Category: zerohedge

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Former President Donald Trump on Wednesday said he believes he has a “great silent majority” who will vote for him during the 2024 election.

While speaking to radio host Hugh Hewitt, the former president claimed that he may have the “biggest ever” silent majority, using a term that was popularized by former President Richard Nixon in 1969. He then made reference to the relatively large crowd turnout during last weekend’s rally in Wildwood, New Jersey.

“I have a great silent majority … the term was very, very powerfully associated with Nixon, and I didn’t want to be copying the term actually, so it’s the great silent majority,” President Trump said, adding that he believes that 107,000 people attended the Wildwood rally. The Epoch Times could not immediately authenticate that figure.

The former president in 2020 made similar claims about a silent majority turning out in droves for him during that year’s election. But the term was famously used by President Nixon to refer to conservative voters who did not participate in the current political discourse at the time, later resurfacing in the campaigns of former President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.

In his interview with Mr. Hewitt, the former president said that he believes inflation may cause some voters to cast ballots in favor of him, coming after the Labor Department released figures Wednesday showing that the consumer price index slightly eased in April.

“It’s a lot of inflation when added to the inflation that we’ve suffered that’s been so bad,” President Trump said, likely referring to years of rising prices since the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. “It’s got to come down much more. That’s a lot of inflation, their number they announced.”

The former president’s remarks on Wednesday come as a recent poll from Siena College shows that President Joe Biden is trialing the former president in five of six battleground states.

President Trump, notably, is ahead by 6 percentage points in Arizona, 11 points in Georgia, and 13 points in Nevada, the survey revealed. He’s ahead about 3 points in Pennsylvania and 1 point in Wisconsin, while is down by 1 point to President Biden in Michigan. In the 2020 election, races were called for President Biden in all of those states mentioned in the Siena College survey.

In a Wall Street Journal poll conducted in April, President Trump garnered a lead of between 2 and 8 percentage points among voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina on a ballot that included third-party and independent candidates. The results were similar in a one-on-one matchup with President Biden, it said.

The former president also was viewed as having better physical and mental fitness for the job by 48 percent of respondents, compared to 28 percent for President Biden, the poll showed.

Meanwhile, a recent Reuters-Ipsos poll showed that more Americans believe President Trump would handle the economy better than President Biden. Some 41 percent of respondents in the three-day poll said the former president has the better approach, compared to 34 percent for the current president.

Debate Announcement

On Wednesday, President Biden said in an announcement that he would agree to two debates with President Trump ahead of the 2024 election, holding one in June and another in September.

“I’ve also received and accepted an invitation to a debate hosted by ABC on Tuesday, September 10th,“ the president said on X. ”Trump says he’ll arrange his own transportation. I’ll bring my plane, too. I plan on keeping it for another four years.”

The former president wrote that he accepted his invitation.

“It is my great honor to accept the CNN Debate against Crooked Joe Biden,” President Trump said on Truth Social. “Likewise, I accept the ABC News Debate against Crooked Joe on September 10th,” he added.

In a separate post, he also pushed for a debate to be held on Fox News, which he said could take place on Oct. 2, or about a month from the election.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a third-party candidate, suggested on social media after the announcement that he might be excluded from the debate “because they are afraid I would win.”

President Trump, who did not debate his rivals during the Republican nominating race before they all dropped out, has in recent weeks been challenging President Biden to a one-on-one matchup with him, arguing that debates should be held before early voting begins in some states. He also told Mr. Hewitt the debate should be two hours long and that both men should be required to stand.

Wednesdays are a day off for President Trump during his ongoing New York trial, where he is accused of falsifying business records to cover up payments to a woman to keep silent about an alleged affair. He has denied her claims and pleaded not guilty, saying it’s an attempt to harm his 2024 presidential campaign.

The trial is expected to last about two more weeks.

Established in 1944, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) supports countries’ economic growth by providing financial aid and guidance on policies to enhance stability, productivity, and job opportunities.

Countries seek loans from the IMF to address economic crises, stabilize their currencies, implement structural reforms, and alleviate balance of payments difficulties.

