Watch: Last Blinken Presser Overshadowed By Chaos As Journalists Dragged From Briefing Room

Watch: Last Blinken Presser Overshadowed By Chaos As Journalists Dragged From Briefing Room

Blinken’s final news conference Thursday, which came hours after the announcement of a ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel, was a bit of a disaster given no less than two journalists were forcibly removed from the US State Department briefing room.

First, veteran journalist Sam Husseini was accused of ‘heckling’ the outgoing top US diplomat. That’s when US State Dept police were called upon to violently drag him out. “You pontificate about a free press!” Husseini told Blinken as he was taken away by several uniformed officers. Some pundits pointed out the double standard given Blinken routinely lectures countries like China, Russia, and Iran on freedom of the press issues. Watch the incident unfold below:

“I am asking questions after being told by [spokesman] Matt Miller that he will not answer my questions,” Husseini continued as he was roughly escorted out. “I’m a journalist not a potted plant,” he also said.

Blinken had told Husseini to “respect the process”. He had responded, “Everybody from Amnesty International to the ICJ [International Court of Justice] is saying that Israel is doing genocide and extermination, and you’re telling me to respect the process?”

Criminal! Why aren’t you in The Hague?! Why aren’t you in The Hague! Why aren’t you in The Hague!” Husseini yelled while being carried out of the room by security.

Fuller video clip:

Journalist from The GrayZone Max Blumenthal also went off on Blinken. “Why did you keep the bombs flowing when we had a deal in May?” he asked. “Why did you allow my friends’ homes in Gaza to be destroyed?”

Blumenthal charged Blinken with “sacrific[ing] the rules-based order on the mantle of your commitment to Zionism.” “You helped destroy our religion, Judaism, by associating it with fascism,” he said.

For this, Blumenthal too was quickly detained and taken out of the room by State Dept police. 

Blumenthal going out with a bang, as the Biden admin spokespersons go out with a whimper and a smirk…

The incident involving the pair of journalists overshadowed the whole press conference, and even seeped into mainstream media coverage.

Both Blinken and Matthew Miller looked visibly upset and uncomfortable as the whole spectacle unfolded and as the accusations flew.

Miller could be seen with his characteristic smirk, while Blinken’s face looked grim amid the fracas. 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 18:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/PgbtuNI Tyler Durden

Newsom Does Damage Control After Awkward ‘Trump-Proofing’ Ploy

Newsom Does Damage Control After Awkward ‘Trump-Proofing’ Ploy

Via Headline USA,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom joined a handful of Republican governors this week in ordering his state to fly the U.S. flag at full height on Inauguration Day, despite President Joe Biden’s order to keep government flags at half-staff because of the death of former President Jimmy Carter.

Flags at the U.S. Capitol and state buildings across the country are expected to remain at half-mast for a 30-day mourning period following Carter’s death.

President-elect Donald Trump, however, has argued the flags should be returned to full height for his inauguration ceremony next Monday.

“The Democrats are all ‘giddy’ about our magnificent American Flag potentially being at ‘half mast’ during my Inauguration,” Trump wrote on Truth Social earlier this month.

“They think it’s so great, and are so happy about it because, in actuality, they don’t love our Country, they only think about themselves.”

He claimed his inauguration would be the “first time ever” the U.S. flags at the U.S. Capitol building would be flown at half-mast.

“Nobody wants to see this, and no American can be happy about it,” Trump added.

In response, several Republican officials, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, announced they would return their state buildings’ flags to full height before Inauguration Day.

Newsom is the first Democrat to join them in the decision.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) announced on Tuesday that flags will fly full-staff at the U.S. Capitol for Trump’s swearing-in ceremony, with the flags being lowered back to half-staff after the event.

The Democrat’s announcement comes just one week after Newsom rallied Democratic state legislatures to pass $50 million in funding to “Trump-proof” the state.

Newsom claimed the funding, passed during a special legislative session, was necessary to “safeguard California values and fundamental rights in the face of an incoming Trump administration.”

He immediately faced blowback from frustrated Californians, who argued Newsom should be focusing on “fire-proofing” the state instead.

“You’re talking about Trump this, Trump that. He’s not even president,” actor Michael Rapaport said last week.

“Get the f*** out of here!”

Last week, Newsom wrote a letter to the president-elect and said he should visit fire-ravaged areas in Los Angeles to “meet with the Americans affected by these fires”

“Join me and others in thanking the heroic firefighters and first responders who are putting their lives on the line,” he said.

Newsom will likely have to rely on federal assistance from the Trump administration to deal with the aftermath of the fires.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 17:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/UDPMbSN Tyler Durden

Trans City-Councilor Takes Month Off To Recover From Being Misgendered

Trans City-Councilor Takes Month Off To Recover From Being Misgendered

A trans Massachusetts city councilor is taking a one-month leave of absence, citing feelings of being unsafe after allegedly being “misgendered” by the mayor and another councilor, and being referred to as “it” by a third city official. 

