Month: July 2024

Authored by Andrew Thornebrooke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

NATO will unveil a plan to help prepare Ukraine to assume the responsibilities of membership in the alliance during its annual summit in Washington, next week.

The deliverable is not a plan for membership outright, but will consist of “standing up an entire command” to ensure Ukraine can fully contribute to NATO in the event it does join, a senior Biden administration official told reporters on July 5.

“Allies will reaffirm that Ukraine’s future is in NATO [and] will make significant new announcements about how we’re increasing NATO’s military, political, and financial support for Ukraine,” the official said.

The effort is part of a larger “bridge to membership” which is designed to help Ukraine assume military responsibilities within NATO “on day one” of its membership.

Though Ukraine has sought membership in the defensive alliance for some time, it is unlikely to be approved anytime soon, as membership is contingent upon a unanimous vote of all member states and requires new member states to meet certain standards of governance and territorial integrity.

Preventing Ukraine from joining NATO has also been a key war aim of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Mr. Putin has said that the objectives of the conflict are to demilitarize Ukraine and compel its neutrality in international affairs.

The U.S. official, however, quoted President Joe Biden, who previously said that Ukraine’s membership in NATO was a question of when rather than if.

As such, the official said, the United States and many of its allies will be working next week to “institutionalize” Ukraine’s military ties to NATO through 20–30 bilateral security agreements that would be announced by Ukraine and various NATO member states.

The United States will also announce a key deliverable, the official said, to “help Ukraine with training coordination, equipment coordination, logistics, [and] support development.”

“It will have a political overlay to it, which will focus on defense, institution building, and interoperability with NATO, and it’ll have a financial pledge associated with it as well.”

Establishing a robust institutional framework to help fund Ukraine’s security needs has become a key goal of the Biden administration and its allies, who have said that a second Trump administration could threaten the flow of weapons to embattled Ukraine.

Such fears largely stem from former President Donald Trump’s critique of NATO, including that European partners in the alliance do not meet their financial obligations.

That situation has shifted dramatically in recent years, however. A fact that the official was quick to point out.

Since the beginning of the Biden administration, the official said, the number of NATO nations spending at least two percent of their GDP on defense has risen sharply from nine to 23.

“That direction of travel is significant,” the official said. “And … to put a dollar figure on it, just since 2020 NATO collectively has spent an additional $180 billion on a yearly basis.”

NATO will convene its 75th annual summit on July 9.

Authored by Stephen B. Young via RealClearPolitics,

Commentary

President Biden’s duty to the American people is to “faithfully execute” his office. As a public trustee, Biden took an oath to do what is right. He is a trustee of powers bestowed upon him by the Constitution in return for his promise to be dutiful.

Like every agent and trustee, Biden owes fiduciary duties to those who are served by his decisions. He owes them two duties: the duty of always acting with due care; and the duty of giving them his absolute loyalty, always putting their interests above his own.

A president’s failure to use due care or be loyal is ground for impeachment. Under our Constitution, impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors” is not a criminal proceeding. Rather, it is a civil proceeding to discharge from office one who has failed in his or her trusteeship.

John Locke put it this way:

Who shall be judge, whether the prince or legislative act contrary to their trust? … To this I reply, The people shall be judge; for who shall be judge whether his trustee or deputy acts well, and according to the trust reposed in him, but he who deputes him, and must, by having deputed him, have still a power to discard him, when he fails in his trust? If this be reasonable in particular cases of private men, why should it be otherwise in that of the greatest moment, where the welfare of millions is concerned, and also where the evil, if not prevented, is greater, and the redress very difficult, dear, and dangerous?

More than 50 years ago, when the impeachment of Richard Nixon was under consideration in the House of Representatives, I researched the English parliamentary practice of impeaching high officers for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The lead special counsel in the impeachment proceeding, John Doar, incorporated my conclusions into the articles of impeachment of Richard Nixon in these words:

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

The same standard of abuse of fiduciary duties was later included in the articles of impeachment of Donald Trump:

In all of this, President Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

As we saw the Thursday before last, President Biden is no longer capable of acting with due care as steward of the best interest of the American people. He appeared physically and cognitively inept. His answers to simple questions were nonsensical. Even Nancy Pelosi wondered aloud, “Is this an episode or is this a condition?”

For Biden to remain in office, he will not be faithfully executing it. Rather, he will be using the powers of the office for self-serving ends, depriving the American people of a vigorous defender of our rights and privileges. If Biden does not resign immediately, he has committed an impeachable offense by causing “manifest injury of the people of the United States.”

Should Biden attempt to have his cake and eat it too, he might withdraw his candidacy for this year’s presidential election but not resign as president. If he affirms that he would not be qualified to execute the office of president in January 2025, then why is he qualified to serve in that office today? To withdraw from the presidential race but continue in office would be a violation of his duty of loyalty to the American people.

Joe Biden made a choice when he took the oath of office to serve as our president. If he can no longer be loyal or serve with due care, then he must resign his office or be impeached.

Stephen B. Young is global director of the Caux Round Table for Moral Capitalism. He was an assistant dean at the Harvard Law School and later dean and professor of law at the Hamline University School of Law.

In the following graphic, Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao ranks and visualizes the least common American jobs by number of employees, as per the latest estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Annual surveys from business owners are used to model employment numbers and wage data for each year. Thus, these figures do not include the self-employed, owners of unincorporated firms, or household workers.

Ranked: America’s Least Common Jobs

The least commonly-held job in America is “wood patternmaker,” with only 260 employed by a business country-wide. According to the BLS, wood patternmakers “plan, lay out, and construct wooden unit or sectional patterns used in forming sand molds for castings.”

Technological advancements have caused job declines in the industry for the last decade. It is also likely that this occupation has more self-employed individuals, explaining their low numbers.

