Gonzaga University Won’t Let Ben Shapiro Speak on Campus

GonzagaGonzaga University will not allow its chapter of the College Republicans to host conservative pundit Ben Shapiro.

An administrator of the private, Catholic school in Spokane, Washington, cited safety concerns and the potential for Shapiro’s visit to create a “hostile environment” on campus.

“Gonzaga’s events policy requires us to consider whether an event would pose substantial risk to the safety of any member of our campus community,” wrote Judi Biggs Garbuio, according to Campus Reform.

It’s not clear whose safety Biggs Garbuio believes is threatened by Shapiro’s presence. Her message to the College Republicans seems to suggest concern about both disruptive leftist protesters and what Shapiro might say. Neither are good reasons to deny students a chance to hear from Shapiro: One gives veto power to the mob, the other conflates words with violence.

Gonzaga is a private university and can do as it pleases, of course. I will note, however, that Gonzaga’s broad conception of public safety is selective. Concerns about a hostile environment and unspecified risks to members of the community did not stop the administration from hiring former Mizzou professor Melissa Click.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2Pa2sSi
via IFTTT

Martin Armstrong: Global Cooling, Not Warming, Is What We Should Fear Most

Authored by Martin Armstrong via ArmstrongEconomics.com,

It is incredibly important to understand that as the weather turns bitterly cold in the north, people will begin to migrate south. This not merely caused the ancient Greeks to become the Sea Peoples, but during the Year without a Summer in 1816. In the United States when in 1816 six inches of snow fell in June and every month of the year had a hard frost, people began to migrate. The temperatures had dropped to as low as 40 degrees in July and August in New York City during 1816. People also called it ‘Eighteen Hundred and Froze to Death’ and the ‘Poverty Year.’

This is what I keep pointing out that cold is what kills society and creates poverty – not warming.

The Year without a Summer sent people fleeing from New England states in search of warmer weather and fertile soils both south and west. It was the weather that began to cause migration in the United States outside of the 13 original states. Thousands of New England families gave up their farms, packed their belongings into wagons and joined the throngs traipsing over rivers and mountains to Pennsylvania and the Ohio River Valley, which includes Ohio, West Virginia, Indiana, Illinois, and Kentucky.

Indeed, between 1810 and 1820, Maine lost as many as 15,000 people. Sixty Vermont towns lost population during that decade as well. The population of 60 other towns in Vermont stayed the same while the U.S. population grew 32%. When we examine Massachusetts, we can see that this state gained only 50,000 people from 1810-20, while Ohio gained five times as many. The Massachusetts Legislature tried to hold on to its citizens by passing a homestead act that gave settlers 100 acres of land for $5.

Even during the American Revolution, when John Adams set out to travel to Philadelphia, it was bitterly cold and there was a foot or more of snow covered the landscape which had blanketed Massachusetts from one end of the province to the other. Beneath the snow, after weeks of severe cold, the ground was frozen solid to a depth of two feet. Packed ice in the road made the journey very hazardous. In a letter to his wife, John Adams wrote:

“Indeed I feel not a little out of Humour, from Indisposition of Body. You know, I cannot pass a Spring, or fall, without an ill Turn — and I have had one these four or five Weeks — a Cold, as usual. Warm Weather, and a little Exercise, with a little Medicine, I suppose will cure me as usual. … Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.”

On September 8th, 1816, Jefferson described the weather during the Year without a Summer in a letter to Albert Gallitan:

We have had the most extraordinary year of drought and cold ever known in the history of America. In June, instead of 3¾ inches, our average of rain for that month, we had only 1/3 of an inch; in August, instead of 9 1/6 inches our average, we had only 8/10 of an inch; and it still continues. The summer too has been as cold as a moderate winter. In every state North of this there has been frost in every month of the year; in this state we had none in June and July but those of August killed much corn over the mountains. The crop of corn through the Atlantic states will probably be less than 1/3 of an ordinary one, that of tobacco still less, and of mean quality.

