This week, we speak with Mike Freno, Chairman and CEO at Barings. The firm is owned by Mass Mutual, and half of its $431 billion in invested assets are from the insurance giant, with the rest coming from institutional investors.

Over 20 years with the firm, Freno has held various positions including Managing Director, Head of Global High Yield, and Head of Global Markets. He also spent 5 years as the company’s President, overseeing a majority of Barings’ business sectors, including investments, sales, operations and tech. Additionally, Mike served as Chairman of the Board of Barings BDC. Alongside his Chairman and CEO duties, he is a current member of the MassMutual Executive Leadership team. On this episode, Barry and Mike discuss the evolution of the asset management industry, his well-rounded business experience, and what it takes to lead with “confident humility.”

A list of his favorite books is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Torsten Slok, Chief Economist at Apollo Global Management. He continues top publish frequently, including the Daily Spark, and the Apollo Academy. Previously, he was at Deutsche Bank, where he was top-ranked by Institutional Investor in fixed income and equities for 10-years.

 

Favorite Books

 

 

 

 

Books Barry Mentioned

The post MiB: Mike Freno, Barings Chairman and CEO appeared first on The Big Picture.

VDH: The Addicted, Petty, And Hysterical Left

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

Donald Trump won the 2024 election in part because the left’s hysterical style of attacking Trump no longer worked.

After a decade of this unhinged furor, it proved worthless in winning public support... and for two simple reasons.

One, after years of Russian collusion hoaxes, the laptop disinformation farce, and the warped lies about the “suckers” and “fine people on both sides”—the shrill left became predictable.

So, the bored public began tuning them out, switching channels, hitting the mute button, and pulling the plug.

Like the deleterious effects of inflation that eventually render a currency worthless, nonstop hectoring, hysterics, pontification, and distortion finally made all such criticisms of Trump mostly as valueless as 1930s German marks.

Second, the wearied public never heard reasoned counterarguments from the likes of a Rachel Maddow. Instead, on spec, she kept mouthing, “The walls are closing in” on Trump.

Joe Biden did not explain why his open border was a better idea than Trump’s closed one. He preferred mumbling about “semi-fascists!” and “ultra-MAGA!”

The Never Trumpers did not critique the Trump deficits. Instead, they hammered away that Trump was Hitler, or Mussolini, or Putin—or just a dangerous dictator or autocrat.

Angry retired generals never demonstrated why Trump was, in their view, an existential threat to democracy. Instead, they shouted nonstop in op-eds and interviews that he was a fascist, Nazi-like, no different from the guards at Auschwitz, a pathological liar, and should be summarily removed.

Worn-out voters began to understand these psychodramas were substitutes for substantive criticism or occasions for legitimate debate.

Indeed, the exhausted public finally concluded that the hysterics increased in direct proportion to the poverty of the charges.

So, what did ten years of such derangement achieve for the left?

Trump now has control of the White House and both houses of Congress operate under Republican majorities.

The Supreme Court is mostly conservative. Almost all of Trump’s issues—the border, immigration, the economy, foreign policy, and crime—poll well over 50 percent.

No matter, the left is still hammering away at the trivial and irrelevant—and remains paralyzed in furor and hysterics.

When Snoop Dogg performed for the Trump inauguration, Ann Navarro of The View, in racist fashion, called the African-American rapper “a trained seal.”

When Pete Hegseth went before the Senate for confirmation as Secretary of Defense nominee, Democrats asked almost nothing about nuclear strategy, recruitment shortfalls, or a paucity of artillery shells.

Instead, what followed were animated gotcha lectures about Hegseth’s prior adultery.

No sooner had Hegseth finished his successful audit than the left rounded up his former sister-in-law, now divorced from his brother.

A hardcore Democrat, she confessed she wanted his nomination rejected. She further claimed—with no evidence—that she had “heard” from his ex-wife that Hegseth was a wife-beater.

His former wife immediately denied the charges. She pointed to their prior divorce settlement that recorded neither had ever lodged such a complaint against the other.

Next, the left went after Elon Musk. Recently, he had finished an address by touching his heart and then extending his arm out to the crowd.

To the left, that greeting now became proof of a “Nazi salute.”

Yet in no time, the internet cited photos of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Elizabeth Warren all extending their stiff arms out in identical fashion to Musk.

We were next told by critics that Donald Trump was not technically president because he did not place his left hand on the Bible as he swore his presidential oath.

The Constitution, of course, demands no such act. But it does explicitly state that no religious test shall be required to hold public office.

During a National Prayer Service for newly sworn-in President Trump, the Episcopal bishop of Washington D.C., Mariann Budde, hijacked the sermon. She rebuked Trump—sitting right in front of her—because he supposedly had portrayed illegal aliens and transgendered children “in the harshest of lights.”

Budde later bragged that had she used the occasion to sandbag Trump with a “one-on-one conversation.”

She talked grandly of mercy, but not of the thousands of Americans who have been physically assaulted or attacked by illegal aliens, or tens of thousands of deaths due to illegally imported fentanyl, or the unfairness of open borders to legal immigrant applicants, or the suffering of our citizen poor when their social services are overwhelmed by some 12 million illegal entries of the last four years.

In sum, the left wants no debate because they know voters have rejected what they saw and suffered during the last four years of the Biden administration.

Forgetting nothing, learning nothing, like zombies, leftists keep screaming banalities.

But like addicts and their feel-good fixes, their hysterics only further turn off the public as they destroy themselves.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 07:45

Trump Tells Hannity: Would "Rather Not" Slap Tariffs On China As Negotiations Ongoing 

President Trump's campaign rhetoric and post-election comments critical of China sparked fears of a renewed trade war on the first day of his second term. But such fears have yet to materialize. Instead, Goldman analysts have described Trump's initial trade policy on day one as having a "more benign tone."

In a Thursday night interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, the president showed his reluctance to escalate the trade war, stating that he would "rather not" impose tariffs on China. He has emphasized this week his willingness to negotiate with Chinese President Xi Jinping and has so far averted a clash between the world's two largest economies. 

"We have one very big power over China, and that's tariffs, and they don't want them," Trump told Hannity in an interview that aired Thursday, adding, "And I'd rather not have to use it. But it's a tremendous power over China."

On Tuesday, Trump considered a 10% tariff on goods imported from China starting February 1. The proposed tariff would be in response to years of fentanyl precursor chemicals flowing from Chinese companies into Mexico, where Mexican drug cartels cook them and then smuggle them into the US via the Biden-Harris regime's previously open southern borders.

In the prior election cycle, Trump floated tariffs on China by as much as 60%, which would've sparked a tit-for-tat trade war and crushed US trade with the Chinese economy heavily reliant on exports. 

"It's hard to know exactly what US President Donald Trump was getting at with his latest comments on China tariffs ... That said, it's difficult to see Trump backing down from his tariff threats. And analysis by Bloomberg Economics shows there's a lot at stake for China, and the world," Bloomberg Chief Asia Economist Chang Shu wrote in a note. 

Fiona Lim, a senior strategist at Malayan Banking Bhd, pointed out that global "markets are likely to reduce bets on tariffs right now." 

US Dollar slides from Trump's Day One at White House. 

"Trump continues to take a softer approach with China," Lim said. 

Goldman Sachs Chief Economist Jan Hatzius, alongside Alec Phillips, David Mericle, and others, told clients on Tuesday that Trump's first day of trade announcements was "more benign than expected," adding, "Trump's comments on China were notably less hawkish than during the presidential campaign or even his more recent comments since the election." 

From China's perspective, "this is a very positive start," said Wang Huiyao, president of the Center for China and Globalization, a Beijing-based think tank and adviser to Beijing, as quoted by The Wall Street Journal.

A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said earlier this week that China is ready to work with the Trump administration to improve ties from "a new starting point."

Carlos Casanova, senior Asia economist at Union Bancaire Privée in Hong Kong, told WSJ that Beijing might be able to navigate the 10% tariff next month by offering incentives such as tax cuts to exporters. He said that a deflationary environment in China has made Chinese goods increasing attractive to US buyers despite additional tariffs, adding, "Ten percent will be quite manageable." 