The soap opera starring that councilor, Thu Nguyen, erupted at Tuesday night’s meeting of the Worcester, Massachusetts city council, where members held a public hearing over whether it was appropriate for council members like Nguyen to attend meetings remotely. Once again appearing remotely, Nguyen blamed the mayor and peers for the routine failure to show up in person, saying, “Under your leadership, I have felt unsafe around this council body. I have faced transphobia with being misgendered and recently learned that I have been dehumanized to a point where I’m being referred to as ‘it’ by my colleagues on this council.”

Worcester city councilor Thu Nguyen during a rare in-person appearance for city business 

Heralded as the “first openly nonbinary lawmaker” in Massachusetts history — a title we’re sure Paul Revere and Samuel Adams would be totally impressed with — Nguyen has held office on the Worcester city council since 2022. Nguyen’s preferred pronouns are “they/them.” 

The day after the hearing, Nguyen posted a statement saying “I am…sad to announce I will be taking a month to prioritize my mental and emotional safety,” so he could recover from having allegedly been misgendered by Mayor Joseph M. Petty and Councilor-at-Large Kathleen Toomey, and called “it” by Councilor Candy Mero-Carlson. Nguyen filed a complaint with Worcester’s Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, urging the prompt launch of an investigation, adding that is was unfortunate to do so at the very same time that “we transition under a Trump administration and exponential increase of fear experienced by the LGBTQ+ community.” 

On Thursday, the city clerk confirmed that Nguyen will continue receiving a $2,641 monthly city stipend while providing nothing for Worcester other than melodrama. 

On the defensive and careful to say the right things for liberal Massachusetts society, Petty said, “We are in a time of uncertainty, where members of the LGBTQIA+ community face real fears and challenges in simply being their authentic selves…I would never knowingly say anything harmful.” He says Nguyen’s accusation of misgendering goes all the way back to 2022 — Nguyen’s first year — when the mayor forgot to use “they/them” before correcting himself and apologizing. Toomey said she’s made a similar “honest mistake” during Nguyen’s rookie year, saying “there’s never, ever been any attempt on my side to misgender them.” 

Alleged “it” girl Mero-Carson issued a more assertive statement. “While I do not recall making the statements in question, I acknowledge that it was a challenging and emotional week where difficult conversations took place…It is deeply troubling that Councilor Nguyen has chosen to distort the narrative and weaponize these accusations for political purposes,” noting that Nguyen has the “the lowest attendance record of any City Councilor.” 

Worcester is home of the College of the Holy Cross, a Jesuit school and alma mater of disgraced Dr. Anthony Fauci (Holy Cross photo)

As you might expect, Nguyen’s council profile is loaded with woke leftist blather like this gem: “Invested in the notion of social justice, they [sic] commit their time and efforts in…navigating the intersectionality of identity, systems and openings for collective care and healing.” Nguyen concludes by touting a trio of identity-politics point-makers: “They [sic] are proud queer, Vietnamese, nonbinary refugee.” 

Since announcing the month off from work, Nguyen has been active on Facebook, basking in support pouring in from “allies,” such as LGBT group MassEquality, which condemned the “bullying” Nguyen has experienced. Nguyen is also wallowing in victimhood, posting the text of “hate emails” like this: 

“Don’t confuse my speaking the truth to you here with hate or some kind of phobia…Your petty, emotional, shrill, fake outrage about being misgendered is not helping you or trans people. It’s what keeps you down….Taking a month off. LOL! Who wants to have to put up with childish, petulant temper tantrums like that? No one. No one wants to work with you now and even though you will scream ‘transphobia’ it won’t be that. It will be idiot-phobia.” 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 17:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/v3M8Yur Tyler Durden

Mexico’s Tijuana Declares Emergency In Anticipation Of Mass Deportations

Mexico’s Tijuana Declares Emergency In Anticipation Of Mass Deportations

Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,

The city council in Tijuana, Mexico, a border city located 20 miles south of San Diego, unanimously passed an emergency declaration on Jan. 13 to allocate city funds for the anticipated arrival of deportees from the United States after President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20.

Trump made mass deportations an integral part of his campaign platform and said in November 2024 that he would declare a national emergency to carry them out.

The council voted on the additional funds in a virtual meeting, the office announced in a statement on social media.

Tijuana Mayor Ismael Burgueño said the city is working closely with Mexico’s federal government.

“We knew that at some point, we could quickly face challenges in infrastructure, public services, as well as security and more,” he said during the meeting, referring to receiving potentially thousands of people in the city in a short amount of time.

The mayor said the declaration would guarantee the city has the conditions and resources to receive the influx of deportees.

“Once they are deported, they are guaranteed to be treated with dignity with full respect for their human rights,” Burgueño said in Spanish, adding that as they return to their country or state of origin they should feel protected and supported.

