The liberal media matrix that spent years saturating the minds of Americans with Biden-Harris regime and Deep State propaganda, toxic woke ideology, discredited Russia-collusion stories, and a censorship-driven leftist agenda is now accelerating its collapse in real time, freeing the minds of tens of millions.

The next domino to potentially fall could be “The View” on ABC. Unfunny and unhinged leftist comedian Rosie O’Donnell posted a lengthy message on TikTok about the show’s imminent demise, which features a panel of leftist women hosts who spend their days screeching anti-Trump rhetoric.  

Here’s what O’Donnell wrote 

You know what I just read today? ABC is “reviewing the liberal bias” on The View. The VIEW. The show with five women speaking the own opinions – That’s the threat now.

They say they’re not canceling it—they’re just “reviewing the bias.” Which is code for – we’re gonna cancel it we’re just trying to soften you up first.

“The View is a leftist echo chamber through and through,” media watchdog group Media Research Center recently wrote on X. 

The View is a leftist echo chamber through and through pic.twitter.com/KXpzuHMJK3

— MRC NewsBusters (@newsbusters) August 2, 2025

O’Donnell claimed, “This isn’t about bias – This is about obedience. This is about removing any program that doesn’t align with Trumpism — soft fascism in full lashes with commercial breaks.” 

Yet the women on The View are noting more than useful idiots – or puppets – who promoted an endless amount of misinformation and disinformation from the Obama-Clinton regime. 

Remember: Russia! Trump! Russia! Trump!

Donald Trump wanted Flynn to contact Russia so they could work together to destroy ISIS.

This is @TheView‘s reaction to this.

This video will not age well. pic.twitter.com/8r7K64pYco

— Liberal ‘Logic’ 🇺🇸 (@LiberalLogic123) December 2, 2017

.@MeghanMcCain calls Trump’s Putin comments “extremely dangerous” and “un-American”: “Our president acted like a pathetic puppy who was completely neutered around a former KGB agent, [a] murderous dictator who has caused some of the worst atrocities.” pic.twitter.com/8YqZ1ZjkCC

— The View (@TheView) July 21, 2018

The View has to be getting government kickbacks. No way people actually watch this show:

Sunny Hostin: Why is Trump so enthralled with Russia?

Joy Behar: Maybe Trump owes something to Putin. pic.twitter.com/7LDNzO4Tm8

— Derrick Evans (@DerrickEvans4WV) February 28, 2025

And then this: Defenders of Fauci and experimental vaccines. “Listen to what we say. We tell the truth,” host Joy Behar told the audience.

NEW – The View Hosts Say You Should Listen to Them When It Comes to COVID Vaccines

“I have been boosted and boosted and boosted. So I got it, COVID. It does not prevent you from getting COVID but you don’t die from it…People need to check their sources. Only listen to what we… pic.twitter.com/Rg3nWi1cMu

— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) January 5, 2024

O’Donnell might be correct about The View’s fate, but she’s entirely wrong about the platform being the guardian of “truth”; instead, these liberal women were defenders of the Deep State agenda and their corporate billionaire allies.

This rumor comes after:

• Stephen Colbert’s “Late Show” Cancelled By CBS

• Corporation For Public Broadcasting Begins “Winding Down” As Taxpayer-Funded Propaganda Machine Crumbles

• Howard Stern’s SiriusXM Show In Dire Straits As $500M Contract Nears End

There will be more… 

The music could soon stop for the broken-record hosts of The View, as the leftist propaganda network implodes around these elitists in real time.

Authored by Paul Sperry via RealClearInvestigations,

A whistleblower report declassified last week suggests that Hillary Clinton’s campaign efforts to manufacture evidence tying Donald Trump to alleged Russian hacking in 2016 were deeper than previously known – as were Obama administration efforts to conceal them.

According to the report, a former senior U.S. intelligence analyst who investigated alleged Russian attempts to breach state voting systems during the 2016 election suspected the breaches may have been “related to activities” of the computer contractors involved in the Alfa Bank hoax, who were accused of manipulating Internet traffic data. 

In that well-publicized case, a Clinton campaign lawyer worked with federal computer contractors and the FBI to create suspicions that Russia was communicating with Donald Trump through a secret server shared by Alfa Bank of Russia and Trump Tower in Manhattan. 

The anonymous whistleblower – who served as the deputy national intelligence officer for cyber issues in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence from 2015 to 2020 – told Special Counsel John Durham he stumbled onto “enigmatic” data while leading the investigation of alleged Russian cyber activity for the Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian meddling in the 2016 election. He said that his discovery took place in December 2016 when President Obama ordered the ICA. 

After examining state-reported breaches of election networks, the whistleblower said, “It seemed only brief interaction was occurring – in some cases, no unauthorized access, or even attempted access, was detected on ‘victim’ systems.” Though the suspicious activity initially was attributed to Russian actors, further analysis raised doubts. 

But when he brought his findings to his boss, ODNI’s national intelligence officer for cyber issues, he was ordered to stop investigating and not include his findings in the final ICA draft. 

“After being directed to conduct analysis of Russian-attributed cyber activity for the ICA, I had been abruptly directed to abandon further investigation,” the whistleblower analyst said.

He added that his boss, whose name was blacked out in the whistleblower statement, “directed me to abandon analysis of these events, stating reports of Russia-attributed cyber activity were ‘something else.'” 

While the names of the whistleblower and his boss are blacked out in the report, a RealClearInvestigations search of federal records shows Vinh Nguyen was the national intelligence officer for cyber issues at the time. The whistleblower would have been Nguyen’s deputy.

Nguyen did not respond to RCI’s request for comment.

Pressured To Change View

The whistleblower’s 2023 complaint, declassified last week by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, also seems to contradict the recent claims of Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and his CIA Director, John Brennan, among others that the ICA was a neutral document prepared according to the highest standards whose conclusions were widely supported by the intelligence community. The whistleblower said his supervisor also “pressured me to accept the ICA’s judgment of a decisive Russian preference for then President-elect Trump, and stated to me that he sought my concurrence as means to sway the position of” another intelligence agency.

“I was pressured to alter my views on the key judgment,” he said.

