (a scale used to determine how evenly resources are distributed across a population) resulted in a 12% decrease in covid deaths. All these results were statistically significant.

Another factor that had an effect that was significant, but more weakly so, was smoking. Each percentage point increase in the number of smokers in a population was correlated with a 3% decrease in covid deaths. Ok, let’s get to the most important thing, which the authors seem to have tried to hide, because they make so little mention of it. Lockdown and covid deaths. The authors found no correlation whatsoever between severity of lockdown and number of covid deaths. And they didn’t find any correlation between border closures and covid deaths either. And there was no correlation between mass testing and covid deaths either, for that matter. Basically, nothing that various world governments have done to combat covid seems to have had any effect whatsoever on the number of deaths.

Well, yeah, that could expose him.

• Brennan et al Spooked Over Suggestion Trump May ‘Declassify Everything’ (RT)

Former CIA director John Brennan took to CNN to speculate wildly on how Trump would dump the US’ most precious military secrets out of spite. Mainstream outlets and social media alike piled on the declassification rumors. Brennan took to CNN’s airwaves on Monday to denounce Trump for firing Defense Secretary Mark Esper, claiming the axe came down over Esper’s “rebuff[ing] Trump’s efforts to politicize the US military.” But the mind-reading went on considerably further as Brennan, aided and abetted by host Chris Cuomo, wondered aloud “who knows what else he has refused to do” – like expose the nation’s deepest, darkest secrets.

If Esper had “been pushed aside because he was not listening to Donald Trump, who knows what his successor is going to do if Donald Trump does give some type of order that really is counter to what I think our national security interests need to be?” Brennan wondered aloud. He cited no proof of his initial statement about the reason for Esper’s firing, or any evidence to back up Trump’s supposed inclination toward spilling all of the national security beans pre-Inauguration Day, but Cuomo didn’t seem to care. Brennan was concerned even as the pundit reminded him that Trump only had 70 days to leave the White House without leaving a smoking crater in his wake. “You can do a lot of damage in 70 days,” he hinted darkly, questioning whether the president was “going to carry out these vendettas against these other individuals.”

“It’s clear Donald Trump Is trying to exercise the power because he can, and he’s going to settle scores, but i’m very concerned about what he might do…” the spook-turned-Resistance stalwart mused, veering into projection territory with a suggestion that the president was “just very unpredictable. Right now he’s like a cornered cat” or “tiger” and was going to “lash out.”

Because a court decided to (among other things) extend the time ballots could come in. And only the legilsature has that power.

• Why Is The Supreme Court Involved In Pennsylvania? (Reeves)

Last Friday evening, in the midst of the media frenzy over the Presidential election, Justice Alito issued a short, page-and-a-half order to all Pennsylvania county boards of election. The order directs the county boards, in counting ballots, to separate any and all ballots received by mail after November 3 at 8:00 pm from those received before that time. Most legal commentators minimized the significance of Alito’s order, declaring it to be no big deal. In fact, though, the order is part of a major lawsuit currently pending before the Supreme Court, the outcome of which could have serious consequences for election law across the country regardless of whether it practically impacts the results of the Presidential election.

[..] The lawsuit, Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Kathy Boockvar, et al., presents the question of whether, under the United States Constitution and federal law, state courts can overturn the express enactments of state legislatures regarding the time, place, and manner of holding Presidential elections. The Constitution vests the state legislatures with the authority to do this and mentions nothing about state courts. The federal Congress, in turn, is vested with the authority to pass a law mandating that all states hold the voting for President on the same day throughout the country. For a major part of our country’s history, Congress declined to exercise this power. As difficult as it is to believe in this day and age, there was a time when different states held their elections for President on different days. But Congress eventually streamlined the election process by passing legislation mandating that the Presidential election be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November.

But while Congress, pursuant to its Constitutional authority, has mandated the date on which the Presidential election must take place, the individual state legislatures are still vested with a large amount of discretion to decide the place and manner of the elections. For example, while Congress has set the date on which the election is to take place, it has said nothing about the closing time by which all votes must be cast on that date. Should the polls close at 5:00 pm? 8:00 pm? This is a prudential matter left to the resolution of the individual state legislatures. Even more critically—should mail-in voting be allowed? If it is, how should it be done? Do mail-in ballots need to be received by election day itself, or is it sufficient for them to arrive later, so long as they are post-marked the day of the election? Again, this is a matter of prudential judgment left to each state legislature. But in any event, the Constitution vests resolution of these matters with the state legislatures—not with the judiciary.

But we have other polls that show you completely different results. One from Reuters put Trump at just 3%. And yet another poll says 70% of Americans think election was not “free and fair”.

• 49% In New Poll Say Biden Is Legitimate Winner Of Election; 34% SayTrump (JTN)

More than a third of registered voters believe Donald Trump legitimately won the presidential election, according to a new Just the News Daily Poll with Scott Rasmussen. Less than half of all respondents — 49% — believe Joe Biden legitimately won the race, while 34% said they believe Trump won the election, and 16% said they are not sure who really won. Of Republican respondents, 77% said they think Trump is the legitimate winner, while just 12% of Republicans believe Biden is the legitimate winner. About a quarter of independent voters also said they believe Trump won. Among Democrats, 87% think that Biden is the winner. Rasmussen noted that the survey was conducted from Thursday night until Saturday early afternoon. “During the time of this survey, no television network or other news source had formally called the race for Biden,” he said. The survey was comprised of 1,200 registered voters and conducted by Scott Rasmussen from Nov. 5-7, 2020.

I don’t find this terribly strong.

• Mathematical Evidence The Election Was Stolen (Lt. Col. James Zumwalt)

In Wisconsin, late into the night of Nov. 3/early morning hours of Nov. 4, President Donald Trump enjoyed a comfortable lead. Milwaukee was to report in with results by 1 a.m. on the 4th; 2 a.m. and 3 a.m. passed without the results. Finally, at 3:30 a.m., the vote tally arrived. All incoming votes went to Democrat Joe Biden; none to Trump. In 1995, not even Saddam proved that brazen. Something highly unusual happened that morning at several voting centers, not only in Wisconsin, but in Michigan and Pennsylvania as well. In Wisconsin, 140,000 mail-in ballots were found ; in Michigan another 200,000; and in Pennsylvania, 1,000,000 – all for Biden.

Supposedly the party of science, Democrats have lambasted Republicans for failing to heed it. Perhaps, then, the science of math provides the best explanation to understand what happened in these three states. A statistical analysis, laying out the chances of such one-sided Biden ballot dumps occurring, leads to but one conclusion: undeniable mathematical evidence the election was stolen. Analysts say statistically it is impossible for those states to have flipped to Biden the way they did. It is a virtual statistical impossibility – the odds being 0.00000189% or 1 in almost 53 million. In a national election demonstrating a close split in popular vote between two presidential candidates, how could so many last minute pro-Biden votes materialize wiping out Trump’s lead?

[..] Any hope of Trump retaining the Oval Office rests on irrefutable proof of voting fraud. Keeping in mind we live in an era where first impression news stories have proven inaccurate, some Trump confidants are saying evidence of massive voter fraud is being assembled, arrests of several players in the voting scam will follow and the proof will be damning. Allegedly, this evidence involves fraudulent use of ballots identified as part of a sting operation. The Trump administration supposedly had all legal ballots secretly imprinted with invisible watermarks in unbreakable code. A scan so far of 14 million ballots in five states reflect an 80% failure rate – all Biden votes.

Did he talk to the Russian ambassador?