The emergency funds are expected to be used to hire security personnel, leasing facilities, utilities, and legal services. The declaration also frees the city up to apply for federal funds.

Tijuana earlier this month announced plans to open a shelter with enough space to house 10,000 deportees. Burgueño said at a Jan. 9 press conference that the shelter could be increased to house 30,000 people if needed.

“We want to give deportees the best possible space available,” he said.

Tijuana officials aim to avoid a return of street encampments, which cropped up in the city during past migrant surges, such as during a migrant caravan in 2018, as well as in 2021 and 2022. In 2022, Mexico’s National Guard was deployed to clear an encampment.

“Public spaces should not be used to house migrants,” Burgueño said.

He added that the declaration would also seek to protect the people of Tijuana from interference in their daily life.

“We want for those of us who already live here in Tijuana to be able to continue using these spaces and not have any changes around their homes or communities.”

In addition to preparations being made by Tijuana, Mexico’s state and federal governments are establishing plans to deal with the anticipated arrival of deportees.

Baja California Gov. Marina del Pilar Ávila announced last week new shelters in Tijuana to house deportees before they would be returned to their place of origin with the goal of opening the shelters before Trump’s inauguration.

At the federal level, Mexico has been preparing for Trump’s immigration enforcement plans with a particular focus in Mexico’s northern states that sit on the border of the United States.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who took office last fall, said in December that Mexico would only allow Mexican citizens to be sent into the country as part of Trump’s deportation efforts. She later amended her position, stating Mexico would be open to collaborating with the United States to return the illegal immigrants to their country of origin.

Mexico’s efforts at the federal level to prepare for mass deportations also include the development of a cellphone app for Mexican citizens in the United States illegally, which would assist them in contacting their families and the local Mexican consulate should they face deportation.

Mexico also opened a 24-hour call center to field questions from Mexican citizens who are in the United States illegally.

Mexico, which has a population of approximately 128.5 million, also increased its consular staff and legal aid resources to assist illegal immigrants with navigating the deportation process.

According to the Office of Homeland Security Statistics, there were about 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States as of January 2022.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 17:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/WBQ7aAJ Tyler Durden

CBO Projects US Debt To Soar By $24 Trillion Over Next Decade, And Then It Gets Much Worse…

CBO Projects US Debt To Soar By $24 Trillion Over Next Decade, And Then It Gets Much Worse…

The Congressional Budget Office may claim it is apolitical and/or bipartsian, but in reality they have few reservations in throwing under the bus any politician(s) that are not viewed as part of the establishment inner circle, and “kitchen sink” them with all the accumulated financial troubles that have piled up in the US. That politician is Donald J. Trump, who is about to be inaugurated as the 47th US president, and who will soon see US debt – already at a ridiculous $36.2 trillion – really explode during his second administration, Musk’s pet project DOGE notwithstanding.

According to the latest CBO budget and economic outlook for the decade 2025 to 2035 the situation is hopeless and getting worse, and even though the budget office doesn’t use those actual terms, it does get pretty close.

While the economic picture presented by the CBO is hardly shocking, if as ridiculous as always, with zero recessions expected over the coming decade when the CBO projects GDP growing at a 1.8% annual pace, with inflation magically flat at 2.0%, unemployment rate a sticky 4.4% and a 3.2% fed funds rate (translating into 3.8% 10Y yield)…

… it gets more exciting when looking at how all this growth is going to be funded. And the answer, of course, is through trillions more in unsustainable deficits, although according to the CBO these are perhaps sustainable since they never seem to end.

So starting with the deficit projection, the CBO expects a 2025 federal deficit of $1.9 trillion, a number which grows to $2.7 trillion by 2035. And while it amounts to 6.2% of GDP in 2025, and then drops to 5.2% by 2027 as revenues increase faster than outlays, this modestly beneficial trend quickly reverses and in later years, outlays once again increase faster than revenues, and by 2035, the deficit once again equals 6.1% of GDP, a number which according to the CBO is “significantly more than the 3.8 percent that deficits have averaged over the past 50 years.” It goes without saying that the actual deficit number will be far, far greater because even a modest recession will assure a surge in government spending (i.e., much more debt-funded deficit) which however will not result in faster growth.

It gets better. In an attempt to entrap Trump, who will very extend extend the expiring TCJA, or Trump tax cuts, the CBO amusingly enough cuts its long-term deficit forecast by $1 billion, but not because of higher growth or anything like that, but because it forecasts “increases in projected revenues from individual income taxes” even as “legislative changes and technical (that is, neither economic nor legislative) changes boosted projected deficits.” As a result, the cumulative deficit from 2025-2034 is expected to decline by $1 trillion, from $22.1 trillion to $21.1 trillion.

That way, in one year when the Trump tax cuts are extended, the CBO will throw the book at trump and blame him when it once again revises its deficit forecast dramatically higher.

