Month: August 2023

Authored by Julie Kelly via RealClear Wire,

At her first appearance in the criminal case against Donald Trump for his alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan repeatedly warned the former president’s lawyers that politics would not be tolerated in her courtroom. 

“The fact that [Trump is] running a political campaign has to yield to the orderly administration of justice,” Chutkan said during the August 11 hearing. “If that means he can’t say exactly what he wants to say about witnesses in this case, that’s how it has to be.” 

But even as she warns Trump about his “inflammatory” language, Chutkan has routinely issued politically charged rulings and made incendiary statements of her own while presiding over some 30 cases involving Trump supporters charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, melee at the U.S. Capitol. 

A review of thousands of pages of hearing transcripts reveal that Chutkan has repeatedly expressed strong and settled opinions about the issues at the heart of United States v. Donald Trump – the criminal case she is now presiding over.  

These include her public assertions that the 2020 election was beyond reproach, that the Jan. 6 protests were orchestrated by Trump, and that the former president is guilty of crimes. She has described Jan. 6 as a “mob attack” on “the very foundation of our democracy” and branded the issue at the heart of the case she is hearing – Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was stolen – a conspiracy theory.   

Although judges often make comments from the bench, Chutkan’s strident language raises questions about her impartiality in handling the case against the presumptive GOP nominee for president in 2024. 

The U.S. code that addresses grounds for recusal states, ”Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” One reason to recuse is if the judge has demonstrated “a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party.”  

GOP Rep. Matthew Gaetz of Florida recently filed a resolution to condemn and censure Chutkan for exhibiting “open bias and partisanship in the conduct of her official duties as a judge.”  

But if the aim among Trump loyalists is to get a new judge assigned to the case, it’s a steep legal hurdle. Stephen Gillers, a professor of law at New York University, said that typically a judge can be recused for bias or the appearance of bias “only when the purported bias comes from a source outside the judge’s work as a judge.” He continued, “Almost never will a judge be recused for opinions she forms as a judge – in hearing cases and motions. Judges are expected to form opinions based on these ‘intrajudicial’ sources. It’s what judges do.”  

A Trump representative declined to comment about Judge Chutkan’s potential bias. The chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the American Bar Association did not respond to requests for comment. Nor did Chutkan.

Appointed by Barack Obama to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2013, Chutkan has been one of the toughest judges on Jan. 6 defendants. In several cases, she has given defendants longer prison terms than recommended by prosecutors. In at least two cases she sentenced defendants to jail time when prosecutors only sought probation. Chutkan herself admitted during a July 2022 court hearing that she is “one of the few judges that’s given a lot of terms of incarceration” in Jan 6. cases. 

On at least one occasion, Chutkan suggested in open court that Trump should have been charged for his alleged role in what she routinely describes as “an attempt to overthrow the government” on Jan. 6.  

Before sentencing Christine Priola, a Trump supporter from Ohio who pleaded guilty to obstruction of an official proceeding, to 15 months in jail, Chutkan appeared to lament the fact Trump was not yet in prison. “[The] people who mobbed that Capitol were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man – not to the Constitution, of which most of the people who come before me seem woefully ignorant, not to the ideals of this country, and not to the principles of democracy,” Chutkan said on Oct. 28, 2022. “It’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” (Emphasis added.) 

Chutkan accused Matthew Mazzocco, another Jan. 6 defendant, of choosing Trump over the country. In rejecting Mazzocco’s argument that he traveled from Texas to Washington to engage in a legal political demonstration, Chutkan declared at his October 2021 sentencing hearing: “He went there to support one man who he viewed had the election taken from him. In total disregard of a lawfully conducted election, he went to the Capitol in support of one man, not in support of our country or in support of democracy.”   

Although Mazzocco only spent 12 minutes inside the Capitol and committed no violence, Chutkun rejected the government’s recommendation of three months home confinement for pleading guilty to “parading” in the Capitol, a Class B misdemeanor, and instead sentenced Mazzocco to 45 days in jail.   

Despite President Trump’s explicit request that his supporters march “peacefully and patriotically” to the Capitol, Chutkan blamed Trump for the Jan. 6 violence while sentencing Robert Palmer, who pleaded guilty in June 2021 to one count of assaulting police officers with a dangerous weapon (a fire extinguisher). In that case, Palmer’s lawyer sought a reduced prison sentence by echoing the judge’s view of Trump.  

“Mr. Palmer went to the Capitol at the behest of the former president,” attorney Bjorn E. Brunvand wrote in a December 2021 sentencing memo to Chutkan. “Like many others who participated in the Capitol riot, Mr. Palmer blindly followed the many figures who falsely but persistently claimed that the election had been stolen from the president.”  

Palmer himself told Chutkan that Trump’s claims about a “stolen” 2020 election prompted him to travel from his Tampa home to the nation’s capital to participate in the Capitol protest. In a handwritten note dated November 2021, Palmer told Chutkan that he realized “Trump supporters were lied to by those that at the time had great power meaning the then sitting president, as well as those acting in his behalf.” 

Palmer apologized to Chutkan for his conduct and begged for mercy. 