But, he added, “I could not concur in good conscience based on information available, and my professional analytic judgment.” 

What’s more, he said his boss “intentionally deceived and excluded me from things I was cleared for and had need to know” during the ICA’s drafting. This included the fact that Clinton campaign opposition research – the now-debunked Steele dossier – was used as supporting evidence in the highly restricted, classified version of the ICA. 

“I had been led to believe that Clapper viewed the ‘Steele dossier’ material as untrustworthy, and I had believed it played no role in the ICA,” he said. 

His boss told him there was other evidence that supported the key Trump-Russia judgment, which he was “not allowed to see,” but “if you saw it, you would agree.” Pressed to share the alleged additional evidence, his superior said, “You need to TRUST ME on this.” (Emphasis in original.) “I need you to agree with these judgments,” he said his boss demanded. 

The whistleblower alleged his superior committed “potential malfeasance” during the crafting of the ICA, which was used as the foundation for several investigations of Trump and his advisers during his first term in office. 

Still, the whistleblower said that back in 2016, he did not view the omission of the suspicious Internet data from the ICA report as “nefarious.” “However, I later began to consider it possible that some of the reporting might reflect Domain Name Service (DNS) record manipulation by parties other than Russian,” he said. 

After conducting further research, “I came to view some of the reported cyber activity as possibly related to activities of USPERSONS under federal investigation” by special prosecutor Durham, who was probing the Alfa Bank hoax. 

Suspected Manipulation

He said he subsequently provided a data report detailing his suspicions of “manipulation” to Durham’s investigators, which remains classified. But they never interviewed him, even though “I likely had information relevant to ongoing criminal investigations.” (Durham’s final report makes no mention of the incident and does not even focus on the ICA. The whistleblower report is separate from the Durham report. Attempts to reach the now-retired special prosecutor were unsuccessful.) 

The whistleblower’s reference to U.S. individuals under investigation ostensibly refers to computer scientists led by tech executive and FBI informant Rodney Joffe, who collaborated with Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann to create documents and data files tying Trump to the Russian-based Alfa Bank in the summer of 2016. Sussmann, in turn, gave the materials to a friend at the FBI to investigate.

By September 2016, Sussmann had convinced the FBI to open an investigation into an alleged secret backchannel between Trump and Putin based on Domain Name Server records that Durham suspected had been manipulated by the contractors. DNS records are numeric addresses that computers, smartphones, and other devices use to communicate with websites and email servers. 

After Joffe and his contractors obtained DNS Internet data related to Trump Tower, emails cited by Durham reveal they created an “inference” of Russian contacts and even suggested “faking” DNS traffic to show communications that didn’t actually exist. 

According to an Aug. 20, 2016, email prosecutors uncovered, one contractor offered, “I could fill out a sales form on two websites, faking the other company’s email address in each form, and cause them to appear to communicate with each other in DNS. (And other ways I can think of).” 

Joffe replied that the ability to “provide evidence of *anything* that shows an attempt to behave badly” [by Trump] would make “the VIPs … happy.” According to Joffe, the Clinton campaign “VIPs” were looking for a “true story that could be used as the basis for a closer examination” by the FBI, and any interactions between Trump and Alfa Bank “would be jackpot.” 

But in an Aug. 22, 2016, email, one of the researchers expressed skepticism the scheme would “fly,” complaining to Joffe that: 

“Lets [sic] for a moment think of the best case scenario, where we are able to show (somehow) that DNS communication exists between Trump and R[ussia]. How do we plan to defend against the criticism that this is not spoofed traffic we are observing? There is no answer to that. Lets [sic] assume again that they are not smart enough to refute our “best case” scenario. Rodney, you do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag to even make a very weak association? Lets [sic] all reflect upon that for a moment. [S]orry folks, but unless we get combine netflow and DNS traffic collected at critical points between suspect organizations, we cannot technically make any claims that would fly public scrutiny. … Sorry to say this, we are nowhere close coming [sic] with a plan to attack this problem that will fly in the public domain. The only thing that drive [sic] us at this point is that we just do not like [Trump].”

Nevertheless, in materials they provided the FBI, Joffe’s group contended “odd” Internet traffic on the server reflected hidden communications between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank. 

Durham found the Clinton associates conspired to gin up an FBI investigation into Trump based on knowingly false information. He also suggested they manipulated that Internet data. 

Alfa Bank, which also operates in the U.S., commissioned two studies that found the DNS data compiled by Joffe and his computer operatives was formatted differently than the bank server’s DNS logs, and one study posited that the DNS activity may have been “artificially created.” 

In his 2023 affidavit, the ODNI whistleblower implied that anti-Trump computer contractors working with the Clinton campaign may have been involved in a similar false flag operation targeting state election networks. He suspected they may have been the source of suspicious connection attempts using “IP [address] ranges historically used by Russian state cyber actors.” 

These “concerns” did not make it into the ICA,  he said, because his supervisor excluded them, among other intelligence that did not conform with the narrative he pushed. 

McCain Connection

Although the supervisor’s name is redacted from the whistleblower’s report, records show that the national intelligence officer (NIO) for cyber issues at the time was Vinh Nguyen. He was new to the job in 2016 but received DNI’s Exceptional Accomplishment Award the following year. 

Before the 2016 election, Nguyen worked with  Democratic National Committee cybersecurity contractor CrowdStrike to gather intelligence on the alleged Russian hacking of the DNC computer system. Even though the company had publicly blamed Russia during the heated presidential campaign for stealing and then sharing the emails, many of which were published by WikiLeaks, its president, Shawn Henry, later testified in a closed-door congressional hearing that there was no proof that Russian intelligence had exfiltrated emails from the DNC.

Nguyen is said to have also overseen election security analysis for the 2018 mid-term elections and 2020 presidential election. He is now the top AI officer at the National Security Agency. 

Federal Election Commission records show that Nguyen has contributed at least $500 to the late GOP Sen. John McCain, his only political donations. Nguyen made the donations while serving as “senior national advance representative” for McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. 

He is listed as a member of the McCain Alumni Club, according to the McCain Institute. In 2020, Nguyen was listed among 100 McCain Alumni who endorsed Joe Biden for president. McCain and Biden served in the Senate together and maintained a friendship despite being from different political parties. 

