Thursday marks the 30-day mark in the 60-day ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel. While plainly obvious that IDF military operations never really ceased, Israel is nowopenly talking about staying in Lebanon past the 60-day pullout deadline.
Wadi al-Hujeir is nearly five miles over the Blue Line, deeper than Israel’s invasion actually penetrated during the war that was supposed to end with last month’s ceasefire. The town also lies along the Litani River, beyond which Hezbollah was to remove its forces after the war.
But travel in occupied southern Lebanon is a difficult business, even 30 days into the ceasefire, as Israel seems to attack anything and everything trying to return to the towns and villages that were seized.
The roads around Wadi al-Hujeir have now been closed by Lebanese officials in an effort to keep the civilian population safely away from continuing Israeli incursions.
Multiple voices have expressed growing concern about Israel’s looming failure to withdraw from Lebanon and its continued firing on Lebanese territory despite the nominal ceasefire.
UNIFIL issued such a statement about the continuing damage Israel is causing in residential and agricultural areas, and on road networks throughout southern Lebanon.
Since the US was meant to be the guarantor of the ceasefire, it was expected that the US would say something about the hundreds of Israeli violations. So far, however, the US has not even broached the subject.
The US seems to consider the ceasefire announcement all it was prepared to do, and, in actuality, all it is likely ever to do.
Germany Has No Defense Against Russian Ballistic Missiles, Govt Review Says
Russian media has picked up on a report in Germany’s Bild newspaper which highlights a German government assessment saying the country is defenseless against the Russian Oreshnik missile system.
“The Patriot is not right to combat longer-range ballistic missiles, such as the Oreshnik,” Bild quoted a government document as saying, in reference to the US-supplied air defense missile system. “Any interception would be more like sheer luck.”
The report further underscored that currently Germany has no effective method of intercepting an inbound ballistic missile, following decades of a ‘neutral’ and degraded post-WWII military.
“The order came without any specific reason, such as an upcoming trip. It is unclear why the German Foreign Ministry wanted to document this defense gap in Germany. After all, these facts are known to the Ministry of Defense, and appropriate measures have long been taken,” a military expert was cited in Bild as explaining of the context of the document.
Berlin has over the last few years since the start of the Ukraine war been rapidly seeking to build its defenses and expand military spending.
The fact that Russia has already used the Oreshnik hypersonic ballistic missile in Ukraine on more than one occasion has likely put greater fear and urgency in European defense officials. Moscow was sending a big ‘message’.
Russian state media sources have touted that the Oreshnik reaches speeds greater than Mach 10+, and can reach 5,500km in distance, or 3,400+ miles (as a medium-range weapon).
A retired Russian Army colonel and military analyst, identified as Viktor Litovkin, has described, “The West does not have missiles that fly at such a speed or hypersonic missiles at all.”
He said further, “Although the US has repeatedly boasted that it has such missiles, it has never demonstrated a missile flight. They appeared to show missiles that flew at a supersonic speed of 5.5 times the speed of sound or Mach 5.5. However, hypersonic speed begins at Mach 6-7.”
With the prior collapse of the INF treaty, which regulated Russian and US ballistic missile deployments throughout the world, Moscow is very wary of a potential US missile build-up in Europe, which it says it is ready to mirror if threatened.
Europe’s benchmark natural gas prices soared on Friday by the most in a week after Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that the chances of a new deal for Russian gas flows to Europe via Ukraine are low.
Dutch TTF Natural Gas Futures, the benchmark for Europe’s gas trading, jumped early on Friday in Amsterdam by as much as 5%, before giving up some of the gains by midday.
On Thursday, Putin said that there isn’t time for a new gas transit deal to be reached between Russia and Ukraine. The Russian president was quick to add that the lack of a deal was entirely Ukraine’s fault.
Ukraine has so far refused to extend the gas transit deal currently in place that would see gas transit continue uninterrupted to Austria, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia—a refusal that Putin says only hurts Europe.
The current gas transit deal began nearly five years ago and expires at the end of 2024, and if the deal does in fact expire without a new deal in place, it will indeed bring hardship to several European countries. According to Putin, the few days left in the year are not long enough to reach a new deal.
