iftttwall

In 2012, the United Nations proclaimed March 20 as the International Day of Happiness or World Happiness Day, which has been held on this date every year since. 

The aim is to promote awareness for a “more inclusive, equitable and balanced approach to economic growth that promotes the happiness and well-being of all people”. Although happiness and satisfaction are subjective parameters, the team behind the World Happiness Report has once again produced a country ranking this year that reveals clear differences between Western industrialized nations and countries in Asia and Africa.

In order to map the satisfaction of respondents in the 147 countries surveyed, participants were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with their current life on a ten-point scale. This was used to calculate an average value for the results between 2022 and 2024 for each country. 

As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the chart below, based on the report, Finland (7.736), Denmark (7.521) and Iceland (7.515) are the countries with the most satisfied residents according to calculations, while the three lowest scores are found among the residents of Lebanon (3.19), Sierra Leone (3.00) and Afghanistan (1.36).

 

You will find more infographics at Statista

The United States is ranked 24th out of the 147 countries in this year’s evaluation.

The report found that unemployment was a factor influencing life evaluation negatively, as were the anticipation of mental health issues or violent crime. Doubling one’s income had a positive effect, but it was by far not as big as the increase in perceived happiness correlated with carrying out benevolent acts like donating to charity, volunteering or helping a stranger. Expecting to have your wallet returned when lost coincided with an even bigger boost to life ratings, however.

It’s important to note here that the ranking of the World Happiness Report is not an objective survey based on key figures such as gross domestic product per capita, life expectancy or the quality of the social system. According to the authors, these are analyzed as “supporting factors” in the text of the report but have no influence on the score.

Authored by Javier Simon via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Technology has made financial transactions as easy as pressing a button on your phone. You can send or request money through mobile apps in seconds. And you can open new accounts like credit cards, personal loans, and even mortgages entirely online. But while technology has made financial transactions simpler, it also has opened a door through which your money can flow into the wrong hands. And that door is guarded by sophisticated scammers and fraudsters.

In fact, Americans lost a record $10 billion to fraud in 2023, according to the latest data by the Federal Trade Commission. And as we approach the finish line of tax season, scammers are racing to capture unsuspecting victims.

More than 2.4 million people in the United States have been targeted by IRS impersonators, according to Equifax. And that has resulted in a loss of $72.8 million. The U.S. Treasury inspector general for tax administration has called these operations “the largest, most pervasive impersonation scam in the history of the IRS.”

However, there are a few steps you can take to avoid all kinds of money scams.

Beware of Giving Out Your Personal Information

Many cases of fraud are tied to imposter or spoofer scams. This happens when a scammer contacts you via phone, text, or email and pretends to be someone else. It could be someone impersonating a bank representative or an IRS agent, for instance.

Their message may claim there’s “fraudulent activity” on your account and they’d need your username and password or PIN to rectify the situation. Or it may be someone saying they’re an IRS agent there to let you know that you need to provide your banking information to get your refund.

If anyone asks for your sensitive personal information, it should raise an immediate red flag. Bank employees don’t ever ask for sensitive information like passwords and PINs. And the IRS only communicates via postal mail.

Of course, these are just a few staged scenarios involving impersonators. The possibilities are endless. But here are other instances where you may be asked to provide banking and financial information, which should raise red flags.

• You owe taxes.

• Someone failed to deliver a package.

• An online romantic interest needs financial help.

• You need to submit personal information like account and routing numbers to finalize a job application.

• A company is providing a refund for overpayment.

Whatever the case may be, you should always stop and think when someone asks for your personal information. Delete the text, hang up the phone, close the email, and never click on any links. Go directly to the source such as the official site of your bank or the company in question.

Watch Out for Email Phishing Scams

Phishing is the process of tricking a consumer into willingly giving away sensitive information like bank account numbers, Social Security numbers, and important PINs. But while the scam can be easily detected via text or phone, it may not be so clear online. This is because scammers use technology to create emails or web pages that look like they are legitimately from a bank, the IRS, or a company you do business with.

You may receive an email claiming there’s been fraudulent activity in your bank or e-commerce account and they need your information to fix the issue. But asking for personal information or sending links to update accounts via email is not usually how legitimate organizations communicate. These types of emails should raise concerns.

Avoid clicking any links as they may contain spyware or malware. These are malicious programs designed to steal your information or infect your device.

You should close and delete suspicious emails. Then go directly to the website in question, such as your online banking site.

Set Up a Strong Online Defense

Scammers don’t always trick you into giving away your banking information and other important details. Sometimes, they get in through the backdoor. But there are some precautions you can take.

