Month: August 2024

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

The Washington Post (WaPo) reported on Saturday that Qatar was secretly mediating a partial Russian-Ukrainian ceasefire before Kiev’s sneak attack against Kursk, which would have seen both sides agree not to target each other’s energy infrastructure. The Kremlin hadn’t commented by the time of that article’s publication nor this present one so it’s unclear how truthful it is. In any case, it’s worthwhile taking a look at what WaPo’s sources said, which might help discern whether or not this is believable.

The first tidbit is that “Some involved in the negotiations hoped they could lead to a more comprehensive agreement to end the war, according to the officials”. This was followed by the claim that “Russia ‘didn’t call off the talks (after Kursk), they said give us time,’ the diplomat said.” The Ukrainian “presidential office” then alleged that talks in Doha were indeed scheduled but were postponed until 22 August “due to the situation in the Middle East” and will now “take place in a video conference format”.

WaPo went on to cite “senior officials in Kyiv” who “had mixed expectations about whether the negotiations could succeed, with some putting the odds at 20 percent and others anticipating even worse prospects” even before Kursk. They still explored the reportedly Qatari-mediated partial ceasefire with Russia though because “’We have one chance to get through this winter, and that’s if the Russians won’t launch any new attacks on the grid,’ a Ukrainian official who was briefed on the talks said.”

“’Everything has to be weighed — our potential and the possible damage to our economy versus how much more damage could we cause them and their economy,” the Ukrainian official briefed on the planned Qatar summit said. ‘But energy is definitely critical for us. We sometimes forget about the economy here, but we’re facing free fall if there’s no light and heat in the winter.’” According to them, the partial ceasefire would be modeled off of the now-defunct grain deal, but Kursk changed all of that.

It’s at this point that two interconnected questions come to mind:

1) why would Russia consider agreeing not to target the energy infrastructure upon which Ukraine’s entire war effort depends, thus preventing its foes’ complete collapse and possibly perpetuating the conflict into another year?; and

2) why would Ukraine launch its sneak attack knowing that it ended any chance, at least for the time being, that Russia might give them such a reprieve that could then allow them to keep fighting into next year?

As regards the first question, if there’s any truth to WaPo’s report (the veracity of which will be assessed later), then Russia might have thought that this could soften its image ahead of the possible resumption of peace talks and create the conditions for Ukraine to comply with more of its terms. Trump’s potential return to power and his promise to swiftly end the conflict could have hung heavy over policymakers’ heads and influenced them to consider abiding by this moratorium until after the elections at least.

If such negotiations were indeed being mediated by Qatar, then that could also explain why Russia left its border with Ukraine largely undefended and might have even shrugged off reports of a buildup there since policymakers could have considered it “irrational” for Kiev to carry out any such sneak attack. RT’s Sergey Poletaev also speculated that a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ was in place between Russia and the US over the defense of the former’s border from the latter’s Ukrainian proxy this entire time.

Taken together and assuming for the sake of this thought exercise that WaPo’s report is accurate, then it might have been that Russia was lured by the aforesaid speculative ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ with the US and the then-ongoing Qatari-mediated partial ceasefire talks with Ukraine into keeping its guard down. The purpose all along could have been for them to get Russia to leave large swathes of its border undefended in order to facilitate a Ukrainian sneak attack as part of an unprecedentedly risky gamble.

This hypothesis segues into answering the second question about why Ukraine would throw away any chance, at least for now, of Russia giving them a reprieve from attacks against their energy infrastructure that could then allow them to keep fighting into next year if they make it through the upcoming winter. Kiev and its US patron might have concluded that the pace of Russia’s on-the-ground gains in Donbass will inevitably lead to their defeat unless something drastic is done to change the conflict’s dynamics.

Freezing attacks on one another’s energy infrastructure wouldn’t halt Russia’s advance, not to mention if Moscow pulls out of the deal after the elections. Despite the odds of success being low, one possible way to prevent Russia’s seemingly inevitable victory would be to seize, hold, and then swap some of its pre-2014 land in exchange for Russia withdrawing from some Ukrainian-claimed land. This plan’s obvious flaw is that Russia might achieve a breakthrough in Donbass that leads to Ukraine’s collapse before then.

It can’t be ruled out though that NATO might conventionally intervene in Ukraine if that happens in order to force a Cuban-like brinksmanship crisis aimed at saving its proxy from full-blown defeat. This could take the form of creating a NATO-Russian DMZ inside the disputed territories, but it’s unclear whether members have the political will to risk World War III over this. Ukraine knows that its sneak attack against Kursk leaves Donbass vulnerable so it might be hoping that this will happen if need be.  

If that’s their leadership’s thought process, then the endgame might be to seize and hold some of Russia’s pre-2014 land through the winter, possibly aided by a conventional NATO intervention in its defensive support if Russia breaks through in Donbass, in order to swap it back next year. This plan assumes that Ukraine could survive until then even if its electricity sector is destroyed, which is dubious but could still happen if the abovementioned sequence of events leads to a NATO-Russian DMZ.