• Biden Camp is Already Working With Foreign Leaders, Like Flynn Did (Greenwald)

Two weeks after Donald Trump won the 2016 election, the President-elect named Gen. Michael Flynn to be his National Security Advisor in both the transition and the new administration. Flynn, who had previously served as President Obama’s Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and then campaigned for Trump, quickly got to work in his new position by reaching out to his counterparts in foreign governments, as is customary for national security transition team officials. One of the calls Flynn made, in late December, was to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, after the Obama administration has imposed a series of sanctions on Moscow in response to pressure to punish the Russians for interference in the 2016 election, including the expulsion of diplomats.

Gen. Flynn — fearful of an excessively retaliatory response from Moscow that could provoke what he saw as unnecessary confrontation, particularly given the growing anti-Russian sentiment in the U.S. — sought to persuade the Russians that there was no need for them to retaliate because the new administration, which was only three weeks away from taking over, would reset its relations with Moscow and try to forge a more constructive engagement.

[..] It is customary for post-election transition officials to work with their counterparts in foreign governments to lay the groundwork for relations with the new administration. As The Washington Post said about Flynn’s call: “it would not be uncommon for incoming administrations to interface with foreign governments with whom they will soon have to work.” Despite its normalcy, Flynn’s call, which was recorded by the National Security Agency that had been targeting Russian officials, prompted the FBI — under the leadership of then-Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe — to decide to criminally investigate Flynn’s conversations with Kislyak.

[..] Any doubts about how customary it is for such calls to be made by transition officials were unintentionally obliterated on Monday night by former Obama national security official Ben Rhodes, who is almost certain to occupy a high-level national security position in a Biden administration. Speaking on MSNBC — of course — Rhodes, while amicably chatting with former Bush/Cheney Communications Director turned-beloved-liberal-MSNBC-host Nicolle Wallace, admitted in passing that “foreign leaders are already having phone calls with Joe Biden talking about the agenda they’re going to pursue January 20,” all to ensure “as seamless transition as possible,” adding: “the center of political gravity in this country and the world is shifting to Joe Biden.”

Cruz McCabe Logan Act

ABSOLUTE DESTRUCTION. pic.twitter.com/fUSDlyrcka

— Beautyon (@Beautyon_) November 10, 2020

Trying to make it a fait accompli, so the backlash will be huge if courts start throwing out ballots.

• Biden Team Considers Legal Action To Force Formal Transition Of Power (NYP)

Joe Biden’s team is considering legal action over the ongoing refusal to grant the president-elect a formal transition into the White House, according to reports. Amid President Trump’s declining to concede the election, the federal agency needed to green-light his transition has also held back from declaring him the victor — a move usually made within 24 hours. The delay by the General Services Administration (GSA) freezes the Biden team out of access to $6.3 million in federal funding, classified information and security clearances or background checks for potential cabinet nominees, Axios noted. It also prevents access to the State Department, which facilitates calls between foreign leaders, Fox News said.

“There’s a number of levers on the table and all options are certainly available,” a Biden transition official told reporters. Legal action is “certainly a possibility,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, according to the Associated Press. “It’s a changing situation and certainly rather fluid,” added the official, according to Axios. Trump is not expected to formally concede but is likely to vacate the White House at the end of his term, several people around him told the AP. A GSA spokesperson told the wire service late Monday that an “ascertainment” on the winner of the election had not yet been made.

The formal presidential transition doesn’t begin until the administrator of the federal General Services Administration ascertains the “apparent successful candidate” in the general election. Neither the Presidential Transition Act nor federal regulations specify how that determination should be made. That decision green lights the entire federal government’s moves toward preparing for a handover of power. In 2000, the GSA determination was delayed until after the Florida recount fight was settled on Dec. 13. At the time, the administrator relied on an assessment from one of the drafters of the 1963 Presidential Transition Act that “in a close contest, the Administrator simply would not make the decision.”

This is even crazier that letting software systems count votes.

• AI Software Verified Mail-In Ballots in Key Swing States (Whitney Webb)

Though accusations of election fraud in the 2020 US presidential election have been swirling across social media and some news outlets for much of the past week, few have examined the role of a little known Silicon Valley company whose artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm was used to accept or reject ballots in highly contested states such as Nevada. That company, Parascript, has long-standing cozy ties to defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin and tech giants including Microsoft, in addition to being a contractor to the US Postal Service. In addition, its founder, Stepan Pachikov, better known for cofounding the app Evernote in 2007, is a long-standing and 2020 donor to Democratic presidential candidates.

Parascript’s AI software was used during this election in at least eight states for matching signatures on ballot envelopes with those in government databases in order to “ease the workload of staff enforcing voter signature rules” resulting from the influx of mail-in ballots. Reuters, which reported on the use of the technology, asked the company to provide a list of counties and states using its software for the 2020 election. Parascript, however, declined to supply the list, replying, instead, that their clients “included 20 of the top 100 counties by registered voters.”

Despite not receiving the official list from Parascript, Reuters was able to compile its own partial list, which revealed that several counties in Florida, Colorado, Washington, and Utah, among others, utilized the AI software to determine the validity of ballots. Reuters also reported that Clark County, Nevada, which is one of the hotspots of litigation between the Trump and Biden campaigns and fraud allegations, was one that used the software. Reuters was able to determine how the software was used in some counties, with many counties allowing the software to approve anywhere from 20 to 75 percent of mail-in ballots as acceptable. For several counties included in the Reuters list,staff reviewed 1 percent or less of the AI software’s acceptances. Figures were not available for Clark County, Nevada.

Prior to the election, concerns were raised regarding the efficacy of AI signature-verification software for use on mail-in ballots. For instance, Kyle Wiggers, a journalist who covers AI for Venture Beat, noted that the accuracy of such systems is believed to vary between 74 and 96 percent. However, he also stated that “we don’t have benchmarks from the systems that are in use to verify signatures on these mail-in ballots. We basically have to go by what the manufacturers of the systems are telling us, which is that the systems are accurate.”

“It signals a massive migration away from the so-called ‘legacy media’ that was complicit in dragging Trump through the mud for four years over the fake news of Russiagate and impeachment.”

• Fox Joins MSM, Forcing Millions Of Americans To The Media Fringes (Bridge)

Once upon a time, Fox provided the Republican Party solitary shelter from a storm of media attacks, which ramped up considerably with the election of Donald Trump, a Washington outsider loathed by the establishment. Eventually, however, for reasons known only to Rupert Murdoch, the channel began to abandon its core audience. Last year, for example, Fox viewers got their first whiff of change when the 89-year-old media mogul brought on board none other than Donna Brazile, a former CNN commentator as well as a former Democratic National Committee chair. Then there’s Chris Wallace, the Fox News anchor who served as moderator during the first debate between Trump and Biden. Critics say Wallace was so harsh with the US president that it appeared as though Trump was debating against two people instead of one.

It wasn’t until Election Day, however, when many Fox viewers got blindsided by the painful realization that the channel they had followed for years had finally betrayed them – and at the worst possible time. That much became apparent when Fox, even before ‘fake news’ CNN, jumped the gun and called the swing state of Arizona for Biden with just 73 percent of the state’s votes having been tallied. The Trump administration seemed justified in calling that move “voter suppression” – a rusty knife in the back. Many Republicans probably turned the car around when they heard that dubious news. The straw that broke the Fox back, however, came on Thursday, when anchor Bret Baier told viewers, “We have not seen the hard evidence,” after Trump remarked during a White House press conference that the election process had been rampant with “fraud and corruption.”