In this graphic, Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti visualizes the 10 countries most indebted to the fund.

Methodology

We compiled this ranking using the International Monetary Fund’s data on Total IMF Credit Outstanding. We selected the latest debt data for each country, accurate as of April 29, 2024.

Argentina Tops the Rank

Argentina’s debt to the IMF is equivalent to 5.3% of the country’s GDP. In total, the country owns more than $32 billion.

A G20 member and major grain exporter, the country’s history of debt trouble dates back to the late 1890s when it defaulted after contracting debts to modernize the capital, Buenos Aires. It has already been bailed out over 20 times in the last six decades by the IMF.

Five of the 10 most indebted countries are in Africa, while three are in South America.

The only European country on our list, Ukraine has relied on international support amidst the conflict with Russia. It is estimated that Russia’s full-scale invasion of the country caused the loss of a third of the country’s economy. The country owes $9 billion to the IMF.

In total, almost 100 countries owe money to the IMF, and the grand total of all of these debts is $111 billion. The above countries (top 10) account for about 69% of these debts.

By John Gallagher of FreightWaves

Cargo vessels are not equipped with backup power sufficient to avoid situations such as the one in March when the container ship Dali struck and collapsed Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge, the country’s top transportation safety investigator told lawmakers.

Testifying before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on Wednesday, National Transportation Safety Board Chair Jennfier Homendy said the backup generator that kicked in after the Dali lost power roughly half a mile from the bridge restored emergency lighting, navigation functions, radio equipment, alarms and a steering pump that allowed for low-speed, limited rudder movements.

That wasn’t enough.

“It does not power propulsion, and without the propeller turning, the rudder was less effective — they were essentially drifting,” she told the committee.

“If you wanted to regain propulsion through any sort of emergency generator, it would literally take a six-storey generator on a vessel to do that. There is that redundancy in, say, cruise ships, but the Dali is not unlike other [cargo] vessels.”

Homendy’s testimony came a day after NTSB released a preliminary report on the March 26 accident that killed six bridge construction workers.

The report shows that the Dali experienced four total power outages — including two that occurred the day before the accident during routine maintenance being performed by the vessel’s crew while the ship was docked at the Port of Baltimore.

While recovering from the second power outage, the crews switched to a different transformer and set of circuit breakers from those that had been in use for several months. “Switching breakers is not unusual but may have affected operations the very next day on the accident voyage,” Homendy said at the hearing.

“We will continue evaluating the design and operation of the Dali’s power distribution system, including its breakers. Examination of damage to the vessel will continue when the ship is cleared of debris and moved to a shoreside facility.”

Timelines and costs

The U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have been able to reopen much of the channel since the accident, officials from those agencies testified at the hearing, adding that they expect the vessel to be refloated and removed from the channel as early as next week.

Shailen Bhatt, administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, confirmed to lawmakers a preliminary estimate to replace the bridge at $1.7 billion to $1.9 billion. It will take four years to construct, with completion estimated to come sometime in 2028, he said.

Bhatt was questioned by several lawmakers on the administration’s request to have 100% of the bridge’s replacement cost paid upfront through federal funds, which will require legislation approved by Congress.

He pointed out that getting the money approved upfront by Congress “removes an element of uncertainty” to insure against construction delays. In addition, a significant amount of that funding will be paid back to the government eventually through insurance payment recovery and money received through litigation proceedings from responsible parties, he said.

“But we don’t want to wait for all the litigation and NTSB investigations and insurance issues” to be resolved, he said.

Rerouting delays increase

During the hearing, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington’s nonvoting delegate in the House, sought comment from Bhatt on federal data showing that traffic crashes rose 29% on alternative routes in the weeks following the Key Bridge collapse.

“The same data show that it now takes between two and four times longer for drivers to travel those alternative routes,” she said. “That traffic means trucks are delayed in reaching their destinations, commuters are late getting to their jobs or home to their families, and there is more air pollution and wasted fuel.”

Bhatt noted that when significant highway capacity is lost, traffic adjusts and levels out. However, “that’s not happening in Baltimore to the same extent, and I think it’s because of just the criticality of this artery,” he said.