It also takes for granted that World War III wouldn’t break out if NATO conventionally intervenes in Ukraine to force the creation of that DMZ and then the threat thereof would remain manageable even if Russian-Ukrainian hostilities continue raging in Kursk. Another related assumption is that Russia would either allow NATO to also set up a DMZ on its pre-2014 border with Ukraine or NATO would willingly leave that frontier open and thus risk Russia launching offensives against those Ukrainian border regions.  

The preceding calculations are “irrational”, but they might have still influenced the Ukrainian leadership’s thought process when deciding to launch their sneak attack against Kursk in spite of knowing that it would end any chance of a Qatari-mediated partial ceasefire with Russia, at least for now. From Russia’s perspective, such a deal wouldn’t have adversely affected the pace of its on-the-ground gains in Donbass, might have given it diplomatic leverage in new peace talks, and could always be abandoned.  

It therefore appears that there might be some truth to WaPo’s report about Qatar secretly mediating a partial Russian-Ukrainian ceasefire before Kursk since both sides would have gained from those talks. Russia could have advanced its long-term diplomatic interests without curtailing its campaign in Donbass if they succeeded, while Ukraine could have kept Russia’s guard down during this process for facilitating its unprecedentedly risky gamble in Kursk aimed at staving off seemingly inevitable defeat.

Authored by Andrew P. Napolitano

Sometime before he withdrew from the presidential race, President Joe Biden secretly reaffirmed his own self-willed and self-created authority to kill persons in other countries, so long as the CIA and its military counterparts have “near certainty” that the target of the homicide is a member of a terrorist organization. That standard was concocted by the George W. Bush administration in 2002.

There is no “near certainty” standard in the law, as the phrase is oxymoronic and defies a rational definition – like “nearly pregnant.” Just as one is either pregnant or not, one is either certain or not. There is no “near” there.

Yet, the creation of this standard underscores the lamentable absence of the rule of law in government today. The Biden administration and its three immediate predecessors have all deployed drones to kill persons who were not engaged in acts of violence at the time of their killing, irrespective of the near certainty of their membership in any organizations.

“Terrorist” cannot be a standard for extrajudicial murder because it is subjective. To King George III, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were terrorists. To the poor folks in Libya and Syria, to the popularly elected governments toppled by CIA-inspired violence in Iran in 1953 and in Ukraine in 2014, to the innocents tortured by the CIA at black sites around the world, the CIA is a terrorist organization.

The presidential use of drones to kill persons overseas began in 2002 with Bush-ordered targeted killings. It continued under President Barack Obama – who even killed Americans overseas. The rules for killing were made up by each president. They were relaxed under President Donald Trump, who gave CIA senior personnel and military commanders the authority to kill without his express approval for each killing. Trump’s folks infamously murdered an Iranian general and his companions on their way to lunch with Iraqi generals to negotiate peace between the two countries.

The Biden administration quietly took back the Trump grants of authority so that today only the president can authorize targeted killing. Yet, there is no moral, constitutional or legal authority for these killings. But presidents of both political parties do it anyway.

The laws of war – a phrase itself that is oxymoronic – which are generally codified in the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Charter, all of which were spearheaded, written and ratified by the United States, mandate essentially that lawful wars can only be defensive and must be proportional to the threat posed or the harm already caused. Stated differently, treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory restrain the president from killing persons in other countries with which the U.S. is not lawfully at war.

Under the Constitution, treaties sit alongside the Constitution itself as the supreme law of the land. The last four occupants of the White House have ignored this when it comes to secret killings. Each has claimed publicly or secretly that the Authorization for Use of Military Force of 2001, or its cousin, the AUMF of 2002, somehow provide congressional authorizations for presidents to kill whomever they please – and somehow Congress can lawfully authorize these killings.

Yet the AUMF of 2001 purported to authorize Bush to hunt down and kill the folks whom he failed to see coming on 9/11 (those would be his friends, the Saudis), and whom he reasonably found caused 9/11. The AUMF of 2002 authorized Bush to invade Iraq in pursuit of the weapons of mass destruction that he was told by experts inside and outside the CIA Saddam Hussein did not possess. Both AUMFs no longer have a valid purpose today, yet they remain the law.

This is how Obama’s Press Secretary Robert Gibbs responded to questioning on the murder of the 16 year old US citizen Abdulrahman al-Awlaki in a drone strike ordered by Obama: “I ‘d suggest that you should have had a far more responsible father”. pic.twitter.com/Hp408VX08P

— Louis Allday (@Louis_Allday) June 21, 2018

The Constitution authorizes Congress to declare war against foreign countries, not random killings of persons. Neither of the AUMFs was or is a valid declaration of war, which the Constitution requires as a predicate for all extrajudicial presidential killings. A declaration of war defines the target and sets the end. It is not open-ended as the last four presidents have claimed with respect to these two Bush-era statutes.

If the presidents are right, and the AUMFs authorize them to kill whomever they wish – including Americans – then they are not presidents answerable to the law and the Constitution, but kings who can kill on a whim without transparency or legal consequence.

The whole purpose of confining the war-making power to Congress and the war-waging power to the president was to keep those powers separate. History is littered with examples of tyrants using the powers of the state to kill for no moral purpose. American presidents have given themselves the power to kill. It is the functional equivalent to a loaded gun in a drawer of the president’s desk.

