62.1 F
Chicago
Tuesday, September 29, 2026
Home Blog Page 1784

US Designates Mexican Cartels As “Foreign Terrorists,” Signaling Financial Warfare Looms

0
US Designates Mexican Cartels As “Foreign Terrorists,” Signaling Financial Warfare Looms

The US State Department has designated eight Latin American drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, setting the stage for a series of legal and financial measures aimed at paralyzing command structures and financial networks of cartels to stop the drug death catastrophe in the US.

“Foreign Terrorist Organization Designations of Tren de Aragua, Mara Salvatrucha, Cartel de Sinaloa, Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion, Carteles Unidos, Cartel del Noreste, Cartel del Golfo, and La Nueva Familia Michoacana,” a notice issued by Secretary of State Marco Rubio read earlier this month.   

Rubio said in the notice that these cartels contain individuals who “have committed or have attempted to commit, pose a significant risk of committing, or have participated in training to commit acts of terrorism that threaten the security of United States nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.”

“I have determined that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the measures authorized in the Order,” Rubio added.

The designation comes about a month after President Trump issued an executive order on his first day of office to evaluate whether Mexican drug cartels could be designated as terrorist groups.  

“The cartels have engaged in a campaign of violence and terror throughout the Western Hemisphere that has not only destabilized countries with significant importance for our national interests but also flooded the United States with deadly drugs, violent criminals, and vicious gangs,” Trump wrote in his order.

In recent weeks, we have incrementally reported USAF spy planes that conducted signals intelligence operations along the US-Mexico border, Green Berets from the US Army’s 7th Special Forces Group deployed on a training mission in Campeche—a Mexican port city on the Gulf of Mexico, and CIA reportedly flying MQ-9 Reaper drones over regions of Mexico dominated by heavily armed drug cartels.

Analysts told Epoch Times that designating cartels with FTO paves the way for the US government to unleash financial sanctions to disrupt the command and control centers of these cartels. Then, after financial networks are disrupted, strike cartel-operated facilities… 

“You could go after people trafficking firearms to the cartels; you could arrest them for providing material to a foreign terrorist organization,” Ioan Grillo, a Mexico-based journalist, told Epoch earlier this month.

Human traffic investigator François Cavard said the Trump administration’s FTO designation would “make it clear to the high-level corrupt accomplices these criminals may have within the United States and in US government offices and agencies … that they’re going after them also.”

Here’s the latest reporting: 

Readers should understand that the disrupt-and-dismantle strategy is broad, targeting not only Mexican cartels but also transnational criminal organizations spanning from Canada to China.

This is what ‘America First’ looks like. It’s time to stop the drug death overdose crisis in America that kills 100,000 per year. 

We must caution that the fight against cartels could get messy, considering the Biden-Harris regime flooded the nation with thousands of Tren de Aragua terrorists.  

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 20:40

Will China Throw BRICS At The Dollar?

0
Will China Throw BRICS At The Dollar?

Authored by Jame Gorries via The Epoch Times,

As the Trump administration’s America First policy continues to unfold, the globalist policies of the prior administration are rapidly disappearing.

To no one’s surprise, the America First policies include imposing tariffs on Chinese goods aimed at reducing the U.S. trade deficit with China and Europe, as well as broader policies prioritizing U.S. interests over international cooperation.

Trump’s Tariffs Trigger Trade War?

But that’s not the whole story. The administration’s high tariffs, specifically on Chinese imports, are not only meant to protect U.S. industries but are also intended to pressure China economically. By extension, as the Chinese economy continues to struggle, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will be under pressure at home.

Predictably, U.S. tariffs have led to retaliatory tariffs from China against American products. Initial actions by Beijing include levying 15 percent tariffs on imports of U.S. liquid natural gas (LNG) and coal, as well as 10 percent tariffs on oil, farm equipment, and certain automobiles.

Tension Escalation and BRICS

The immediate effect has been escalating tensions between the two nations across geopolitical and economic spectrums. If the trade war continues to ramp up, the friction between Washington and Beijing will likely increase, with potentially more provocative actions and responses to follow.

One specific response could be for China to find a quicker path toward a BRICS-based trading system. BRICS, which is an acronym for the first five participating countries—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—was founded in 2009 and is currently considering an alternative currency that would be used primarily to replace the dollar for trading between member countries.

No actual BRICS currency yet exists.

Establishing a functioning BRICS-based trade bloc isn’t a new proposal; it’s been talked about for years or even decades. Avoiding U.S. financial dominance is the reason the BRICS nations came together in the first place. The idea has always been to insulate BRICS economies, which constitute 35 percent of global GDP, from U.S. financial pressures.

But skeptics point out that there’s no substitute for the dollar, at least not from Europe, Japan, or China. By some estimates, the U.S. dollar is used in 84.3 percent of international trade—compared to just 4.5 percent for the Chinese yuan.

BRICS: A Valid Challenge to the Dollar Dominance?