Clock and timer technicians (not watchmakers), farm labor contractors (460), and furnace and kiln repair technicians (540) are the next three least commonly employed American workers.

Ranked fifth, prosthodontists (570) are the second-highest paid occupation ($240,750) on the uncommon jobs list.

In the same vein, pediatric surgeons are the 10th least common occupation in America, with only around 1,100 in the entire country.

NPR reports that while pediatric programs have increased in the last 10 years, the number of trained MDs going into pediatric surgery has steadily decreased. Per STAT News, close to one-third pediatric residency programs did not fill their positions in 2024.

If you liked this kind of content, check out The 20 Fastest Growing Jobs in the Next Decade which identifies where new jobs will be created next.

Authored by Robin Seaton Jefferson via The Epoch Times,

In March, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a revised draft guidance to help drug companies develop medication to treat cases of early Alzheimer’s disease that “occur before the onset of overt dementia.”

One theory about Alzheimer’s is that amyloid pathology can occur decades before symptoms appear, and to stop the disease, doctors may need to address this underlying pathology well before that happens. Some say that will label people as having a disease they may never develop; others say it’s the only way to stop it in those who will come to have it.

Treat Dementia Like Heart Disease

Rudolph E. Tanzi, who has a doctorate in neurology and is a professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School and the director of its Genetics and Aging Research Unit, said that to stop dementia and Alzheimer’s, doctors must treat it the way they currently treat heart disease.

“Just like we keep track of cholesterol and alter lifestyle and take safe drugs to lower cholesterol levels in order to avoid heart disease, we will need to do the same for Alzheimer’s disease,” Mr. Tanzi told The Epoch Times. “The FDA guidance is a step in that direction.”

The American Heart Association reports that death due to heart disease has declined by 60 percent since 1950 and that the number of people in the United States dying of a heart attack each year has dropped from one in two in the 1950s to one in 8.5 today. Mr. Tanzi said that is because doctors now treat their patients proactively for a disease that could otherwise kill them many years in the future.

As a geneticist who co-discovered three of the first Alzheimer’s disease genes, Mr. Tanzi replicated the cascades of cellular changes in Alzheimer’s in a petri dish so scientists could conduct tests as the disease developed and test drug efficacy. He said the problem is now that doctors don’t diagnose Alzheimer’s disease until the brain has already deteriorated to the point of dysfunction. Patients “need safe and affordable drugs to intervene with amyloid deposition as early as possible,” he added.

Mr. Tanzi said that although the guidance is correct to advise treating early-stage Alzheimer’s patients, scientists will still someday need to prevent the buildup of abnormal amyloid deposits as soon as they begin in the brain before damage occurs.

“This would be most important for those with early-onset familial Alzheimer’s disease gene mutations, those with Down syndrome, and carriers of the APOE epsilon variant that increases risk for Alzheimer’s disease, where you know amyloid deposition is guaranteed or highly likely beginning early in life,” Mr. Tanzi added.

Is Amyloid Positivity Enough to Redefine Alzheimer’s Disease?

But there is still no solid proof that any drugs, even if they reduce amyloid, will decrease dementia fates in the future, said Dr. Eric Widera, a professor of clinical medicine in the Division of Geriatrics at the University of California–San Fransisco. He also questions the risks of some drugs with serious side effects, such as brain bleeding and death.

There is a trend to redefine Alzheimer’s disease based on whether someone is amyloid positive on a test, “independent of whether an individual has any symptoms of cognitive impairment, or whether they will develop them in the future,” Dr. Widera said.

He explained that while scientists do have “pretty good evidence that in individuals with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia,” two drugs, donanemab and lecanemab, “have an exceptional ability to remove amyloid.” However, he argues that this ability has only a “subtle effect” on the rate of decline in cognition.

“This is pretty clear evidence that suggests amyloid is likely not the only factor that contributes to Alzheimer’s disease progression and that we have a lot yet to learn about how to stop or reverse the disease,” he said.

The changes proposed will have effects that are “far from subtle” and will be marketed as “a new Alzheimer’s epidemic,” said Dr. Widera.

An estimated 6 million Americans aged 65 and older live with Alzheimer’s and dementia, with the majority being over age 75. “The proposed changes will move what is a feared but far from universal disease of aging, Alzheimer’s dementia, to a largely silent, asymptomatic disease affecting a much larger population, as most people with positive amyloid biomarkers have no cognitive issues,” Dr. Widera wrote in his commentary, published in February in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

What Can Be Done?

For his part, Mr. Tanzi agrees that much more must be done. “We will need blood tests that tell us not only when amyloid is already doing its damage in the brain, but also tests that can tell us when to treat so as to prevent amyloid deposition in the brain in the first place.”

Mr. Tanzi said Alzheimer’s is only “beatable” when predicted early, based on family history and genetics; detected early, based on blood biomarkers and imaging; and intervened upon early, using safe and affordable drugs.

“The approved amyloid drugs, like Leqembi [lecanemab], are not approved for prevention, but only for treatment in the mildest cases of Alzheimer’s disease. That is good to do, but still too late.” He added that lecanemab “is too costly, at over $60,000 per year, including the necessary MRIs to detect brain swelling and hemorrhage.”

He said that is one of the focuses at the McCance Center for Brain Health, where he is currently fundraising for an Alzheimer’s disease clinical trial initiative to test combinations of repurposed safe and affordable drugs and natural products to lower amyloid levels in the brain, as a safer and more affordable alternative to amyloid immunotherapy like lecanemab.

“The hope is that combinations of safe and affordable repurposed drugs can someday be used in tens of millions of Americans to prevent Alzheimer’s disease,” he added.

What Will the Guidance Do?