“It’s important for Maryland and Baltimore, but it’s also important for the Northeast Corridor. So yes there are trucks and vehicles moving through neighborhoods that normally they would not, and that’s why it’s important that we move with as much speed as possible” to rebuild the bridge.

Bhatt told lawmakers he would look into potential long-term relief, including hours-of-service waivers, for truck drivers affected by the delays.

Bridge assessments recommended

As part of its investigation, NTSB is looking at other areas in the U.S. where bridges have been improved following vessel strikes. Depending on the information collected, the agency could issue an urgent safety recommendation even before a final report is issued in the Dali accident, which could take up to 18 months.

“The key is, you have here a bridge that was opened in 1977. It’s not the bridge that’s getting larger, it’s not the waterway that’s getting larger, it’s the vessels that are getting larger — both width and height. So it’s important that states and other bridge owners look at, from a risk assessment standpoint, what type of vessel traffic is going through, and how is the bridge protected.”

Another week, another mid-air mishap for a Boeing plane. This time, a 747-400 carrying 468 passengers from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia had to make an emergency landing immediately after takeoff when one of the plane’s four engines erupted in a fireball.

“The decision was made by the pilot in command immediately after takeoff, considering engine problems that required further examination after sparks of fire were observed in one of the engines,” Garuda Indonesia president director Irfan Setiaputra wrote in a statement obtained by the local media outlet The Jakarta Post. 

Garuda-1105 flight to Madinah, a city in western Saudi Arabia, was departing from the Indonesian city of Makassar on Wednesday when, as soon as the plane achieved rotation speed and lifted off the runway, a giant fireball erupted from one of the plane’s engines. 

Garuda Indonesia 747-412 returns safely to Makassar Airport in Indonesia after an engine failure during takeoff. pic.twitter.com/VibKqCQosc

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) May 15, 2024

Here’s what happened last week with Boeing mishaps:

May 8:

• Boeing 767 Cargo Plane Crash-Landed In Turkey

May 9:

• Boeing 737 Crashes After Failed Takeoff At African Airport

May 10: 

• United Airlines Boeing 737 Makes Emergency Return To Japanese Airport After Wing Flap “Irregularity”

If you want to avoid flying in Boeing’s “death traps,” use this plane ticket booking search feature for Airbus “only” before your next trip.   

Authored by David Williams via RealClearEnergy,

Electric vehicles (EVs) may be the most subsidized product in America. Federal taxpayers shell out $7,500 every time a new eligible electric vehicle is purchased (usually by wealthy buyers). State and local taxpayers chip in an additional $1,500 for each EV purchase. Then, there’s the tens of billions of dollars “invested” by policymakers into building EV plants. Even these bank-breaking concessions aren’t enough to please the Biden administration. Recently finalized EV tax credit rules expand eligibility for the subsidy while maintaining bizarre trade sourcing rules likely to lead to further tariffs from China. It’s time for President Biden and lawmakers to ditch protectionism and finally end EV subsidies. 

From the start, President Biden’s fumbling approach to EV subsidies has harmed the economy without bolstering ecology. In 2022, the chief executive declared, “[t]hanks to American ingenuity, American engineers, American autoworkers… if you want an electric vehicle with a long range, you can buy one made in America.” Prices were already through the roof, with taxpayers being asked to shoulder these pricy purchases. Kelley Blue Book estimates that the average price of a new EV is more than $65,000, compared to $48,000 for gas-powered cars. Biden imposed requirements that EVs must undergo “final assembly in North America,” contributing to even higher prices for taxpayers and consumers. 

Biden’s rules make production cost-prohibitive by restricting the foreign mineral inputs (e.g., graphite) that could go into tax credit-eligible EVs. The administration has since reversed course and allowed for a grace period for graphite sourcing. However, the new rules, “introduce a stricter test for measuring whether 50% of the vehicle’s critical minerals come from the United States or a free trade agreement partner…[requiring] automakers to more precisely account for the value added at each step of the supply chain.” The net effect of all these confusing new rules is to expand the number of vehicles eligible for EV tax credits, while increasing compliance costs. And, of course, this cost will be passed onto taxpayers and consumers. 

