Authored by Rachel Acenas via The Epoch Times,

A southern California doctor who purposely drove his car with his family off a cliff won’t face trial due to his mental illness, prosecutors announced.

Dharmesh Patel, 42, was granted a mental health diversion by a court due to evidence that shows the radiologist suffers from major depressive disorder, according to the San Mateo District Attorney’s office in a statement on Thursday.

The completion of a mental health diversion program in California allows a defendant to seek treatment and have charges against them dismissed.

“Weighing all factors, the court determined the defendant was suitable and granted the defense request for mental health diversion,’ Judge Susan Jakubowski said in her ruling, adding that his diagnosed disorder “has the required nexus to the criminal conduct.”

250 Feet Off a Cliff

Dr. Patel had pleaded not guilty to three counts of attempted murder after he drove his Tesla 250 feet off a cliff in January last year. His wife and two children, 7 and 4, were injured, but all survived the crash.

The car was traveling southbound on Pacific Coast Highway before flying off the cliff known as Devil’s Slide in San Mateo, about 20 miles south of San Francisco.

Local media footage captured images of the damaged Tesla under the cliff near the water’s edge.

Fire crews rushed to the scene after witnesses called 911. Firefighters rappelled off the cliff to rescue the children while helicopters hoisted the couple to safety.

“The damage to the vehicle indicated that it hit and flipped several times and landed mostly on its wheels,” Brian Pottenger, battalion chief, said at the scene.

“We were actually very shocked that we found survivable victims in the vehicle,” he added.

Psychologists Testify

The judge overseeing his case heard from several psychologists who testified that Dr. Patel appeared increasingly delusional in the days before the crash, which ultimately spiraled into a one-time psychotic episode.

Prior to the psychotic break, he often could not sleep at night and was consumed with negative thoughts, according to psychologists’ court testimony. The doctor drove his children off the cliff because he feared they would be kidnapped or sex trafficked. He also often thought about the nationwide fentanyl crisis and the war in Ukraine.

But his delusions stopped after receiving treatment behind bars, according to expert witness Dr. Mark Patterson, who also said Dr. Patel feels a lot of remorse for the crash.

“I see him as someone who is very motivated and amenable to treatment,” the doctor testified.

Dr. Patel’s attorney, Joshua Bentley, described him as “a good man” during a previous hearing to determine whether he was eligible for a treatment program, stressing that his wife begged for his release.

The doctor will remain jailed for several weeks during a so-called “bridging period.” He will be released to his parents’ home in San Mateo County but will not be able to leave the residence while he remains under house arrest.

The judge set a July 31 date to solidify details of his release.

Dr. Patel will continue to participate in therapy sessions, must report to court once a week to provide updates on his progress, and take twice weekly tests to show that he is complying with his medication.

He is also prohibited from drinking alcohol or taking drugs and must surrender his driver’s license and passport. He would also be barred from practicing medicine under the plan.

It has for many months been clear that the world is one incident away from witnessing WW3 in eastern Europe, as NATO gets ever-more deeply involved in Ukraine, and given Moscow has recently issued threats to attack Western airbases housing aircraft which could be deployed in the country.

NATO aircraft, including drones, have also been busier than ever over the Black Sea, just off Russia. Already this has resulted in confrontations like the March 14, 2023 incident in which a Russian Su-27 fighter jet intercepted and damaged an American MQ-9 Reaper drone, causing it to crash in the Black Sea.

This could easily happen again, and the Kremlin on Friday is sounding the alarm over an encroaching US presence over the Black Sea. It is preparing new “rapid response measures” to deal with potential incidents in nearby airspace.

Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov has ordered the armed forces to prepare to “react to provocations” due to NATO’s increasing involvement in the Ukraine war. The statement was translated and featured in national media reports.

He specifically cited the “increased number of US strategic drone missions flown over the Black Sea” and described that the aircraft “conduct reconnaissance and provide targeting data for weapons, which Western nations supply to conduct strikes on Russian objects.”

