Authored by Jonathan Turley,

We have been discussing the dubious constitutional basis for President Joe Biden withholding the audio tapes of his interview with special counsel Robert Hur. I have previously written that the claim of privilege makes little sense when the transcript of the interview has already been released. It seems curious that Biden is claiming to be the president “who cannot be heard” in withholding the audio version.

It just got wackier as the Justice Department seeks to create a new type of “Deepfake privilege” that would effectively blow away all existing limits on the use of the privilege when it comes to audio or visual records of a president.

Multiple committees are investigating Biden for possible impeachment and conducting oversight on the handling of the investigation into his retention and mishandling of classified material over decades. Classified documents were found in various locations where Biden lived or worked, including his garage. The mishandling of classified material is uncontestable. Broken boxes, unprotected areas and lack of tracking are all obvious from the photos.

Biden made the situation even worse with a disastrous press conference in which he attacked Hur and misrepresented his findings.

Hur’s ultimate conclusion that Biden’s diminished cognitive abilities would undermine any prosecution left many dumbfounded. After all, the man who is too feeble to prosecute is not only running a superpower with a massive nuclear arsenal but running for reelection to add four more years in office.

From impeachment to oversight to the 25th Amendment (allowing the removal of a president for incapacities), there are ample reasons for Congress to demand information and evidence from the government on these questions. Congress is also interested in looking at repeated omissions for “inaudible” statements. Under this sweeping theory that Biden can legitimately withhold these recordings under executive privilege, any president could withhold any evidence of incapacity or criminality.

As previously explained, the claim that the audiotape but not the transcript remains privileged is hard to square with precedent or logic. However, now the Justice Department appears to be pivoting with a new claim with a late Friday filing.  The filing obtained by Politico states that the audiotape must be withheld due to the risk that it could be altered by artificial intelligence and passed off as authentic in a deepfake release: “The passage of time and advancements in audio, artificial intelligence, and ‘deep fake’ technologies only amplify concerns about malicious manipulation of audio files.”

Consider the implications of that argument for a second. It would mean that any visual or audio recording of the President could be withheld due to the danger of digital or other manipulation. It would eviscerate any existing limits on privilege assertions.

It is also absurd since you could create such fake recordings using the transcript and Biden’s voice from countless interviews through AI programs. The Justice Department acknowledges that obvious logical disconnect by noting that the release would make any fake version more credible.

“To be sure, other raw material to create a deepfake of President Biden’s voice is already available, but release of the audio recording presents unique risks: if it were public knowledge that the audio recording has been released, it becomes easier for malicious actors to pass off an altered file as the true recording,.”

The filing is logically and legally absurd. It is also dangerous.

For a president who is already carefully insulated from questions and controlled in public appearances, the argument would allow staff to completely control any public or, more importantly, congressional review of his actual speech and discourse.

In seeking to prevent “malicious actors” from altering reality, the government is claiming the right to frame reality as an inherent constitutional prerogative.

The argument ignores that, if an audiotape is released, it is harder to pass off a fake as genuine. As it stands, actors can claim tapes as leaked or derived from other sources. In the absence of an official tape, such arguments can be difficult to refute.

The fact that this spurious argument is being made by Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is another disappointing sign that he has abandoned his pledge to remain apolitical in office. This litigation is clearly designed for one overriding purpose: to delay any release until after the election when it cannot harm the President.

It is the legal version of a deepfake — misrepresenting the law to mislead citizens into believing that they are better off with less information on the credibility and competence of their president.

One day after Donald Trump was convicted of 34 felonies in his ‘hush money’ trial, a court-appointed officer overseeing the Infowars bankruptcy apparently went rogue on Friday and tried to seize and shut down Alex Jones’ studio without a court order, despite having a reported “path with the [bankruptcy] judge to continue on for years.”

On Saturday, Jones held a four hour X space, in which supporters including Gen. Mike Flynn, Steve Bannon and Roger Stone commented on the situation. All three suggested that Jones stand his ground and peacefully resist. 

According to commentator and attorney, ‘Viva Frei’ (David Freiheit), the court-appointed Chief Restructuring Officer (CRO) in the Infowars bankruptcy, Patrick Magill, “showed up to lock the place down,” adding “and apparently in the absence of a court order.“

“This is going to be Infowars’ last show, because I learned yesterday that they were going to padlock the door and kick us out last night,” Jones said during the Saturday space.

