Authored by Carol Cassis via The Epoch Times,

Officials announced last week that California will share in over $1 billion of federal funding allocated to all 50 states to help plant trees in an effort to cool rising temperatures and fight climate change.

The state will receive around $103 million from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, which in turn will be dispersed to 43 recipients across Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, and other areas for tree planting and maintenance, urban canopy improvements, and other green efforts.

The funding, which stems from President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act passed last year, is the act’s largest investment in urban and community green spaces, according to officials.

Those from the Biden administration said such funding is aimed at fighting climate change due to global warming.

“Unfortunately, the difficulties and challenges we’ve seen with weather are not going to go away,” Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack was quoted in the Los Angeles Times.

“We’re going to continue to be challenged by Mother Nature, so we want to make sure that our communities are more resilient and more capable of withstanding what Mother Nature may have in store.”

Supporters of the program say the funding is arriving just in time after the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced Sept. 14 that last month was the planet’s warmest August on record, and that the Northern Hemisphere experienced its hottest meteorological summer to date.

Research has shown that areas with more pavement and fewer trees are hotter in temperature than greener spaces, and experts say that extreme heat kills more each year than hurricanes, tornadoes, and other weather dangers, according to data from the National Weather Service.

A group of men sit underneath a tree for shade amid a heatwave in Calexico, Calif., on Aug. 31, 2022. (Ariana Drehsler/Getty Images)

Such areas with less shady tree cover or “urban canopy,” such as parts of Los Angeles and Riverside counties have been shown to have elevated temperatures compared to areas within the same regions with more tree cover.

The largest program grant awarded in California was $12 million to the San Francisco Public Works Bureau of Urban Forestry, which aims to plant and create “thousands of street trees in low-canopy communities,” according to its project description. San Diego will receive $10 million to plant and preserve trees and promote “tree equity,” wherein the city plans to increase trees planted in lower-income areas where fewer trees are currently present, among other goals.

U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) voiced her support for the program in a recent statement, stating funding to plant trees in urban spaces in turn will “filter out pollution, reduce energy consumption, lower temperatures and provide more Californians access to green spaces in their communities.”

A homeless camp in Denver was cleaned up after a viral video revealed that some enterprising individuals had set up a makeshift speakeasy with prostitution tents, according to police.

The setup featured lounge chairs, umbrellas and astroturf was found in the city’s burgeoning homeless encampment at 23rd and Champa streets.

The encampment resulted in “numerous complaints” to the police after pedestrians were forced into the street to pas it.

“We’re hearing there was an open bar, sales of alcohol, things like that,” Denver Police Patrol Division Chief Aaron Sanchez told CBS Colorado, adding “We have officers looking into that.”

Sanchez also said that there have been complaints that surrounding tents and couches at the streetside bar were being rented out for prostitution.

Homeless aid group executive Meghan Shay of Step Denver says she noticed the apparent bar while driving to work, and said that an encampment featuring liquor would only exacerbate the city’s homeless problem – given that 80% of homeless have experienced lifetime alcohol and/or drug issues, according to Shay.

Authored by Philipp Bagus via The Mises Institute,

The Austro-libertarian movement has the better ideas. They continue to be discussed, elaborated, and intellectually defended. But how can the right ideas be implemented? What good is it to be right if the reality is left-wing? In fact, most of the population, or at least public opinion, seems to be drifting further and further to the left, with cancel culture, climate hysteria, a sprawling welfare state and ever higher taxes and levies.

The right ideas and theories are there, but they have not yet been put successful in practice. How can this be changed? Of course, ideas are important, they must also be disseminated, from below, from the grassroots up. It’s an arduous process. And there has been undeniable progress in recent years. Nevertheless, the left-wing zeitgeist is rolling over the freedoms of citizens almost unhindered; most shockingly during the Covid crisis. The left tries to paint anyone who stands in the zeitgeist´s way as an extremist or even a Nazi.

Against this background, what can a successful strategy look like? Murray Rothbard addressed this question in an article in the Rothbard-Rockwell Report entitled Right-Wing Populism: A Strategy for the Paleo Movement. His contribution is groundbreaking and forward-looking. He anticipates the successes of Donald Trump in the United States and, more recently, of Javier Milei in Argentina.