His plea fell on deaf ears. Although Chutkan expressed no sympathy for Palmer, whom she sent to prison for more than five years, she amplified Palmer’s assertions that Trump bore some responsibility:

And it is true, Mr. Palmer you have made a very good point, one that has been made before – that the people who exhorted you and encouraged you and rallied you to go and take action and to fight have not been charged. That is not this court’s position. I don’t charge anybody. I don’t negotiate plea offers. I don’t make charging decisions. I sentence people who have pleaded guilty or have been convicted. The issue of who has or has not been charged is not before me. I don’t have any influence on that. I have my opinions, but they are not relevant. And you’re correct in that no one who was encouraging everybody to take the Capitol has been charged as of yet, but I don’t think that fact means that you should get a lower sentence. 

Chutkan’s references to the former president aren’t the only area of concern for Trump. Her comments from the bench also suggest that she shares the same view of Jan. 6 as the man prosecuting Trump in her courtroom, Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Tasked by Attorney General Merrick Garland with investigating “whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021,” Smith indicted Trump in the District of Columbia on three conspiracy counts and one obstruction count last month.  

Throughout the 45-page indictment, Smith repeatedly accused Trump of knowingly promoting falsehoods about the 2020 presidential election. “[For] more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false. But the Defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway – to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election.” 

Chutkan clearly shares that view. On numerous occasions, the judge has insisted the 2020 election was legitimate and fully vetted by the court system – a claim disputed by Trump that lies at the heart of the case she is now hearing.  

“He went to the Capitol because, despite election results which were clear-cut, despite the fact that multiple court challenges all over the country had rejected every single one of the challenges to the election, Mr. Palmer didn’t like the result. He didn’t like the result, and he didn’t want the transition of power to take place because his guy lost,” Chutkan also said during Palmer’s sentencing. (When not cryptically referring to Trump, Chutkan often describes the former president as “guy.”) 

She has accused individuals who believe the 2020 election was “stolen” as promoting “conspiracy theories.” In the case of Donna Bissel, who pleaded guilty to the nonviolent petty offense of “parading” in the Capitol, Chutkan cited Bissel’s personal beliefs as reason to sentence her to 14 days in jail rather than impose the three-year probation sentence recommended by prosecutors. 

“As noted in the government’s sentencing memo, the defendant appears to be susceptible to believing outlandish and absurd conspiracy theories,” Chutkan said during Bissel’s October 2021 sentencing. “To protect the public, it’s important to make sure that she does not fall victim to another lie or conspiracy and act out in a way that again jeopardizes public safety. It’s one thing to believe in conspiracy theories in your basement, and it’s another thing to act out on them and, for instance, to travel from Indiana to D.C. to storm the Capitol to overturn an election.” 

Court records show that Chutkan has repeatedly scolded defendants who question the integrity of the 2020 election – skepticism shared by 39% of Americans, according to a recent CNN poll. Here are a few examples of Chutkan’s comments on Jan. 6:  

• USA v. Scott Ponder: “When you say you got caught up, Mr. Ponder, there’s a lot of rage and a lot of emotion and a lot of tension as you describe, and people felt very strongly, right or wrongly, that an election had been stolen. I think the evidence is quite clear that it had not, but that’s neither here nor there.” (July 26, 2022)
• USA v. Benjamin Larocca: “Everyone standing around with their cameras on that — in front of those doors, every single one of those people contributed to the mob that tried to intimidate those police officers; that tried to gain entry into that building; that were trying to stop the transfer of power and nullify a lawfully conducted election. This was a lawfully conducted election.” (August 10, 2022)
• USA v. Christian Cortez: “[He] was motivated to come because his candidate didn’t win and he somehow believed this election was stolen and he wanted to get it back. As I said, this wasn’t just a protest. He wanted to — that mob wanted to overthrow the government. They wanted to undo the results of what they considered a stolen election; their guy didn’t win.” (August 31, 2022) 

Little Nuance: Chutkan’s View of Jan. 6 

For Chutkan, the events of Jan. 6 provoke strong emotions, which she freely volunteers from the bench. “[Every] single time I watch the videos and look at the photographs of what was going on that day, I am struck anew by how horrible this was, by how violent and terrifying, and how the outnumbered and vastly unequipped law enforcement officers were feeling that day as they were basically struggling for their lives and wondering if they were going to make it home to their kids,” Chutkan told defendant Matthew Caspel in December 2022. “I don’t know if we’ll ever recover from that.” 

A former public defender in Washington, D.C. – one of the country’s most perennially violent cities, and one generally lenient toward criminals – Chutkan argues that Jan. 6 is among the worst crime scenes she’s ever witnessed.  

“I watch these videotapes in almost every case, and every single time I am struck anew at how horrifying the events of that day were,” she volunteered to Benjamin Larocca, who pleaded guilty to a disorderly conduct misdemeanor and received 60 days in jail. “And I’m struck as someone who is watching – has seen this kind of footage multiple times and was looking at footage on the day – and as somebody, frankly, who has seen a lot of crime scene footage. I was a criminal defense lawyer, I was a public defender for many years. I’m not easily shocked, but it’s shocking.”  

Many observers believe Trump already confronts a nearly insurmountable task in receiving a fair trial in the nation’s capital, a city that voted 92% for Joe Biden. Further, the Justice Department has a near-perfect conviction rate in Jan. 6 trials. Chutkan’s extensive record of comments suggest the judge presiding over his case will not make it any easier. 