“Such flights increase the probability that incidents may happen in airspace involving Russian military aircraft and the risk of a direct confrontation of the alliance with the Russian Federation,” defense chief Belousov warned additionally.

“NATO members will be held responsible in the event of any such incident,” the defense ministry statement added. Possibly Russia could down another NATO drone over the Black Sea in order to send a ‘message’.

The warning comes days after the deadly Crimean beach attack which involved Ukraine utilizing its US-supplied ATACMS systems, and also as Kiev is set to receive F-16 fighter jets from European allies.

Russia warns the US that its reconnaissance drone flights over the Black Sea raise the risk of “direct confrontation” between Moscow and NATO https://t.co/147tXwcNo5

— TRT World (@trtworld) June 28, 2024

The jets are expected to be transferred at some point this summer, but already Kiev says it could keep many of them at NATO bases outside Ukraine, such as in Poland or Romania.

President Putin himself has directly warned that any base from which a jet used to attack Russian forces is launched could come under attack, even if it is not in Ukraine.

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

A Los Angeles federal jury has ordered the National Football League (NFL) to pay nearly $4.8 billion in damages over antitrust violations relating to its “Sunday Ticket” programming.

The verdict was delivered in the U.S. District Court in the Central District of California on June 27 after less than a day of deliberations.

It followed a trial that included testimony from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones.

Roughly $4.7 billion in damages was awarded to residential “Sunday Ticket” subscribers and $96 million to commercial subscribers such as restaurants and bars. Since damages can be tripled under federal antitrust laws, the NFL could end up being liable for $14.39 billion.

The ruling stemmed from a class action lawsuit filed in 2015 by the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco alleging the league “conspired” with distributor DirecTV to raise prices for the “Sunday Ticket” package, which allows viewers to watch out-of-market games but requires them to purchase access to a bundle of games to do so.

The complaint covered 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses who paid for the “Sunday Ticket” package from DirecTV, or its subsidiaries, at any time between 2011 and 2022.

Plaintiffs argued that the package effectively “results in the blackout or unavailability of out-of-market games” unless consumers purchase the “Sunday Ticket” package at inflated prices. They argued that the deal “results in substantial injury to competition” and violates antitrust laws.

“This scheme restricts competition and harms Sunday Ticket purchasers. First, the total elimination of competition allows the NFL, its Teams, and DirecTV to charge supracompetitive monopoly prices, rather than the prices that would exist if the 32 teams were competing for interest and distribution in a free market. Second, Class members must pay for access to all 32 teams’ out-of-market games, even if they are only interested in viewing one or two teams’ games,” plaintiffs wrote in the lawsuit.

“No other major sports league in America has such a drastic, total elimination of competition in the broadcasting of its games.”

Lawyers for the NFL, in moving to dismiss the lawsuit, had argued the “Sunday Ticket” program was exempt from antitrust scrutiny under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961, which allowed it to sell its TV rights as a group, despite the NFL consisting of 32 team owners who collectively own all the big TV rights.

The NFL confirmed the ruling on its official website, adding that it was “disappointed” with the jury’s verdict.

“We continue to believe that our media distribution strategy, which features all NFL games broadcast on free over-the-air television in the markets of the participating teams and national distribution of our most popular games, supplemented by many additional choices including RedZone, Sunday Ticket, and NFL+, is by far the most fan-friendly distribution model in all of sports and entertainment,” the league said in a statement.

The league noted it plans to appeal the verdict.

If it does, an appeal would go to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and then potentially to the Supreme Court.

“We will certainly contest this decision as we believe that the class action claims in this case are baseless and without merit,” the league said. “We thank the jury for their time and service and for the guidance and oversight from Judge [Philip] Gutierrez throughout the trial.”

The lawsuit against the NFL was initially dismissed in 2017 but reinstated by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019.

Judge Philip S. Gutierrez, overseeing the case, ruled last year that it could move forward as a class action suit. He is set to hear post-trial motions on July 31.