Create strong passwords. A strong password should be eight or more characters. And it should contain a mix of capital and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols.

Set your phone to automatic update. Ongoing updates can protect against the latest threats.

Multifactor authentication: This is a process that requires two or more credential entries to provide access to an account. It could come in the form of a code sent by email and phone, for example.

Back up data. You can back up important files on an external drive or on the cloud for added security.

Use security software. You can invest in a reliable security-protection software on your computer, phone, and tablet.

What to Do If You’ve Been a Victim of Fraud?

If you believe you’ve been a victim of fraud, call your bank or other financial institution immediately to report fraudulent activity. You could also report the incident to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). You should also update passwords.

The Bottom Line

To avoid money scams, never give away sensitive information like your passwords, PIN numbers, and Social Security number—even if the person asking for it seems legitimate. Instead, go directly to the source and see if there’s any real need for action. You can also protect yourself online by creating strong passwords, regularly updating your devices, and setting multifactor authentication on your accounts.

The Epoch Times copyright © 2025. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.

By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

President Donald Trump invoked emergency powers to increase U.S. critical minerals production in a bid to reduce reliance on “hostile foreign powers’ mineral production.”

In an executive order, the U.S. President invoked the Defense Production Act (DPA), which was passed in 1950 in response to production needs during the Korean War, which is the main tool at a U.S. president’s disposal to shift economic activity toward national defense priorities.

The executive order says that the Secretary of Defense may use the authority under section 303 of the DPA, for the domestic production and facilitation of strategic resources the Secretary of Defense deems necessary or appropriate to advance domestic mineral production in the United States.

“The United States possesses vast mineral resources that can create jobs, fuel prosperity, and significantly reduce our reliance on foreign nations,” the executive order says.

“The United States was once the world’s largest producer of lucrative minerals, but overbearing Federal regulation has eroded our Nation’s mineral production,” it adds.

“Our national and economic security are now acutely threatened by our reliance upon hostile foreign powers’ mineral production. It is imperative for our national security that the United States take immediate action to facilitate domestic mineral production to the maximum possible extent.”

The executive order also aims to accelerate private and public capital investment.

“The Secretary of Defense shall utilize the National Security Capital Forum to facilitate the introduction of entities to pair private capital with commercially viable domestic mineral production projects to the maximum possible extent,” according to the President’s executive order.

The US International Development Finance Corporation, working with the Department of Defense, is expected to help provide financing for new mineral production projects.

The National Mining Association (NMA) applauded the Presidential order to boost minerals production.

“By encouraging streamlined and transparent permitting processes, combined with financing support to counter foreign market manipulation, we can finally challenge China’s mineral extortion,” NMA president and CEO Rich Nolan said.

“We applaud this strong action that confronts our mineral crisis head on and we look forward to working with the administration to ensure made in America increasingly means mined in America.”

Amid ongoing meetings between American and Russian delegations to find a path forward to peaceful settlement of the Ukraine war, President Putin has issue rare remarks on his vision for a likely timeline.

He told Russian business leaders in a closed-door meeting this week that they shouldn’t expect a quick peace deal and that US-led sanctions are unlikely to be dropped anytime soon, despite President Trump’s recently hinting that he could drop sanctions.

The words, only revealed in regional newspapers Thursday, were issued at Tuesday’s annual congress of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs.

Putin conveyed his view US-backed negotiations would be “difficult and slow” no matter the optimism coming from the White House.

“This [war and sanctions] machine won’t be that easy to turn around,” one attendee summarized of Putin’s take after leaving the private session.

“The president advised us not to be naive and to understand how many people and interests are involved in the processes currently taking place,” journalist Farida Rustamova reported another source as saying.

Attendees further cited Putin’s presentation as “positive but objective” while yet lacking in “unbridled optimism” – which characterized some of the initial back and forth between Washington and Moscow during opening weeks of the Trump presidency. 

There were reports a month ago that the Kremlin wants Russian media and officials to be more restrained regarding the glowing and enthusiastic coverage of statements from Trump and his vice president J.D. Vance – after they made clear that Ukraine would never join NATO.

Putin in a Tuesday phone call reportedly pressed Trump to grant recognition of Russian sovereignty over the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.

Trump has appeared open to this, given his previous rhetoric toward Kiev was that it would have to eventually make concessions if it hopes to end the war. The easiest concession to make is regarding Crimea, and this will likely be the very first recognition Moscow asks for along with the four “new territories”. As for upcoming meetings:

• US TEAM TO MEET UKRAINIANS SUNDAY IN RIYADH: CBS
• US TEAM TO MEET WITH RUSSIANS ON MONDAY: CBS

Putin meanwhile has little incentive to rush negotiations – given that with every passing week his forces continue to take ground. For example, Ukraine forces are fast retreating in Kursk, and there’s been wide recognition that Zelensky’s cross-border gambit is effectively over.