Breaking: Feds Attempting To Shut Down Infowars Tonight!
https://t.co/MOm7W2I1Hu

— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) June 1, 2024

“They are trying to shut us down,” Jones told us when reached for comment.

A CRO is typically appointed during times of significant financial stress, and is tasked with overseeing the restructuring companies in bankruptcy. On Saturday, Jones suggested that his legal team had come to terms with the judge in the bankruptcy proceedings regarding a long-term timeline for transition, and was instead surprised with an ambush by Magill to seize his studio.

“They want us shut down because in bankruptcy and what was happening we have a path with the judge to continue on for years, and the judge has signaled that. So, different groups involved in the bankruptcy that will be exposed soon have literally made a move to shut this place down and end my show,” Jones said.

DEVELOPING: @RealAlexJones GOES OFF on Biden’s feds who he says are in the process of shutting down InfoWars and seizing his studio.

“You will at the end of the day know that Alex Jones, the American patriot, defeated your evil a**!”

Warning: language. pic.twitter.com/E0YagZLdkU

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) June 1, 2024

In March, tensions came to a boil between Jones’ legal team and Magill, after a company managed and partially owned by Jones’ father, PQPR Holdings Limited, LLC asked the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas to replace Magill with a new CRO – days after accusing Magill of acting unprofessionally and in a dysfunctional manner.

PQPR has been accused of receiving millions in payments from Jones’ Free Speech Systems while families of Sandy Hook Elementary School students attempt to collect $1.5 billion worth of legal judgements against Jones and Infowars. In a court filing, PQPR slammed Magill’s decision to replace the company’s lead bankruptcy attorney with someone new, after the CRO accused attorney Ray Battaglia of hindering progress on the bankrupcy.

Jones says Magill is trying to “obviously and maliciously” entrap him, per Frei, in order to “facilitate the shutting down of Infowars.”

Steve Bannon’s advice to Alex Jones- go to the mattresses! Put the Cameras on them! pic.twitter.com/HRkdakCm9U

— Karli Bonne’ 🇺🇸 (@KarluskaP) June 1, 2024

Gen. Mike Flynn (Ret.) suggested that this was part of a play for the ruling party to stay in power and cripple opposition voices in advance of a potential NATO-instigated false flag in Europe in order to trigger Article 5 and spark war with Russia.

“They’re looking for big excuses to stay in power and shut the election down,” Flynn added.

Une confrontation brutale et imminente est désormais inévitable (souhaitable ?) !
Le général Flynn sur INFO WARS, dit que le Deep State prévoit un False Flag en Europe de l’Ouest pour rentrer en guerre avec la Russie et annuler les élections américaines de novembre.
Le monde doit… pic.twitter.com/PNmvPOFHl3

— Artémisia Collège (@ArtmisiaCollege) June 2, 2024

In February, the Sandy Hook families voted 100% in favor of a Chapter 11 plan for Jones that would see to the liquidation and redistribution of his property and cash. In December, Jones proposed a settlement that would pay Sandy Hook families at least $5.5 million per year for a decade, however the plaintiffs called the offer “woefully short.”

Last week Jones obtained approval to sell his Texas ranch for $2.8 million, which will be placed into escrow in order to pay for legal expenses.

What Went Down

According to Frei, whose summary Jones says is “an accurate breakdown,” Magill “was trying to frame Alex Jones” by allowing the Infowars host to personally pursue contracts for sponsorships.

“What apparently happened is, this guy Magill, the CRO, was trying to frame Alex Jones – saying ‘hey Alex, I’m not going to pursue signing contracts for sponsorships. But you’ve got some. Maybe you just wanna pocket that money – knowing damn well that if Alex says yes to this, well then they’ll shut down Infowars for committing criminal fraud,” said Frei. “Alex Jones is not an idiot… he knows that they tried the same schtick over and over again, and he says ‘no.’ And apparently he’s been recording a lot of this.”

“It seems that they are in fact, and it would appear to be, premia facie, unlawfully and in violation of their fiduciary duties to the creditors, trying to shut down a profitable enterprise that is Infowars, in detrement to the people who are owed money. Because they don’t care about those people… their goal was to shut Alex Jones up, and to shut Infowars down. And they’re doing this two days after Donald Trump was convicted on 34 counts of rubbish,” Frei continued, adding “It’s not a coincidence.“

“It’s 2024 people. Donald Trump is getting convicted on bogus felony indictments, and two days after that the most popular populist voice that resulted, arguably, in Donald Trump getting elected in 2016, is now getting shut down unlawfully. They’re going to be in court Monday, but this is what’s going on,” Frei concluded.