It is Global Cooling – not Global Warming, that we should fear the most. While 1816 was the year we had a major volanic eruption, it also came during the Little Ice Age with Solar Minimum.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2E504es Tyler Durden

Comey Fights Subpoena From House GOP; Asks Judge To Toss

Former FBI Director James Comey has challenged a subpoena from House Republicans demanding he appear for a closed-door testimony in federal court. 

According to court records, Comey filed a motion to quash – following through on his vow to fight the order unless his testimony was in a public forum – where lawmakers would be significantly restricted as to the scope of questions they might ask. 

“Happy Thanksgiving. Got a subpoena from House Republicans,” Comey tweeted on Thanksgiving day. “I’m still happy to sit in the light and answer all questions. But I will resist a “closed door” thing because I’ve seen enough of their selective leaking and distortion. Let’s have a hearing and invite everyone to see.”

Comey rejected an October request by the House Judiciary Committee to appear at a closed hearing to testify in the GOP probe into allegations of political bias at the FBI and DOJ, according to Politico.  

“Mr. Comey respectfully declines your request for a private interview,” said Comey’s attorney, David Kelly, in a response to the request. 

The Judiciary Committee, chaired by Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) didn’t appreciate Comey’s response. 

We have invited Mr. Comey to come in for a transcribed interview and we are prepared to issue a subpoena to compel his appearance,” said a committee aide. 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2P9CldS Tyler Durden

Illegal Immigrants Are at a 10-Year Low, So Can We Chill for a Minute?

A funny thing happened on the way to stringing razor wire, splitting up families, and sending the military to police the United States’ border with Mexico: The number of illegal immigrants—especially from Mexico—in America continued its decade-long decline. Via Pew Research:

The number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. fell to its lowest level in more than a decade, according to new Pew Research Center estimates based on 2016 government data. The decline is due almost entirely to a sharp decrease in the number of Mexicans entering the country without authorization.

Note that we reached peak illegals (and peak illegal Mexicans) back in 2006 or 2007, right around the time the housing bubble popped and what eventually become the financial crisis started kicking into high (low?) gear. Between 2007 and 2016, the number of unauthorized Mexican immigrants declined from about 6.9 million people to 5.5 million people. These days, illegals are most likely to come from Asia (especially China and India) and to enter the country with legal documents, such as a tourist, student, or work visa and then overstay. Deportations peaked in 2013, when Barack Obama was running the show.

Why has illegal immigration from Mexico declined? According to Pew’s Jeffrey Passel and D’Vera Cohn, illegals missed their families. One also presumes that the sluggish U.S. economy presented fewer opportunities.

According to Mexican government survey data [from 2009 to 2014], most returnees said they left the U.S. of their own accord, and the majority cited family reunification as the main reason for going to Mexico. However, 14% said they came back because they were deported.

At the same time, the number of illegals from Central America (chiefly Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala) has increased over the past decade, from 1.5 million people to about 1.85 million.

Why might more Central Americans’ be heading north? Mostly because those countries have gotten poorer over time, often due to U.S. intervention. Reason‘s Shikha Dalmia explains, in the 1980s,

President Ronald Reagan, eager for a showdown with the [Soviet Union, funded]…the Contra insurgency against the Nicaraguan Sandinistas and paramilitary operations to prop up the U.S.-friendly regimes of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

The upshot was civil war and a complete social breakdown from which these countries have never recovered.

As Princeton’s Doug Massey noted at a recent immigration conference (that I co-organized on behalf of Reason Foundation), in the 1960s, the GDP of these “frontline countries” was equivalent to those of “non-frontline states” such as Costa Rica, Belize, and Panama. Now the latter cohort’s GDP is almost three times greater. Likewise, while the homicide rate of non-frontline states is 19.7 per 100,000, it is 43.5 per 100,000 for the frontline states. San Pedro Sula, the Honduran city where the caravan started, has become the murder capital of the world.

Prior to Reagan’s intervention, migration from Central America was negligible.