Javier Milei is making a splash on all sides, because on August 13, 2023, he won the primaries for the presidency in Argentina. In the German media, he is described as ultra-right and ultra-libertarian. Recently, the Financial Times dealt with the self-confessed anarcho-capitalist in a column, in which the author insinuated that the libertarian Milei would follow the strategy of right-wing populism designed by Murray Rothbard in 1992. This gives rise to the question if that claim is true and what exactly is this right-wing populism?

According to the paleo-libertarian Rothbard, the program of right-wing populism includes 8 main points:

1. Radical tax cuts

2. Radical reduction of the welfare state

3. Abolition of privileges for “protected” minorities

4. Crushing criminals

5. Getting rid of bums

6. Abolition of the Federal Reserve

7. A program of America First (anti-globalist and isolationist)

8. Defending traditional family values

Indeed, Milei’s election manifesto is very much in line with Rothbard’s right-wing populism and paleo-libertarianism. Milei wants to radically reduce taxes. He never tires of calling taxes what they are, theft. He also wants to radically grind down the welfare state and likes to illustrate the reduction in government spending and his proposal of reducing Argentinian ministries from 18 to 8 with a chainsaw. His “Chainsaw Plan” is intended to radically trim the state.

Milei repeatedly speaks of equality before the law as a fundamental liberal principle and wants to abolish privileges for minorities. As a result, he repeatedly clashes with radical feminists who defend legal privileges for women.

The imprisonment of criminals is also on Milei’s agenda. Gun freedom is in his program so that victims can defend themselves against criminals. Those who refuse to work are no longer supported by the state in his Argentina.

Milei also has the 6th of Rothbard’s points in his agenda: Milei wants to abolish the central bank of Argentina. Using right-wing populist rhetoric he aims to physically blow up the central bank. In doing so, he would wipe out the power of one of the most inflationary central banks, which willingly financed all Peronist and Kirchnerist spending programs. He wants to dollarize the country and open it up to currency competition.

Milei also puts his own country first: Argentina first. Right-wing populism opposes the globalist agenda. It cuts development aid, climate programs and military adventures. Milei likes to point out that Argentina was one of the richest countries in the world at the beginning of the 20th century thanks to classical liberal policies and was destroyed by socialism in the 20th century. In 35 years, Milei promises, Argentina can be a superpower again. The prerequisite for this to happen is a return to libertarianism.

Finally, Milei also defends traditional family values and opposes the state takeover of family responsibilities. The vehement opponent of abortion has defended the right to life several times in debates with radical feminists.

Milei used to be chief economist at various institutions and a professor of economics. He is a follower of the Austrian School of Economics. One of his dogs is named Murray. He contributor a chapter two-volume Festschrift in honor of Jesús Huerta de Soto edited by David Howden and myself. A couple of years ago he was guest via zoom in my seminar in our Master’s degree in Austrian Economics that we offer in Madrid, and spoke about his strategy.

In short, Milei is one of us. And he can win the election. He can become president of Argentina. An Austrian. An anarcho-capitalist. With an openly radical libertarian election program. In a country that has paid homage to socialism for decades. Amazing.

Milei has been very present in the public debate in Argentina for years. He gained fame as a polarizing and fiercely arguing talk show guest. Later, he decided to create his own party to lead the culture war against socialism and statism more effectively and to bring the right ideas to more people.

His rhetorical strategy in debates is vociferous, belligerent, and is sometimes perceived as offensive (if the truth can be offensive at all). He does not allow himself to be intimidated or belittled by left-wing opinion-makers. In a debate, he simply shouts louder than the leftists, whom he calls “Zurdos”, and interrupts them to tell them to their faces that they are saying an absolute stupidity and have no idea what they are talking about. You should read Hayek, Mises and Rothbard first, Milei recommends to them. He also calls leftists and politicians parasites and thieves, in a debate. For taxes are theft. 

In keeping with Rothbard’s strategy of right-wing populism, he clearly names the profiteers of the state apparatus. He rails again and again against the caste of politicians and bureaucrats. He calls them parasites that live at the expense of the hard-working and decent citizens. Politicians are completely useless and could not live without the productive Argentinians. Politics is not the solution, but the problem. And politicians form part of the problem. In this way, Milei wins over those decent Argentinians who suffer most from the yoke of the state. Equally clear are his remarks on the concept of social justice. So-called social justice is a monstrous injustice because it means unequal treatment of people before the law. It is a fig leaf for envy and resentment.

