Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

In recent articles I’ve been discussing the ways in which the political left exploits the principles of a society as a shield to destroy that society. In other words, if a nation has a certain historic regard for freedom, they will try to destroy that nation while under the protection of those freedoms. If you point out what they’re doing and try to stop them, they then argue that you are “violating your own principles,” the same principles which they are trying to tear down.

It’s a form of psychological warfare designed to create a Catch-22:

• If the target population sits back and does nothing in the face of the cultural onslaught, their heritage and their beliefs are systematically dismantled.

• If people take action to disrupt the saboteurs, they are accused of being hypocrites who don’t actually value the freedoms they claim to value.

However, this little mind game relies on a certain false relationship. It requires that the population under attack continues to see the saboteurs as integral members of that society with the same freedoms and the same protections. They are Americans just like us, and therefore we have to treat them merely as citizens in disagreement even though they would like nothing better than to see our culture burn.

Globalists and woke leftists often openly boast about their agenda to deconstruct western society and replace it with their own ideological cult. They are not simply in disagreement, they have declared war.

They’ve been treating conservatives and patriots as the enemy for quite some time, while we continue to treat them as fellow citizens. They tried to erase all of our freedoms permanently during the covid panic (which they perpetuated through false information). They tried to create a government apparatus working with social media corporations for mass censorship. They tried to create punishments for people who spoke against the establishment narrative. They supported vaccine mandates that would have enslaved Americans for years to come. They almost got what they wanted, too.

They then twisted the events of the Jan 6th protests and declared war on us again. They fired rubber bullets and tear gas into the crowds, got a violent response, and then acted as if the reaction was an “insurrection.”

They have targeted our children with political and sexual indoctrination in an effort to groom them into willing servants to the woke cause. They have saturated our media from commercials to movies with an endless stream of DEI propaganda, all while claiming WE are “terrorists” because we refuse to spend our money on woke products.

When someone is actively at war with you they are no longer a part of your community or tribe.  They can’t claim to be Americans while also planning to undermine everything that makes America what it is. When someone is working tirelessly to destroy the constitutional principles you hold dear, they don’t get to use those same freedoms as a buffer against retaliation.

An enemy in war is meant to be defeated; their “rights” are secondary to this goal.

Again, this is not a political disagreement. This is not a friendly debate among countrymen with the best of intentions. This is not a cultural speed bump on the way to mutual benefit. This division is irreparable. It cannot be salvaged. This is about survival. THIS IS WAR.

This is why I smiled when I read the story of Michael Cassidy, a former US Navy fighter pilot who destroyed a satanic statue of Baphomet on display at the Iowa State Capitol Building.

The political left is in an uproar on social media, and as expected they argue that this incident is proof that conservatives are “authoritarians” hellbent on dictatorship. They say the statue has a constitutional right to be there if any other religious symbols are allowed to be there – But does this really matter to the situation?

My personal feelings about organized religion are complicated, but I still recognize the replacement tactics being used by the political left to undermine the west; they have been clearly targeting Christianity for many years. The satanic statue in Iowa may or may not represent satanism and evil to the people who paid to have it placed in the capitol, but it does represent their ongoing effort to wear down American foundations using any tool they can find.

Here are the reasons why what Cassidy did is absolutely acceptable under our current political conditions, even in the face of constitutional questions…

1) Do we really even live in a “constitutional society” anymore?  Or does the 1st Amendment only apply when it’s convenient to leftists?  As mentioned above, the political left and their allies have been working overtime to destroy freedom of speech through collusion between governments, corporate media and Big Tech.  Mass censorship was the norm during covid and leftists defended it vigorously. These people are in no position to use the 1st Amendment as a tent pole for their ideological games. Sorry, but that ship has sailed; they have lost the privilege of wrapping themselves in the flag.

2) The political left has been aggressively attempting to demolish historic monuments and statues of Founding Fathers in an effort to erase our connections to the past.  In 2021 they even removed a nearly 200-year-old statue of Thomas Jefferson from the New York City Hall building on the grounds that it was a “symbol of racism.” What goes around comes around.  They tear down our statues, now we tear down their statues.

3) Michael Cassidy is not a government representative, just as most of us are not government representatives. Leftists seem to operate under the false assumption that constitutional rules are meant to restrict public behavior. They are not. They are meant to restrict the government.

The Iowa state government didn’t tear that satanic statue down (unlike the New York City government that removed Thomas Jefferson). Rather, it was just a man, a regular citizen.

This is not a 1st Amendment issue because Michael Cassidy is not bound by the 1st Amendment in this situation. He might be guilty of vandalism under the law, just like thousands of woke activists across the country are guilty of vandalism for destroying monuments and government buildings, but that is all.  This is not a legal battle, this is war.