Abraham Lincoln was the first head of state in world history to target civilians militarily and the first to engage in the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians of his own country. Franklin D. Roosevelt slaughtered thousands of innocent helpless German civilians at the end of World War II by carpet-bombing German cities, rather than targeting the German military. Harry Truman slaughtered many thousands of Japanese civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

All these murders were met with popular approval, as the targets had been demonized by the machinery of government – just like the “terrorists” Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden have killed.

But demonization of human targets and popular approval of their murders cannot turn an immoral act into a moral one. An act is moral when it is consistent with the Natural Law. According to the Declaration of Independence, under the Natural Law, all persons are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, and among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” The right to live is the foremost natural right and the great divine gift to all persons – not just Americans.

No person may morally be targeted for death by government for any reason unless it is presently necessary to stop that person from actively killing an innocent. In the cases cited above, the presidential killings were done to terrify political opponents, as the civilian targets were helpless. And the killers were lauded as heroes.

Today, American troops are on the ground in Ukraine showing Ukrainian forces how to use American weapons to kill Russian troops and in Israel showing the IDF how to kill civilians in Gaza. This was done by secret presidential orders that have never been publicly acknowledged. Russian troops and Gazan civilians pose no threat whatsoever to life, liberty or property in America.

Why do American presidents kill? Because they can get away with it.

* * *

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the US Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.

Youth unemployment is being cited as one of the core drivers of the unrest in Bangladesh, which led to weeks of protests and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina stepping down from office.

As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the following chart, based on ILO data, labor force unemployment for people aged 15-24 years in Bangladesh stood at 15.7 percent in 2023, above the world average for youth unemployment of 13.8 percent and the low and middle income average of 14.1 percent.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Youth unemployment is a regional issue, with India having hit a similar level in 2023, while Nepal and Sri Lanka’s rates last year were worse, both surpassing the 20-percent mark.

Of this selection of countries, Pakistan fared better in 2023 at around 9.7 percent.

According to a report by the Japan Times, the latest figures indicate that in 2024, roughly 40 percent of Bangladeshi youth are not in education, employment or training, including those no longer looking for work or registered unemployed.

The authors write that stagnant job growth in the private sector as well as a cooling economy has made public sector jobs more attractive. Protests started weeks ago over a quota for such civil service jobs which reserved 30 percent of government roles to relatives of veterans of the 1971 war of independence from Pakistan.

While all of the countries’ unemployment rates have fallen from a pandemic-induced peak, they have in all five cases risen in the past decade.

Authored by Bruno V. Manno via RealClearEducation,

There is nothing abnormal about deviance. This is a lesson I learned growing up during the 1950s and early 1960s in an Italian American neighborhood called Collinwood on the east side of Cleveland, Ohio. While the neighborhood had plenty of conformity, there was also sufficient forbearance for enough deviance to make life interesting and educational.

Years later in the early to mid-1970s, I found myself a Ph.D. student in a seminar on the works of the French sociologist Emile Durkheim. I was pleasantly surprised that the lesson I learned growing up was one of Durkheim’s important sociological insights into our common life.

Durkheim showed that deviance performs at least four important functions in society. It affirms our cultural values and norms; clarifies our moral boundaries; brings us together; and encourages social change by challenging our views. Moreover, our neighborhood was a good example of what’s called the Durkheim Constant: there is a limit to the amount of deviant behavior that a community will tolerate since deviant behavior causes conflict.  

Many years later in 1993, I read a now-famous essay by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York titled Defining Deviancy Down who based his article on Durkheim’s insight into deviance. Moynihan wrote mostly about crime in America: “We have been redefining deviancy so as to exempt much conduct previously stigmatized, and also quietly raising the ‘normal’ level in categories where behavior is now abnormal by any earlier standard.”

Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Chester E. Finn, Jr., suggests that today’s controversy about the recalibration of the College Board’s Advanced Placement exam scores is an educational example of Moynihan’s essay about our human predisposition to define deviancy down.

The Advanced Placement Controversy

The College Board Advanced Placement program is often described as the gold standard for high school academic excellence. High school students take college-level courses and exams in 39 subjects from Biology to Music Theory. Tests are typically composed of multiple-choice and essay questions and scored on a scale of 1–5. Depending on the college, students who earn at least a 3 can earn college credit, “place out” of certain college course requirements, or have AP scores transfer directly to credit hours.

In 2022, the College Board revised the expert panel scoring process for AP exams because student success rates in some AP subjects were well under the 60% to 80% success rate of other subjects. That lower success rate produced a significant disconnect in these subject areas between AP scores and college grades. The College Board claimed that this revised scoring process would get all AP exams to that 60% to 80% success rate and better align all AP exam scores to equivalent college grades.   

While the College Board did inform the AP community at its conferences about this change, there was no formal public announcement made about the undertaking. The Board has now gone public and released a public update on the scoring process. They describe two reasons for taking this action, which they dubbed evidence-based standard setting.