Following Trump’s surprise victory in 2016, McCain played a role in the attempts to link Trump with Russia. On directions from McCain, one of his top staffers from the McCain Institute sought out Christopher Steele and FusionGPS and began working directly with them to distribute their Clinton-funded dossier. 

The Clinton campaign had hired FusionGPS, which in turn hired Steele to produce the dossier. The now-debunked collection of hearsay and inventions was used by the FBI to obtain a wiretap to spy on the Trump campaign, and later by Clapper and CIA chief John Brennan to buttress the findings of the ICA. 

On Dec. 9, 2016, the same day Obama convened a meeting to refocus the ICA on Trump, McCain personally provided 16 Steele reports to then-FBI Director James Comey, including five that Steele had not given the agency previously. 

Then on Dec. 17, Comey discussed the new dossier material with Nguyen’s boss, Clapper, over the phone. A few weeks later, in early January 2017, the same McCain Institute aide, David Kramer, gave copies of all of the Steele reports to Buzzfeed, which published them in full under the headline, “These Reports Allege Trump Has Deep Ties to Russia.” 

On Jan. 5, 2017, McCain, as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, held hearings with Clapper as his lead witness and forcefully reaffirmed the findings of the ICA. 

The following month, despite the FBI debunking the Alfa Bank hoax and closing its case, the Senate Armed Services Committee “leadership” commissioned a report on the alleged links to Trump. The report was written by Daniel Jones, a FusionGPS and Steele crony, who said the committee put him in touch with Sussmann and Joffe, who provided him with a “dataset of DNS look-ups.” Joffe knew McCain from his days working in Arizona. 

Jones’ 687-page report concluded “there was likely human interaction and coordination between personnel working on behalf of Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization,” even though his own research team “found no evidence of a secret channel of communications.” 

Turns out the Trump Organization had no access to the email server or any of the systems involved, according to the Durham report. 

Paul Sperry is an investigative reporter for RealClearInvestigations. He is also a longtime media fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution. Sperry was previously the Washington bureau chief for Investor’s Business Daily, and his work has appeared in the New York Post, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Houston Chronicle, among other major publications.

While the planned August 15 Trump-Putin summit set for Alaska is a very positive breakthough toward potentially ending the war in Ukriane, one wonders precisely how the sides aim to actually achieve this, given they look to already be back at square one regardless. What has substantially changed in the warring sides’ positions that now makes peace possible?

First, here is The Wall Street Journal clarifying what Putin wants, which hasn’t changed:

Russian President Vladimir Putin presented the Trump administration this week with a sweeping proposal for a cease-fire in Ukraine, demanding major territorial concessions by Kyiv—and a push for global recognition of its claims—in exchange for a halt to the fighting, according to European and Ukrainian officials.

…European and Ukrainian officials, who were briefed by Trump and Witkoff in a series of calls this week, said they worry Putin is simply using the offer as a ploy to avoid new U.S. sanctions and tariffs while continuing the war.

Next, here’s The New York Times presenting President Zelensky’s Saturday firm rejection of giving up any land – and not even offering Crimea which has been fully controlled by Russia for many years, having been formally annexed in 2014 via a popular referendum:

President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine on Saturday flatly rejected the idea that Ukraine could cede land to Russia after President Trump suggested that a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia could include “some swapping of territories.”

“Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier,” Mr. Zelensky said in a video address from his office in Kyiv, several hours after Mr. Trump’s remarks, which appeared to overlook Ukraine’s role in the negotiations.

…His blunt rejection risks angering Mr. Trump, who has made a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia one of his signature foreign policy goals, even if it means accepting terms that are unfavorable to Kyiv. In the past, Mr. Trump has criticized Ukraine for clinging to what he suggested were stubborn cease-fire demands and for being “not ready for peace.”

Zelensky had further said in his video address, “Any decisions made against us, any decisions made without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace.” He then clarified Ukriane’s position further, “They will bring nothing. These are dead decisions; they will never work.”

If this is indeed the case, now what? What will Alaska achieve? Interestingly the Europeans have also been asking for a seat at the table regarding any Washington-Moscow talks to end the war.

If Trump wants to see this through, he’ll have to cut of Zelensky – both in terms of arms supplies and pushing him out into the politicla cold, or isolation. But the European allies will of course revolt, and accuse Trump of being steamrolled by Putin’s demands.

But President Trump actually did hint that he’s read to finalize a land swap in his recent words to reporters, though it wasn’t exactly clear which territories are being talked about here.

“We’re going to get some back, and we’re going to get some switched,” Trump said during an event at the White House, as quoted in the NY Times. “There’ll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both.”

“Ukraine will not gift its land to anyone,” Zelensky said, adding that any agreements reached without Ukraine will be stillborn. https://t.co/3mOiakToc4

— Yaroslav Trofimov (@yarotrof) August 9, 2025

However, that’s not the mood in Kiev, where Zelensky appears ready to keep fighting – especially along the front lines in the east. And some of the more hardline, neo-Nazi elements among Ukraine’s military ranks and militia units certainly won’t let Zelensky get away with ceding territory.

Still, Western mainstream media is noticing a definite mood shift, such as in this top Saturday headline from CNN…

WSJ’s chief foreign correspondent Yaroslav Trofimov is probably correct in predicting the following: “No matter what Witkoff may have told Trump, there is no scenario under which the Ukrainian army voluntarily withdraws from Slovyansk and Kramatorsk and hands over these major cities to Russian occupation.”

Authored by David Gangemi via RealClearDefense,

The greatest threat to America may be something we cannot see.

Biological and chemical weapons can spread debilitating fear and wreak havoc on populations. Unfortunately, the threat of these kinds of attacks on American soil is only rising, empowered by the unique capabilities of artificial intelligence. To prevent catastrophe, we must use AI to counter the danger that this advanced technology can unleash.

We are only one misstep away from catastrophe. The most recent close call came last month when two Chinese nationals, who received funding from their communist government to work on a noxious fungus, were caught smuggling the pathogen into the United States. The FBI arrested them just in time, as this was no ordinary fungus—instead, it was what scientists call an “agroterrorism weapon” that would have decimated America’s grain farms, sickened the U.S. population, and disrupted our nation’s food supply.