Instead of tethering absurd rules to a complex and costly program, the Biden administration should start from scratch and axe the tax credit. EV subsidies are showered onto the wealthiest Americans at the expense of their poorer neighbors. According to a 2023 analysis of California EV purchase patterns by the news outlet CalMatters, “Most of the median household incomes in the top 10 [zip codes with the highest share of EVs] exceed $200,000, much higher than the statewide $84,097. Typical home values in those communities exceed $3 million, according to Zillow estimates.” In comparison, “electric cars are nearly non-existent in California’s lowest income communities: only 1.4% of cars in Stockton’s 95202, where the median household income is $16,976, and 0.5% in Fresno’s 93701, where the median is $25,905. Most are plug-in hybrids, which are less expensive.” This study’s findings are consistent with earlier, multi-state surveys. A 2018 study by Dr. Wayne Winegarden of the Pacific Research Institute found, “79% of electric vehicle plug-in tax credits were claimed by households with adjusted gross incomes of greater than $100,000 per year. Households with incomes greater than $50,000 per year claimed 99% of the credits.” 

This stunning regressivity ensures that subsidies are a net-negative for ecology. Wealthy Americans primarily purchaseEVs as secondary cars, keeping them in the garage for occasional outings. EV owners are largely still using conventional cars, and there’s less-than-hoped-for substitution between gasoline and electricity. As a result, extra pollution is generated via increased EV production without corresponding decreases in driving emissions. One 2022 Harvard study suggests, “foregoing gasoline in favor of volts may actually increase, not lower, overall emissions in some cases.” This is far from the outcome envisioned by “green” activists and policymakers. 

The Biden administration and lawmakers ought to seriously rethink adding more fuel to the dumpster fire of EV subsidies. Struggling Americans shouldn’t be forced to foot the bill for these over-hyped toys for tycoons.

David Williams is the president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance. 

Commodity trader Pierre Andurand appeared on Bloomberg’s Odd Lots to discuss his bullish bet on cocoa markets and the future direction of physical markets amid severe droughts plaguing vast farmlands in West Africa. He’s still bullish on cocoa prices, with an upside price target of $20,000 a ton later this year or next because continued droughts will spark a “massive supply shortage this year.” 

Andurand’s discussion with Tracy Alloway and Joe Weisenthal comes after cocoa prices had two of the largest single daily declines ever in recent weeks as liquidity evaporated from the market. 

• Cocoa Crash Unfolds As “Liquidity Evaporates”
• Cocoa Market Hit With Second Crash In Weeks As Liquidity Evaporates

And Rabobank analyst Paul Joules told clients the bull rally has likely peaked. 

• After Cocoa Crash, Rabobank Says Bull Rally Likely Peaked

However, Andurand, founder of Andurand Capital Management LLP, known for his oil and energy trades, told the Odd Lots hosts that his bullish cocoa bets from March paid off when prices skyrocketed north of $12,000. He believes there is potential for further upside as extreme global deficits of the bean loom. 

“Basically, we have a massive supply shortage this year. I mean, we see production down 17% relative to last year. Most analysts out there have it down 11%, but that’s because they tend to be very conservative. You know, they have lots of clients and they don’t want to to worry the world, so they come with relatively conservative estimates,” he explained, adding, “We’re in a situation where we might actually run out of inventories completely.”

Andurand continued, “This year we think we will end up with a with an inventory-to-grinding ratio — so inventory at the end of the season — of 21%.” 

“For the last 10 years, we’ve been between 35% and 40%. Roughly at the previous peak in 1977, we were at 19%,” he said.

The International Cocoa Organization tracks inventories of unprocessed cocoa, which can serve as a cushion when there’s a shortfall in supply. However, the lower the inventory-to-grinding ratio drops, the less of a buffer there is. When the stock-to-grinding ratio crashed in 1977, cocoa prices soared to $5,500, or on an inflation-adjusted basis today, $28,000. 