4) Most conservatives are not even arguing the matter on 1st Amendment grounds. Instead, they argue the matter on moral grounds. Is it right to allow satanic symbols to stand in our institutions of law and institutions of heritage? Symbols that represent moral relativism, narcissism, chaos and psychopathy? Is it right to look the other way while a subversive activist movement works to demolish everything we hold dear?

5) Does every belief system or ideology deserve a place of “equality” within our society? Every death cult? Every terrorist or criminal philosophy? Are they ALL entitled to statues and monuments on public property? Or, is there a line? Should there be statues of Hitler, Stalin and Mao in the halls of Congress? Should there be a Pol Pot bust on the floor of the Senate? Should Charles Manson get his face on Mount Rushmore because of the 1st Amendment?  There is such a thing as standards, but leftists think that when it comes to their ideological goals, there are no standards.

Never before in the history of the US has there been a time when a statue of Baphomet in a state government building would have been treated as acceptable, even under constitutional law. Suddenly, in the past decade we’re supposed to treat these destructive symbols as equal to other religions and give them places of reverence on public grounds? I think not.

6) Satanists like to play games with legal categorization when it suits them. When they want to argue for their presence in public schools they say they are NOT a religion and are merely a philosophical club. When they want 1st Amendment protections they claim they are a religion.  If these groups are going to refuse to identify what they are in finality, then they should be restricted from access to public institutions until they make up their minds and the courts can establish a fair precedence.

7) We have to ask ourselves what really defines freedom? Does freedom mean being able to do whatever you want whenever you want without being subject to scrutiny or skepticism? Does freedom extend to hedonism at the expense of morality, truth, responsibility and order? Because this is what the political left is demanding and it’s leading to the self immolation of civilization.

I think we have allowed them to indulge themselves for far too long, to the point that they have become arrogant and presume themselves untouchable. They laugh at us because we play by a certain set of rules by which they see no reason to abide. We engage in a battle of ideas and facts while they go scorched Earth, rigging the fight using central government and corporate power to their advantage.

Maybe we stop playing by these rules? Maybe every time they try to tear down our statues and symbols, we tear down their symbols until there’s nothing left of them? Maybe we remove the enemy that has declared war on us, and then continue on with life as we did before?  Would the populace really miss the antics of woke activists, or would they applaud if these people were shipped off to an island somewhere?

If they hate the cultural roots of this country so much then they can always leave. They choose not to, and instead scheme to upend everything we used to stand for. So no, I shed no tears for the progressives or the satanists (almost the same thing at this point) or the globalists when their mocking statues are cut in half. After years of trespasses they are finally facing some blowback. As the leftists like to say, freedom of speech does not guarantee freedom from consequences.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

Authored by Frank Miele via RealClear Wire,

For the last year, ever since Donald Trump announced his run for a second non-consecutive term as president, the political pundits have told each other that “no one is paying attention.”

They did that for one reason only – because Trump has been consistently ahead in the polls, and the pundits didn’t want to believe that voters might actually send Trump back to the White House. If voters were taking his candidacy seriously, the theory goes, Trump would lose in a landslide.

Remember, the overwhelming majority of the elites who provide the commentary and analysis of politics are either far-left propagandists or proponents of the “governing coalition” theory that sees compromise as the mechanism by which things get done, which presupposes that getting things done is by definition better than fighting for things you believe in.

These elites think they know more than you do, and since they believe Trump is an autocrat, a dictator, an evil self-obsessed criminal – take your pick – then they have to believe you aren’t paying attention because despite all their negative commentary, you the voters still want Trump back as president.

Most worrisome to them, it seems you want Trump more today than you did on Nov. 15, 2022, when he announced his re-election bid. Just look at the Republican primary polls recorded at RealClearPolitics. In the Harvard-Harris poll conducted on Nov. 16-17, 2022, Trump had a 46%-28% lead over Gov. Ron DeSantis, his nearest competitor. In a couple of polls in the following three months, DeSantis came within a point or two of Trump, but that was his high-water mark. As soon as the Democratic establishment launched their first indictment against Trump in March 2023, the former president strengthened his lead over DeSantis to 50%-24% in the Harvard-Harris poll of March 22-23. Since then, with each succeeding indictment, Trump has risen higher and higher. In the last Harvard-Harris poll in November 2023, Trump led DeSantis by 58 points. Virtually every poll in the last three months has Trump ahead by 40 to 50 points.

All along, the talking heads on MSNBC and CNN persisted in claiming that Trump is beating DeSantis and Nikki Haley because voters aren’t yet paying attention. But this isn’t the 1980s any more. We have something called the Internet, with 24/7 news coverage and social media trying to convince the world that all conservatives like Trump are hatemongers. It’s impossible for anyone who is interested in politics not to have been paying attention.

In other words, anyone who hasn’t been paying attention up until now will never pay attention. And by the way, the Iowa caucuses are now less than 30 days away. The whole argument has fallen apart.