As a draft, the document will “serve as a focus for continued discussions” for the treatment of early Alzheimer’s disease, the draft states. However, when finalized, the document “will represent FDA’s current thinking regarding the selection of subjects with early [Alzheimer’s disease] for enrollment in clinical trials and the selection of endpoints for clinical trials in this population.”

With its proposed guidelines, the FDA is focusing more on amyloid. It considers the reduction of brain amyloid, found by positron emission tomography (PET scans), to be a surrogate endpoint that is “reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit” and that clinical trials showing an effect on that surrogate endpoint can be the basis for accelerated approval, including for drugs intended to treat Alzheimer’s.

According to Fierce Biotech, a company that reports on the biotech industry, the FDA isn’t going as far as to say that amyloid reduction can be considered a primary endpoint—the main result measured at the end of a study to see whether a given treatment worked—in Alzheimer’s trials. However, the agency suggests that this biomarker can serve as a surrogate endpoint—an indicator that tells if a treatment works—to predict clinical benefit.

Alzheimer’s researchers currently use both cognitive and functional measures as co-primary endpoints, resulting in a two-year or less average clinical trial duration in the symptomatic stages of the condition. But it could take longer to establish clinically meaningful treatment effects among patients with early Alzheimer’s due to limited or nonexistent cognitive and functional deficits seen early on. Plus, tools often used to measure functional impairment in patients in the later stages of Alzheimer’s may not be able to identify subtle changes in early-stage disease.

For these reasons, the FDA is considering other approaches, including endpoints based on cognitive assessments or surrogate endpoints, which may allow for shorter trial durations in the earliest stages of disease, Fierce Biotech reported.

Possibility of Overdiagnosis

In a draft document published in October 2023, the Alzheimer’s Association Workgroup suggested expanding the criteria for Alzheimer’s diagnosis and basing diagnosis on core biomarkers such as amyloid rather than clinical syndromes.

The American Geriatrics Society (AGS) commented on the criteria expansion, expressing concerns that it would “place many older and multimorbid people at risk of overdiagnosis, which in turn could lead to initiation of treatments with as yet unproven clinical benefit, particularly in an asymptomatic population, and high potential for harm.”

The AGS said the document fails to pay sufficient attention to the potential impact of an Alzheimer’s diagnosis on patient identity or any social and fiscal consequences.

“The reality is that many biomarker-positive individuals never develop cognitive impairment … and most people diagnosed with dementia will die with, not of, dementia,” the AGS wrote.

“At this juncture, a cognitively normal 50-year-old would have a 1 in 10 chance of testing positive for amyloid … and then carry an [Alzheimer’s disease] diagnosis in their health records,” the organization wrote.

The AGS added that this “distracts from the broader aim of ensuring high quality health care for individuals who already have cognitive impairment or dementia.”

Citing the “potential influence of financial ties between key stakeholders who make decisions on definitions and diagnostic thresholds,” the AGS said transparency is critical, and any conflict of interest should be disclosed.

The Epoch Times contacted the FDA and the Alzheimer’s Association Workgroup but did not receive a reply.

Authored by Monica O’Shea via The Epoch Times,

McDonald’s Australia has cut breakfast time in Australia by 90 minutes due to an egg shortage amid an outbreak of bird flu.

The decision follows after the highly pathogenic H7 influenza infected eight farms in Victoria,  two properties in New South Wales, and one in the Australian Capital Territory.

More than one million birds in the two states combined have been euthanised as part of the government’s response to bird flu, also known as avian influenza.

In a post on social media, McDonald’s explained breakfast would end at 10.30 a.m. instead of midday, due to egg supply issues.

“Like many retailers we are carefully managing supply of eggs due to the current industry challenges,” McDonald’s Australia posted to Instagram.

“To keep bringing you your breakie favourites with fresh Aussie eggs, we’ll be temporarily serving breakfast until 10.30 a.m. across Australia (usually available until midday).”

McDonald’s said it is working hard with Aussie farmers and suppliers to return  to normal “as soon as possible.”

Egg Supply Disruptions

Recently, the federal government warned egg supplies in Australia have been disrupted and consumers should not buy more eggs than required.

“The national layer hen flock has been impacted by these outbreaks which is resulting in some localised disruption to egg supplies to the retail, hospitality and manufacturing sectors,” the government said.

They warned consumers could expect to see some empty shelves in the short-term, but supply was being redirected.

“Some retailers have already imposed purchasing limits which may extend across retail chains and jurisdictions, including rural and regional areas,” the federal government continued.

Supermarket giant Coles imposed egg purchase limits on Australian customers in June.

Where Has Bird Flu Been Detected?

In Victoria, the H7N3 strain was detected at seven poultry farms in the Golden Plains Shire near Meredith. A case of the H7N9 strain avian flu has also been discovered.

Meanwhile, in NSW, two outbreaks of H7N8 poultry have been found in the Hawkesbury district in northwest Sydney. This is a separate strain to Victoria.

Further, in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), H7N8 bird flu was detected at a poultry farm on June 27. This farm is linked to one of the NSW properties.

The first human case of bird flu in Australia was also reported in Victoria in May, in a child who acquired the H5N1 strain overseas in India.

The current strains of avian influenza in Australia do not appear to “transmit easily between humans,” the Australian government said.

The government also reassured Australians that eggs and chicken meat are still safe to eat if cooked properly.

“They do not pose a risk and are safe to consume. Victoria has a secure supply chain including the importation of eggs from interstate, so the current outbreak has not significantly affected supplies,” said Agriculture Victoria.

Bird flu is caused by a “variety of influenza type A viruses” that usually infect birds, according to Murdoch University Professor of Viral Immunology Cassandra Berry.

“The difference lies in the number of basic amino acids at the cleave site of haemagglutinin (HA), a spike protein on the virus surface, which is cleaved by cellular proteases,” she said.