Watch:

This is an accurate breakdown of the tyranny currently taking place. Please watch and share. https://t.co/GqhdiZReLd

— Alex Jones (@RealAlexJones) June 2, 2024

Jones broke into tears on Saturday, saying “We’re going to beat these people. I’m not trying to be dramatic, but it’s been a hard fight,”adding “I’ve been targeted for abuse. I was duped by someone. Federal files in secret have claimed that I’m committing crimes. This was untrue, of course[…]This may be my final performance.”

NEW: Alex Jones breaks down in tears as he claims federal authorities are getting ready to shut down his studio.

As authorities threatened to lock the doors, Jones reportedly spent the night at the studio last night and threatened to call local police.

“I’ve been targeted for… pic.twitter.com/97KFi9oz2t

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) June 2, 2024

Jones has received an outpouring of support over his situation.

I stand with Alex Jones! pic.twitter.com/xvXxgkdLnh

— Marjorie Taylor Greene 🇺🇸 (@mtgreenee) June 2, 2024

I’ve worked for Alex for nearly a decade. Best boss I’ve ever had. One of the greatest Americans in history.

I stand with Alex Jones 🫡 pic.twitter.com/zvE5gDuvO9

— Dan Lyman (@realdanlyman) June 2, 2024

Do you stand with Alex Jones? pic.twitter.com/KcRK7uQ2WR

— Ian Jaeger (@IanJaeger29) June 2, 2024

I STAND WITH ALEX JONES. pic.twitter.com/eKRrzB4Mm2

— Liz Churchill (@liz_churchill10) June 2, 2024

To be continued…

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Two state supreme courts are considering whether workers who administered COVID-19 vaccines to minors without parental consent should be shielded by a federal law.

The North Carolina Supreme Court agreed to take up an appeal from Tanner Smith, one of the minors, and his mother, according to an order dated May 23.

Tanner, who was 14 at the time, went to a clinic at a school in his district, Guilford County Schools, in 2021 to receive a COVID-19 test. Instead, his mom and stepfather learned later, he was injected with a COVID-19 vaccine even after he told workers at the clinic he didn’t want it.

Emily Happel, Tanner’s mother, and the boy sued the district and the organization that was running the clinic, alleging battery and violations of constitutional rights.

A trial court ruled against them, though, finding that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) provides immunity to the workers.

The act, signed in 2005 by then-President George W. Bush, conveys immunity to administrators of covered vaccines except in cases of “willful misconduct.”

The North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the ruling in March, despite designating the conduct carried out by the administrators “egregious.”

“We must determine whether the scope of immunity covers the potential liability at issue in this case. We hold that it does because, as the trial court noted, the immunity provided by the act is extremely broad,” Judge April Wood wrote in the unanimous ruling.

“Plaintiffs argue that the PREP Act does not cover their claims because they do not arise because of COVID-19, but merely happen to relate to COVID-19. We would be inclined to agree if the PREP Act did not define the scope of immunity so broadly,” she added later.

In a filing to the North Carolina Supreme Court, lawyers for Ms. Happel and Tanner said that the lower court decisions “rendered totally useless N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-21.5(a1) which prohibited the very acts committed by defendants.” They also said that the trial court erred in finding that available evidence did not show the clinic workers were “acting within the scope of their employment by administering a vaccine” because that meant the court “would have required that administering vaccines without consent be a part of the employment duties of the vaccine clinic workers for a claim to stand.”

State Rep. Neal Jackson and seven other members of the state’s General Assembly said in a supporting brief that the lower court rulings wrongly overrode state law.

The PREP Act states in part that covered persons are immune from “all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual” of a covered vaccine. It defines loss as death, injury, fear of injury, or loss of or damage to property.

“Nothing in the text of the PREP Act specifically and expressly speaks to a violation of the state constitution, especially the deprivation of a parent’s right to determine the care, custody, and control of her minor child,” the members said. They added later, “If allowed to stand, however, the decision of the Court of Appeals would permit any constitutional violation and immunize all manner of ‘egregious’ conduct so long as it is done in connection with the provision of a COVID-19 vaccine.”

The Guilford County Board of Education, one of the defendants, told the state’s top court that the matter is “a straightforward application of federal statutory immunity” and not deserving of a fresh look by the court. The Old North State Medical Society, another defendant, said it was in full agreement with the county’s filing.