What the talking heads don’t want to admit is that voters have been paying attention for months, and they are sending a message to the elites that they will make up their own minds, thank you very much. And that goes for blacks, Hispanics, and young voters, too – not just MAGA Republicans. Polls show Trump gaining support in all those demographics, and either tied with President Biden or ahead of him nationally.

What must terrify them even more is the latest report from Morning Consult and Bloomberg that in the key battleground states that will determine the winner in 2024, Trump has a commanding lead of 5 points overall and as much as 9 points in North Carolina.

So what are voters paying attention to? As the polls show, they have been paying attention to the persecution of Donald Trump by his political opponents, and they don’t like it. They are paying attention to the variety of third-party candidates who have said they will run in 2024, and when those candidates are included in polls, Trump’s lead in battleground states increases from 5 points to 7. They are paying attention to the blossoming debt crisis that Congress and Biden have shown no interest in addressing. They are paying attention to the border, where millions of military-age males have been arriving from Africa, the Middle East, and across the world, some on the terrorism watch list. They are paying attention to the unaffordability of housing, whether rental or purchased, and they are paying attention to their own growing credit card balances and their shriveled savings accounts. They are paying attention to those Ivy League college presidents who think threats of genocide are only a problem if they are carried out.

Sorry, Democrats. Sorry, Joe Biden. Sorry, congressional dead weights of both parties. Sorry, elites and talking heads. We have been paying attention, and we are coming for you. You can’t hide behind your fake narrative any longer. The truth has set us free.

“Buy now, pay later” (BNPL) loans surged in popularity during Black Friday and Cyber Monday in late November. As Christmas is less than a week away, Walmart shoppers have been greeted with a new BNPL payment at the checkout line. The increased use of BNPL is incredibly problematic for consumers with insurmountable credit card debt and depleted savings. 

Affirm Holdings announced Tuesday that its BNPL service has been expanded to self-checkout kiosks at 4,500 Walmart stores nationwide. Customers can purchase electronics, apparel, toys, and many more items (except groceries) by spreading payments out from three months to 24 months. 

“Recent Affirm research revealed that more than half of Americans (54%) are looking for retailers to offer a buy now, pay later option at checkout. Moreover, we’ve found that 76% of consumers would either delay or not make a purchase without Affirm,” said Pat Suh, Affirm’s SVP of Revenue.

Suh continued, “Expanding our partnership with Walmart and bringing Affirm’s transparent monthly pay-over-time options to their self-checkout kiosks in the US will help even more consumers increase their purchasing power during the holiday shopping season and beyond.” 

A number of government agencies and even the central bank of central banks (Bank for International Settlements) have warned about the BNPL craze. 

Last month, the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) – the powerful federal banking regulator – sounded the alarm over increased usage of BNPL. 

OCC warned about the overuse and poor understanding of the BNPL payment structure that could lead to disastrous outcomes for consumers if payments are missed. 

A report published earlier this month by the Bank for International Settlements said BNPL is mainly being used by young adults, particularly those with low education and maxed-out credit cards.

Other major retailers might follow Walmart’s lead. It’s never a good sign when retailers expand the purchasing power of broke consumers. 

Authored by Beth Brelje via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The State of Pennsylvania terminated its contract earlier this month with a firm tasked with modernizing its voter registration system, citing the contractor’s inability to adequately address issues with the system.

The state had contracted KNOWiNK, an election software company, to replace the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE) system, which manages the voter registration information of more than 8 million Pennsylvania voters. The SURE system stores the data of every legitimate, eligible voter, but there were problems with the system, according to an election official.

The Pennsylvania State Department terminated the contract on Dec. 4, stating in a letter sent to members of the Pennsylvania County Board of Elections that KNOWiNK would not adequately address “identified deficiencies” in the new SUREVote system meant to replace the current software.

Jonathan Marks, Pennsylvania’s deputy secretary for elections and commissions, sent the letter.

Questions about the progress of improving the SURE system have routinely come up in Senate hearings and in the halls of the state capitol. The letter verified the work was behind schedule. It described how over the course of nine months the State Department worked with KNOWiNK, trying to correct the course of the project, “including procuring expert mediation and project management services, bringing on the expertise of a chief modernization officer, and collaborating with our vendor to address Pennsylvania’s contractual project standards,” the letter reads.

“This administration has made the successful completion and implementation of the SUREVote System a priority … Unfortunately, the Department has concluded that the vendor will not meet … timelines and contractual standards,” the letter states.

The State Department said it would find another vendor to do the work. It will take time to write and approve a new request for proposals, vet, and hire a new vendor.

In his letter, Mr. Marks stressed several times that the decision to end the contract would not affect the 2024 election.

But former State Rep. Frank Ryan is questioning the move. A longtime certified public accountant, Mr. Ryan left his seat in the Pennsylvania House last year specifically to work on election security, believing he could have a bigger effect on public policy outside the legislature than from within.

