Authored by Zoltan Vardai via CoinTelegraph.com,

Former United States President Donald Trump’s lead on the top blockchain-based betting market is nearing 67% as a mysterious whale continues to bet on his victory in the upcoming presidential election on Nov. 5.

Trump’s odds of winning the election surpassed 66.3% on the leading decentralized predictions market on Oct. 28, according to Polymarket data.

Presidential election winner 2024, one-month chart. Source: Polymarket

Trump’s odds increased after a Polymarket whale, or large holder, invested another $2 million worth of USD Coin USDC$1.00 tokens into pro-Trump bets.

The mysterious whale has spent $7.22 million on “Yes” shares, according to onchain intelligence firm Lookonchain, which wrote in an Oct. 28 X post:

“Since Oct 11, the whale has spent 7.22 million $USDC to buy 11.28 million ‘Yes’ shares on Donald Trump winning the US election, with an unrealized profit of $256,000.”

With only seven days until the 2024 US presidential election, decentralized prediction markets may offer more accurate predictions than traditional polling systems, according to billionaire Elon Musk.

The Polymarket odds flipped in Trump’s favor on Oct. 4, marking a sharp reversal from September. By Oct. 12, Trump was leading by over 10 points, Cointelegraph reported.

Mysterious Polymarket whale seems unrelated to “Fredi9999”

The mysterious Polymarket whale, known as “zxgngl,” holds over 11.2 million “Yes” votes worth over $7.5 million, according to Polymarket data.

Zxgngl, Polymarket whale, positions. Source: Polymarket

The increasing positions come after the top Trump bettor on Polymarket, “Fredi9999,” bolstered Trump’s odds above 60.2% by buying over $20 million worth of “Yes” shares up to Oct. 18.

Moreover, Fredi’s transaction patterns suggest that it controls four of the six largest Trump-voting accounts on Polymarket, all funded with Kraken deposits.

Leading Trump bettors. Source: PolyMarket

While 99% of zxgngl’s bets were also placed on Trump, their account was funded by Binance, not the Kraken exchange. Their transaction patterns are also different, with the last two Binance deposits being worth $338,000 and $1.68 million, respectively.

Zxgngl, Polymarket deposits. Source: Lookonchain

As for Fredi, the account is likely controlled by a person with deep confidence in a Trump victory, according to pseudonymous political bettor Domer, who told Cointelegraph:

“My guess is it is a true believer who is very rich and trying to make a big bet. He is getting more confident as the price goes higher and is in a confirmation bias loop where new information keeps increasing his confidence.”

US presidential elections fuel 565% prediction market growth

The upcoming US elections have boosted investor interest in prediction markets.

The betting volume on prediction markets rose over 565.4% in the third quarter to reach $3.1 billion across the three largest markets, up from just $463.3 million in the second quarter.

Top three crypto prediction markets. Source: CoinGecko

This significant third-quarter growth is mainly attributed to the US elections, according to an Oct. 14 CoinGecko report.

Polymarket, the most prominent decentralized betting platform, dominated the market with over a 99% market share as of September.

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Supreme Court has sidestepped a challenge to a federal law prohibiting felons from possessing firearms.

Instead of scheduling oral argument in the case filed by Lorenzo Garod Pierre, on Oct. 21, the court granted the petition and immediately overturned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruling that Pierre was appealing.

The Supreme Court did not provide reasons for its decision. No justices dissented.

The Supreme Court directed the 11th Circuit to reconsider its ruling in Pierre’s case in light of United States v. Rahimi, a decision the high court issued in June that the federal government said “clarified the methodology for determining whether a firearms regulation complies with the Second Amendment.”

In Rahimi, the justices upheld Section 922(g)(8) of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, a federal law that bars people under domestic violence-related restraining orders from possessing firearms.

Specifically, they found that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution isn’t violated when an individual is disarmed after a court has found him to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another.

Pierre said in his petition that he was charged in July 2022 with violating Section 922(g)(1) of Title 18 of the U.S. Code for knowingly possessing a firearm after being convicted of a felony. Court papers did not provide details of the prior felony conviction.