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Denial doesn’t end well, and the ‘Economy of Denial’ is destined to deconstruction.

Even the most opinionated become circumspect when the discussion turns to The Addiction Economy, for the term The Addiction Economy calls things by their real name, which disrupts our protective shield of denial.

Yes, denial, for ours is an Economy of Denial, where the surface stability of normalcy demands we avoid calling things by their real name at all costs, for that lays bare the core mechanisms of the Economy of Denial: addiction, extortion, deception. This is a jarring, disturbing mirror, for we see our own reflection.

We become quiet when The Addiction Economy comes up, for the core concept here is that highly profitable addictions have been normalized to the degree that the majority of the populace is addicted but doesn’t identify their addiction as an addiction because the words addiction and extortion have such negative connotations that they threaten both our sense of normalcy (i.e. belonging to the safe, stable, acceptable majority) and our self-pride that we’re far above the poor lost souls who succumb to addiction.

Addiction calls up images of illicit drugs and lost souls trapped in destructive dependency. Since discipline and will power are the highly valued engines of accomplishment, we view addicts with disdain, for their emotional craving for immediate comfort and solace has overwhelmed their rational will.

This is why saying that we’re addicted to our phones, social media, snacks, junk food, fast food, novelty, selfies, entertainment, the endless scroll of “news” and all things “money” is so disquieting, as all of these addictions have been normalized. Since “everyone does it,” it can’t be an addiction, right?

The denial isn’t just about recognizing behaviors as destructive dependencies; it’s also a denial of the core dynamic of our economy, which is weaponizing and normalizing our instincts to overcome our rationality. As Charles Darwin observed, “The very essence of instinct is that it’s followed independently of reason.”

It’s natural to seek sources of immediate comfort and solace, and be drawn to sources of novelty, distraction, amusement and belonging that are socially approved. These are our instinctual, hard-wired drives for dopamine hits and endorphin highs.

What The Addiction Economy does is exploit these instincts by engineering products and service to be so addictive that dependency is guaranteed. Given an immediate dopamine hit, rationality and will both dissipate into the ether, and the instinct to get another hit of comfort and solace increases.

Bet you can’t eat just one is the entire goal, and it’s easily amplified / weaponized. But just as important as the weaponization is the narrative control of normalizing destructive dependencies: impulsively looking at our phone hundreds of times a day isn’t like an addict seeking a hit; it’s normal. Turning to snacks for dopamine hits isn’t an addiction, it’s normalized. Everyone snacks, all day long.

This narrative control is so effective that anyone who refuses to get on board the addiction train is considered not just abnormal, but a threat because refusal is a way of saying “all of this is destructively addictive,” i.e. calling things by their real name, and this brings us face to face with our own dependencies on these products and services to provide us comfort, amusement and solace.

Just as the alcoholic cannot admit to being addicted to alcohol, we can’t admit that our dependencies are dependencies. We rationalize it all away, for the rational mind cannot reverse our hard-wired instincts, but it is absolutely masterful at conjuring rationalizations.

The same can be said for extortion, an ugly sounding word conjuring up images of sordid gangsters and helpless victims. That this is a core strategy of Corporate America is an ugly truth that we prefer to cloak with denial. I outlined this dynamic in Here Come the Chaos Monkeys: we took away the durability of your appliance, now pay us extra for an extended warranty.

Deception is a core dynamic in the Economy of Denial, for to call it deception, i.e. by its real name, is to reveal the destructive nature of the economy. Deception plays out in multiple levels: products are labeled deceptively to con consumers into buying what they seek–a high-status product that enhances their self-worth in a society geared for downward mobility–with an inferior product intentionally packaged to claim something that isn’t true.

So the package of coffee is labeled “Kona Coffee,” but the fine print reveals it is only 10% Kona coffee. The other 90% is cheap filler. The idea is obvious: label cheap coffee as being $50 per pound specialty coffee, and sell it to those who feel better about themselves drinking coffee that’s labeled as high-status.

The deception is universal: the once prestigious brand is now made cheaply as a commoditized product bound for the landfill, but the brand can still be milked for higher profit margins.

Here’s another example. I recently accompanied a friend seeking 100% cranberry juice at a Big Box retailer. A dizzying array of juices claimed to be 100% cranberry juice, but this was not the case; a careful reading of the label revealed that they were “100% juice” but not 100% cranberry juice; they were blends of cheaper juices. Only one brand had only cranberry juice in the list of ingredients. The rest were intentionally deceptive.