Vermont Case

The Vermont Supreme Court, meanwhile, heard arguments on May 28 in a case involving a 6-year-old who received a COVID-19 vaccine despite his parents explicitly stating they did not want the child to receive the shot.

The child was injected in 2021 at Academy School in Brattleboro even after Dario and Shujen Politella, the child’s parents, had informed officials they did not want the child vaccinated.

Mark Speno, superintendent of the Windham Southeast Supervisory Union, apologized and blamed the injection on a mixup with name tags.

Mr. and Mrs. Politella removed their child from the school and sued, alleging negligence, battery, and fraud.

The Vermont Superior Court dismissed the suit, finding that they needed to bring litigation in federal court under the PREP Act’s willful misconduct immunity exemption.

Lawyers for the family in a brief pointed to a U.S. appeals court ruling from 2023 that found defendants failed to show the PREP Act covered their actions and directed the case back to state court. “That should happen here,” the lawyers said.

Ronald Ferrara, one of the attorneys, told justices during oral arguments that the failure of school staff to listen to the parents is “really the cause of harm in this case,” the Vermont Digger reported. He said that “the vaccine has absolutely nothing to do with it.”

While the PREP Act immunity appears broad, disallowing the suit due to the law “create[s] some bad public policy because this kind of mistake can be repeated without ever having any judicial review,” he added later.

Vermont lawyers said that the lower court rulings were correct.

“The weight of authority clearly comes down in favor of the defendants having immunity in this case, and the lack of consent is causally related to the administration of the ‘countermeasure’ by covered individuals, therefore immunity applies,” David McLean, a state attorney, told the justices.

Aaron Siri, the managing partner of Siri & Glimstad LLP, who represents plaintiffs in legal action challenging the PREP Act’s compensation scheme, reviewed the cases.

“Anyone that injects a child against the child’s wishes or without parental consent,“ Mr. Siri told The Epoch Times in an email, ”should be criminally prosecuted and treated like any other criminal that engages in battery.”

Authored by Kalev Leetaru via RealClearPolitics,

AI-powered image generators were back in the news earlier this year, this time for their propensity to create historically inaccurate and ethically questionable imagery. These recent missteps reinforced that, far from being the independent thinking machines of science fiction, AI models merely mimic what they’ve seen on the web, and the heavy hand of their creators artificially steers them toward certain kinds of representations. What can we learn from how OpenAI’s image generator created a series of images about Democratic and Republican causes and voters last December?

OpenAI’s ChatGPT 4 service, with its built-in image generator DALL-E, was asked to create an image representative of the Democratic Party (shown below). Asked to explain the image and its underlying details, ChatGPT explained that the scene is set in a “bustling urban environment [that] symbolizes progress and innovation . . . cities are often seen as hubs of cultural diversity and technological advancement, aligning with the Democratic Party’s focus on forward-thinking policies and modernization.” The image, ChatGPT continued, “features a diverse group of individuals of various ages, ethnicities, and genders. This diversity represents inclusivity and unity, key values of the Democratic Party,” along with the themes of “social justice, civil rights, and addressing climate change.”

In contrast, the image below shows the Republican Party, with ChatGPT explaining that “the serene rural setting represents traditional values and a connection to the land . . . associated with the Republican Party’s emphasis on rural communities and agricultural interests, highlighting a respect for tradition and simplicity,” and notes the “stereotype that the party only represents a specific segment of the population” and that the “core principles of the Republican Party, focu[s] on conservative fiscal policies, a robust approach to national security, and the protection of personal liberties.”

Asked to create an image of “liberal and progressive values,” ChatGPT explains that they include a “vibrant urban environment,” “the inclusivity and openness of liberal ideology,” “equitable social policies, environmental care, and the advancement of civil rights . . . environmental stewardship and technological progress . . . hope, diversity, and the pursuit of a more equitable and sustainable future.”

Asked to represent “conservative and traditional values,” ChatGPT summarizes its image as capturing “heritage and simpler times . . . conservative values emphasiz[e] a return to traditional lifestyles and a slower, more grounded way of life . . . farming, community gatherings, and family events . . . maintaining established social norms and cultural heritage . . . reverence for history and the foundations of society . . . stability and order . . . importance of upholding long-established societal norms . . . [and] resisting rapid change.”