First, new digital data collection technologies make it possible to collect and analyze large amounts of data. Second, these technologies allow them to create a new digital library of courses—the AP Classroom—linking each AP course’s units, topics, learning objectives, and skills to exam questions that produce granular student performance data that allow for more accurate exam scoring. Here is a description of what they did:  

…from 2022-2024, researchers applied evidence-based standard setting (EBSS) processes to determine appropriate performance standards for students in a range of AP courses. This methodology collects input from hundreds of experts and then assembles fine-grained student performance data for analysis by subject-matter experts.

This process produced a significant increase in average student scores in several AP exams, primarily in humanities subjects. For example, the EBSS process increased the success rate for AP English Literature from 43.9% in 2021 to 77.9% in 2022. The individual student score levels in English Literature increased, going from 12% to 27% earning a 4, and from fewer than 5% to 16% earning a 5. The overall effect on 9 AP exams over the last three years is that a 3 or better score was achieved by approximately a half million more students.

The Reaction

Liam Knox, writing in Inside Higher Ed, documents reports that many AP stakeholders support the new approach. On the other hand, not everyone is pleased. These views are summarized in articles with headlines like “Grade Inflation Sends AP Test Scores Soaring” and “Are AP Exams Getting Easier?”

John Moscatello is a leading questioner of this recalibration process. He is the founder of Macro Learning company and works with school districts creating AP programs. He writes that the AP program “…is undergoing a radical transformation” and that the recalibration process has created “runaway [grade] inflation.”

He and other critics point out that while there may be sound academic research to support this change in how exams are scored, the effort has lacked public transparency leaving many AP teachers and supporters confused.

But there are other not-so-sound issues to consider beyond the lack of public transparency. For example, the number of students taking the AP has grown by leaps and bounds, creating a large revenue source for the College Board. Dana Goldstein writing in the New York Times reports that the AP program generated almost $500 million in 2022 revenue for the College Board, calculating that around 20% of that comes from federal, state, and local public dollars. Additionally, some states offer bonuses and salary increases to teachers when their students get a 3 or higher on an AP exam. “Higher scores are good for business” on multiple levels, Moscatello writes.

A Way Forward

“We are getting used to a lot of behavior that is not good for us,” writes Moynihan in the essay I reference at the beginning of this piece. He then goes on to reflect that societies and organizations under stress seek ways of killing their pain.

Maybe we have reached Durkheim’s constant, the proverbial limit to the amount of deviant behavior that a community will tolerate. Or there may be legitimate reasons for the College Board’s new AP scoring approach.

But it seems common sense that what we need is a lot more transparency on the part of the College Board. That might go a long way to assuring AP program supporters that this new approach is not just a way of defining deviancy down to kill the pain brought on by various forces putting the organization under stress.

Time will tell.

Within the last month, nearly all major Western and international airlines have announced suspensions and cancelations of their service to both Tel Aviv and Beirut. This also as foreign nationals have scrambled to get out of both countries, given ongoing fears of the outbreak of bigger regional war involving Iran and Hezbollah attacking Israel.

While American Airlines was among the many carriers announcing temporary pauses in service, it has just issued a surprising lengthy extension to this suspension in flights. On Friday, the Fort Worth-based company announced it doesn’t plan to resume flights to Tel Aviv until April 2025.

This is a longer cancelation than any other airline, including in all of Europe, so far as a result of the Gaza war and related fears of regional escalation and spillover.

“American Airlines has suspended operations to and from Tel Aviv through March 29, 2025,” a spokesperson said in a fresh statement to Newsmax.

“To provide additional flexibility, we will extend our travel alert allowing customers whose travel plans are impacted by this adjustment to rebook without a fee or cancel and receive a refund.”

“We will continue to work closely with our partner airlines to assist customers traveling between Israel and European cities with service to the U.S.,” the statement continued.

The latter part of the statement suggests that once AA-partner British Airways (BA) resumes service to Tel Aviv, tickets can be booked for the Europe part of a flight utilizing BA partner service.

Newsmax wrote of the outlet Israel Hayom:

The outlet said that it contacted the American Airlines reservation center and tried to book a flight in December. However, it reported that a representative was “surprised” to discover there were no American Airlines flights in its system and that it was not possible to book flights this winter.

So it seems that despite recent US declarations that a Gaza ceasefire is at the “eleventh hour” and near the “goal line” – major carriers like American Airlines remain deeply skeptical and foresee extended safety issues in terms of airspace over the region.

Iran has yet to retaliate for the July 31st Israeli assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran; however, Israel is still on the alert, and believes such a reprisal attack could come in the form of a ballistic missile and drone launches at any moment. This is also what has put international commercial aviation on alert.

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. refuted a Washington Post report from earlier this week that said he would drop out of the race and endorse Vice President Kamala Harris in exchange for a cabinet position if she wins in November.

During an Aug. 15 Latino Town Hall on TikTok, he told the moderators that the story is “fake news.”

“I didn’t ask for a cabinet position,” Kennedy said.

“I want to meet with all candidates about dampening down the rhetoric and unifying our country.”

Kennedy said candidates, including former President Donald Trump and Libertarian presidential nominee Chase Oliver, have met with him.

“Kamala Harris said she doesn’t want to [meet],” he said.

Kennedy has repeatedly said at campaign stops and in interviews with media outlets and on podcasts that he would always welcome conversations with opposing candidates, media outlets, and podcasters who do not share his views.