The volume of natural gas that flows from Russia through Ukraine and onto Europe via the current pipeline deal is about 15 billion cubic meters or less than 10% of the total volume Russia shipped to Europe pre-Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Last week, European Union leaders met in Brussels to discuss the issue of alternatives to Russian gas with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Ukraine has emphatically stated that it would not discuss the idea of continued Russian gas transit with Russia.
Some consultations are being held – without Russia – Heorhii Tykhyi, a spokesperson for Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told Bloomberg on Friday.
Biden began his term in office by abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban and allowing the creation of a new terrorist super state. He is finishing his time in the Oval Office by watching helplessly as a new Caliphate is formed in the rubble of what was once Syria. Divorced from reality as always, his hapless State Department now calls the jihadi ruler of Damascus Al-Jolani a “pragmatist” and talks mindlessly about accommodation and cooperation with mass murderers and rapists.
Meanwhile, inside Syria, the new Islamic rulers are losing no time in consolidating their rule and making clear their intentions. On 26 December, Al-Jolani appointed former Al-Qaeda commander and Nusra Front co-founder Anas Hassan Khattab as the head of the country’s general intelligence agency. Khattab was designated a “terrorist” by the United Nations a decade ago. According to the UN, he was involved “in the financing, planning, facilitating, preparing, or perpetrating of acts or activities by, in conjunction with, under the name of, on behalf of, or in support of” and “otherwise supporting acts or activities of” the Nusra Front. This Al-Qaeda offshoot was rebranded as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in 2017.
Those are the guys who now run Syria.
As the head of intelligence Khattab’s job will not be to prepare detailed analyses of foreign developments. He will be in charge of domestic security. His job will be to crush any dissent and guarantee Al-Jolani stays in power. He has already been performing that function in the areas that HTS has controlled for years, where torture and murder are common tactics used to stifle dissent.
Last week, Asaad Hassan al-Shibani, a founding member of Al-Qaeda in Syria, was appointed foreign minister for the new terrorist state being created in Syria.
Meanwhile, more information is becoming available on the composition of the jihadist forces that drove Assad from power. Contrary to press reports that want to characterize the ousting of Assad as some sort of liberal, democratic, populist movement, the reality appears to be that substantial numbers of fighters from outside of Syria are present on the ground. Just before Christmas, a video surfaced of a Christmas tree in a town in Syria being burned by Islamists. It now appears the terrorists who carried out this action were Uzbek fighters fighting with Al-Jolani’s forces.
“The exact number of Tajik, Uzbek, and Chinese Uyghur citizens present in Syria is unknown, but these individuals operate in three separate groups under the leadership of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham.”
“Tajik jihadis residing in Syria operate under an organization called Jaish Al-Jihad Imam Abu Hanifa. Members of this group refer to its flag and name as the central focus of their activities on their Telegram channels. Several Telegram channels affiliated with this organization are active, sharing jihadi messages and reports from the Syrian battlefield.”
“One of the Tajik jihadis in Syria, known as ‘Musafir Tactical’, produces videos on YouTube and Telegram to promote and recruit young Tajiks for the war. He also creates content teaching weapon usage, the operation of communication devices, the repair of automatic weapons, and guerrilla warfare tactics.”
“Another member of the group, known as Mohsen Tajiki, also has thousands of followers on social media. Since the start of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham’s offensive on Aleppo, he has been providing updates moment by moment on the advances toward villages and towns under the control of Bashar Al-Assad’s government.”
“The East Turkestan Islamic Party is one of the most active jihadi groups in Syria, and compared to other Central Asian-origin groups, it has more resources and manpower. This group is a Uyghur jihadi organization that has been active in the Syrian civil war since around 2012. Its stated goal is to establish an Islamic state in the Xinjiang region of China (East Turkestan) and it is aligned with various jihadi groups in Syria, including branches of Al-Qaeda.”
