Apple AI Release Reportedly Delayed Until After iOS 18 Update, Seen As ‘Atypical Strategy’
Apple Intelligence will not be included in the September iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 update. Instead, according to Bloomberg, citing sources familiar with internal discussions at the world’s most valuable company, the new artificial intelligence features will be rolled in the weeks and months ahead.
The company is planning to begin rolling out Apple Intelligence to customers as part of software updates coming by October, according to people with knowledge of the matter. That means the AI features will arrive a few weeks after the initial iOS 18 and iPadOS 18 releases planned for September, said the people, who declined to be identified discussing unannounced release details. -Bloomberg
It’s crucial to note that the new AI features will miss the all-important September update, signaling that engineers need additional time to fix bugs.
Here’s more from Bloomberg:
Still, the iPhone maker is planning to make Apple Intelligence available to software developers for the first time for early testing as soon as this week via iOS 18.1 and iPadOS 18.1 betas, they added. The strategy is atypical as the company doesn’t usually release previews of follow-up updates until around the time the initial version of the new software generation is released publicly.
In June, Apple unveiled Apple Intelligence during the Worldwide Developers Conference. The new and improved Siri and integration of OpenAI’s ChatGPT are expected to be released later this year.
Bloomberg noted that Apple is expected to roll out a number of the Apple Intelligence features through several updates from late this year through the first half of 2025.
Besides iPhone and iPad, Apple Intelligence will be featured on Macbooks that run the M1 chip or newer. Also, Vision Pro goggles are expected to receive Apple Intelligence, but a release date has yet to be announced by the company or leaked by insiders.
Be sure to review Apple’s Terms of Service before updating your devices to understand what data they will be harvested.
‘To my colleagues at Bakersfield College and nationwide, I say: Keep the faith; we are winning the battle, one case at a time.’
A Bakersfield College professor who was investigated and disciplined after he questioned the use of grant money to fund social justice initiatives at his school has agreed to a $2.4 million settlement to resolve his lawsuit.
Matthew Garrett, formerly a tenured history professor at the California community college, will receive $2,245,480 divided into monthly payments for the next 20 years as well as an immediate one-time payment of $154,520 as “compensation for back wages and medical benefits since [his] dismissal,” according to the July 10 settlement agreement.
Also under the terms of the settlement, Garrett agreed to resign from his job with the Kern Community College District. Administrators, in turn, have withdrawn and sealed any and all accusations and reports accusing him of “unprofessional conduct.”
Bakersfield College and Kern district administrators did not immediately respond to an emailed request from The College Fix seeking comment Saturday.
Reached by The College Fix for comment via email, Garrett said he cannot discuss the settlement. However, he said he is able to speak on matters leading up to it.
“After five years of administrative misconduct, a decisive courtroom display exonerated me of all allegations and exposed that Kern Community College District engaged in flagrant retaliation for my questioning of partisan policies and wasteful expenditures,” he said via email.
“Facing an imminent ruling in my favor and the prospect of paying millions of dollars in damages, KCCD had only one viable option: settlement. I am grateful to the many who stood by my side during this difficult time and invite them to join in our triumph.”
“To my colleagues at Bakersfield College and nationwide, I say: Keep the faith; we are winning the battle, one case at a time.”
As The College Fix previously reported, part of the controversy dates back to at least 2019, when Garrett in a speech vigorously defended free speech on campus — including speech some deemed offensive and racist — as well as questioned grant funds that appeared to bankroll a social justice agenda.
Those concerns were then parleyed into accusations he accused his peers of fiscal malfeasance or misappropriation of funds, which led to an administrative determination against him.
In 2021, Garrett and his colleague Professor Erin Miller, who faced similar accusations, filed a federal lawsuit against the college district alleging their employers violated their civil and First Amendment rights and academic freedom.
Asked about the status of Miller’s claims against the district, Garrett told The Fix she is still employed as a professor at Bakersfield College but “continues to suffer retaliation by the administration,” including having several of her classes canceled.
While the two were co-plaintiffs on the same federal First Amendment lawsuit, after the district wrongfully targeted Garrett for termination, he said, that necessitated a separate state administrative court battle while their shared federal suit sat on hold.
“I am now dropping out of the shared federal lawsuit so she will continue on alone, and has ample grounds for litigation,” he told The Fix via email.
Garrett’s case has been covered extensively by higher education watchdogs, includingInside Higher Ed, which reported it in 2023 as a battle between a scholar expressing conservative views against administrators with a “long list” of allegations — claims that are now withdrawn from his record under the settlement agreement.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression had also come to the defense of Garrett, reporting in 2023 that he caused frustrations for DEI proponents on campus, but ones that were well within his free speech rights:
Animosity toward Garrett by some faculty and administrators increased over the past couple years as Garrett and several other faculty members associated with the Renegade Institute for Liberty — a Bakersfield College think tank Garrett founded — joined the faculty diversity committee. Other committee members say that the Renegade faculty have made it difficult for the group to get anything done by stalling campus diversity initiatives. But it was Garrett’s comments regarding a proposed racial climate task force during a diversity committee meeting last fall that led Bakersfield to recommend Garrett’s termination.
At the October 2022 meeting of the Bakersfield Equal Opportunity and Diversity Advisory Committee, Garrett criticized a proposal by professor Paula Parks to create a racial climate task force he felt might usurp the jurisdiction of the diversity committee. He also contested the student survey data cited as justification for the proposed task force and questioned the survey’s objectivity and the lack of evidence connecting the data presented and the proposed solutions. Several other faculty members in the meeting also challenged the veracity of the survey data. But ultimately, the committee voted to approve the creation of the task force.