Pierre asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to throw out the felony-level indictment, arguing that it was “unconstitutional in light of” New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which the Supreme Court handed down in June 2022. In Bruen, the nation’s highest court held that firearms restrictions must have a historical analogue and that the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms in public for self-defense.

A magistrate judge filed a report that recommended denying the motion to dismiss. Magistrate judges are appointed to assist federal district judges.

Pierre objected, and the district court refused to dismiss the charge, finding that prior 11th Circuit rulings “squarely foreclosed” the constitutional challenge and were not undermined by the Bruen precedent.

Pierre lodged an appeal with the 11th Circuit arguing that his conviction “as applied” ran afoul of the Second Amendment. In an as-applied challenge, a litigant argues that a statute or regulation is unconstitutional in the context of a specific case.

On March 12, the 11th Circuit affirmed the district court in a two-page decision, holding that the circuit court’s prior rulings were binding in the case.

Pierre argued in his petition that, since Bruen was decided, federal courts of appeals have been split on whether a “defendant may mount a challenge that his individual circumstances do not supply a basis, consistent with the Second Amendment, for stripping the right” to possess firearms.

The 11th Circuit says felons are “categorically ‘disqualified’ from exercising their Second Amendment right,” but the Seventh and Ninth circuits allow defendants to file as-applied challenges to charges under Section 922(g)(1).

The Supreme Court should grant review to resolve the circuit split, the petition states.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued in a Sept. 16 brief that the Supreme Court should grant the petition and send the case back to the 11th Circuit with instructions to review its ruling in light of Rahimi.

The Rahimi decision contains within it the proper legal standard for evaluating the Pierre case because it “clarified the methodology for determining whether a firearms regulation complies with the Second Amendment.”

And because the Supreme Court vacated judgments in five separate challenges to Section 922(g)(1) in July and sent those cases back to circuit courts for review in light of Rahimi, “consistent with that practice, the Court should grant the petition … in this case, vacate the court of appeals’ judgment, and remand for further consideration in light of Rahimi,” Prelogar said.

The Epoch Times reached out for comment to Pierre’s attorney, Brian Taylor Goldman of Holwell, Shuster, and Goldberg in New York City, and the U.S. Department of Justice but had received no replies as of publication time.

There’s been a seismic shift in the mood of the American people. Have you noticed?

The propaganda and manipulation by Democrats, Deep State non-profits (funded by radical leftist billionaires), and corporate media outlets have lost control of the narratives just days before the presidential election—they’re no longer effective at propping up Kamala Harris—as a majority of American people reject censorship, wokeism and whatever this is... 

It was crucial we shifted the Overton window away from this 👇 pic.twitter.com/AAPlKx1G3o

— Declaration of Memes (@LibertyCappy) October 28, 2024

Americans are now more interested in upholding the values of the West, the US Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence, with some youth seeking traditionalism. The far-left slant of the Overton window during the Biden-Harris administration appears to be shifting the other way/ or perhaps widening. 

The Overton Window is a range of acceptable policy ideas within mainstream political debate. For years, corporate MSM, radical leftist non-profits, and far-left activists in government and corporations have artificially pushed the window to the left, force-feeding Americans into radical leftist ideas to transform the nation towards a pathway towards socialism/or 21st-century communism.

History may show that Elon Musk’s X and former President Trump shifted the Overton Window from a leftist extreme to more of a center-right. Americans are increasingly giving up on woke pronouns, instead focusing on “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Musk has shown MSM’s matrix has glitched, with an X post stating, “The refreshing cool breeze of a wide open Overton Window.” 

The refreshing cool breeze of a wide open Overton Window https://t.co/zOGLJ8A9ax

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 21, 2024

Musk followed up on the Overton Window on Sunday evening. He said, “Ever wondered about the Overton Window?” 

Musk quoted X user Jash Dholani, who explained the origins of the Overton Window and just exactly how this model shows wokeism is coming to an end. The window has shifted to the center-right. 

Here is the explainer:

The Long View states…

TV and newspapers are toast and naturally so is the Overton window. This is the first election where neither are relevant.

— The Long View (@HayekAndKeynes) October 28, 2024

“The most important thing to understand about the Overton Window is that it is not static, it is always on the move. Not only can the window shift left or right, but the window itself can also expand and contract based on a number of different cultural and political factors,” another X user noted. 