Milei’s emotional and polemical nature resonates with many, especially among young people. After winning the primaries in mid-August, he has legitimate hopes for the Argentine presidency.

Milei’s successes have become a topic of everyday conversation, especially in the Hispanic world. One speaks of Milei with astonishment and appreciation. Acquaintances and friends send short videos of his rhetorical gems. Libertarian ideas are back in vogue. People are venturing forward with libertarian opinions, everywhere and unexpectedly. The window of public and permissible opinions is shifting in the direction of freedom. Thanks to Milei.

Regardless of whether the charismatic Milei ultimately wins the election, his campaign has sparked a young and powerful libertarian movement. His triumph in the primaries may be more significant than the Ron Paul Revolution of 2008 and 2012. The incredible fact is that he is successful. With a right-wing populism that Rothbard recommended, in a run-down country, with his charismatic personality, with aggressive rhetoric. Nothing is impossible. Even a libertarian can win a democratic election. It’s the strategy that counts. ¡Vamos Javier! ¡Viva la libertad, carajo!

Authored by Emile Phaneuf III via The American Institute for Economic Research,

University professors around the world are struggling to adapt to a student body that is, for the first time in history, able to generate essays and conduct other sophisticated tasks in just a few seconds by ordering an Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbot such as ChatGPT to roll up its digital sleeves and do the dirty work.

Since ChatGPT’s launch, I took the general viewpoint that higher education would eventually have to come around to allowing students to use such technologies as just another tool for research and writing, just as calculators are usually considered fair game in math classes.

I was then delighted to stumble upon the AI chatbot policy of Stephen Hicks, Professor of Philosophy at Rockford University in Illinois. His policy reads as follows:

I encourage you to use ChatGPT.

It is a powerful new research tool. Anything that enables you to learn faster and become more skillful is to be embraced.

At the same time, a tool is not a substitute for your own self-development. As a student, your goal is to acquire as much new knowledge as you can and to become skillful with every useful learning tool available. The goal is for you to become knowledgeable and wise, and for you to become excellent at research and judgment.

Metaphorically: Become a lean, mean learning machine. And make that a personal goal and a matter of honor.

If you are taking this course for credit, it is your responsibility to demonstrate that the work you submit is your own. There are many ways to do that, and you and I can consult individually to determine which way is best for you.

Stephen R. C. Hicks
Professor of Philosophy

As you see, while Hicks recognizes the importance of the students’ own individual self-development, he still embraces an important disruptive technology that can push beyond the more laborious traditional methods of researching and writing.

This reminds me of my 7th grade math teacher. She was an elderly lady who was often capable of working out long division math problems in her head, and she recounted stories of people she knew in her youth who were even more capable. (We, her students, worked it out on paper). Given that she grew up before the launch of the pocket calculator, her more advanced quantitative skills revealed the extent to which she was a product of her time. Similarly, as a student during middle school, I was (I believe) better at spelling than I am now, but then software (word processors) disrupted that with spell check. “Spelling Bees” seemed to disappear as I got older. While I am more reliant on spell check than I was in my younger years, it seems that this has freed up both cognitive space and time for me to be able to focus on more advanced (and less mundane) tasks. This phenomenon was articulated beautifully by Alfred North Whitehead:

It is a profoundly erroneous truism, repeated by all copy-books and by eminent people when they are making speeches, that we should cultivate the habit of thinking what we are doing. The precise opposite is the case. Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking about them.

It seems to me that perhaps, for the first time ever, it could be critical thinking itself that is disrupted (at least at scale; a calculator does the same at a much smaller scale).

A new problem for freedom?

If I am correct that AI will disrupt critical thinking itself, then it appears that we have a new potential threat to a free society. Consider, for a moment, the motto of the Universidad Francisco Marroquín in Guatemala:

The education and spreading of ethical, judicial, and economic principles of a society of free and responsible persons

Being free and responsible comes with an implied necessity for a citizenry capable of thinking for itself. But if I am correct that AI is on its way to disrupt critical thinking itself, then new generations of people may never learn critical thinking in the first place. If a free society requires a citizenry of free and independent thinkers, the future of freedom is confronted with a new problem. 

Or, perhaps that worry is overly pessimistic. The way I see it, a combination of at least a couple of things is likely to happen. Upon first glance, they may seem at odds, but we could see that in some way one is true, while in another way, the other is simultaneously true. 