He told The Epoch Times that many Democrats and Republicans acknowledge the division in America but then get mad “if you meet with Trump or Kamala Harris.” He said he is “willing to take the heat by working to build a bridge between both sides.”

Kennedy, who is attempting to get on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, met with Trump last month in Milwaukee during the Republican National Convention. The Washington Post reported that Kennedy discussed dropping out of the race to back the former president and join his administration if he returns to the White House.

The purpose of meeting with President Trump was to talk about the chronic disease epidemic and children’s health, Kennedy said. He denied that he would end his presidential bid and support the former president.

Democrats and Republicans alike have expressed concern that Kennedy could take away votes from their respective presidential candidates.

Earlier this year, the DNC hired Lis Smith, a veteran Democrat strategist who managed Pete Buttigieg’s 2020 presidential campaign, to spearhead an aggressive communication plan to combat Kennedy, independent Cornel West, and Green Party nominee Jill Stein.

In recent months, the DNC and Clear Choice, a super PAC aligned with Biden to counter third-party presidential candidates, have objected to Kennedy’s appearance on the ballot, making legal filings in multiple states.

Last week, a New York State Supreme Court judge ruled that Kennedy falsely listed that he was a New York resident on his nominating petitions. As a result, he was removed from the state’s general election ballot, a decision Kennedy has appealed.

The DNC has called Kennedy a “stalking horse” to “prop up” Trump. Kennedy, meanwhile, has accused the DNC of trying to win the election in courtrooms and keep voters from having another choice.

Regarding the report that Kennedy sought a meeting with Harris, Matt Corridoni, a DNC spokesman.said, “No one has any intention of negotiating with a MAGA-funded fringe candidate who has sought out a job with Donald Trump in exchange for an endorsement.”

David Carlucci, a former Democratic New York state senator who is now a Democratic strategist, told The Epoch Times that Kennedy’s attempt to reach out to Harris “speaks to the issue that many voters already know: Kamala Harris will be elected as our next president.”

Kennedy’s actions during his campaign have “repeatedly shown that his judgment is not suitable for the presidency or any other leadership role in government,” he said.

Stefanie Spear, Kennedy’s press secretary, told The Epoch Times in a statement that “Mr. Kennedy is willing to meet with leaders of both parties to discuss the possibility of a unity government” and has done so since he entered the presidential race.

Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

On the eve of the Democratic National Convention, after a coup against their former standard-bearer Joe Biden, we face a very disturbing question.

What if Kamala Harris isn’t the idiot the media has made her out to be?

Harris was clearly chosen for this role. She’s been groomed for it for nearly two decades. She isn’t the best of a list of bad choices. The Democrats drove the good choices from the party and blocked others becoming a part of it.

There were no Democratic primaries, folks.

She was placed as Biden’s Vice-President to have the inside track on this gig when they decided Joe finally had to be dragged from the stage.

The coup was penciled in on the Gantt Chart at Evil Corp. Central for the weekend of July 13th.

In 2020, Harris voters roundly rejected her for President, getting zero delegates before being roasted by Tulsi Gabbard.

She dropped out despite being the darling of the media and the donor class. Going into those primaries, she was the establishment’s pick.

Once she failed they moved to Plan B: rig the game for Biden.

They said, “We’ll install a mushroom so corrupt we can make him do whatever we want Joe just wants his money and his ice cream.”

So you force Harris onto Joe. Or the other way around… never mind she’s too old for him.

Meanwhile Harris waited. She let Joe take the heat. She said little, did less and then is installed, tabula rasa, into a campaign just days after a failed assassination attempt on Donald Trump to steal even that thunder.

We were never allowed to discuss her culpability, along with the cabinet, as to how Biden could have been running the country for the past three years without them invoking the 25th amendment out of pity for the man if nothing else.

Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot Democrats don’t have emotions other than hate and envy.

She was installed as the candidate to front-run an insurgency at this week’s convention by Hillary Clinton and her merry band of Neocons. Don’t expect them to take this sitting down, there are likely to be some sparks this week in Chicago, even if they don’t turn into a bonfire.

So, that leads me to ask my question, not because I think Harris is some latent IQ160 or anything. I asked my question because this is a woman who faced zero real voters and is one vote-rigging operation away from the presidency.

So, maybe she’s a genius when measuring her political intelligence.

What if we’ve all been led down the primrose path of stooping to Trump’s level coming up with cute memes about her vast collection of knee pads or her inappropriate laughter at tragedy?

What if that is exactly the means to lull us all into thinking there’s no way anyone will vote for this woman?

And if this was any normal (a nebulous term these days at best) election, I would agree with you. But, for 90% of the fifty elections the US is going to hold for its president, who you vote for doesn’t matter.

This is, as always, a five state race.

All that matters is printing/counting the right number of votes in those five states and the rest is just a Benny Hill skit.

Harris chose uber-commie and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate to what, exactly? Shore up the only state that voted for Walter Mondale in 1984? Really?