The most important thing to understand about the Overton Window is that it is not static, it is always on the move. Not only can the window shift left or right, but the window itself can also expand and contract based on a number of different cultural and political factors. https://t.co/xcFDXxpwuP pic.twitter.com/WzfAvjcEIy

— Starvin’ the Beast (@StarvintheBeast) October 27, 2024

Overton Window has shifted so severely in recent months… And we wonder why.

Don’t just open the Overton Window, knock down the whole damn wall!

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 26, 2024

Like many of Trump’s new supporters this year. 

I don’t mean to sound contentious, but the Overton Window has shifted a great deal in a short time. pic.twitter.com/JHXxhhhfAX

— Fight With Memes (@fightwithmemes) October 27, 2024

What’s clear is that the Overton Window has shifted towards “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” 

Earlier this year, we stated: “Open The Overton Window.”

Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

As Michigan’s statewide early voting began on Oct. 26, long wait times discouraged more than a few would-be participants who spoke with The Epoch Times.

Bill Keller decided against sitting in a two-hour line in Farmington Hills.

“I think what I’ll do is absentee vote,” the supporter of Vice President Kamala Harris told The Epoch Times before he walked back to his car.

Farnsworth and Tricia Howard were deterred by the line at a site in Waterford Oaks.

Farnsworth, a retired United Auto Workers union representative, told The Epoch Times they planned to vote for former President Donald Trump in the hopes of ushering in “a new era.”

For all the attrition, the state posted record-breaking returns.

It is Michigan’s first presidential election to see the process of early voting, which was instituted via a 2022 ballot proposal to amend the state constitution, and Oct. 26 saw more than 145,000 early ballots cast.

“We’re starting a new tradition of early voting here in Michigan,” Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said in a statement announcing the figures.

The buzz of activity was reflected in the polling numbers. By late in the afternoon, 463 ballots had been pushed through the tabulator at the Farmington Hills site.

“This is a higher turnout than we expected,” said Dawn Raymond, who was overseeing early voting at the site.

She told The Epoch Times that things had gone well: “We haven’t had many people with any political issues that they’re trying to bring up with us when it’s something that we shouldn’t be discussing here.”

For senior citizen Leia, like many other voters, 2024 is about more than policy and dry statistics—it is charged with emotion. She and her husband Hans did not wish to use their real name for fear of reprisal.

A dietician, Leia described the election as her chance to oppose Trump, a man she likened to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.

“Harris makes you feel good,” she said.

Leia’s husband, Hans, noted that his own brother-in-law was attending a nearby Trump rally. Harris held a rally in the state the same day.

“All my friends that like Trump think that somehow, that Trump’s going to make their lives better,” said Hans, a retired specialty store owner. “What the world would be like if Trump does everything he says he’s gonna do—that’s a scary, scary thought.”

A few feet away, Emma Wolford had just voted in her first election as a U.S. citizen.

“I moved to the U.S. from England when I was almost nine,” she said.

Trump earned her support.

“I left a socialist country and came here for a better future,” she said.

Wofford is a graduate of Hillsdale College, a school known for its conservatism. Some of her friends from that institution oppose Trump, she said.

Tricia Howard said her biggest motivator to vote was “the safety of our country.”

Her husband Farnsworth, who is a U.S. Army veteran, was particularly concerned about the border.

He isn’t happy that foreigners who entered the country illegally can get resources even as many American veterans are homeless.

The retired UAW union representative is also concerned about electric vehicle mandates.

Another couple, Adam and Michelle Stankus, waited roughly an hour in line at Waterford Oaks. They weren’t making a statement by showing up on day one of early voting—they just wanted to get it out of the way.

“Vote now, vote later, vote mail-in—it’s all the same,” Adam Stankus said.

They were glad to vote against Trump—“against fascism,” as Adam put it.

Matthew Kovach, who was waiting for his ride outside the Waterford Oaks site, said he came out to fight communism and globalism. To him, that meant voting for Trump.

Kovach was disabled after a serious car accident in 2021.

“They thought I was going to be a vegetable,” he recalled. He thanked God that didn’t happen.

“They say President Trump dodged death. I dodged death. That’s the only thing we’ve got in common,” he said with a laugh.