On Nov. 15, Parks published an op-ed in Kern Sol News accusing Garrett and other Renegade Institute-affiliated faculty of a “disturbing pattern of actions” that “created negativity and division in the name of free speech.”
Fast-forward to today, and Garrett said the Renegade Institute for Liberty continues under the leadership of Bakersfield College history Professor Daymon Johnson, who also has filed a free speech lawsuit against the school. Most recently, in April, the institute hosted a webinar featuring Mark Goldblatt on the rise of subjectivity in society.
As for Garrett’s future plans, he said he is weighing his options, and will likely launch a line of social studies materials for homeschooling parents.
“My first product will be a Native American history course (which is my research and publication field) designed to fulfil California’s new high school Ethnic Studies requirement with original text, images, videos and more,” he said.
“…And of course, I intend to continue to advocate for free speech and institutional transparency at Bakersfield College and the broader academy. I will continue to speak at board meetings, campaign for candidates, and intend to write a biographical user’s manual for defeating the campus radicals, though that will take me some time to write and edit.”
China, Russia Hail Maduro Victory As US Congress Members Urge Intervention Over ‘Fraud’ Election
Summary: By most accounts, things are surprisingly quiet on the streets of Caracas, despite the opposition candidate Edmundo González and his backers, specifically the prominent and outspoken Maria Corina Machado, loudly contesting the result. There have been some reports of protesters blocking highways and burning tires, including to the capital’s international airport, however. It’s not just that the opposition says that the election was stolen, but that González actually won by a land-slide: “Venezuela opposition leader Maria Corina Machado said early on Monday that opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez won 70% of the vote in a presidential contest over the weekend,” writes Reuters. This came just after the government controlled national electoral council announced a 51% victory for President Nicolas Maduro. This flew in the face of several exit polls. According to more from Bloomberg: “After a lengthy delay following the closing of polls, Venezuela’s electoral center said Maduro won 51.2% of the vote, compared with 44.2% for rival Edmundo González. But opposition leader María Corina Machado, who was barred from running, said her coalition had gained access to 40% of the tabulated votes and had González winning 70% of the vote so far.”
The international reaction has rolled in since the early morning hours. Predictably, the United States has raised “serious concerns” over the voting process, but overall the Biden White House has issued a fairly tame message. “It is critical that every vote be counted fairly and transparently, that election officials immediately share information with the opposition and independent observes without delay and that the electoral authorities publish the detailed tabulations of votes,” Secretary Blinken said. As for Mexico, it also issued a calm statement, with President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador saying: “If the electoral authority confirms the current trend, we will recognize the government-elect.”
But this is contrasted in the reaction of firebrand conservative Argentina President Javier Milei: “Argentina will not recognize another fraud, and hopes that this time the Armed Forces will defend democracy and popular will,” he had said just ahead of the announced election results. Peru too said it will not recognize the results, and even recalled its ambassador from Venezuela for consultations. “I condemn in all extremity the sum of irregularities with the intention of fraud committed by the Venezuelan government. Peru will not accept the violation of the popular will of the Venezuelan people,” Foreign Minister Javier Gonzales-Olaechea posted on X.
Russia and China of course stand out as strong backers of Maduro, with President Putin congratulating him on his win: “Russian-Venezuelan relations have the character of a strategic partnership. I am confident that your activities at the head of state will continue to contribute to their progressive development in all directions.” Putin even said, “Remember that you are always a welcome guest on Russian soil.”
And China and Cuba: China hailed Maduro’s “successful re-election” said the country should be praised for “smoothly holding its presidential election,” according to Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian. “China stands ready to enrich our all-weather strategic partnership and better benefit the peoples of both countries,” the statement said. “China and Venezuela are good friends and partners who support each other.” Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canel expressed support for his “brother” Nicolas Maduro… “your victory, which is that of the Bolivarian and Chavista people, has cleanly and unequivocally defeated the pro-imperialist opposition,” he wrote on X. “They also defeated the regional, interventionist and Monroist right. The people spoke and the Revolution won.” All of these countries, including Russia, are military allies with Caracas as well.
Meanwhile, the last 24 hours of voting in Venezuela has sparked a fierce online debate about who is ultimately to blame for the country’s longtime severe economic woes, which has lately seen waves of mass migration. Socialism or sanctions?… or perhaps decades of both/and…
Don’t turn off your critical thinking skills just because you have been told Venezuela is “socialist” your whole life. The Venezuelan opposition have claimed fraud and contested virtually every election that they have lost since Chávez came to power. Yet they can never provide…
Some in Congress are already calling for immediate action from the US administration, and urge that Maduro’s third term should not be recognized.
Some are also calling for some kind of political intervention (or worse) with a declaration only recognizing the opposition (Juan Guaido-style).
Times like these remind us why socialism can be voted in, but removing it is nearly impossible. I urge the Biden administration and America’s regional partners to act swiftly and not recognize Venezuela’s illegitimate election. pic.twitter.com/J6agRX0E4Z
Update(02:00ET): The Venezuelan government has announced official election results shortly after midnight: Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has won a third term with 51% of the vote, announced the country’s electoral authority, with 80% of ballot boxes counted. But there are widespread reports that several key exit polls pointed to a huge opposition upset victory by Edmundo González.
The opposition is claiming victory and that the election has been stolen amid reports that Maduro’s security forces have deployed significant numbers of armored vehicles and heavily armed-police to the streets of Caracas ahead of likely unrest.
The opposition is further calling on the military to turn against Maduro and back the ‘rightful’ victory of Gonzalez.
Venezuela’s political opposition vehemently rejected the electoral authority’s ruling that Nicolás Maduro was reelected as the nation’s president, calling on the military to intervene https://t.co/mDQI7sWEEb
The Associated Press has detailed in an overnight update:
Venezuela’s opposition claimed Edmundo González defeated President Nicolás Maduro in Sunday’s presidential election, setting up a showdown with the government, which earlier declared Maduro the winner.