No, it was to do a few things:

1. Signal that they didn’t need Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro to win there.

2. Continue Obama’s antipathy towards Israel. They don’t need “The Jews” anymore.

3. Put the Quarter-Black HR Nanny in charge of the cucked White Guy.

After that, all you have to do is use AI and special effects to make fake crowds supporting fake polls and faker ads to sell everyone on the idea that this woman is what Americans want to rule them over this…

The sad part is that too many people still think this is all just part of the game. But it isn’t. It’s nothing more than the same playbook run in 2020 to create just enough plausible deniability that Harris can win this election before they steal it and dare us to do one damn thing about it.

Or did you miss how upset the French and British are at their recent outcomes?

So, Kamala cackles her way through scripted interviews. She and Walz dance around bringing “joy!” to the world. But when you actually get her talking about policy, about what she believes in, the cackling stops, the fangs come out, it’s just communism all the way down.

I was asked by Sputnik News to comment on her announced economic plan. In short, it’s the same warmed-over ‘Eat the Rich,’ politics of envy the Democrats have used for decades to set the table for a class war where the soon-to-be permanent underclass is used to finish off destroying the middle class so that they both can live in squalor and be thankful for whatever thin gruel is left over.

Those that don’t like it can go die in a meat grinder overseas somewhere else. Hey, at least it’s ‘3 hots and a cot’ right? Or is her ascension to the throne the moment when everyone gets just uncomfortable enough for the wolf to come out in a few million of us?

No, I don’t think Harris is at all stupid. And I think we’d all do well to put away the memes and get serious about making sure that we make this a November 5th to her not to remember.

Sputnik’s Questions and my full answers:

1) Harris presented something that she called an “opportunity economy”. How different do you expect this to be from “Bidenomics”?

Not much, to be honest. Democrats are looking to rebrand the same agenda they had during both Obama’s two terms and “Biden’s” one term. It’s all an extension of the original plan, which is to nationalize all the important sectors of the economy – housing, health care, energy, transportation – that the Federal Government didn’t already control, e.g. communication and defense.

This strategy is simply to break the private economy — dislocate trillions of investment capital, displace millions of workers, disrupt supply chains – and then create new “opportunities” for those most harmed by these policies, the lowest strata of wage earners young people, by giving them handouts. This is classic ‘divide and rule’ politics engaged in by the oligarch class to set the lower class, in their terminology the ‘proletariat,’ against the middle class, the “bourgeoisie.’

Nothing new here. Typical “Break your legs and hand you a crutch” politics.

2) How are the measures that Harris’ economic plan includes going to be paid for?

Debt at first and the hoped for transition to Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) after the debt passes the point of sustainability, where they just print money and tax your earnings at whatever rate they need to in order to maintain power, via programmable Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC).

3) Harris promised to push forward a federal government law against price gouging as a solution to Americans’ frustration with the high cost of living. What effect would a law like this have on prices? How would a small business react to such a law?

The Democrats have been prepping this talking point for more than a year by sending out Elizabeth Warren to complain about corporations gouging us on food prices. But if you look at retailer, especially supermarket, corporate profits you’ll see their costs rising with our costs. The average bottom line margin for a supermarket chain is around 2%. If Harris and Warren think this is “Price Gouging” then they have no idea what the term means.

Real costs of production will rise. Prices will rise. The government will then use a flat fining structure to punish the bad guys.

Because of this small businesses will go under. Larger firms can always absorb the cost of new regulations better than smaller businesses. They are the primary target because they are the engine of economic growth. Harris is nothing new, just another in a long line of doctrinaire communists promoted via anti-democratic processes to serve an overclass desperate to hold onto power as their old system of wealth extraction reaches its terminal stage.

4) How do you assess the possibility that a federal law against price gouging might backfire and trigger shortages?

All price floors and price ceilings lead to shortages, never surpluses. This is literally first semester macro-economics. Harris and her handlers know this. In fact, they are counting on creating shortages. It’s part of the strategy in the end to destroy the country they lead.

This is not stupidity or incompetence. It is policy.

5) Harris promised to address housing affordability by issuing $25K support for first-time house byers. How would you expect such a measure to affect the housing market?

It can’t stop the deflation of housing prices, it will only further dislocate the market by keeping prices up and suckering people who can’t afford a home into thinking they can. What needs to happen is sincere price corrections which reallocate scarce capital back to generating jobs that create wealth rather than subsidizing the things you buy once you have wealth.

Starter homes now cost $180-200 per square foot to build in the US. At those prices, there are no new affordable homes. The tiny home industry in the US is booming. People are trying to right size their debt with their income. And are now coping with the insanity by telling themselves they can raise a family in 500 sq.ft. They can’t.

So, again, what’s the goal? It’s not to put people in new homes. It’s to put people in smaller homes and/or choose to live in a rented space whose cost is subsidized by the government in the medium-term to nudge them towards the preferred outcome… living in cities with no food security, no real security, and constant/total surveillance.

6) How realistic do you find Harris’ promise to build 3 million new houses?

We can build any number of houses. The US has more than enough productive capacity to build 3 million houses. That’s not the right question. The right question is should we build any new houses, and for what price?

It’s a talking point. A pathetic attempt to buy young voters who are increasingly looking at them and thinking they are crazy people.

7) How successful do you expect Harris to be in distancing herself from the criticisms and negative effects that the Biden/Harris administration’s policies had on the US economy in recent years? How would you describe her target audience and why would this tactic work for it?