“This cleavage determination then allows the virus to infect cells of different tissues and organs in the body. So if the virus HA is more easily cleaved by proteases, it will be more pathogenic.”

Over 1.2 Million Birds Culled

The NSW government announced 240,000 birds would be culled in June after bird flu was discovered in the state.

The state activated an “emergency biosecurity incident plan” in a bid to contain the virus after bird flu was detected at the poultry egg farm.

“We started depopulating the farm, in a humane manner, following Australian Veterinary guidelines. This process will take up to 5-7 days to depopulate 240,000 birds,” Agriculture Minister Tara Moriarty announced on June 20.

Later in the month, it was revealed a further 87,000 birds would be killed in NSW as part of a “depopulation process” after the second case in the state was found.

In ACT, birds have also been culled although the exact number is unclear at this stage.

More than one million birds had to be euthanised in south-western Victoria, according to Agriculture Minister Murray Watt in June.

Each year, the U.S. sends billions in foreign aid to promote global stability, national security, and its own economic interests.

To see where this money flows, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu visualized the top 10 countries receiving U.S. foreign aid in fiscal year 2022 (FY2022). These numbers represent total disbursements, which are the actual amounts paid in cash or cash equivalents by federal agencies.

All figures were sourced from https://www.foreignassistance.gov, as of May 2024. At the time of writing, full reporting for FY2023 is not yet available.

Data and Highlights

All of the numbers we used to create this graphic are listed in the table below. Note that the U.S. fiscal year begins on Oct. 1 of the previous calendar year and ends on Sept. 30.

Ukraine was the largest recipient of foreign aid, with $11.2 billion disbursed throughout FY2022. This was a massive increase from the $419M sent in FY2021, due to the Russian invasion which began in February 2022.

So far for FY2023 (incomplete reporting), foreign aid sent to Ukraine has reached $16.7 billion.

The second largest recipient is Israel, though unlike Ukraine, the $3.3 billion disbursed in FY2022 is consistent with previous years (around $3.3 billion every year since FY2019).

The vast majority (over 99%) of foreign aid to Israel is dedicated to “Conflict, Peace, and Security”, with disbursements being facilitated by the U.S. Department of Defense.

If you enjoy graphics like these, be sure to check out Charted: How Americans Feel About Federal Government Agencies.

Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,

The implosion of President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign has been years in the making and highly anticipated.

Really, the biggest surprise, if any, has been how long the Left was able to milk the absurd notion that their political placeholder was a viable candidate.

As many have since noted, it speaks to the sheer toxicity that the corrupt conglomerate of corporations, information gatekeepers and partisan special-interests within the Beltway.

The Biden debate scandal and subsequent fallout effectively proved that not only has lying within the political Establishment become systemic, but it makes no difference if it is even a credible lie.

There is an almost taunting quality to putting forth something utterly implausible and challenging people to question it, knowing they lack the institutional power to hold the liars accountable.

GOING OVERBOARD

Most recognize that the current predicament is just another means to an ends—out with the old and in with the new: a candidate who must be capable of running on short notice with the existing funding sources and infrastructure needed to offset Trump’s advantage, and someone who both has the name recognition needed for a possible write-in campaign along with the perception of being a political outsider.

Nonetheless, it is somewhat satisfying to see the cockroaches scurrying away when the light switch gets flipped.

The Fools in this Learian tragedy have been the leftist media and members of Biden’s inner circle feigning shock and ignorance about the problem that everyone else has long been aware of.

Although some continue to double down, most have now pivoted to an entirely new “Big Lie” by pretending their sudden efforts to perform damage control will vindicate them.

From their half-deflated lifeboats, they point fingers at the other Biden loyalists who are going down with the ship and insist that their prior complicity was a function of fear.

Those who have spent the past three-plus years interacting with the 81-year-old president have suddenly begun sharing their stories of red-flags that now seem clear in hindsight. But they insist that if they had waged a Trump-like Resistance campaign to undermine him they would have faced severe consequences for it by becoming blacklisted rather than celebrated for their public service.

A MAGA MAKEOVER?

Ironically, their face-saving efforts only help build the case for the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which has become a boogeyman for the so-called Blue MAGA movement (a hashtag term coined by one group of leftists to attack those they see as conspiratorial and irrational).

The underlying objective of Project 2025 is to highlight key areas of reform needed within the corrupted deep state and to articulate a series of policy expert-endorsed proposals through the 880-page Mandate for Leadership in order to prevent another sabotage effort without losing any time trying to fight the bureaucracy.

“The new conservative movement that America needs is right here, right now in this room,” Heritage President Kevin Roberts said during the conservative think-tank’s 2023 leadership summit at Washington, D.C.’s National Harbor.

“No more bringing butter knives to gunfights—we’ve learned that,” Roberts continued. “The old Washington red team of free marketers, neoconservatives and evangelicals is simply not enough.”

In effect, it was intended to be an inward-looking movement to retrench the conservative movement and root out the RINOs, learning from the mistakes of the first Trump administration.

‘NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM’

Since then, unhinged and TDS-afflicted conspiracy theorists have pushed allegations that Project 2025 is Trump’s authoritarian dogwhistle in order to justify their own efforts to calcify the weaponized deep state with measures that would make it more difficult for the next administration to fire disloyal civil servants.

The propagandist Associated Press even pushed the suggestion that it was a guidebook for “revolution,” carping on some of Roberts’s rhetoric to distort the context of his statements.

Yet, as former President Donald Trump recently said in distancing himself from the initiative, it was never specifically coordinated with his campaign.

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” he wrote on Truth Social on Friday.

“I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal,” he continued. “Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

Once again, the truth will eventually get out.

America, you’ve been lied to again.

Project 2025 was just a think tank paper.