Still, the push for de-dollarization among BRICS nations has gained momentum in response to Washington’s weaponization of the dollar through sanctions and trade policies against nations it disagrees with. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Iran’s proxy wars against Israel are two prime examples of the United States imposing crippling sanctions and freezing the national assets of adversaries, but they’re not the only ones.

Now, with the Trump administration threatening the Chinese economy, the CCP views the need to launch a BRICS currency and trading system as “pressing.” They’re not alone. The other BRICS nations, especially Russia, are also very interested in forming a new currency to compete with the U.S. dollar and recently announced plans for a BRICS blockchain-based payment system.

However, achieving true currency diversification against the dollar won’t be easy. The dollar has been widely used since the end of World War II, and the entire global financial system is dollar-based. Furthermore, the dollar network is well-established and functions better than any other.

The dollar network includes the U.S. economy, which remains the biggest and most productive and innovative in the world; the U.S. financial markets; the banking and exchange system (SWIFT), which is the world’s largest, most reliable, and most liquid; and the U.S. legal system, which is the most reliable and transparent. Finally, the U.S. military remains the most lethal and effective enforcement agency on the planet.

In soft power terms, American culture has global recognition and appeal. Neither China’s nor Russia’s cultural appeal is anywhere close. Given these factors, no other country, or even 10 nations (the number of BRICS members today), can replace the dollar’s place and power in the world.

Can China Create a BRICS-Based Trading System?

How would China and BRICS overcome these obstacles?

Various strategies have been considered. One is to conduct trade in individual currencies of BRICS participants. Another would be to form a new BRICS currency based on a basket of currencies that could be backed by gold or create the aforementioned blockchain-based currency. Discussions at BRICS summits have seen China lead these discussions.

China has also proposed a new payment system to bypass the dollar-based SWIFT system, called “BRICS Pay.” This would use blockchain-based or other innovative payment systems that enable transactions in local currencies and reduce dollar dependency. China is also building an international financial infrastructure to support BRICS members, which includes the New Development Bank to finance development projects using BRICS currencies.

As the expansion of BRICS participants continues, its chances of success will improve. With 120 nations that count China as their largest trading partner, broadening the participation and influence of this alternative economic bloc could be easy and may pose a more serious challenge to the dollar.

Impact of BRICS-Based System on the World

Some observers say that BRICS countries would regain sovereignty over their financial policies, freeing them from U.S. economic sanctions and giving them greater control over their financial policies.

That may be true. But it may also result in participants finding themselves under the heavy yoke of the CCP. Beijing’s history of saddling Belt and Road Initiative “partners” with crippling debt and military domination is well known.

Given the nature of the CCP and China’s economic and military superiority, it’s unlikely to expect Beijing to be a benevolent leader. See, for instance, how once-free Hong Kong is doing now, or for that matter, the Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, or even China’s minority populations like the Uyghurs.

As a financial hegemon, China has already shown how it will behave.

As for bringing more balance to global trade, a successful BRICS could lead to a bipolar or multipolar world in terms of finance, trade, and currencies, where nations can choose which system to use or be forced to choose. But exchanging a dollar-based system for a BRICS-based one doesn’t necessarily mean more freedom or control.

The geopolitical impact of a successful BRICS system would certainly weaken U.S. influence in global economic governance and strengthen communist China. That, of course, is the whole point. Developing nations may not like how the United States handles some situations, but they’ll be much worse off under the bootheel of the CCP.

Challenges and Obstacles to BRICS

But today, BRICS members have conflicting economic systems, political goals, and levels of development, which makes reaching a consensus on a new currency or payment system complex.

India, for example, is an economic, political, cultural, and regional rival to China. Live fire border skirmishes between the two are common, and China supports Pakistan, India’s prime adversary.

Will New Delhi be willing to take financial orders from communist Beijing?

As the world’s largest democracy with the highest population on Earth, India is a nuclear power, enjoys a rapidly growing economy, and has a young, dynamic population that starkly contrasts China’s shrinking economy and rapidly aging population.

It’s also difficult to believe that the United States will sit back and allow BRICS to happen without a fight. The Trump administration is quite willing to use tariffs up to 100 percent against BRICS members if they try to replace the dollar.

The bottom line?

China, Russia, Iran, and South Africa need BRICS more than their trading partners do. With a surging America and a powerful dollar, if and when a BRICS currency emerges, it may resemble the old Soviet trading bloc that couldn’t compete with the West, which is really what BRICS is all about.

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
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 20:15

Paging DOGE: Study Finds 28% Spike In Corruption When Feds Shower Local Governments In Cash

0
Paging DOGE: Study Finds 28% Spike In Corruption When Feds Shower Local Governments In Cash

Federal grants are a crucial funding source for local governments, growing from $135 billion in 1990 to an astounding $1.2 trillion in 2022. However, a new study reveals that sudden surges of federal money – so-called “windfalls” – increase local corruption by up to 28%. This research underscores the urgent need for stringent oversight mechanisms, particularly at the federal level, to ensure these funds serve their intended purpose rather than lining the pockets of corrupt officials.