The Epoch Times has contacted spokespersons for the NFL and DirecTV for comment.

In a flurry of SCOTUS decisions that have seen a clustering of losses for liberals and pro-government deep-staters, including a reversal of the Chevron Deference decision which crushes the encroaching administrative state, and a huge victory for the politically prosecuted Jan 6 protesters, today’s Supreme Court ruling that may be the most adverse impact on Democrats everywhere, was the decision to enforce bans on homeless people sleeping outdoors, even in the mostly socialist West Coast, where shelter space is lacking yet where the population of the homeless is highest due to the generally nice weather (at least until the icebergs melt later today).

The case is the most significant to come before the high court in decades on the issue of America’s rising wave of homeless democrat.

In a 6-3 decision, split as usual along ideological lines, the high court reversed a ruling by a deeply liberal San Francisco-based appeals court that found outdoor sleeping bans amount to cruel and unusual punishment. Which is only appropriate since San Francisco recently has descended into 8th circle of homeless hell territory, with drug needless, piles of human excrement, and armies of homeless zombies covering the streets of the once great city.

The majority found that the 8th Amendment prohibition does not extend to bans on outdoor sleeping bans.

“Homelessness is complex. Its causes are many. So may be the public policy responses required to address it,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority. “A handful of federal judges cannot begin to ‘match’ the collective wisdom the American people possess in deciding ‘how best to handle’ a pressing social question like homelessness.”

Gorsuch suggested that people who have no choice but to sleep outdoors could raise that as a “necessity defense,” if they are ticketed or otherwise punished for violating a camping ban.

Or they can just stop taking drugs, clean themselves up and find a job, but that may require actual effort. Hence, easier to just vote Democrat.

A bipartisan group of leaders had argued the ruling against the bans made it harder to manage outdoor encampments encroaching on sidewalks and other public spaces in nine Western states. That includes California, which is home to one-third of the country’s homeless population.

“Cities across the West report that the 9th Circuit’s involuntary test has created intolerable uncertainty for them,” Gorsuch wrote.

Homeless advocates, on the other hand, said that allowing cities to punish people who need a place to sleep would criminalize homelessness and ultimately make the crisis worse. Cities had been allowed to regulate encampments but couldn’t bar people from sleeping outdoors.

“Sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime,” said communist Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, reading from the bench a dissent joined by her liberal colleagues.

“Punishing people for their status is ‘cruel and unusual’ under the Eighth Amendment,” she wrote in the dissent. ”It is quite possible, indeed likely, that these and similar ordinances will face more days in court.”

It wasn’t clear how “status” is a factor in determining how someone ends up homeless but nobody every accused Sotomayor of being rational.

The case came from the rural Oregon town of Grants Pass, which appealed a ruling striking down local ordinances that fined people $295 for sleeping outside after tents began crowding public parks. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over the nine Western states, has held since 2018 that such bans violate the Eighth Amendment in areas where there aren’t enough shelter beds.

Friday’s ruling comes after homelessness in the United States grew a dramatic 12% last year to its highest reported level thanks to Bidenomics, as soaring rents and a decline in coronavirus pandemic assistance combined to put housing out of reach for more people.

It’s only ironic that the homeless, most of whom are Democrats and voted for Joe Biden, ended up there thanks to their vote. It turns out actions do have consequences.

More than 650,000 people are estimated to be homeless, the most since the country began using a yearly point-in-time survey in 2007. Nearly half of them sleep outside. Older adults, LGBTQ+ people and people of color are disproportionately affected, advocates said. In Oregon, a lack of mental health and addiction resources has also helped fuel the crisis.

Finally, we can’t help but wonder what would have happened if Soros had diversified better, and had saved a few billion to retain control of SCOTUS instead of just blowing most of his money on regional courts and various DAs across the country.