Kovach hopes to play hockey again someday. For now, he’s recovering his mobility. He brought his crutches to the early voting site in case of long lines.

Andy Kollin spent an hour and fifty minutes at the Farmington Hills site.

“I don’t want to see #45 [Trump] in office again,” he said when asked what brought him out on the first day of early voting.

Kollin said he was glad to see people turn out in high numbers, “whichever way they’re voting.”

Shortly before 4:30 p.m., a trio of young Michiganders appeared on the edge of the parking lot at the Waterford Oaks site. A young man and two young women were trying to cast their early ballots before the site closed for the day.

The Epoch Times jogged with them to the door, where they barely missed the cutoff. Nathan Rehm let out a groan.

“I’m more of a Trump guy,” said Rehm, an engineering student at Michigan State University (MSU). Winter Runyan and her sister, Gabby, both support Trump too.

“I just can’t imagine Kamala Harris sitting down with world leaders,” he said.

Rehm has grown more comfortable voicing support for Trump on campus. He wonders if hatred for the former president has ebbed

“What college major you are plays a role,” said Winter Runyan, who is also an MSU student. “He’s an engineering major, so I feel like a lot of people are more on the Republican side,” she said of Rehm.

As a health care student, Winter Runyan’s less inclined to reveal her political preference to her peers.

“I do feel judged, and I definitely think they’re going to have some view towards me,” she said, adding that she counts many Democrats among her friends.

The Runyan sisters work alongside each other. Gabby is a dispatcher, while Winter is an emergency medical technician. Winter wants to be a physician assistant.

Although the three weren’t pleased to miss out on the first day of early voting, they were determined to make their voices heard.

“We’ll be back tomorrow,” Winter Runyan said.

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

Virginia officials filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 28 asking the justices to allow the state to remove suspected noncitizens from the voter rolls.

The application was filed in the case known as Beals v. Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights.

The application was directed to Chief Justice John Roberts, who oversees emergency litigation from Virginia.

The lead applicant, Susan Beals, is Virginia’s Commissioner of Elections.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found unanimously on Oct. 27 that taking the names off the voter rolls within 90 days of an approaching federal election appears to violate the National Voter Registration Act.

Federal elections are scheduled for Nov. 5.

The Supreme Court previously held in Purcell v. Gonzalez (2006) that courts should not change rules close to an election because doing so creates a risk of causing confusion.

Virginia counters that the legal provision is not relevant because the names being removed are not those of U.S. voters.

But “that argument violates basic principles of statutory construction by focusing on a differently worded statutory provision that is not at issue here and proposing a strained reading of the Quiet Period Provision to avoid rendering that other provision absurd or unconstitutional,” the Fourth Circuit said.

Such an interpretation would be problematic because it would give the words “voters” and “registrant” an identical meaning, the circuit court said.

Moreover, Virginia had not demonstrated its appeal was likely to succeed or that it would suffer irreparable harm should the appeal be denied, the circuit court said as it affirmed an Oct. 25 ruling by U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles.

Giles wrote that Virginia was still free to cancel the voter registration of noncitizens individually or to investigate “noncitizens who register to vote or who vote in Virginia’s election.”

The ruling applies only to Virginia’s “systematic” effort to remove noncitizens that began after Aug. 7, she added.

In the new application, Virginia said it objected to the district court decision because “less than two weeks before the 2024 Presidential Election, and more than a month into early voting, the district court … ordered Applicants, Virginia and its election officials, to place over 1,600 self-identified noncitizens back onto Virginia’s voter rolls, in violation of Virginia law and common sense.”

Virginia said the Supreme Court should stay the district court ruling because it “is based on a misinterpretation of the [National Voter Registration Act], which does not prohibit Virginia from removing noncitizens from its voter rolls.”

The ruling would also “impose significant cost, confusion, and hardship upon Virginia, creating a massive influx of work for its registrars in the critical week before the election, and likely confusing noncitizens into believing that they are eligible to vote.”

Roberts directed co-respondents Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights, League of Women Voters of Virginia, African Communities Together, and the federal government to respond to the application by 3 p.m. on Oct. 29.