Federal Windfalls: A Breeding Ground for Corruption

The study reveals that local governments experiencing sudden increases in federal grants witness a 28% rise in corruption-related charges. This trend is not surprising given that rapid financial expansion often outpaces the development of adequate oversight structures. 

Examples abound of public officials exploiting these funds for personal gain. One such case involved the mayor and accountant of Stonecrest, Georgia – Jason Lary, who pleaded guilty in 2022 to defrauding local churches, businesses and nonprofit organizations out of hundreds of thousands of dollars – out of a $6.2 million federal grant for COVID-19 relief.

In October of 2021, the DOJ seized roughly $480,000 of fraud proceeds from Lary – who was sentenced to nearly five years in prison.

Former Stonecrest Mayor Jason Lary

The principal-agent problem exacerbates this issue. While the federal government provides funds with the expectation that local governments will use them appropriately, local officials—acting as agents—sometimes operate contrary to these expectations, exploiting gaps in oversight and enforcement.

The Role of Federal Oversight Agencies

Given the lack of oversight at the local level, federal oversight agencies, like the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), are vital in curbing these abuses. According to the study, federal oversight of ‘windfall’ grants rely on ‘Single Audits’ – the impact of which is “surprisingly limited and mixed. According to a 2021 study (Brumley et al.), when Single Audits do find corruption, there is usually no subsequent reduction in federal grant awards.

State oversight mechanisms offer some deterrence, particularly when state auditors hold Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) credentials. However, their effectiveness is inconsistent across jurisdictions. While states with more fraud auditors experience lower corruption levels, the overall impact is relatively weak compared to federal intervention.

At the local level, the situation is even more dire. The study highlights that poor audit outcomes—such as material weaknesses, questioned costs, and audit findings—exacerbate corruption. Local governments with a history of financial mismanagement are particularly vulnerable when receiving windfall grants, as they lack the necessary controls to prevent misuse.

The Power of the Press: An Unofficial Watchdog

In addition to formal oversight mechanisms, a strong local press plays a crucial role in exposing corruption. The study demonstrates that local corruption spikes when newspapers shut down. This finding aligns with broader research showing that the media acts as an informal check on government misconduct by increasing transparency and public accountability. Unfortunately, the decline of local journalism in recent years has weakened this crucial line of defense.

Policy Implications and Recommendations

To combat the corruption linked to federal windfalls, policymakers must strengthen oversight at multiple levels:

  1. Enhance Federal Oversight: Agencies like DOGE should increase their scrutiny of windfall grants, particularly in municipalities with a history of financial mismanagement.

  2. Mandate Independent Federal Audits: Rather than relying on local and state audits, federal agencies should conduct independent, randomized audits to deter misconduct.

  3. Strengthen State Fraud Detection: States should require their auditors to hold CFE credentials and allocate more resources to fraud detection.

  4. Support Local Journalism: Given its deterrent effect, federal and state governments should explore initiatives to sustain local investigative journalism.

Until then, politicians gonna politician…

*  *  *

Support independent media. Grab a ZeroHedge hat at the ZH Store, or buy any 2 bags of coffee and receive a free ZeroHedge Tumbler!

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 19:50

Trump Could Be About To Ban COVID Vaccines; Report

0
Trump Could Be About To Ban COVID Vaccines; Report

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Trump health officials could be about to recommend a complete stop to covid vaccines for all age groups in the US, according to a report.

The move would effectively ban the vaccines amid widespread suggestions that they are having expansive side effects and causing a spike in excess deaths.

The Daily Mail outlines how Dr Jay Bhattacharya, President Trump’s nomination to lead the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has backed a petition calling for the mRNA vaccines to be paused and retested.

Bhattacharya, an Infectious diseases expert, has signed on to the Hope Accord, which claims there is a ‘casual link’ between the mRNA shots and an alarming rise in excess deaths worldwide, the report further notes.

The report also asserts that new Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr is ready to axe the shots if the data supports such a move.

RFK previously petitioned the FDA to revoke emergency authorisation of the shots six months after they were rolled out, citing a lack of data for their effectiveness or safety.

Kennedy has since said that while he wouldn’t have directly blocked the vaccines if he was in government, “I would have made sure that we had the best science, and there was no effort to do that at that time.”

Dr Aseem Malhotra, a British cardiologist who is being considered for a health advisory role in Kennedy’s team, has also called for the jabs to be suspended and reassessed.

Bhattacharya was a co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration in which thousands of scientists called for a policy of herd immunity over lockdowns and vaccinations.

He was also one of the many experts who was censored and attacked during the pandemic for challenging the orthodoxy.

Bhattacharya previously warned that “When you take a position that is at odds with the scientific clerisy, your life becomes a living hell.” 

Speaking at the Academic Freedom Conference at Stanford’s Graduate School of Business, Bhattacharya, who previously described lockdowns as the most catastrophically harmful policy in “all of history,” and “the single worst public health mistake in the last 100 years,” noted “we have a clerisy that declares from on high what is true and what is not true.”