As for the real reason why the US deficit is about to go exponential has little to do with taxes, and everything to do with the stratospheric levels of US debt, or rather interest on that debt, we find that while things are more or less normal for the next 3 years, then they go vertical, to wit:

“Federal outlays in 2025 total $7.0 trillion, or 23.3 percent of GDP. They remain close to that level through 2028 and then rise, reaching 24.4 percent of GDP in 2035 (if adjusted to exclude the effects of shifts in the timing of certain payments). The main reasons for that increase are growth in spending for Social Security and Medicare and rising net interest costs.”

Unfortunately, there is no such hockeystick effect to US government revenues which total $5.2 trillion, or 17.1% of GDP, in 2025, then rise to 18.2% of GDP by 2027, which according to the CBO is “because of the scheduled expiration of provisions of the 2017 tax act”, which obviously will not expire and instead will be extended, meaning revenues will not increase and while the CBO knows this, it will instead wait for 6-12 months before letting the hammer fall in its next, far uglier forecast.

But even without the 2017 tax act, the CBO projects that revenues as a share of GDP will then decline over the next two years, falling to 17.9% in 2029, and flatline around 18.3% in 2035. In reality, this number will be far lower, perhaps around 15% if note worse, due to the extension of the Trump tax cuts which means that the next CBO forecast will be substantially worse than the current one.

Alas, this one is also a disaster, and one has to look no further than the CBO’s debt forecast to see that. That’s because while debt held by the public (which conveniently excludes debt used to fund Social Security), is currently at $28.2 trillion, this number nearly doubles by 2035, when it is expected to hit $52.1 trillion.

But wait, wouldn’t debt only increase as GDP also increased, with the relative ratio improving? Actually no, because as the infamous CBO “chart of doom” shows, as debt held by the public rises each year, it does so at a faster pace than GDP; in fact, from 2025 to 2035, debt/GDP swells from 100% to 118%, an amount which as the CBO admits, is “greater than at any point in the nation’s history.”

Now the reason why the CBO published a report that saw a modest improvement in the US fiscal picture over the next decade is not because the US fiscal picture is actually improving, but on the contrary, was to entrap Trump and republicans. As ABC notes, “the analysis paints a difficult picture for an incoming Republican administration bent on cutting taxes in ways that further widen deficits unless they’re also paired with major spending cuts.” Indeed, Trump’s proposed extension of his 2017 tax cuts that are set to expire after this year along with new cuts could easily exceed $4 trillion and his nominee to be treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, warned Thursday that the economy could crash without them.

“We do not have a revenue problem in the U.S.,” Bessent insisted at his confirmation hearings. “We have a spending problem.”

He’s right, but the even bigger problem is that cutting any spending, whether discretionary or mandatory, would lead to unprecedented economic devastation for a country that is used to issuing debt and spending it like a drunken sailor.

While tax revenues as a share of the total U.S. economy are close to the 50-year average, government spending is poised to continue growing, largely because of the unprecedented $1.2 trillion in gross interest expense, a number that will almost certainly never go down again, because even if interest rates do drop briefly, the total amount of debt will just keep rising, more than offsetting any rate decline. Meanwhile, discretionary spending on national security and social programs will account for $1.85 trillion next year. The CBO already has spending in these categories on a downward trajectory as discretionary spending would equal 5.3% of GDP, down from the half-century average of 7.9%.

CBO Director Phillip Swagel told reporters at a press conference Friday that net interest costs are a major contributor to the deficit and “in the coming years, net interest costs are projected to be similar to the amounts of discretionary spending for either defense or non-defense” programs.

And all of that is, of course assuming no recession and a demographic picture that remains unchanged; alas both assumptions are ludicrous.

With an aging population, government spending would largely increase because of Social Security and Medicare — two programs popular with voters that many Republicans and Democrats alike have vowed to protect, despite clear signs that they’re on an unsustainable path.

Swagel said. “We’re already an aging society and the aging of our society is driving mandatory outlays.”

And as American women wait later in life to have children and have fewer of them, “the change of fertility sometimes accelerates that pattern of the aging of our society,” he said.

Michael Peterson, CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation — which among other things tracks the federal debt — said in a statement that “as lawmakers consider the range of expiring tax policy at the end of the year, they should make a commitment to at least ‘do no fiscal harm’.”

“They should avoid budget gimmicks and base their assumptions on neutral, nonpartisan estimates like this one from CBO,” he said.

Unfortunately for the US, it is now way too late to change the inevitable outcome of an existence that has been driven by exorbitant debt-funded spending. Indeed, when it comes to normalizing or “doing no fiscal harm” that ship has sailed, and as much as we would like for there to be some happy ending, we are terrified at what will happen when the brightest minds in the room admit that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been a failure, and that nothing can prevent the inevitable US implosion.