Those who lived through the fraught days immediately after 9/11 likewise remember the anthrax scare, as toxic letters were sent through the postal service, killing five people and making everyday Americans terrified to open their mailboxes. 

Every few years, some new suspect threatens our military bases, political leaders, or someone else with ricin, a deadly poison derived from the castor plant.

And just a few short years ago, millions died and the entire world was thrown into a tailspin when COVID-19—which many experts now believe originated from questionable handling and a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology—crossed borders with abandon.

The rapid rise of AI is only making this problem more prevalent. In 2022—months before ChatGPT was released, bringing large language models to the masses—an AI designed to develop drugs invented 40,000 new chemical weapons in a mere six hours. In 2023, AI was used to provide a recipe for poisonous chloramine gas, which it called “Aromatic Water Mix.” AI experts and government officials have been warning for years that AI could spark the next pandemic and be an unparalleled tool in the hands of terrorists.

These facts are encouraging some to ask that AI developers give pause to the negative consequences of this powerful technology. We have enough problems with biological espionage, terrorism-by-mail, and lethal lab leaks. Why would we put potential biological and chemical weapons generators in the hands of anyone with a computer?

But responding to this threat is not so simple as pulling the plug. First, while AI has the potential to be used for evil, it also has immense power for good. The same tools that could be used to make biological weapons are also being applied to cure currently untreatable diseases. Additionally, America can’t stop others from developing AI for whatever uses they desire. COVID-19 and the recent agroterrorism fungus both came from China, and you can bet China will have no problem unleashing AI for even more destructive ends if it serves their interests, as will every other bad actor in the world.

So what else can we do?

First, the administration should continue to aggressively investigate and thwart potential acts of biological and chemical terrorism. The recent FBI arrest of the Chinese fungus smugglers proves that America’s law enforcement is aware of this threat and still capable of preventing attacks before they happen.

Likewise, President Donald Trump acted presciently in his first administration by launching the first-ever National Biodefense Strategy in 2018, which outlined how our nation can defend against natural outbreaks and intentional biological attacks. This strategy, coupled with the president’s swift military action against Syria for its use of biological weapons that same year, reveals that the current administration will still use the immense power of American deterrence to stop the use of these deadly weapons. 

Yet with AI poised to rapidly exacerbate biological and chemical weapon proliferation, traditional tools are not enough. We must use AI to respond to AI.

The private sector is already on the case. Companies like Renovaro, and OpenAI, two U.S.-based AI firms, are already applying machine learning to both prevent AI from producing recipes for weaponry and to identify and counter biological and chemical threats before they can spiral out of control. 

New coding produced by top AI experts can be applied to any large language model to prevent it from teaching users how to make weapons of mass destruction. For those pathogens that slip through the cracks, Renovaro’s AI has the potential to develop antidotes to biological and chemical samples within five days, lightyears faster than the long months it took to develop vaccines and effective treatments for COVID-19.

President Trump promised a golden dome to protect America from missile attacks—a worthwhile initiative. Yet the next war may be started not by a missile, but by a microbe. We need a biological golden dome, and AI can make it.

Dr. David Gangemi is a Professor Emeritus at Clemson University, Former Senior Science Advisor on health affairs to the Assistant Secretary of Defense, and a virologist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases 

A police officer is dead after a surgical-mask-wearing gunman riddled the Atlanta headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with bullets. His parents think it was an act of revenge, saying their son believed he had an illness caused by the controversial Covid-19 vaccine. The attack ended with the shooter’s own death, but it’s unclear at this point if his mortal wound was self-inflicted. 

“The CDC campus did receive multiple rounds into their buildings,” Atlanta Police Chief Darin Schierbaum told reporters. CDC Director Susan Monarez said four buildings were hit. As this is written, the name of the white, male shooter has not been released by authorities. He was armed with two handguns, a rifle and a shotgun, and a law enforcement official on the scene told CNN he was wearing what appeared to be a surgical mask like those the CDC pushed for all men, women and children to wear during the Covid-19 pandemic, despite well-informed doubts about their efficacy and concerns about ill effects. He was also wearing ear protection. 

Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens made cryptic allusions to the question of motive, telling reporters, “[The shooter] is a known person that may have some interest in certain things that I can’t reiterate right now.” However, according to CNN’s police sources, the shooter’s father had called the police prior to the shooting — earlier on Friday — to report that his son was suicidal. Family members also told investigators that the shooter was either physically ill or at least believed he was physically ill, and he was convinced that his malady resulted from receiving the Covid-19 vaccine.

MOMENT shooter opens fire at Emory University campus

Nonstop gunfire rips through the air

Police confirm shooter now DEAD https://t.co/y3GcUAPgx6 pic.twitter.com/RKonjvKipV

— RT (@RT_com) August 8, 2025

Police began receiving reports of a shooter immediately in front of the CDC campus at 4:50 pm. A CDC alert informed employees of an “active shooter” and instructed them to “RUN, HIDE FIGHT.” Responding officers found the fallen officer and extracted him from the scene. As they did, gunfire could be heard inside a building across the street from the CDC, that houses a CVS pharmacy on the campus of Emory University. Police entered the building and found the dead shooter on the second floor.

It appears the shooter never entered the CDC buildings, choosing only to shooting at them from below. Many vehicles were shot as well. Beyond the fatal shooting of the officer, no other people were shot, though four went to a hospital to be treated for stress and anxiety symptoms. CDC employees posted photos of bullet-shattered windows, and bystanders also shared videos that recorded the sound of abundant gunfire.

WATCH: Video shows bullets on the ground and bullet holes in windows inside CDC Headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia after gunman opened fire outside the building. pic.twitter.com/aaqe4cVsXe

— AZ Intel (@AZ_Intel_) August 9, 2025

DeKalb County police officer David Rose, a Marine Corps veteran who doubts about their efficacy and concerns about ill effects.  

Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens made cryptic allusions to the question of motive, telling reporters, “[The shooter] is a known person that may have some interest in certain things that I can’t reiterate right now.” However, police sources told CNN that 

DeKalb County police officer David Rose died in the attack, leaving behind a pregnant wife and two children. 

“>graduated from the police academy in March, died in Friday’s attack, leaving behind a pregnant wife and two children. Police haven’t yet determined why he happened to be on or near the scene when the attack erupted. 

The apparently vaccine-related attack came in the same week that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr announced he was killling a half-billion-dollars in funding for development of mRNA vaccines, such as those developed by Pfizer and Moderna for Covid-19. Kennedy said “mRNA technology poses more risks than benefits for these respiratory viruses” that the mRNA vaccines are meant to contain. Under Kennedy’s leadership, the CDC retracted its recommendation for universal Covid-19 immunizations for healthy children through age 17, and healthy pregnant women.  

CDC windows were struck by gunfire in Emory University shooting. pic.twitter.com/XELD15hULl

— Blue Georgia (@BlueATLGeorgia) August 8, 2025

While it wouldn’t have helped the CDC shooter, Kennedy in July announced he going to overhaul the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, in collaboration with Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Health and Human Services. The VICP is focused on compensating children who are harmed by vaccines for which manufacturers enjoy immunity from lawsuits under the 1986 Vaccine Act. Kennedy explained: 

“Under the VICP, vaccine victims can petition for compensation to the so-called ‘Vaccine Court,’ which pays out awards from a trust fund endowed by a 75-cent surcharge on every vaccine. Congress intended that injured children be compensated “quickly and fairly” for injuries, “either presumed or proven to be causally connected to vaccines,” with doubts about causation resolved in favor of the victim…

The VICP no longer functions to achieve its Congressional intent. Instead, the VICP has devolved into a morass of inefficiency, favoritism, and outright corruption as government lawyers and the Special Masters who serve as Vaccine Court judges prioritize the solvency of the HHS Trust Fund, over their duty to compensate victims.

The structure itself hobbles claimants. The defendant is HHS, not the vaccine makers; and claimants are therefore facing the monumental power and bottomless pockets of the U.S. government…There is no discovery, and the rules of evidence do not apply. The government lawyers do not allow children’s attorneys access to the Vaccine Safety Datalink, a taxpayer-funded CDC surveillance system that houses the best data on vaccine injuries…

The VICP routinely dismisses meritorious cases outright or drags them out for years. Instead of ‘quickly and fairly’ awarding compensation, Special Masters dismiss over half of the cases. Most of those that proceed typically take 5+ years to resolve.” 

In June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of a panel of supposed “experts” that advises the CDC on vaccination policy, saying it was “plagued by persistent conflicts of interest and [had] become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine,” and that “the problem is their immersion in a system of industry-aligned incentives and paradigms that enforce a narrow pro-industry orthodoxy.”

The American public’s confidence in Covid vaccinations continues to erode. According to a July survey, 59% of U.S. adults say they will either “definitely not” or “probably not” receive a vaccine this fall, with just 21% saying they definitely will. Many also have a dim view of federal health agencies: Only 42% believe they make decisions based on a sound scientific basis, and only 37% confident they operate free of corrupting outside influences. 

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

If everything is going to be just fine, why are thousands of stores closing all over the country?  So far this year, the total amount of retail space that has been permanently closed has surpassed 120 million square feet.  We have never seen anything like this before.  Store closings spiked during the early days of the pandemic, but in 2025 stores are being permanently shuttered at an even faster pace.

 In fact, during the first six months of this year 5,822 store closures were recorded…

Store closures across the U.S. continue to rise, and remain on track to far significantly surpass both new openings and the figures seen in 2024.

According to a new report from research and advisory firm Coresight Research, cited by CoStar News, 5,822 store closures were recorded as of June 27, compared to 3,496 closures announced during the same period of 2024.

If stores continue to close at this rate, we will break the old record that was established during the pandemic by a wide margin.

We are also being told that the total amount of retail space that has been permanently shuttered in 2025 has reached a staggering 120 million square feet…

In June, store closings by Plano, Texas-based home goods seller At Home and Philadelphia-based pharmacy chain Rite Aid, which have both filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, “pushed the total amount of retail space to close in the U.S. this year to over 120 million square feet,” Coresight said. The real estate churn is happening “as cyclical impacts confront structural shifts,” according to one executive at the research firm.

Wow.

You may have noticed that there are an increasing number of abandoned buildings in your particular area.

Sadly, this is just the beginning.

Consumers are under more financial stress than we have ever seen, and that has resulted in a substantial decline in store traffic…

Many of the retail store closures are a result of declining store traffic as more consumers respond to inflation by reducing spending. There also are more consumers turning to online shopping especially for apparel, accessories and household items. The winner is not merely Amazon but increased competition from Temu and Shein marketplaces and social commerce outlets like TikTok.

Needless to say, more stores are being closed down with each passing day.

After filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, Claire’s announced that it will be closing 18 more stores…

Claire’s, a mall-based teen accessories retailer, has identified several locations across the country it plans to close after filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Claire’s U.S., which operates Claire’s and Icing stores, made the filing in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware on Wednesday. It’s the second time since 2018 the company has filed for bankruptcy.

While the company says the majority of its retail stores will remain open while it “continues to explore all strategic alternatives,” Claire’s said it identified 18 stores ahead of the Aug. 6 bankruptcy filing it would close, filings show.

And home goods retailer At Home just announced that it will be closing 6 more stores…

The home goods retailer At Home is closing an additional six stores across the country, bringing its total closure tally to more than two dozen as it grapples with high debt and dwindling sales.

The furniture and home decor retailer based in Coppell, Texas, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on June 16, pointing to “broader economic and retail-specific market pressures,” in court documents. The bankruptcy filing and store closures follow several other “big box” retailers that have also significantly downsized their brick-and-mortar footprints this year, including Big Lots, Joann Fabrics, Kohl’s, JCPenney, Macy’s, and Party City.

The retailer intially announced 26 store closures in June, before paring that down to 24 when it decided to keep open two stores in New Jersey and Wisconsin. The company added another six stores to the list, according to a statement by retail firm Hilco Consumer-Retail on Aug. 1, bringing the current number of stores it will shutter in the coming months to 30.