On Friday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning outlined that both countries have "huge common interests." She said, "The two sides should step up dialogue and consultation." 

Earlier on Thursday, Trump said in a virtual interview at the World Economic Forum that he has "always had a great relationship" with the Chinese leader. 

"All we want is fairness. We just want a level playing field," Trump continued, adding, "But I like President Xi very much. I've always liked him."

Trump's efforts to keep the Chinese video-sharing app TikTok operating in the US can be viewed as an 'olive branch' to Beijing, signaling a willingness to negotiate on trade instead of reigniting a tit-for-tat trade war. 

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 07:20

Moore: Liberals Guffawing Over Trump's Greenland Vision Might Want To Crack Open A History Book

Authored by Stephen Moore via DailyCaller.com,

The media and the intelligentsia are laughing at President Donald Trump’s idea of the United States acquiring Greenland from Denmark. At first hearing of what seemed to be an outlandish idea, I guffawed too.

Trump’s argument is that Greenland is of strategic military and national security value to the United States.

He is also betting this giant island has other rare and undiscovered assets.

There is no question that it would serve as a strategic buffer between the United States and Russia and perhaps other hostile nations, including China.

This would be a purchase, not a conquest. But does it make sense? Let’s turn back the clock.

Anyone who paid attention to their U.S. history class in high school has heard of “Seward’s Folly.”

This was the American acquisition of Alaska in 1867 by then-Secretary of State William Seward.

The price tag was $7 million. That would be the equivalent of less than $1 billion today — or less than what Washington spends every day.

Alaska is more than twice the size of Texas, so Russia practically gave it away to us.

The purchase of Alaska was showered with widespread criticism; it was an “icebox” that was viewed as uninhabitable and more suitable for polar bears than people.

How wrong the skeptics were. Alaska was soon discovered to have vast quantities of gold in the Yukon and played a strategic role during World War II. Then, of course, the North Slope of Alaska was discovered to have massive deposits of oil and gas. No doubt, Putin would love today to have Alaska in his portfolio.

Thank God for William Seward.

The idea of purchasing land in order to expand freedom and America’s manifest destiny predates the purchase of Alaska.

In the first hundred years of our country’s history, we repeatedly acquired land to expand America’s reach. Most famously, was Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase — which roughly doubled America’s land area from the original 13 colonies/states.

That purchase was criticized as a “land grab” as well. But it was the gateway to the development of the West.

Florida came shortly thereafter — a virtual gift from Spain.

The “Republic of Texas” was an independent territory and joined the U.S. voluntarily and we gladly and wisely brought the Lone Star state into the fold.

Needless to say, none of these acquisitions or additions was “folly.”

Which brings us back to Greenland.

Why does Denmark need it?

It is hard to imagine anything that would add more income, wealth and security to the less than 100,000 people living in Greenland than to plant the American flag there and make it a U.S. territory.

The residents of Greenland would be able to bequeath to their children one of the greatest assets on the planet — a U.S. passport.

While we are on the topic of acquisitions, if Trump is really thinking big, he should also consider offering to bury from Mexico a 50-to-100 mile stretch of coastal land stretching from San Diego down the Pacific coast.

If Mexico were to sell that land to us, this idyllic beachfront property might instantly become some of the most valuable land in the world — inflating in price by perhaps 10- to 20-fold.

Here is another thought experiment.

 Imagine how rich Cuba would be today, if it were an American territory. 

Cuba could and would be the Hong Kong of the western hemisphere if it detoured from its near seven-decade long excursion into communism.

Trump is not an imperialist. He wants to spread freedom, prosperity and peace to much of the rest of the world. The old joke about Greenland is that it is neither green nor land.

It is a vast sheet of floating ice. Plant the American flag on that ice and suddenly it becomes a hot property.

*  *  *

Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a co-founder of Unleash Prosperity. His latest book is “The Trump Economic Miracle.”

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 06:30

Grenell To NATO: Ukraine Membership Push Would Face "Big Buzzsaw" In US

Authored by Ryan Morgan via The Epoch Times,

Richard Grenell, President Donald Trump’s nominee to serve as envoy for special missions, warned that NATO leaders would face backlash from the United States if they pushed to extend alliance membership to Ukraine without first boosting their own support for the embattled eastern European nation.

Amid the ongoing Russia–Ukraine war, NATO leaders have discussed steps to extend the alliance membership to Ukraine, but the alliance is still working out details of the ascension plan.

Speaking at a Jan. 23 panel discussion on Ukraine on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said the alliance is committed to extending membership to Ukraine, but still has to work out the ascension process.

“The question now of course is how this will exactly play out whenever hopefully as soon as possible,” said Rutte, a Dutch national.

Calling into the panel from California, Grenell pushed back on Rutte’s comments.

“I think you’re going to run into a big buzzsaw in America if we have the NATO secretary general talking about adding Ukraine to NATO,” Grenell said.

While Ukraine has sought NATO membership for years, the alliance’s ascension process requires the unanimous support of all current member nations. U.S. opposition alone could halt Ukraine’s membership.

Trump and his allies have raised concerns that the United States has borne the brunt of the cost of arming and sustaining Ukraine throughout the ongoing war and that the other NATO members have lagged behind alliance military spending targets.

“The American people are the ones that are paying for the defense,” Grenell said.

“You cannot ask the American people to expand the umbrella of NATO when the current members aren’t paying their fair share. And that includes the Dutch.”

NATO set a target in 2014 for each of its member nations to commit at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product to military spending. In 2023, only 11 of the alliance’s 31 members had met that spending target. The Netherlands finally hit the 2 percent target in 2024, but eight other countries are still lagging behind.

Responding to Grenell’s remarks, Rutte agreed that there is a problem with alliance members lagging behind their existing spending commitments.

Rutte then said the alliance will need to set even higher military spending targets to adjust to growing international threats and boost its arms production capabilities.

Rutte said he’s hopeful to get all alliance members past the 2 percent spending target within the coming months.

“Then we have, collectively, to move up. And we will decide on the exact number later this year, but it will be considerably more,” Rutte added.

Ukraine Negotiations

Beyond criticizing NATO allies for not bearing more of the burden of sustaining Ukraine, Trump has repeatedly indicated he would prefer to negotiate an end to the ongoing war.

In his own virtual remarks before the World Economic Forum on Thursday, Trump said, “Our efforts to secure a peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine are now, hopefully, underway.”

Trump said Ukraine is ready to make a deal, and now a peace deal will depend on Russia. This week, Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated Trump on his return to the White House and said Russia is open to begin talks “on an equal and mutually respectful basis.”

Grenell told the WEF panel that Trump was “handed a terrible mess.”

“There are not a lot of great choices, but President Trump ... has already made clear that he’s going to pressure both sides to end this,” he said.

At times on the campaign trail, Trump said he could negotiate a deal to end the fighting within 24 hours. His team has since softened that timeline for a deal.

“I would say just give President Trump a little time,” Grenell said. “He’s the best negotiator.”

Trump has threatened to impose new economic sanctions and tariffs on Russian goods if Moscow doesn’t quickly accept a deal.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 05:00

EU Updates Digital Rules Requiring Big Tech To Allow 'Reporters' To Monitor Hate Speech

Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times,

Under a revised code of conduct on online speech, the European Commission says that Big Tech signatories need to allow a network of “monitoring reporters” to regularly monitor hate speech notices.

European Commission Executive Vice President Henna Virkkunen attends the first meeting of the new college of European Commissioners in Brussels, Belgium on Dec. 4, 2024. Reuters/Yves Herman

On Jan. 20, the European Commission announced that updated hate speech guidelines will be folded into the Digital Services Act (DSA).

The DSA is an EU-wide regulation that regulates the obligations of digital services.

Part of this requires social media platforms to remove, and take other specified steps to deal with, what is deemed disinformation. The DSA fully came into force in 2024.

Under the revised code, companies that are signed up must allow a network of “monitoring reporters” that are nonprofit or public entities with expertise on illegal hate speech to regularly monitor how the signatories are reviewing hate speech notices.

They will have to review at least two-thirds of hate speech notices received from monitoring reporters within 24 hours.