What does a Democratic voter look like? According to ChatGPT, the “key values” of Democratic voters are “diversity, education, technology, inclusivity, and a focus on environmental and social issues,” with the image centering on “a young African American woman in professional attire and a Hispanic man in casual attire. The woman’s professional attire and the book and digital tablet she holds symbolize the Democratic values of progressive ideals, education, and technological advancement. The man’s casual attire represents inclusivity and grassroots activism.”

A Republican voter emphasizes “patriotism, family values, and a focus on local and national issues,” with the image centering on a “middle-aged Caucasian man in a business suit and a Caucasian woman in a smart casual dress. The man’s business suit symbolizes professionalism and traditional values, while the woman’s attire embodies family values and community involvement.” The setting “focus[es] on suburban voters and highlights the importance of housing and local issues in the Republican platform,” with the flag representing “patriotism, a core value often associated with the Republican party.”

ChatGPT appeared incapable of creating imagery critical of electric vehicles, with the following image showing its representation of a “voter campaign criticizing clean energy due to the lack of energy storage technology, the limited range of electric vehicles, the expensiveness of it.”

Its image for a campaign to “promote continued fossil fuel use” similarly appears to be an ad for precisely the opposite.

Told explicitly to “criticize clean energy due to the challenges and complexities,” ChatGPT produces an image that does precisely the opposite, featuring a cluster of windmills bursting through thick pollution to lead the way to a brighter future.

ChatGPT encounters no such problems promoting clean energy, even going so far as to emphasize that the image features a “diverse group of people” that shows “clean energy is accessible and beneficial for all segments of society.”

Similarly, asked to promote careers that don’t require higher education, such as the trades, ChatGPT steadfastly features an image of a graduate at its center.

Its image for a campaign to “promote gun ownership” yields a dystopian view of a fenced-in classroom, militarized guards, and unsafe gun handling, complete with the instructor’s finger on the trigger.

At the same time, the future of image generators as campaign-ideation tools is clear. For topics that Silicon Valley views as less politically sensitive, the full potential of the models is clear. For example, an image for a campaign to promote fast affordable fashion looks like this:

And a campaign criticizing it:

Here’s a campaign poster promoting an incumbent and his policies as a tremendous success:

And here’s one condemning him as an abject failure whose policies are ruining the nation:

In the end, AI image generators remind us of the enormous potential of AI for political campaigning, both in ideation and in rapid mass production of highly customized (and potentially individually tailored) imagery. At the same time, the current models’ refusal to produce imagery on certain topics, and the stereotypical (and partisan) representations of Democrats and Republicans that they have internalized in their code reminds us of Silicon Valley’s enduring biases.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross Domestic Income (GDI) are two measures of the same thing. But the difference is now over two percentage points, the third largest in history.

GDP and GDI data from BEA, calculation and chart by Mish

Discrepancy Notes

• When GDP is greater than GDI the numbers are positive. When GDI is greater than GDP the numbers are negative.

• Last quarter the discrepancy was 2.3 percentage points and this quarter 2.2 percentage points. Only twice in history has the discrepancy been higher.

• The average discrepancy is +0.5. This suggests a tendency to overstate GDP relative to GDI.

• There is no discernable pattern other than a tendency to revert to the mean, eventually, with long trends in one direction or the other.

Real GDP and GDI in Billions of Dollars

Chart Notes

• Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross Domestic Income (GDI) are two measures of the same thing. Product produced should match sales and income. They do over time, but this is a large ongoing discrepancy.
• Real Final Sales is the bottom line estimate of GDP. The difference between GDP and Real Final Sales is inventory adjustment which nets to zero over time.
• Real means Inflation adjusted using the GDP deflator as calculated by the BEA as the adjustment.

In dollar terms, the discrepancy is the largest ever. However, percentage comparisons are a better measure which is why I created a new chart today to show the percentage point differences.

Reversion to the Mean

There is a strong tendency to revery to the mean. However, reversion to the mean does not imply GDP will fall. GDI could overshoot to catch up.

However, based on where the economy is right now, I would expect GDI to drop with GDP dropping more on a relative basis.

More Soft Economic Data, Q1 GDP Revised Lower, Q4 GDI Significantly Lower

Earlier today, I reported More Soft Economic Data, Q1 GDP Revised Lower, Q4 GDI Significantly Lower

Significant Negative Revisions

• 2024 Q1 GDP went from 1.6 percent to 1.3 percent.