We see more stories like this every single day.

So what is going to happen if our economic momentum continues to take us very rapidly in the wrong direction?

Earlier today, we learned that the percentage of student loans entering serious delinquency is absolutely exploding…

The total amount of outstanding student loan debt was $1.64 trillion in the second quarter of 2025 after rising by $7 billion in the quarter.

Additionally, the share of student loan debt entering serious delinquency, considered 90 days or more late, jumped to 12.9% at the end of June, up from 8% in March and above pre-pandemic trends that were around 9-10% from 2012 into early 2020, when the moratorium initially took effect.

The American people are drowning in debt, and I expect delinquency rates of all types to continue to rise in the months ahead.

We are going to see more layoffs too, and the fact that continuing claims for unemployment benefits just hit their highest level since 2021 is not a good sign at all…

Recurring applications for unemployment benefits surged to the highest since November 2021, adding to recent signs that the labor market is weakening.

Continuing claims, a proxy for the number of people receiving benefits, rose by 38,000 to 1.97 million in the week ended July 26, according to Labor Department data released Thursday.

On top of everything else, U.S. manufacturing activity is now in contraction territory…

From March to July, U.S. manufacturing activity contracted, according to the Institute for Supply Management’s monthly survey. The Manufacturing PMI last registered at 48, below the 50 score that differentiates growth and decline.

The effective average tariff rate on all imported goods now stands at around roughly 18% versus 2.3% last year, the highest levels since the 1930s.

We are in so much trouble.

After evaluating all of the latest economic numbers that have come in, Mark Zandi has come to the conclusion that the “economy is on the precipice of recession”…

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, on Monday wrote a post on X that the “economy is on the precipice of recession” – citing the weaker-than-expected jobs report released Friday and the inflation data from the previous day that showed consumer prices rose as indicating the economy’s precarious position.

“Consumer spending has flatlined, construction and manufacturing are contracting, and employment is set to fall. And with inflation on the rise, it is tough for the Fed to come to the rescue,” he wrote.

It is hard to argue with him.

Of course what is eventually coming is going to be so much worse than just a “recession”.

As conditions deteriorate, will store closings slow down or will they speed up?

The answer to that question is obvious.

If there are stores in your local area that you really enjoy, I would visit them now while you still can, because they might not be there next year.

*  * *

Michael’s new book entitled “10 Prophetic Events That Are Coming Next” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can subscribe to his Substack newsletter at michaeltsnyder.substack.com.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Donald Trump stays true to his line and asserts dominance over the geopolitical chessboard — symbolically as well. Following the announcement of a trade deal with the EU at his golf resort in Turnberry, Scotland, peace talks in the Ukraine conflict with Russian President Vladimir Putin are now scheduled in Alaska.

The venue of a negotiation often predefines the balance of power between opponents. In that sense, it must be read as a clear show of force that both European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer — notably without military fanfare — traveled to Trump’s private resort in Turnberry to be politically “placed” by the American president. Judging by the outcome of those talks, one conclusion is unavoidable: the European Union no longer plays in the league of the great powers. Washington’s interest in intra-European affairs has noticeably cooled, focusing essentially on two things: an orderly withdrawal from military entanglements, and the defense of US corporate interests in the EU single market.

We are witnessing a shift of power from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

Europe Losing Grip

It’s hardly a secret: China and the United States will be setting the standards of international politics in the future. Russia, the world’s most resource-rich country, may be labeled by Europeans as a pariah state and a malicious hub of all evil — but that does not change the fact that the age of postcolonial European dominance is ending, and Moscow will have no trouble playing its resource-market cards outside the shrinking European sphere of influence.

In this spirit, Russian President Vladimir Putin will travel on August 15 to “away territory” in Alaska — once part of Russia — to preliminarily negotiate peace terms in Ukraine with President Trump. Trump sees progress in the stalemated conflict and stresses that the talks will likely lead to a land-swap arrangement “to the benefit of both sides.” While the Russian government has not issued an official statement, much suggests Moscow will not return the occupied territories in Donbas, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, nor Crimea. Russia currently holds the military initiative and is increasing pressure on Ukraine and its allies to force a resolution.

To avoid overshadowing the personal meeting, the White House postponed a tariff ultimatum — originally set for August 9 — that would have imposed 100% duties on Russian goods if the war continued, pushing it back to August 27.

Alaska as a Signal

We will have to see what unfolds in the meantime and whether potential disruptions derail this cautious rapprochement once more. One recalls the much-discussed visit of former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who, two months after the outbreak of war, acted as a kind of shadow diplomat to reject a Russian-proposed peace deal.

What is now on the table again — a land swap and Ukraine’s exclusion from NATO — was flatly rejected back then. Hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded later, there appears to be a renewed turn toward diplomacy in light of the bleak military situation. This time, however, it is the Americans applying pressure on the warring sides. From Europe, little is heard apart from intense rearmament efforts and a declared will to “re-militarize” the population, as the German government has repeatedly emphasized.

Diplomatic Thread to Be Picked Up

The diplomatic thread is now to be picked up again in Alaska. Until 1867, Alaska was Russian territory before the US purchased it from Tsar Alexander II for $7.2 million — after Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War left its treasury depleted. The geography here speaks volumes: Alaska lies between Russia and the US, separated only by the Bering Strait, symbolizing the direct neighborhood of two great powers that may now be entering a new phase of rapprochement in a rapidly changing world order.

For the Ukraine talks, the location signals that even deeply rooted geopolitical divides can be bridged through pragmatic agreements. At the same time, Alaska has strategic importance for the Arctic, whose trade routes and resources will likely be integrated into the future architecture of global power.

By hosting the Russian president at such a neuralgic spot, Trump fuses historical reconciliation with present-day power politics, creating a symbolic setting that suggests readiness for compromise without conceding sovereignty.

Trump’s Move

What might look like a PR coup in the headlines is in reality a move at the highest level of geopolitics. By inviting Putin onto US soil, Trump openly breaks with the prevailing doctrine of keeping Russia isolated. The ICC arrest warrant, the sanctions regime, years of carefully cultivated enemy imagery — all of it, should the meeting take place, would evaporate in significance with a single photograph.