“If I were chair of an audit committee, I’d ask, is there an incentive on the part of the Democratic Party to kill the changes to the SURE System until they get to the next presidential election? Because [President Joe] Biden is behind in the polls with [former President] Donald Trump in 2024. I can’t make that allegation because we don’t have enough data, but it would be a hypothesis that I would want to run down.”

The push to overhaul the SURE System came after a scathing report released in December 2019 by Pennsylvania’s then-Auditor General Eugene DePasquale, who identified internal control weaknesses in the SURE System related to input and maintenance of voter records. The audit revealed examples of potential inaccuracies, which the report said should be sent to counties to be investigated.

The report states that the State Department refused to cooperate during its investigation and that it denied auditors access to critical documents or excessively redacted documents, leaving the Auditor General’s Office unable to fully achieve three of the eight objectives it had been assigned.

The auditor, according to the report, was unable to assess the accuracy of the records maintained in the system, was unable to review security protocols of the system, and was unable to review the external controls and methodology for external audits.

The 2019 audit also identified potential needed areas of improvement related to computer security, information technology, general controls, and interference controls that it felt it could not mention in a publicly available report.

The audit found issues that it specifically excluded from the report “because of the sensitive nature of this information due to the security concerns over the commonwealth’s critical elections infrastructure. These conditions and our recommendations have been included in a separate, confidential communication, to [State Department] management,” the 2019 report reads.

The report made 50 recommendations to strengthen State Department policies, including addressing duplicate voter records and records of potentially deceased voters on the voter rolls.

Because of everything revealed in the report, the auditor general was “unable to establish with any degree of reasonable assurance that the SURE System is secure and that Pennsylvania voter registration records are complete, accurate, and in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and related guidelines.”

This SURE System has been in continuous use since the report and is slated for use in again in 2024.

“At the beginning of this administration, several months ago, we decided to utilize our tested, accurate and safe legacy system for the upcoming 2024 election,” Mr. Marks’s Dec. 4 letter reads.

$3 Million Spent

The contract to build the SUREVote system to replace the SURE System had an unconventional beginning. The state signed a nearly $10 million contract with South Dakota-based software company BPro. The 603-page contract signed on Dec. 28, 2020, was to be valid through December 2024. But 42 days later, BPro announced publicly that it had been purchased by KNOWiNK. The Department of State filed an emergency procurement on Feb. 2, 2021, requesting $3 million more for KNOWiNK to fulfill the BPro contract.

“BPro did not let the Dept. of State know about the acquisition until mid-December, after the agency contract was going through the signature process,” the request, signed by Mr. Marks, reads. “Since BPro is implementing a new system for our Elections Bureau, it is highly time sensitive. It is the desire of the Department to have the deliverables started ASAP, and we would like to create the Emergency Purchase Order with KNOWiNK to pay for deliverables and monthly expenses until the new Agency Contract is in place.”

The request for additional money was denied.

Pennsylvania has made payments totaling more than $3.6 million to BPro and KNOWiNK since Feb. 2021, payment records from the Pennsylvania Treasury show.

KNOWiNK did not respond to a request for comment.

The company offers states and counties a selection of election-related software, including TotalVote, described on the KNOWiNK website as a centralized voter registration and election management system that securely captures all election information.

It also provides ePulse, which monitors polling places on Election Day, tracking voter wait times and turnout. Another product KNOWiNK offers is Poll Pad, a set of tablets that replace the poll books voters sign at polling places.

“Poll Pad has replaced the outdated and inefficient paper model that is often the cause of long lines at the polls and inefficient election record keeping,” the KNOWiNK website reads.

The company is working in 36 states and Washington, D.C.

Your holiday present from Comcast has arrived, in the form of a massive data breach that has compromised the personal information of nearly 36 million customers. Comcast released a statement on Monday this week stating that a “recent data security incident” occurred involving Citrix software.

“On October 10, 2023, Citrix announced a vulnerability in software used by Xfinity and thousands of other companies worldwide,” Comcast wrote.

“Citrix issued additional mitigation guidance on October 23, 2023. Xfinity promptly patched and mitigated the Citrix vulnerability within its systems. However, during a routine cybersecurity exercise on October 25, Xfinity discovered suspicious activity and subsequently determined that between October 16 and October 19, 2023, there was unauthorized access to its internal systems that was concluded to be a result of this vulnerability.”

“Xfinity notified federal law enforcement and initiated an investigation into the nature and scope of the incident. On November 16, Xfinity determined that information was likely acquired,” the release said.

“After additional review of the affected systems and data, Xfinity concluded on December 6, 2023, that the customer information in scope included usernames and hashed passwords; for some customers, other information may also have been included, such as names, contact information, last four digits of social security numbers, dates of birth and/or secret questions and answers.”

So, everything?