People troubled by illegal immigration may find comfort in the trend line of the past decade. But to me, the decline is worrisome. Our problems are only beginning when people stop choosing to come here, whether legally or not. Increased living standards follow economic growth, which follows population growth. And population growth follows immigration. Contra nativist Rep. Steve King (R–Iowa), the only proven way you can maintain your “civilization” is with somebody else’s babies. And for all the fears of literal and figurative invasions by supposedly unassimilable Mexicans and Central Americans, crime and most other social pathologies have been declining regardless of the flow and ebb of immigration (both legal and illegal). The real immigration crisis is when newcomers stop showing up.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2KFRXoW
via IFTTT

SEC Charges Floyd Mayweather, DJ Khaled With Illegally Promoting ICOs

One year after the SEC warned against celebrity endorsements of shady ICOs, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced on Thursday that it had settled charges with boxer Floyd “Money” Mayweather Jr. and music producer DJ Khaled for failing to disclose payments they received to promote ICOs on their social media feeds.

Crypto

According to the Commission’s press release, Mayweather was found to have failed to disclose payments from three ICO sponsors while Khaled failed to disclose a $50,000 payment from Centra Tech Inc. Mayweather agreed to pay a $300,000 penalty and return $300,000 he made pitching Centra, while Khaled agreed to pay $100,000 plus forfeit the $50,000 paid to him for the promotions. In addition, Mayweather agreed not to promote any crypto products for 3 years, while Khaled agreed to a similar ban for 2 (Mayweather is also continuing to cooperate with investigators).

In one post advertising Centra, Floyd joked that his followers should start calling him Floyd “Crypto” Mayweather.

Floyd

Mayweather and Khaled were among a rash of celebrities, including Paris Hilton, Ghostface Killa, Jamie Foxx and Dennis Rodman, who struck deals to sponsor ICOs – and were subsequently warned by the SEC that they were violating securities laws. Two of the founders of Centra Tech were arrested by federal authorities back in April for violating anti-fraud and registration provisions of federal securities laws, according to cryptoglobe. The company raised $32 million during the height of the ICO frenzy in 2017.

“We allege that Centra sold investors on the promise of new digital technologies by using a sophisticated marketing campaign to spin a web of lies about their supposed partnerships with legitimate businesses. As the complaint alleges, these and other claims were simply false,” an SEC spokeswoman said in a statement about Centra.

In its release announcing the settlements, the SEC advised that investors should be “skeptical of investment advice posted to social media platforms.”

“These cases highlight the importance of full disclosure to investors,” said Enforcement Division Co-Director Stephanie Avakian. “With no disclosure about the payments, Mayweather and Khaled’s ICO promotions may have appeared to be unbiased, rather than paid endorsements.”

“Investors should be skeptical of investment advice posted to social media platforms, and should not make decisions based on celebrity endorsements,” said Enforcement Division Co-Director Steven Peikin. “Social media influencers are often paid promoters, not investment professionals, and the securities they’re touting, regardless.”

They aren’t the first celebrities to be targeted by the SEC over ICO promotion (though they are undoubtedly the most famous). Earlier this year, John McAfee claimed he had stopped pitching ICOs due to SEC threats.

Given the sheer insanity at the height of the ICO frenzy, and the fact that hundreds of millions of dollars in “market cap” have already vanished, we imagine Mayweather and Khaled won’t be the only celebrities to pay fines to the SEC.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2E4L14j Tyler Durden

NYC Councilman Proposes Cash-Free Business Ban to Battle ‘Insidious Racism’

With many establishments moving away from accepting physical currency, a New York City councilman has proposed legislation that would prohibit businesses from going cash-free.

New York City Councilman Ritchie Torres (D–15) introduced a bill Wednesday that would make it “unlawful” for restaurants and retailers “to refuse to accept payment in cash from consumers.” Businesses found to be in violation would have to pay a $250 fine the first offense, and a $500 fine for each repeated offense.