The message: The rules the foreign-policy establishment holds as untouchable are negotiable — not carved in stone — at least if the President of the United States decides so.

Behind closed doors, the focus will likely be on redrawing spheres of influence: a possible Ukraine endgame in exchange for Russian concessions — energy, Arctic passage, perhaps even a gradual distancing from Beijing. For Trump, the meeting offers a chance to pull Russia, perhaps through trade, into America’s geostrategic orbit. This would align with the raw-materials deal signed with Ukraine in April, granting the US exclusive access to the country’s rare earths as well as certain oil and gas reserves.

But the true test linked to this meeting lies within the inner workings of America’s power machine: Can Trump carry out such an unconventional operation without sabotage from his own security apparatus? Should he manage to launch a robust peace process, he will have proven that he has taken full control of US foreign policy strategy.

That would be a decisive blow against the neocons pushing for escalation in Ukraine — and a further step toward peace.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe is a German graduate economist who has worked as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Authored by Brenda Shaffer via RealClearWire,

One of the most important developments this century has been a major increase in energy access across the globe: Billions of people have gained access to modern energy, a precondition for rising from poverty.

Sub-Saharan Africa is the only region of the world not benefiting from this transformation. In Africa, energy poverty is growing. For the first time since World War II, access to electricity is also backsliding in Africa.

Over the past year, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has sought to address Africa’s rising energy poverty, through organizing conferences and publishing reports. The IEA and global leaders gathered in conferences in Africa. The Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation was a major funder of the endeavor. Yet, the IEA did not offer any practical solution to address the rising energy poverty in Africa because it is unable to utter the essential words: fossil fuels.

In fact, through its promotion of cutting loans and investments in fossil fuels in Africa, the IEA itself contributed to the decline in energy access in Africa. The IEA’s promotion of “Net-Zero” served as the basis of decisions in recent years by the G7, World Bank, and United Nations to cut funding and investments in fossil fuels and production of electricity from fossil fuels in Africa.

The idea behind denying investments and funding for fossil fuels was that it would force Africans to adopt renewable energy. However, reducing access to fossil fuels did not lower pollution and emissions. In fact, the lack of access to stable and affordable electricity produced from fossil fuels, has led to increased pollution, emissions, and premature deaths in Africa, as Africans turn to burning dung, wood, lump coal, and other biomass for cooking and other basic energy functions.

The IEA acknowledged in its recently published report “Universal Access to Clean Cooking in Africa” that burning traditional biomass releases more carbon emissions than using fossil fuels.

Despite this acknowledgment that the path to lower emissions and pollution—improving public health—is through fossil fuels, the IEA isn’t willing to say the plain truth: Africa needs fossil fuels. For the IEA, like so many multilateral institutions, energy policy has become a cult in which fossil fuels are sacrilegious.

The new IEA report on Africa numbers 151 pages and probably cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to compile, yet it doesn’t give any reasonable path for Africa to increase energy access. The report points to the transformation of China, Indonesia, and India in energy access over recent decades as models for Africa. However, the IEA neglects to point out that those three countries benefitted from access to coal and to government and multilateral funding to develop electricity produced from fossil fuels. Yet, Africa is denied funding and investments to develop its fossil fuel resources.

In the report, the IEA sets South Africa apart as an example of a place where modern energy access is growing and the number of homes reliant on burning biomass is decreasing, in contrast to countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

The IEA, however, neglects to point out that South Africa has succeeded in expanding modern energy access by developing and burning its domestic coal reserves. Coal provides 69 percent of South Africa’s energy consumption and is the source of 82 percent of its electricity production.

In the report, the IEA acknowledges that liquified petroleum gas (LPG) and electricity are necessary to replace the use of traditional biomass. Yet, it still advocates blocking Africa from developing its own fossil fuel resources. According to the IEA report, imported LPG and natural gas can replace traditional biomass, but not local energy resources.

What is the IEA’s answer as to how Africa will pay for that imported fuel and finance new cooking stoves? The IEA suggests that Africa sell carbon credits to fund the transition from burning wood and dung to using LPG and electricity. However, it is highly unlikely that enough revenue from carbon credits could be generated to finance a move from dung and wood—which is collected for free—to pay for stoves, LPG, and electricity. Moreover, this would increase Africa’s dependence on handouts from abroad, instead of strengthening local economies.

The answer to Africa’s energy poverty is development of the continent’s oil, gas, and coal resources. Profits and taxes from the development could be used to expand LPG and electricity access in Africa. Paradoxically, as the IEA acknowledges, developing fossil fuels and producing electricity from them would lower emissions, pollution, and premature deaths in Africa.

U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright recently stated that the Trump administration is evaluating whether the United States should withdraw its membership from the IEA or attempt to reform the organization. The administration claims that the IEA has strayed from its mission of promoting energy security. Instead, the IEA has become another one of the dozens of major climate policy advocacy organizations. In his evaluation of the IEA, Wright should add the IEA’s role in increasing energy poverty in Africa and its use of public funding on projects that do not benefit Africans.

The Islamification of the West continues unchecked. Millions of third-worlders have been funneled into Western nations, especially France, Spain, Ireland, England, and Germany. Globalist rulers in Brussels have remained silent about the intentional invasion, while anyone voicing concern is immediately thrown into the state-run government censorship gauntlet and labeled a “racist.” 

It comes as no surprise that Brussels’ failed open-borders experiment since 2015, flooding Europe with millions of migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees from countries such as Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, has sparked not only a deepening identity crisis for Europe, but also fueled a powerful resurgence of nationalism across the continent. 

Barcelona, Spain, has sadly been conquered. pic.twitter.com/z9n9kpWAxn

— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) July 9, 2025

The latest example comes from the small Spanish town of Jumilla, where the local nationalist party Vox enacted the country’s first ban on Muslim use of public spaces (sports halls, civic centres) for activities “alien to our identity” unless organized by the council, effectively blocking Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha gatherings.

The local Vox party posted on X: “Thanks to Vox, the first measure to ban Islamic festivals in Spain’s public spaces has been passed. Spain is and will be forever the land of Christian people.”