Baier could have at least acknowledged that some of the more questionable incidents – such as Republican ballot observers being turned away as the votes were being counted, and the names of the dearly departed appearing on the ballots – deserved some scrutiny. Now Fox will have to suffer with the ramification of its political volte-face, which, judging by the comments on Twitter, has thousands of erstwhile viewers running for the fire exits. But is there a safe alternative media universe to escape to? It should disturb many people, not least in the world of media, that Trump got 71 million votes in the 2020 showdown against his rival. That number represents not only millions of jaded American voters, exasperated by the apparent botching of the most consequential US election in modern times. It signals a massive migration away from the so-called ‘legacy media’ that was complicit in dragging Trump through the mud for four years over the fake news of Russiagate and impeachment.

Twitter silencing news stories is not enough.

• Biden Aide Signals Push For Greater Censorship On The Internet (Turley)

We have been discussing the calls from top Democrats for increased private censorship on social media and the Internet. President-elect Joe Biden has himself called for such censorship, including blocking President Donald Trump’s criticism of mail-in voting. Now, shortly after the election, one of Biden’s top aides is ramping up calls for a crackdown on Facebook for allowing Facebook users to read views that he considers misleading — users who signed up to hear from these individuals. Bill Russo, a deputy communications director on Biden’s campaign press team, tweeted late Monday that Facebook “is shredding the fabric of our democracy” by allowing such views to be shared freely.

Russo tweeted that “If you thought disinformation on Facebook was a problem during our election, just wait until you see how it is shredding the fabric of our democracy in the days after.” Russo objected to the fact that, unlike Twitter, Facebook did not move against statements that he and the campaign viewed as “misleading.” He concluded. “We pleaded with Facebook for over a year to be serious about these problems. They have not. Our democracy is on the line. We need answers.” For those of us in the free speech community, these threats are chilling. We saw incredible abuses before the election in Twitter barring access to a true story in the New York Post about Hunter Biden and his alleged global influence peddling scheme. Notably, no one in the Biden camp (including Biden himself) thought that it was a threat to our democracy to have Twitter block the story (while later admitting that it was a mistake).

I have previously objected to such regulation of speech. What is most disturbing is how liberals have embraced censorship and even declared that “China was right” on Internet controls. Many Democrats have fallen back on the false narrative that the First Amendment does not regulate private companies so this is not an attack on free speech. Free speech is a human right that is not solely based or exclusively defined by the First Amendment. Censorship by Internet companies is a “Little Brother” threat long discussed by free speech advocates. Some may willingly embrace corporate speech controls but it is still a denial of free speech.

Dangerous. Trying to use pedophilea to clamp down on an entire society. Do these people not understand this, or is something else going on?

• EU Seizes on Vienna Attack to Enact Long-Desired Ban on Encryption (MPN)

The European Union is rushing through new legislation to get rid of end to end digital encryption. This would mean the end of privacy for users of popular messaging apps like WhatsApp and Signal. A European Council draft resolution on encryption quietly published on Friday afternoon lays out the EU’s Orwellian position in detail. “The European Union fully supports the development, implementation and use of strong encryption,” it states, “Encryption is a necessary means of protecting fundamental rights and the digital security of governments, industry and society.” Yet in the very next sentence it insists that “At the same time, the European Union needs to ensure the ability of competent authorities” to “exercise their lawful powers, both online and offline.”

These “competent authorities” (a phrase occurring throughout the document) refer to law enforcement agencies and judicial authorities. “Protecting the privacy and security of communications through encryption and at the same time upholding the possibility for competent authorities in the area of security and criminal justice to lawfully access relevant data for legitimate, clearly defined purposes infighting serious and/or organized crimes and terrorism, including in the digital world, are extremely important,” it concludes. Thus, the EU’s position is that its citizens should be able to hide their data from criminals, but not from the government or its various spying agencies.

The official justification for these new laws, Austrian public service broadcaster Österreichischer Rundfunk reports, is the Vienna terrorist attack of November 2, which left five people dead and 23 injured. However, it notes, the EU has long dreamed of pushing through legislation which lets it surveil its population. In June, for instance, European Commissioner for Home Affairs Ylva Johannson gave a speech outlining what must be done to win the fight against child trafficking and abuse. “We must also deal with encryption. Military grade encryption that’s easy to use but impossible to break makes paedophiles invisible and hides evidence of their crimes from police,” she insisted. “It’s our obligation to protect children. We must do what is necessary,” she added.

Civil rights group the Electronic Freedom Foundation is not impressed by the various arguments put forward by the EU in order to justify the end of end to end encryption, calling it a “drastically invasive step.” “We are in the first stages of a long anti-encryption march by the upper echelons of the EU, headed directly toward Europeans’ digital front-doors. It’s the same direction as the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States have been moving for some time. If Europe wants to keep its status as a jurisdiction that treasures privacy, it will need to fight for it,” they wrote last month.

The EU needn’t worry.

• Zoom Lied To Users About End-to-End Encryption For Years – FTC (ArsT)

Zoom has agreed to upgrade its security practices in a tentative settlement with the Federal Trade Commission, which alleges that Zoom lied to users for years by claiming it offered end-to-end encryption. “[S]ince at least 2016, Zoom misled users by touting that it offered ‘end-to-end, 256-bit encryption’ to secure users’ communications, when in fact it provided a lower level of security,” the FTC said today in the announcement of its complaint against Zoom and the tentative settlement. Despite promising end-to-end encryption, the FTC said that “Zoom maintained the cryptographic keys that could allow Zoom to access the content of its customers’ meetings, and secured its Zoom Meetings, in part, with a lower level of encryption than promised.”

The FTC complaint says that Zoom claimed it offers end-to-end encryption in its June 2016 and July 2017 HIPAA compliance guides, which were intended for health-care industry users of the video conferencing service. Zoom also claimed it offered end-to-end encryption in a January 2019 white paper, in an April 2017 blog post, and in direct responses to inquiries from customers and potential customers, the complaint said. “In fact, Zoom did not provide end-to-end encryption for any Zoom Meeting that was conducted outside of Zoom’s ‘Connecter’ product (which are hosted on a customer’s own servers), because Zoom’s servers—including some located in China—maintain the cryptographic keys that would allow Zoom to access the content of its customers’ Zoom Meetings,” the FTC complaint said.

The FTC announcement said that Zoom also “misled some users who wanted to store recorded meetings on the company’s cloud storage by falsely claiming that those meetings were encrypted immediately after the meeting ended. Instead, some recordings allegedly were stored unencrypted for up to 60 days on Zoom’s servers before being transferred to its secure cloud storage.”

Second try.

• EU Goes After Amazon For Breaching European Antitrust Rules (RT)

The European Commission (EC) announced a second formal investigation into online retailer Amazon on Tuesday, accusing the firm of breaching European antitrust rules by using independent sellers’ data for its own benefit. The EC said that Amazon was using the data of third-party sellers, such as order numbers, revenues and numbers of visitors, to inform its strategic business decisions, like reducing the price of products. The e-commerce giant plays a dual role – both selling products itself, and acting as a platform for independent (and sometimes rival) sellers. “Data on the activity of third-party sellers should not be used to the benefit of Amazon when it acts as a competitor to these sellers,” said EU’s competition chief Margrethe Vestager.

Amazon disagreed with the Commission’s assertions, saying it “will continue to make every effort to ensure it has an accurate understanding of the facts.” It also said that represents less than one percent of the global retail market. “No company cares more about small businesses or has done more to support them over the past two decades than Amazon,” it said. In July 2019, the EC, the executive arm of the European Union, launched a probe into Amazon due to concerns over anti-competitive behavior. This time, the antitrust investigation will look at how the company chooses which sellers offer products via Amazon Prime, its paid-for premium service. It will investigate the possible preferential treatment of Amazon’s own retail business and those that use its logistics and delivery services (known as “fulfilment by Amazon” sellers) over other sellers.