This week Iran’s military unveiled a drone which it says rivals the United States’ MQ-9 Reaper drone, touting the aircraft as easily capable of reaching Tehran’s number one enemy Israel.

The Islamic Republic claims the new Mohajer-10 drone can stay continually airborne for 24 hours, and showcased it as the Defense Industry Day conference on Tuesday.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi attended the conference in person in order to inspect the drone, and hailed that it will “firmly introduce Iran as an advanced and technologic nation to the world.”

According to regional reporting, “The Islamic Republic’s media outlets claimed the drone can fly up to 24,000 feet with a speed of 210 kph carrying a bomb payload of up to 300 kilograms. The drone can also allegedly hold electronic surveillance equipment and a camera.”

However, some Western analysts have expressed skepticism, particularly regarding the claim that it mirrors the capabilities of the MQ-9 Reaper.

Steve Bucci, a former Pentagon official, told The Foreign Desk publication that the Iranians “tend to exaggerate a lot, so I will assume that while it may look like a Reaper, I doubt it is as capable.”

Al Jazeera writes that “media reports said the drone can travel non-stop at an altitude of 7,000 metres (4,350ft) for up to 2,000km (1,242 miles), meaning that it could reach Israel.”

But there does remain consensus that Iran’s drone program is generally very capable, also given the heavy reliance on Iran-produced drones by Russian forces operating in Ukraine. 

New footage released by the Islamic Republic’s state media…

Iran today unveiled the latest entry in its Mohajer drones – Mohajer 10. It has a reported operational range of 2,000 km.

State media have released the video below. The text in Persian and Hebrew at about 9 second in reads: “Prepare your bunkers”. pic.twitter.com/ji5wyFgOqs

— Kian Sharifi (@KianSharifi) August 22, 2023

It’s also long been known that Iran’s ballistic missiles are quite advanced, and these have been subject of intense debate alongside Iran’s nuclear program.

Iran and Israel are still engaged in a proxy war inside Syria, where Israeli air attacks frequently target both Syrian and Iranian military positions, especially in and around Damascus and the south.

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

I have often commented that inflation is especially nefarious, because it operates in the dark machinery of the night, as nobody notices or has the time to understand it.

Inflation robs people every second of every day, with a majority of its victims unable to articulate how it works.

Inflation’s equally odious and obnoxious cousin is shrinkflation. Shrinkflation is what companies do when they don’t want to violently rub it in your face directly by raising prices. Instead they offer up the gentle rub of giving you less product, for the same price.

Usually, this douchebaggery is accompanied by exceptionally insulting marketing. For example, here’s some limp-d*cked attempt by a focus group at Proctor and Gamble at trying to convince you that the Arabic numeral “6”, an integer known and understood for millennia, actually means “9”.

Shrinkflation is just as grotesque as inflation, and falls into a chum-bucket of consequences that materializes out of thin air, the excrement of the dollar’s continued loss of purchasing power.

And not unlike inflation, these consequences need to be kept under wraps just enough so that they can persist, but with nobody noticing them. If you don’t notice the powers that be taking one nanometer in ground a day from you, it’ll be decades before you notice that you’ve been moved a mile.

There’s been no better example of this “taking one nanometer in ground a day from you” than an emerging and growing chorus of news articles and op-eds beginning to suggest that the populace will one day be eating insects for meals in order to – wait for it – help fight climate change.

Have you noticed headlines like these popping up over the last few years? Here’s one from earlier this month:

Here’s another from May 2023:

And here’s a third, from the head of the snake over at the World Economic Forum:

The best part? Before the World Economic Forum’s article even starts, there’s disclaimers about how the WEF is the “victim” of this article being widely “misrepresented”, as if people are incapable of reading the fucking title and drawing their own conclusion.

Before there is one word of op-ed, there’s a “Help us prevent the spread of misinformation” note.

One might ask why this idea continues to pop up, other than the fact that Klaus Schwab is directing his lobotomized sycophants in charge of various world governments and media outlets to push the narrative.

Surely progressive, left-leaning yuppies believe that it’s for our own good.

---

50% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS: Subscribe and get 50% off and no price hikes for as long as you wish to be a subscriber.

---

“Insects must be better for us nutritionally and will help save the planet,” they’ll think to themselves. “That’s why the government and media, who always have our best interests in mind, are introducing the idea to us. Thanks guys!”

But the reality of the situation is that bug-eating, which used to be fodder for shows like Fear Factor, is being pushed on us because it is the next step in drastically moving our quality of life lower to compensate for a widening inequality gap and the continued loss of purchasing power of the dollar.

I have argued for years that our quality of life is slowly deteriorating as a result of not having sound money or sensible Central Bank policies. Shrinkflation is an obvious example. Less obvious examples include our cities slowly turning into demilitarized zones, the quality of products we use deteriorating and an array of campaigns to have us surrender our civil liberties and quality of life in the name of Greta Thunberg.

As I wrote about in my article “World Economic F*ck’em”, our government and media seem to be happily falling in line with the cues of the puppeteers of the world, many of whom can be found at the World Economic Forum, a collective of self-righteous global elites handing down virtues, values, lessons, lectures and political initiatives to us peons out here in the rest of the world.