“The Venezuelans and the entire world know what happened,” González said in his first remarks. Opposition leader María Corina Machado made the announcement standing alongside González, whose margin of victory she said was “overwhelming.” Earlier the opposition said it had obtained voting tallies from about 30% of ballot boxes nationwide, with more expected overnight.
The National Electoral Council, which is controlled by Maduro loyalists, has yet to provide the tallies from 30,000 polling booths nationwide.
Regardless of what actually happen or what will happen in terms of the possibility of violence, it’s clear that the leftist and socialist Venezuelan government just suffered its most significant electoral test and shock in decades.
Some regional and external governments have signaled they will not recognize Maduro’s ‘win’…
BREAKING: Venezuelan National Electoral Council says President Nicolas Maduro has won the election despite exit polls suggesting the opposite.
The council claimed Maduro won with 51.20% of the vote.
The populace could be gearing up for a fight, but if violence doesn’t spiral within the next 24-48 hours, the situation is likely to remain stable. All eyes will also be on Washington Monday, waiting to see how forcefully the US administration condemns the outcome.
Meanwhile, an interesting recent admission and revelation…
Ahead of Venezuela’s election, John Bolton admitted to the Washington Post that he knew that the Trump admin’s crippling sanctions and coup attempt against Venezuela would destroy its economy and force millions to flee:
President Nicolas Maduro alarmed and riled his enemies as well as Washington and its allies by declaring just ahead of Sunday’s elections: “If you don’t want Venezuela to fall into a bloodbath, into a fratricidal civil war, due to the fascists, let’s ensure the greatest success and greatest victory in the electoral history of our people.”
Many pundits are taking this as a warning that he’ll refuse to give up power in the unlikely event he loses his bid for six more years in office, which would be his third term. While there are eight names total on the ballot as Venezuelans wait in long lines to vote Sunday, 74-year old opposition candidate and former diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia is considered the only real contender who has a chance of defeating Maduro.
González is basically the surrogate candidate for María Corina Machado, who has organized the opposition and has become wildly popular, even recently gaining name recognition abroad and in US media.
Maduro and his United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) have ruled over the central American country since 2013, after he took over following the death of his mentor, far-left icon Hugo Chavez.
Millions of desperate citizens have already left their country in search of work and opportunities abroad amid a crushed economy and rampant accusations of corruption against Maduro government officials. Millions more may leave if his power is extended for another term.
Polls have seen massive queues since they opened at 6am, but already there are reports of barriers in pro-opposition areas and stories of black-clad, masked men blocking voting stations, as The New York Times has alleged. “The destiny of Venezuela depends on our victory,” Maduro has proclaimed at campaign rallies, while decrying efforts of a hidden imperialist foreign hand to thwart his aims, as well as longtime US-led sanctions.
Both the United States and Brazil have issued messages of “we’re watching closely”:
Asked in a press briefing whether Maduro was likely to rig Sunday’s vote, John Kirby, White House national security spokesperson, said it was difficult to know how the situation would play out but that the U.S. wanted “to make it clear to Mr. Maduro that we’re watching, we’re watching closely.”
Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has also urged Maduro to respect the results, telling international news agencies that he was “scared” by the Venezuelan’s recent remarks, Reuters reported.
Brazil’s president added that Maduro “needs to learn that when you win, you stay; when you lose, you leave.”
Some analysts expect some degree of unrest and violence to break out no matter who emerges victorious, with either side set to contest.
“On the basis of their own exit polls, the opposition will probably declare victory and push for regime change, ushering in a period of heightened political tension and uncertainty ahead of the inauguration,” Andre Masuko, a research analyst with the Economist Intelligence Unit, stated to CNBC.
President Nicolas Maduro ahead of Sunday’s elections: “If you don’t want Venezuela to fall into a bloodbath, into a fratricidal civil war, due to the fascists, let’s ensure the greatest success & greatest victory in the electoral history of our people.” pic.twitter.com/rao45c0NIC
“However, we do not expect the Maduro regime to be overthrown. His strict control over the country’s institutions, including the security forces, the judiciary and the electoral national council (CNE), will be instrumental in helping him to stay in power,” he underscored.
One big unpredictable scenario of huge consequence is whether the US would throw its support behind any opposition allegations claims of widespread election abuse and fraud.
Meanwhile, the usual Neocon suspects in Congress are alleging a ‘stolen’ national election before the ballots are even in…
If the election in #Venezuela today is legitimate Maduro will lose by 40 points
But the election commission that counts the votes is controlled by the Maduro regime and they will do everything they can to try and steal it pic.twitter.com/EhxzGZjb1j
🚨PRESIDENT TRUMP: “I WILL KEEP 100% OF ALL THE BITCOIN HELD BY THE UNITED STATES AS PART OF THE NATIONAL BITCOIN STRATEGIC STOCKPILE.” pic.twitter.com/fDNKvYe0uv
Less than 48 hours after Trump spoke at a major Bitcoin conference in Nashville about his ambitious goals for bitcoin in America, the Biden administration has decided that this is an opportune moment to transfer around $2 billion worth of its bitcoin stockpile (e.g. Silk Road confiscations)
BREAKING:
The US. Government just moved $2B of Bitcoin to a new address:
— Thomas | heyapollo.com (@thomas_fahrer) July 27, 2024
And this is all the more odd considering the pleading letter written by various Democratic lawmakers urging the administration to back off their crypto war.