By Stefan Koopman, Senior Macro Strategist at Rabobank

Italy has style and flair that everyone wants a piece of, from their killer fashion sense to their mouth-watering cuisine. Yet, when the conversation turns to its politics, it’s all eye rolls and snarky comments. That’s not entirely fair, though, because more often than not, Italy has been at the forefront of how we all do politics today.

Fascism took root on Italy’s soil before spreading beyond its borders. This fertile environment also accelerated the transformation of political parties from grassroots organizations to power-centric entities, a cycle of patronage immortalized by figures like Giulio Andreotti. With the disintegration of this system in the early 1990s, Berlusconi stepped onto the scene with his innovative take on populism through television, ushering in an era where personality trumped policy. The Five Star Movement’s rise further reshaped the political scene, enhancing the role of social media and the internet. And now a far-right party, whose lineage can be traced back to neo-fascist movements, has successfully carved out its place in government by taking a firm stance on identity politics while carefully navigating foreign policy and economic issues.

These shifts have been punctuated by technocratic governments, often led by bankers, who have calmed investors and enacted unpopular but necessary reforms. Italian politics show that closing the gap between citizens and their government remains very difficult, with leaders persistently seeking and embracing new solutions. In Italy, this divide is more pronounced due to the country’s rapid and somewhat artificial unification, making it a bellwether for similar trends elsewhere. You could say that all roads lead to Rome.

The current Italian playbook is clear. You could see its implementation in the Netherlands, where the two populist parties in the forthcoming Schoof cabinet control most of the domestically oriented ministries, while the two centrist parties oversee the finance ministry and foreign affairs. Such an approach may also emerge in France. In recent years, Marine Le Pen has carefully smoothed out some of the rough edges in her image and party brand. She quietly distanced herself from advocating for Frexit, distanced herself from Putin since he invaded Ukraine, and adopted a slightly more diplomatic stance on issues such as immigration.

It makes this Financial Times article all the more surprising. In light of the far-right’s emboldened stance after the European elections, Jordan Bardella, prime ministerial hopeful for the Rassemblement National (RN), may start a Paris-Brussels rift by vowing to negotiate a rebate of France’s EU contributions. Despite the slim odds – owing to the EU’s fixed budget until 2027 and the implications of either increased contributions from other member states or new debt – success would earn Bardella acclaim for challenging EU officials. Failure, however, would allow him to lay blame on Brussels. We are also seeing this in the Netherlands, where an EU rebate is underpinning the financing of the Dutch coalition agreement and where being ‘tough’ in Brussels is mostly for domestic political considerations.

Concurrently, and looking much more ‘Italian’, public broadcaster franceinfo reports that the RN, should it ascend to power after July 7th, plans to appoint a non-affiliated individual to the Ministry of Economy and Finance, looking at candidates that could placate financial markets and investors with a seemingly credible past. The true direction will become clearer in two weeks’ time, potentially confirming whether, indeed, all roads lead to Rome. 

Germany continues to give France nudges in that direction. Asked about potential ECB support in the event of a French crisis, German finance minister Lindner said that intervention in French government bond markets would raise economic and constitutional questions. Usage of the TPI would, according to Lindner, “test the German finance minister to see whether all this is still in line with treaty law”. He has a point, though. Recall that the European Commission has proposed that the Council should place France, along with six other Member States, under the excessive deficit procedure, which would disqualify them for the ECB’s TPI. The spread on the two countries’ 10 year notes is currently 83 bps. The first round of voting will be held this Sunday.

In this U.S. election’s first presidential debate, two senior citizens hurled insults at each other, taking offense especially when their golf abilities came under scrutiny. One stumbled and fumbled, the other told falsehoods. It’s quite a sorry state of affairs, but Biden’s performance was particularly painful to watch, raising worries about his age, his mental fitness, and his chances against Trump. There are now plenty of reports of panicking Democrats, with even CNN pundits seeming to give up, as there is no evident strategy to shift the narrative. Perhaps the decision to stage this debate so early in the race might be a stroke of genius. With the Democratic convention still on the horizon, there is time for change. So this makes it all a bit unclear whether the night really favored Berlusconism, or whether the Democrats find a new way to Rome.