That’s right. This group of globally unelected turbo-dildos knows what’s best for us. And what’s best for us always somehow results in us having less private property, fewer civil liberties and moving us one step closer to literally eating dog shit in order to survive. Thanks, Klaus!

Today I take my stand, because one day we’re making peace with eating crickets…the next we’re eating that weapons-grade slop they were serving up on the Nebuchadnezzar in The Matrix because the machines have taken over and food is no longer a delicacy, it is only a required and necessary source of sustenance and basic nutrients to adequately continue to keep our bodies functioning as batteries.

To put it simply, I’ve had enough. The idea of not having personal property and surrendering my civil liberties is one thing. Hell, I can make peace with both just by virtue of the fact that I don’t own much to begin with, and because the government is just going to take whatever it wants regardless. But when you start to replace my Cooler Ranch™ Doritos and Chick-fil-A with mealworms? Well, then you just found the boundaries of the hill that I’m willing to die on.

So if you work at NPR, The New York Times or the Washington Post, do me a favor and save your breath when it come to penning Klaus’ next virtuous-sounding op-ed suggesting we start digging through dirt to find earthworms for breakfast.

I’m not reading it, it’s obvious that you are shills for a globalist agenda that further divides the haves and the have-nots, and, for lack of a better way to put it: I’m not f*cking eating bugs.

QTR’s Disclaimer: I am not a guru or an expert. I am an idiot writing a blog and often get things wrong and lose money. I do not fact check contributor material that I aggregate from other sources. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning and generally trade like a degenerate psychopath. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities or any asset class – just my opinions of me and my guests. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in and I’m sure have lost more than I’ve made in my time in markets. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. Positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it three times because it’s that important.

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

A doctor whose license was recently suspended by Ohio’s medical board is planning to sue the board.

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny is planning to fight the decision, which members of the State Medical Board of Ohio said was over the doctor’s response to their investigation into her critical comments on COVID-19 vaccines, Dr. Tenpenny’s lawyer says.

“We’re going to definitely be filing suit,” Tom Renz, the lawyer, told The Epoch Times. “I don’t think there’s really any question about that.”

The suit will focus on alleged violations of Dr. Tenpenny’s due process rights and will challenge the suspension. Depending on the components, it may be filed in state court or may be filed in federal court.

“We’re going to just make sure that we do what we wish they would have done, which is to be ethical, to follow the law, and to make sure that justice is served,” Mr. Renz said.

The board declined to comment.

Suspension

Board members voted on Aug. 9 to suspend Dr. Tenpenny’s license until she meets certain conditions, including paying a fine and cooperating with investigators.

Members and the office of Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost said that Dr. Tenpenny did not properly respond to questions prompted by complaints filed over her public testimony before the Ohio House of Representatives that included references to claims that vaccinated people had become magnetic.

“This case is not about Dr. Tenpenny making comments about how when you’re vaccinated, 5g Towers could interfere with [you]. It’s not about Dr. Tenpenny saying, when you are vaccinated, your body becomes magnetized. It’s not about any of that, right?” Dr. Amol Soin, a board member, said ahead of the vote. “It really is about this whole issue of cooperation or not.”

Dr. Tenpenny’s actions included failing to appear at a deposition, according to Kimberly Lee, the state official who served as hearing examiner for the case.

“This is not punitive. This is procedural,” Assistant Attorney General James Wakley said before the vote. “This is a stick necessary to ensure that we get the answers that we require based on the board’s responsibility for ensuring the safety of the public.”

Dr. Tenpenny and Mr. Renz say the state is mislabeling how she responded to questions and other investigative steps. They say she filed legal objections to the subpoena and other documents, that the investigation was unconstitutional in part because the state could not define how it defines “failure to cooperate” and because it would not show them the complaints.

“You may not like her position on vaccines, on COVID, on whatever it is that she has. But that’s not the question before the board,” Mr. Renz told the board. “The question before the board today is one simple question: ‘Were her rights to due process violated? The record shows that they were. We have a hearing examiner who can’t actually define what those rights are.”

He added: “This appears very much like a witch hunt, like someone who’s looking for an outcome rather than looking to follow the law.”

The board declined to provide the complaints to The Epoch Times, citing state law. The law says that the board must investigate in a way that “protects the confidentiality of patients and persons who file complaints with the board.”

The same law says that punitive action can be leveled in the event of failure to cooperate with a board investigation.

Mr. Renz also says that the state should have gone to court to resolve the matter.

Mr. Wakley said that going to the courts would lead to “a complete breakdown of the process of investigations” and that “justice delayed is justice denied.”

If the board went to court for every case, “the board would never get anything done,” added Dr. Jonathan Feibel, another board member.

Breathalyzer Comparison

Mr. Yost, a Republican, said that Dr. Tenpenny could have gone to the courts before the vote.

Mr. Renz said that it was the state’s responsibility to compel and that they were not trying to cause a fight with the board.

Mr. Yost also told Just the News that Dr. Tenpenny’s actions were like a driver who was pulled over refusing to take a breathalyzer.

Mr. Renz said that comparison did not make sense.