Conveniently not included in the release but disclosed in follow up reporting by PhillyBurbs.com was the fact that over 35.8 million customers were affected by the breach, according to a report with Maine’s Attorney General. 

Comcast has said it is requiring all of its customers to reset their passwords and that it is encouraging its users to use 2FA in the future. 

“Xfinity advises customers not to re-use passwords across multiple accounts, the company is recommending that customers change passwords for other accounts for which they use the same username and password or security question,” the release said.

Just in case you didn’t have anything to do heading into the holidays…

Authored by Roberto Ledezma via The Mises Institute,

Capitalism, defined as a form of social organization in which there are means of production such as private property and wage labor, is not the moral principle upon which liberalism is based.

The reason for this is that there are nonliberal scenarios that capitalism, as a moral principle, allows for – for example: slavery, sexism, racism, and various forms of violence.

However, semantic compatibility does not imply a causal relationship between such variables.

In this brief text, I will explain why certain anticapitalist arguments have fallacious inferences, showing the semantic relationships between different concepts that constitute the political economy and other similar disciplines.

Fallacious Inferences and False Statements

Sound arguments are those that contain only true statements and valid inferences. On the other hand, fallacious arguments are those that, regardless of the truth value of their statements, have invalid inferences. An example of such a scenario is as follows:

Premise 1: All married people are not single.

Premise 2: No single person is married.

Conclusion: Socialism is a form of social organization.

In this example, all the statements are analytical and, therefore, true. However, the conclusion is an invalid inference since its meaning is not contained in the meaning of the premises. Although both its premises and its conclusion are true statements, it is not a sound argument as it contains an invalid inference.

The definitions previously used do not indicate the impossibility of valid arguments about causal relationships. Valid arguments about causal relationships can exist if their premises indicate the existence of a certain causal relationship and if their conclusions are inferences whose meaning is contained within the meaning of their premises. An example of this would be:

Premise 1: All types of A are a necessary cause of B.

Premise 2: X is a type of A.

Conclusion: X is a necessary cause of B.

Therefore, it is indeed possible for valid arguments to exist concerning causal relationships. Some arguments with invalid inferences can become valid when one or more premises are added to them. As will be demonstrated in the following sections, many fallacious arguments exhibit structures in which conclusions are erroneously regarded as necessary or sufficient causes, even if their premises and conclusions are contradictory.

Some Fallacious Arguments against Capitalism

As explained in the previous section, fallacious arguments can contain true premises or conclusions.

The use of certain technical terms or complex mathematical operations does not mean that a certain argument is sound or, at the very least, valid.

Here are some examples of fallacious arguments:

• From its inception, capitalism was riddled with racism, sexism, and slavery. Therefore, as long as there is capitalism, racism, sexism, and slavery will always exist.

• The socially necessary labor time required for the production of a particular commodity determines its exchange value. Capitalists appropriate a portion of the value created by their workers. Therefore, capitalists are stealing from their workers.

• There are poor countries that are capitalist. Therefore, free markets do not serve to alleviate poverty.

Is Capitalism a Form of Theft?

As mentioned at the outset, the definition of capitalism used here is compatible with slavery and violence. However, this does not mean that it is the only possible scenario. Semantically, there can be situations in which different individuals, in the absence of coercion and violence, enter into agreements for specific services at predetermined prices within defined timeframes.

Only if such an agreement is breached would the employer be stealing from the employee through such an employment relationship. An example of this scenario would be if there is a labor contract between individual A and individual B that establishes the payment of $200 per day for the provision of a specific service for five hours. Then, individual A does not provide that amount of money to individual B because he wants individual A to work another two hours despite individual A fulfilling all the agreed conditions. Otherwise, given the definitions used here, if the agreed-upon conditions of such a labor relationship are not violated, it is fallacious to infer that the employer is stealing from the worker.

If a state imposes limits on the contractual freedom of the individuals it governs, noncompliance with such limits does not mean that the employer is stealing from the employee. If a set of labor regulations is imposed, such as a minimum wage for hourly wage labor or mandatory severance pay, and such regulations are not part of the labor agreement, the noncompliance with these regulations does not mean employer theft from the employee.

Furthermore, even if it is assumed that the exchange value of a commodity is determined by the socially necessary labor time for its production, the existence of profits in a business activity does not mean that the employer is stealing from their employees. In a labor relationship where the agreement was to pay the employee thirty dollars and the employer pays the employee that amount, the profit margin does not determine whether such a social interaction was theft or not. Even in the absence of risk and opportunity costs, the accrual of profits would not constitute theft by the employer from the employees.

Free Market Capitalism and Business Freedom

Capitalism and free markets are two different concepts. There can be a region where, in the absence of state coercion or violence, only cooperatives exist. On the other hand, there can be a region where only capitalist enterprises exist, and due to the presence of certain interventionist economic policies, it may not be possible to buy or sell certain goods/services, set certain prices, or establish penalties for noncompliance with commercial contract terms.