It wasn’t a Trump “master plan” to become a dictator.

Just like we told you. Here’s an idea: Stop listening to liars. pic.twitter.com/S8Au8K0nfU

— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) July 5, 2024

‘CANDIDATE AGNOSTIC’

Having been present for the grand unveiling at the leadership summit—which featured a speech by then-candidate Ron DeSantis in its top billing (along with what would be Tucker Carlson’s last speech as a Fox News host), I can attest that the resurgence of Trump in such sweeping fashion was the last thing on the minds of many of the Heritage Foundation’s policy writers.

Indeed, it is more likely that many of them feared his candidacy might hold back the sort of grand reinvention of Republicanism that they envisaged.

When I asked, point blank, during a media breakfast with some of the Mandate‘s lead editors what would happen if Trump won and proceeded to disregard all their painstakingly crafted proposals, they struggled to find a suitable answer, with some seeming to suggest in their aghast reactions that a Trump comeback seemed unfathomable at the time.

Nonetheless, they were diplomatic at the time in their insistence that the initiative was intended to be for whoever might emerge as the favored Republican candidate.

Lead editor Paul Dans, the former chief of staff in Trump’s Office of Personnel Management, said that the book sought to be “candidate agnostic” and serve as a resource to any future leader, regardless of who prevailed.

The Mandate authors did “such a good job that you cant help but embrace [it],” Dans said. “You kind of ignore this a little bit at your peril.”

A VISION OF HIS OWN

That Trump has his own plans, of course, should surprise few—especially not the cadre of ex-staffers and advisers who contributed to the Heritage project.

It was clear from the former president’s recent disavowal that he took umbrage with the notion that anyone would prescribe to him a set of “expert” policies to follow after his hard-fought climb back to White House contention.

Moreover, it seems as if Project 2025 runs parallel, in many ways, to the efforts of his own, Trump-endorsed America First Policy Institute.

Trump assures his supporters that he has learned his own valuable lessons.

“I’ve been through it. I know the good people, I know the bad people. I know weak people and strong people,” he said last year at the North Carolina Republican Convention in Greensboro. “I know the people that are losers that we don’t want, I know the people that are winners that a lot of people don’t know or understand.”

Nonetheless, the presumptive GOP nominee—whose current odds of becoming the next president are around 70% by some mainstream media estimations—should not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

If there was one weakness in Trump’s prior presidential experience, it was his misjudgment of character and investment of trust in the wrong people based on their ability to flatter him to his face while undermining him behind his back.

Thus, he should regard Project 2025 and its Mandate for Leadership as a valuable second opinion, a sort of grounding influence that he can use as the baseline for making his decisions.

PROOF IS IN THE PROTEST

Following Trump’s comments dismissing Project 2025 as “ridiculous and abysmal” one of those who came forward in an effort to ridicule him was former Republican National Committee chair Michael Steele—the epitome, if ever there were one, of a traitor to conservative values and ideals.

“Since #Project2025 is designed to institutionalize Trumpism and you know nothing about it, then why do you echo some of its policy priorities during your rallies?” said the former Maryland lietenant governor, whose own efforts to seek higher office failed miserably.

Ok, let’s all play with Stupid for minute…so exactly how do you “disagree” with something you “know nothing about” or “have no idea” who is behind, saying or doing the thing you disagree with? Since #Project2025 is designed to institutionalize Trumpism and you know nothing about… pic.twitter.com/z3irzidWP6

— Michael Steele (@MichaelSteele) July 5, 2024

If the same people in the permanent bureaucracy who spent the past several years laying cover for the dubious 2020 election—and the senile geriatric they installed into power as an empty-suit figurehead for the corrupt oligarchy—are devoting this much energy to trying to distort the facts about Project 2025 and misrepresent its motives, then, ipso facto, it is worth a second look.

While Trump is justified in his apprehension about any and all unsolicited advice from D.C. think-tanks and career civil servants, the indications that so many Democrats (and disloyal right-wing denizens of the Swamp) seem panicked about its proposals should be a telling indication itself that Project 2025 is hitting its mark.

As Roberts noted at the Heritage leadership summit, “The Left started this culture war; we’re gonna finish it.”

Ben Sellers is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/realbensellers.

Following months of back-and-forth as well as contradictory reports of an Israel-Hamas ceasefire, which has proven elusive thus far, the two sides and their mediators could actually be getting closer this weekend.

CIA director Bill Burns is set to embark on yet another trip to Doha this coming week to rejoin negotiations focused on achieving a hostage exchange and broader ceasefire, Axios is reporting.

Axios previews that “Burns is expected to hold a joint meeting with the Prime Minister of Qatar, the director of the Israeli Mossad and the head of the Egyptian intelligence service in an effort to push forward the deal that could lead to the release of 120 hostages held by Hamas in Gaza and end nine months of war.”

The below fresh report from The Times of Israel suggests Hamas may have just dropped a major demand which had previously thwarted any progress. From the start of negotiations, Hamas leaders have conditioned peace on an Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) total withdrawal from the Gaza Strip:

Hamas has given initial approval for a US-backed proposal for a phased truce and hostage exchange deal in Gaza, dropping a key demand that Israel give an up-front commitment for a complete end to the war, a Hamas and an Egyptian official said Saturday.

At the same time, a key stumbling block appeared to be Hamas’s desire for “written guarantees” from mediators that Israel will continue to negotiate a permanent ceasefire deal once the first phase of a ceasefire goes into effect.

The Hamas representative told The Associated Press the group’s approval came after it received “verbal commitments and guarantees” from mediators that the war won’t be resumed and that negotiations will continue until a permanent ceasefire is reached.