A new analysis of public trade data suggests that Brussels and Washington’s efforts to entirely block Moscow from accessing cutting-edge Western technology may have encountered a critical stumbling block. An apparent loophole has emerged in India: A biotech firm, possibly acting as a front company, has purchased servers with advanced US chips, which are then rerouted and shipped to Russia. 

Investigative reporters with Bloomberg shed light on Shreya Life Sciences, a so-called biotech firm located in Mumbai. They cite trade data compiled by trade-tracking firms ImportGenius and NBD that show Shreya exported 1,111 units of PowerEdge XE9680 Rack Servers produced by Dell Technologies to Russia.

On Dell’s website, the product description for the PowerEdge XE9680 reads, “Take on demanding artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning. Rapidly develop, train and deploy large machine learning models with this high-performance application server made for artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning and deep learning. Dell’s PowerEdge XE9680 delivers the industry’s best AI performance.” 

Further down in the product description, Dell notes the servers are equipped with either Nvidia or AMD chips. 

Bloomberg noted that the servers and chips are on a blacklist by the US and the European Union, preventing the flow of technology to Moscow. The EU, in cooperation with the US, UK, and Japan, has said these sanctions on Russia are “to target sensitive sectors in Russia’s military-industrial complex and to limit its access to crucial advanced technology.” 

According to Bloomberg journalists, trade data shows that two Russian trading companies, Main Chain Ltd. and IS LLC, imported AI servers with US chips totaling $300 million to Russia.

Taking this investigative report even further, public trade data compiled by counterparty and supply chain risk intelligence firm Sayari shows Russian buyers Main Chain, IS, and Mine Hine imported these PowerEdge XE9680s from Shreya in April and May. 

Data compiled by Sayari is then produced in a web visual form to show how the Indian pharma company pumped hundreds of these Western AI servers into Russia earlier this year. 

Additional trade data by the supply chain risk firm shows that 81% of Shreya’s total exports this year have been directed to Russia.

Most of the export shipments to Russia were computers and processing machines… Not really biotech-ish, eh? 

Maybe the journos at Bloomberg have stumbled upon a front company that allows Russia to evade Western sanctions on procuring AI tech. 

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on Monday has introduced yet another new bombshell claim related to allegations of North Korean troops fighting in Ukraine alongside Russian forces.

At a press conference in Brussels, which reportedly followed a private briefing by South Korean intelligence officials, Rutte claimed that there is intelligence confirming that North Korean military units have been deployed to Russia’s southwest Kursk region.

The Kursk region has been subject of a Ukrainian cross-border offensive which began in early August. It shocked Kremlin leadership, given Ukrainian soldiers were able to hold on to hundreds of kilometers of territory.

Part of Kiev’s aim appears to have been to distract Russia’s military from its operations in Ukraine’s east, and divide resources, forcing the Russians to deal with clawing back their own territory.

But now the accusation appears to be that Kim Jong Un’s North Korean military is assisting in getting Kursk back. Rutte has called it a sign of “growing desperation.”.

“The deepening military cooperation between Russia and North Korea is a threat to both the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic security,” Rutte said at the press conference. “The deployment [of] North Korean troops to Kursk is also a sign of Putin’s growing desperation.”

Butte urged: “NATO calls on Russia and the DPRK to cease these actions immediately.”

Zelensky’s office has once again used alleged North Korean involvement to call for more immediate military help from Western allies. “This is an escalation. Sanctions alone are not enough. We need weapons and a clear plan to prevent North Korea’s expanded involvement in the war in Europe,” Zelensky’s chief of staff Andriy Yermak said.

“Today, Russia brings in North Korea; next, it could broaden their engagement, and then other autocratic regimes may see that they can get away with this and come to fight against NATO,” Yermak added. “The enemy understands strength. Our allies have this strength.”

President Joe Biden also on Monday slammed the apparent North Korean troop deployment as a “dangerous” development: 

“Very dangerous,” Biden said when asked about the North Korean deployment, as he spoke to reporters after casting his early vote in the US presidential election in his hometown of Wilmington, Delaware.

JUST IN: 🇰🇵🇷🇺 North Korea officially deploys troops to fight alongside Russia in its war against Ukraine, NATO confirms. pic.twitter.com/voDE8LTAg2

— BRICS News (@BRICSinfo) October 28, 2024

For the first time, the Kremlin has appeared to admit some level of North Korean military troop assistance related to the Ukraine conflict: 

In a response, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov pointed to a security and defense treaty signed by Moscow and Pyongyang in June.