The EU said that the updated code of conduct, a voluntary instrument, builds on a 2016 code on “countering illegal hate speech online.”

European Commission Spokesperson Thomas Regnier told The Epoch Times by email that Facebook, Instagram, and X are among the signatories of the new code of conduct. These platforms were also part of the previous code of conduct, initiated in 2016, he said.

It was also signed by Dailymotion,  Jeuxvideo.com, LinkedIn, Microsoft-hosted consumer services, Snapchat, Rakuten Viber, TikTok, Twitch, and YouTube.

The EU also wants signatories to present “country-level data broken down by the internal classification of hate speech (such as race, ethnicity, religion, gender identity or sexual orientation).”

Some of the monitoring reporters include Amnesty International Italia, German organisation HateAid, and the French Ministry of the Interior’s dedicated portal to cybercrime, PHAROS.

Big Tech

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced on Jan. 7. that fact-checkers are “too politically biased” and that they “destroyed more trust than they created.”

He also called Europe a place of “censorship.”

“Europe has an ever-increasing number of laws, institutionalizing censorship, and making it difficult to build anything innovative there,” he said.

Zuckerberg also told “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast that the EU had forced U.S. tech companies operating in Europe to pay “more than $30 billion” in penalties for legal violations over the past 10 or 20 years.

The commission also opened formal proceedings in December 2024 to assess whether or not Elon Musk’s X platform may have breached the DSA.

The EU has been scrutinizing the social media platform in recent weeks as Musk, now an adviser to President Donald Trump, hosted Alice Weidel, the leader of Germany’s right-wing Alternative for Germany party, in a live interview on X.

Musk also endorsed the party.

EU Debate

The announcement came before an EU debate on enforcing the DSA to “tackle illegal content, online disinformation,” and the geopolitical and economic implications of the new Trump administration.

“In Europe there is no place for illegal hate, either offline or online. I welcome the stakeholders’ commitment to a strengthened Code of conduct under the Digital Services Act. Cooperation among all parties involved is the way forward to ensure a safe digital space for all,” Henna Virkkunen, the European Commission’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty, security, and democracy, said in a statement.

Accompanying Virkkunen’s statement, Michael McGrath, commissioner for democracy, justice, the rule of law, and consumer protection, said that “hatred and polarisation are threats to EU values and fundamental rights and undermine the stability of our democracies.”

He claimed that the “internet is amplifying the negative effects of hate speech.”

The EPP Group, the largest and oldest group of center-right MEPS in the European Parliament, released a statement on Jan. 21 that said that “those wanting to earn money in Europe must comply with EU law.”

Andreas Schwab, EPP Group spokesman on the internal market, said, “We need to ensure that sanctions are taken without hesitation when violations are confirmed” and that “social media should not be used to foster polarisation and undermine European democracies.”

He added that the EPP Group will support a “Democracy Shield, which will include pilot projects, to tackle disinformation in all Member States.”

“We are not in the Wild West, where everything is allowed, and we are not the Chinese state that monitors everything. Freedom of speech applies, and it can be exhausting. But it does not include the right for every platform owner to do whatever,” Schwab said.

‘Very Severe Penalties’

In a 2024 report, Norman Lewis, visiting research fellow at the think tank MCC Brussels and former PwC director and former director of technology research at Orange UK, said the EU is institutionalizing laws against “hate speech” and “disinformation” that represent a “fundamental attack on free speech and democracy in Europe.”

“It is a system which institutionalizes non-accountability,“ Lewis previously told The Epoch Times.

“Platforms have to comply arguing that they have no choice if they want to continue operating in Europe.

“The fact-checkers are not accountable to anyone. In the end, the commission can claim they’re not censoring but Big Tech is, despite the fact that the commission created the environment that forces this censorship.

“If they don’t act upon it, then there are very severe penalties.”

The European Commission relies on officially designated fact-checkers, some of whom are nongovernmental organizations.

These entities flag specific pieces of content for platforms to review. Platforms are then obligated to act, either by taking down the content or investigating it further.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 03:30

Musk's Starlink Is Rapidly Expanding Its Footprint In Africa

Elon Musk’s Starlink has rapidly expanded its presence in Africa, now operating in 15 countries as of January 2025.

Starlink provides high-speed satellite internet to remote and underserved locations, enabling connectivity in areas where traditional internet infrastructure is unreliable, expensive, or nonexistent by using a constellation of low-Earth orbit satellites.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist's Kayla Zhu, shows Starlink prices vs. the leading internet service provider’s price in 12 African countries, as of January 2025.

Data comes from Starlink, and various ISP website via Rest of World. The Starlink prices do not include the upfront cost of the Starlink hardware.

Is Starlink Cheaper Than Internet Providers in Africa?

 

Starlink is becoming increasingly affordable in Africa, with monthly plans in countries like Kenya and Zimbabwe significantly cheaper than traditional internet service providers, often at less than half the cost.

In at least five African countries specifically–Ghana, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Cape Verde–Starlink is now cheaper than the leading fixed internet service provider.

This affordability is disrupting the market, forcing traditional ISPs like Safaricom in Kenya to lower prices and increase internet speeds to remain competitive.

Despite its high-speed offerings, Starlink faces criticism from local telecommunications companies for not investing in local jobs or infrastructure.

In South Africa, negotiations are ongoing, with the government requiring Starlink to allocate at least 30% equity to local ownership by marginalized groups as a condition for licensing.

To learn more about internet infrastructure in Africa, check out this graphic that visualizes the cost of 1GB of data in various African countries.

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 02:45

"Remigration Now" – AfD's Weidel Calls For Mass Deportations After Afghan Migrant Stabs 2-Year-Old To Death

Authored by Liz Heflin via Remix News,

Following the brutal attack that cost two people their lives yesterday, including a 2-year-old child, in the Bavarian city of Aschaffenburg, Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Alice Weidel is calling for mass deportations.

“In Bavaria, which is governed by the CSU, an Afghan in Aschaffenburg kills a toddler (2) and a good Samaritan (41) who rushed to help the child. The Afghan had previously followed the child’s daycare group. My thoughts are with the relatives and the injured. Remigration now!” wrote Weidel on X.

Im CSU-regierten Bayern tötet ein Afghane in Aschaffenburg ein Kleinkind (2) sowie einen Helfer (41), der dem Kind zur Hilfe eilte. Zuvor hatte der Afghane die Kita-Gruppe des Kindes verfolgt. Meine Gedanken sind bei den Angehörigen & Verletzten. Remigration jetzt! pic.twitter.com/Y5OeYEyg8T

— Alice Weidel (@Alice_Weidel) January 22, 2025

Yesterday, as Remix News reported, a 28-year-old Afghan man killed two people in a knife attack on a kindergarten group in a park in Aschaffenburg, Bavaria. The victims were a two-year-old boy and a 41-year-old passerby, said Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann (CSU) in Aschaffenburg. Three people were injured, including a two-year-old girl.

According to Herrmann’s statements, as cited by Die Welt, initial findings indicate that the Afghan suspect stabbed a child from the kindergarten group “suddenly and deliberately” with a kitchen knife.

The 41-year-old man was allegedly trying to prevent further attacks on the children and was killed in the process. Police say other passers-by pursued the perpetrator fled on foot. A few minutes after the attack, the man was caught by police officers. The kitchen knife used in the attack was also confiscated.

“A passer-by and two colleagues tried to resuscitate (the child),” a police officer stated.

Another child still in the group’s handcart, used to transport the toddlers, was stabbed but conscious and received immediate medical assistance on-site. 

“I find this situation completely incomprehensible,” said Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann after a moment of silence. 

An initial investigation has revealed that the suspect was undergoing psychiatric treatment and was supposed to leave Germany. He had been caught at least three times in the past for violent crimes, and had been given psychiatric treatment and released each time, said the minister. In December, the district court in Aschaffenburg ordered him to be placed under supervision.