That said, Treasuries did fall during the debate, with the yield on the 10-year note rising 3 bps to 4.32%. The dollar rose, although here too, the move was modest and looks to have faded. It all reversed some of the price action of yesterday afternoon, when U.S. economic data showed a further rise in continuing jobless claims, reaching a peak unseen since late 2021. This uptick contributes to a growing body of evidence suggesting a still robust labor market that does show signs of relaxation, appearing increasingly more ‘pre-pandemic’ than ‘post-pandemic’. A surprising downturn hit factory orders for business equipment, and US pending home sales plummeted to new lows in May, as high mortgage rates and high prices deter potential buyers. The Atlanta Fed has downgraded its Q2 GDPNow forecast from 3.0% to 2.7%. We foresee a further deceleration in consumer activity for the second half of 2024, which is not helping Biden either but may pave the way for a Fed rate cut come September.

The Supreme Court on Friday handed around 350 Jan. 6 defendants a potentially huge win, while weakening the DOJ’s case against former President Trump in the process.

The court narrowed one specific charge – obstructing an official proceeding – that the DOJ had relied on in more than 300 J6 cases, including Trump’s, Axios reports. This charge has been used almost exclusively to prosecute white-collar crimes like evidence tampering, however the DOJ tried to apply it to J6 defendants, arguing that the riot was an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding – that being the certification of the 2020 election.

The court on Friday said that prosecutors would now need to show that a defendant interfered with documents, records or other material parts of an official proceeding. They also sent the case back to a lower court to reassess Jan. 6 cases in light of the new test.

In Fischer, the Supreme Court narrows the federal obstruction statute to require evidence that the defendant at least attempted to impair the availability, for use in an official proceeding, of “records, documents, objects,” or other “things.” https://t.co/lNsAMeJaYQ pic.twitter.com/I4LC0UIEJp

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

Oddly, Barrett dissented, saying that the majority “does textual backflips to find some way—any way—to narrow the reach” of the obstruction law.

Barrett, in a very sharp dissent, says the majority “does textual backflips to find some way—any way—to narrow the reach” of the obstruction law and “failed to respect the prerogatives of the political branches” to punish the conduct that occurred on J6. https://t.co/lNsAMeJaYQ

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2024

There are currently more than 1,300 J6 defendants – of which roughly 350 of them having been charged with obstructing an official proceeding. Around 170 people have been convicted ussing that charge.

That said, many of the protesters were convicted on other charges, which will still stand despite the obstruction convictions potentially becoming invalid.

The ruling could also weaken the Biden DOJ’s case against Trump – who faces the same charge that the court narrowed, along with a charge of conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding.

The final print for UMich sentiment survey in June saw sentiment improve over the course of the month and inflation expectations decline further from 3.3% flash to 3.0% final for 1y expectations…

Source: Bloomberg

But sentiment overall was lower month over month (despite an uptick intramonth) with the headline dropping from 69.1 to 68.2 with a bid drop in current conditions (lowest since May 2023)…

Source: Bloomberg

UMich’s Joanne Hsu notes that:

“While consumers exhibited confidence that inflation will continue to moderate, many expressed concerns about the effect of high prices and weakening incomes on their personal finances. These trends offset the improvements in the short- and long-run outlook for business conditions stemming in part from expectations for softening interest rates.”

That’s reflected in buying conditions crashing across the board…

Source: Bloomberg

As we detailed here, the UMich data indeed shows that a growing majority are giving up hope they’ll ever be able to afford the traditional middle class lifestyle of a car, home, and eventual retirement.

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

I’ve been saying it for months and tonight it has become crystal clear: Joe Biden will not be the Democratic nominee in November.

The prevailing sentiment after tonight’s debate performance — inclusive of Biden opening the bidding by freezing up and making a strange throat noise for 3 straight seconds — is that Joe Biden is unfit to serve another 4 years in office.