Andurand warned the ratio could collapse to as low as 13%, adding, “That’s when you really have a real shortage of cocoa beans. You can’t get it. And that’s when the price can really explode.”

Authored by Charles Bell via RealClear Wire,

Overshadowed by Hamas’s attack on Israel, the release of the congressionally mandated Strategic Posture Commission (SPC) report heralded the arrival of an American nuclear Zeitenwende – a sea change setting us on a new course. By issuing consensus recommendations for significant changes to the size and composition of the deployed nuclear forces of the United States, the bi-partisan members of the SPC signaled that we have crossed the Rubicon from the post-Cold war nuclear order to the terra incognita of two peer nuclear adversaries’ intent on brandishing their growing nuclear weapons capabilities to overthrow the rules-based international order.  The SPC commissioners warn that this “new global environment is fundamentally different than anything experienced in the past,” constituting “an existential challenge for which the United States is ill prepared, unless its leaders make decisions now to adjust the U.S. strategic posture.”

It would be difficult to exaggerate the extent to which the SPC’s consensus conclusions have reoriented the nuclear debate, shifting the focus away from how to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. strategy and towards a focus on how to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in the strategies of our adversaries (by building a nuclear posture that will credibly deter them). In doing so on a bi-partisan basis and by articulating comprehensive recommendations to address “this unprecedented two peer threat,” the SPC commissioners can legitimately lay claim to having produced the most important national security document of the post-Cold war era.

Nevertheless, the SPC’s recommendations have not received the widespread, public attention that they urgently require. This inattention needs to be quickly remedied, lest we fail to garner the essential public support necessary to ensure the United States creates a strategic posture capable of preventing great power military conflict.

One of the many strengths of the SPC report is to remind us of a salient reality that we too often lost sight of during the long period of great power geopolitical quiescence following the end of the Cold war: the rules-based internal order is, at its core, predicated on the strength of the U.S. strategic posture – and especially the credibility of the U.S. extended nuclear deterrent. Thus, a failure to ensure that the U.S. nuclear deterrent remains credible is likely to cause the unraveling of our alliances, a nuclear “proliferation cascade,” and the demise of the international order that has kept the peace for over three quarters of a century.

The SPC emphatically states that allowing this to happen “is not an option.” Instead, the commissioners argue that “[m]odifications to both strategic nuclear forces and theater nuclear forces are urgently necessary,” particularly considering the “increased role of nuclear weapons in the strategies and tactics of our adversaries.”

Accordingly, the SPC recommends increasing the numbers of deployed strategic nuclear weapons in the land, air, and sea legs of the U.S. strategic triad by the placing more nuclear warheads on ICBMs and SLBMs and producing more nuclear-armed, air-launched cruise missiles.  Also recommended is rendering U.S. strategic forces more survivable by deploying mobile ICBMs, placing a portion of the bomber fleet on alert, and increasing the number of ballistic missile submarines.

The SPC commissioners place particular emphasis on the need to enhance U.S. theater nuclear capabilities, an imperative rendered even more urgent because “China is adopting an expanded theater nuclear war-fighting role” and in light of “Russia’s increasing reliance on nuclear weapons…” In response, the SPC recommends that “U.S. theater nuclear forces should be urgently modified in order to: Provide the President a range of military effective nuclear response options to deter or counter Chinese of Russian limited use in theater.” These changes in the U.S. theater nuclear posture are deemed essential if the U.S. is to maintain the flexible response options required to credibly extend nuclear deterrence to our allies.

Given the significance that the SPC attaches to maintaining the credibility of the U.S. extended nuclear deterrent, it is important to emphasize the degree to which the problem of ensuring the credibility of the U.S. extended nuclear deterrent was a vexing conundrum for U.S. strategists throughout the Cold War, particularly as the Soviet Union became a true peer nuclear power with an assured second-strike capability that negated U.S. nuclear superiority.