She won’t be. You can’t run as the “reform candidate” when you are the incumbent. And nothing she has proposed is functionally any different than what was done previously while she was in office. Her target audience for this is the wholly unsophisticated young voter who is entering a broken workforce and economic landscape today and seeing nothing but a lack of real opportunities. They are hoping for a new round of “Obama Youth” to marshal into an effective fighting force for “Hope and Change.”

What they are doing is purposefully increasing the possibility of full-blown civil war.

8) How should we expect Harris’ economic plan to increase the US national debt?

Exponentially. Again, that is the goal. They will use ruinous fiscal policy to run out the clock on Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve who are telling them that if they want their Communist revolution they will pay for it at 5.5% or higher. All of these ‘subsidy’ programs –food, housing, etc.—are meant to extend the current pricing regime until after the end of Powell’s term in 2026 and then close the loop, bringing the Fed back into the fold.

*  *  *

Join my Patreon if you hate Communism

The entirety of the Lebanese capital and the whole nation has been plunged into darkness amid a crippling power outage which has been in effect since midday Saturday.

That’s when the state power provider Electricité du Liban (EDL) announced in a statement that “the last operational unit at the Zahrani power plant was forced to shut down completely, due to the complete depletion of the plant’s fuel oil reserves, resulting in a total power outage across all Lebanese territories.”

The official statement identified that the shutdown affects “essential facilities such as the airport, port, water pumps, sewage systems and prisons.”

The situation could grow dangerous for the citizenry given that even wastewater treatment facilities and drinking water pumping stations have been impacted, resulting in the South Lebanon Water Establishment to issue a statement “urging citizens to conserve water as much as possible due to the expected reduction in water supply.”

Separate regional reports say that the government anticipated the depletion of fuel, and prepared for electricity generators to temporarily supply power to Beirut Airport for two days. 

The General Director of Beirut Airport expressed hope that it can still be operational until additional fuel arrives, while caretaker Energy Minister Walid Fayad indicated a timeline of 24-48 hours for the resumption of regular power operations across the capital.

Meanwhile, Lebanon’s Energy Minister Walid Fayyaz is seeking to assure the public that new gas shipments from Egypt will soon arrive at Lebanese ports to resupply the fuel required for power plants. Algeria too has in a fresh statement said it is ready to send emergency fuel assistance.

While Lebanon’s economic and electricity and resource woes have been exacerbated by the de facto state of war between Hezbollah and Israel in the southern border, the reality is the country has already suffered energy shortages and rolling blackouts for at least the last two years following the banking and currency crisis.

Neighboring Syria too has also had regular blackouts and periods where the water is turned off going back years. The whole region came under severe wartime economic strain going back to the height of the Syrian proxy war, and the full impact on smaller Lebanon is now being felt full force. But is also a story of severe mismanagement by the Central Bank of Lebanon, also amid long-running and historic corruption and elite cronyism.

Lebanon is currently experiencing a blackout, which is not related to conflicts but rather to the government’s failure to pay its bills. pic.twitter.com/cpR0SnA7VJ

— SuperGirlBunny_TheChamp (@SuperGirlDChamp) August 17, 2024

Some Western analysts have blamed Hezbollah for stealing and diverting fuel and electricity from Beirut airport, and for holding the country’s resources hostage, but the economic woes are a much bigger force which have been felt for a long time before the current conflict with Israel.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has landed in Israel on Sunday for his ninth visit since Oct.7 as part of an ongoing effort to achieve ceasefire in Gaza, and to gain the release of the hostages.

He’s expected to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at 11 a.m. tomorrow (local time), alongside which there will be meetings with Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, Foreign Minister Israel Katz and President Isaac Herzog.

The Biden administration has constantly claimed to be “at the goal line” of achieving a truce deal, a refrain heard for months, but with still nothing official to show.

Both warring sides have blamed the other. Hamas has long insisted on a full Israeli military withdrawal as a condition for releasing the hostages.

But Netanyahu has countered that he will not order troops out of Gaza until Hamas as an organization is destroyed and fully eradicated. Some of his own generals, however, have argued that this will be impossible and an protracted, or even endless insurgency will result.

The latest words of Netanyahu reveal he won’t budge despite international and US pressure: 

Speaking at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says that Israel is sticking to its demands in ongoing hostage talks, positions that he says are in line with the proposal laid out by the White House in May.

“We are conducting very complex negotiations,” he says, “while on the other side stands a murderous, uninhibited, and obstinate terrorist organization.”

“But I want to emphasize,” the premier continues, “we are conducting negotiations [“give-and-take” in Hebrew], and not give-and-give. There are areas where we can show flexibility, and there are area where we can’t show flexibility — and we are standing firm on them. We know quite well how to distinguish between the two.”

For whatever ‘optimism’ comes out of Doha, and for whatever ‘carrots’ the US hopes to use to entice both sides to at least agree to a pause in fighting, Blinken’s ninth trip appears yet another diplomatic exercise in futility.

The US still hasn’t hesitated to approve gargantuan defense packages for Israel of late. So in the end Tel Aviv clearly has little to fear from White House ‘pressure’. 