The most important deception is the one protecting us from admitting that our economy doesn’t just profit from deception, it’s dependent on deception, in effect addicted to addiction, extortion and deception because if these were somehow extinguished, profits would collapse.

Denial is the core dynamic of collapse. Refusing to call things by their real name is the core rationalization that enables us to avoid facing our economy’s dependence on destructive dependencies. It’s cute to call the weaponization of instinct The Attention Economy, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s The Addiction Economy.

Denial doesn’t end well, and the Economy of Denial is destined to deconstruction. Our only option as individuals and households is Going Cold Turkey in our Addiction Economy.

*  *  *

Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

Subscribe to my Substack for free

Authored by Wilson Beaver & Anna Gustafsn via RealClearDefense,

So far, Elon Musk’s DOGE has swept through government agencies like USAID, brushing off cobwebs and uncovering skeletons as it goes. Now, DOGE is set to enter a much bigger agency whose shortfalls demand reform: the Department of Defense (DoD).

Long criticized for its budget woes, the DoD has recently faced accusations of overspending, underspending, and even simple misspending – criticisms which are all well founded. In fact, the DoD consistently mismanages its budget, a fact that’s led it to fail all of its last seven audits.

To address these issues, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently announced that he would work with DOGE to conduct a DoD-wide budget review. Already, this initiative has revealed $80 million in wasteful spending, including $1.9 million in “DEI transformation and training” and $3.5 million in “Defense HR Support for DEI.”

While the Pentagon is notoriously resistant to change, additional pressure from DOGE and the administration could finally force the reforms needed to modernize the American military, refocus on warfighting capabilities, and rid the Pentagon of absurd budget line items.

But DOGE’s mission isn’t just to slash budgets: it’s also to restore efficiency. Specifically, DOGE’s role is to ensure the federal government makes the most effective use possible of American taxpayer dollars.

Fundamentally, the DoD exists to ensure America’s warfighting capability—a task DOGE has no intention of obstructing. And even as the DoD’s mission grows more and more urgent, Pentagon dollars continue to be misused, a flaw that cries for immediate correction.

Hegseth recently announced he’d be implementing a DoD budget “cut” of 8%, or about $50 billion. Rather than simply imposing strict cuts, this plan seeks to “refocus… and reinvest… existing funds” to build a more lethal fighting force, restore “warrior ethos,” and reestablish global deterrence.

This shift is essential at a time when our arsenal is severely depleted and outdated and we lack the ships and planes to deter China from launching an attack in the Indo-Pacific. To fix this, Secretary Hegseth should prioritize reinvesting funding cuts into procurement and, specifically, into the construction of new of ships, planes, and munitions.

Hegseth should also divert dollars from personnel – a category that accounts for almost a quarter of the DoD’s budget.

Already, he and Musk have announced plans to reduce the civilian workforce by between 5% to 8%, a cut that will save the DoD between $9 and $14.5 billion. So far, he’s implemented this plan via a hiring freeze and the firing of probational employees and recent hires.

Many  have sought to villainize the Pentagon’s budget purge. Yet those in national security should recognize the need to cut defense budget waste, especially given recent developments on the international stage.

There, China continues to rapidly modernize its military to challenge U.S. dominance, while Russia persists in its aggression in Eastern Europe. North Korea still pursues its ever-growing nuclear ambitions (and strengthens its support for Russia), while Iran maintains its destabilizing influence in the Middle East.

These various actors all share one common feature: a vicious antipathy toward the United States.

The burden falls on the Pentagon and the DoD to protect the American people. DOGE represents a historic opportunity for the DoD to further this mission by rethinking how it organizes, supports, and employs its people. The goal isn’t to cut corners—it’s to reinvest in the capacity and capability of America’s warfighting force.

In a world of rising global threats, America cannot afford inefficiency. The Pentagon must embrace DOGE’s mission to break free from outdated bureaucracy and inefficient spending. Only then will the DoD be able to enhance American warfighting capability and ensure our security and prosperity.

Wilson Beaver is a Senior Policy Advisor for defense budgeting at The Heritage Foundation. 

Anna Gustafson is a member of Heritage’s Young Leaders Program.

Columbia University has agreed to meet wide-ranging conditions set by the Trump administration to restore $400 million in federal funding, according to a memo sent by the university to the federal government reported first by the Wall Street Journal.