We give the last word to well-known crypto billionaire (and major Dem donor), Mike Novogratz:
“Tone deaf anyone??? Moving Silk Road BTC two days after Trumps pledge to not move them is just dumb!!!!”
Read the room, indeed! Presumably, once again, ideology trumps all common sense.
Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas Crowns Tesla ‘Top Pick’ In US Autos, Dethroning Ford
Morgan Stanley’s autos guru, Adam Jonas, has just crowned Tesla as the ‘Top Pick’ for the US auto market, dethroning legacy OEM automaker Ford Motor Company.
Here are the several factors that drove Jonas’ decision:
Cost-cutting and restructuring
Dominance in electric vehicle credits
Managing China risks
Robust recurring revenue streams
A booming energy storage business
Major advancements in artificial intelligence and autonomy
A more in-depth understanding of why Jonas upgraded Tesla to number one on ‘Top Pick’ in US autos and maintained his overweight stance on the company with a price target of $310 that commands a 40% upside from here:
Cost cutting/restructuring has stemmed the downside risk to the EV business. Tesla’s 2Q results came within 3 or 4% of consensus expectations (and ahead of our own) when stripping out restructuring charges and regulatory credits. The over $0.6bn of restructuring charges recognized by Tesla in the quarter, combined with other actions, has helped lower the breakeven point to levels where Tesla can still generate positive cash flow at an enterprise level, even with EV capacity utilization at 69% last quarter. While Tesla is still making cars, we note the company is aggressively redeploying incremental resources, technology, people and capital away from the auto side of the house. We found it notable that Ford management spent far more time on its 2Q conference call discussing EVs than Tesla did.
Cornering the market on ZEV credits? Tesla recognized zero emission vehicle (ZEV) credit revenue equating to around $2k/unit in the quarter, more than 2x the recent run-rate. We believe as more legacy OEMs pull back on their EV plans, combined with increasingly stringent EPA standards, that Tesla may achieve an even more dominant position in the market for highly lucrative ZEV credits going forward. In Ford’s 2Q24 10Q in ‘item 2’ of its MD&A section, the company disclosed it entered into agreements to purchase an incremental $3.8bn of regulatory compliance credits in NA and Europe. Combined with previous balances ($700mm) and current period credits used ($100mm) we estimate Ford has a total of $4.4bn of regulatory credits for use in the current and future model years. We anticipate other car companies such as GM and STLA may be wading more deeply into the ZEV market as buyers in the quarters ahead. We estimate Tesla may account for as much as 1⁄2 the credit sales in the market, supporting a 100% margin business for Tesla that may not be anticipated by the investment community at this time.
Managing exposure to China risks. Tesla’s China sourced revenues accounted for 18.2% of total Tesla revenues in 2Q24. While this line may exhibit seasonal volatility in the quarters ahead, we expect the long-term trend for Tesla’s China exposure to continue to fall systematically. By 2030, we forecast that China accounts for approximately 10% of Tesla auto unit volume and between 6 and 7% of total group revenue.
Increased contribution from recurring services revenue. ‘Services & Other’ revenue accounted for 10.2% of total company revenue in 2Q24 and 9.7% of sales on a trailing LTM basis. It’s notable that the Services & Other revenues increased 21% YoY while automotive revenues decreased during the same period. We note that these ‘services’ revenues should largely grow in line with the growth of Tesla’s installed car population which we forecast rises to 24mm units by 2030 (a 24% CAGR from 2024 through 2030). We also note that the margins derived from after-sales/service of the car fleet are typically far higher than point-of-sale margins.
Strong position in fast growing energy storage portfolio. From our discussions, investors are starting to consider the potential for Tesla to be an expression on the AI theme. But recent indicators of climate change are bringing even greater attention to Tesla’s dominant position in energy storage. Severe storms and unusual global weather phenomena (including heat waves) may be focusing investor attention on companies that may be well positioned to address climate- and energy-related problems. We see potential for the Tesla Energy business to be worth more than the autos business. Investors are focusing on the theme of Gen AI acceleration spurring a multigenerational increase in energy demand and a recent ~2x beat in 2Q Tesla Energy storage deployments with gross margins roughly 2x that of the auto business.
Optionality on new ‘expressions’ in AI and autonomy. As we continue our analysis of the overlap of AI and robotics, it is increasingly clear to us that the commercial opportunity of non-auto expressions of embodied AI is likely far larger and faster-adopting than that of autonomous cars. We believe the humanoids opportunity is far bigger and faster adopting than autonomous cars and will see a greater quantum of capital behind it. Tesla is at the epicenter of the theme. Investors may need to add new tabs to their Excel models.
Given Jonas’ bull case, he explained some of the risks that could derail upside price action in Tesla:
We believe near-term expectations around FSD/robotaxi may be too high. We were not terribly surprised to see the original 8/8 ‘Robotaxi day’ be postponed and would not be shocked to see the content of the 10/10 event to include commercial themes far beyond just autonomous cars. In our opinion, the biggest ‘tell’ as to the governor of AV commercialization at scale is the lack of 3rd party statistically/empirically tested safety data from the likes of IIHS/NHTSA or other respected industry/regulatory bodies. We need something far beyond intervention data and suspect the absence of such a study may reflect that the system does not, at this point, clearly demonstrate beyond doubt the efficacy of the system vs human driving statistics. Autonomous cars are tasked with avoiding objects. There are other use-cases where it may be easier to target objects.
Specifically, we believe expectations around Tesla’s ability to commercialize autonomous technology in China are too high. We recently asked the question “What is Tesla’s future in China?” In our opinion, if Tesla (or any other US company) were to ‘solve’ the robotaxi problem, we believe it would be highly unlikely that company would be allowed to offer such technology within the PRC. The dual purpose element of embodied AI carries obvious national security sensitivities.