More in the full CBO bidget forecast.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 16:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/AWinuUz Tyler Durden

Joe Biden: An Assessment

Joe Biden: An Assessment

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

“Power is the capacity to compel loyalty and obedience, under conditions of duress. Authority is the capacity to inspire loyalty and obedience, under conditions where free will obtains”

– Aimee Terese

You’re aware, I’m sure, that a lot of people thought “Joe Biden” was being play-acted in the White House over his four years there by a series of look-alike actors. You saw those news items comparing “JB’s” earlobes to the old gaffer who showed up at the podium on a given day. Hmmmmmm. . . . I was not persuaded by any of that. “Joe Biden” has simply been impersonating himself — play-acting the role of “president.” The mystery is how he got there.

You can expect very shortly, probably only a matter of weeks, to see a raft of news stories, soon-to-be big-money books, revealing the utter sustained chaos that churned behind the pathetic, half-animated figure pretending to be “chief executive” of the US government lo these dismal four years past. You will learn who was pulling his strings day-to-day since 1/20/21, probably a gang of 25-year-old, ambitious, Cluster-B staffers too disorganized to even amount to a cabal — but sufficiently united in their mission to destroy the country by any means necessary.

Whose idea was it, anyway, back in the spring of 2020, to retrieve this broken hack from the dumpster of discarded Democratic Party primary candidates and jam him into the role of nominee for president? You’d suspect Barack Obama, of course, since the former president had set-up a war-room across town from the White House during the Trump interregnum, and had openly bragged that he’d love nothing better than to someday kick back in a warm-up suit and phone-in governing orders to a stand-in dummy occupying the oval office.

Except Mr. Obama famously disdained his former veep. The few duties “Joe Biden” had in that role (under poor supervision apparently), he converted into a money-laundering and grift operation — most notoriously his adventures in pre-war Ukraine, where First Son Hunter played bag-man from his seat on the Burisma gas company board. That racket evolved quickly and neatly so that at just about every airport around the world that Air Force Two landed, Hunter and “Joe” were clocking-in fat bribes, supposedly for “influence.” That was the joke, of course, because “Joe Biden” had no influence with his President Obama, who regarded him as an idiot, a bumbling Inspector Clouseau, of whom he famously said, “Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to fuck things up.”

Yet, somehow, the old crook got maneuvered into “winning” the 2020 Super Tuesday multi-primary — abracadabra! Ballot magic! — while some little birdie flew around and persuaded Elizabeth Warren, Mayor Pete, Amy Klobuchar and the rest to drop out. Meanwhile, the Deep State blob had delivered the gift of Covid-19, whatever it was, a lab creation, a seasonal flu, or just a mass of PCR-test fake positives, and Mr. Trump was snookered into lockdowns by the same public health blobsters who engineered the “pandemic” crisis: Fauci, Birx, Francis Collins, Alex Azar, et al., with Bill Gates, Ralph Baric, and Klaus Schwab lurking somewhere in the background.

You can’t overstate the fervency of the Democratic Party in 2020 to eject Mr. Trump from office, considering the threat he represented to all of DC’s business-as-usual — especially after he escaped the perfidious impeachment trap engineered by legal assassins Mary McCord and Norm Eisen. Ergo, The USA slid haplessly into an ethos of grotesque institutional lying and election fraud because, you see, something else had evolved ominously backstage since 2016: the criminal activities of the FBI, CIA, DOJ, and Pentagon (major blob tentacles) in the drawn-out RussiaGate scam. Many people needed to shield themselves from potential prosecution.

“Joe Biden” hit the campaign trail like he was Rutherford B. Hayes, back in the day when candidates for president barely strayed beyond the front porch of their home. To say he hid in his basement was only a slight exaggeration. The few public events his handlers dragged him into attracted the public in embarrassing double-digits. He was already widely suspected of being in clinical dementia. Despite the blob’s best efforts, the content of Hunter’s laptop was already leaking onto the Interwebs, photos of Hunter naked with whores, guns, and drugs, deal memos between shadowy foreigners and Hunter’s Rosemont-Seneca money laundromat. But, of course, the news media buried all that and social media censored it.

And so, more election magic! The blob’s “Big Lie” trope — employed to this day even in the latest cabinet confirmation hearings — was itself the biggest lie, a complete inversion of the truth, which is that the 2020 election was a total and comprehensive fraud. It was an orgy of crime carried out across many states. Those of us who stayed up late the night of November 3-4, 2020, watched the numbers slip-and-slide from one column to the other right in our faces, saw the videos of fake ballots in Fulton County, GA, the shenanigans in Philadelphia, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Detroit, and Milwaukee. Mark Zuckerberg had laid nearly half a billion dollars on swing states to switch-out election officials with Democratic Party activists and to fund ballot “harvesting” ops. Yes, you can state with certainty that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen for “Joe Biden.”