Furthermore, a free market does not necessarily mean business freedom. This is because the free market refers to the absence of state restrictions on the exchange of property rights over monetary and nonmonetary assets, whereas business freedom refers to the absence of state restrictions on production, consumption, or property exchange activities carried out by a business. Therefore, a broader category than business freedom would be economic freedom, which encompasses not only businesses but also other types of individual behavior—for example, the freedom to cultivate a specific plant, regardless of whether it is for personal consumption or commercial purposes. In the presence of economic freedom, there are no price controls, monopolies through state coercion, or import quotas.

Lastly, the fact that country A has undergone a greater economic liberalization process than country B does not mean that country A possesses greater economic freedom. A country may eliminate more price controls than another during a specific period of time and still have a greater number of price controls, not to mention the existence of other interventionist economic policies.

Capitalism and Social Problems

Even if capitalism were to result in poverty, violence, sexism, racism, and environmental problems, this does not mean that this mode of social organization is the sole cause of such phenomena. Moreover, the fact that a certain form of capitalism generates certain outcomes does not imply that all semantically possible forms of capitalism will have the same consequences.

While many are focusing on the Ivy League Democrats on Colorado’s Supreme Court who voted to kick Donald Trump off the 2024 primary ballot, there underlying case itself has a direct link to the Biden administration.

The Colorado case against Trump was brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), headed by President and CEO Noah Bookbinder…

…who sits on the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Advisory Council  (HSAC), as the Daily Caller‘s James Lynch reports.

“Our Constitution clearly states that those who violate their oath by attacking our democracy are barred from serving in government. It has been an honor to represent the petitioners, and we look forward to ensuring that this vitally important ruling stands,” Bookbinder gloated in a press release.

It gets better…

Bookbinder is a former trial attorney for the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) public integrity section and former chief counsel for criminal justice for the Senate Judiciary Committee. He repeatedly donated to former President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign during his tenure with the Senate, Federal Elections Commission (FEC) records show.

The DHS appointed Bookbinder and 32 other new members to HSAC in March 2022 ahead of the council’s first meeting under Secretary Mayorkas. -Daily Caller

DHS Secretary Mayorkas said in a March 2022 press release related to HSAC: “Together, we will ensure that the Department is best positioned to meet the challenges we confront today, foresee and be ready for the challenges of tomorrow, capitalize on the power of technological innovation, and serve our country by living up to our highest ideals. Our Department is privileged to benefit from the experience, vision, and creativity of these incredibly accomplished individuals.“

According to Lynch, HSAC has met numerous times – where they’ve produced various reports for Mayorkas ranging from “disinformation” to supply chains.

Bookbinder was in attendance during a September 2023 in-person meeting of HSAC, according to meeting minutes.

He also worked on a report produced by the DHS’s ‘Openness and Transparency Subcommittee’ – providing recommendations for how DHS can become more transparent without compromising its law enforcement mission (sure!).

General Mills shares fell at the beginning of the US cash session after the package food company reported a decline in quarterly sales. It slashed its annual organic sales forecast to flat because of softening demand for snacks and breakfast foods. 

The maker of Cheerios and Cocoa Puffs reported Wednesday that second-quarter sales for the three months ended Nov. 26 were $5.14 billion, down 2% from a year ago and below the Bloomberg estimate of $5.35 billion. 

Here’s the second quarter earnings snapshot (courtesy of Bloomberg):

• Adjusted EPS $1.25 vs. $1.10 y/y, estimate $1.16 (Bloomberg Consensus)

• Adjusted gross margin 35% vs. 33.2% y/y, estimate 33.9%

Net sales $5.14 billion, -1.6% y/y, estimate $5.35 billion

• North America Retail Net Sales $3.31 billion, -2% y/y, estimate $3.42 billion

• North America Foodservice Net Sales $582.0 million, -0.2% y/y, estimate $602.9 million

• Pet Segment Net Sales $569.3 million, -4% y/y, estimate $616.9 million

• International net sales $683.1 million, +1.7% y/y, estimate $723.7 million

• Organic net sales -2%, estimate +2.82%

• North America Retail organic net sales -2%, estimate +2%

• Pet organic net sales -4%, estimate +3.69%

Organic sales volume -4.0 pts, estimate -1.77 

• North America retail organic sales volume -5.0 pts, estimate -3.05

• Pet organic sales volume -11.0 pts, estimate -0.07

• North America foodservice organic sales volume -1.0 pts

• International organic sales volume -4.0 pts, estimate -2.47

Organic sales price/mix +3.0 pts, estimate +4.41

• North America retail organic sales price/mix +4.0 pts, estimate +4.6

• Pet organic sales price/mix +7.0 pts, estimate +3.91

• North America foodservice organic sales price/mix +1.0, estimate +1.0

• International organic sales price/mix +3.0 pts, estimate +6.91

General Mills warned about a slower recovery in sales volumes for the current fiscal year, citing a “more cautious consumer economic outlook” and increased competition on supermarket shelves. 