In the very near future, the U.S. will confront the even more difficult problem of having to extend nuclear deterrence to our allies in the face of not one, but two, peer nuclear powers. In this future, enhanced theater nuclear forces, along with more robust strategic nuclear forces, will be critical to the U.S.’s ability to deter opportunistic – or planned simultaneous – aggression in two theaters and “to compensate for any conventional shortfall in U.S. and allied non-nuclear capabilities.”  Enhanced U.S. nuclear capabilities are critical to reassuring our allies, who “perceive that the risk of Russian and Chinese aggression and potential nuclear employment has increased; and thus, U.S. nuclear and conventional capabilities are increasingly important for credible extended deterrence.”

The SPC’s emphasis on the importance of both nuclear and conventional forces points to yet another strength of the SPC, which is to embed the imperative of strengthening the U.S. nuclear posture within the broader imperative of strengthening all aspects of the U.S. strategic posture from cyber to space to missile defense – and integrating these elements of deterrence into a whole of government approach.  At the same time, the SPC emphasizes that the “U.S. nuclear posture composes the foundation of U.S. military strength, and therefore the foundation of the U.S. strategic posture.”  No matter how capable U.S. conventional forces may be, if the U.S. does not deploy nuclear forces capable of credibly deterring adversary use of nuclear weapons, we run the risk of adversaries believing that they can gain advantage by using nuclear weapons in a conventional conflict that they are losing.

The overriding challenge before the United States is how to implement the SPC’s recommendations. This will require bringing to the attention of the broader body politic that, in the words of the SPC, the “new global environment is fundamentally different than anything experienced in the past, even in the darkest days of the Cold War.” It is an environment in which 35 years of U.S. nuclear restraint has gone unreciprocated; in which “China is pursuing a nuclear force build-up on a scale and pace unseen since the U.S.-Soviet nuclear arms race” (but this time without the U.S. racing); in which Russia continues to build on its advantage in theater nuclear forces while issuing explicit nuclear threats; and in which our allies fear that U.S. extended nuclear guarantees to their security are eroding. 

Given this “dramatic change in the overall strategic setting,” we must recall that deterrence does not supply its own efficacy; it must be tailored “to decisively influence the unique decision calculus of each nuclear-armed adversary.”  Building a strategic posture capable of deterring war will not be cheap; but it would be “far more expensive to fight such a war.”  Or as former Secretary of Defense Mattis pithily remarked: “America can afford survival.”

If there is a dominant theme that pervades the SPC, it is a palpable sense of alarm: “The challenges are unmistakable; the problems are urgent; the steps are needed now.” We ignore the SPC’s cri de coeur at our peril.

Charles Ball served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Threat Reduction and Arms Control from 2018-2021 and is a retired Reserve Naval Intelligence Officer. The views expressed are solely his own.

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Federal prosecutors have charged a recently discharged U.S. Marine with making threats to attack white people in a mass shooting.

On Monday, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey announced the arrest of Joshua Cobb, 23, on a single-count indictment of transmitting an interstate threat over the internet. According to a complaint filed in the case, Mr. Cobb authored a social media post on Dec. 17, 2022, indicating his interest in inflicting mayhem “on the white community.”

The author of the Dec. 17, 2022, social media post states, “I want to cause mayhem on the white community. The reason i specifically want to target white people is because as a black male, they will NEVER understand my struggles.”

The post’s author goes on to state he has already begun planning the attack, which he intended to carry out somewhere in New Jersey at some point in 2023, though he had not chosen an exact time.

“I have not chosen a exact date but I am going to be sure it is close to an important holiday to their race. I have a location in mind already which I have frequented for the past year and I am certain nobody there is armed to be able to stop me from spraying them to the ground,” the suspect’s social media post continues. “I have already acquired 2 of the 4 firearms I plan to use for my attack, and I also know my entry and exit points already after the mayhem.”

The social media post was published under the handle “NearbyUserl0l.” Investigators determined that social media activity was associated with an internet protocol (IP) address matching the Trenton, New Jersey residence in which Mr. Cobb resided at the time.