“Fighters from Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan are also present in Syria, having fought under the flag of Hay’at Tahrir Al-Sham during the attack on Aleppo, and are now on the front lines fighting to advance toward other cities in Syria. These Uzbek and Kyrgyz fighters operate within a group called Katibat Al-Tawhid wAl-Jihad, which was established in northern Syria in 2013.”
“In March 2022, the U.S. Department of State designated this group as a terrorist organization due to its terrorist activities and its connections with international terrorist organizations, including Al-Qaeda.”
None of this is consistent with the fiction that Syria is now controlled by individuals seeking a liberal democratic order and cooperation with the West. It is a picture of a nation that has fallen to radical Islamic forces and which will now in tandem with Afghanistan serve as a launching pad for attacks on the United States and its allies.
Already Al-Jolani’s boys are moving fast to consolidate power. They are demanding that all rival groups turn in their weapons and disarm. They are beginning to proscribe rules for women’s dress throughout the country. They are also advising that anyone who fears Islamic rule is simply misinformed. You will live under Sharia law and you will like it.
We spent twenty years fighting a war against Islamic terror. That war is not over. We simply stopped shooting back. In a matter of years, we have allowed the creation of two radical terrorist states from which attacks can be launched worldwide. The newest of those is in the heart of the Middle East.
Don’t look now. Al Qaida is winning. There is a brand new caliphate in Syria.
“We Tested 300 Bay Area Foods For Plastic Chemicals” Here’s What We Found…
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has set his sights on the processed foods industrial complex. Nominated by President-elect Donald Trump to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy has long been an outspoken critic of toxic ingredients in food, including dyes and seed oils.
Trump’s second term has yet to begin, but the merging of the ‘Make America Healthy Again‘ and ‘Make America Great Again’ movements has sparked a dietary awakening among millions of consumers.
It’s not just dyes and seed oils poisoning Americans and ending their lives short; plastic chemicals are increasingly being found in popular fast foods and supermarket staples.
The former CEO of GitHub, Nat Friedman, who is also an investor seeding AI, infrastructure, open source, and frontier tech companies and is focused on health, published data on X about plastic chemicals found in a majority of foods across the San Francisco Bay Area.
“We did it! We tested 300 Bay Area foods for plastic chemicals. We found some interesting surprises,” Friedman wrote on X.
Our tests found plastic chemicals in 86% of all foods, with phthalates in 73% of the tested products and bisphenols in 22%. It’s everywhere.
We detected phthalates in most baby foods and prenatal vitamins.
Hot foods which spend 45 minutes in takeout containers have 34% higher levels of plastic chemicals than the same dishes tested directly from the restaurant.
The 1950s Army rations we tested contained surprisingly high levels of plastic chemicals.
Almost every single one of the foods we tested are within both US FDA and EU EFSA regulations.
Friedman noted:
“An important disclaimer: we have refrained from drawing high-confidence conclusions from these results, and we think that you should, too. Consider this a snapshot of our raw test results, suitable as a starting point and inspiration for further work, but not solid enough on its own to draw conclusions or make policy recommendations or even necessarily to alter your personal purchasing decisions. These results represent point-in-time results of a small number of product samples and may not be representative of actual product contents. These tests, like all tests, have inherent uncertainties, and different testing methodologies are likely to yield different results. And the existence of a chemical in a food doesn’t necessarily imply a safety issue. We’d be thrilled to see serious efforts to replicate our results and we are open to any corrections you may have.”
“Was the Whole Foods meat from the counter or the packages on the shelves? I get this brand there,” one X user asked Friedman.
The great food awakening continues, broadening from warnings about dyes and seed oils to a new call for Americans to demand changes in food packaging and processing to eliminate plastic chemicals.
The United States and Japan have unveiled new guidelines for “extended” deterrence, citing an “increasingly severe strategic and nuclear threat environment” that reflects heightened tensions in the Indo-Pacific, where China, Russia, and North Korea have taken steps to modernize their arsenals and project power.
The guidelines, unveiled on Dec. 27 through coordinated statements from the U.S. State Department and Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, underscore the two nations’ commitment to reinforcing their alliance to maintain regional stability and deter conflict.