Of course, we’ve all known that for years, but the DNC machine, coupled with the mainstream media and operatives operating Biden’s strings for the last 4 years hasn’t been so hurried to come to the same conclusion.

After tonight, they have to. Like with any problem in our country, the first solution is always to kick the can down the road, not risk discomfort amongst the party or country, not to ruffle any feathers and then ignore it and hope it goes away on its own. And as I noted days ago, nothing is off limits for the media to run interference on.

This happened with Covid coming to the U.S., it happened with inflation spiraling out of control and, tonight, it happened when both sides of the aisle were treated to objective reality bludgeoning them in the face in the form of the realization that we just bore witness to Joe Biden’s last debate ever.

How can I make such a bold statement (other than from simply opening my eyes and ears and watching the debate)? When the mainstream media machine turns on you, its already a foregone conclusion that your time is up. John King said about DNC discussions, live on CNN immediately after the debate:

“Right now, it involves party strategists, it involves elected officials, it involves fundraisers, and they’re having conversations about the president’s performance, which they think was dismal…”

“Some of those conversations include, should we go to the White House and ask the president to step aside?”

Similarly, Chuck Todd — the tip of a far-left spear of Marxist idiocy that has defended Biden despite his obviously disastrous tenure as President and obvious mental decline — also took to MSNBC to rail on Biden’s performance.

“Biden looks like the caricature that conservative media has been painting … you saw it before your eyes!” Todd said post-debate.

Even the Trump-hating Matt Drudge 2.0 has thrown in the towel:

We all know Democrats are shameless, but how can the media and the party who have both defended Biden’s mental acuity for the last few weeks not be completely humiliated by tonight’s showing? Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman said it best, post-debate, writing on X:

“Tonight was an indictment of the Democratic Party. How could they? Did they think they could pull one over on the American people? Catastrophic for the party and everyone in charge. How much money has the party and the campaign taken from the American people to put up Joe Biden as the candidate?”

In some respects there’s a cruel irony to the fact that the last coherent point argued by an octogenarian decades long career politician was an obvious lie about being a 6 handicap on the golf course. It’s sad not only because it’s meaningless to the presidency, but because it was to further one last obvious lie: that Biden would ever have a snowball’s chance in hell against Trump on a golf course.

We live in a representative republic where politicians are supposed to be made up of everyday citizens who turn over frequently, so as to allow the soul of the nation to take deep breaths and not get stuck in patterns. But as is the case with career politicians like Mitch McConnell or Dianne Feinstein, they just can’t seem to ever release their wretched liver-spotted talons from the “power” they’ve fought their whole lives to desperately cling to.

As we learned from both of these examples over the last year, the castrated impotent desperation and concern career politicians have with remaining “in power” in their dying days isn’t just depressing from a political standpoint, its a disheartening commentary on human beings and their priorities in life. It’s the opposite of retiring, and dying, with dignity.

And tonight we watched it live with Joe Biden, as he tried to force one last gasp of oxygen into the lungs of his political career and came up short. Instead, he’ll now be subjected to pitchforks and torches from the party he spent his whole life fighting for, and his “career” will become nothing more than another brick in the wall for the argument that politicians of all stripes are just narcissistic, self-absorbed and generally useless pustules.

In case you missed it, last week I detailed who I think will be Biden’s replacement and Trump’s VP heading into the last 100 days leading up to the election: Biden’s Replacement And Trump’s VP Pick

I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments — you know, to hold me over until Mika Brzezinski gives Joe Scarborough his talking points tomorrow morning.

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. These positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Conservative commentator and filmmaker Robby Starbuck conducted an intensive three-week investigation into Tractor Supply, revealing and sharing on X how the US retailer, known for selling farm goods to rural Americans (mainly freedom-loving Republicans), has been donating to woke radical leftist causes that do not resonate with its customer base. The retailer, in response, abruptly scrapped its climate targets and diversity, equity, and inclusion fantasies late Thursday, preventing itself from getting ‘Bud Light’d’ by its customer base.