1. Critical thinking is diminished because of an overreliance on AI. AI here, over the long-term, serves as a crutch. (This is the main concern I raise in this article). 

2. Critical thinking reaches new heights, aided by AI.

What remains of raw, mere-human critical thinking (without aid of AI) will likely need to be channeled into a certain healthy distrust for the biases of the AI bots and their developers, and into understanding the incentives under which the developers (and those who financially support them) operate.

Whatever the outcome, let’s hope that AI (on the whole) works to serve as a tool for the betterment of the human condition, allowing for “a society of free and responsible persons.”

Fox News reporter Bill Melugin posted on X, “It’s a total free for all in Eagle Pass right now.” 

Thousands of illegal immigrants continue flooding the southern US border while the Biden administration pretends everything is fine. 

Melugin and his team are at Eagle Pass, Texas, where they have captured alarming footage that shows a massive flow of illegals crossing into the US. 

Melugin said, “Mass illegal crossing taking place for over an hour and a half. Almost 2 years to the day we saw 15,000+ Haitians under the bridge in Del Rio, we now have thousands of predominantly Venezuelans gathering under Eagle Pass bridge.” 

It’s a total free for all in Eagle Pass right now. Mass illegal crossing taking place for over an hour and a half. Almost 2 years to the day we saw 15,000+ Haitians under the bridge in Del Rio, we now have thousands of predominantly Venezuelans gathering under Eagle Pass bridge. pic.twitter.com/VkfUQnexGZ

— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) September 20, 2023

Melugin said Texas has declared an emergency in Eagle Pass. 

BREAKING: An emergency declaration has been issued in Eagle Pass, Texas after a surge of migrants invaded the southern border.

The declaration was made by Eagle Pass mayor Rolando Salinas after over a thousand migrants crossed the border.

Most of the migrants are coming from… pic.twitter.com/txkpmzl2FI

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 20, 2023

Elon Musk commented on Melugin’s X post: “Strange that there is almost no legacy media coverage of this.” 

Musk continued, “About 2 million people – from every country on Earth – are entering through the US southern border every year. The number is rising rapidly, yet no preventive action is taken by the current administration.” 

Musk is correct that corporate media aligned with the Democrats are not covering the continuing border crisis. And why would they? It’s another failure of this administration, even after they put forth supposedly new ‘border enforcement actions’ earlier this year.  

Earlier this week, Fox News journalist Griff Jenkins shared another shocking video of a train of illegals heading north in Mexico to the US border. 

**NEW VIDEO**
FOX News sources capture a FerroMex train bursting with migrants out of Zacatecas heading to our southern border right now… cheering and clearly not heeding the message: “do not come”@FoxNews pic.twitter.com/YflMwXrWqu

— Griff Jenkins (@GriffJenkins) September 17, 2023

Under the Biden administration, disastrous open border policies have led to nearly 6 million illegal crossings. The influx of migrants has also supercharged the drug crisis nationwide, as fentanyl is now on every street corner. And things are quickly deteriorating in major metro areas, such as New York City, which have been swamped with migrants that risk sparking a financial crisis. 

Radicals in the White House are going against the will of the people with open border policies. Why is that?

The dam is breaking on unified Western support for Ukraine, and the timing couldn’t be worse for Zelensky, given tomorrow he’s expected to meet with President Biden at the White House. On Wednesday evening there is monumental news out of Poland which could potentially change the entire course of the war.

“Poland will no longer arm Ukraine to focus on its own defense,” Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki announced just hours after Warsaw summoned Ukraine’s ambassador related to a fresh war of words and spat over blocked grain, according to the AFP. Warsaw has throughout more than a year-and-a-half of the Ukraine-Russia war been Kiev’s staunchest and most outspoken supporter.

Will this massive and hugely significant about-face mark the beginning of the end? Are peace negotiations and ceding of territory in the Donbas inevitable at this point? 

Within the last 48 hours relations between Poland and Ukraine quickly spiraled to their lowest point since the Russian invasion, and it is directly related to Warsaw leading a handful of EU countries to extend a grain export ban on Ukraine, amid continuing anger and outrage from Polish farmers who are suffering due to their country being flooded with cheap Ukrainian wheat.