Article in Sydney Morning Herald, September 25 2019 about hay fever says: “This article was originally published in 2018 and has since been updated.”

How is it possible it’s talking about COVID19 in Sep 2019 at the latest? Didn’t we not know about it till December? What did I miss?

• Why Do Some People Get Hay Fever And What Can They Do About It? (SMH)

In any other year, an errant sniff or explosive sneeze might be met with an offer of a tissue or a polite “bless you” – but the deadly COVID-19 pandemic has made us extremely cautious, for good reason. Thankfully, Melburnians dreading a tough hay fever season behind masks can breathe a (stifled) sigh of relief. Good late summer and autumn rains were followed by a dry winter, leaving the soils of western Victoria’s grazing lands more parched than last year. This is likely to keep pollen-producing grasses to a minimum – and itchy, running noses to just a drip.

[..] … and does it relate to COVID-19? While there are some similar symptoms: a cough, runny nose, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing (the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention released a Venn diagram that neatly illustrates the symptoms of both), there is no evidence of a link between the two. But Professor Katelaris says there is plenty of evidence to show that when the nasal lining is inflamed, it is easier to catch any virus. So those suffering from allergies should try to keep symptoms in check: seek medical advice on treatments, avoid touching your eyes and nose at all times and head straight for the nearest COVID-19 testing station if you experience allergic symptoms for the first time.

Professor Douglass says if it’s just hay fever, it’s highly unlikely you’ll experience the fevers, sore throats and general aches and pains associated with COVID-19. “[They] are more typical of a respiratory infection than hay fever … sneezing, an itchy throat and eyes are more typical of allergic symptoms,” she says.

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site.

Click at the top of the sidebars for Paypal and Patreon donations. Thank you for your support.

Veritas Hopkins

RECORDING: Federal agents “coerce” USPS whistleblower Hopkins to water down story. Hopkins doubles down…

Agent Strasser: “I am trying to twist you a little bit”

“I am scaring you here”…” we have Senators involved…DOJ involved…reason they called me is to try to harness.” pic.twitter.com/tK2JPu6Wqm

— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) November 11, 2020

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime, election time, all the time. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

Debt Rattle October 24 2020

Oct 242020

October 24, 2020 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 8:49 am Finance Tagged with: AOC, Assange, Covid19, curfew, diabetics, face masks, FBI, Obamacare, Russophobia, Tesla, transition, Tulsi Gabbard, YouTube 37 Responses »

Henri Matisse Le Bonheur de Vivre 1906

• Russian Data Reveals Diabetics Ten Times More Likely To Catch COVID19 (RT)

• Kremlin Says US Elections Have Become “Competition In Russophobia” (ZH)

• MSM Beat The Bidens To Declare Laptop Leak ‘Russian Disinformation’ (RT)

• Millions Of Insurance Plans Were Cancelled Due To Obamacare (JTN)

• FBI, GSA Undermined 2016 Transition By Sharing Private Trump Team Records (JTN)

• Differences in How Democrats and Republicans Behave on Twitter (Pew)

• If Trump Wins, My Profession Is Done: Pollster (RT)

• Bleeding Out (Jim Kunstler)

• AOC Blasts Republicans For Calling Her AOC (JTN)

• YouTube Is Selling So Many Political Ads It Has Run Out Of Videos For Them (ZH)

• European Data Considers Coronavirus Risk in Greece Mainly Low to Medium (GR)

• Tesla, Ordered To Recall 30,000 Cars In China, Blames ‘Driver Abuse’ (LAT)

Tulsi Gabbard Daniel Ellsberg
“A whistleblower cannot get a fair trial”
https://twitter.com/i/status/1319750791641530369

What’s worse: ..coronavirus could be causing “an entirely new form of diabetes.”

• Russian Data Reveals Diabetics Ten Times More Likely To Catch COVID19 (RT)

Diabetics are 10.3 times more likely to develop Covid-19, and their symptoms are more severe and life-threatening, with over a quarter of all infected patients already suffering from the illness as a pre-existing condition. That’s according to Russian Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova, who told officials that coronavirus is especially dangerous for those suffering with the common metabolic disorder. “In patients with diabetes, Covid-19 infection is 10.3 times more common,” Golikova explained. “Patients with diabetes experience the disease more severely, and more frequently develop acute respiratory distress syndrome, as well as respiratory failure, [requiring] artificial ventilation and, unfortunately, [experiencing] higher mortality.”

According to Golikova, 27 percent of all infected patients have diabetes among their comorbidities, and this is often complicated by increased glycemia. As of the start of 2020, 5.1 million people in Russia had a diabetes diagnosis. She noted that the risk is even higher in patients with high blood pressure. Curiously, earlier this week, American Covid-19 patient Mario Buelna experienced exactly the opposite situation – he developed diabetes for the first time, having contracted coronavirus. According to his doctors in Mesa, Arizona, Buelna’s diabetes was triggered by Covid-19. Speaking to London-based news agency Reuters, Dr. Robert Eckel, president of medicine and science at the American Diabetes Association, thinks that coronavirus could be causing “an entirely new form of diabetes.”

“..competition in Russophobia has become a constant in all US electoral processes, regrettably.”

• Kremlin Says US Elections Have Become “Competition In Russophobia” (ZH)

This week’s perhaps overly dramatic announcement Wednesday night by the heads of multiple federal agencies – foremost among them Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe – alleging new major efforts by Russia and Iran to interfere in the US presidential election formed a key question and talking point by debate moderator Kristen Welker Thursday night. Welker even referenced as somehow undisputed and settled “truth” the now debunked “Russian bounties” story. Over a month ago the Pentagon and other intelligence heads concluded after an exhaustive investigation that there’s simply no evidence to suggest Russian military intelligence paid Afghan fighters to target Americans.

Russia was certainly paying attention to the debate and was not amused. The Kremlin on Friday blasted what it said was “Russophobia” at the center of the debate. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists Friday that “competition in Russophobia has become a constant in all US electoral processes, regrettably.” “We are fully aware of this and can only express regret,” he added as quoted in TASS. “After all, probably, it is the American electorate who is the target audience of these debates, that is, common Americans. It is up to them to decide who won the debate, not us,” the spokesman said. Indeed the American public is by and large likely growing tired of the endless Russia scapegoating too.

Corporate droid Kristin Welker says the laughable claim that Iran emailed threats to US lawmakers was “confirmed” by the same intel officials who made it up. Biden then spouts the discredited tale about Russian bounties, leading Trump to brag of arming Ukraine. National dementia.

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) October 23, 2020

“Joe Biden is supposed to deny and deflect attention from damaging information. He’s a politician, after all – it’s his job. The press is supposed to do the exact opposite.”

• MSM Beat The Bidens To Declare Laptop Leak ‘Russian Disinformation’ (RT)

It’s not the media’s job to cover for Joe Biden. Yet the New York Times and its ilk have fallen over themselves to call the damaging leaks “Russian disinformation,” while also awkwardly publishing the FBI’s denial of the claim. As President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden geared up to debate on Thursday night, the cable TV commentariat wondered how Trump would bring up the “laptop from hell.” Recovered from a Delaware repair shop last year and handed to Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani, the laptop – which allegedly belonged to Joe’s son, Hunter – contained a tranche of emails that implicated the Biden family in numerous foreign graft schemes, all while Joe was in the White House.