“The Alliance will continue to explore how best to ensure extended deterrence is strong and credible,” read the identical statements from the two countries.
The guidelines are the culmination of long-running discussions under the Extended Deterrence Dialogue, a bilateral framework established in 2010 to address challenges to the U.S.–Japan alliance posed by evolving security threats.
Details of the new guidelines have not been disclosed.
Both the United States and Japan said that the document emphasizes enhancing strategic messaging to ensure adversaries clearly understand the alliance’s resolve and capabilities. The measures also include bolstering U.S. extended deterrence with Japan’s defense advancements, such as enhanced missile defense systems and readiness to respond to contingencies.
The joint announcement coincided with Japan’s Cabinet approval of a record $55 billion defense budget for 2025, marking the third year of a sweeping five-year military buildup under Japan’s national security strategy adopted in 2022. The broader national budget bill, totaling over $730 billion, is set for parliamentary approval by March.
Part of Japan’s plan involves bolstering its missile defenses. To this end, Japan has allocated another $3.37 billion for interceptors and a mobile reconnaissance radar on Okinawa, a strategic location hosting more than half of the 50,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan.
Japan is also preparing to deploy U.S.-made Tomahawk cruise missiles by late 2025, a pivotal step in its bid to acquire strike-back capability. The defense budget allocates $6 billion for a “standoff” defense system that includes long-range missiles, satellite constellations, and other advanced arsenals. Among these, $11.4 million is earmarked for outfitting Aegis-class destroyers to launch Tomahawks.
The five-year strategy also aims to double Japan’s annual military spending to around $63 billion, positioning Japan as the world’s third-largest military spender, behind the United States and China.
The new deterrence guidelines and Japan’s record defense budget signal a united front aimed at countering growing regional threats, reflecting concerns over China’s growing military assertiveness, North Korea’s persistent missile tests, and Russia’s activities in the Indo-Pacific.
Japan’s newly elected Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has been outspoken about the inadequacy of traditional deterrence frameworks. In a recent interview with the Hudson Institute, Ishiba warned that developments in nuclear weaponry and delivery systems by adversaries could undermine U.S. extended deterrence.
Ishiba has proposed the creation of an “Asian version of NATO” that would ensure deterrence against the “nuclear alliance of China, Russia, and North Korea,” while calling for nuclear-sharing agreements and the potential deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons on Japanese soil.
Imagine if something as common as the oil in your kitchen could be silently contributing to cancer. For millions around the world, this unsettling possibility has moved from speculation to science. Two studies, released just days apart, have cast a harsh spotlight on widely used cooking oils, suggesting a troubling connection between their consumption and increased cancer risks, particularly in the colon.
These findings are not just scientific footnotes—they are alarms ringing in households globally, where seed oils like sunflower, soybean, and canola are staples in daily cooking. As scientists dive deeper into the health consequences of these oils, they’re uncovering a hidden cost to convenience and affordability. Are we sacrificing long-term health for short-term savings? And if so, how can we protect ourselves from this unseen risk?
What the Studies Reveal: Key Findings
In two groundbreaking studies released just days apart, researchers have spotlighted a concerning link between widely used cooking oils and cancer risks, specifically pointing to tumor growth in the colon and other organs. These studies raise critical questions about the health implications of seed oils, a staple in kitchens worldwide.
One study conducted at the University of California, Los Angeles, focused on the effects of certain oils on cancer progression. Dr. William Aronson, a professor of urology at UCLA School of Medicine who led the study, stated: “Our findings suggest that something as simple as adjusting your diet could potentially slow cancer growth and extend the time before more aggressive interventions are needed.” His team’s research suggests that dietary changes could be pivotal in managing the progression of diseases like prostate cancer.
Meanwhile, another study examined how the consumption of seed oils, such as sunflower and soybean oils, could increase levels of carcinogenic compounds in the body. These compounds, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), are known to play a role in tumor development. The findings have sparked further investigation into the safety of these oils and their processing methods, especially when exposed to high heat during cooking.