Crucially, Poland will hold parliamentary elections on Oct.15. The prior atmosphere of enthusiastic pro-Kiev rhetoric has drastically changed, now with comparisons likening Ukraine to a “drowning man”. As The Associated Press explains:

Polish leaders have compared Ukraine to a drowning person hurting his helper and threatened to expand a ban on food products from the war-torn country. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested that EU allies that are prohibiting imports of his nation’s grain are helping Russia.

Now, Polish officials, who are trying to win parliamentary elections next month with help from farmers’ votes, are expressing dismay over some of Ukraine’s latest moves, including a World Trade Organization complaint over bans on Ukrainian grain from Poland and two other EU countries.

Poland’s elections are Oct. 15… https://t.co/DRwG37xGut

— Mark MacKinnon (@markmackinnon) September 20, 2023

In surprisingly blunt and terse words given to reporters on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, Polish President Andrzej Duda said on Tuesday: “Ukraine is behaving like a drowning person clinging to anything available.”

He then said, “A drowning person is extremely dangerous, capable of pulling you down to the depths … simply drown the rescuer.” Given Ukraine’s battlefield losses and as it’s currently bogged down in a failing counteroffensive, the words no doubt stung. But as The Hill notes further of the domestic political context in Poland:

Public sentiment around the issue, however, has started to deteriorate, putting the ruling party in a difficult position ahead of a close October election. The far-right Confederation party is hoping to capitalize on the waning support in the country. 

Reuters reported that a recent poll showed support for Ukrainian refugees fell from 91 percent when the war started to just 69 percent recently. The same survey showed a quarter of Poles are against supporting refugees, compared to 4 percent in early 2022.

In response to the grain ban, Zelensky during his UN speech had condemned the “alarming” behavior of allies regarding the import ban, but without naming Poland specifically. Further, Kiev has announced plans to sue Warsaw in the World Trade Organization while also holding out the possibility of its own embargo on Polish foodstuffs, including onions, tomatoes, cabbage, and apples. Again, all of this amounts to a full-blown diplomatic crisis for Zelensky which couldn’t come at a worse time, as he’s in D.C.

To review, these are some of the major developments and setbacks in only the last few days:

• Zelensky fired at least 6 top-ranking defense officials over corruption, after recently firing longtime Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov amid a graft probe.
• American transgender spokesperson for Ukraine’s Territorial Defense Forces Sarah Ashton-Cirillo was suspended indefinitely by the Ukrainian military in an embarrassing debacle.
• The New York Times ran an article which said a missile fired by Ukraine struck a busy civilian market and not Russia…marking an unexpected establishment media about-face.
• Biden has yet to pledge any new weapons for Ukraine as Zelensky is in the US, and there are reports that ATACMS long-range missiles will not be approved.

And most importantly, there’s this per Politico…

New: Senators are bracing to give Zelenskyy some tough news tomorrow

That in the face of GOP opposition to aid — and a guv shutdown — they might be sending him home empty handed

W/ @burgessev https://t.co/tBolo3TcMX

— Ursula Perano (@UrsulaPerano) September 20, 2023

According to the fresh Wednesday report:

Delivering any new aid to help defend against Russia, even later this year, is looking tougher than ever.

The obstacles are piling up: House Republicans are skeptical of any new money at all. What’s more, their dysfunction threatens to push the government into a shutdown — a move that certainly gets Zelenskyy no closer to getting the billions requested by the Biden administration. Senate Republicans, meanwhile, are divided over whether to continue providing humanitarian aid, arguing the rest of Europe needs to step up.

As if fully aware that the tap at the expense of the US taxpayer may run dry, Zelensky has been meeting in New York with a who’s who of leading banks, hedge funds, and private investors. Fox Business, which broke the story, says the ongoing meetings are part of broader efforts to secure investment for rebuilding Ukraine and fixing destroyed infrastructure:  

The meeting was put together by JPMorgan, the big bank serving as Zelenskyy’s financial adviser to attract private capital for a new investment fund to rebuild Ukraine’s infrastructure destroyed in its war with Russia, according to people with knowledge of the matter. 

Earlier in the afternoon, Zelenskyy met privately with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, the sources say. BlackRock is the world’s largest asset manager and has also been advising Zelenskyy on how to attract U.S. private sector money for the rebuilding effort.