He added that he has come to the conclusion that “academic freedom is dead.”

The most recent CDC data shows that 45 percent of adults over 65 years old have taken the most recent Covid booster shot, while 23 percent of Americans over 18 years of age have gotten it.

*  *  *

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

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 18:35

Putin: ‘I Will Meet Donald With Pleasure’

0
Putin: ‘I Will Meet Donald With Pleasure’

“I will meet Donald with pleasure” – that’s what President Putin expressed Wednesday in a brief televised interview with RT. He further outlined some conditions for such a meeting, saying that it can’t just involve sitting for some tea or coffee, but both the Russian and American diplomatic teams which met in Riyadh the day prior must thoroughly prepare to negotiate issues most important to each, particularly the Ukraine crisis.

Interestingly, Putin described that Trump’s timetable for achieving peace in Ukraine changed and this was inevitable and ‘natural’ – given that upon entering office he was able to see the fuller scope of intelligence information, and the greater complexities of the conflict. Putin made mention of the potential for peace within six months (referencing the White House change), in contrast to Trump on the campaign trail talking just ‘days’.

Putin also called the Trump team ‘completely different’ in terms of positive openness and willingness to work with Moscow, in contrast to the prior Biden administration, and given the Riyadh meeting took place without bias and on “friendly” terms, and with no “condemnation of what had been done in the past” – meaning the two sides showed willingness to move forward and not rehash a blame-game.

Of the Tuesday Saudi-hosted talks, which lasted four-and-half hours, Putin described: “It is impossible to solve many issues, including the Ukrainian crisis, without increasing trust between Russia and the United States” – and stressed that the process is about restoring this trust, toward a resolution of the conflict.

He was further quoted in Interfax saying of the talks: “Yes, I have been informed. I rate them highly, there are results.”

As for Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, his follow-up assessment after leading the delegation in Riyadh was as follows: “Moscow and Washington need to clean up the legacy of former US President Joe Biden’s administration, which ruined the foundation of long-lasting cooperation between the two countries.”

“For now, it is necessary to clean up the legacy of the Biden administration, which did everything to destroy even the first hints at, the very foundation of long-term partnership between our countries,” Lavrov added.

Meanwhile, without doubt Kremlin leaders are enjoying Trump’s fresh blasting of Zelensky. Trump in a Wednesday post on Truth Social called the Ukrainian President a “modestly successful comedian” who essentially tricked the US into spending hundreds of billions for a war that “couldn’t be won” and should have never started. Trump further referenced “A Dictator without Elections” said the Ukrainian leader “better move fast” or he “won’t have a country left.”

Likely this will only add to Putin’s willingness to meet with Trump, which would be a first since 2021. Putin’s spokesman on Wednesday remained cautiously optimistic: 

“Maybe. Or maybe not,” Peskov said, responding to a question about the possibility of the Trump-Putin summit in February.

Peskov described the meeting in Riyadh as a “very, very important step” toward resolving the Ukraine conflict, while emphasizing that “naturally, it’s impossible to fix everything in a day or a week. There is still a long road ahead.”

But Trump said after the Riyadh talks that he feels “much more confident” about brokering a deal to end the Ukraine conflict. Additionally, goodwill and trust was build when Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth made clear while in Germany last week that Ukraine will not be joining NATO, which has been a crucial request of Moscow from the start.

At the G20 summit in Buenos Aires in November 2019, via Reuters

Given that Trump is now outright personally insulting Zelensky for mismanagement of the war and of his country, this could actually serve to hasten a face-to-face Putin-Trump meeting. Both sides have signaled it could happen by month’s end. Peskov has affirmed both sides are preparing for the bilateral presidential summit.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 18:10

“We’re Winning Across The Board”: Raskin Takes Premature Victory Lap Just Before Slew Of Court Losses

0
“We’re Winning Across The Board”: Raskin Takes Premature Victory Lap Just Before Slew Of Court Losses

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

On CBS’s Face the Nation, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) repeated the talking point of Democratic politicians and pundits that the courts are stopping President Donald Trump’s lawless actions taken after his inauguration. Raskin declared “we’re winning in court…we’re winning across the board.”

The boast was dubious at best on Sunday given earlier losses, but became embarrassing on Monday and Tuesday as additional courts ruled in favor of the Trump Administration in major cases.

For weeks, some of us have expressed confusion over the basis for some of the Democratic challenges and initial injunctions in court. President Trump clearly has the authority to designate federal officials to look at the books and track expenditures in the executive branch. After losing both houses and the majority vote, Democratic groups sought to use the courts to block such executive actions.

There was obvious forum shopping as these groups went to many of the same courts and judges for relief. 

However, even judges viewed as decidedly hostile to Trump like Judge Tanya Chutkan in Washington ultimately balked at the demand for an injunction and allowed the access and actions to continue.

On Monday, Judge Randolph Moss, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia delivered a blow to groups seeking to block the Department of Government Efficiency from gaining access to data from the Department of Education on student borrowers. 