In response to demands from the Trump administration, Columbia will implement several notable changes, including ending mask mandates on campus, granting 36 campus police officers expanded authority to arrest students, and appointing a senior vice provost with extensive oversight powers for its Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies department, as well as the Center for Palestine Studies.

Control of the Middle East department has been a central dispute in negotiations and sparks controversy across campus. Faculty at Columbia and nationwide are expressing deep reservations about letting the federal government dictate how they can operate an academic department. The new vice provost, appointed by Columbia, will review curriculum, nontenure faculty hiring and leadership “to ensure the educational offerings are comprehensive and balanced.” -WSJ

Columbia’s agreement represents a turning point in ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and some elite universities. President Trump has emphasized the need to address alleged antisemitism on campuses, particularly singling out Columbia due to recent controversies and protests regarding the Middle East conflict.

Earlier this month, Trump administration officials suspended federal grants and contracts to Columbia, alleging insufficient protections for Jewish students during pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations. Following intense negotiations, Columbia agreed to multiple demands outlined by the federal task force on antisemitism, and even committed to additional reforms promoting intellectual diversity.

“We have worked hard to address the legitimate concerns raised both from within and without our Columbia community, including by our regulators, with respect to the discrimination, harassment, and antisemitic acts our Jewish community has faced in the wake of October 7, 2023,” the university stated in the memorandum.

A senior Columbia administrator indicated that while the university considered legal action against the federal government, officials ultimately concluded that cooperation was necessary due to the federal government’s significant financial influence. Some reforms listed by the administration were already under consideration, according to the university.

Among the new policies, Columbia will prohibit disruptive protests involving the occupation of campus buildings, require protesters to identify themselves, and ensure an unbiased admissions process. The university also plans to closely investigate a recent decrease in enrollment among Jewish and African-American students.

Although Columbia stands among the country’s wealthiest universities, with an endowment of about $15 billion, it wouldn’t take long for it to cease to operate in any recognizable form without government money.

That stark reality hovers behind the school’s concessions. Columbia has agreed to curtail protests that take over buildings and disrupt classes. The school will require protesters to identify themselves and will review admissions practices to “ensure unbiased admissions processes.”

Columbia noted they have “identified a recent downturn in both Jewish and African-American enrollment, and we will closely examine those issues.”

Additionally, Columbia will adopt a specific definition of antisemitism developed by its own antisemitism task force, clarifying what constitutes antisemitic speech or behavior, including exclusion of students based on views toward Israel or the celebration of violence against Israelis or Jewish individuals.

The university emphasized steps beyond federal demands, including institutional neutrality on political issues, launching educational programming at its Tel Aviv hub, and developing a free K-12 curriculum focused on promoting open inquiry and civil discourse.

To further enhance academic diversity, Columbia announced it will hire faculty jointly affiliated with the Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies and other departments such as Economics, Political Science, and the School for International and Public Affairs.

Other universities nationwide are closely observing Columbia’s concessions, as many depend on federal funds, student loans, and research grants critical to their operations. The outcome may influence negotiations at other institutions facing similar government scrutiny.

*  *  *

You can support ZeroHedge by picking up a waxed canvas hat!

Authored by Sam Antar via White Collar Fraud,

New York Attorney General Letitia James has made a name for herself prosecuting landlords and real estate fraudsters. Yet our investigation reveals troubling discrepancies in her own property filings—irregularities that would likely result in stiff penalties for most New Yorkers.

Documents from the NYC Department of Buildings show a pattern of inconsistencies about a Brooklyn property James owns—inconsistencies that mysteriously received special treatment when reported.

The Discrepancy: Official Records vs. James’ Filings

Note: Links to NYC Department of Buildings records may load slowly due to system capacity limitations. Please be patient as they connect to the city’s database.

At the heart of the issue is a contradiction between what the city officially permits and what James’ filings claim.

The Certificate of Occupancy for 296 Lafayette Avenue in Brooklyn—issued January 26, 2001—clearly states the property is a five-family dwelling regulated under NYC housing laws. James purchased this property on February 14, 2001, just two weeks after this Certificate of Occupancy was issued. This official classification has been on the books for more than two decades.

Yet James repeatedly filed permit applications identifying the same property as a four-family dwelling—a classification subject to different regulatory requirements under New York City building codes. Under NYC building code classifications, her property with five units would be classified as C2 (which applies to buildings with 5+ units), while her filings list it as C3 (which applies to 3-4 unit buildings). This fundamental contradiction between the long-established Certificate of Occupancy and her permit applications raises serious questions about regulatory compliance.