The list of invitees, according to sources, includes William Ackman, the head of hedge fund Pershing Square Capital; Ken Griffin of the Citadel investment empire; Jonathan Gray, president and chief operating officer of private equity powerhouse Blackstone; Philipp Hildebrand, a vice chairman at BlackRock; Michael Bloomberg, former New York City mayor and founder of Bloomberg LP; and Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google and now head of the Schmidt Futures, a philanthropic organization.

Ken Griffin and Bill Ackman meeting with Zelensky to ensure they get first dibs on the juiciest deals in the rebuilding of #Ukraine post war.

— CEO Technician (@CEOTechnician) September 20, 2023

Tomorrow’s White House visit, and Zelensky’s planned meeting with Republican House Speaker Kevin McCarthy will surely be interesting.

Meanwhile, for a foretaste and indicator of how much the tide has turned since Zelensky’s last trip to Washington (in Dec. 2022) when he was received with rockstar status, there’s this…

Speaker Kevin McCarthy, facing a right-wing rebellion in his ranks and mounting GOP resistance to aiding Ukraine, has declined to convene a forum for President Volodymyr Zelensky to address members of the House on Thursday during a visit to Capitol Hill. https://t.co/mDEH1yGpJS

— The New York Times (@nytimes) September 20, 2023

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) said in an exclusive Fox News interview published Wednesday that Saudi Arabia will obtain a nuclear weapon if its number one regional rival does so first.

“If they get one, we have to get one,” MbS told Fox’s ‘Special Report’ anchor Bret Baier when asked what the kingdom would do if Iran builds a nuclear weapon.

BREAKING: If Iran gets nuclear weapon, we will get it too, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman says in an interview with Fox News pic.twitter.com/rIpAuBSOWO

— Insider Paper (@TheInsiderPaper) September 20, 2023

It marks Riyadh’s clearest warning to date related to Iran’s alleged nuclear aspirations (though Tehran has long maintained its nuclear program is solely for peaceful nuclear energy purposes). 

The blunt statements regarding Saudi Arabia’s intentions to go nuclear if the Islamic Republic does were set against a broader discussion about potentially achieving full peace and diplomatic relations with Israel on the basis of the Abraham Accords. 

“Every day we get closer,” the crown prince said when asked about the recent expanding ties with Israel, which has lately included opening up airspace to Israeli flights for the first time, and exchanging official delegations.

Interestingly, Israel itself is already the region’s sole nuclear-armed power, but has never confirmed this openly. MbS’ comments on going nuclear reflect the general thinking that Tehran achieving a nuke would set off a broader nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

Despite the tough words of warning from the crown prince, China this summer brokered a detente between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which Beijing hopes will drive a “wave of reconciliation” in the region, particularly along the historic Shia-Sunni religious divide.

As for the potential of full diplomatic relations with Israel, it’s been widely reported that Riyadh is asking Washington to allow it to have a nuclear energy program, which would see the Saudis enrich uranium, just like the Iranians currently do.

Authored by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog,

Anyone capable of critical thought knows this entire globull warming/ climate crisis/ health emergency narrative is false, contrived by the ruling elite/globalist cabal billionaire class as a further means to gain control, increase their already ungodly wealth, tax us into oblivion, lock us down in their 15 minute cities, and dole out our daily allotment of bug protein.

Their narrative is filled with lies, misinformation, and holes so big you can drive a Tesla through them.

They have faked the temperature data for decades.

CO2 is not a pollutant.

Eating meat is not destroying the planet.

Cows farting is not ruining our environment.  Of course, Chris Christie farting may be harming the planet.

This fake narrative is dutifully spewed by the corporate regime media 24/7, as they are funded by Gates, Soros, and the WEF to do so. Lies, lies and more lies.

The foolishness of the drivel they expect us to swallow is beyond the pale.

They want to put oil companies and coal companies out of business because fossil fuels are evil.

They are purposely attempting to drastically reduce our energy output, which means less electric power.

But they also want to force everyone to drive an electric vehicle.

And they won’t allow nuclear power plants to be built. These insane beliefs are ridiculous.

Only low IQ willfully ignorant NPCs could believe them. More than half the population apparently fall into this category.

Wind and solar are polluting, environmentally damaging and inefficient. They push solar, while at the same time push geo-engineering  to block the sun, to cool the planet.

This idiocy speaks volumes to what these people running the show think about the intellectual capacity of the masses.