EV’ winter’ may be prolonged and could still require further steps to mitigate further potential losses. We recently reduced our FY30 US EV penetration forecast to a street-outlier-low of 20% vs. 25% previously driven by a number of factors ranging from sluggish demand, regulatory uncertainty and economic factors.
Other/Governance considerations. Elon still does not have 25% blocking minority of Telsa. Tesla’s CEO has clearly expressed his desire to achieve a 25% blocking minority vote position in Tesla to ensure in his view that powerful and potentially dangerous AI technology does not fall into the wrong hands. However, on our calculations, assuming the 2018 CEO compensation package would only take Elon Musk’s stake in Tesla to just over 20% (before taxes). How would the extra $40bn to $50bn gap in voting stake (to bridge the gap to 25%) be achieved?
In markets, shares of Tesla were up nearly 6% to $232.5 in the early cash session, while Ford shares were down about 2%.
Cathie Wood, head of Ark Investment Management, has been pounding the table about Tesla’s technical analysis and explained recently on CNBC: “Longer the base, the bigger the breakout.”
The entire industry (excluding Tesla) might face a reckoning next year if Trump wins in November. That’s because the former president has stated that EV subsidies will be eliminated. Even Musk supports this move.
Why? Well, as Musk said: “Take away the subsidies. It will only help Tesla. Also, remove subsidies from all industries!”
So, back to what Jonas noted: “…Tesla may achieve an even more dominant position in the market …”
It is shameful to see a delegation of the terrifying Grupo de Puebla “supervise” the Venezuelan elections that authoritarian leader Maduro wants to manipulate again.
The Puebla Group “supervising” elections is like Pablo Escobar overseeing the fight against drug trafficking. This infamous organization defends all communist murderous dictatorships and looks to the other side when human rights and freedom of expression are attacked in socialist regimes.
There is no comparison to the economic disaster that Venezuela’s 21st-century socialism has caused. As José Guerra, an economist at the Venezuelan Observatory of Finance, explains in his brilliant book “25 Years of Chavista Governments,” over the past quarter-century, Venezuela’s gross domestic product has plummeted by more than 55%, while the region’s GDP has grown by 25%, per capita income has dropped to less than half, poverty has increased 2.8 times, extreme poverty has multiplied by five, and the real minimum wage has sunk by 99%. 21st Century Socialism led the Venezuelan economy to the utmost misery, with the applause of the global left. Let us not forget, moreover, that Chavism wasted the enormous oil income it received during the years of high crude prices, sinking the economy despite receiving more than a trillion dollars of oil revenue between 1999 and 2014.
Nine million Venezuelans have been condemned to emigrate; poverty levels exceed 80 percent, according to the National Survey of Living Conditions/Encovi; and Chavism has destroyed the national currency, the bolivar, with a monstrous collapse of purchasing power.
In the last 14 years, 14 zeros of the currency’s nominal value have been removed.
You may have read the lie that Venezuela’s problem is the nonexistent US blockade. It’s completely false. In Venezuela, there is no blockade and it has bilateral agreements with more than 50 nations, including the major world powers. The United States is one of its main trading partners, along with China, Russia, Turkey, Spain, India, the Netherlands, and Brazil, among others, according to government data. Furthermore, Venezuela has received soft loans and financial support from China and Russia in excess of $78 billion since 2014, according to the US CRS. Moreover, Venezuela has been the largest beneficiary of soft loans and debt restructuring in the entire region since 2013. Indeed, the first person to acknowledge that there is no blockade is dictator Maduro, who boasts of the dead-cat bounce of the economy and its rising exports. Hilarious.
There is no blockade in Venezuela. The only blockade is that which socialism imposes on impoverished citizens. There are only sanctions on the leaders who have robbed the Venezuelan people with full hands and have demolished the state-owned oil company, PDVSA, which has gone from being the most efficient in the world before chavism to a decapitalized and indebted company on the brink of bankruptcy.
Monetary destruction and confiscation of private property, as well as rampant corruption, are trade marks of socialist regimes. Chavism is no different. They stole 3.4 million hectares of land, confiscated more than 523,000 apartments, and expropriated 1087 businesses. In addition, 62% of the expropriations were abandoned, and 95% were directly stolen.
Chavism has closed more than 40 national and regional newspapers, almost forty radios, and blocked the broadcast of more than thirty television stations, including the Spanish-language CNN or Antena 3. In addition, Chavism holds more than 260 political prisoners, according to the Criminal Forum.
Venezuela is the most unsafe country in the region, with more than 330,000 violent deaths in 20 years of the Chavista regime, according to the Observatory for Violence. The NGO Provea published that Maduro’s government killed more than 9,400 people between 2013 and 2023, institutionalizing murder, according to the NGO.
Hyperinflation, misery, and repression. A murderous dictatorship was perpetuated with the support of the Sao Paulo Forum and the terrifying Puebla Group, which also whitewashed the Castrista and Nicaraguan dictatorships. That is the legacy of Chavism, which the left has applauded for years and continues to support. This is the same left that has the temerity to tell you that they defend democracy, progress, and freedom of expression.
This caviar left that remains silent in the face of murder and misery in Venezuela and Cuba is the same that voices concerns about the rise of the extreme right while looking to the other side when faced with evidence of the socialist terror regime.
Sanctions did not destroy Venezuela. Socialism did. In times of high oil prices, squandering the record oil revenues, and implementing a regime of terror, misery, and confiscation where political leaders become obscenely rich, stealing the nation’s wealth just like they do in Cuba, Nicaragua, and other socialist regimes.