The report stresses that “Hamas says it dropped demand Israel vow up-front to end war, but wants mediators’ guarantees.” If true this could prove a major opening, given PM Netanyahu had long focused on this specific demand as being a non-starter, making progress in talks impossible.

If a deal is achieved, it could result in the first full ceasefire of the conflict. According to diplomatic sources involved:

The Hamas and Egyptian officials, who spoke on conditions of anonymity to discuss the ongoing negotiations, said Washington’s phased deal will first include a “full and complete” six-week ceasefire that would see the release of a number of hostages, including women, the elderly, and the wounded, in exchange for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. During these 42 days, Israeli forces would also withdraw from densely populated areas of Gaza and allow the return of displaced people to their homes in northern Gaza, the pair said.

In the US, a deal would lessen intensifying pressure on the Biden White House, given it has been losing support especially among Progressives due precisely to the president’s Gaza policy.

Netanyahu is expected to travel to DC at the end of this month to address Congress, and so far media reports are saying it is ‘likely’ he will meet with President Biden. Any potential ceasefire deal would ease the pressure of such a visit, certainly from Washington’s point of view at least.

An “ongoing electric power issue” suspended train service in the Northeast Corridor between Boston and New York City on Saturday afternoon, Amtrak wrote in a press release. 

“Our crews are working hard to correct the issues,” Amtrak said but did not explain the cause of the service disruption.

Amtrak noted that “this service interruption” will be in place for the “remainder of the day.”  

Service Temporarily Disrupted Between New York and New Haven https://t.co/l7VYykHMHu

— Amtrak Northeast (@AmtrakNECAlerts) July 6, 2024

According to AP News, the disruption was caused by a malfunctioning circuit breaker, which sparked service disruption between Penn Station in New York and Union Station in New Haven, Connecticut. There was no official word if the circuit breaker problem was caused by scorching temperatures across the Northeast.

Besides the ongoing heat wave, this outage comes at the worst possible time when a record 71 million Americans are expected to be traveling this Fourth of July holiday weekend. 

Last month, Amtrak’s service in and out of New York City suffered a “malfunctioning circuit breaker” that sparked travel chaos for hours across the nation’s busiest transit hub.

With frustrations over unreliable train service in the Northeast mounting, it’s time for US Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg to actually stand up and be a leader and do something – just something. Come on ‘Mayor Pete’ – you got this. 

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

There is a stunning number of ironies in the Trump-Biden rematch. At the top of the list is Biden’s belief that he is the only one who could beat Trump.

Wish Granted

At a NATO conference on March 24, 2022 Biden quipped to a reporter “In the next election, I’d be very fortunate if I had that same man running against me.”

Comedian Bill Maher Commented: “The whole rationale for Biden running has always been I’m the only guy who can beat Trump. Now I think it’s inverted. He’s the only guy who can lose to him.”

King of Student Loans

In a press conference briefing in July of 2021, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated the Constitutional Facts on Student Loans.

“The president can’t do it,” Pelosi said, at a press briefing. “That’s not even a discussion.”

Pelosi said any student debt forgiveness would have to be carried out by Congress. Other people in her party have said otherwise.

On June 30, 2023, the SCOTUSblog reported Supreme Court Strikes Down Biden Student-Loan Forgiveness Program

But that did not stop the king of student loans. He went ahead with another unconstitutional work around, then bragged about it.

The Supreme Court Didn’t Stop Me

In a White House Briefing on February 4, 2024, Biden bragged “The Supreme Court of the United States blocked me, but they didn’t stop me.“

Immunity for Official Acts

On July 1, 2024 the Supreme Court ruled the President has immunity for official acts.

I commented, The Left is Aghast at the Correct Supreme Court Immunity Decision on Trump

In a 6-3 decision, the SC that held the President has immunity for official acts. It was not a complete victory for Trump. In fact, the Court rejected Trump’s base case.

That was my opinion but it was entirely based on the actual  Supreme Court Ruling. Here are a couple of snips from the Court, subtitles mine.

Court Blasts Trump’s Base Case to Outer Space

Trump asserts a far broader immunity than the limited one the Court recognizes, contending that the indictment must be dismissed because the Impeachment Judgment Clause requires that impeachment and Senate conviction precede a President’s criminal prosecution. But the text of the Clause does not address whether and on what conduct a President may be prosecuted if he was never impeached and convicted. See Art. I, §3, cl. 7. Historical evidence likewise lends little support to Trump’s position. The Federalist Papers on which Trump relies concerned the checks available against a sitting President; they did not endorse or even consider whether the Impeachment Judgment Clause immunizes a former President from prosecution. Transforming the political process of impeachment into a necessary step in the enforcement of criminal law finds little support in the text of the Constitution or the structure of the Nation’s Government.

Trump claimed to have absolute immunity. The Court blasted that claim to outer space. Again from the ruling …

Distinguishing Official Acts From Unofficial Ones

The first step in deciding whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions. …

Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution. On remand, the District Court must carefully analyze the indictment’s remaining allegations to determine whether they too involve conduct for which a President must be immune from prosecution. And the parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct.

Distinguishing official acts from unofficial ones requires a prosecutorial hearing or fact finding mission to establish what is or is not an official act and what is or is not a constitutional act.

Such hearings are standard procedure for official acts. The Court merely extended the standard procedure to the office of president.

Contrary to hyperventilation by the Left, the SC ruling does not protect the President from unofficial acts or unconstitutional acts.

Truman Example

If the President claims authority to act but in fact exercises mere “individual will” and “authority without law,” the courts may say so. Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 655 (Jackson, J., concurring). In Youngstown, for instance, we held that President Truman exceeded his constitutional authority when he seized most of the Nation’s steel mills.

On grounds of national defense, Truman tried to seize steel mills. The Court quickly told Truman no, that’s unconstitutional.