Multiple Discrepant Filings Show Pattern, Not Mistake

This wasn’t a one-time error. We uncovered multiple DOB permit applications containing identical discrepancies:

• July 2020 Application (Job #340743146): Documents show “Dwelling Units: Existing: 4” despite the Certificate of Occupancy listing five units for the past 19 years.
• September 2020 Application (Job #340768510): Another filing repeats the same inconsistent information.

The permit application details are explicit, stating: “Total Number of Dwelling Units at Location: 4” for a property documented in the Certificate of Occupancy as a five-unit building since 2001.

This discrepancy goes far beyond a simple administrative error. As noted in my previous post, mortgage documents signed by Letitia James repeatedly characterize the property as a four-unit building—a critical representation that directly contradicts the official Certificate of Occupancy, which clearly designates the structure as a five-family dwelling. This inconsistency carries significant legal and financial implications, potentially allowing James to secure more favorable lending terms or avoid stricter regulatory requirements that apply to larger multi-unit properties.

The applications to the Department of Buildings were submitted through the city’s professional certification program, under which the architect affirmed:

“I HEREBY STATE THAT I HAVE EXERCISED A PROFESSIONAL STANDARD OF CARE IN CERTIFYING THAT THE FILED APPLICATION IS COMPLETE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS… I FURTHER REALIZE THAT ANY MISREPRESENTATION OR FALSIFICATION OF FACTS MADE KNOWINGLY OR NEGLIGENTLY BY ME, MY AGENTS OR EMPLOYEES, OR BY OTHERS WITH MY KNOWLEDGE, WILL RENDER ME LIABLE FOR LEGAL AND DISCIPLINARY ACTION…”

This sworn certification underscores the seriousness of the discrepancy. It was not merely a clerical oversight, but a representation made within a process where legal and professional accountability is explicitly defined—yet seemingly unenforced in this case.

Why It Matters: Critical Regulatory Differences

The implications of this discrepancy go far beyond paperwork—it affects compliance with safety and occupancy laws that vary based on unit count. According to the NYC Administrative Code, buildings with different unit counts face materially different regulatory requirements, particularly in safety standards. The NYC Building Code mandates different fire protection protocols based on dwelling unit count, affecting everything from required safety systems to inspection frequency.

The difference between a four-unit and five-unit building is particularly significant, as five units triggers additional regulatory oversight. By listing a five-unit building as having only four units, these applications potentially circumvented proper regulatory review—an action that, if done knowingly, may constitute a violation of state and city law.

The Case of the Missing Unit

This pattern raises a disturbing question: What happened to the fifth unit? If the Certificate of Occupancy legally certifies five units since 2001 but James’ filings consistently reference only four, we face a straightforward logical conclusion: either the property currently has five units and the filings contain false information, or the property has four units and an unauthorized conversion has occurred. In the latter case, for ordinary property owners, such unauthorized alterations trigger immediate investigations, stop-work orders, and significant penalties. The NYC Department of Buildings routinely issues violations for exactly this type of undocumented change to a building’s legal occupancy configuration.

Legal Framework: False Statements in Building Documents

These discrepancies potentially implicate several New York laws:

• NYC Administrative Code §28-211.1: This section explicitly prohibits “false statements in certificates, forms, written statements, applications, reports or certificates of correction” related to building permits and compliance documents.
• NY Penal Law §175.30: This statute defines the offense of “Offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree” as “knowing that a written instrument contains a false statement or false information, [when one] offers or presents it to a public office or public servant with the knowledge or belief that it will be filed with, registered or recorded in or otherwise become a part of the records of such public office or public servant.” This offense is classified as a Class A misdemeanor.
• NY Penal Law §175.35: This elevates the offense to a Class E felony when done “with intent to defraud the state or any political subdivision, public authority or public benefit corporation of the state.”

Building code compliance is not discretionary. The NYC Administrative Code §28-202.1 establishes a framework for enforcement through both civil and criminal penalties for violations, stating “violations of this code, the 1968 building code, the zoning resolution or other laws or rules enforced by the department shall be punishable by civil penalties.”

A Double Standard in Action: DOB’s Puzzling Response

Perhaps most revealing is how the city’s Department of Buildings responded when the discrepancy was brought to its attention.

The most troubling aspect emerged when a complaint was filed about this discrepancy. The DOB’s response was surprisingly dismissive:

“MINOR ERROR, C/O 3P0010437 LIST 5 FAMILY BLDG.”

The original complaint was quite specific, stating:

“THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN BUILDNG PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY – APPLICATIONS LIST THE BUILDING AS A 4 FAMILY BUT C OF O INDICATES A 5 FAMILY DWELLING. PERMIT APPLICATIONS SIGNED BY LETITIA JAMES APPEAR TO CONTAIN FALSE INFORMATION.”