Together, these studies provide a sobering glimpse into the risks associated with cooking oils that millions consider harmless. By focusing on the potential long-term impacts, the researchers aim to ignite a broader conversation about diet, lifestyle, and cancer prevention.
The Science Behind the Risk: How Cooking Oils Are Linked to Cancer
Cooking oils, often seen as innocuous kitchen essentials, may harbor hidden dangers that extend far beyond their caloric content. The scientific findings point to a troubling connection between these oils and the development of carcinogens during their use. Specifically, when oils like sunflower or soybean are heated, they release harmful compounds that have been linked to tumor growth.
One of the main culprits identified in the studies is the production of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and aldehydes. These toxic substances are formed when oils undergo thermal decomposition, a process that occurs when they are heated to high temperatures. These compounds have long been recognized for their potential to damage DNA and trigger cellular mutations, laying the groundwork for cancer development.
Dr. William Aronson emphasized the importance of understanding how dietary choices influence cancer risks. As he explained, “This is an important step toward understanding how diet can potentially influence prostate cancer outcomes.” The research underscores the role of oxidative stress caused by these compounds, which not only fuels cancerous growths but also accelerates inflammation, a known precursor to various chronic diseases.
Moreover, the risks aren’t confined to occasional deep frying or high-heat cooking. Even regular, everyday use of these oils in common cooking practices—like stir-frying or sautéing—can release these hazardous substances, making the threat widespread and pervasive. Understanding these mechanisms helps shed light on why the seemingly harmless cooking oils in our homes may be contributing to a growing public health concern.
Seed Oils in the Spotlight: A Look at the Culprits
At the center of these alarming studies are seed oils, a category that includes widely consumed options like sunflower, soybean, canola, and corn oils. Praised for their affordability and versatility, these oils have become staples in households and commercial kitchens worldwide. However, their widespread use comes with potential health risks that many consumers are unaware of.
Seed oils are particularly problematic because they are rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), which are unstable when exposed to heat. When these oils are subjected to high temperatures during frying or other cooking methods, they degrade, releasing harmful chemicals such as aldehydes and PAHs. These compounds have been directly linked to cancer and other chronic diseases in multiple studies.
Adding to the concern, seed oils are heavily refined and processed, often involving high heat and chemical solvents during production. This process not only strips the oils of any beneficial nutrients but also creates toxic byproducts even before the oils reach consumers.
The global reliance on these oils is driven largely by their low cost and long shelf life. Sunflower and soybean oils, for example, dominate cooking practices in both high-income and low-income regions due to their availability and affordability. Yet, as these studies reveal, the convenience of seed oils may come at a significant cost to long-term health.
This growing body of research is forcing a re-evaluation of seed oils’ place in the modern diet, with scientists urging caution and advocating for safer alternatives. The implications for public health are profound, as millions of people continue to rely on these oils in their daily cooking.
The Global Impact: Millions at Risk
The widespread use of seed oils places millions of people at potential risk, especially in regions where these oils dominate culinary practices due to their affordability and availability. Sunflower, soybean, and canola oils, among others, are often considered essential kitchen staples in low-income households and developing nations, making the health implications of these studies a global concern.
A key issue lies in the balance between cost and safety. For many, these oils represent an economical solution to everyday cooking needs, but their long-term health costs are largely invisible. The findings from recent studies underscore that what appears to be a budget-friendly choice may carry hidden dangers in the form of increased cancer risks. This is particularly troubling in communities that lack access to healthcare resources, where prevention through dietary changes becomes even more critical.
Additionally, the reliance on seed oils is not confined to individual households. They are heavily used in the food industry for frying, baking, and as key ingredients in processed foods. This amplifies exposure to the harmful compounds linked to these oils, as they are often consumed multiple times a day in various forms.
The public health implications are significant. If these findings continue to hold true, governments and health organizations may need to revisit guidelines on cooking oils and promote education about healthier alternatives. Raising awareness about the risks and encouraging safer cooking practices could save countless lives while fostering a much-needed shift toward more conscious dietary choices.