Before the debate kicked off, the New York Times quoted the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) as saying: “No concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation,” and the FBI as seconding this claim. For the Times, it was a dramatic turnaround. Just days earlier, before the FBI and DNI could weigh in, a headline in the nation’s paper of record read, “Is the Trump campaign colluding with Russia again?” Quoting only a Senate Democrat, the Times alleged that Giuliani had been cultivated as an “asset” by the Kremlin, and “any information proffered by Rudy Giuliani is likely compromised.” The Washington Post sang from the same hymn sheet, using the usual anonymous “former officials” to tie Giuliani to Russia.

Even before the media settled on Russia as the culprit, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough called the scandal “made up” and a “hokey story,” while NBC’s Hallie Jackson described it as “dubious” and “questionably sourced.” As the Times and Post rang the Russia alarm last week, neither the FBI nor DNI had commented on the laptop. DNI John Ratcliffe would do so on Monday, and the FBI followed suit a day later. In fact, as these articles hit the presses, the only people who had fingered Russia for the stunt were a collection of Biden’s aides and advisors, who gave no evidence to support their claims. The Biden campaign itself didn’t embrace the Russia excuse until several days later. It’s one thing to cover a candidate sympathetically. It’s another to work as his preemptive press corps. Joe Biden is supposed to deny and deflect attention from damaging information. He’s a politician, after all – it’s his job. The press is supposed to do the exact opposite.

But Biden can make the claim uncontested that number is zero.

• Millions Of Insurance Plans Were Cancelled Due To Obamacare (JTN)

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden said during Thursday night’s debate that nobody lost their health insurance plans when Obamacare was fully implemented, but millions of individuals had their insurance policies cancelled at the time. A RAND Corporation study estimated that 5.9 million people lost their insurance plans due to Obamacare’s rules and regulations. Obamacare is the 2010 health care law crafted by former President Obama, for whom Biden served as vice president for both of his terms. Obama was heavily criticized at the time for telling Americans that if “you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” which turned out not to be the case. Politifact rated Obama’s promise the “lie of the year” in 2013.

Trump and Biden each were asked Thursday night how they would handle health care policy if the Supreme Court invalidates Obamacare’s individual mandate in the upcoming California v. Texas case. “What I’m going to do is pass Obamacare with a public option. It will become Bidencare. The public option says in fact if you do not have the wherewithal, if you qualify for Medicaid and you do not have the wherewithal in your state to get Medicaid, you’re automatically enrolled, providing competition for insurance companies,” Biden said. Biden rejected the idea that he wants to eliminate private insurance. “Not one single person with private insurance would lose their insurance under my plan, nor did they under Obamacare. They did not lose their insurance unless they chose they wanted to go to something else,” he said.

In response, Trump said Biden’s health care plan would amount to socialized medicine, given that the federal government would run the public option.

Bernie Biden

For years, Joe Biden fought to cut your Social Security and Medicare—a fact which Joe falsely denied last night. This video (Joe Biden’s own words) was created by Bernie Sanders earlier this year to expose Joe Biden’s atrocious record and egregious lies! pic.twitter.com/womMTc70RP

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 24, 2020

This is the most severe of all. This is also why they complain in advance about Trump not doing a peaceful transition. Because they themselves did not.

• FBI, GSA Undermined 2016 Transition By Sharing Private Trump Team Records (JTN)

A Senate report released today claims that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the General Services Administration undermined the Trump transition team in 2016 by sharing private Trump team records in violation of an agreement between that team and the GSA. The majority staff report from both the Senate Committee on Finance and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs claims that officials from both the FBI and Mueller’s office “secretly sought and received access to the private records of Donald J. Trump’s presidential transition team, Trump for America, Inc.”

“They did so,” the report continues, “despite the terms of a memorandum of understanding between the Trump transition team and the General Services Administration…—the executive agency responsible for providing services to both candidates’ transition teams—that those records were the transition team’s private property that would not be retained at the conclusion of the transition.” The report states that officials at the GSA proactively called the FBI and offered to retain Trump transition team records following the controversy surrounding Michael Flynn’s resignation as national security adviser in early 2017. The agency informed neither the White House nor Trump for America of that decision. Those records would eventually make their way to Mueller’s office, the report says.

“At bottom,” the report continues, “the GSA and the FBI undermined the transition process by preserving Trump transition team records contrary to the terms of the memorandum of understanding, hiding that fact from the Trump transition team, and refusing to provide the team with copies of its own records.” “These actions have called into question the GSA’s role as a neutral service provider, and those doubts have consequences,” the report adds. “Future presidential transition teams must have confidence that their use of government resources and facilities for internal communications and deliberations—including key decisions such as nominations, staffing, and significant policy changes—will not expose them to exploitation by third parties, including political opponents.”

Amanda Milius The Plot Against the President

Important Film: Amanda Milius explains how @PATPmovie exposes the greatest political scandal in our country’s history and why it is important for all Americans. Watch it at https://t.co/p6JifeK4SD. #MAGA #AmericaFirst #Dobbs pic.twitter.com/GZoz2DN8gv

— Lou Dobbs (@LouDobbs) October 23, 2020

And guess who gets censored?

• Differences in How Democrats and Republicans Behave on Twitter (Pew)

Most U.S. adults on Twitter post only rarely. But a small share of highly active users, most of whom are Democrats, produce the vast majority of tweets. The Center’s analysis finds that just 10% of users produced 92% of all tweets from U.S. adults since last November, and that 69% of these highly prolific users identify as Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents. A number of factors contribute to this phenomenon. Previous Twitter analyses by the Center have found that the platform contains a larger share of Democrats than Republicans. And in addition to being more prevalent on the site in general, the 10% most active Democrats typically produce roughly twice as many tweets in a month (157) as the 10% most active Republicans (79).

Across both parties, those who use Twitter differ in several ways compared with non-users. For instance, Twitter-using Democrats and Republicans alike tend to be younger and have higher levels of educational attainment compared with members of each party who do not use the platform. Although nearly identical shares of Republican Twitter users (60%) and non-users (62%) describe themselves as very or somewhat conservative, Democrats who use Twitter tend to be more liberal than non-users. Some 60% of Democrats on Twitter describe their political leanings as liberal (with 24% saying they are “very” liberal), compared with 43% among those who are not Twitter users (only 12% of whom say they are very liberal).

Beyond posting volume, Democrats and Republicans also differ from each other in their actual behaviors on the platform. For instance, the two accounts followed by the largest share of U.S. adults are much more likely to be followed by users from one party than the other. Former President Barack Obama (@BarackObama) is followed by 42% of Democrats but just 12% of Republicans, while President Donald Trump (@realDonaldTrump) is followed by 35% of Republicans and just 13% of Democrats. Many other popular accounts are followed primarily by those who identify as either Democrat or Republican. However, a small number of the most-followed accounts on Twitter (mostly popular celebrities or entertainers) are followed by similar shares of U.S. adults belonging to each party.

I don’t think so. If it didn’t happen in 2016, why would it now?

• If Trump Wins, My Profession Is Done: Pollster (RT)

Polling guru Frank Luntz has admitted that if Donald Trump wins re-election, his “profession is done.” Though polls show Joe Biden in the lead, Luntz and his colleagues are hedging their bets and preparing to be shocked… again Democratic candidate Joe Biden is leading President Donald Trump by up to 10 points nationwide. Yet polls can be wrong, and for all the talk of a Biden “landslide” in the media, Trump’s supporters likely remember 2016, when their candidate pulled off a shock victory against Hillary Clinton, despite being given only a seven percent chance of winning by the New York Times two weeks before election day. Should Trump once again dispatch his Democratic challenger, the polling industry is finished, Republican pollster Frank Luntz told Fox News on Thursday.