Yet instead of typical enforcement action, the agency simply labeled it a “minor error”—not even disputing the factual claim, just minimizing its significance despite the discrepancy persisting for nearly two decades.

One Rule for James, Another for Everyone Else

This lenient treatment stands in stark contrast to how the DOB typically handles similar inconsistencies. Consider this example:

In a case argued by housing attorney Jesse Gribben, when tenants discovered their building contained more units than listed on its Certificate of Occupancy, the DOB required “the presence of 24/7 fire guards as a condition of continued occupancy.” The courts supported tenants who organized a rent strike over the violation.

Under the NYC Administrative Code §28-213.1, “in addition to any penalties otherwise authorized by law pursuant to article 202 and the rules of the department, whenever any work for which a permit is required pursuant to this code has been performed without a permit, a penalty shall be imposed by the department.” For ordinary property owners, such violations can result in significant fines and mandatory remediation requirements.

Questions That Deserve Answers

Our investigation raises several troubling questions:

• Why were James’ applications approved despite containing information that contradicts the Certificate of Occupancy that has been in place since 2001?
• Why did DOB dismiss as “minor” what would typically trigger enforcement actions for ordinary property owners?
• Is there a reasonable explanation for this apparent differential treatment?
• Given the building is legally certified for five units for over 20 years but consistently described as having only four, has an unauthorized unit conversion occurred without proper permits or inspections? This would constitute a serious violation that typically results in immediate enforcement action for non-public officials.

As the state’s chief legal officer, James has a duty to explain these irregularities. If regulatory enforcement varies based on power or position, the public is owed not just answers—but accountability.

We’ll continue monitoring this situation. Stay tuned for updates.

Authored by James Howard Kunstler,

“Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ ‘due process.’” 

– Buck Sexton

Impeachment would be too mild for the claque of Woke-activist federal judges attempting to nullify the executive branch with hectoring writs against any and all sorts of executive actions. If simply bounced off their benches, they could just take up new careers as NPR legal commentators or transsexual pole-dancers. Rather, what you’ve got here is an obvious seditious conspiracy, plain for all to see, orchestrated by the same legal Nosferatus as RussiaGate, the 2020 election, and the J-6 witch hunt.

The catch is, this time it is discoverable and subject to prosecution because the party running this legal insurrection no longer has its hands on the levers of power in the DOJ and the FBI as it did when they ran the aforementioned ops. And so, the mighty silence emanating from those two agencies just now should tell you something: namely, that cases are being carefully constructed to finally bring these despicable caitiffs to real and chastening law.

If you want to know one paramount reason for institutional failure in our country, look to the evil enterprise that calls itself “Lawfare.” It originated as a blog launched on September 1, 2010, founded by three key figures: Benjamin Wittes, Jack Goldsmith, and Robert Chesney. Over time it evolved into an activist operation, The Lawfare Institute, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to (cough cough) “Hard National Security Choices,” and run under the shady umbrella of the Brookings Institution.

The point of Lawfare is self-evident in its name: it is an instrument of warfare against a perceived enemy which, for the past decade, has been the political faction led by Mr. Trump, the once-and-current chief executive of the federal government. Mr. Trump is a danger to the bureaucratic arm of the federal government because he has defined it as a racketeering operation and moved decisively to end its depredations.

Lawfare is the praetorian guard of the permanent DC bureaucracy, including especially its rogue intel actors, who function as enforcers for the Democratic party that largely staffs the bureaucracy.

Norm Eisen, a Brookings senior fellow, is the chief operational strategist for the Lawfare enterprise. He has been active in all its ops, capers, and mind-fucks since Mr. Trump came on the scene in 2015 vowing to “drain the swamp” (i.e., end the racketeering). Norm Eisen holds leadership roles in two subsidiary Lawfare orgs: States United Democracy Center and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Eisen’s broader connection stems from his history of orchestrating legal challenges against Mr. Trump — advising the Mueller investigation, drafting impeachment articles, and leading CREW’s 200-plus lawsuits in Mr. Trump’s first term.

Now, following the Biden interregnum, Norm Eisen leverages a network of nonprofits (ACLU, Public Citizen, etc.) and left-leaning judges to file hundreds of new lawsuits to thwart the MAGA clean-up effort under Elon Musk’s DOGE. Tax filings show that CREW’s funding, in part, comes from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations. Item: during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, CREW received $432,000 in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans from Newtek Small Business, which evolved into a financial holding company after acquiring National Bank of New York City in January 2023, rebranded as Newtek Bank.