Hezbollah Moves Precision Missiles Into Place After Israel Says ‘Severe’ Retaliation Coming
“Our response is coming, and it will be severe,” Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu announced Monday while visiting the scene of a Lebanese rocket strike on a soccer field in the town of Majdal Shams in the occupied Golan Heights which killed 12 children and teenagers the day prior.
The rocket came from Lebanon and has been widely blamed on Hezbollah, however, the group denied responsibility soon after the mass civilian casualties became evident. Interestingly, Syria blamed an Israeli anti-air rocket for the catastrophe. The Israeli prime minister and his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, have received formal authorization from an emergency security cabinet session Sunday night to retaliate in a way of their choosing against Hezbollah.
Israeli media has on Monday said that Hezbollah has begun moving around its precision-guided missiles while bracing for an imminent major response. Israeli ministers are still signaling it will remain ‘limited’ though other sources have warned that all-out war in Lebanon is coming.
But in southern Lebanon, preparations appear underway:
An official with a Lebanese group told The Associated Press on Monday that Hezbollah’s stance has not changed, and that the Iran-backed organization does not want a full-blown war with Israel, but that if war breaks out it will fight without limits.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive activities, said Hezbollah since Sunday has started moving some of its “smart precision-guided missiles” to use if needed.
It has been ten months of consistent tit-for-tat rocket and drone fire along Israel’s northern border going back to Oct.7, but so far each side has waged a ‘limited’ war which has not spread to the rest of Lebanon.
That could very quickly change as the Netanyahu government is under pressure from Israeli members of parliament to strike a significant military blow, also as over 80,000 Israeli citizens still remain evacuated from their homes, with no restoration of a stable security situation in sight.
Netanyahu said of the victims of the Majdal Shams attack while visiting the scene, “These children are our children, the children of all of us. Israel will not and cannot let this pass and carry on as usual. Our response is coming, and it will be severe.”
The village is made up of Druze who consider themselves Syrian citizens and reject Israeli domination; however, Israel considers the settlements their own citizens.
Trump has meanwhile claimed that this escalation spiral wouldn’t be happening if he were in office as Commander-in-Chief…
Trump: “I condemn the evil attack on Israel 🇮🇱. Hezbollah launched an Iranian missile, killing a dozen children playing soccer. This tragedy is the result of the weak Biden and Harris administration. Hezbollah and Iran wouldn’t have dared to do this if I were president.” pic.twitter.com/czDIWumIBF
According to fresh reporting in the NY Times, “Israeli analysts said Hezbollah was most likely aiming at a nearby army base on Mount Hermon and did not intentionally target the village.” The report added: “But the group’s use of inaccurate rockets in an area dotted with civilian communities led to the kind of unintended consequence that risks sparking an all-out war, they said.”
The federal Child Tax Credit was first introduced in 1997 and currently allows parents with children up to age 17 to write off up to $2,000 per child on their annual tax burden, of which $1,600 is refundable. The credit was temporarily expanded to $3,000 for the year 2021 and made fully refundable—leading to an estimated 44 percent reduction in the national child poverty rate. Proponents argue that is necessary to help low-income families afford food and clothing, among other things, for their children.
In January, negotiators in the Senate and House of Representatives announced a bipartisan deal to expand the credit for tax years 2023, 2024, and 2025, which passed the House by a vote of 357–70 later that month.
However, nearly six months later, no action has been taken on the bill in the Senate, with time running out for the 118th Congress to pass it.
The ‘Lookback’ Provision
Senate Republicans have opposed the bill, objecting to a provision that would allow parents to use prior years’ income to claim the credit if their earnings fall in the subsequent year. Their stated concern is that parents who stop working altogether could claim the credit intended to help working families with children.
“Allowing individuals to receive a refundable credit when they have zero annual earnings—as the prior year’s earnings provision allows—is a departure from longstanding policy,” Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), the ranking Republican member of the Senate Finance Committee, wrote in a statement. “My key concerns, shared by many of my colleagues, remain the same—the prior year’s earnings provision must be dropped.”
Many groups have defended the prior year’s provision, or the “lookback” provision, as essential to helping taxpayers adjust to temporary changes in circumstances, such as a job loss or a parent’s sickness. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities wrote, “The lookback provision acknowledges these realities and would provide a modest income buffer when a setback occurs or when people move through cycles of life that reduce their earnings.”
Still, responding to Republican opposition, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the Finance Committee’s chairman and the bill’s leading proponent, has offered to drop that provision. Senate Republicans have not accepted that offer and, since then, proposed more changes to the bill, such as preventing illegal immigrants who are parents of U.S. citizens from claiming the credit, which proponents have described as a “poison pill” for Democrats that would kill the bill.
“The Senate Republican leadership has basically said, ‘We’re interested in doing this in 2025 because we believe that we will be in the majority,’ and they basically want to give the tax breaks to their business buddies and maybe offer crumbs to kids,” Mr. Wyden told The Epoch Times. “I’ll change the work rules. I offered that to them, and that wasn’t good enough.”
A January report by the Joint Committee on Taxation found that the credit would increase labor supply but that the increase was “too small to be significant.”
Republicans remain firm in their position.
“There need to be changes that can get a majority of Republican senators’ support,” Amanda Critchfield, a spokesperson for Mr. Crapo, told The Epoch Times.
A Republican source speaking on background told The Epoch Times: “In March, Wyden said he is done negotiating with Crapo. … Senate Republicans won’t be jammed with a take-it-or-leave-it proposition.”
The 2024 Election
Senate Republicans’ new demands have led stakeholder groups to accuse them of acting in bad faith to try to delay the bill’s passage, allegedly to prevent Democrats from claiming a political victory ahead of the 2024 presidential election.
“I do not think removing the lookback provision would improve the odds of the bill passing the Senate,” Joe Hughes, a senior analyst at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, wrote to The Epoch Times. “They do not want to hand the President what would widely be seen as a victory this close to the election.”