In a world where seed oils are deeply embedded in culinary traditions and food supply chains, the challenge lies in addressing this health threat without compromising affordability or accessibility. This makes the recent findings not just a wake-up call, but a critical step toward global dietary reform.
Expert Opinions: What Scientists and Doctors Are Saying
The recent findings linking cooking oils to cancer risks have sparked widespread concern among researchers and health professionals. Experts are emphasizing the need for awareness and further investigation into the compounds released during high-heat cooking with seed oils. These harmful byproducts, including aldehydes and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), have been directly tied to cellular damage and tumor development.
Researchers have also raised questions about the widespread reliance on highly processed seed oils in modern diets. The processing methods often involve high heat and chemical treatments, which can produce toxic residues even before the oils are used in cooking. This has led many health professionals to recommend exploring alternative oils with higher heat stability and lower risk profiles.
While not all experts agree on the immediate implications of these findings, there is consensus that diet plays a critical role in preventing chronic diseases, including cancer. Public health advocates are urging consumers to consider these findings when making everyday dietary choices, highlighting the need for further research to solidify these early conclusions.
By spotlighting the risks associated with widely used oils, these studies are a call to action for consumers, policymakers, and the food industry alike. The goal is not only to reduce exposure to potentially harmful substances but also to promote safer, healthier cooking practices on a global scale.
What You Can Do: Healthier Alternatives and Precautions
While the findings on seed oils are alarming, they also serve as an opportunity to take proactive steps toward healthier cooking practices. By making informed choices, consumers can minimize their exposure to potentially harmful compounds and reduce their risk of associated health issues.
Choose Safer Cooking Oils
Replace seed oils like sunflower, soybean, and canola with alternatives that have higher heat stability and fewer harmful byproducts. Oils such as extra virgin olive oil, avocado oil, and coconut oil are better suited for cooking at higher temperatures and are less likely to produce toxic compounds. Additionally, cold-pressed oils are less processed, retaining more of their natural nutrients and antioxidants.
Modify Cooking Techniques
The method of cooking can significantly impact the safety of oils. Opt for low-heat cooking methods such as steaming, baking, or slow cooking, which reduce the risk of forming carcinogenic compounds. Avoid deep frying or prolonged high-heat cooking, and ensure proper ventilation in the kitchen to minimize exposure to any airborne toxins.
Incorporate Fresh and Whole Foods
Diversifying your diet with fresh fruits, vegetables, and whole grains can help offset the potential risks associated with oils. These foods are rich in antioxidants and nutrients that combat inflammation and oxidative stress, two key factors in cancer development.
Stay Informed and Read Labels
Pay close attention to the labels on cooking oils. Look for minimally processed options and avoid products that list additives or chemical stabilizers. Awareness of how oils are processed and the conditions under which they are used can help you make safer choices.
Small changes, like swapping oils and tweaking cooking methods, can have a significant impact on long-term health. By taking these precautions, individuals can mitigate risks and empower themselves with healthier, more conscious dietary habits.
Two Democrat legal experts are calling on Congress to take immediate action to prevent President-elect Donald Trump from taking office, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Evan A. Davis, the former editor in chief of the Columbia Law Review and David M. Schulte, the former editor in chief of the Yale Law Journal, called for Trump’s disqualification in an opinion piece for The Hill, citing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Davis is a New York City attorney and a former president of the New York City Bar Association. He worked on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee impeachment inquiry staff during the impeachment process against Richard Nixon.
Schulte is an investment banker and good friend of Barack Obama. He owns the oceanfront Martha’s Vineyard home where the Obama and his family used to vacation when he was in office.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment bars individuals who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or given aid or comfort to its enemies from holding “any office, civil or military.”
In a unanimous decision last March, the Supreme Court tossed out a Colorado court decision that barred Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot. The lower court had based its decision on 14th Amendment provision.
In their 9-0 ruling, the Supremes concluded that “states have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.”
But Davis and Schulte argue that evidence of Donald Trump engaging in “insurrection” is “overwhelming” and that Congress has the authority to block Trump from being inaugurated under the Constitution and the Electoral Count Act of 2022.