“While we saw a slower-than-expected volume recovery in the second quarter amid a continued challenging consumer landscape, we generated bottom-line growth thanks primarily to strong HMM cost savings,” Chief Executive Officer Jeff Harmening said in prepared remarks.

Harmening warned about a weakening consumer environment: “We’re seeing consumers continue to display stronger-than-anticipated value-seeking behaviors across our key markets, and this dynamic is delaying volume recovery in our categories.” 

As for the full-year forecast, the Lucky Charms maker cut its fiscal 2024 organic net sales down 1% to flat, from a year ago, compared with its earlier forecast for growth of 3% to 4%. Bloomberg estimates were around 2.75%. 

More color on the full-year forecast (courtesy of Bloomberg):  

• Sees organic net sales -1% to 0%, saw +3% to +4%, estimate +2.75%

• Sees adj. EPS in constant currency +4% to +5%, saw +4% to +6%

• Sees Adjusted operating profit constant-currency +4% to +5%, saw +4% to +6%

“For the full year, we’ve revised our topline outlook to account for a slower volume recovery, narrowed our profit and EPS expectations within our original guidance ranges, and maintained our outlook for strong free cash flow conversion,” Harmening said. 

Shares of General Mills are down nearly 3% in the first 30 minutes of US trading. During the year, shares have tumbled into a bear market. 

Several retailers this past earnings season have warned about a weakening consumer. The latest consumer credit data shows consumers are in the worst financial shape in years. 

It’s only a matter of time before consumers buckle under the weight of elevated inflation and failed ‘Bidenomics.’ 

Authored by Travis Gillmore via The Epoch Times,

While videos of smash-and-grab robberies in California circulating on social media are attracting attention worldwide, lawmakers say finding solutions to stop the crimes is challenging.

Though acknowledging action is needed, some say viral clips are distorting reality and suggest that retail theft crimes are difficult to count.

“What is happening in our communities is unacceptable and we must act with urgency,” Assemblyman Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Hollywood) said in a Dec. 18 press release.

“But we must also look at the facts and find the solutions that will actually work.”

Complicating understanding is a lack of consistent reporting across the retail industry, according to experts.

The California State Assembly’s Select Committee on Retail Theft holds its first meeting in Sacramento, Calif., on Dec. 19, 2023. (Travis Gillmore/The Epoch Times)

Seeking to address the issue, the California Assembly’s newly formed Select Committee on Retail Theft met for the first time Dec. 19.

“The retailers are screaming for help,” committee member Assemblyman Juan Alanis (R-Modesto) told The Epoch Times after the meeting.

“Everyone has their own ideas, and hopefully by the end of these hearings, we can identify some solutions.”

Established by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) in October, the 11-member panel—chaired by Mr. Zbur and consisting of nine Democrats and two Republicans—is tasked with identifying solutions to what lawmakers describe as an “ongoing crisis.”

“The Select Committee was formed to do just that—to listen to the experts and those in our communities who are impacted, to discern the facts, and to understand the best path forward,” Mr. Zbur said.

Encompassing shoplifting, and commercial burglary and robbery—where violence or threats were used to intimidate employees—retail crime is significantly impacting the Bay Area, Central Valley, and Los Angeles County, according to a Dec. 12 committee press release.

“This is impacting our constituents,” committee member Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Laguna Beach) said during the hearing.

“They’re feeling the brunt of this in higher costs … and feeling unsafe in public spaces.”

With larger counties experiencing higher levels of theft—Magnus Lofstrom, policy director and senior fellow for the Public Policy Institute of California, told the panel that commercial burglaries and robberies are on the rise in 21 and 25 of the 58 counties across the state, respectively.

Highlighting the challenge of obtaining solid data, he noted that changes in reporting, with some businesses no longer calling police for some thefts, are impacting statistics.

“As with any data, there are important limitations … to incidents reported,” Mr. Lofstrom said.

Rachel Michelin, president and CEO of the California Retailers Association, notified the committee that some stores are told by law enforcement not to call unless a threat of violence occurs.

A business in Sacramento was warned that if misdemeanor theft reports continued, the store would be cited with a public nuisance complaint, further leading to “skewed data,” she said.

CVS items among nearly 14,000 products recovered from retail theft ring investigation in Glendale, Calif., on Aug. 31, 2023. (Courtesy of California Highway Patrol)

Retailers are asking lawmakers to address changes in state law that occurred with the passage of the 2014 ballot initiative—Proposition 47—designed to lessen prison populations by reducing some felony drug and theft crimes to misdemeanors.

Of particular concern are what are known as aggregation of thefts—where values of stolen items can be combined to reach the $950 felony threshold—and petty theft with a prior charge that allows the filing of felony charges for repeat offenders.