They believe we are sufficiently dumbed down, distracted, and apathetic to implement their agenda through constant propaganda, fear mongering, and threats.

They want to own everything, while you own nothing. It’s nothing but a show and they will keep it going until we do something about it.

Currently, with Zelensky in New York and soon to arrive Washington, the big question remains whether the Biden administration will grant him something that has long topped Ukraine’s wish list: the MGM-140 Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS. 

Fox News Pentagon correspondent Lucas Tomlinson says it’s looking like the White House is set against it, for now at least. His sources told him the following: 

Ukraine will not get ATACMS, the 190-mile-range tactical ballistic missiles, urgently requested by Zelensky to destroy Russian forces in Crimea and other Russian-held territory ‘anytime soon,’ officials say. News comes one day before Zelensky visits Biden at the White House.

But nothing is certain, and there are other publications suggesting Biden is ready to approve these long-range guided missiles, which would have the potential of striking deep into Russian territory. 

In a Wednesday report, The Atlantic Council notes, “On background and on the record, commentators and administration officials over the past two months have been all over the map, at times expressing disappointment and concern with Ukraine’s progress, but also suggesting that there have been increasing gains and that the prospect of a breakthrough is growing.”

The prevailing thinking goes that if Ukraine shows more progress, it will be politically easier for the West to provide more weapons at a faster rate. Yet Kiev has complained that it can’t make quicker progress unless it first has these more advanced weapons.

Ukraine will not get ATACMS, the 190-mile-range tactical ballistic missiles, urgently requested by Zelensky to destroy Russian forces in Crimea and other Russian-held territory ‘anytime soon,’ officials say. News comes one day before Zelensky visits Biden at the White House.

— Lucas Tomlinson (@LucasFoxNews) September 20, 2023

The Atlantic Council alludes to this state of things based on battlefield setbacks in the following:

These varying assessments have a surreal element. Given the months Moscow had to prepare its defenses for the Ukrainian assault, and the ongoing reluctance of the White House to provide the more advanced weapons Ukraine needs to increase the odds of success (F-16s and the long-range fires such as Army Tactical Missile Systems—ATACMS), a major Ukrainian advance that would break Moscow’s land supply corridor to Crimea was not likely. This means that the hand-wringing over the missing breakthrough was not grounded in sound military analysis or fact.

But whether it’s NATO, or Kiev, or the think tanks… there’s one thing they can all agree on:

Good news for some people: https://t.co/9ThRRCALqn

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) September 20, 2023

All of his sets up the further dilemma – that if the White House approves the ATACMS or other long-range missiles, it means this advanced system is being handed over to the losing side.

Rather than lead to frontline breakthroughs, it would only escalate the potential for NATO and Russia being sucked into a direct clash. This as Ukraine has clearly shown a willingness to launch cross-border attacks on Russian cities with anything it has in its arsenal. 

Authored by J. Peder Zane via RealClearPolitics.com,

I was expecting a lively exchange when Mike Gallagher invited me to debate the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter James Risen on his “No Interruptions” podcast last week. Instead, I was gobsmacked as the former New York Times reporter abruptly hung up the phone after some 15 minutes.

Like the recent viral video showing Washington Post columnist Philip Bump suddenly terminating an interview, Risen’s breaking point came when I questioned his reporting on Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings.

Before we get to that, Risen, who now reports for The Intercept, does deserve some backhanded praise: In the few minutes he spoke on Mike Gallagher’s podcast, Risen delivered a master class in concision, echoing most every major talking point fashioned by Biden’s handlers and the mainstream media to defend the president.

The Loving Father: Risen framed his defense of Joe Biden by asserting that the president’s major fault may be that he loves his son too much. Young Hunter and his brother Beau were in the car that December morning in 1972 when his mother and his baby sister died. This trauma, armchair psychologists suggest, set the stage for Hunter’s later drug abuse and his father’s boundless efforts to support his troubled son – whose problems were deepened by Beau’s death from cancer in 2015. Risen said Joe’s compassion probably led him to be too “permissive” toward his prodigal son, implying that he did what any good parent would.

Perhaps. But who knows? Each of us is driven by a confluence of personal forces that are often a mystery to ourselves – and nearly impossible for anybody else to precisely untangle. Everybody has a reason, but discerning those motives is often beyond our powers. This is especially true of Joe Biden, a congenital fabulist whose public career has been an exercise in grandiose self-mythologizing. Claiming to know what makes him tick is an act of hubris.