Judge Moss found in his ruling that the University of California Student Association failed to show sufficient irreparable harm to receive such immediate relief.

He, however, left the door open a crack: “The Court leaves for another day consideration of whether USCA’s has standing to sue and has stated a claim upon which relief may be granted. Those questions are less clear cut and are better answered on a more complete record.”

Judge Chutkan also refused to grant the plaintiffs’ request to issue a temporary restraining order of Doge, again citing the failure to demonstrate evidence of “irreparable harm.”

There was a palpable sense of reluctance, even regret, in the opinion by Chutkan who noted that “Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight.”

This, of course ignores the “elected individual” in the body of the President who is allowed to delegate such responsibility to subordinates. Chutkin would have been reversed by the higher courts if she had issued the requested TRO as demanded by the coalition of 14 Democratic state attorneys general.

Even before Raskin’s boost, U.S. District Judge John Bates also rejected a request to block DOGE from accessing records of three government agencies, writing in his own opinion Friday that plaintiffs “have not shown a substantial likelihood that [DOGE] is not an agency.”

Likewise, challengers thought that they had a victory in hand when U.S. District Court Judge George O’Toole enjoined the buyout offer by the Administration. Some of us criticized the injunction as lacking any cognizable basis given the clear authority of the President to make such an offer. Then, as many were citing the victory as proof of the Trump Administration’s unlawful actions, Judge O’Toole lifted the injunction on the buyout program, agreeing to allow the buyouts to go forward.

Then Judge Randolph Moss (D.D.C.) in Doe v. Office of Personnel Mgmt. rejected another challenge to testing by the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) of a new email system. The federal employees argued that the move violated federal law including privacy protections. The court, however, ruled that the “Plaintiffs have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating (1) that they likely have standing to bring this action, and (2) that they are likely to suffer irreparable injury in the absence of emergency relief.”

These and other setbacks do not mean that new cases cannot be brought with new records and parties. However, it is a far cry from the claim of Democrats “winning across the board.”

Of course, Raskin is not alone in the perils of premature celebration:

For those members like Raskin opposing the freeze on hiring and payouts, there is even an example of losing to the Freeze due to a premature celebration:

The race is far from over so both sides may want to stay focused on the finish line in the ongoing litigation.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 17:50

India’s Tata Consultancy “Gaming The US Visa System” And Falsifying Applications, Former Workers Allege

0
India’s Tata Consultancy “Gaming The US Visa System” And Falsifying Applications, Former Workers Allege

In 2017, as Donald Trump took office with a crackdown on employment visas, former Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) IT manager Anil Kini alleges he was ordered to falsify internal organizational charts to make the company appear more manager-heavy.

Kini claims this was a cover-up to evade scrutiny over TCS’s use of L-1A manager visas, which have fewer restrictions than H-1B visas and lack minimum pay requirements, according to a new feature by Bloomberg.

Kini and two other former TCS employees filed whistleblower lawsuits under the False Claims Act, alleging the company used L-1A visas to bring in non-managerial workers. However, the cases were dismissed before the visa fraud claims were examined, with Kini’s still under appeal. He says he resisted altering the charts and was fired in 2018 after filing his lawsuit.

Federal data reviewed by Bloomberg indicates that TCS has received more L-1A approvals than the number of managers it disclosed to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, suggesting possible misuse of the visa program. TCS, which serves major U.S. tech firms, has secured more L-1A visas than any other employer in recent years.

The company denies any wrongdoing, stating that courts have already dismissed these allegations.

While Trump initially opposed employment visas, arguing they undercut American workers, his stance has shifted, now expressing support for such programs. This has created tensions between his traditional nationalist base and newer tech-industry allies. Meanwhile, legal experts note that gaming the L-1A program is common, with federal authorities uncovering nearly 200 cases of misuse in the past decade.

The Bloomberg feature says that False Claims Act lawsuits let whistleblowers sue companies on behalf of the U.S. government, often alleging corporate fraud against taxpayers. These cases gain traction when the Justice Department joins, but the DOJ declined to back any lawsuits against TCS over L-1A visa misuse, including Anil Kini’s.

TCS stated in legal filings that an internal review found “most of the issues raised” by Kini were unsubstantiated and claimed it had “already taken corrective action” on those that were. However, the company did not disclose what its inquiry revealed. A federal judge dismissed Kini’s case in February, ruling he failed to prove how TCS’ visa practices violated financial obligations to the U.S. government.

Kini, who appealed the decision, says he refused to alter organizational charts and filed two internal complaints before suing in 2017. He was fired the following year, which he calls retaliation. TCS did not comment on his dismissal. “I was proud to be working for TCS,” he said. “But then some things in life, there should be integrity in what you do.”

In another case, Vinod Govindharajan, an Indian national, alleges TCS falsely claimed he was a manager in 2013 to secure an L-1A visa, bypassing stricter H-1B rules. He says the company brought him to New Jersey, where he worked a sales job with no subordinates and was paid half of what American colleagues earned. Frustrated, he filed a 2018 complaint with the EEOC, which later found “credible documentary evidence” that TCS “frequently falsifies documents in support of L-1 visa applications.” The agency also determined Indian visa workers were underpaid and that TCS retaliated against Govindharajan for speaking out.