Both were eliminated by Prop. 47 and would require another ballot initiative to reestablish.

Some prosecutors in California argue that existing laws, including Prop. 47, are limiting prosecutors’ options and allowing many crimes to go unpunished.

“Even if you can charge them with a felony, the jails are so crowded they won’t serve any time,” Ivy B. Fitzpatrick, managing district attorney for Riverside County, told the commission.

“With no real consequences for repeat offenders, we’re seeing a rise in retail theft crimes.”

One person charged with 54 burglary offenses served a total of seven months in county jail, she said.

Fewer sentencing options for prosecutors have also reduced the number of individuals participating in drug treatment diversion programs—down 67 percent since Prop. 47 passed while homelessness statewide spiked 42 percent—Ms. Fitzpatrick told commissioners.

Law enforcement officials said the issue is negatively impacting communities across California, as repeat offenders are exacerbating the problem.

“When we see the same people committing the same crime … it suggests the system is broken,” Alexander Gammelgard, Grass Valley Police chief and president of the California Police Chiefs Association, said during the hearing.

A close-up view of chains securing a freezer full of food in a Walgreens store in San Francisco on July 18, 2023. (Lear Zhou/The Epoch Times)

Balancing recent legal reform efforts with the need to address the retail theft problem is a complex process, according to the assembly speaker.

“It’s important that we preserve our successful criminal justice reforms,” Mr. Rivas said during the hearing. “But at the same time, we need to ensure that we are delivering solutions to businesses and consumers.”

The new Chair of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Assemblyman Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento), said he recognizes the nature of the problem and is looking for creative fixes.

“Inaction is unacceptable,” he said during the meeting.

While experts told the panel Prop. 47 was playing a role in the rise in criminal activity, Mr. Zbur, the panel’s chair, expressed reluctance to single out the voter initiative.

“I’m circumspect on pulling Prop. 47,” Mr. Zbur said during the hearing. “We should be thinking about smart solutions and out-of-the-box thinking.”

The four-hour-long hearing designed to gather information included about a half hour of public comment, with more than a dozen individuals voicing their opinions.

The committee plans to hold meetings in San Francisco and Los Angeles in 2024, on dates yet to be determined, to give stakeholders an opportunity to provide input, according to Mr. Zbur.

Major deal-making between Washington and the government of President Nicolas Maduro, long under US sanctions, has clearly been progressing. It follows on the heels of intensified Biden admin efforts to free up Venezuela oil as an alternative energy source amid the Russia-Ukraine war, having recently lifted oil-focused sanctions on a temporary basis months ago.

The Biden administration has just conducted what amounts to a rare prisoner swap with Venezuela. The US agreed to release a “close ally” of President Maduro in exchange for jailed Americans, the Associated Press reports Wednesday.

That high profile Maduro ally is Alex Saab, who has been in US detention since his arrest in 2020 for money laundering. He was freed on Wednesday. There are reports that in exchange, some ten or more Americans who’ve been held in Venezuelan prisons have been released and are expected to return home to US soil. 

Venezuela has long claimed that Saab should have diplomatic immunity. US prosecutors have alleged he stole $350 million by skimming from Venezuelan government contracts. He was caught by an Interpol notice and flown to the United States: 

The Colombian-born businessman was on his way to Iran when he was detained on an Interpol “red notice” while his plane refuelled in Cape Verde in 2020.

The Venezuelan government described him as an “envoy” and argued that he had been travelling to Iran to buy medical supplies during the Covid-19 pandemic.

But Cape Verde ruled that he did not have diplomatic status and extradited him to the US, where he was charged with money laundering and bribery.

Among the group of Americans freed are two Green Berets who took part in a tactical beach landing as part of a bizarre failed attempt to work with locals to topple the Maduro government in 2020.

Former Green Berets Luke Denman and Airan Berry had at that time of their arrest been paraded for weeks in front of state TV cameras, with Maduro blaming the Trump administration for running covert ops to destabilizing his government. They were later sentenced to 20 years in prison each for their role in the failed assault.

A shady Florida-based private security firm had been part of that fiasco, which proved a deep embarrassment to the US side:

On May 4^th, 2020, Denman and Berry landed with a group of former soldiers and mercenaries in the fishing village of Chuao. The operation failed, with eight dead and dozens captured. Former Green Beret Jordan Goudreau, owner of private security firm Silvercorp USA, said he organized the attack under promise of payment from the “interim government”.

At that time, Juan Guaido was head of Venezuela’s political opposition and was strangely declared ‘Interim President’ by the US and some other countries, but without any recognition inside Venezuela or much of the rest of the globe (outside close US allies).

This prisoner release deal appears part of the quiet long-running conversations which saw the Biden administration greatly loosen sanctions on Caracas starting Oct. 18 of this year.