Court Synopsis

The court rejected Trump’s base case, properly cited Truman as an unconstitutional example, and specifically applied its ruling to official acts.

Importantly, official acts must be constitutional!

Truman was acting “officially”, but not “constitutionally”.

The King Moans About Kings

Following the SC Ruling, Biden gave a speech “I Dissent“

This nation was founded on the principle that there are no kings in America.  Each — each of us is equal before the law.  No one — no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States. 

With today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed.  For all — for all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do. 

Given Biden’s forceful flouting of the Supreme Court not only is that dripping with irony, it’s also a blatant, purposeful lie as any careful reading of the actual ruling shows.

But that did not stop major hyperventilation from the Left including this nonsensical headline from the Huffington Post: Supreme Court Gives Joe Biden The Legal OK To Assassinate Donald Trump

Did anyone bother to read the ruling before commenting?

A Delusional Defense of Biden’s Health

There is a stunning number of ironies in the Trump-Biden rematch. At the top of the list is Biden’s belief that he is the only one who could beat Trump. Wish Granted At a NATO conference on March 24, 2022 Biden quipped to a reporter “In the next election, I’d be very fortunate if I had that same man running against me.” Comedian Bill Maher Commented: “The whole rationale for Biden running has always been I’m the only guy who can beat Trump. Now I think it’s inverted. He’s the only guy who can lose to him.” King of Student Loans In a press conference briefing in July of 2021, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated the Constitutional Facts on Student Loans. “The president can’t do it,” Pelosi said, at a press briefing. “That’s not even a discussion.” Pelosi said any student debt forgiveness would have to be carried out by Congress. Other people in her party have said otherwise. On June 30, 2023, the SCOTUSblog reported Supreme Court Strikes Down Biden Student-Loan Forgiveness Program But that did not stop the king of student loans. He went ahead with another unconstitutional work around, then bragged about it. The Supreme Court Didn’t Stop Me In a White House Briefing on February 4, 2024, Biden bragged “The Supreme Court of the United States blocked me, but they didn’t stop me.“ Immunity for Official Acts On July 1, 2024 the Supreme Court ruled the President has immunity for official acts. I commented, The Left is Aghast at the Correct Supreme Court Immunity Decision on Trump In a 6-3 decision, the SC that held the President has immunity for official acts. It was not a complete victory for Trump. In fact, the Court rejected Trump’s base case. That was my opinion but it was entirely based on the actual Supreme Court Ruling. Here are a couple of snips from the Court, subtitles mine. Court Blasts Trump’s Base Case to Outer Space Trump asserts a far broader immunity than the limited one the Court recognizes, contending that the indictment must be dismissed because the Impeachment Judgment Clause requires that impeachment and Senate conviction precede a President’s criminal prosecution. But the text of the Clause does not address whether and on what conduct a President may be prosecuted if he was never impeached and convicted. See Art. I, §3, cl. 7. Historical evidence likewise lends little support to Trump’s position. The Federalist Papers on which Trump relies concerned the checks available against a sitting President; they did not endorse or even consider whether the Impeachment Judgment Clause immunizes a former President from prosecution. Transforming the political process of impeachment into a necessary step in the enforcement of criminal law finds little support in the text of the Constitution or the structure of the Nation’s Government. Trump claimed to have absolute immunity. The Court blasted that claim to outer space. Again from the ruling … Distinguishing Official Acts From Unofficial Ones The first step in deciding whether a former President is entitled to immunity from a particular prosecution is to distinguish his official from unofficial actions. … Presidents cannot be indicted based on conduct for which they are immune from prosecution. On remand, the District Court must carefully analyze the indictment’s remaining allegations to determine whether they too involve conduct for which a President must be immune from prosecution. And the parties and the District Court must ensure that sufficient allegations support the indictment’s charges without such conduct. Distinguishing official acts from unofficial ones requires a prosecutorial hearing or fact finding mission to establish what is or is not an official act and what is or is not a constitutional act. Such hearings are standard procedure for official acts. The Court merely extended the standard procedure to the office of president. Contrary to hyperventilation by the Left, the SC ruling does not protect the President from unofficial acts or unconstitutional acts. Truman Example If the President claims authority to act but in fact exercises mere “individual will” and “authority without law,” the courts may say so. Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 655 (Jackson, J., concurring). In Youngstown, for instance, we held that President Truman exceeded his constitutional authority when he seized most of the Nation’s steel mills. On grounds of national defense, Truman tried to seize steel mills. The Court quickly told Truman no, that’s unconstitutional. Court Synopsis The court rejected Trump’s base case, properly cited Truman as an unconstitutional example, and specifically applied its ruling to official acts. Importantly, official acts must be constitutional! Truman was acting “officially”, but not “constitutionally”. The King Moans About Kings Following the SC Ruling, Biden gave a speech “I Dissent“ This nation was founded on the principle that there are no kings in America. Each — each of us is equal before the law. No one — no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States. With today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all — for all practical purposes, today’s decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do. Given Biden’s forceful flouting of the Supreme Court not only is that dripping with irony, it’s also a blatant, purposeful lie as any careful reading of the actual ruling shows. But that did not stop major hyperventilation from the Left including this nonsensical headline from the Huffington Post: Supreme Court Gives Joe Biden The Legal OK To Assassinate Donald Trump Did anyone bother to read the ruling before commenting? A Delusional Defense of Biden’s Health “He’s probably in better health than most of us.” What?! Nate Silver replied, “They can’t tell the truth, that their candidate is well below the threshold of someone who should be president for another 4 years, so they tell obvious lies that nobody but the dumbest partisans will buy.” In another bit of delusional madness … Biden Says ‘My Son Has Done Nothing Wrong’ On May 7, 2023, the Wall Street Journal reported ‘My Son Has Done Nothing Wrong’ “My son has done nothing wrong,” the President said on MSNBC. “I trust him. I have faith in him, and it impacts my Presidency by making me feel proud of him.” Not Confidence Inspiring The Guardian comments Joe Biden is taking advice from his son, Hunter. This does not inspire confidence. The Biden clan gathered at Camp David on Sunday and, according to multiple reports, urged him to “keep fighting”. The New York Times stated: “One of the strongest voices imploring Mr Biden to resist pressure to drop out was his son, Hunter Biden, whom the president has long leaned on for advice.” Which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence: Hunter has poor judgment and a well-documented history of scandals. (To be clear, I am not sneering at his drug use; addicts deserve empathy. Drugs aside, his questionable business dealings and chaotic personal life make it difficult to look at Hunter and think: “Yeah, that’s a guy I should take advice from.”) Three Hunter Ironies The Hunter irony is threefold. First, the president is taking advice from someone whose motive is clearly suspect. Second, the President goes around calling Trump a convicted felon. The third irony is the New York trial was so flawed conviction is highly likely to be overturned but the Hunter felony will stand. A Travesty of Justice On May 30, Trump was convicted of a felony. Ironically, no one can precisely say what the felony is. I commented Trump Found Guilty – a Travesty of Justice for America A misdemeanor, on which the Statute of Limitations had run out, was used to produced 34 felony counts on committing a Federal offense for which he was not charged. They will say “No one is above the law”. Indeed. But no one should be beneath the law either. Every effort has been made to put Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Hillary Clinton above the law. And every effort has been made to put Trump beneath the law, including judicial instructions. I am outraged and I don’t even care for Trump. Everyone should be outraged. The trial was unfair because there should not have been a trial at all. On Getting Their Wish So, here we are. Biden got his wish that nearly all Democrats now regret. The DNC went along, greasing the wheels for a renomination and eliminating debate despite (or was it because of) the President’s increasingly obvious senility. Judging from a recent cornucopia of posts on the New York Times, Washington Post, the Guardian, etc., Democrats have a new wish, for Biden to step down. Sorry, the wish fairy only grants one political wish. It’s now up to Jill or Hunter to convince Joe to stand down. That does not look promising now. However, there’s a decent chance the President soon will not be able to walk or say anything coherent even in the newly designated prime hours of 9:00AM to 4:00PM. Yet, the longer the delay, the worse it looks. There is not a reasonable person on the planet who believe Biden can last another year, let alone four more years. Effectively, the ne battle cry is “Four More Months!” Democrats got what they deserve. Unfortunately, it’s not what the nation deserves. That’s the final irony in a sorry script fully loaded with ironies.