According to the state health minister, Judith Gerlach (CSU), the three injured people were treated in an Aschaffenburg hospital. The two-year-old girl suffered stab wounds to the neck, the injured adult suffered stab wounds to the upper body, and the kindergarten teacher broke her forearm in a fall.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) described the events as an “unbelievable act of terror” and assured the victims and their families of the German government’s sympathy. The authorities must now “work hard to clarify” why “the attacker” is still in the country, he said in Berlin. “I am sick of seeing such acts of violence every few weeks by perpetrators who came to us to find protection,” said the Scholz.

However, Scholz is already being slammed for allowing yet another heinous attack involving foreigners in just a matter of months. The left-wing head of the BSW, Sahra Wagenknecht, is calling the knife attack a clear signal that the government’s refugee policy has failed.

“The fact that nothing happened after Mannheim and Solingen is primarily the failure of the chancellor and his interior minister,” Wagenknecht told Politico magazine. “That makes them politically responsible for every further terrible act.”

The chancellor summoned the heads of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the Federal Criminal Police Office, and the Federal Police to the Chancellery yesterday evening. According to government sources, Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser (SPD) will also attend the meeting. Scholz returned to Berlin from a trip to Paris shortly before 7 p.m.

Other ministers and politicians have also expressed their shock and sympathies.

Faeser said she was “deeply shocked” by the crime, however, as Remix News has pointed out, this has become a sad refrain from her in recent months.

CDU chairman and Union top candidate Friedrich Merz was also “deeply shocked.”

“Things cannot go on like this,” Merz said, adding, “We must and will restore law and order.”

Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder expressed his condolences on X to the relatives and those affected. Söder called the act “cowardly and despicable” and demanded a “complete investigation.”

Economics Minister Robert Habeck (Greens) was also appalled by the act and spoke about the knife attack on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos. The Greens’ candidate for chancellor called the attack a “terrible assassination attempt,” calling out its “brutality and perversity” and expressing his condolences to the relatives.

FDP parliamentary group leader Christian Dürr called for a special conference of federal and state interior ministers as soon as possible. “Politicians must react to this,” Dürr told the Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND). It must be ensured that potential violent offenders and psychologically conspicuous people like the perpetrator from Aschaffenburg are identified and deported. “We have learned from a series of terrible events that those who have already attracted attention pose a danger,” said Dürr.

The police are also asking any witnesses to upload video recordings to a website or report relevant observations to 0800 0060322.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Fri, 01/24/2025 - 02:00

These Restorative Executive Orders Should Not Be Necessary

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

You can scour the Founding documents all day and find very little support for government-by-executive-order. It was not supposed to be this way.

It should not have to be this way. The President under the Constitution has a very limited role.

That said, most of the many executive orders issued by President Trump are purely restorative, a reaffirmation of core constitutional structures that had been previously ignored or overthrown. Therefore, these are not acts of executive imposition so much as deployments of power in order to give power back to the people.

In other words, most of the actions are not about the “imperial presidency.” They are about returning power to where it belongs and never should have left, namely to the U.S. Constitution and to the voters in a republican system of government.

This is why all the chatter about Trump’s use of power (“He’s behaving like a dictator!”) misses the mark. Completely.

Let’s just consider one that is near and dear to my heart: “Restoring Freedom Speech and Ending Federal Censorship.” It does nothing other than restate the meaning of the very first amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which proclaimed that government cannot interfere with the freedom of speech.

In recent years, plenty of government agencies have found a way around the law. They would call media outlets and social-media services, and even book retailers, and browbeat them to publish this and not that, take down posts, prioritize this content over that, delete whole groups, and ban accounts. In addition, government agencies constructed a vast web of third-party providers to make lists of approved and unapproved points of view.

This was pushed to crack down on disinformation and misinformation, as if it was the job of the federal government to decide what is what. Invariably, this was designed to bolster the industrial prospects of a particular industry. The result was a global censorship complex of astounding levels of complexity and reach. It became terrifying for everyone and deeply injurious to careers and reputations.

These practices have come under fire in a flurry of lawsuits. One court in the case of Murthy v. Missouri ended up with an injunction against federal agencies. That found its way to the Supreme Court. In the hearings, more than half the members of the court simply could not follow the arguments. Some comments even raised questions about the whole idea of free speech itself, as if the concept was somehow new. It was shocking and demoralizing.

The result of that hearing was to reject the injunction on grounds that the plaintiffs did not have standing, as if the victims of censorship themselves have no real right to redress. Now the case is again tangled up in litigation that will likely last years. Despite tens of thousands of pages of evidence, the court could not somehow find its way toward enforcing the clear law of the land.

That’s when this executive order comes into play. Someone had to enforce the law against government overreach. That someone is President Trump. His executive order reads as follows:

“The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, an amendment essential to the success of our Republic, enshrines the right of the American people to speak freely in the public square without Government interference. Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve. Under the guise of combatting ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,’ and ‘malinformation,’ the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government’s preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate. Government censorship of speech is intolerable in a free society.”

It continues:

“It is the policy of the United States to: (a) secure the right of the American people to engage in constitutionally protected speech; (b) ensure that no Federal Government officer, employee, or agent engages in or facilitates any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen; (c) ensure that no taxpayer resources are used to engage in or facilitate any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen; and(d) identify and take appropriate action to correct past misconduct by the Federal Government related to censorship of protected speech.”

Great so far, so what is to be done?

“(a) No Federal department, agency, entity, officer, employee, or agent may act or use any Federal resources in a manner contrary to section 2 of this order. (b) The Attorney General, in consultation with the heads of executive departments and agencies, shall investigate the activities of the Federal Government over the last 4 years that are inconsistent with the purposes and policies of this order and prepare a report to be submitted to the President, through the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions to be taken based on the findings of the report.”

There we go! Was that so hard? This is what the ACLU used to believe before they went the other direction to become a nonprofit enforcer of woke ideology.

Thus is free speech seemingly restored but that is not the end of the story. The plaintiffs should be entitled to a full compensation of all litigation costs, and these should come out of the budgets of the CDC, Department of State, the National Institutes of Health, and any other agency involved in this censorship program.

Is this order enforceable? One can hope but not be certain. The institutions and money out there favoring censorship are voluminous. It is likely going to require more than a proclamation to make the First Amendment real again. Moreover, much of the prevailing censorship is now deeply embedded in algorithmic structures on Google and YouTube. No human is operating it anymore. It will take human hands to rip out the coding that makes it all possible. And keep in mind that this happens today with no direct state involvement, so it is possible that current censorship operations will continue while being technically in compliance with the order.

That is to say, this order should have been issued many years ago, since it began much earlier than four years ago. In fact, it was in full operation during the first term of Trump, likely in a way that was unbeknownst to the Trump administration. One has to admire how Trump 2.0 has made a concerted effort here to take charge and really mean it.

There are plenty of other thrilling executive orders concerning transgenderism, the World Health Organization, the Paris Climate Accord, and much more. The freeing of the January 6th prisoners is especially bold and on point, as is the glorious freeing of Ross Ulbricht.

In general, what we are seeing here is an exercise of power in order to take power away from the globalists and deep state and give it back to the people.

This is precisely what the voters wanted, for, in the end, we prefer self-government to tyranny.

It is tragic that it should require executive orders to restore what should never have been taken from the people in the first place. But that is the world in which we live, and Trump should be commended for seeing what was necessary and doing it.

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 23:25

Portland Church Vows To Protect Illegal Immigrants From Deportation

One city not eager to comply with President Trump's new immigration plans is Portland.

The city will be actively working to try and prevent its immigrants from deportations, according to a new report from KATU ABC 2. 

One immigrant who " came to the United States from El Salvador when he was just a teenager", Francisco Aguirre, told ABC: “I can't imagine leaving my kids behind.”

He added: “I flee the violence there because my life, you know, was in danger, and if I stay, I will get killed. My relatives got killed back in El Salvador, and I did not have any other choice to just run away one day when I could, you know.”

Portland pastor Mark Knutson has vowed to try and protect Aguirre, calling the Augustana Lutheran Church in Northeast Portland a sanctuary.

Knutson reflected on the sacredness of sanctuary, saying,“The idea was if ICE were to dare breach this sacred space, this holy grail, and violently drag a man out of this church, with all the cellphones and technology, even back 10 years ago, can you imagine the pictures of a man being dragged?" 