“We have said many times that the treaty is not secret, it is public, the entire text has been published, and it in no way violates any provisions of international law, because it involves, among other things, the providing of assistance in case one of the countries that is a party to the treaty is militarily attacked,” he told a press conference in Moscow, in comments reported by the Interfax news agency.

Lavrov added: “So our position here is absolutely honest and open.” But nothing has been disclosed in terms details of precisely where DPRK soldiers might be operating.”

Authored by John Kennedy via The Mises Institute,

For religions throughout the world, established rules, studies, and practices are instrumental for their legitimacy. Established religious institutions throughout the world train theologians to study the nature of God and their belief system. For the Sunni Muslims, theologians in the Hanafi school consist of legal studies in line with Islam, while others like the Murji’ah sect focus on moral teachings of work and faith. Catholics too prescribe specialized areas of study to theologians, whether that be social teachings on leading a moral life or supernatural studies of God.

Whatever the case, each of these studies offers legitimacy to the faith and to the clergy, so the state, in all its omnipotence, follows suit. The late German jurist Carl Schmitt held that the “omnipotent state” practices its legitimacy similarly.

Writing in his book, Political Theology, that “all significant concepts of the modern theory of the state are secularized theological concepts.”

As the age of monarchs came to a close in the early 20th century and the age of massive ideological states came into play, new concepts and ideas had to be developed, as they did not have a “mandate of heaven” to legitimize their power.

The United States government, for instance, has had an army of academics, experts, and celebrities to legitimize its actions.

Their political theology consists of some of the following: economics, law, and the hard sciences.

Analyzing these concepts, we can see how the state and its clergy weaponize them in order to maintain their power.

Economics

In 1994, Charlie Rose interviewed the British businessman James Goldsmith. Sir Goldsmith was campaigning in the European Union against the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), a component of the WTO agreement. In 1995, 125 countries had signed onto the agreement, which included agricultural subsidies. Goldsmith warned in the interview that this would lead to massive emigration from third-world countries and that people in western society had come to serve an economic index that harms them.

He claimed that, if the GATT were adopted, we would be:

Creating mass immigration, which none of us could control. We would be destroying the towns, which are already largely destroyed. Look at Mexico; look at our own towns, and we’re doing this for economic dogma because we’ve got to get it done by the end of December. We can’t wait another year or two to see the results. Otherwise some political gimmick like Fast Track will go out of the way. What is this nonsense? Everything is based in our modern society on improving an economic index. How do we get greater economic growth? How do we grow the GNP? The result is, we are destroying the stability of our societies because we are worshiping the wrong god, economic index.

It is economic orthodoxy today that GDP must grow and that financial stimulus is one way of doing this. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States government issued stimulus checks from the low of $600 to a high of $1,400 per person. Assistant professor Christina Patterson of the University of Chicago suggested that when Congress pumped the money into the economy during COVID, the highest growth came from the individual household. Her suggestion: “Lawmakers should give the money to people who will spend most of it, rather than sock it away in savings.”

To suggest that the COVID stimulus grew the economy is preposterous. Some of the real effects of the “stimulus” are as follows: nearly 7,000 firms are considered “zombie firms” that are laden with debt, an increase of 30 percent over the last ten years; the average price inflation rate in 2022 was 8 percent, with a high of 9.1 percent in June 2022; grocery prices increased by 20 percent. The inflationary expansion of the money supply and adjustment of interest rates by the Federal Reserve during this time caused the increase in prices. The Federal Reserve propping up the stock market led to the rise of zombie firms because of malinvestment, but mainstream economists refuse to believe their orthodoxy is wrong.

Law

The United States has prided itself on being a land of law, where the rule of law reigns supreme and all its subjects, even the president, cannot usurp it. This is an illusion in our current political theology. America’s “supreme law of the land,” the Constitution, has been nothing more than a suggestion for much of its history. Whether that be censorship against the freedom of speech and press, as seen with the Espionage Act of 1917, or with the illegal mass surveillance by the NSA as exposed by Edward Snowden in 2013. Each case violated amendments in the Constitution, the 1st and 4th respectfully. Despite the controversy, the Espionage Act is still in effect and Edward Snowden is in exile in Russia.