However, the EEOC lacks authority over immigration or employment visa wage laws, which fall under separate federal agencies. There’s no indication it shared its findings with them. An EEOC spokesperson cited confidentiality rules in declining to comment. “It was a dream of mine to move to the U.S.,” Govindharajan said. “But I was doing a sales role, nothing to do with management.”

You can read the full writeup here. 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 17:30

American AI Should Be Quintessentially American

0
American AI Should Be Quintessentially American

Authored by Richard Porter via RealClearPolitics,

The United States and Europe have long shared a common political culture rooted in the ideals of the Enlightenment. These include the primacy of personal freedom; individual autonomy; the inherent equal moral standing of human beings; acceptance of diverse viewpoints; and the use of logic, intellectual rigor, and critical thinking to understand the world. The Western alliance’s raison d’etre is protecting those ideals – and the societies built on the foundation of these ideals – from authoritarian regimes.

J.D. Vance restated our commitment to these ideals in two powerful speeches last week – to a Paris conference on artificial intelligence and then to the Munich Security Conference. America’s newly installed vice president directly challenged European political elites who, fearing freedom, are drifting away from these ideals as they seek to squelch popular political movements while becoming autocratic themselves. For some reason, leaders in the audience were visibly stunned. They shouldn’t have been.

Vance’s rhetorical fluency was his ticket into politics. Both his recent speeches were deftly crafted and temperately delivered. They accurately reflected MAGA’s disgust over reflexive regulation by self-loathing elites who limit freedom in the name of “democracy,” and who seek to cover up government incompetence and dishonesty by deconstructing Western culture as somehow inherently racist.

In Munich, the vice president made it clear that our shared Enlightenment ideals are central to the Trump administration’s security policy and our ongoing commitment to the alliance. In Paris, Vance proclaimed that less government interference is essential to winning the AI race, and that AI should remain free from the ceaseless demands of woke culture:

Number one, this administration will ensure that American AI technology continues to be the gold standard worldwide, and we are the partner of choice for others, foreign countries, and certainly businesses as they expand their own use of AI. Number two, we believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it’s taking off, and we’ll make every effort to encourage pro-growth AI policies. And I like to see that deregulatory flavor making its way into a lot of the conversations at this conference. Number three, we feel very strongly that AI must remain free from ideological bias and that American AI will not be co-opted into a tool for authoritarian censorship.

This third point is not aimed at Europe alone, or China, for that matter. The context here is that AI is being created by human beings who have political perspectives. AI will always have an ideology or ethic. So, let’s talk directly about the perspective that will make AI as useful (and humane) as possible.

Extrapolating on Vance’s point, U.S. companies and software engineers could adopt this refrain: “Embracing the goals of the Enlightenment, American AI must avoid bias and authoritarian censorship. It must pay homage to the primacy of personal freedom, individual autonomy, and the inherent equal moral standing of human beings. It must also celebrate diverse viewpoints while also elevating the use of logic, intellectual rigor, and critical thinking to understand the world.”

Because Western elites now doubt this ideology, the Trump administration should explicitly endorse these ideals in its AI policy as emphatically as it does in its security policy.

American-developed AI should be humane, pragmatic, logical, and possess common sense, so that AI actually advances and spreads knowledge instead of being a tool for propagating dogma, stifling intellectual curiosity, or advancing creeping European-style authoritarianism.

Google’s generative AI tool, which now provides the “top” response for most queries, shows how urgently we need to reframe the AI already in the marketplace. While earlier versions of Google’s AI product were mocked for producing ahistorical imagery, the current version is still infused with a left-wing, anti-analytical, anti-American perspective. This matters because Google’s AI is now the primary source of information for the entire world.

For example, consider how Google’s generative AI answers these queries.

Is the U.S. structurally racist?

Yes, the United States is structurally racist. Structural racism is a system of policies, practices, and norms that create and maintain white supremacy. It affects the health, education, employment, and economic status of people of color and others marginalized in society.

Does DEI make companies more profitable?

According to research from McKinsey and other studies, yes, implementing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) practices can generally make companies more profitable by fostering a wider talent pool, boosting innovation, and leading to better decision-making within diverse teams, ultimately improving financial performance; companies with higher diversity in their leadership tend to outperform their peers financially.

(One of the citations actually states that the results of the McKinsey studies could not be replicated, a fact the AI ignores.)

Is healthcare ever free?

Yes, healthcare is free for everyone in some countries, but not in the United States.

(Obviously healthcare is never free – someone needs to pay the doctors and build the hospitals.)

Of course, today’s AI will be seen as primitive in just a few years, but it should be worrisome not just to the Trump administration, but to all free-thinking Americans that AI’s first draft was written by left-wing activists. AI must instead be designed to question, consider, and analyze different alternatives and express uncertainty when appropriate; AI won’t be useful, and could even be dangerous, unless it’s programmed to actually be thoughtful.