The report says that the church even has an alarm system—if ICE arrives, the bell will sound.

Under President Trump, tensions at Augustana Lutheran Church have risen, fueled by his executive order prioritizing deportations of “inadmissible and removable aliens.” Trump, when asked about ICE raids, stated, “I don’t want to say when, but it’s going to happen. It has to happen.”

Knutson is organizing community action. “You'll see this church overflowing with leaders from the community, everyday people here to stand in solidarity. That's going to send a message to this administration that we in Oregon are not going to go for this.”

For many, deportation can mean tragedy. Aguirre, a congregant, lost his son Moses, who was killed after fleeing to El Salvador out of fear of deportation. “He was playing soccer when they shot him,” Aguirre said.

The fear of deportation has overwhelmed Portland’s immigrant community. Immigration attorney Vanesa Pancic noted, "I think my office missed 50 phone calls, missed 50 phone calls yesterday. I don't know how you guys got through my office yesterday."

While the timing and scope of deportations remain uncertain, Aguirre remains hopeful. “I dream of becoming a pastor to help unite people through God’s word,” he said.

In Oregon, nearly 90,000 citizens live with undocumented family members, according to a 2016 report by the American Immigration Council.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 23:00

US Government Back Door FISA Searches Are Unconstitutional: Federal Judge

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

The federal government’s method of searching through information incidentally collected on U.S.-based individuals violates the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, a federal judge has ruled.

“To countenance this practice would convert Section 702 into precisely what Defendant has labeled it - a tool for law enforcement to run ‘backdoor searches’ that circumvent the Fourth Amendment,” U.S. District Judge LaShann Dearcy Hall said in the ruling, which was released on Jan. 21.

Government officials acquired information on the defendant, Agron Hasbajrami, a legal permanent resident who they arrested in 2011 and charged with providing material support to a terrorist organization. The information was gathered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which lets authorities spy on people.

After Hasbajrami pleaded guilty, authorities disclosed that some of the evidence they used in the case was the fruit of information they obtained without a warrant under a FISA supplement called Section 207, which enables authorities to conduct surveillance on non-U.S. persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States.

The authorities had gathered some evidence on Hasbajrami as they targeted non-Americans believed to be located outside the country and other communications from Hasbajrami because, they said, they at one point mistakenly thought he was a non-U.S. person.

Hasbajrami moved to suppress the evidence. After the motion was denied, he pleaded guilty on the condition he be allowed to appeal the denial.

A federal appeals court in 2019 largely upheld the denial, finding that the government’s incidental collection of information on Hasbajrami as they carried out surveillance was lawful because the surveillance was lawful in the first place. The appeals court also remanded back to the district court the examination of whether the government’s so-called back door searches of the Section 702 database violated the Constitution.

Hall, in the new decision, concluded they did. While the government’s collection of the evidence was lawful, that doesn’t automatically mean the subsequent database searches were, she said.

“In other words, simply acquiring defendant’s communications under Section 702, albeit lawfully, did not, in and of itself, permit the government to later query the retained information,” Hall wrote.

“To hold otherwise would effectively allow law enforcement to amass a repository of communications under Section 702—including those of U.S. persons—that can later be searched on demand without limitation. But this approach undermines the purpose of the warrant requirement, which is ’to interpose a ‘neutral and detached magistrate’ between the citizen and ’the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime,'” Hall added.

The judge denied the remaining portion of Hasbarjami’s motion, which asked for the government to hand over the evidence it collected.

A U.S. Department of Justice spokesperson declined to comment.

An attorney for Hasbarjami did not respond to a request for comment.

Government watchdogs hailed the ruling.

“This is a major constitutional ruling on one of the most abused provisions of FISA,” Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project, said in a statement.

“In light of this ruling, we ask Congress to uphold its responsibility to protect civil rights and civil liberties by refusing to renew Section 702 absent a number of necessary reforms, including an official warrant requirement for querying US persons data and increased transparency,” Andrew Crocker and Matthew Guariglia, with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, added.

President Donald Trump’s nominee for CIA director, John Ratcliffe, said during his recent confirmation hearing that Section 702 provides an “indispensable national security tool” and that he opposed requiring warrants for queries of the database.

Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard from Hawaii, whom Trump selected as his national security adviser, also says she supports Section 702.

Section 702 has been repeatedly reauthorized by Congress, most recently in 2024.

Section 702 is set to expire on April 15, 2026.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 22:35

FBI Seeking Public's Help In Identifying "Asian Female" Bank Robber In Seattle

Described as an "Asian female" in her 20s, the FBI and Seattle Police are seeking help identifying a serial bank robber linked to five Seattle heists between June 28, 2024, and January 13, 2025.

FBI spokesperson Steve Bernd noted, “Once we start seeing someone do multiple jobs or violent bank robberies, it's something the bureau will put more priority to."

The FBI identified the targeted banks as Wells Fargo on Queen Anne (6/28), US Bank on NE 45th (9/7), US Bank on NE 63rd (10/31), Key Bank on Holman Road (11/21), and US Bank on Edmunds (1/13), according to KOMO News.

KOMO News reports that the suspect is described as an Asian woman, 18-25 years old, 5'3" to 5'5", often wearing a hat and facemask. She typically handed tellers a note demanding money during the robberies. 

Help the #FBI and Seattle Police Department identify a serial bank robber. If you have information, let us know here: https://t.co/1ci6yDdaYq or call 1-800-CALL-FBI or the Seattle Police Department. pic.twitter.com/SFewsiHQlM

— FBI Seattle (@FBISeattle) January 22, 2025

Bernd said: “She’s using notes, what we call a note job, but the last one, she actually displayed a weapon. She didn’t point it at the teller, but she indicated that she had one, so that’s concerning to us because she hadn’t done that before." 

“If that’s indicative of what she’s willing to do if the teller isn’t doing what she’s asking, that's alarming," he continued. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 22:10

Trump Signs Executive Order Releasing Additional JFK Assassination Files

Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday, releasing additional government files associated with the assassinations of former President John F. Kennedy (JFK), former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (RFK), and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Trump promised at his pre-inauguration rally in Washington on Jan. 19 that he would release the remaining records on the assassinations of JFK, RFK, and King in the coming days.

“That’s a big one,” Trump said while signing the order at the Oval Office.

“A lot of people have been waiting for this for years, for decades. And everything will be revealed.”

The FBI accused Lee Harvey Oswald, a former U.S. Marine who had defected to the Soviet Union for a period after embracing Marxism, of assassinating JFK in 1963.

Nightclub owner Jack Ruby shot and killed Oswald as authorities were moving him from Dallas police headquarters to the county jail just two days after the assassination, stirring decades of speculation and conspiracy theories.

JFK’s assassination coincided with a period of increasing mistrust in the federal government, and many Americans still believe Oswald was part of a larger plot to kill the president.

Gallup’s most recent poll, conducted in October 2023, found that 65 percent of U.S. adults reject the theory that a lone gunman killed JFK.

Trump and former President Joe Biden previously released thousands of documents related to JFK’s death.

Roughly 99 percent of the assassination files have been released as of 2023, according to the National Archives.

However, Biden had agreed to delay the disclosure of additional records, stating the necessity of protecting “against identifiable harms to the military defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, and the conduct of foreign relations that are of such gravity that they outweigh the public interest in disclosure.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 21:45

Trump Brings Stellantis Jobs To Illinois... Pritzker Takes Credit

Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.org,

Illinois had some rare, good news yesterday.

Stellantis, the Big 3 auto maker, announced it will be investing $1.2 billion in its Belvidere assembly plant and bringing back about 1,500 jobs there.

You’ll never know who really got it done if you listen to Illinois’ leadership.

It was a  “dramatic turnabout,” as the Detroit Free Press put it.

As you may remember, Gov. JB Pritzker announced to much fanfare in October 2023 that the Stellantis facility in Belvidere, idled with layoffs just before the previous Christmas, would be reopened. But no deal was ever signed and, last year, Stellantis indefinitely postponed any Belividere expansion, blaming “market conditions.”