The money-laundering through multitudinous foundations, NGOs, and “non-profits” is the essence of the Democratic Party’s racketeering mode in league with federal bureaucracies such as USAID that dispensed billions of dollars to a vast network of activist recipients. Translation: it provides salaries (often six-figures) to party foot-soldiers whose only duties are to move the money through the organizational layers and to be available for such party tasks as ballot harvesting, vote-counting, and organizing riots.

This is the mischief that Mr. Trump seeks to put an end to, and so he must be thwarted at all costs by those whose lifeblood depends on the ongoing rackets. The so-called “Resistance” alliance between the Democratic Party and the bureaucracy seeks to prevent reform by any means necessary. Since they no longer control potent executive agencies such as the DOJ and the FBI for intimidating and punishing their enemies, their only recourse is the federal judiciary and its officers of the courts, that is, lawyers and judges practicing Lawfare.

The federal judges are political appointees, such as John J. McConnell from the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, who was a personal injury lawyer (i.e., “ambulance chaser”) and major Democratic Party donor, giving nearly $700,000 to party causes, and serving as Rhode Island Democratic State Committee treasurer. Judge McConnell issued a wide-ranging restraining order against the DOGE-advised freeze of federal funding launched in February of this year. McConnell’s daughter, Catherine, is a senior policy advisor at the U.S. Department of Education, appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022. See how that works?

Similarly, James Boasberg, a RussiaGate cast member, and as a presiding judge in the DC federal court in sixty J-6 cases. Independent journalist Laura Loomer alleges that Judge Boasberg’s daughter, Katherine, works for Partners for Justice (PFJ), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that is dedicated to defending “criminal illegal aliens and gang members,” including opposing their deportation, and that it receives significant funding from U.S. government grants, such as those from USAID. Judge Boasberg notoriously issued a restraining order last week against the deportation of Tren de Aragua gang members labeled by the DOJ as a terrorist organization. See how that works?

Now, the difference between Lawfare and the practice of law is that Lawfare trafficks lavishly in lies to do its business in the courts and actual law practice is supposed to be dedicated to ascertaining the truth in matters that come before the courts. Lawfare is grounded in dishonesty — as is its main client, the Democratic Party. That is exactly why Judge James Boasberg went along with FBI Director James Comey’s false warrant applications in the FISA court that enabled the RussiaGate operation to do its dirty business. Thus, the grand orchestrator of the Lawfare enterprise as a whole, Norm Eisen, is a sort of Father-of-Lies.

Remember beyond all this sturm and drang stands an essential principle: the truth is sturdy and untruth is fragile. 

Like you, I am standing by to see what eventually comes out of the Trump DOJ in the way of cases that might definitively settle this mighty battle between Lawfare and the law.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Hollywood “actor and activist” John Cusack has added his support to the organised attacks on Tesla facilities and vehicles, declaring that Elon Musk is a fascist who is “literally killing people.”

Cusack, who used to be likeable in the 1990s after movies such as ‘Say Anything’ and ‘Better Off Dead’, has now nailed his radical leftist colours to the mast after joining a recent online “Mass Mobilizing” ‘TeslaTakedown’ Call during which various extremists plotted a coordinated anti-Tesla action for March 29th.

Cusack claimed that Musk is a “pathological liar,” a “criminal,” a “sociopath,” and a “ghoul” who is “literally killing people.”

The actor also claimed that Elon likes to repeatedly flash Hitler salutes in public.

“These are unprecedented times of mass criminality,” declared Cusack.

He continued, “I mean those terms very precisely because who else would use his own child as a sympathy prop while literally taking starving aid from people all over the world,”

“People are going to die because of this madness. He’s a man who threw 80,000 people out of the VA indiscriminately,” Cusack further blathered.

Actor & Blue Anon spox @johncusack says @elonmusk twice made a “Sieg Heil Nazi salute” & is literally killing people by helping cut govt spending.

He says by accessing Treasury Dept. “metadata,” Musk knows everything people like Cusack are searching for on the internet.

“Musk… pic.twitter.com/pPKh1uEIkP

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) March 20, 2025

Cusack also called for people to get involved with Bernie Sanders and AOC’s “fight the Oligarchy” tour.

As we earlier highlighted, far left Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett was also part of the ‘TeslaTakedown’ discussion, expressing a desire to see Elon Musk “taken down.”

While the FBI investigates far-left terrorist attacks against Tesla service centers, showrooms, Supercharging networks, and vehicles, the radical Soros-funded non-profit Indivisible is preparing to launch the multi-city offensive against the American company in the coming days.

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.