“If a cop pulls you over, and says, ‘you need to take a breathalyzer,’ he’s got to have a reason for that, right? He’s not allowed to just randomly pull you over and say you need to take a breathalyzer because he doesn’t like how you look, he can’t pull you over and say that you need to take a breathalyzer unless you’re showing some signs and symptoms or give him some reason to think that you may be intoxicated,” Mr. Renz said. “Otherwise, that’s violating your due process rights.”

We know this one is going to sound too unbelievable to be true, but a real estate influencer (whatever that means) from Philadelphia who goes by the pseudonym “Big Bizzneesss” has been accused of fraud and deceit. 

The online persona, whose real name is Greg Parker Jr. and who hails from Philadelphia, has been offering “a dream come true for thousands of young investors looking to break into the real estate market”, according to a report from The Real Deal. 

His wife, Danielle “Nikki” Morris Parker, has also shared in showcasing his supposedly lavish lifestyle, the report says. But behind the rags-to-riches story and photos of private planes, luxury cars, and a multimillion-dollar mansion, the couple’s promises to empower young investors may not have been what they seemed.

The report, which cites a Philadelphia Inquirer expose, says that instead of helping young people replicate their success, they left people high and dry after taking in tens of thousands of dollars from some of their 285,000 Instagram followers. 

The couple would routinely hold seminars that ranged from $97 to $297, including upsells like mentorship and opportunities to invest in properties that they picked, the report says. They were offering “secrets of profiting from distressed real estate markets”, the report says. 

Benjamin Nelson, an undergraduate at Drexel University, was one such aspiring real estate entrepreneur. He shelled out $20,000 to the Parkers for a property purchase but the sale never consummated and then follow up calls to the Parkers were “met with silence”.

He said: “I keep getting the runaround. I just want to know what’s going on.”

He texted Parker last year in an attempt to get his money back: “Playing with someone’s hard earned money is one of the worst things you can do.”

And he’s not the only story. The report says that Federal lawsuits have been filed against the Parkers under the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) fraud act. The suits are alleging that the couple defrauded clients by promising either mentorship or property sales that never took place. 

Two suits have already been settled and Danielle Parker’s company has filed for bankruptcy, putting two other suits on hold. The Cleveland FBI office may be investigating potential criminal liability, the report says. 

Authored by Sundance via The Conservative Treehouse,

By now we are all too familiar with the schemes and plots of the corporate media as they participate in the political illusion of choice game.  However, for Rupert Murdoch and Fox News debate moderator Martha MacCallum, this catch shreds the remaining little credibility they carried.

Fox News is hosting the GOP debate in Wisconsin.  During this build up segment, Martha MacCallum introduces the “random Republican voters” in Wisconsin who will watch the debate.  Except, well… there’s a little problem.  MacCallum introduces Chris Lawrence as a “Wisconsin GOP voter” who seemingly supports Ron DeSantis.  However, MacCallum fails to mention that Chris Lawrence actually works for the Koch Network, who have recently pledged to spend $70 million to defeat President Trump.

Not only has Chris Lawrence worked for the Koch Network for the past 9 years, he is also the Senior Field Director for the Koch group Americans for Prosperity.  In essence, Lawrence is a political operative planted in the group by Fox News to support Ron DeSantis and make it appear like he is an innocuous voter.  Fox News and Martha MacCallum should be embarrassed, but they won’t be.  WATCH (prompted):

Don’t forget, Ron DeSantis supporters Eric Erickson and Guy Benson sit on the Koch Network AfP Advisory Board (see here).

It’s all one big game of illusion, and Fox News is once again a big part of the Republican fraud.  Proving yet again, that everything in the Ron DeSantis orbit is astroturf, phony, manufactured and made up.

👋🏼 Hi I looked into “Wisconsin voter” Christopher Lawrence, why didn’t you tell people he’s a paid activist belonging to the open borders network that recently pledged $70M to stop Trump?

👉 https://t.co/AtRDTWMkTc pic.twitter.com/qKDz9F6iwg

— Raheem. (@RaheemKassam) August 23, 2023

A DC-based trade group says that Huawei is building a network of secret semiconductor-fabrication facilities across China in what Bloomberg describes as “a shadow manufacturing network that would let the blacklisted company skirt US sanctions and further the nation’s technology ambitions.”

Huawei, which is receiving some $30 billion in state funding from the CCP and its home town of Shenzhen, moved into chip production last year according to the Semiconductor Industry Association, which says in a recent presentation that the sanctioned company has acquired at least two existing plants and is building at least three others.

The US Commerce Department under former President Donald Trump added Huawei to its entity list in 2019, which prohibits it from working with American companies under nearly all circumstances. If they’re constructing facilities under undisclosed subsidiaries, however, the telecom giant may be able to dodge sanctions and indirectly purchase US chipmaking equipment and other supplies that would otherwise be banned.