But that was before Trump, his tariff threats and four days of meetings last week between Stellantis, Trump and his team.

Here is a headline on one of many stories linking yesterday’s good news about more jobs in Illinois to Trump’s pressure on Stellantis:

“Stellantis responds to Trump’s tariff threat, will restart Illinois plant and build new Durango in Detroit.”

And from the Wall Street Journal:

John Elkann, chairman of Jeep-maker Stellantis, wasted no time reassuring President Trump of the global automaker’s commitment to U.S. manufacturing. The scion of Italy’s famous Agnelli family met with Trump last week to emphasize the company’s support for American workers.

On Wednesday, following the meeting, Stellantis reaffirmed plans to reopen a now-idled factory in Illinois to make a new midsize truck, according to an internal memo reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Pritzker, however, claims full credit for himself and his friends.

Not a word even acknowledging Trump’s role.

From Pritzker’s statement yesterday about Stellantis’ new announcement:

This would not be possible without proactive collaboration and coordination between the State of Illinois, Stellantis, UAW, the Biden-Harris Administration, and our champions in Congress, including Senator Durbin, Senator Duckworth, Representative Bill Foster, and Representative Eric Sorensen,” said Governor JB Pritzker.

“My administration has worked tirelessly with our partners to secure this investment and we are excited to see it come to fruition.

Illinois Senator’s Duckworth and Durbin were no better.

Their joint statement likewise doesn’t mention Trump.

One big loose end is that we still don’t know how much state money Illinois initially offered Stellantis as part of the initial deal that fell apart. Pritzker and the state never said and nobody in the media ever pressed him for an answer. Some or all of that money is presumably still on the table. In any event, that does not mean Trump’s role wasn’t essential to Stellantis’ new committment.

Why does Pritzker figure he can get away with deceit and ingratitude so extreme?

Because the Illinois press never calls him out on such things.

He knows they won’t lay a hand on him.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 20:05

Thacker Dismantles WSJ Propaganda Over Gain-Of-Function Research

The Wall Street Journal is playing sleight of hand over an (allegedly) upcoming Trump executive order that would halt federal funding for gain-of-function (GoF) research.

For starters, they frame opposition to GoF as partisan, and suggest that concerns over it are recent. Journalist Paul Thacker of The Disinformation Chronicle breaks it down.

For example, the WSJ writes "The gain-of-function studies had been a staple of research into viruses, but became an object of controversy and criticism during the pandemic crisis. Republicans in Congress criticized the studies."

Wrong: GoF has been under scrutiny for more than a decade. In fact, the Obama Administration banned it in 2014, which is why Dr. Anthony Fauci offshored it to Wuhan, China via EcoHealth Alliance.

2) "The gain-of-function studies had been a staple of research into viruses, but became an object of controversy and criticism during the pandemic crisis. Republicans in Congress criticized the studies."

FALSE: Scientists have long criticised this research. This is from 2018 pic.twitter.com/AqSCHpgxa3

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) January 23, 2025

Next, the Journal suggests that only "some Republicans" who think GoF caused Covid-19, when in fact a majority of Americans think that's the case, including 53% of Democrats.

The article also cites scientists with huge conflicts of interest, and that "Many scientists and public-health officials have said there isn’t any public evidence that an experiment at the Wuhan lab could have created the virus that caused the pandemic."

Wrong: The government was concerned at the highest levels that the virus started in a lab.

5) "Many scientists and public-health officials have said there isn’t any public evidence that an experiment at the Wuhan lab could have created the virus that caused the pandemic."

FALSE: Emails released by Congress show Tony Fauci concerned the pandemic started in a lab. pic.twitter.com/0a2pB2QRlQ

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) January 23, 2025

And about those conflicts of interest...

7) @l_e_whyte reported on the pandemic problems in the Trump WH, but I don't remember her doing the same when the Biden administration misled the public on the pandemic origins, masks, lockdowns, and vaccines.

Why is that? pic.twitter.com/nNdNPPSCMA

— Paul D. Thacker (@thackerpd) January 23, 2025

Amazing.

The headline is the sole fact in the article.

— Richard H. Ebright (@R_H_Ebright) January 23, 2025

Maybe the Trump team needs to hold a daily briefing about articles in the media and go through them explaining the fallacies. Then, afterwards send out the corrections to their social media sites and post it on the White House website. They'll have to hire a couple of people to…

— Snarky Side (@snarky_side) January 23, 2025

To think, some people still pay $400 a year for the @WSJ limited hangout when they can get the X firehose and learn to think for themselves FOR FREE.

— fbastiat (@fbastiat17) January 23, 2025

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 19:40

Meet The 'Crunchy' Moms Who Support RFK Jr. As Health Secretary

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A term once reserved for granola-eating hippies, “crunchy” moms has evolved into a label for women who embrace a more natural lifestyle for their families.

Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock, Courtesy of Lyndsey Mulherin, Courtesy of Kristen Taylor, Courtesy of Krista Cobb, Jeff Louderback/The Epoch Times, Courtesy of Samantha Adams

These are women who favor herbal treatments over physician-prescribed and over-the-counter medications, cooking with butter or beef tallow instead of seed oils, examining food labels at the grocery store, and exercising caution about vaccinating their children.

When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ran for president—first as a Democrat and then as an independent—these moms were among his most vocal supporters.

Fighting chronic disease, improving children’s health, and addressing corporate influence on government agencies were vital parts of Kennedy’s campaign platform.

Ultimately, Kennedy suspended his presidential campaign and backed the Trump ticket in August 2024.

Since then, Kennedy has launched his Make America Healthy Again campaign, with the intention to curtail what he calls America’s chronic disease epidemic. He is seeking to have toxic chemicals from the nation’s food supply removed and he wants to address what he has branded the corporate capture of federal health agencies, among other objectives.

In November, President-elect Donald Trump nominated Kennedy to serve as secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the latter promptly pledged to make sweeping changes to its subsidiary agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Several moms told The Epoch Times they are ecstatic about the possibility of Kennedy as HHS secretary, pending Senate confirmation.

“With RFK Jr., we have a champion in our corner,” Lyndsey Mulherin told The Epoch Times.

A homesteader in northwest Ohio, Mulherin has devoted her life to being a stay-at-home mom caring for her three children, including her middle son, Jack, who was diagnosed with autism at age 2. She blames a vaccine.

“Everything we put in or on our body affects our health. In its simplest form, that is what crunchy moms are all about,” Mulherin said.

“People have questioned our decisions to not vaccinate our [other] kids, and avoid certain foods and cleaning products among other items we use in everyday life.

“Now, because of Kennedy’s platform, Trump nominating Kennedy, and what Kennedy plans to do, people are starting to learn what we learned a long time ago,” Mulherin said.

Lyndsey Mulherin. Courtesy of Lyndsey Mulherin

Kristen Taylor is a South Carolina mom who embraces a holistic lifestyle. She wasn’t always that way.

“There was a time I believed and trusted conventional doctors. I thought they knew everything about health. I believed what the media told us about health,” she said.

“I thought vaccines were necessary and getting my children vaccinated was a sign I was a good mother. Simply put, I was indoctrinated.”

Taylor was motivated to dig deeper into products when she investigated the ingredients of a self-tanning wipe she used and found they included parabens, which have been linked to causing cancer.

“I started reading the ingredients of every single product our family was putting on our skin and if I saw an even somewhat questionable ingredient, I trashed that product. I woke up.”

A fitness enthusiast, Taylor has a Master’s degree and taught in public school before she decided to become a stay-at-home mom and a homeschool teacher.

“The collaboration between Trump and RFK Jr. gives me hope that I haven’t felt in a long time. Those of us who are crunchy, holistic, natural—whatever you want to call it—believe in RFK Jr. because he is one of us and he didn’t dismiss us,” Taylor told The Epoch Times.

“He takes the time to deeply learn about a topic, and if he finds reason to stand up for it, he does it loud and clear. That’s why so many of us back him, regardless of political beliefs, because he genuinely cares and is committed to making positive change,” she said.

“That’s been lacking in our health care agencies for a long time,” she added.