Tractor Supply gave $100,000 to an activist group that “worked around the clock” to stop deportations during the Trump presidency.

The group is Conexion Americas’. Their founder also previously headed the National Council of La Raza which got $2+ Million from George Soros.

How… pic.twitter.com/vtr2a2HbfP

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) June 26, 2024

“We have heard from customers that we have disappointed them. We have taken this feedback to heart,” Tractor Supply wrote in a statement posted on X. 

From now on, the retailer claims it will retire its woke activism by nuking its DEI objectives and, instead, focus on actual and legitimate causes such as “ag education, animal welfare, veteran causes and being a good neighbor…” 

• No longer submit data to the Human Rights Campaign.

• Refocus our Team Member Engagement Groups on mentoring, networking and supporting the business.

• Further focus on rural America priorities including ag education, animal welfare, veteran causes and being a good neighbor and stop sponsoring nonbusiness activities like Pride festivals and voting campaigns.

• We will review and consider revising our current DEI goals while still ensuring a respectful environment.

• Withdraw our data on emissions and focus on our land and water conservation efforts.

Statement from Tractor Supply pic.twitter.com/ZMweR8JVuy

— Tractor Supply (@TractorSupply) June 27, 2024

Following the Tractor Supply statement, Starbuck wrote on X, “This is a massive victory for sanity and the single biggest boycott win of our lifetime.”

He continued, “I want to give a special thanks to all of my monthly subscribers on @X . You fund our research, films and reporting. We couldn’t do it without you. If you’re not subscribed but see the value in our work, go click subscribe on my X page to join the team so we can restore sanity together.” 

After 3 weeks of researching and reporting on @TractorSupply going woke, they responded with the most dramatic policy reversal I’ve ever seen.

This is a massive victory for sanity and the single biggest boycott win of our lifetime.

My reaction and strategy going forward ⬇️

I… pic.twitter.com/AIRgcaoDyp

— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) June 28, 2024

A slew of mega-corporations and universities have already reversed course in their leftist activism as the anti-DEI tide rises.

Consulting firm Farient Advisors told Bloomberg that more than 50 companies, including Chipotle Mexican Grill, Johnson & Johnson, Best Buy, and many others, have “removed or de-emphasized DEI when setting executive pay.” 

Earlier this year, we explained, “Both the DEI and ESG gravy trains on Wall Street are finally coming to an unceremonious end.” 

And more recently pointed out, “DEI was doomed to fail, and corporations have been quickly scrambling to abandon mindless and profitless diversity programs with Marxist roots.” 

Data from AlphaSense shows “DEI” mentions on earnings calls collapsed in recent quarters. 

In January, Johnny Taylor, president of the Society for Human Resource Management, told Axios that corporate executives are fed up with DEI. 

“The backlash is real. And I mean, in ways that I’ve actually never seen it before,” Taylor said, adding, “CEOs are literally putting the brakes on this DE&I work that was running strong” since George Floyd’s murder in early 2020. And why is that? The answer is here… 

Boeing has figured out this the hard way… 

Returning to Starbuck’s anti-DEI campaign, here’s what X users are saying about Tractor Supply’s about-face:

This is what boycott panic smells like

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) June 27, 2024

Wow, Tractor Supply realizes its whole customer base are conservatives and they have completely abandoned DEI. I love it.

— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) June 27, 2024

Go Woke Go Broke! Soon every company will learn! Ask a farmer how many sexes are there! Or try milking a bull

— Valentina Gomez (@ValentinaForSOS) June 27, 2024

Wow. Incredible. All thanks to @robbystarbuck and free speech on X. We will get rid of DEI one company at a time 👏🔥

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 27, 2024

Well done. Thank you, Tractor Supply. I will be doing more business with you in the future.

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) June 27, 2024