Slotting the president, or anybody else, into some archetypal narrative – the man who loved too much – is just blowing smoke. That is why, especially in public life, we assess people by their verifiable actions. You don’t have to be religious to see the apostle Matthew nailed it when he wrote, “By their fruit you will recognize them.”

No Evidence: As to Joe Biden’s actions, Risen repeated the scandalously common claim that there is no evidence the president has done anything “illicit or illegal.” That one is a real head-scratcher. As Miranda Devine of the New York Post recently wrote, such a belief requires one to:

Forget the bank records, shell companies, SEC complaints, sworn testimony, IRS whistleblower statements, FBI informant files, emails, texts, WhatsApp messages, photos, speakerphone calls, voicemails, White House visitor logs, Air Force Two travel logs, Joe’s pseudonymous email addresses and a parade of Hunter’s shady foreign benefactors lining up for handshakes with Joe in Beijing, breakfasts at the VP’s residence and dinners at Café Milano, not to mention millions of dollars in filthy foreign lucre for no discernible product or service other than access to Joe.

Risen and Biden’s other defenders are playing word games. By evidence they really mean proof. Indeed, we don’t have a signed memo by Joe Biden stating he changed a specific policy in exchange for payments to his son. While we have multiple examples of Hunter’s business associates identifying Joe as the “big guy” who would get a cut of the action, we do not, as yet, have a check made out to the president. The evidence clearly shows that Joe personally facilitated Hunter’s efforts to earn money from China, Ukraine, and Romania based on the promise of access to his father. These hard facts cannot be wished away.

The Jared Defense: Risen also worked to normalize Hunter’s shady dealings by suggesting that familial influence-peddling is common in the nation’s capital. Suddenly changing his definition of evidence from proof to conjecture, Risen pointed to the $2 billion the Saudi government “gave” Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner a few months after Trump left office. In fact, the Saudis did not give Kushner $2 billion; they placed that sum with him to be invested – hoping for a fat return on the generous fees they are paying him.

It’s not a good look for the Trump family. But when have two wrongs ever made a right? More importantly, there truly is no evidence that the Saudi investment was payback for action taken during the previous administration. Risen’s comparison is a canard. Foreigners gave money to Hunter in the hopes of currying favor with the government while Joe was serving as Obama’s vice president. Investing money with Kushner in 2021 – as Trump was being reviled for his claims of a stolen election and the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol – seems like the last thing one would do to gain influence in Washington.

The Trump Card: In defending Biden, Risen repeatedly brought up Trump, whom he branded a “criminal.” From his Manichean perspective, any effort to hold President Biden to account is aiding and abetting Trump’s return to the White House. He called me a Trump “toady” for supporting the Biden impeachment inquiry. This may be his more dangerous assertion, as it suggests that we should give a free pass to wrongdoing on our side because it might help the other side.

Asked and Answered: The interview ended after Risen cast himself as a fearless journalist whose exoneration of Biden should have special weight because he had written one of the first articles, back in 2015 for the New York Times, addressing Hunter’s dealings in the Ukraine. I’m familiar with his piece and told him it reflected the problem with so much mainstream reporting on Hunter’s position on the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma: It noted the company’s shady history but dug no deeper as it regurgitated spin concocted by the company, Hunter, and his team.

While we now know that Hunter was paid the princely sum of $83,000 per month for his service, I reminded Risen that he simply quoted a Burisma spokesperson who said Hunter’s pay was “not out of the ordinary” for similar corporate board positions. I also pointed out that he merely quoted a Burisma spokesperson who suggested Hunter was brought on to help with “strong corporate governance and transparency.” This seems fanciful on its face. As Lee Fang reported this week for RealClearInvestigations, emails from Hunter’s laptop show his employment was connected to lobbying efforts in Washington and access to his father.

In response, Risen said he refused to be “insulted,” and hung up the phone.

I don’t fault Risen for failing to get the whole story from the get-go. Reporters depend on sources, and sometimes they mislead us. What was stunning was that this experience of being used and misled did not seem to stoke much skepticism in him about the false narratives advanced by the Bidens to dismiss the evidence of wrongdoing.

When it comes to the mainstream press, it seems you can fool all of the people all of the time.