“The hang-up is less this provision and more, to be frank, about the politics,” Meredith Dodson, a senior official with the Coalition on Human Needs, which has advocated for the bill, told The Epoch Times.
Stakeholders also have said that Republicans are delaying the bill so that it will expire at the end of the 118th Congress and then be renegotiated in a new Congress with a substantially lower tax credit. Congress is expected to consider changes to the Internal Revenue Code in early 2025, when several business tax provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017—the Trump administration’s tax cut package—will expire.
“There is widespread understanding that the Republican caucus is holding ground … because certain members believe that they will get a better ideological tax deal if they were to take back the Senate,” a source familiar with the negotiations, speaking on background, told The Epoch Times.
Mr. Crapo has rebuffed the argument that Republicans are holding out on the bill.
“I don’t presume those kinds of things, and that’s not the position I’m advocating,” he said, according to comments shared by his office with The Epoch Times.
Pressure on Schumer
In response to Republican opposition, senators supporting the bill are demanding that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) schedule a vote, in hopes that it will compel reluctant senators to vote in favor and avoid being seen as targeting the Child Tax Credit, which is popular in opinion polls.
“I urge you to also bring this critical middle class tax relief legislation to the Senate floor as soon as possible,” Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) wrote in a February letter to Mr. Schumer.
“We want to get the Child Tax Credit done. It’s an urgency,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) told The Epoch Times.
“Many of us have made clear that we support moving forward [on the bill],” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) told The Epoch Times.
Still, his colleagues indicated to The Epoch Times that they didn’t know when a vote would occur.
Some Democrats were hesitant in their commitment to the bill.
“I haven’t made a decision on it,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told The Epoch Times.
“I’ll have to look at the latest negotiations,” Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) told The Epoch Times, although she expressed general approval of the bill.
Mr. Wyden noted that there is “substantial agreement” in the Senate Democratic Caucus on the current bill, though it would require at least nine Republican votes to clear the “cloture” hurdle of a filibuster. He did not answer when The Epoch Times asked about whether the expansion could be passed this Congress.
Advocates warn that the Senate is running out of time to act. After July 4, the body will be in session for just 55 days for the remainder of the year. The bill will lapse on Jan. 2, 2025.
“There’s limited time that the Senate’s in session,” Mr. Dodson said. “I hope that Senator Schumer will offer a clear signal that this is going to come up for a vote in July.”
The Epoch Times caught up with Mr. Schumer in the Senate foyer and asked whether the bill would come to the floor. He did not answer the question.
‘No One Is Above The Law’: Harris Backs Biden Proposals To Reform Supreme Court
In what marks a major shift for President Biden – the former head of the Senate Judiciary Committee who had long resisted calls to reform the high court – is calling for Congress to back his proposals for two significant changes to the U.S. Supreme Court and a change to the U.S. Constitution.
His plan includes establishing term limits and an enforceable ethics code for the court’s nine justices. He’s also pressing lawmakers to ratify a constitutional amendment limiting presidential immunity.
The announcement marks a remarkable evolution for Biden, who as a candidate had been wary of calls to reform the high court.
Last week, he announced during an Oval Office speech that he would pursue Supreme Court reform during his final months in office, calling it “critical to our democracy.”
As Melanie Sun reports at The Epoch Times, the president (well, his team of millennial minions) outlined his reasoning for pursuing changes that have been long-sought by progressive camps in U.S. politics in an op-ed published this morning.
“This nation was founded on a simple yet profound principle: No one is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not a justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. No one,” the president wrote.
According to a White House official, President Biden will call for Congress to back term limits for Supreme Court justices and a code of ethics enforceable by the legislative branch.
He also will propose an amendment to limit the extent of presidential immunity afforded by the Constitution, proposing that former presidents be granted no immunity for crimes committed in office.
This effort is clearly in direct response to the Supreme Court’s ruling on July 1st granting broad immunity to former President Donald Trump with regards to the various criminal prosecutions against him related to actions he took while in office.
Citing his 36 years as a U.S. senator and former chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, President Biden said that while he has “great respect for our institutions and separation of powers,” what is happening now in the United States is “not normal, and it undermines the public’s confidence in the court’s decisions, including those impacting personal freedoms.”
“We now stand in a breach,” the president wrote.
In 2020, then-candidate Mr. Biden promised to create a commission to study potential changes to the Supreme Court amid progressive voices calling for expanding the Supreme Court.
The commission published a 294-page report to the president in December 2021. President Biden has not acted on that report until now.
The president is scheduled to speak today on his plan from the LBJ Presidential Library commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Civil Rights Act.
The first three justices who would potentially be affected by term limits are on the right.
Justice Clarence Thomas has been on the court for nearly 33 years.
Chief Justice John Roberts has served for 19 years,
and Justice Samuel Alito has served for 18.
Critics of the code of conduct have expressed concern that oversight of justices by Congress would politicize the court.
For President Biden to be successful, his proposals would require 60 votes for passages in the Senate. His proposed constitutional amendment faces additional hurdles, including two-thirds support in both chambers of Congress, or by a convention of two-thirds of the states, and then approval by three-fourths of state legislatures.
Kamala Harris has issued a statement in support of the President’s proposals
Statement from Vice President Kamala Harris on Supreme Court Reforms
In the course of our Nation’s history, trust in the Supreme Court of the United States has been critical to achieving equal justice under law. President Biden and I strongly believe that the American people must have confidence in the Supreme Court. Yet today, there is a clear crisis of confidence facing the Supreme Court as its fairness has been called into question after numerous ethics scandals and decision after decision overturning long-standing precedent.