Despite this, the establishment is still unwavering in their claims of being defenders of American law and democracy. What they’re really defending is their so-called mandate of heaven. Just as the Chinese Emperors had this supernatural mandate, the president, the Congress, and the bureaucrats each have the supernatural concept of “law” on their side. Hugo Krabbe, a Dutch political scientist, developed an explanation for the legitimacy of constitutional law in his book The Modern Idea of the State, saying:

We no longer live under the dominion of persons, either natural or fictitious legal persons, but under the dominion of norms [laws], of spiritual forces. In this is revealed the modern idea of the state…. These forces rule in the strictest sense of the word. Obedience can be freely rendered to these forces, for the very reason that they do proceed from the spiritual nature of mankind. (italics in original)

The entire constitutional legal order is, therefore, based on man’s sense of right and wrong. Just as Moses took down the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai to the Israelites, so do we receive the law from the politicians on Capitol Hill and in the halls of bureaucratic departments. This is how the American establishment is able to maintain its power, by linking their positions of authority to American “morality” that they claim is linked to the law. Any attack against them or to the law is a threat to the American way of life and the regime will use all the means at its disposal to silence you. The former British PM, Tony Blair, had described himself and all who govern as a Moses-like figure in his book, On Leadership. He had stated:

I liken governing to leading people on a journey. You don’t just start by stepping out. You begin with a description of the destination—the house on the hill you might call it…. Think of Moses and the Exodus from Egypt. You might have thought that since he was leading his people out slavery and oppression, they would have been perpetually grateful. But they weren’t. They complained bitterly much of the time. They dissented. They rebelled. They frequently averred that they would have been better off if he had just left them where they were.

Many of the bureaucrats that rule, whether from places such as London, Brussels, or Washington DC, have a Messiah complex. All they do is for the benefit of the democratic system and, therefore, the whole Western world. From here, the regime can continue to manage its economy and wars without interference, as James Burnham said in his book The Managerial Revolution:

They proclaim the rules, make the law, issue the decrees. The shift from parliament to the bureaus occurs on a world scale. The actual directing and administrative work of the bureaus is carried on by new men, a new type of men. It is, specifically, the MANAGERIAL type. The active heads of the bureaus are the managers-in-government, the same, or nearly the same, in training, functions, skills, habits of thought as the managers-in-industry.

Because of the form the law has taken, we’re no longer ruled; we’re administered. The term “law and order” becomes merely a tool to contain what Carl Schmitt has called the “exception.” When the current regime finds the state of things abnormal, they can declare war on it. Whether they be abstract concepts such as “disinformation,” against populists like Donald Trump, or against ideologies like “fascism” and white supremacy.

Conclusion

In the past, kings could legitimize their power through alliances with a church or spiritual leader to show that their rule was established by a higher authority, an alliance of the throne and altar.

Today, politicians and bureaucrats use the “sciences” and their experts to establish their authority.

Economists at the Federal Reserve and IMF fund the government’s schemes, judges support laws via theories that violate the Constitution, and you, while dissenting, will follow the “new Moses” to the house on the hill.

Jeff Bezos’ decision for The Washington Post not to endorse a presidential candidate this year has resulted in a total shitshow for the progressive newspaper, with staffing members having epic meltdowns and editor-at-large Robert Kagan (husband of Victoria Nuland) walking off the job on Friday. Even more troubling for the paper is the mass exodus of liberal subscribers being reported by NPR News on Monday afternoon. 

According to two sources within the paper and familiar with the subscriber exodus, over 200,000 digital subscription cancellations had occurred by Monday afternoon. 

Not all cancellations take effect immediately. Still, the figure represents about 8% of the paper’s paid circulation of 2.5 million subscribers, which includes print as well. The number of cancellations continued to grow Monday afternoon. -NPR

Former Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli told NPR, “The problem is, people don’t know why the decision was made. We basically know the decision was made, but we don’t know what led to it.”

The editorial page editor, David Shipley, told colleagues that WaPo’s publisher, Will Lewis, said the reason for the lack of a Harris-Walz endorsement was to create an “independent space” where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.