Torres told Grub Street he sees cash-free policies as “racially exclusionary in practice.” According to a 2015 study from the Urban Institute, 11.7 percent of New York households had no bank accounts. The survey did not break down its results by race, though a national survey released last month by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) did: Roughly 6.5 percent of American households were unbanked last year, the FDIC said, including 16.9 percent of black households and 14 percent of Hispanic households.

Cashless businesses “gentrify the marketplace,” Torres told Grub Street. “On the surface, cashlessness seems benign, but when you reflect on it, the insidious racism that underlies a cashless business model becomes clear,” he added.

Torres’ legislation, cosponsored by six other councilmembers, is actually pretty mild, all things considered. A similar bill proposed in Washington, D.C., earlier this year would have made it illegal for companies to either refuse cash or offer discounts for paying in cash, with both violations punishable by fines ranging from $1,000 to $8,000. A cash-free business ban introduced in Chicago last October, meanwhile, threatened daily fines of $2,500, as well as the potential revocation of offending businesses’ licenses.

Both bans have yet to be enacted. In fact, cash-free businesses are largely legal in 49 states. Only Massachusetts has a law on the books banning establishments from refusing cash.

Yet the rise of cash-free businesses can be explained without resorting to accusations of racism. For one thing, there’s a lot of time, effort, and money that goes into accepting and processing cash. “Cash has to be handled. It has to be stored in a [point of sale] system. It has to be counted at least every shift. At the end of the day it has to counted and tallied into a sales report,” John Gordon, founder of Pacific Management Consulting Group, a restaurant consulting firm, told Reason‘s Christian Britschgi in October 2017, around the time that Chicago’s ban was proposed. Gordon also explained that cash can be miscounted or stolen, and that some businesses need to pay for armored trucks to take their cash to the bank.

Many companies launch with cash-free payment models to protect their employees; the absence of cash transactions has long been cited as a safeguard for Uber drivers, for instance.

Going cash-free is easier for many types of businesses, but it can also make things easier for consumers. Non-cash forms of payment are getting faster by the day, meaning cash-free establishments can offer faster service. Plus, consumers can more easily keep track of what they’re spending.

But what about the alleged discrimination against poor people and minorities? Well, as Britschgi argued in July, it’s not as if retail businesses want to turn away paying customers. It is conceivable, though, that the businesses going cash-free are the ones where people rarely pay in cash anyway. For those establishments, it just makes more sense to eliminate cash transactions altogether.

It’s also worth noting that cash-free establishments tend to be on the pricier side. Is going cash-free, then, a form of price discrimination? Maybe, but I don’t see very many politicians trying to regulate how much restaurants can charge for food.

Moreover, statistics suggest the number of people without bank accounts is steadily decreasing. The 6.5 percent of unbanked households in the country as of 2017 is down from 7 percent in 2015, 7.7 percent in 2013, and 8.2 percent in 2011. In New York, meanwhile, the unbanked rate dropped from 14.3 percent in 2011 to 11.7 percent in 2013.

Businesses owners, not politicians, should decide what forms of payment they’ll accept, and consumers who prefer to pay in cash can take their business elsewhere. The market is pretty good at these kinds of transactions, especially since private establishments have to compete to stay in business.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2E57Sgk
via IFTTT

Michigan College Is “Arming” Students Against Mass Shooters…With Hockey Pucks

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

Would-be mass shooters beware: Faculty and students at Oakland University in Michigan are going to be ready to fight back, should you target their school.

University police are reportedly training faculty at the college to fight gunmen in their classrooms with an unlikely weapon: hockey pucks.

Who came up with this idea?

Detroit Free Press explains:

The idea of using the quirky self-defense tool grew out of a training session Police Chief Mark Gordon led in March for faculty members on what they should do if a gunman enters their classroom.

A participant asked what people could bring to campus to be better prepared in case they need to fight back. The university has a no-weapons policy.

Gordon’s advice? Be ready to throw something — anything — that could distract a shooter, even a hockey puck, as a last resort if fleeing or hiding aren’t an option.