The act, which was intended to prevent another January 6 scenario, added certain procedures for the counting of electoral votes following a presidential election.
In January 2021, the then-Democrat controlled House of Representatives impeached Trump for “incitement of insurrection” following the January 6 Capitol riot, but the Senate acquitted him, falling short of the two-thirds majority needed for conviction.
The Democrat lawyers argue that the majority (57-43) vote in the Senate supports their case for disqualification under the 14th Amendment.
They say that any votes cast for Trump should be deemed “not regularly given” due to his alleged disqualification.
“Democrats need to take a stand against Electoral College votes for a person disqualified by the Constitution from holding office unless and until this disability is removed,” the Davis and Schulte wrote.
“No less is required by their oath to support and defend the Constitution.”
Most legal experts however agree that the notion of Republican lawmakers supporting a move that could elevate Kamala Harris to the presidency is highly improbable and at the moment, Democrats just don’t have the stomach for such a fight.
“Republicans and Democrats seem to agree they’ll give Trump the smooth, drama-free transfer of power he denied Democrats in 2020,” Politico reported Thursday, adding “top Democrats say they have no plans to stand in the way of Trump’s victory — and they’re not even sure their rank-and-file colleagues will make the token objections they’ve lodged in years past.”
‘Philanthro-Capitalism’ – RFK Jr. Questions Bill Gates’ Motivations
“I know most about Gates, you know, because I’ve written a book about him,” says Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – President-elect Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services – recollecting his 2021 book, “The Real Anthony Fauci’, where RFK Jr exposes Gates’ so-called “philanthro-capitalism”, which, he explains is “using philanthropy to make yourself rich and you use it strategically and that’s what he’s done again and again.”
“He’s gotten control of the World Health Organization so that they mandate vaccines all over the world and the companies that make those vaccines are, Gates’ and many of them the major shareholder. And so and he did the same thing with the green revolution.”
RFK Jr. – full of facts and not conspiracies (for, if they were, where are the defamation suits) – then unraveled one of Gates’ greatest disasters:
“He got a hold of the the regulatory agencies in African countries and forced them to take, to change the nature of agriculture. You know, there there’s there’s 20,000 generations of agriculture of of people being, growing, crops like sorghum and plantains and yucca and all these plants for subsistence.”
“And he said, no. We’re gonna transfer them all to these, you know, GMO monocultures of corn, and then we’re gonna bring in, the companies that he owns Kraft, Coca Cola, McDonald’s, these big food companies, processing companies to buy that and that’s gonna be the deal.”
“And then of course during COVID, all of that shut down and you had, you know, there’s 30,000,000 Africans now as a direct result of Gates’s policy who are now on the edge of starvation.”
But, it gets worse, as Gates ‘ventured’ into the vaccine world:
“I think the the big the real tell was what happened with the DTP vaccine, which is diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. Because of Gates pushing this this shot, it’s now the number one vaccine in the world, DTP.”
“And it’s mainly given in Africa. It was that particular shot is discontinued in the United States because it was killing 1 out of every killing or badly injuring 1 out of every 300 kids who took it. We ended it in Europe and the United States, but there’s Gates giving it to every kid in Africa. And in 2017, he asked the Danish government for money to support this program and he said, we’ve saved we’ve saved 20,000,000 kids. The Danish government said, can you show us the data?”
“He couldn’t. So the Danish government went and did its own study, and they had records of 30 years of this vaccine in a country called Guinea Bissau. And, they looked at the records and what they they realized in retrospect, which they were never seeing, is that the the girls who were getting that vaccine at 6 months of age were 10 times more likely to die over the next 6 months as children who didn’t get it. “
“Wow. And they were dying of things that nobody on the ground had ever associated with vaccination.”
“They were dying of anemia and bilharzia and malaria and dysentery, and, and, and nobody had ever had made the connection that it’s only the girls who got the vaccine who were dying of those things, that the other kids were much healthier. ”
“And the Danish government had hired the retained the greatest, vaccine scientist all and were pro vaccine. A guy called Peter Aaby who’s like a deity in that space, and another guy called Soren Morgensen.”