Spanish Town Bans Islam in Public Spaces, calls them ‘alien to our identity’.

The ban was passed in Jumilla, a town in the Murcia region with a population of around 27,000 – roughly 7.5 per cent of whom come from mostly Muslim countries.

The motion was proposed by Spain’s… pic.twitter.com/3iNTP52G1i

— Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 (@TRobinsonNewEra) August 7, 2025

Vox spokesperson Alba Franco told the Qatari-owned pro-Arab news outlet The New Arab that Muslim practices are linked to “insecurity” and warned of the “Islamisation” of communities. 

For some context, Jumilla was once part of the Roman Empire and fell to Berber and Arab forces in the eighth century and remained predominantly Arab for centuries, until Christian troops under Alfonso X of Castile seized the land in the mid-13th century. 

Islam does not belong in Spain 🇪🇸https://t.co/4QOBYXXTpP pic.twitter.com/3ThtourvXn

— The Christian Nationalist Party (@the_christnats) July 31, 2025

Last month, anti-migrant protests unfolded in Murcia, about an hour away from Jumilla, after locals were infuriated with reports that third-worlders from North Africa had attacked an elderly pensioner. 

Walid Habbal, coordinator of the Islamic Commission of Murcia, told New Arab that Vox’s move “is a step backwards. It has left the Muslim community in shock. We don’t see it just as a political attack, but as a lack of respect.” 

The broader issue here is that failed globalist open border policies from crazed leftists in Brussels are driving increasing odds for civil conflict as some of these migrants fail to assimilate and upend lives for natives. 

Hmmm. 

Authored by Owen Evans via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Laws demanding internet users provide proof of age are sprouting up around the world.

In the United States, at least 24 states have already passed laws requiring pornography sites to verify users’ ages, according to the Age Verification Providers Association.

A handful of countries, including Germany, France, Australia, and Ireland, have implemented age verification to access specified content, from social media access to pornography.

At the end of July, the UK rolled out the most comprehensive national system so far.

How does age verification work in practice? What are the loopholes? And how might it reshape the internet? Here’s what the experts say.

How Age Checks Work in Practice

Age‑verification systems range from uploading a photo of an identification such as a driver’s license to advanced biometric scans.

The Age Verification Providers Association lists several approved methods for age checks, including mobile phone account verification, credit database matching, transactional records, and digital ID apps.

Some platforms ask users to upload a government‑issued ID, while others rely on mobile phone account data, banking or credit records, or digital ID apps to confirm age.

Increasingly, sites are turning to biometric solutions, such as facial analysis that estimates age from a selfie or a brief movement check.

Reddit, for example, uses the third‑party service Persona to verify either an ID or a live selfie, while Discord relies on k‑ID, which confirms age by analyzing facial movements. X combines internal account signals with optional ID checks.

Porn sites like Pornhub offer a mix of options, such as requiring a photo ID or running a credit card check before users can view sexually explicit material.

The Next 24 Months

Mary Ann Miller, vice president and fraud adviser at Prove, a digital identity verification platform, said that age verification will become more standard and required over the next 24 months.

Miller said that simpler methods include uploading a government-issued ID that is sometimes checked for authenticity or a selfie taken to ensure identity accuracy and that the person is alive.

“Other methods use solutions that leverage technology that uses the phone as a proxy for our identity since we have them with us ‘all the time’ and determine the assurance and trust of the person presenting information or attesting their age or attesting for a child’s age as part of parental consent,” she told The Epoch Times by email.

“Other methods include age estimation from facial recognition or other data sources.”

In terms of which methods are most reliable, Miller pointed to those that “can use passive techniques to determine identity assurance first, then age verification as part of an identity flow.”

Passive identity assurance techniques verify a user’s identity without requiring the user to actively perform actions—such as entering a password or scanning a fingerprint—by using data already available to infer age, including credit cards, IP addresses, or other information.

Businesses in the near future will have to overhaul their age‑verification systems to meet stricter standards, rather than relying on low‑accuracy or patchwork identity checks.

“What has taken many businesses by surprise is that when they try to apply age verification with low-accuracy identity checks or the absence of identity checks, they have to ‘go back to the drawing board’ on both aspects,” she said.

The Push for Biometric Verification

Biometric age estimation can be conducted using facial analysis.

Other methods include voice blueprints, gestures, and keystrokes (how you type). These methods are currently less well-developed than facial analysis but are progressing quickly.

Derek Jackson, chief operations officer and cofounder of Cyber Dive, a tech company founded with the mission of keeping children safe online, told The Epoch Times by email that facial biometrics are “newer but catching on quickly.”

“They estimate your age by analyzing your facial features, cheekbones, eye spacing, skin tone, in real time,“ Jackson said. ”Voice biometrics and keystroke patterns are even newer. They try to match your unique patterns, your voice pitch, how fast or slow you type to known age profiles.”

He said that facial recognition is growing quickly because “it’s simple, fast, and surprisingly effective.”

Privacy Risks and Skepticism

Users remain wary about sharing personal data online, especially government IDs or biometrics.

Denis Vyazovoy, chief product officer of AdGuard VPN, said that some platforms attempt to be more privacy-aware by, for example, not permanently storing selfies or ID documents or keeping data for just seven days.

“But even with such reassurances, trust is low,” he told The Epoch Times by email.

“Even though platforms claim that facial data or ID scans are not stored long-term, people remain wary, and rightfully so. The truth is, any method that requires biometric data, government ID, or sensitive financial information introduces serious privacy risks.”

The UK’s New Law

The UK’s Online Safety Act does not mandate a single method of age verification. The UK’s tech regulator Ofcom, which is in charge of policing the law, just requires companies to implement highly effective age assurances.

The law focuses on keeping under‑18s out of adult spaces but does not tell companies how to achieve this goal, leaving firms to choose their own verification systems as long as they are “highly effective.”

But failure to implement a system can result in financial penalties of up to 10 percent of a service’s qualifying worldwide revenue, or 18 million pounds ($23.9 million), whichever is greater. The Online Safety Act is a UK-specific law, but it affects U.S. and global companies with no legal presence in the country.

Read the rest here…