Kristen Taylor is a South Carolina mother and fitness enthusiast who is excited about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s nomination as Health and Human Services secretary. Courtesy of Kristen Taylor

Krista Cobb, a 41-year-old mother of three, grew up in the hills of southeastern Kentucky where her grandparents taught her all about canning, gardening, and hunting.

After moving to an urban area in the Dayton, Ohio, area and living there for a few decades, she grew tired of the “concrete jungle” and bought a small property in rural western Ohio last year.

Since then, she has transformed the land into a homestead with chickens, goats, ducks, and gardens.

“I wanted to get back to my roots,” Cobb told The Epoch Times.

An ardent Trump supporter, Cobb told The Epoch Times she is “ecstatic” that Kennedy might be days away from becoming HHS secretary.

“It’s long overdue for vaccine schedules to be addressed, for toxins to be removed from our food, and for government health agencies to be managed by people who have no ties to Big Pharma and Big Ag,” Cobb said.

“I believe that Kennedy will do what he says he’s going to do, and we as a country will be better off.

“It will take some time. I don’t think it will all happen overnight, but just knowing he will be in a position to make those changes is a great feeling.”

Krista Cobb, a self-described “crunchy mom,” has goats, chickens, and ducks on her western Ohio homestead. Courtsey of Krista Cobb

Mulherin said her son, Jack, developed autism when he was 2. She stopped all vaccinations, eliminated all processed foods and artificial dyes, went to a chiropractor instead of a pediatrician, and took him to occupational and speech therapy.

Read the rest here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 19:15

From Idlib To Davos: Al-Qaeda Linked Syrian Official On Mainstage At WEF

A US-designated terrorist group still remains the current de facto ruling entity in Damascus and over Syria. But for the West, all that matters is that al-Qaeda linked Jolani is not Assad. A decade-plus long proxy war in pursuit of regime change finally overthrew the secular Baath government early last month, and resulted in the hardline Islamists of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) controlling most of the country.

The West appears to be fully embracing the new rulers which we previously referred to as al-Qaeda in suits. This week we have been treated to the spectacle of a HTS representative speaking on the main stage at Davos. He's come a long way from Idlib and its black flags... straight to the red carpet jet-setting champaign-sipping insider atmosphere of world elites.

During the 55th annual WEF meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2025. via Reuters

Syria's new HTS-appointed Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan Al-Shaibani told the World Economic Forum on Wednesday that Saudi Arabia is now the exemplar for Syria to follow.

"Where do we see inspiration for the new Syria? We have the Vision 2030 of Saudi Arabia," Al-Shaibani said during a conversation with former UK prime minister Tony Blair.

"We need Syria to be a place of peace, to be a place of development, a place free of war," the top HTS diplomat added.

On top of the irony of an AQ-linked official being invited to Davos (and merely within less than two months after HTS took power), there's the added irony that Tony Blair - one of Bush's key allies who pushed the 2003 invasion of Iraq - was hosting the Davos main stage discussion with Al-Shaibani.

Former leaders like Blair, in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, are responsible for having overseen the sectarian and Islamist nightmare which gripped Iraq and the region in the aftermath. The rise of ISIS would not have been possible if it weren't for the US/UK 'shock and awe' regime change operation, for example. Later, the West and Gulf states funded the Syrian insurgency, during which time Al-Qaeda in Iraq jihadists poured across the border into Syria. HTS was born out of this West-backed anti-Assad jihad (it was known as Nusra Front in the beginning).

But of course, the Davos elites are embracing it all: war crimes and jihad. 

Meanwhile, in Syria HTS has allowed ISIS-linked foreign fighters to intimidate the population with impunity. Alawites, Druze, and Christians live in fear as sectarian-driven killings are on the rise in the "liberated Syria" - especially in the Homs, Latakia, and coastal and countryside regions.

As he appealed for the support of the Davos predator class with the help of Iraq war criminal and neoliberal frontman Tony Blair, Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan Al Shibani complained that Western sanctions destabilize Syria and make governing the country nearly impossible pic.twitter.com/hf87FRzixk

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) January 23, 2025

Did Blair extract from Shaibani a firm commitment to protect Syria's Christians and uphold secularism for Syria at Davos? Of course not.

The future looks bleak as Jolani has pledged eventual implementation of Sharia law. Already there have been widespread reports of alcohol stores being smashed, women forced to wear the Islamic veil, and imposed separation of the sexes in many public places. But the WEF has enthusiastically greeted this new Syriaistan. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 18:50

Trump MemeCoins Set To Be Sued... But To What End?

Authored by Ailsa Sherrington via CoinTelegraph.com,

Just days before US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the crypto industry was taken relatively by surprise with the launch of Official Trump (TRUMP), which was swiftly followed by Official Melania (MELANIA) — two memecoins launched by the first family that have pumped and yo-yoed in the days that followed.

​​

The president’s memecoin hit a peak of $72 on Jan. 19, then dipped to $44 on Jan. 20 when MELANIA launched. The coin briefly recovered while the president was sworn into office and has since hovered around the $40 mark. At the time of writing, the president’s memecoin is $37 — down 49% from its peak.

If speculation is to be believed, more official memecoins by the Trump family are on the way. Though touted as “memecoins,” their significance is unprecedented.

It was difficult to imagine an incoming American president launching his own memecoin before Jan. 18. Now, it’s hard to picture TRUMP and other tokens not playing a pivotal role in the US political sphere.

As crypto lawyer Preston Byrne wrote in a blog post, “Crypto is going to be a bigger political football than it’s ever been. Everyone who cares about politics is going to care about it, with no exceptions.”

This includes Democrats and disgruntled investors, who, according to Byrne, are 100% likely to sue the project within two months.

Is TRUMP even illegal?

James Thurber, founder and former director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies, told the Guardian that Trump is blatantly profiting from his own pro-crypto agenda.

“There are shameful and major conflicts of interest with respect to his family business benefiting from his cryptocurrency policies,” Thurber said. 

Ryan Lee, chief analyst at Bitget Research, told Cointelegraph that TRUMP has “drawn new investors into the space.” But new audiences aren’t necessarily aware of what makes a sound investment. The launch of TRUMP and MELANIA has predictably made winners and losers, with some shedding millions of dollars as prices slumped.

Nearly 570,000 wallets have made a loss on TRUMP, compared to nearly 330,000 that made a profit. Source: 0xning

Byrne believes these lost investments will inevitably lead to litigation. But what is the legal basis?

“To my knowledge, no court in the United States has determined that memecoins are explicitly legal,” crypto lawyer Aaron Brogan told Cointelegraph.

That said, they have historically been difficult to prosecute. Brogan explained that memecoins may not be classified as securities under the Howey test.

“This is because they are basically inert. They don’t do anything and are not tied to any project with a goal of developing useful applications. They just sit onchain, and people buy them for the memes.”

This is likely why the Securities and Exchange Commission largely avoided memecoins during its Gary Gensler era, instead opting for comparatively “easier” targets like XRP and SOL.

“But regardless of why, launching a memecoin was less risky over the last four years than developing a bona fide project in cryptocurrency, which is probably the reason they have proliferated,” Brogan said.

So, memecoins exist in a sort of litigation vacuum, making it the best way for the Trump family to launch a token when all eyes were firmly on them. However, these memecoins are tied to arguably the most important people in the United States — so whether the intent or not, the value of TRUMP and MELANIA will likely serve as a litmus test of public sentiment.

As Byrne wrote:

“Trump Coin will now be tracked on CNBC financial shows, in newspapers, the price will be a reflection of the underlying tone of American society and the American project.”

Crypto lawyer Josh Lawler told Cointelegraph that the question is whether this should immediately place TRUMP and MELANIA into a different, regulated category.

“The unresolved and difficult question is whether the fact that a large segment of the global population is primed to turn this ‘consumer product’ into a major capital asset should automatically put it into a regulated category even though there is no ‘official’ communication of ongoing investment value,” he told Cointelegraph. 

“As of this moment in time, there is no law that would require that treatment.”

Democrats likely to sue anyway

Trump and his team of lawyers have clearly prepared for attacks from Democrats or others keen to see him bleed over these memecoins.