The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, in response to questions from Bloomberg News about the SIA warnings, which haven’t been previously reported, said it’s monitoring the situation and is ready to take action if necessary. It has already blacklisted dozens of Chinese companies beyond Huawei, including two the SIA says are part of Huawei’s network — Fujian Jinhua Integrated Circuit Co. and Pengxinwei IC Manufacturing Co., or PXW.  -Bloomberg

“Given the severe restrictions placed on Huawei, Fujian Jinhua, PXW and others, it is no surprise that they have sought substantial state support to attempt to develop indigenous technologies,” said the BIS in a statement to Bloomberg. “BIS is continually reviewing and updating its export controls based on the evolving threat environment and, as evidenced by the Oct. 7, 2022 rules, will not hesitate to take appropriate action to protect US national security.”

Last October, the Biden administration slapped China with export controls that prevent Chinese companies from acquiring certain advanced semiconductors and chipmaking equipment in an attempt to slow down the CCP’s military development. The controls excluded older-generation chipmaking equipment, such as those which use 28-nanometer technology or above. Companies on the blacklist, such as Huaei, can’t even buy older equipment without a rarely-issued license.

“These developments were already publicly reported on by multiple media outlets months before SIA simply highlighted these news items at an association meeting discussing market trends,” the SIA said in a statement.

It’s not clear why the association is sounding the alarm on these issues now. The Washington-based lobbying group represents the majority of the world’s semiconductor makers, including Intel Corp., South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co. and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Its members also include companies that produce chipmaking equipment, such as Applied Materials Inc. and the Netherlands’ ASML Holding NV.

Certain members of the lobbying group will face competition from Chinese rivals if they’re successful in building domestic production facilities, but SIA members like ASML and Nvidia Corp. lose revenue from China as American export controls become stricter. The association may be trying to warn members to be cautious in working with companies that could have hidden ties to blacklisted entities like Huawei. -Bloomberg

According to the SIA presentation, Huawei is backing five chip plants located primarily around Shenzhen where they are headquartered. If they operate without the Huawei label, it may be difficult for suppliers to know they’re dealing with a sanctioned company.

Under BIS rules, American suppliers are obligated to adhere to “know your customer” rules requiring them to investigate whether customers are buying under suspicious circumstances, such as an item being inconsistent with a customer’s stated needs.

“If there’s a red flag, then you have an obligation to investigate,” said lawyer Kevin Wolf of Akin Gump. “Absent a red flag, there is no affirmative duty to verify or go beyond the company’s representations.”

Since it was published in April, the SIA presentation has set off alarm bells both within the industry as well as the Biden administration, which is weighing more stringent export controls over Beijing.

The CCP, meanwhile, says the US is trying to hinder its economic development, and has vowed to develop its own local alternatives for chips, critical tech components, and production machinery.

Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

Well, the COVID panic has been over for more than a year, and most people seem to be breathing a bit easier now, both literally and figuratively.

Most everyone has returned to their pre-COVID lives. The masks are mostly gone, and testing is only undertaken by a few people who remain in fear.

The great majority of people state that they did the “right thing” and got the requisite initial jabs, although a majority of people state that they decided against the boosters. The reason? Most are unclear on that, except to say that, “I was beginning to have doubts… but I’m still glad I got the initial injections.”

Of course, since the “all clear” signal was sounded, those doctors who initially jumped on board the COVID Express with both feet have calmed down a bit, and many research facilities have been doing studies on the possibility of vax damage.

Those studies have been showing with fair consistency that the jab was indeed detrimental – both short-term and long-term. At this point, scores of studies have come to this conclusion, and even many prominent doctors who initially supported vaxxing are now stating emphatically, “We were lied to.”

So, we might expect that those who filed into clinics like cattle to get the jab would now have learned three important lessons –

• Don’t trust Big Pharma

• Don’t trust the media as regards Big Pharma

• Don’t trust the authorities as regards Big Pharma

And yet these lessons, with few exceptions, do not seem to have been learned.

Some people are still getting tested whenever they get cold symptoms. When asked why, they don’t seem to have a clear answer.

When asked if they would trust those who pushed the vaccines again, their eyes tend to glaze over. Again, they don’t really have an answer.

Most people who got the jab don’t seem to have advanced their thinking in the last year. Their learning curve appears to have halted the moment the media stopped talking about COVID.

But why should this be? Surely, the evidence of deception by Big Pharma and its support group is self-evident at this point. One only has to read the results of post-COVID studies that have been undertaken to arrive at the conclusion that the evidence is overwhelming: A major con has been played on the world – a con that netted tens of billions of dollars for Big Pharma.

The answer to the question, I’m afraid, may well be harder to face than the fact that the majority of people bought into the vaccine charade. The answer as to why very few people have advanced their understanding of what’s been done to them has more to do with human nature than medical perceptions.

It’s unfortunately true that, back when we went to school, we were taught almost entirely by rote. We weren’t asked to learn why the world believed that warfare was necessary; we were only told to memorise the names of the generals and the dates that the wars took place.

If we were asked to read the works of great writers, we weren’t expected to develop an understanding of their insights; we were merely expected to memorise some famous quotes by them.

And, once we had passed our exams, it was perfectly acceptable for us to forget what we’d memorized.

In short, a primary principle of “normal” education was that all that mattered was that we could parrot back whatever we had been fed most recently.

No surprise, then, that, in adulthood, we do the same. Of course, adults tend to study less than when they were in school. They rely instead on the evening news to keep them informed. We hear the latest urgent breaking news, and we pay careful attention. We then follow the instructions we receive from the “experts” doing the speaking and wait until the following evening to receive further indoctrination and instructions.