“It was just kind of a spur-of-the-moment idea that seemed to have some merit to it and it kind of caught on,” Gordon said.

Gordon said he once got hit in the head with a puck, and the painful event spawned the idea that the hard disks could be used for self-defense.

There isn’t any research to support the use of hockey pucks in an active shooter situation, Gordon admits. Still, they can serve as a defensive tool, like throwing a stapler, a laptop, “or anything that has weight” and could hurt and distract a shooter so he or she could be disarmed, he said:

“Anything that you can throw that’s heavy and will cause damage, cause injury is the bottom line of what you’re trying to do. (A hockey puck) was just a thing that was suggested that could possibly work, especially when you have 20 or 30 people in a classroom and they all throw hockey pucks at the same time, it would be quite the distraction.”

Faculty and students will be taught to flee first, if possible. If that isn’t an option, it is time to start flinging the pucks.

The university’s faculty union, the American Association of University Professors, is organizing the training and has distributed hockey pucks to its members and to students, reports Click on Detroit.

“We believe that once faculty have been trained in what to do in an active shooter situation, they will be able to share that information with students to provide a more secure learning environment,”says AAUP President Tom Discenna.

Hockey pucks can be carried in briefcases or backpacks and are “not considered a weapon”. They will meet the goal of distracting the shooter, according to Gordon.

In Michigan, open carry is legal (there is no law that prohibits it), and Concealed Pistol Licenses (CPLs) are relatively easy to obtain. However, state laws limit the premises on which a person may carry open or concealed. Michigan’s gun laws are confusing, and colleges can create their own rules. As for Oakland University, it appears students and faculty are left with hockey pucks for self-defense…for now.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2KHUU8B Tyler Durden

Special Counsel Used Cohen To Try To Catch Trump In A “Perjury Trap,” Giuliani Says

Michael Cohen’s admission that he lied to Congress about the timeline for an aborted Trump Organization deal to build a Trump Tower Moscow (Cohen initially told Congress that the deal fell apart in January 2016, but confessed on Thursday that talks had continued until August of last year) triggered a wave of speculation Thursday morning about whether this was the masterstroke that would finally bring down the president. But amid all of the breathless coverage (as the media did its part in trying to revive the long-dead Russian collusion narrative), one important detail was lost: The fact that Trump – as he told reporters on the White House lawn Thursday – never lied to anyone about the Trump Tower Moscow project.

In fact, the details of Cohen’s admission fit with Trump’s claims that he didn’t have any business in Russia during his time as president (the deal, after all, never materialized). And what’s more, when Trump submitted written answers to Mueller last week, he offered a truthful accounting of the deal that comports with the description provided by Cohen, according to White House lawyer Rudy Giuliani.

Trump

During an interview with the New York Times, Giuliani revealed that Mueller had asked about the Trump Tower Moscow deal, and that Trump had been completely transparent about his involvement – turning over all requested documents and answering all of the special counsel’s questions, unlike Cohen, who blatantly lied to Congress.

Mr. Cohen admitted in court on Thursday that he had lied to congressional investigators about the length of the negotiations over the Trump Tower Moscow project and the extent of Mr. Trump’s involvement. He said that he discussed the deal with Mr. Trump several times and that Mr. Cohen continued to work on a potential deal until at least June 2016, court documents showed – months later than Mr. Cohen had told Congress that the deal fell apart.

Though the president tried to accommodate the special counsel’s office (within reason), he never provided a timeline for the deal talks. Why? Because Trump was never asked.

Mr. Giuliani said that Mr. Mueller’s office did not ask the president about the timing of his discussions with Mr. Cohen about the project.

Given the timing of Cohen’s plea deal with prosecutors, Giuliani believes that Mueller was attempting to lay a perjury trap for Trump – waiting for the president to offer more details about the deal in the hopes that he would catch him in a lie.

The fact that Mr. Cohen’s admission in a deal with prosecutors came so soon after Mr. Trump returned his responses to Mr. Mueller’s questions raised concerns among the president’s legal team that Mr. Mueller was laying a perjury trap – waiting for the president to explain his understanding of events before presenting evidence to the contrary to show that he lied, according to people close to the president’s legal team.