“I’m bored, so I shoot.” Israeli soldiers describe near-total absence of firing regulations in Gaza, with troops shooting as they please, setting homes ablaze & leaving corpses on the streets – all with their commanders’ permission | @972mag investigation https://t.co/TrECJp1dtJ

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 18, 2024

At the same time US progressives and also conservative anti-war activists have long pointed out that the White House’s condemnation of the unfolding humanitarian disaster, which US-supplied bombs are having an outsized role in, is all for show and mere public relations damage control.

And likely that’s what Blinken’s latest trip to the region is all about. There will be much high-ideal rhetoric and little substance. And the war and escalation will continue. Meanwhile a Times of Israel Sunday top headline reads: IDF expanding operations in southern, central Gaza… even as Blinken is in country.

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

The wealthy are doing just fine at the moment, but they don’t seem to understand that much of the country is deeply hurting right now.  59 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. economy is currently experiencing a recession, and that is because most of them are personally experiencing economic pain.  Literally just about everything is substantially more expensive in 2024, more major layoffs are being announced with each passing day, and thousands of businesses are going bankrupt.  We haven’t seen a tsunami of economic suffering like this in a long time.

If you live in a wealthy area in a good part of the country, you may wonder what all of the fuss is about.

If you and everyone around you is still doing well, life may still seem quite good.

But the truth is that there are vast stretches of this country that are so depressed that they literally look like something out of a horror movie.

There are many communities that are so plagued by poverty, drugs, homelessness, violence and theft that it seems like there is no possible way that things could ever turn around.

A man named Drew Binksy recently visited one of the poorest parts of West Virginia, and he discovered that most of the people there are living in poverty…

‘Most of [the residents] live below the poverty line and life expectancy is well below the national average.

‘Many families rely on Government assistance just to get by and there’s limited access to healthcare.’

Today, tens of millions of Americans are heavily dependent on the checks that they get from the government each month.

In areas where most people have lost hope of ever finding a better life, drug addiction often runs rampant, and that is precisely what Binksy witnessed…

He also notes that ‘crystal meth and Fentanyl addictions run wild’ in the state, while many people are ‘living so isolated, they have their own dialect.’

The content creator starts his journey in Bluefield and as he wanders through the once prosperous manufacturing city, he says it feels like he has stepped into ‘a forgotten world.’

He continues: ‘Empty streets and closed shops stretch as far as the eye can see. It’s like life just stopped.’

This is where the entire country is heading.

Just a few days ago, I wrote about the “retail apocalypse” that is rapidly spreading across America.

Thousands upon thousands of stores are closing, and most of those abandoned stores will not be filled any time soon.

But at least they will make convenient locations for drug addicts to gather.

According to one woman that Binksy interviewed, 30 percent of the people in her community are into illegal drugs…

One woman in the store tells the camera crew: ‘We’re the poorest county in the United States or we were.

‘About 30 per cent of our community are dopers, druggies… more than 30 per cent!’

The same conditions are being repeated in rural community after rural community all over America.

Sadly, the standard of living in our rural communities is going to continue to go down because the cost of living just keeps going up…

The cost of frozen noncarbonated juices and drinks has risen by 19.2 percent from July 2023 – the most of any grocery item.

Eggs, meanwhile, have increased by 19.1 percent in price, and frankfurters are now 9.7 percent more expensive.

The cost of bacon, beef roasts, pork chops and butter have also risen notably in the last year.

In terms of non-food items, car insurance is the biggest riser in the last year – with an 18.6 percent price hike.

We have already reached a stage where a large portion of the population cannot even afford the basics.

As I shared yesterday, I was absolutely shocked to learn that 39 percent of Americans have been forced to skip meals so that they will have enough money to make their housing payments…

39% of Americans say they’ve skipped meals to make housing payments, per Clever Real Estate survey.

And among millennials, that figure rose to 44%. Among Baby Boomers, it was 20%.

It is no wonder why so many voters are so deeply frustrated with the current state of the economy.

This is our country now, and the outlook for the future is not positive at all.

In fact, it appears that very alarming changes are starting to happen in the employment market as large companies lay off large numbers of workers…

Another domino falls for recession as job creation turns negative for small businesses, which employ nearly half of all Americans.

In the past year, payrolls for companies with under 50 employees plunged by nearly 100,000, while job trends were flat for midsized businesses up to 500 employees.

The only bright spot was big businesses—which might be changing, given recent layoff announcements, including 2,500 at Chrysler, 4,000 at Cisco, 12,000 at Dell, and 15,000 at Intel. Paramount and the left-wing Axios both cut 10% to 15% of their workforce.

20 years ago, most American families were clearly thriving.

Today, most American families are clearly struggling.

This change occurred so gradually that most people didn’t even realize what was happening.

The gap between the wealthy and the rest of us is now larger than ever, and our major cities are teeming with millions of highly desperate people.

This story is not going to end well, but most of you already knew that.

When people feel like they have nothing left to lose, it doesn’t take much to push them over the edge.

Unfortunately, it appears that the next few months represent a major tipping point, and it won’t be too long before all of the frustration that has been building up in this country starts to boil over.

*  *  *

Michael’s new book entitled “Chaos” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.