The four years of “Joe Biden’s” term-in-office that followed have induced the most severe disordering of the collective American mind in our history, lost in a fog of perfidious mendacity unmatched in scope by the Civil War, or any other national crisis. “Joe Biden’s” government went to war against the people of this land, at the same time it sold-out our vital national interests to the CCP, the WEF, the WHO, and other parties seeking our nation’s destruction. For years, we have been forced to swallow absurdities such as unsafe and ineffective vaccines, drag queens in the grade schools, borders wide-open to saboteurs (declared to be “secure”), and a stupid war against Russia that has destroyed the sad-sack nation of Ukraine.

“Joe Biden” has been a disaster and an embarrassment, easily the most damaging character to ever creep onto the US political scene. His one talent was for fakery. Even with sclerosis eating through his brain, he was able to go through the motions of faking it, reading his script off the teleprompter — though he was no longer up to casual questions in a news conference setting. The slime trail of crimes he leaves behind would be easy to follow by law enforcement officials actually interested in crime. He’s likely to pardon himself at the last moment, and pardon a long roster of federal officials who have committed crimes with and behind him. One way or another, they are going to be found out, even if many manage to evade prosecution. But at least we are going to learn a lot more about who was pulling “Joe’s” strings, and exactly what they did, and how — including the trick of making the news media hostage to their crimes.

So, adios, “Joe Biden,” you miserable, treasonous bastard. History will record you as the one president so far who was consciously a villain outright, in true self-knowledge of his own wickedness. You left your country a wreck in every dimension: in national security, national bankruptcy, national pride, and national confidence. Go back to Delaware and sit in the dim light of your room with the curtains drawn so you won’t have to hear about the gruesome discoveries to come of what you left behind.

And when the day arrives for your funeral, be advised that it will not be much better than your campaign stop in Darby, PA, in June 2020, when you maundered pointlessly to a nearly empty room… before going out for ice cream with your secret service detail.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 16:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/m8I9QR0 Tyler Durden

Fake Dues: CNN Found Guilty In $5M Defamation Case As CBS Mulls Settlement In Trump Lawsuit

Fake Dues: CNN Found Guilty In $5M Defamation Case As CBS Mulls Settlement In Trump Lawsuit

Fake News has had a bad couple of months.

Last month, ABC News agreed to a $15 million settlement with Donald Trump after anchor George Stephanopoulos repeatedly lied about Trump being “liable for rape” in a civil case. Parent company Disney agreed to contribute the $15 million to Trump’s presidential foundation or museum, and pay $1 million in legal fees to Trump’s attorneys.

Now, CNN was just found liable for $5 million in damages for defaming a Navy veteran on Jake Tapper’s show (as previewed by Jonathan Turley here).

On Friday, a jury in Florida concluded after a two-week trial that contractor Zachary Young was falsely accused of illegally participating in a “black market” for exfiltration services in Afghanistan after the disastrous withdrawal by the Biden administration. According to a segment on CNN, Young was called out by name as participating in the alleged scheme – which he said ruined his reputation and harmed his business. Young said he provided his services to major corporations seeking to render aid to employees stuck in Afghanistan, and that his prices were fair.

Young filed his lawsuit in 2022, which revealed CNN correspondent Alexander Marquardt disparaging Mr. Young to his CNN colleagues – while some coworkers internally characterized the report as “flawed.”

CNN argued that the report, which aired during Jake Tapper’s show, did not make any false assertions, however in 2022 the network removed the segment from its website and said it regretted using the term “black market,” arguing that they meant to refer to unregulated activities, not unlawful ones.

CBS Next?

And now for the trifecta – CBS News‘ owner Paramount Global executives have reportedly held internal discussions to settle a $10 billion lawsuit with Donald Trump ahead of its planned merger with Skydance Media, the Wall Street Journal reports.

It’s become clear to executives at both companies that Trump’s dissatisfaction with CBS News will make the review tougher than they anticipated, and that they’ll likely need to offer concessions to win approval, people familiar with the situation said.

Incoming Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr gave Paramount executives a warning to that effect at a reception late last year following the taping of the Kennedy Center honors in Washington, according to people familiar with the exchange, and he has echoed the message in public remarks.

Trump’s lawsuit alleges that the network committed election interference by editing the hell out of a Kamala Harris interview to make her appear not retarded. Trump claimed CBS aired one version of the interview on “60 Minutes,” and another version on “Face the Nation,” each of which contained a different answer on the topic of Israel. CBS has defended itself – calling the “60 minutes” version simply ‘more succinct.’

What’s going on here is a lot of bluster to discipline the future operations of CBS,” said Andrew Jay Schwartzman, a longtime public-interest attorney and senior counselor at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. “My guess is that this is just to kind of soften them up and a warning to others.