Along the way, we also hear “non-authoritative” information and are careful to classify such information as “conspiracy theory.” Such information enters the temporal lobe only briefly. In most cases, the human brain has been trained to delete such information, as it has no value with regard to following instructions. Worse, it makes us question that instruction. The temporal lobe becomes adept at deleting such information as though it had never been received.

And, here, we have a basic function of the human brain that affects the great majority of people – indeed, all people who have not, at some point in their lives, become independent thinkers:

Respond to controlled input and ignore peripheral input

For those who questioned the COVID scam early, a great deal was learned even as it was playing out. But the question remains, why did others, who bought into it, not learn from the plethora of studies that have been released over time?

After all, the controlled input regarding COVID ceased to be pushed a year or more ago. What that translates into is that those who simply memorise information and do not significantly question it now have nothing to go on. They’re stuck in neutral. They’re receiving occasional peripheral input that negates the controlled input, but they interpret it as peripheral input and, in a trained knee-jerk reaction, ignore it on each and every occasion. They don’t ever consider its totality, as they’re not programmed to think in that fashion.

As unpleasant as it is to consider, this inability is the norm, even for people who are otherwise intelligent and/or educated. Like hamsters on a wheel, they’re under the impression that they’re in forward motion, but in truth, they won’t move an inch forward until they receive controlled input instructing them to do so.

The COVID masks have been taken off, but an understanding of the fraud that has been perpetrated has, for the majority of people, not been understood.

It could be argued that the discussion presented above could be seen as being academic – pointless – as the COVID scare is now over, and the masks are gone.

But, in fact, unless we pay attention to what researchers have been concluding in the last year and, indeed, if we return to our well-ingrained training not to question, but merely to respond to immediate input, we’re primed to get suckered again.

If we and the majority of the people we know, once again, respond to the controlled input and ignore the peripheral input, we won’t merely have missed the boat on the reality of the COVID scam.

We’re primed to be fooled again.

*  *  *

The wave of political correctness and liberal group-think has taken the US by storm. The effort to silence opposing viewpoints and free speech will continue to accelerate. That’s why Doug Casey has prepared a timely video on surviving this modern American trend. In it Doug exposes the lies and mainstream bias that’s poisoning America… Click here to watch it now.

A leading medical journal, JAMA, recently published an essay lamenting that the National Institutes of Health would be slowing awards for “misinformation research,” aka, studies to justify censorship.

Written by JAMA reporter Rita Rubin, the piece cites one Dr. Richard Baron, president and CEO of the American Board of Internal Medicine.

Yet, what journalist Paul Thacker uncovered in a recent article in The Disinformation Chronicle is mind-numbingly par for the course given the propaganda we’ve seen from leading ‘experts’ over the last 3.5 years; Baron is totally conflicted.

According to Thacker, Baron has been collaborating with Pfizer and Moderna’s PR firm, Weber Shandwick.

But wait, there’s more!

And here comes a shocker: Richard Baron’s concern about “misinformation” was first triggered when physicians spoke out against COVID vaccine safety, efficacy, and side effects. Of course, these are the same concerns held by Weber Shandwick, who Pfizer and Moderna are paying big buck to promote their vaccines.

What a surprise.

…

Now that I’ve explained what Richard Baron views as “misinformation” let me explain what Weber Shandwick views as “medicine.” Some years back, Weber Shandwick was caught aiding Forest Pharmaceuticals in their illegal promotion of Celexa for treating children and adolescents suffering from depression. Forest later pleaded guilty and paid $313 million in 2010 to resolve this with the Department of Justice.

–The Disinformation Chronicle

And why would Baron collaborate with Weber Shandwick on “misinformation”? Because it’s become a central focus for vaccine makers and, of course, their PR firms! Hence the massive, undisclosed conflict of interest contained within the JAMA article.

3) Here’s the questions I sent to JAMA EIC @KBibbinsDomingo. She failed to respond. pic.twitter.com/Dnp4SztbGR

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) August 16, 2023

6) Weber Shandwick is also the PR firm contracted to staff the CDC’s vaccine centre to promote vaccines. pic.twitter.com/gjUpSjSLlO

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) August 16, 2023

After taking her sweet time, Bibbins-Domingo finally responded – saying in a statement:

“Thank you for bringing this to our attention.  We initiated our internal investigation earlier this week, in accordance with our standard processes for allegations of non-disclosure of conflicts.”

More via The Disinformation Chronicle…

Congress started investigating university misinformation researchers after the Twitter Files exposed some of the academics who cloak censorship under the rubric of “misinformation research”—people such as Stanford’s Renee DiResta, formerly with the CIA, and Brown University’s Claire Wardle. Due in part to this pressure, the NIH has been slowing down awards for research that helps the government censor Americans.

As JAMA’s Rita Rubin reported:

As stated by the Common Fund, the program’s objectives were to “investigate, develop, test, and disseminate new approaches for effective and equitable health communication,” an effort that would include addressing misinformation. The 5-year program would partner its research with technology and social media platforms, marketing experts, and health information communicators. The budget was set at $154.3 million, a tiny share of the NIH’s 2023 fiscal year budget of $47.5 billion but a windfall for health communications researchers.