“Well, I hate to acknowledge it, because that’s my industry,” he told Fox anchor Bret Baier. “But the public will have no faith. No confidence. If Donald Trump surprises people… my profession is done.” Luntz insists that his polling is accurate this time, and that Biden will win. However, undecided voters may be leaning toward Trump. As the two men faced off in the final presidential debate in Tennessee on Thursday night, Luntz organized a focus group of undecided voters. After the showdown, a majority of these voters were leaning toward backing Trump. They described him as “controlled,” “poised,” and “surprisingly presidential,” while Biden was thought of as “vague,” “elusive,” and “defensive.”

Luntz is a longtime critic of Trump, and a recently released email – found on Hunter Biden’s now-infamous laptop – apparently showed him massaging his predictions in favor of Biden back in 2012, when the then-VP was debating Mitt Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan. Luntz appeared to confirm the email’s authenticity in a tweet, but denied it was any kind of bombshell, saying he’s known the Biden family since the 1990s. However, if a Biden-friendly pollster, backed by his latest focus group, is publicly opening the door to a potential Trump victory, the election gurus may not be as confident in their figures as they let on.

“Is Hillary ironing her purple pantsuit up in Chappaqua, awaiting the emergency call from her DNC?”

• Bleeding Out (Jim Kunstler)

“The difference between you and me,” Mr. Trump said to the ever more ghostly Joe Biden, fading mentally late in the action on the debate stage, “is that I’m not a politician and you are, and you’re a crooked politician.” Millions watching this spectacle might not have noticed, due to the media’s near-complete blackout of news detailing the Biden family’s adventures in systematic global moneygrubbing, but the Democratic candidate for president has political Ebola, a hemorrhagic fever of credibility, now gushing out of every pore and orifice.

Twitter and Facebook may try to squelch the story, but the evidence is all over the Internet now, like blood on a crime scene, in verifiable emails, texts, Snapchats, memoranda, and bank records that Ol’ White Joe Biden is at the center of a decades-long influence-peddling spree, selling his personal services to China, Russia, Ukraine, and any other country seeking favors in US government policy, and that this slime-trail of grift disqualifies him from holding high office as much as the irreversible rot of his cognitive abilities.

The “Laptop from Hell” affair has twelve more days to play out before the November 3 vote and the Democratic Party is in a terrible jam. Do they ask Mr. Biden to step aside, or do they keep running with him while the barrage of allegations and hard evidence pours down on them like so many mortar rounds on a besieged bunker? It’s obvious now that one way or another, voters are actually being asked to elect Kamala Harris president — but who asked for her? Only the disgraced and disabled head of the ticket, Joe Biden, desperate for a non-white running mate. Elsewise, she was so disliked by voters that she skulked out of the Iowa caucuses, ending her own run. Is Hillary ironing her purple pantsuit up in Chappaqua, awaiting the emergency call from her DNC?

The early 2020 impeachment gambit has finally blown up in the Democrats’ faces, too, as it’s now obvious the phony furor over Mr. Trump’s phone call to Ukraine President Zelensky was ginned up to smother any inquiry into Hunter Biden’s $83,000-a-month services to the Burisma gas company and its crooked chief, Mykola Zlochevsky, with help from then US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and several of her staff, as well as then Secretary of State John Kerry.

On to more important matters.

• AOC Blasts Republicans For Calling Her AOC (JTN)

Her name is a mouthful, so Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez became AOC. In fact, she calls herself AOC. “Team AOC is hiring!” she wrote on Twitter in August, for instance. But the first-term Democratic Socialist from New York bristles when Republicans call her AOC, as President Trump did during Thursday night’s debate with Joe Biden. “I wonder if Republicans understand how much they advertise their disrespect of women in debates when they consistently call women members of Congress by nicknames or first names while using titles & last names when referring to men of = stature. Women notice. It conveys a lot,” she wrote on Twitter.

“AOC is a name given to me by community & the people. Y’all can call me AOC. Government colleagues referring to each other in a public or professional context (aka who don’t know me like that) should refer to their peers as ‘Congresswoman,’ ‘Representative,’ etc. Basic respect 101,” she added. Twitterers pointed out that President Trump calls nearly all of his opponents, regardless of gender, by nicknames — some not so nice. Trump calls Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) “Pocahontas” for her false claims that’s she’s Native American. He calls Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut Democrat who falsely claimed to have fought in the Vietnam War, “Da Nang Dick.” Jeb Bush was, of course, “Low Energy Jeb.” Then there’s “Crooked Hillary,” “Lyin’ Leakin’James Comey,” “Jeff Flakey,” “Head Clown Chuck Schumer,” and “Mad Maxine Waters.”

So AOC isn’t all that bad, is it? “You do this all the time, referring to ‘Trump’ or ‘Pence,'” Fee Online contributor Brad Polumbo wrote on Twitter. “Just *stop* with the endless self-victimization. It’s pathetic and tiring.” “Yes, names like Crying Chuck Schumer and Crazy Bernie are super sexist,” wrote another. In fact, AOC has another nickname for her and three colleagues — “The Squad,” which includes Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Ilhan Omar, (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.). That’s who Trump referred to in Thursday’s debate. “They know nothing about the climate,” Trump said, referring to AOC’s “New Green Deal” environmental plan. “I mean, she’s got a good line of stuff, but she knows nothing about the climate. And they’re all hopping through hoops for AOC plus three. Look, their real plan costs $100 trillion.”

And one Twitterer pointed out that AOC isn’t even a nickname: “AOC is not a nickname, they’re your initials. JFK is also not a nickname. The FBI, again, is not a nickname. You can maybe say that Trump should’ve still used your official title, but Obama was also referenced sans title, and you don’t see him whining about it on Twitter …”

“..commercial ads have been “anemic”..”

• YouTube Is Selling So Many Political Ads It Has Run Out Of Videos For Them (ZH)

While social media makes its best attempt at trying to get Joe Biden elected by censoring stories about his son, YouTube is facing another dilemma: the platform is so inundated with political ads it has nowhere to put them. As advertising campaigns flood the platform, YouTube has “struggled” to place the ads in front of the desired audience for each, according to Bloomberg. Interestingly enough, YouTube is experiencing the shortage most in “critical swing states”, where ad prices have doubled as a result. This, obviously, makes political advertising far more lucrative for Google, who saw ad revenue fall this year and will announcing its earnings next week.

Cat Stern, media director for Lockwood Strategy Lab, a digital campaign agency focused on Democratic candidates and progressive advocacy organizations, told Bloomberg: “There’s a crunch. All political advertisers are buying in the same states, to similar audiences.” YouTube viewers have risen during the pandemic and while commercial ads have been “anemic”, political ads have spiked heading into November 3. In highest demand are the ads that users aren’t allowed to skip through. There are also ad “reservations” for YouTube’s most popular videos that are in high demand. Reid Vineis, vice president of digital at Majority Strategies, a Republican political ad firm, said: “The reserves tend to be gobbled up by well-funded campaigns.”

While this occurs, other less-well-funded campaigns have turned to platforms like Hulu and Roku to run their ads. Some states, like Iowa, are usually entirely sold out on YouTube. Tim Cameron, co-founder of FlexPoint Media, said: “A lot of late money that’s coming on board — it’s difficult to find anywhere to put it.” At some points, YouTube has been unable to place up to 75% of the amounts that people are willing to spend. YouTube didn’t comment for Bloomberg’s article, but the article notes that a “code yellow” was assigned to Google’s staff regarding the inability to place ads, meaning Google was increasing the resources it was deploying to try and solve the issue.