• Based on updated data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages program, Wages and salaries are now estimated to have increased $58.5 billion in the fourth quarter, a downward revision of $73.0 billion.

• Real gross domestic income is now estimated to have increased 3.6 percent in the fourth quarter, a downward revision of 1.2 percentage points from the previously published estimate of 4.8 percent.

Regarding the first bullet point, I calculated revised GDP at 1.2509 percent which the BEA rounded to 1.3.

Is GDP or GDI a Better Measure?

The Philadelphia Fed prefers GDI over GDP but it prefers a blend (not an average) which it calls GDPplus even more. Note that GDPE = GDP and GDPI = GDI in the discussion below.

The GDPplus Working Paper is mostly geekish math, but there are some readable snips.

Aggregate real output is surely the most fundamental and important concept in macroeconomic theory. Surprisingly, however, significant uncertainty still surrounds its measurement. In the U.S., in particular, two often-divergent GDP estimates exist, a widely-used
expenditure-side version, GDPE [GDP], and a much less widely-used income-side version, GDPI [GDI].

Nalewaik (2010) and Fixler and Nalewaik (2009) make clear that, at the very least, GDPI deserves serious attention and may even have properties in certain respects superior to those of GDPE. That is, if forced to choose between GDPE and GDPI , a surprisingly strong case exists for GDPI . But of course one is not forced to choose between GDPE and GDPI , and a GDP estimate based on both GDPE and GDPI may be superior to either one alone. In this paper we propose and implement a framework for obtaining such a blended estimate.

Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com,

On Friday, the Israeli military said it had expanded its operations to the central area of Rafah. Before the assault on the city, Rafah served as a refuge for over one million displaced Palestinians.

The Associated Press reports that the Israeli military confirmed its forces were now fighting throughout most of Rafah. President Joe Biden claimed that if Israel attacked the population centers in the city without a plan for the civilians living there, it would cross his “red line.”

However, as Israeli troops continue to push into the city, killing hundreds in the process and forcing over one million to flee, Biden administration officials have asserted that Tel Aviv has not crossed the red line.  After Israel used a US bomb to kill 45 people living in a tent camp in Rafah, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said, “As a result of this strike on Sunday, I have no policy changes to speak to.”

The assault on Rafah has pushed the overall death toll to over 36,000, including according to Gaza’s health ministry tens of thousands of women and children. The IDF has also sustained losses in Rafah, increasing the number of soldiers killed to 289 since October 7.

As Israeli forces are pushing deeper into Rafah, the IDF announced the end of weeks of operations in the Jabalia refugee camp, located in northern Gaza. Tel Aviv initially devastated the city in the early months of the war on Gaza, but its forces returned in May. During the operations, the IDF dropped over 200 bombs.

The attacks on Jabalia and Rafah have caused aid deliveries into Gaza to plummet. Trucks crossing into the Strip in May decreased by two-thirds. This week, two Biden administration officials resigned in part because of the Israeli imposed restrictions on aid deliveries into Gaza and the lack of a response from the White House.

A letter signed by 19 aid agencies released on Tuesday warned that the lack of aid was increasing the risk of death due to starvation and disease.

As Israeli attacks intensify on Rafah, the unpredictable trickle of aid into Gaza has created a mirage of improved access while the humanitarian response is in reality on the verge of collapse, it says. “Aid agencies now fear an acceleration in deaths from starvation, disease and denied medical assistance.”

Meanwhile an Al Jazeera investigation says that 32% of the Gaza Strip has been made uninhabitable:

Israel has taken over 32% of Gaza’s area by “systematically demolishing neighbourhoods” to create a buffer zone and a central axis dividing it, according to Al Jazeera’s Sanad Verification Agency https://t.co/bigyjBsO1f pic.twitter.com/otCCakt6y3

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) May 31, 2024

While many are on the brink of death, Tel Aviv says it will not sign on to an agreement that would bring the war to a close and Israeli hostages freed. On Thursday, Hamas officials said the group was willing to come to a “complete agreement” that ends the conflict and frees the hostages. On Friday, the Israeli government told the families of the hostages that Tel Aviv was unwilling to end the conflict in exchange for the release of their relatives.

A shocking video has exploded across social media showing a man stabbing anti-Islam activist and politician, 59-year-old Michael Stürzenberger, during a campaign event in Mannheim.

As Remix News’ John Cody reports, the bloody and chaotic video shows the man running amok among campaign staff, who are wearing blue jackets, while the man stabs any victim in his sight.