Also, American AI should be quintessentially American, reflecting the best of the culture that produced our exceptional nation. We will ultimately fail in our common cause of making America great again if U.S. history is written by its haters, its economics are explained by Marxists, and “the science” is allowed to replace the scientific method. 

Richard Porter is a lawyer in Chicago and an advisor to the Alfa Institute, a policy and idea accelerator founded by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 17:10

Miller Embarrasses CNN Over Absurd Trump-Musk DOGE Question

0
Miller Embarrasses CNN Over Absurd Trump-Musk DOGE Question

Authored by Luis Cornelio, via Headline USA,

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller on Thursday turned a CNN interview on Tuesday into a civics lecture, humorously educating host Brianna Keilar on who runs President Donald Trump’s DOGE. 

Miller’s remarks came in response to leftist cynicism over a court filing in which the Trump administration stated that tech mogul Elon Musk is neither an employee nor the administrator of DOGE.

Democrats have attempted, albeit unsuccessfully, to thwart Musk’s involvement in DOGE, but Trump has made it clear that Musk serves as a special advisor. That basic fact appeared lost on Keilar. 

“Who is in charge of DOGE?” she asked.

“The president of the United States,” Miller replied with a noticeable smile.

“He’s the administrator of DOGE?” Keilar pressed, prompting Miller to take her on a walk down memory lane about DOGE’s beginnings. 

“No,” he shot back.

“DOGE is what was formerly U.S. Digital Service, is an agency of the federal government that reports to the Executive Office of President, which reports to the president of the United States.” 

He continued,

“The way Article II works is that: the president wins an election, and then he appoints staff—including myself, including [National Security Advisor] Mike Waltz, including [White House Chief of Staff] Susie Wiles, including Elon Musk—and those staff report to him.”

Keilar, seemingly frustrated, interjected, “Okay, well aware.” 

She then played a clip of Musk inside the Oval Office with Trump, referring to DOGE as “our” task force. Keilar seemingly attempted to suggest that Musk was, in fact, running it.

“Did you hear him there? ‘We post OUR actions. All of OUR actions are maximally transparent.’ Does Elon Musk know he’s not in charge of DOGE?” Keilar asked. 

Miller immediately shot back: 

“Again, the president runs the government, the president appoints advisors, including Elon, including myself, including all the other staff at the White House and then those staff in turn, execute the president’s commands and directions to all agencies of the federal government. This is how democracy works, something that we treasure in America.”

Miller’s response countered Democrat claims that Musk is somehow plotting a hostile takeover of the federal government, though these claims conveniently ignore that Musk is simply following Trump’s orders. 

CNN viewers wouldn’t know this if they relied on Keilar. 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 15:00

MSM Melts Down Over ‘Jaw-Dropping Pivot In US Foreign Policy’ After Trump Ripped ‘Dictator’ Zelensky

0
MSM Melts Down Over ‘Jaw-Dropping Pivot In US Foreign Policy’ After Trump Ripped ‘Dictator’ Zelensky

Update(1452ET): As expected the reaction from mainstream pundits and Ukraine’s backers to Trump’s Wednesday post decrying Zelensky as a “dictator” who “better move fast” on striking a peace deal and holding elections or else “he won’t have a country left” has been swift and fierce.

The ‘fact-checkers’ are also out in force, for example with the NY Times quickly putting out a piece entitled “Trump Falsely Says Ukraine Started the War With Russia. Here Is What to Know.” They want the public to know why “the country isn’t holding elections.” And below is what CNN’s frontpage is currently displaying, reviving the old debunked ‘Russiagate’ talking points of supposedly ‘parroting Russian talking points’:

Many are using this moment to draw a line in the sand, describing Trump as in a state of “madness” and saying it’s time for the world to unambiguously side with Zelensky, as did this German/Greens party member of European Parliament:

And Puck News’ co-founder Julia Ioffe is dumbfounded and outraged: “What I cannot understand is why the American establishment and its institutions are folding so quickly. What are you people so afraid of? You never even had gulags,” she wrote in an emotional appeal on X.

There’s also the absurd accusations that Trump has ‘switched sides’ – after Zelensky strongly suggested earlier that Russia is feeding him ‘disinformation’…

And the reaction from the neocons has been predictably loud: “Trump’s characterizations of Zelensky and Ukraine are some of the most shameful remarks ever made by a US President. Our support of Ukraine has never been about charity, our way of life at home depends on our strength abroad,” John Bolton wrote.

More from Europe:

Olaf Scholz challenges Trump for calling Zelensky a dictator: ‘It is simply false and dangerous to deny Zelensky democratic legitimacy’ In turn, German FM Baerbock called Trump’s words ‘completely absurd’.