We have a mask mandate now. And a curfew.

• European Data Considers Coronavirus Risk in Greece Mainly Low to Medium (GR)

According to data released by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) on Friday, much of Greece is at a “low” or “medium” risk level for Covid-19. The ECDC records the epidemiological burden across Europe, and classifies either entire countries or regions, depending on their coronavirus risk level. Unlike much of Europe, excluding areas of Central and Northern Europe, which is considered high-risk, much of Greece is at low or medium risk. The regions of Attica, Central Greece, Macedonia, Epirus, are at medium risk, and areas of Central Macedonia belong to the high-risk category. Southern Greece, Eastern Macedonia, and Thrace are all considered very low risk areas.

All European countries, except for Greece, Cyprus, Finland, Estonia, Liechtenstein and Norway, which are considered “stable” by the ECDC, are in a situation of “great epidemiological concern” in terms of the virus. Although the stable countries may report an increase in cases, like Greece, they are still considered to have a relatively low risk level for young and healthy citizens. Older people and those who belong to vulnerable groups in these stable countries are still considered to be of high risk, however. Despite their stable designations, the situation regarding Covid-19 in the six countries should be carefully monitored, as the virus can spread quickly, increasing the countries’ risk level, according to the authorities.

Best business model: always blame your customers.

• Tesla, Ordered To Recall 30,000 Cars In China, Blames ‘Driver Abuse’ (LAT)

Tesla Model S and Model X owners have complained about potentially dangerous flaws with suspension systems at least since 2015. On Friday, the Chinese government took action — and the company responded by blaming the country’s drivers. China’s State Administration for Market Regulation ordered a recall for about 30,000 Model S and Model X vehicles manufactured at Tesla’s Fremont, Calif., plant and exported to China. The affected cars were built from 2013 to 2017. Model S and Model X vehicles sold in the U.S. and Europe were built at the same factory using the same suspension systems. More than 250,000 were sold worldwide. The traffic safety regulator for the United States, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said Friday afternoon it is “aware of the Tesla recall due to suspension problems in China.

At this time, the agency has not received significant complaints related to these issues in the United States. The agency is in contact with Tesla and monitoring the situation closely, and will not hesitate to take action to protect the public against unreasonable risks to safety.” A spokesman declined to say what marks a complaint as significant. [..] in a letter sent by a Tesla attorney to NHTSA on Sept. 4, the company blamed Chinese drivers for the problem, said there was no safety issue, and said it didn’t plan to issue a recall outside China.Tesla owners at the Tesla Motors Club forum have been complaining about suspension issues since at least 2015, complaints that continue to this day. Many report that a ball joint connected to a control arm comes loose.

We try to run the Automatic Earth on donations. Since ad revenue has collapsed, you are now not just a reader, but an integral part of the process that builds this site.

Click at the top of the sidebars for Paypal and Patreon donations. Thank you for your support.

“Fall in love with some activity, and do it! Nobody ever figures out what life is all about, and it doesn’t matter.”

Richard Feynman

Emotions Trump

How could I love this latest video from Damon Imani more?pic.twitter.com/bOJCe7lXej

— Mad Trunalimunumaprze (@mad_liberals) October 23, 2020

Support the Automatic Earth in virustime, election time, all the time. Click at the top of the sidebars to donate with Paypal and Patreon.

No More Flyover Country

Nov 132016

November 13, 2016 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 5:57 pm Finance Tagged with: America, anger, globalization, Growth, media, protests, Russia, transition, Trump, war 16 Responses »

Esther Bubley Waiting for Greyhound bus trip from Memphis to Louisville, KY 1943

Been scribbling several some post-election notes over the past few days, it seemed a good idea to not publish things too soon after the upset, even if I at least had the advantage that it wasn’t that much of a surprise or upset. But I’ve read far too many people too eager to write about how they haven’t moved an inch, and too many others who have -mostly reluctantly- moved but don’t know how or where to. It’s okay to think about such matters first, guys and dolls. Make that: it’s better. There’s too much nonsense out there as is. Why bother adding to the pile? Here’s a few thoughts in no particular order:

The transition we find ourselves in, into an era as profoundly different as it will be from the one that preceded it, can only possibly be chaotic. Smooth is not an option. Because it takes much time for people to recognize let alone accept that there is such a transition to begin with, and not everyone acknowledges or accepts it at the same time. Many never will at all, they will be left behind in their own realities tied down by the chains of what once was.

This transition is the one away from economic growth and globalization -centralization in general- and towards smaller, less centered and grandiose, politics and markets. It is not an idealistic transition towards self-sufficiency, it’s simply and inevitably what’s left once unfettered growth hits the skids. It doesn’t have to be anywhere near as bad as people would have you believe, or at least not necessarily so. What could make it real bad, though, is the widespread resistance and denial which seem certain to meet it.

Our entire worldviews and ‘philosophies’ are based on ever more and ever bigger and then some, and our entire economies are built upon it. That has already made us ignore the decline of our real markets for many years now. We focus on data about stock markets and the like, and ignore the demise of our respective heartlands and flyover countries, even as we experience Brexit and Trump and similar movements set to come to many more countries.

Donald Trump looks very much like the ideal fit for this transition – but nor because he understands the issue itself, or its implications. What matters is he promises to bring back jobs to America, and that’s what the country needs. Not so they can then export their products, but to consume them at home, and sell them in the domestic market.

That is the future of the world post-growth, and post-globalization. Every country and every society needs to focus on self-reliance, not as some idealistic luxury choice, but as a necessity. And that is not as bad or terrible as people would have you believe, and it’s not the end of the world. What would be terrible is if all we do is try and restart growth and globalization, because that would be a hideous waste of time and resources.

You’ll be flooded in the years to come, even more than today if you can imagine, with terms like protectionism and isolationism and even populism, but ignore all that. There’s nothing economically -let alone morally- wrong with people producing what they and their families and close neighbors themselves want and need without hauling it halfway around the world for a meagre profit, handing over control of their societies to strangers in the process.

There’s nothing wrong or negative with an American buying products made in America instead of in China. At least not for the man in the street. It’s not a threat to our ‘open societies’, as many claim. That openness does not depend on having things shipped to your stores over 1000s of miles, that you could have made yourselves at a potentially huge benefit to your local economy. An ‘open society’ is a state of mind, be it collective or personal. It’s not something that’s for sale.

Earlier this week I read what looks to be an apt observation: ‘Every white person in New York who didn’t vote for Trump is now out in the streets protesting against him’. But the people who protest now are miles off target and months too late: they should have stood up for Bernie when it became clear that the Hillary camp and the DNC conspired to oust him. Indeed, Bernie himself should have stood up back then, not for himself but for his supporters; they would have stood up with him.

Whether they all like it or not, being asleep and/or silent when big things happen that count, does carry a price. If you drop the ball, you can’t just pick it back up again and pretend it didn’t fall. Shouting ‘not my president’ in the wake of an election is a sign of weakness, no matter how well-intentioned. The protests should have taken place before the election, not after.

Moreover, to a large extent people are up in protest against the image the Hillary campaign and the media have painted of Trump, not the man himself. A difference they cannot see. Would these same people have been protesting if Hillary had won? No, they wouldn’t. But why?