Paramount and Skydance execs have mulled various options to shore up CBS News editorial operations while assuring the Trump camp that they would implement new processes around programming – possibly even releasing the transcript of the Harris interview, according to people familiar with the situation.

Skydance is run by David Ellison, the son of billionaire Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, who has a good relationship with Trump. Under the terms of the deal, Skydance and its investors agreed to spend more than $8 billion to acquire control of Paramount from media heiress Shari Redstone and merge it with Skydance. A person close to Skydance said David Ellison would support measures to promote unbiased journalism.

Paramount finds itself in a similar predicament to the one CNN owner Time Warner faced in 2016 when it proposed merging with telecom giant AT&T. Trump regularly took aim at CNN for alleged bias, and his Justice Department sued to block the deal on antitrust grounds. -WSJ

Time to make a deal to make a deal?

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 15:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/vdKS2t9 Tyler Durden

Xi Expresses Hope For Reset In US Relations Under Trump In “Very Good” Call: TikTok, Trade, Taiwan Discussed

Xi Expresses Hope For Reset In US Relations Under Trump In “Very Good” Call: TikTok, Trade, Taiwan Discussed

Incoming President Donald Trump spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday, three days before his inauguration Monday. Tensions between Washington and Beijing have only escalated since Trump was last in the White House, and the Pentagon and US intelligence have named China as a top global threat.

Still, Trump hailed the “very good call” he had with Xi, which was on the occasion of the Chinese leader wishing Trump well on his second term in office. Trump posted on his Truth Social account, “I just spoke to Chairman Xi Jinping of China. The call was a very good one for both China and the U.S.A. It is my expectation that we will solve many problems together, and starting immediately.”

Via Associated Press

The statement continued, “We discussed balancing Trade, Fentanyl, TikTok, and many other subjects. President Xi and I will do everything possible to make the World more peaceful and safe!”

On the Chinese side, the readout said, “Xi congratulated Trump on his reelection as President of the United States. President Xi noted that they both attach great importance to their interactions, and both hope for a good start of the China-US relationship during the new US presidency.”

“President Xi expressed his readiness to secure greater progress in China-U.S. relations from a new starting point,” it added.

The words were unexpectedly warm and welcoming considering the fact that during Trump’s first term in office he was an outspoken China hawk, also piling up sanctions and tariffs on Beijing.

But it was Biden who directly increased military and diplomatic support to Taiwan, with the single biggest escalation coming when then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the self-ruled island, triggering the largest Chinese military encircling exercises up to that point.

The Chinese statement on Friday’s Trump call continued, “Xi pointed out that it is natural for two big countries with different national conditions to have some disagreements. The important thing is to respect each other’s core interests and major concerns, and find a proper solution.”

It added, “The Taiwan question concerns China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The US side needs to approach it with prudence.”

A further positive sign that American-Sino relations have the potential to thaw is that the Chinese Foreign Ministry announced that Vice President Han Zheng will be attending Trump’s inauguration on Monday.

The Vice President’s high rank in government is significant, and he’s not a mere lower or mid-ranking official…

Political analyst Dylan Loh,assistant professor at the Nanyang Technological University, was cited in Business Insider as saying, “Han’s attendance is significant, and even though the vice president does not really wield political power, it is still consequential, and he certainly will be able to play the role of an interlocutor and a channel of communication.”

“Symbolically, the presence of Han for Trump’s inauguration is also important to underline that political communication and cooperation is possible despite the campaign rhetoric and threat of tariffs,” Loh added.

Also significant is that the chief executive of TikTok plans to attend the inauguration and is expected to sit in a position of honor on the dais. “The invitation to the executive, Shou Chew, went out from the Trump Vance Inaugural Committee, the people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the inauguration on Monday,” NY Times writes. “Mr. Chew will join Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk on the dais, along with other tech executives at the event, according to two people with knowledge of the planning.”

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 15:25

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/gw7kLXe Tyler Durden

“Neo-Nazi Madness”: Stanford Law Professor Publicly Rebukes Zuckerberg And Drops Him As A Client

“Neo-Nazi Madness”: Stanford Law Professor Publicly Rebukes Zuckerberg And Drops Him As A Client

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

As lawyers, we often take a series of steps to protect the interests of our clients when it becomes necessary to sever or end representation. The dropping of a client can have a damaging impact on the reputation or standing of a client. That is why it was surprising to see Mark Lemley, a Stanford law professor publicly denounce Mark Zuckerberg as part of social media tirade. It is a deeply concerning lesson for students at a law school already rocked by prior controversies over intolerance for opposing viewpoints.

When we take on a client, we are closely identified with their interests and their case. That creates a deep professional obligation not to use that relationship for our own benefit against the interests of our client. Thus, a lawyer cannot sever an unpopular criminal defendant by denouncing him as morally reprehensible.

We continue to shoulder that obligation even after we end our representations. (I have had to sever clients in the past and avoided any public statement on the reasons or critical comments tied to the cases).