Suspect Planned to ‘Continue Training’ For Attack

Federal prosecutors allege Mr. Cobb made subsequent posts on a second social media platform in the Spring of 2023, expressing homicidal ideations. A May 2023 social media post states, “Imagine the rush you’d feel while shooting some [expletive] up. Probably could get literally high off the adrenaline alone. I’d probably OD on my own adrenaline after the 10th body goes down.” Another May 2023 post states, “I hope I do progress into a serial killer because I [expletive] hate life man… But one day everyone will suffer. I promise I will make everyone feel my [expletive] pain. My deep, sincere, raw, & sharp pain.” Prosecutors say Mr. Cobb’s posts also indicated a plan to “continue training and buying more ammunition” until the day he could carry out his attack.

Mr. Cobb joined the U.S. Marine Corps and entered basic training in June 2023. The Marine trainee completed his basic training in September and was given a period of post-basic leave. He arrived at another duty station, the Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms (Twentynine Palms), in California in February of this year.

Investigators eventually caught up with Mr. Cobb last month while he was still stationed at Twentynine Palms. They seized and searched his phone, finding additional notes he allegedly made in May 2023 expressing further homicidal ideations.

Suspect Discussed Attack Ideas in FBI Interview

The federal complaint indicates that FBI agents interviewed Mr. Cobb at the Marine Corps in April after they had seized his phone. The complaint states that during his interview, Mr. Cobb described to FBI agents his ideas for carrying out mass shootings, including one idea he had to shoot up a gym called New Jersey Strong, believing he could carry out the attack at the gym’s peak hours and then easily escape. Mr. Cobb described a second idea of attacking a grocery store because those are “almost always crowded.”

Mr. Cobb allegedly told FBI agents he specifically thought of targeting an Aldi’s grocery store in Robbinsville, New Jersey, “cause it was like one of them grocery stores like where you just see all these [expletive] rich-[expletive] white people.”

Mr. Cobb allegedly told FBI agents a third idea he had was to simply “go into like a rich white area and just like start shooting.”

During the April interview, Mr. Cobb allegedly suggested an affinity for the suspects in the 2018 Parkland High School shooting in Florida and the 2022 shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York. In the latter of those two shootings, federal prosecutors have alleged the shooter posted a manifesto expressing a desire to specifically target a black community. Despite their differing racial motives, Mr. Cobb said he “liked the element of surprise and style” of the 2022 Buffalo supermarket attack.

Mr. Cobb was discharged from the Marine Corps sometime after his April interview with the FBI.

NTD News reached out to a pair of public defenders assigned to Mr. Cobb’s case for comment, but they did not respond by press time.

Mr. Cobb faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted.

From NTD News

A team of Goldman analysts led by Jan Hatzius found that domestic migration trends from big cities continued through mid-2023. This trend, initially sparked by virus fears and remote working, was further fueled by rising violent crime in urban areas. People sought peace and quiet, moving to suburbia and rural areas for more land and larger homes.    

“The recent surge in immigration into the US is now well known. But newly released county-level population estimates from the Census reveal another major migration trend: domestic emigration from large cities,” Hatzius told clients on Wednesday.

Goldamn’s chief economist said – that most cities – with populations over a million – “experienced population growth nearly 1% below the pre-pandemic trend over 2019-2023 cumulatively, while all but the most rural counties experienced above-trend population growth.” 

Here’s more color on the findings: 

First, the most urban Tier 1 counties, which include cities such as Kansas City, New Orleans, and Cleveland, experienced population growth nearly 1pp below the pre-pandemic trend over 2019-2023 cumulatively, while counties in Tiers 2-7, which include cities such as Ann Arbor in Tier 2, Santa Fe in Tier 3, and Juneau in Tier 5, experienced population growth 0.4pp above the pre-pandemic trends on average over that period (Exhibit 1).

The rise of remote and hybrid work arrangements made it easier for workers to relocate away from offices that might have tied them to city centers prior to the pandemic. We noted previously that the share of US workers working from home at least part of the week peaked at 47% at the height of the pandemic and has now stabilized at around 20-25%, well above the pre-pandemic average of 2-3%.

Hatzius’ team also revealed that government county-level population data showed domestic migrants were leaving big cities in droves (about 750k in 2021, 650k in 2022, and 550k in 2023). More than half of them moved to areas between 250k to 1 million. This outflow comes as the Biden administration facilitated the greatest illegal alien invasion this nation has ever seen, piling migrants into crime-ridden progressive cities.