Many voices expressed the wish that Americans would vote for Hillary, a story about a woman and a glass ceiling, instead of for the male and allegedly sexist and misogynist Donald Trump. Simply because she’s a woman, and it’s time for a female president.

These voices have been consistently and for a long time been blind to the fact that Hillary’s campaign and Foundation, in legal, shady and downright illegal ways, have long been financed to a substantial degree by uber-rich men in charge of Middle East oil extracting nations who have far more misogynist views and attitudes towards women than Trump will ever have.

These men carry things like misogyny, racism, xenophobia and homophobia high and proudly in their banners. Also, they’re well on their way towards obliterating not just an entire country in Yemen, but indeed an entire people, all with the enthusiastic support of Obama, Hillary and their friends and donors in the arms industry. And lest we forget, they sponsor ISIS too. Is that the future Americans want?

The bright side is the chances of a war with Russia have gone down substantially. While the odds have gone up dramatically of much fewer US servicemen and -women being sent abroad to engage in endless and countless battles and wars that never seemed to have much to do with the US, going back all the way to Korea and Vietnam.

How can either of these things can be perceived as negative? The continuation and expansion of -often proxy- hostilities versus Moscow would have been cast in stone had Hillary been elected, it was a milestone of her entire campaign. And a major part of this would have been fought at some desert location in the Middle East.

Where America has needlessly squandered the lives of many of its young and finest, to and in a mad scramble over control of oil resources which has resulted in nothing but a shapeless chaos that has equally needlessly killed millions of people, sent millions of others fleeing their homes and razed entire ancient civilizations, accomplishments that will follow America around the world for many years to come. Is that the future Americans want? Double down?

There’s -undeniably- still a risk that Donald Trump will succumb to the mighty hand of the military industrial complex. But at the same time, he may well be the country’s -and the world’s- best if not only chance at making that hand that much less mighty. There may be many things wrong with Trump -there are- but being in the pockets of arms manufacturers and other doctors of death is so far not among them, to our best knowledge.

Hillary and her crowd ran the entire election process from inside a cocoon, built largely on hubris and a lack of contact with the world outside. They had the media so much on their side that TV and newspapers became part of the Hillary cocoon, and reporters got locked into a groupthink mode that then in its turn infected the campaign itself.

What I mean is you can’t stop at saying Trump is a disaster, so let’s pick the other side, it was always very much a choice between two disasters. And at the same time, as I wrote at the Automatic Earth the day of the election, the US presidency is a poisoned chalice. There’s nothing simple about this.

Trump means a big clean-up for the GOP, and the Hillary loss means the chance for the Democrats to do the same. You bet those folks realize achingly well they could have won with Bernie. Hopefully that wing can take over substantially from the lying conniving machinery the DNC has turned out to be.

Someone summed it up as: Trump swept aside the Republicans, the Democrats, the Bush dynasty and the Clinton dynasty, all in one fell swoop, and we should perhaps be thankful to him for that.

Trump has run his campaign catering to the anger that exists among Americans. And people experience and label that as ‘terrible’ and ‘awful’. His Republican friends and opponents find it terrible, because it scares the bejeezus out of them, and they’re too scared to go anywhere near that anger. Trump embraced the anger. Because he knew from the start, instinctively, that it was the only way he could win.

And you can think like the majority of your peers do, that all that commingling with the anger, with racists and bigots and what have you, is inexcusable. But what you miss out on if you take that approach and hold on to it, is that in that case the anger does not get addressed at all. It’s instead left free to just wander over the land and fester and grow on society, out of reach of politics, media, everything.

A certain by now very vilified cartoonist explained that what Trump does is to ‘feel’ what the angry crowd wants, and then play into it by making over the top statements targeted at the anger. That way this crowd will follow him, gather around him. This has worked like a charm. But no, that doesn’t make him look like a certain German dictator.

Because it does not mean that Trump is going to literally do everything he said in the over the top statements he made. It’s all just a basic sales trick. Trump makes the angry people feel like he knows, and cares about, their grievances. Just like a car salesman makes you think he knows just what you want and need in a car, and praises the assets of that car in such a way that it touches that part of you which makes you want the car.

But that doesn’t mean at the end of the day he’ll drive the same car home that you just bought off of him. He makes you think he is like you, and knows what you want, so he can sell you that car. That’s all. He’s judged you to be the right ‘target’ for that vehicle.

That is how Trump has reeled in America’s hidden anger, how he has gathered its lost hidden mob. And before you say anything else, it’s perhaps a good idea to wonder where that anger would go without Trump. Because it’s not going to go away by itself. It’s been growing and festering for a long time, and it’s well-armed, lest you forget.

The question then becomes: would America be a better, or a safer, place if the entire angry part of its population had again, and still, been ignored by everyone? Or is it better to have them gathered under the umbrella of Donald Trump? Take your pick. Don’t be shy.

Another way to phrase the issue is this: without the exact same sales tactics that Trump used to ‘gather the anger’ around him, the TV ads (most ads in general) you see on a daily basis would look completely different. Whatever products these ads sell, from detergents to cars, they do it by referring to your unconscious, not your rational abilities.

The ads, like Trump, sell feelings, not facts (if you don’t get that, you’re lost).

Yet nobody would think of taking the companies whose products are advertized this way to court -nobody even gets really angry with them- because the happy smily people and unending open roads bathed in sunshine from the ads do not magically appear once you purchase the product. We would even find that crazy, that anyone might take the images shown in the ads, literally.

We should interpret Trump’s campaign words along those same lines, the same way we ‘undergo’ the ads that play to our subconscious. The problem is, how do you do that? How do you interpret what you are largely unaware of on a rational level?

The president-elect will now need the same skills in order to ‘come down that mountain’ without antagonizing each and every side of the discussion, of the nation. He’ll have to convince the liberal camp that he didn’t mean everything he said in a literal sense, while at the same time keeping his ‘angry mob’ satisfied that he will do enough of what he promised them.

That will take a lot of persuading. But at the same time that happens to be the one thing he’s really good at. He’ll have to convince his voters that he’s not breaking his promises, just adjusting them in ways that will, if at all possible, be even more beneficial to them than the original ones.

Difficult, but if he can convince them that there are signs, delivered relatively fast, that their living conditions are improving, he may succeed. They just vent their anger at people that are visibly not themselves, but that’s not where the anger stems from.

There are all sorts of nasty things going on, racists and supremacist etc. But you can’t say that Trump caused that to happen. The most you could say is that he gives the people involved in that stuff the idea that because someone finally hears them, they can, are allowed to, make themselves heard.

But just because a few loose cannons let loose, doesn’t mean America has 60 million loose cannons who all voted for Trump and should all be condemned including Trump himself for good measure because there’s a few incidents. Not only is that a misinterpretation of what goes on, it prevents you from understanding what lies behind.

Those incidents at least have a lot to do with the fact that so many ignored Americans live in what Washington has long considered flyover country. It would be a lot more positive and productive at this point in time if everyone looks at what they themselves have gotten wrong over the past years -not just this election campaign- before pointing fingers at everyone but themselves.

But seeing the dug-in heels in Britain almost five months after the Brexit vote, it’s hard to get your hopes up about people coming together, or even doing some genuine introspection. It’s easier to just remain stuck in your comfy little rut.

Thing is, the world is rapidly changing -it already has-, America is changing, Britain is, and many more countries will, it just takes an election to show how much. We’re transitioning to a next phase, and trying to deny we are with all our might, good luck and good night.

Or in a more poetic fashion – we can do that too-:

the blizzard of the world
has crossed the threshold
and it has overturned
the order of the soul