But Vice President J.D. Vance is pushing back alongside other top Trump admin officials, warning that Zelensky will regret this feud and ‘badmouthing’ President Trump:

And Musk too has been pushing back. For example he tweeted out the following list by prominent pro-Trump account @DC_Draino: 

Want to know why Trump called Zelensky a Dictator? Here are the FACTS:

  • He’s in year 6 of his 5 year term
  • Declared martial law Feb 2022 and has banned elections since then
  • Banned 11 political parties
  • Passed law in 2022 to censor journalists and combined all news into one gov’t station
  • Journalists investigating his corruption get conscripted and thrown on the front lines to die

The list ended with the observation that “Even Saddam Hussein held elections!” We should add to this list the ongoing persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by the Zelensky government, merely because it maintains spiritual communion with the Moscow Patriarchate.

* * *

President Trump has absolutely excoriated Zelensky in a growing tit-for-tat which is fast turning into an exchange of wide-ranging criticisms and direct insults. Trump in a fresh Truth Social post has dismissed the Ukrainian leader as a “modestly successful comedian” who essentially tricked the US into spending hundreds of billions for a war that “couldn’t be won” and should have never started.

Worse, Trump blasted Zelensky as “A Dictator without Elections” given that he “refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden ‘like a fiddle.’ Trump added: “I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died – And so it continues…” and said the Ukrainian leader “better move fast” or he “won’t have a country left.”

These are by far the harshest words Trump has ever hurled at Zelensky yet, even on the campaign trail (where previously he dubbed Zelensky as the “world’s greatest salesman”. Below is the full post which is sure to fuel the flames of controversy further, as European always also express bitterness over Trump’s peace talks with Russia…

* * *

How did we get here?

Much as expected, President Volodymyr Zelensky is reeling in the wake of President Trump’s Tuesday evening words from Mar-a-Lago wherein he blasted critics of his Ukraine peace initiative, including Zelensky himself. Responding to a reporter’s question about Zelensky and his European partners demanding a seat at the table in any negotiations with Moscow, Trump had said, “You’ve been there for three years. You should’ve ended it in three years. You should have never started it.”

But perhaps the most personally insulting words aimed at Zelensky on Tuesday was when Trump ripped him for canceling elections with no movement on democracy or toward making peace with Russia. “We have a situation where we haven’t had elections in Ukraine, where we have martial law … the leader in Ukraine, I hate to say it, but he’s down at 4% approval rating… the country has been blown to smithereens… the country looks like a massive demolition site,” he said.

Zelensky hit back Wednesday, telling a Ukrainian broadcaster that Trump lives in a disinformation bubble. The Ukrainian leader specifically referenced Trump’s words from the day prior repeatedly asserting that the war “should never have started.” He said Trump’s team needs “more truth” and followed with:

“Unfortunately, President Trump – I have great respect for him as a leader of a nation that we have great respect for, the American people who always support us – unfortunately lives in this disinformation space,” Zelensky said.

He further suggested (in a clear throwback to the debunked ‘Russiagate’ narrative of US Democrats) that it is Russia that’s feeding Trump falsehoods on the conflict and situation in Ukraine.

Via AP

Zelensky said: “As we are talking about 4%, we have seen this disinformation, we understand it’s coming from Russia.”

Of course, the reality is that it’s impossible to know – given that not only is there a war raging chiefly in the country’s east, but there’s been no elections or polling whatsoever – and Zelensky’s term expired back in May 2024.

Last Saturday, Zelensky sought to address the growing criticism of the undemocratic situation, saying his country can’t hold elections as martial law is still in effect. “I’m focusing on the survival of our country, and I am doing it really all my term,” he said.

“I’m ready to speak about elections if you want,” he continued, claiming that “Ukrainians don’t want, totally don’t want, because they are afraid, because otherwise we will lose the military loan, the war loan, our soldiers will come back home, and (Russian President) Putin will occupy all our territory.”

He argued that he has maintained the unity of the country amid the Russian invasion…

“So it’s not about myself. It’s about the future of our country. The question is to survive to save Ukraine, our independence, our people, (and) our homes. And if somebody doesn’t like (it), they can choose another citizenship,” he said.

He was also asked about the question of the US taking NATO membership off the table, somewhat shocking European allies this week. “If we are not in NATO, then as I said, NATO has to be in Ukraine. We will need an army comparable with soldiers of Russia; it’s 1.3 or 1.5 million soldiers,” he said.

A sampling of what Zelensky is so angry about from Tuesday’s Trump presser…

And as we reported previously, he let his frustration and anger with Trump be known in abruptly cancelling a pre-scheduled state visit to Saudi Arabia. He stated fact that the US held direct talks with Russia (in Riyahd) “helped Putin out of his long isolation.”

Putin has since acknowledged that a full restoration of relations with Washington is underway, and that talks will continue. Putin and Trump might meet by month’s end, both sides have indicated.

* * * 

Meanwhile…

Given that Washington has always been the real power-broker in Ukraine, the clock is ticking…

*  *  *

Flash Sale at ZH Store! 20% off IQ Smart Protein Collagen Peptides (stacks with volume /subscription discounts) & ZH Multitools for a limited time.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 02/19/2025 – 14:52