The campaign workers scramble to stop the man, who also stabbed a police officer in the neck.

Embedding the video has been blocked on X (click image for link):

News reports indicate that the suspect has already been shot and killed by police, although the suspect’s death has not been confirmed by all news outlets. In one frame of the video, the man can clearly be seen plunging his knife into the neck of a police officer.

Police say the victim was campaigning and providing “educational information” in the lead-up to the attack in the city square.

Stürzenberger is an anti-Islamic political activist who is a member of the Citizens’ Movement Pax Europa, who earlier served in the Munich Christian Socialist Union (CSU) and as the chairman of the Freedom party, a small party which is now dissolved. He publishes an anti-Islamic blog.

He is well known for producing a citizens’ petition against the construction of a mosque in Munich. He was convicted for “insulting an officer” and “denigration of religious teachings.”

He has also been under surveillance in the past, with the Bavarian State Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) listing Stürzenberger in its report related to “Islamophobia relevant to the Protection of the Constitution.”

The stabbing incident comes just one week before EU parliament elections.

Authored by Amie Dahnke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Childhood attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is becoming increasingly common, with a new study revealing that one in nine American kids have been diagnosed with the condition—equating to 7.1 million children.

Many more children in the U.S. have been diagnosed with ADHD recently. In 2022, there were 1 million more cases compared to 2016, potentially fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic’s effect on children’s mental health and virtual schooling putting symptoms on display.

Pandemic Stressors May Have Fueled Rise in ADHD

The research article, published in the Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, provided insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic potentially influenced ADHD diagnoses. The higher prevalence could reflect “a generally increasing awareness of and pursuit of care for ADHD and/or a reflection of poor mental health among children during the COVID-19 pandemic,” the researchers wrote.

Previous studies have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on the mental and social well-being of young people, who experienced stressors such as illness and death in the family and community, changes in parents’ work habits, disruptions in school life, decreased social interaction, and increased fear and uncertainty. A 2022 study found that these pandemic-related stressors “can increase symptoms of inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity.”

The COVID-19 pandemic likely helped encourage an increase in diagnoses, as previously unobserved ADHD symptoms were front and center in households when children attended school virtually, according to the new study.

Conversely, during the pandemic, schools faced greater challenges in providing support for those students, “may have led more parents to seek diagnoses to ensure access to support for their child,” the research team wrote.

What It Takes for a Child to Be Diagnosed

ADHD is one of the most common developmental conditions affecting children in the U.S. In the three-year span before the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly one in 10 children had received a diagnosis. To be diagnosed with the condition, a child must exhibit at least six symptoms of either inattention or hyperactivity-impulsivity for at least six months.

The symptoms must be severe enough to be “maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level” or negatively impact social, academic, and occupational activities, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

Common symptoms of inattention include difficulty maintaining attention during tasks or play, not following instructions, often losing items required for an activity or task (like a pencil for homework), or being forgetful in daily activities.

Examples of hyperactivity include fidgeting with hands or feet, leaving one’s seat in the classroom or situations where they’re expected to remain seated, or having difficulty playing quietly. Examples of impulsivity include difficulty waiting for their turn or often interrupting others.

ADHD Gender Gap Narrows

In the U.S., more boys than girls have typically been diagnosed with ADHD, but new data shows that the gap between the two sexes is narrowing. Before 2022, the boy-to-girl diagnosis ratio was 2:1, while in 2022, it dropped slightly to 1.8:1, according to the study.

Among children aged 3 to 17 with ADHD, 41.9 percent had mild cases, 45.3 percent moderate, and 12.8 percent severe. Certain factors were linked to more severe ADHD: being aged 6-11 (vs. adolescents), living in households with lower education or income levels, and having a co-occurring mental/behavioral/developmental disorder.

More white American children are diagnosed with ADHD than minority children, though the research team noted that “with increased awareness, such gaps in diagnoses have been narrowing or closing.”

Children with public health insurance had the highest prevalence levels, as did children whose caregivers’ highest level of education was high school.

ADHD in children was most common in the Northeast, Midwest, and South, compared to children living in the West.

The report notes that the prevalence of ADHD in children is higher in the United States than in other countries. The reason “may be the result of variation in availability of clinicians trained to diagnose and manage ADHD, state and local policies, and regional differences in demographic characteristics,” the research team wrote. Future research could determine the differences between clinical guidelines and practices across countries.