WaPo has mostly endorsed Democrats for nearly a century (with only 3 Republicans since 1928): 

• 1932 to 1944: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat)

• 1948: Thomas Dewey (Republican)

• 1952 & 1956: Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican)

• 1960: John F. Kennedy (Democrat)

• 1964: Lyndon B. Johnson (Democrat)

• 1968: Hubert Humphrey (Democrat)

• 1972: George McGovern (Democrat)

• 1976 & 1980: Jimmy Carter (Democrat)

• 1984: Walter Mondale (Democrat)

• 1988: Michael Dukakis (Democrat)

• 1992 & 1996: Bill Clinton (Democrat)

• 2000: Al Gore (Democrat)

• 2004: John Kerry (Democrat)

• 2008: Barack Obama (Democrat)

• 2012: Barack Obama (Democrat)

• 2016: Hillary Clinton (Democrat)

• 2020: Joe Biden (Democrat)

• 2024: Neutral 

Back to WaPo’s mass exodus of subs, Google search data shows “cancel Washington Post subscription” has gone parabolic nationwide since the weekend. Most cancelations are based in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. 

And Amazon cancellations, too?

This is true…

Nobody cares who WaPo endorses 😂

The writers are mostly insufferable, radical leftists and everyone knows it.

Sounds like some of the worst have left the paper, which is good.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 28, 2024

The move comes after the Los Angeles Times declined to endorse Kamala Harris. And perhaps the rationale given the timing – just days before the presidential election –  comes as the race is neck-and-neck with former President Trump. 

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times,

Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner is suing to halt Elon Musk’s $1 million giveaway to swing state voters.

The suit, filed on Monday in the Common Pleas Court in Philadelphia, accused the tech billionaire and his America PAC supporting former President Donald Trump’s candidacy of “running an illegal lottery in Philadelphia, as well as throughout Pennsylvania.”

The case is based on Pennsylvania’s lottery and consumer protection laws.

Krasner, a Democrat, clarified in the complaint that is was not about state and federal laws that prohibit vote-buying.

“Running an illegal lottery and violating consumer protections is ample basis for an injunction and concluding that America PAC and Musk must be stopped, immediately, before the upcoming Presidential Election on November 5,” Krasner told the court in his suit.

“That is because America PAC and Musk hatched their illegal lottery scheme to influence voters in that election.”

Specifically, the district attorney alleged that Musk failed to meet Pennsylvania’s requirements for lottery operators, which mandate publishing a “complete set of lottery rules” and detailing measures to protect participants’ personal information. He also raised concerns that the selection of winners may have been rigged.

“Though Musk says that a winner’s selection is ‘random,’ that appears false because multiple winners that have been selected are individuals who have shown up at Trump rallies in Pennsylvania,” the lawsuit alleges, arguing that the lottery rules are “deceptive.”

Oh, here’s one more thing to consider…

Interesting https://t.co/E27HI97EyA

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 28, 2024

The suit came after Musk announced the eighth winner of his super PAC’s $1 million prize in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and doubled down on his pledge to give out awards to registered voters in seven battleground states every day until Election Day.

To be eligible, participants must sign a petition on the PAC’s website affirming their support of the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution. The online petition form says one has to be a registered voter to participate, but voting itself is not required.

“We’re trying to get attention for this very important petition to support the Constitution,” Musk told the audience at the Oct. 26 event. “We need the right to free speech; we need the right to bear arms.

“So we’re going to be giving out a million dollars every day through Nov. 5. All you have to do is sign the petition in support of the First and Second Amendment. That’s it. You don’t even have to vote. It’d be nice if you voted, but you don’t have to. And then just basically sign something you already believe in, and you get a [chance] to win a million dollars every day from now through the election.”

The America PAC didn’t respond to a request for comment by publication time.

President Biden thinks it is “totally inappropriate”…

President Biden says Elon Musk’s million-dollar giveaway to registered voters is “totally inappropriate.” https://t.co/Rjs7QHEYxG pic.twitter.com/hJbFnS6rBI

— NBC Politics (@NBCPolitics) October 28, 2024

…but over-ruling the Supreme Court to offer vote-buying bailouts to student loan recipients is “appropriate”?