“He’s probably in better health than most of us.”

What?!

Nate Silver replied, “They can’t tell the truth, that their candidate is well below the threshold of someone who should be president for another 4 years, so they tell obvious lies that nobody but the dumbest partisans will buy.”

In another bit of delusional madness …

Biden Says ‘My Son Has Done Nothing Wrong’

On May 7, 2023, the Wall Street Journal reported ‘My Son Has Done Nothing Wrong’

“My son has done nothing wrong,” the President said on MSNBC. “I trust him. I have faith in him, and it impacts my Presidency by making me feel proud of him.”

Not Confidence Inspiring

The Guardian comments Joe Biden is taking advice from his son, Hunter. This does not inspire confidence.

The Biden clan gathered at Camp David on Sunday and, according to multiple reports, urged him to “keep fighting”. The New York Times stated: “One of the strongest voices imploring Mr Biden to resist pressure to drop out was his son, Hunter Biden, whom the president has long leaned on for advice.” Which doesn’t exactly inspire confidence: Hunter has poor judgment and a well-documented history of scandals. (To be clear, I am not sneering at his drug use; addicts deserve empathy. Drugs aside, his questionable business dealings and chaotic personal life make it difficult to look at Hunter and think: “Yeah, that’s a guy I should take advice from.”)

Three Hunter Ironies

The Hunter irony is threefold. First, the president is taking advice from someone whose motive is clearly suspect.

Second, the President goes around calling Trump a convicted felon.

The third irony is the New York trial was so flawed conviction is highly likely to be overturned but the Hunter felony will stand.

A Travesty of Justice

On May 30, Trump was convicted of a felony. Ironically, no one can precisely say what the felony is.

I commented Trump Found Guilty – a Travesty of Justice for America

A misdemeanor, on which the Statute of Limitations had run out, was used to produced 34 felony counts on committing a Federal offense for which he was not charged.

They will say “No one is above the law”. Indeed. But no one should be beneath the law either.

Every effort has been made to put Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, and Hillary Clinton above the law. And every effort has been made to put Trump beneath the law, including judicial instructions.

I am outraged and I don’t even care for Trump. Everyone should be outraged. The trial was unfair because there should not have been a trial at all.

On Getting Their Wish

So, here we are. Biden got his wish that nearly all Democrats now regret.

The DNC went along, greasing the wheels for a renomination and eliminating debate despite (or was it because of) the President’s increasingly obvious senility.

Judging from a recent cornucopia of posts on the New York Times, Washington Post, the Guardian, etc., Democrats have a new wish, for Biden to step down.

Sorry, the wish fairy only grants one political wish.

It’s now up to Jill or Hunter to convince Joe to stand down. That does not look promising now. However, there’s a decent chance the President soon will not be able to walk or say anything coherent even in the newly designated prime hours of 9:00AM to 4:00PM.

Yet, the longer the delay, the worse it looks. There is not a reasonable person on the planet who believe Biden can last another year, let alone four more years.

Effectively, the ne battle cry is “Four More Months!”

Democrats got what they deserve. Unfortunately, it’s not what the nation deserves.

That’s the final irony in a sorry script fully loaded with ironies.