Professor Lemley did not represent Zuckerberg in a criminal matter. However, he was counsel in the high-profile representation of Meta in 2023 after comedian Sarah Silverman and other authors sued the company for alleged copyright violations.

After Zuckerberg recently pledged to restore free speech protections on Meta, many on the left went positively berserk.

This week, Lemley, a partner at the law firm Lex Lumina, decided that he was not content with simply severing the representation without fanfare or embarrassment to his clients.

Instead, he decided to publish a tirade on LinkedIn to denounce Zuckerberg’s “descent into toxic masculinity and Neo-Nazi madness.”

He declared “While I think they are on the right side in the generative AI copyright dispute in which I represented them, and I hope they win, I cannot in good conscience serve as their lawyer any longer.”

He further declared that he deactivated his Threads account because he did not want to “support a Twitter-like site run by a Musk wannabe.”

Rather than expressing concern over the trashing of a former client, Rhett Millsaps, managing partner of Lex Lumina, stated, “Money can’t buy everyone. We’re proud to be a firm that doesn’t sell out our values. Sadly, it seems this is becoming a rarer and rarer quality in America today.”

The incident raises a question that can be uncertain and difficult for many lawyers. I do not believe that Professor Lemley should be forced into a life of monastic silence over Meta policies unrelated to his litigation. Zuckerberg is a public figure and Lemley often engages in public commentary.

What concerns me is the nexus drawn by both Lemley and Lex Lumina to their representation of Zuckerberg to magnify their message of opposition. They could have simply severed representations without comment while Lemley could have continued his commentary in opposition to the new free speech policies. Frankly, while Professor Lemley is a respected and accomplished academic, it is doubtful that such criticism would have generated significant media attention. It was the connection to severing representation that amplified the message and caused the criticism to go viral.

Instead, the media is aflame with stories of how even Zuckerberg’s own lawyer and law firm cannot abide him. That was the obvious result of the public statements made by Lemley and the firm in demonizing their former client and citing their severance as morally compelled by his policies.

This can clearly be a gray area for many lawyers. The rules expressly prevent a lawyer from representing a client in an adverse case against a prior client or using information derived from the prior case. That is not the case here. Indeed, Professor Lemley appears to stand by the merits of the earlier case. The question is whether lawyers should use their prior representation as a type of cudgel in a public denunciation of a former client, using their prior representation to elevate their own voices.

None of this sits well with me, but I may be “old school” on such professional conduct issues. I would feel the same way if a lawyer attacked an anti-free speech figure like Hillary Clinton by emphasizing their prior representation. Once again, I am not suggesting that representation bars lawyers from criticizing former, high-profile clients. Professor Lemley has free speech rights and strong opinions in this area. However, the use of the severance or termination of representation as part of that criticism is deeply problematic in my view.

*  *  *

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 15:05

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/gjHKxr3 Tyler Durden

“Hoover Had The Largest Peacetime Deficits In US History”; Economists Debate Money And The State

“Hoover Had The Largest Peacetime Deficits In US History”; Economists Debate Money And The State

“He who controls the money supply of a nation controls the nation.” – James Garfield

From economic history to in-depth analysis of today’s financial plumbing, last night’s MMT Vs Austrian debate assessed the roles of debt and currency within the State.

In the Austrian corner was Bob Murphy, senior fellow at the Mises Institute. Across from him, Fields Institute researcher Nathan Tankus, made the case for Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). Moderating was Jack Farley of Monetary Matters.

Here were the key moments:

Austrians & The Great Depression: The Textbooks Lied

Did “free market excesses” cause The Great Depression? This is what Americans learn in public school. Murphy, however, provided counterpoints to the narrative. Principally, Herbert Hoover was not laissez faire:

“Contrary to what people may have heard, Herbert Hoover had the largest peacetime deficits in US history up to that point. And then FDR came and his new deal really just expanded upon what Hoover did.”

MMT & Central Planning: Carbon Taxes?

Government must curb people’s behavior. That is the argument from Tankus during his opening remarks, saying Climate Change necessitates a “massive mobilization of resources.” 

“The private sector and some fancy price game is not going to be the thing that  makes decisions about how our electricity grid works,” he said. “We kind of have to make choices on how our electricity grid works.”

According to Tankus, by shifting the understanding of money from conventional budget-constraint focus to the inflation-constrained view, these mass changes in human choices can be achieved.

“You need to make design choices to incentivize certain outcomes… we need public money to incentivize people to make choices.

Asked how to deal with climate change without government, Murphy said he does not believe it is an existential threat nor would he put his faith in government if it were.

“If the governments of the world limited global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, that would be worse for humanity than doing nothing.”

Watch the full debate below:

These debates would not be possible without our sponsor, JMBullion.com, trusted and used by ZeroHedge.
 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 01/17/2025 – 14:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/B1KpLYM Tyler Durden