Mr. Giuliani said that the president and the Trump Organization, the umbrella company for his family’s businesses, have been forthcoming with Mr. Mueller’s investigators for months about the deal. The company, he added, voluntarily provided investigators with documents related to the Moscow deal.

Fortunately for Trump, he didn’t fall for it.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2PaItmf Tyler Durden

Merkel Makes Emergency Landing In Germany On Way To G-20 Summit

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s journey to Buenos Aires for this weekend’s G20 summit was interrupted on Thursday after the government’s “Konrad Adenauer” Airbus airplane experienced “electronic problems” mid-flight, German media report.

Merkel’s plane had to return after just an hour into the 15-hour flight to Buenos Aires after experiencing a technical malfunction.

According to DW, shortly after departing from Berlin on Thursday evening, the plane circled over the Netherlands and landed at the Cologne/Bonn airport in western Germany, which is also home base for the German government’s aircraft.

Merkel, who was also traveling with Finance Minister Olaf Scholz and a pool of journalists, hoped to switch into a replacement plane at the airport, but it is unclear how the travel interruption will affect the chancellor’s attendance at the G20 summit which is due to start tomorrow, and where Merkel is expected to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss Syria and Ukraine, including the recent incident in the Kerch Strait.

The pilot informed the chancellor and other passengers that a technical defect had caused several electronic systems on the Airbus A340-300 to fail, reported news agency DPA.

This is not the first time Germany has had problems with “made in Europe” airplanes: Issues with the government’s A340 jets also caused travel problems for German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier during several of his diplomatic trips this year.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2SigBP5 Tyler Durden

Chicago Mayoral Candidate Wants To Settle City Debts by Taxing the Neighbors

Bill DaleyChicago has declined in population for the third year in a row, according to the census, marking it as a significant outlier in America’s urban centers. It’s saddled with enormous debts, partly due to unpaid pension obligations, and the city is trying everything from taxing sodas and human waste, to holding citizens’ cars for ransom, in order to make money.

One candidate to succeed Mayor Rahm Emanuel (soon to be heading for the exit himself) has a novel idea to fix the city’s financial woes: stealing from the neighbors.

Candidate Bill Daley, son of former Mayor Richard J. Dailey, brother of former Mayor Richard M. Daley, and Emanuel’s successor as President Barack Obama’s chief of staff (can Chicago’s political dynasty get any more incestuous?), is proposing a commuter tax to try to get more money from suburbanites who work in the city of Chicago. “We have to find new revenues, and everything is on the table,” he said in a speech.

A city inspector in 2010 determined that a 1-percent commuter tax could potentially raise $300 million dollars. Except, the Chicago Tribune notes that when Philadelphia instituted a commuter tax, it saw job losses, and other cities who have done the same “are generally considered economically stagnant and have lost a substantial percentage of their populations since 1950.”

Yet, when asked if he thinks a commuter tax would drive business out of the city, Daley said he didn’t think it would.

It’s a baffling response given Chicago’s current trend of population loss, one matched by the surrounding areas and the state of Illinois. Why would you even think about giving people another reason to avoid going to the city? Why would you think people would accept this given that the current economic climate is already driving people out the door?

Adding a bit more absurdity is the fact that Daley’s plan to deal with Chicago’s crime problem is to spend even more money on a new department at City Hall to fight crime. That means more city government employees and therefore even more public employee pension obligations! (Oh, and he’s blaming the crime problems on not having enough gun control.)

Daley did say that he was also potentially supportive of changes to the Illinois state constitution that currently prevent the state and cities from scaling back any pensions or benefits for government employees, a rule that is driving the state to ruin. But in the absence of that change, adding to the pension crisis via a new city bureaucracy and then trying to get even more money from a reduced population seems remarkably irresponsible.

from Hit & Run https://ift.tt/2FYxT2i
via IFTTT