Given the strong positive population trends outside large cities, Hatzius’ team determined housing markets were hotter in suburbia: 

“Stronger population growth outside the Tier 1 counties has meant somewhat faster house price appreciation relative to pre-pandemic trends compared to the Tier 1 counties.”

The bad news is that housing prices in suburbia are unlikely to return to pre-Covid levels. 

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

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit claiming that Wisconsin’s requirement for witnesses to sign for absentee voters clashes with federal law.

The claims by plaintiffs, four voters represented by Democrat firm Elias Law Group, are based on faulty interpretations of the law, according to U.S. District Judge James Peterson.

The challengers said the Voting Rights Act unilaterally bars requiring absentee voters to prove their qualifications, making the Wisconsin requirement illegal. The act states in part that “no citizen shall be denied, because of his failure to comply with any test or device, the right to vote in any federal, state, or local election conducted in any state or political subdivision of a state.” It defines “test or device,” in part, as any requirement that makes a person “prove his qualifications by the voucher of registered voters or members of any other class.”

However, that interpretation of the federal law is not correct, Judge Peterson said in his May 9 ruling.

“Plaintiffs say that Wisconsin law requires the witness to do more than ensure that the voter followed the proper procedure in preparing the ballot; rather, the witness must also certify that the voter is eligible to vote,” he said. “But that interpretation is inconsistent with the text and purpose of the statute, and it is inconsistent with how the law has been interpreted since it was enacted. Even the plaintiffs themselves do not say in their declarations that they believe they need to find a witness who can certify their qualifications to vote.”

In Wisconsin, any qualified voter who is “unable or unwilling” to vote in person is eligible for an absentee ballot. The law states that among requirements to vote by mail, another adult must observe the voter filling out the ballot and signing a statement that reads, in part, that “the above statements are true and the voting procedure was executed as there stated.”

As the “above statements” include the attestation from the voter that he or she is a resident of Wisconsin and entitled to vote in the state, plaintiffs said the requirement is illegal under federal law.

However, government officials argued that the witnesses only confirm the second part of the statements, which states that the voter certifies that he or she showed the enclosed ballot to the witness and that he or she marked the ballot and placed it in the envelope without assistance.

“If defendants are correct, there would be no violation of the Voting Rights Act. As other courts have held, a witness does not vouch for a voter’s qualifications by simply confirming with a signature what he or she observed,” said Judge Peterson, an appointee of former President Barack Obama.

He said that the phrase “the above statements” is ambiguous but that the plaintiffs’ interpretation “simply does not make any sense.”

If they were correct, “every witness would have to determine the voter’s age, residence, citizenship, criminal history, whether the voter is unable or unwilling to vote in person, whether the voter has voted at another location or is planning to do so, whether the voter is capable of understanding the objective of the voting process, whether the voter is under a guardianship, and, if so, whether a court has determined that the voter is competent,” according to Judge Peterson.

“If plaintiffs’ interpretation were correct, it would mean that countless absentee ballots over decades were invalid because the witness certified that the voter was qualified to vote and met the other requirements in the first voter certification, even though the witness had no basis for such a certification,” he said.

The challengers never provided evidence of any witnesses being penalized for not confirming a voter’s qualifications, and the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s guidance does not mention witnesses taking any steps to confirm voters are eligible to vote, the ruling noted.

The lawsuit also stated that the witness requirement violates the Civil Rights Act, which bars people from “[denying] the right of any individual to vote in any election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting, if such error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote in such election.”

The Wisconsin Elections Commission, the defendant, declined to comment.

The law group did not return an inquiry.

The organization Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections, which lodged an amicus brief in support of the government in the case, welcomed the ruling.

“It’s essential that people voting by mail follow the law in doing so, and Wisconsin has implemented a witness signature requirement that helps ensure they do just that,” Derek Lyons, president of the group, said in a statement. “This case marks another example of liberal activists’ transparent and shameful efforts to co-opt important civil rights legislation for their partisan agendas.”