The terms of service on the TRUMP memecoin’s official website state that TRUMP is not intended to be, in any way, “an investment opportunity, investment contract, or security of any type.”

Lawler agrees that “an early assessment indicates that TRUMP is carefully crafted to avoid literal violation of laws including the Securities Act or the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the United States Constitution.”

And it is “absolutely unthinkable” that Trump would face legal threats from the federal government during his term, Brogan stated.

However, Byrne says that this won’t stop Democrats or certain investors from filing, say, a civil lawsuit. In fact, he’s banking on it.

The TRUMP terms include a class-action waiver and a clause requiring any litigation to be handled in arbitration (out of court), which serve to protect the project from civil lawsuits. Byrne wrote:

“This might make it tough for initial purchasers to bring a suit, but it’ll be easier for holders of tokens on secondary sales to argue that there’s no contractual privity between them and the project and so these terms shouldn’t apply.”

According to the crypto lawyer, there’s a 100% chance of a civil lawsuit within two months and a 90% chance of one filed in the next two weeks.

“I am absolutely certain this will happen. Someone will lose money, some lawyer will come up with a theory and file.”

Brogan agrees, telling Cointelegraph:

“Frankly, I think the torrent of legal filings is about to make Noah’s great flood look like a sun shower.”

What’s the worst that could happen?

As a man who became a convicted felon and then the 47th president of the US — in that order — it’s worth asking what, if anything, litigation will do to Trump. It may be difficult to legally pursue the leader of the “free world,” but it is not impossible.

“In Clinton v. Jones, the Supreme Court ruled that presidents are subject to suit for actions they took before becoming president,” Brogan explained.

“So, it is possible that some of these lawsuits will get through.”

The issue is that Trump has developed Kevlar-grade skin. Some civil lawsuits, perhaps a few TRUMP associates hounded by state attorneys general… will these attempts lead to any real form of enforcement? Of protection for investors?

“He’s cultivated a coalition of supporters who are not interested in policing traditional mores of public conduct,” Brogan argued, “and the dividend from that effort is that he can do whatever he wants.”

“Trump has immanentized the crypto revolution,” Byrne concluded in his blog post. “We will each remember this day until we die, because we will be dealing with the consequences of this for the rest of our lives.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 18:25

RINO Defections Fail To Derail Hegseth As Senate Confirmation Advances

Via Headline USA,

The Senate advanced the nomination of Pete Hegseth as President Donald Trump’s defense secretary Thursday on a largely party-line vote, despite party-line opposition from Democrats and defections from two notorious RINOs who - like most in the Senate - voted in favor of confirming grossly incompetent Biden Defense secretary Lloyd Austin.

Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine predictably broke rank with the Republican majority to elevate the former Fox News star, distinguished military veteran, accomplished author and Harvard graduate.

The vote was 51-49, with a final vote on confirmation expected Friday.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., implored his colleagues to think seriously, “Is this the best man we have to lead the greatest military in the world?”

In what has become a standard part of the Democrat playbook, Hegseth has been subjected to salacious personal smear attacks, accusing him of heavy drinking and infidelity—both of which Democrats routinely engage in with impunity and which would not impugn his competence as a military leader if true. Hegseth has denied many of the allegations.

Mukowksi, in a lengthy statement, said that his behaviors “starkly contrast” with what is expected of the U.S. military. She also noted his past statements that women should not fill military combat roles.

“I remain concerned about the message that confirming Mr. Hegseth sends to women currently serving and those aspiring to join,” Murkowski wrote on social media.

Murkowski said behavior that Hegseth has acknowledged, “including infidelity on multiple occasions,” shows a lack of judgment.

“These behaviors starkly contrast the values and discipline expected of service members,” she said.

“Above all, I believe that character is the defining trait required of the Secretary of Defense, and must be prioritized without compromise,” she said.

Trump is standing by Hegseth, and the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee has dismissed the claims as factually inaccurate.

It will take a simple majority senators to confirm Hegseth’s confirmation. Most Republicans, who hold a 53-seat majority in the chamber, have signaled they will back the nominee, though Vice President JD Vance could be called in to break a tie vote.

“I am ironclad in my assessment that the nominee, Mr. Hegseth, is prepared to be the next secretary of defense,” the chairman, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said in a statement on the eve of voting. “The Senate needs to confirm this nominee as fast as possible.”

Wicker said he had been briefed a third time on the FBI background investigation into Hegseth. He said “the allegations unfairly impugning his character do not pass scrutiny.”

A new president’s national security nominees are often the first to be lined up for confirmation, to ensure U.S. safety at home and abroad. Already the Senate has overwhelmingly confirmed Marco Rubio as secretary of State in a unanimous vote, and it was on track to confirm John Ratcliffe as CIA director later Thursday.

During a fiery confirmation hearing, Hegseth swatted away allegations of wrongdoing one by one—dismissing them as “smears”—as he displayed his military credentials and vowed to bring “warrior culture” to the top Pentagon post.

Among the allegations levied against Hegseth is a claim that he sexually assaulted a woman at a Republican conference in California, which he has maintained was a consensual encounter.

A new claim emerged this week in an affidavit from a former sister-in-law who said Hegseth was abusive to his second wife to the point that she feared for her safety. Hegseth has denied the allegation. In divorce proceedings, neither Hegseth nor the woman claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Schumer said Thursday that Hegseth was unqualified for the job because of his personal behavior, including drinking, and his lack of experience.

“One of the kindest words that might be used to describe Mr. Hegseth is erratic, and that’s a term you don’t want at DOD,” Schumer said.

“He has a clear problem of judgment.”

A Princeton- and Harvard-educated former combat veteran, Hegseth went on to make a career at Fox News, where he hosted a weekend show. Trump tapped him as the defense secretary to lead an organization with nearly 2.1 million service members, about 780,000 civilians and a budget of $850 billion.

Hegseth has promised not to drink on the job if confirmed.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, herself a combat veteran and sexual assault survivor, has signaled her backing after initially opposing the choice. It is believed that Ernst herself may have been engaged in a soft campaign for the spot but that intra-party pressure and backlash led her to reconsider.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 17:40

Washington State Seeking To Legalize Homeless Encampments

Washington Democrats have introduced House Bill 1380, sponsored by Rep. Mia Gregerson (D-SeaTac), which would prevent cities and towns from banning or heavily restricting homeless encampments on public property, according to 770 KTTH.

The bill requires any regulations to be "objectively reasonable as to time, place, and manner," a vague standard determined by judges. It also applies retroactively, potentially nullifying existing ordinances, and provides legal advantages to homeless individuals challenging encampment restrictions.

The bill allows homeless individuals to sue cities over encampment restrictions, request injunctive or declaratory relief, and argue that the restrictions are unreasonable. If the city loses, taxpayers would be responsible for covering the plaintiffs' legal fees.

Opponents claim the bill's ambiguous language deters cities from enforcing restrictions, as its unclear standards may result in inconsistent court decisions.

State Rep. Mia Gregerson, who advocates for the right to camp on public property, has proposed legislation that could create legal confusion, with different judges potentially issuing conflicting rulings on the same ordinance.

The bill offers no clear definition of “objectively reasonable,” leaving the term open to subjective interpretation when applied to encampment restrictions. Courts are directed to prioritize the impact on homeless individuals, even permitting violations of "unreasonable" ordinances if it is necessary for survival, such as staying warm and dry.

The potential benefits of these ordinances for the broader community are not considered.

Critics argue this framework makes it nearly impossible for cities to defend their policies, likely by design. A local lawmaker told “The Jason Rantz Show” that Rep. Gregerson did not consult cities in her district before moving forward with the legislation.

The 770 KTTH report says that most cities can’t afford the lawsuits triggered by challenges to their homeless ordinances under the vague “objective reasonableness” standard, which invites endless legal disputes.

Critics argue HB 1360, proposed by Rep. Mia Gregerson, is a rebranded version of her controversial “homeless bill of rights” and worsens the crisis by limiting local leaders’ ability to address encampments, prioritizing ideology over solutions.

Tyler Durden Thu, 01/23/2025 - 17:20