One of the experts Rubin cites to explain why the NIH should keep funding medical “research” that runs afoul of First Amendment protected speech is Dr. Richard Baron. In Baron’s mind, this is all about politics, not free speech.

“They’re backing away from research that could save lives because there’s some political agenda they’re afraid they’re going to run afoul of.”

In this case, Baron said, the political agenda appears to center on the debate over whether people who make claims on social media that go against public health recommendations are simply exercising their First Amendment right to free speech.

At the bottom of the Rubin’s JAMA essay, the journal discloses the conflicts of interest of anyone named or mentioned in the essay. But at no point does JAMA disclose that Baron is collaborating with Weber Shandwick in his crusade against “misinformation.”

I first brought to light Baron’s collaboration with Weber Shandwick last November: “PR Firm Repping Vaccine Manufacturers Now Promotes Doctors Group Denouncing Alleged COVID Vaccine Disinformation.” Weeks before uncovering Baron’s ties to Weber Shandwick, I had discovered that the PR firm was repping Pfizer and Moderna while staffing the vaccine office at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Read the rest (and there’s a lot more) here…

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

New guidance on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) announced by New York Attorney General Letitia James warns schools not to ban any curriculum components from classrooms on the “pretext” of obscenity or lewdness—or face the prospect of legal action.

Ms. James and New York State Education Department Commissioner Betty Rosa have jointly released guidance reminding New York public schools that they have a legal obligation to promote DEI to schoolchildren.

The guidance (pdf) warns schools not to ban certain books; not to remove curriculum components under the “pretext” that they are inappropriate, lewd, or obscene; and not to stop students who are transgender or nonbinary from using single-gender facilities or participating in programs that don’t match their biological sex.

“As states such as Texas, Florida, and Missouri are banning books and canceling classes, New York is making clear that diversity, equity, and inclusion will always be protected and central to our children’s education,” Ms. James said in a statement.

Parents in a number of states—with Florida and Texas being at the forefront of such efforts—have raised objections to their children being exposed to what they say are sexually inappropriate, explicit, or outright pornographic materials and have been fighting to get such materials banned.

In the guidelines, Ms. James and Ms. Rosa told schools that New York State’s Dignity for All Students Act and the New York State Human Rights Law contain anti-discrimination provisions that prohibit a district from adopting a curriculum that “excludes” people or their histories because of race, color, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender—including gender identity.

Schools could be in violation of these laws if they decide to adopt an “exclusive” curriculum on an impermissible basis (such as race or gender identity) or if the curriculum “causes or contributes to race- or gender-based harassment.”

One notable example of an action that could cause a school to run afoul of the two laws is “using a pretext of inappropriateness or lewdness to systemically remove diverse perspectives from the classroom.”

Another such action, according to the guidance, is prohibiting classroom discussions on issues related to “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, nonbinary and gender expansive people, or diverse family structures and identities using a pretext of inappropriateness or obscenity.”

Yet another is “prohibiting a transgender, gender expansive, or nonbinary person from using the single-gender extracurricular program or facility most closely aligned with their gender identity.”

Parental Backlash

It comes as parents in schools across the country have raised objections to their children being exposed to books and classroom materials that contain sexually inappropriate or explicit material and are fighting to have such materials removed.

For example, Florida adopted a law that prohibits K–3 students from receiving any type of teaching or classroom materials that deal with sexual orientation or gender identity.

Florida Citizens Alliance, a group that has been pushing for the removal of sexually explicit materials from schools, provided a sample list of objectionable materials in its “porn in schools” report and argued that all the books listed at the very least “violate common decency for age-appropriate material and undermine Judeo-Christian and traditional family values.”

“We urge parents to be extremely vigilant on what their kids are reading,” the group wrote in the report.

Content that parents might find disturbing in books often found in school libraries is detailed in reports on an independent review site called BookLooks. The home page of the site reads, “Find out what objectionable content may be in your child’s book before they do.”

In another example of pushback against the availability of objectionable materials in schools, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill into law in June that restricts the availability of sexually themed content in public schools and affirms that parents are the main decision-makers on what materials their children are exposed to.

“Some school libraries have books with sexually explicit and vulgar materials,” Mr. Abbott said at a signing ceremony on June 12. “I’m signing a law that gets that trash out of our schools.”

By contrast, some organizations, such as civil liberties advocacy group PEN America, have expressed alarm over book bans, portraying moves to ban books and other classroom content as censorship and as discriminatory, and in some cases premised on a shaky legal foundation.

For example, PEN America wrote in a note that the crux of the “porn in schools” report by the Florida Citizens Alliance is the claim that the books on the list violate Florida laws because of alleged sexually explicit content, “characterized as ‘indecent,’ ‘inappropriate,’ ‘pornographic,’ and ‘obscene.'”

“These allegations do not appear to adhere to legal definitions nor take into account relevant federal jurisprudence, resulting in a lack of foundational integrity of the report,” the group argued.

PEN America stated in its Index of School Book Bans that there have been nearly 1,500 instances of book banning in schools in the first half of the 2022–2023 school year, a nearly 30 percent increase from the prior year.