“And a whole team of scientists did that, and those scientists started speaking up and saying you got to discontinue this vaccine. And their careers, Gates made sure their careers were destroyed.”
All of which left RFJ Jr with no doubts:
“So that’s when I understood that he actually understands what he is doing. And, you know, this is not just him being hypnotized. He knows that this is wrong because he’s this science was indisputable. And it really made me wonder about what his motivations are.”
Watch the full conversation here:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: “I know most about Gates, you know, because I’ve written a book about him and that what he calls philanthropicapitalism, which is you use philanthropy to make yourself rich and you use it strategically and that’s what he’s done again and again.”
Big Lots finalized a deal that preserved the brand name and prevented the discount retail chain from entirely going under.
Ohio-based Big Lots announced it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy earlier this year, citing economic pressures. The company tried to sell its business to Nexus Capital Management but failed to strike a deal. On Dec. 27, Big Lots announced a sales transaction with Gordon Brothers Retail Partners.
As part of the agreement, North Carolina-based Variety Wholesalers will acquire around 200 to 400 Big Lots stores “which it plans to operate under the Big Lots brand.”
Variety, which owns more than 400 retail stores in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic United States, may also “employ Big Lots associates at the acquired stores and distribution centers, as well as certain corporate associates.”
Bruce Thorn, chief executive officer of Big Lots, said the sale to Gordon Brothers and transfer to Variety is a “favorable and significant achievement.”
“This sale agreement and transfer present the strongest opportunity to preserve jobs, maximize value for the estate, and ensure continuity of the Big Lots brand,” he said.
The agreement now needs to be approved by the bankruptcy court and must undergo other closing conditions.
Big Lots operates more than 1,400 stores across 48 states in the United States. While filing for bankruptcy, the company cited issues like inflation, saying that rising prices have changed the spending behaviors of customers.
“The prevailing economic trends have been particularly challenging to Big Lots, as its core customers curbed their discretionary spending on the home and seasonal product categories that represent a significant portion of the company’s revenue,” it said in September.
Big Lots listed assets and liabilities in the range of $1 billion to $10 billion, owing money to 5,001 to 10,000 creditors. The company’s shares have crashed by more than 99 percent this year.
Last week, the company said it intends to kick off a “going out of business” sale at its stores.
Bankruptcies on the Rise
Multiple American retail chains have entered bankruptcy over the past year. In June, apparel retailer Bob’s Stores went bankrupt and decided to sell all its stores in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island.
In July, furniture retailer Conn’s announced filing for bankruptcy, closing down all its 553 stores nationwide following a sales slowdown over past years.
New Jersey-based Party City filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in December, and said it was preparing to close down almost 700 stores across the country. This was the second time in two years that the company filed for bankruptcy.
According to an S&P report, there have been 634 U.S. corporate bankruptcy filings in 2024, up to the end of November, with the figure on track to potentially hit a new 14-year annual high. S&P bankruptcy numbers only take into account large companies that exceed certain asset and liability thresholds.
The jump in bankruptcies comes as businesses face challenges like inflation, elevated interest rates, and changing consumer spending patterns, it said.
“While the US Federal Reserve has begun lowering its benchmark interest rate from a 20-year high, the pace of further cuts may slow in 2025 amid challenges posed by persistent inflation and potential tariffs implemented by President-elect Donald Trump,” said the report.
“However, Trump’s election victory in November did provide an initial boost to stock markets and investor risk appetite.”
The American Bankruptcy Institute reveals that overall commercial bankruptcy filings fell 1 percent yearly in November, according to a Dec. 4 statement.
Michael Hunter, vice president of bankruptcy filing data provider Epiq AACER, attributed this small decline to fewer business days and the holiday season.
ABI Executive Director Amy Quackenboss said that “elevated interest rates, tougher lending terms, and increased geopolitical tensions continue to impact the balance sheets of many struggling businesses and families.”
“While still below the levels recorded prior to the pandemic, the steady growth in filings reflects the growing financial challenges faced by distressed companies and consumers.”