That is why President Biden and I are calling on Congress to pass important reforms – from imposing term limits for Justices’ active service, to requiring Justices to comply with binding ethics rules just like every other federal judge. And finally, in our democracy, no one should be above the law. So we must also ensure that no former President has immunity for crimes committed while in the White House.
These popular reforms will help to restore confidence in the Court, strengthen our democracy, and ensure no one is above the law.
Former President Donald Trump previously said of such efforts in the legislative branch:
“The Democrats are attempting to interfere in the Presidential Election, and destroy our Justice System, by attacking their Political Opponent, ME, and our Honorable Supreme Court,” he wrote on Truth Social.
“We have to fight for our Fair and Independent Courts, and protect our Country.”
The former president also warned that any removal of presidential immunity for official acts of former presidents would risk politicizing prosecutions and undermine the office of the president.
“No Manual Action Taken”: Google Responds To Assassination Autocomplete Controversy
Update (1035ET):
Google has responded to the uproar on X regarding potential election interference and information warfare against former President Donald Trump.
It appears that big tech and the Democrats might not want the American people to remember the assassination attempt on Trump, as it doesn’t appear on Google’s autocomplete search function, which is designed to help users find information faster and more accurately.
“We’ve got protections in place against Autocomplete predictions associated with political violence, which is normally a good thing. That said, we’re working on improvements to ensure our systems are more up to date. Regardless of what Autocomplete shows, you can always search for whatever you want to and we’ll provide access to the info available, including about this horrific incident,” Google wrote on X.
Some context here: We’ve got protections in place against Autocomplete predictions associated with political violence, which is normally a good thing. That said, we’re working on improvements to ensure our systems are more up to date. Regardless of what Autocomplete shows, you…
— Google Communications (@Google_Comms) July 28, 2024
O’rly… Everyone but Trump.
Google also wrote, “That’s right — we have protections in place for topics like political violence, which typically work well. But we’re working on improvements to make our predictions more up to date. Regardless of what Autocomplete shows, people can always search for whatever they want to, and we provide access to the info available, including about this horrific incident.”
That’s right — we have protections in place for topics like political violence, which typically work well. But we’re working on improvements to make our predictions more up to date. Regardless of what Autocomplete shows, people can always search for whatever they want to, and we…
— Google Communications (@Google_Comms) July 28, 2024
But that’s not the point, Google. The autocomplete algorithm can easily censor suggestions to discourage people from searching for topics that are not government-approved.
Also, a Google spokesperson told The New York Post that no “manual action was taken on these predictions,” and its algos include “protections” against autocomplete predictions “associated with political violence.”
* * *
Information warfare may be underway as Google’s safeguards to ensure accurate and unbiased search results seem skewed. Users on X are reporting that the world’s most popular search engine is not showing autocomplete results for the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. These concerns are unsurprising, given that the big tech firm has been accused of election interference.
“Big Tech is trying to interfere in the election AGAIN to help Kamala Harris. We all know this is intentional election interference from Google. Truly despicable,” Donald Trump Jr. posted on X on Sunday morning.
Big Tech is trying to interfere in the election AGAIN to help Kamala Harris. We all know this is intentional election interference from Google. Truly despicable. https://t.co/gWDbFGaHI7
Fox News sheds more color into Google’s autocomplete elimination of Trump from the list that appears when users type in ‘assassination attempt’:
Google users searching for the attempted assassination of former President Trump were miffed when the desired results failed to populate on the search engine.
Instead, the website autocomplete feature omitted the results of the July 13 shooting, drawing criticism from social media users who accused the Big Tech giant of trying to influence the presidential election.
Screenshots from Google instead showed recommended search results of the failed assassination of Ronald Reagan and the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, whose death sparked World War I, the shooting of Bob Marley and the failed attempt on former President Ford. -Fox News
As X user Autism Capital noted, “They really tried to memory hole the Trump assassination Jesus Christ. Information warfare and the revision of history is real.”
They really tried to memory hole the Trump assassination Jesus Christ. Information warfare and the revision of history is real. This isn’t fantasy or a novel. This is actually real. They hate you.
— James Lindsay, anti-Communist (@ConceptualJames) July 28, 2024
However, X’s Grok bot was one of the few platforms that accurately responded to a search query about Trump’s assassination attempt.
It seems Grok is the only AI that actually gives information about the attempted ass*ss*nation of Trump and doesn’t try to memory hole it. pic.twitter.com/9T2XLdA0RU
— James Lindsay, anti-Communist (@ConceptualJames) July 29, 2024
Meanwhile, a Google spokesperson told The New York Post that no “manual action was taken on these predictions,” and its algos include “protections” against autocomplete predictions “associated with political violence.”
“Why is @Google suppressing the search about the Trump assassination attempt? These are all screenshots from this morning. Has there been a dramatic increase in Truman biographers in the last two weeks?” Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS) wrote on X.
He added: “I’ll be making an official inquiry into @google this week – I look forward to their response.”
Why is @Google suppressing the search about the Trump assassination attempt? These are all screenshots from this morning. Has there been a dramatic increase in Truman biographers in the last two weeks?
— Attorney General Andrew Bailey (@AGAndrewBailey) July 28, 2024
Earlier this year, Media Research Center founder and president Brent Bozell told Fox News, “No organization has more control over information than Google, and they have repeatedly used that power to manipulate the public to vote for the most left-wing candidates in every major election since 2008.”
Bozell said, “It’s un-American to attempt to manipulate elections this way. It’s time Congress acts to shut down this massive election interference scheme.”
“It’s time Congress acts to shut down this massive election interference scheme,” he continued.
Maybe it’s time for the tech billionaires who support Trump to introduce a rival search engine to Google.
