With Biden’s weaponized Dept of Justice intending to seek a second indictment of Hunter Biden after the catastrophic disaster that was the government’s first sweetheart plea deal, which revealed the corruption of “special counsel” David Weiss, who now is scrambling to slap Hunter’s wrist for the second time over a, drumroll, gun charge which will lead to the president’s crackhead son not spending even a minute in prison for being, along with his senile father, a bought and paid for Chinese muppet, the US Department of “Justice” needed a big enough distraction and got that today when SBF’s former right hand figurehead and former FTX CEO Ryan Salame, pleaded guilty Thursday in New York federal court to campaign finance and money-transmitting crimes, and agreed to forfeit more than $1.5 billion. Yup, Salame had $1.5 billion in cash just hanging around courtesy of the epic criminal syndicate that was FTX, and is about to part with it.

According to CNBC, Salame, during his plea, admitted that from fall 2021 to November 2022 he steered tens of millions of dollars of political contributions to both Democrats and Republicans – but really mostly Democrats…

… in his own name when in actuality the money came from Alameda Research, the hedge fund arm of the cryptocurrency exchange owner FTX. Those contributions were made at the behest of then-FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, Salame said, making SBF the second biggest Democrat donor during the 2022 midterms, only behind George Soros…

… in which the Dems managed to avoid getting steamrolled thanks to Biden draining the SPR. Oh and, according to Vox, it was SBF who was “one of the people who is most responsible” for Biden being “elected” president.

“From at least in or about 2020, up to and including in or about November 2022, Ryan Salame, the defendant, engaged in multiple conspiracies to advance the interests of Samuel Bankman-Fried … and the cryptocurrency companies Bankman-Fried founded and controlled — including FTX.com (“FTX”) and Alameda Research (“Alameda”) — through the operation of an unlawful money transmitting business and violations of the federal election law,” the charging document filed against Salame says.

That document says that Salame, in a private message to a confidant, wrote that “the purpose of these bipartisan donations would be ‘to weed out anti crypto dems for pro crypto dems and anti crypto repubs for pro crypto repubs,’ and that donations would likely be routed through Salame ‘to weed out that republican side.’”

Salame, who was released on a $1 million bond Thursday, faces a maximum possible sentence of 10 years in prison for the campaign finance violation and charge of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business. His sentencing was scheduled for March 6 by Judge Lewis Kaplan in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

In addition to what must be a record monetary forfeiture, which will be paid to the U.S. government, the 30-year-old Salame will pay $5 million to debtors of FTX and $6 million in fines to the government. Salame also will surrender two houses he owns in Lenox, Massachusetts, and his 2021 Porsche automobile.

Salame’s attorney, Jason Linder of the firm Mayer Brown, in a statement said. “Ryan looks forward to putting this chapter behind him and moving forward with his life.″

A source told CNBC that Salame is not cooperating with federal prosecutors who are preparing for the criminal fraud trial of 31-year-old Bankman-Fried. But three other former executives who previously pleaded guilty in the same court are expected to testify against Bankman-Fried.

They are Caroline Ellison, who had been CEO of Alameda; former FTX technology chief Gary Wang; and Nishad Singh, who was FTX’s engineering boss.

U.S. Attorney Damien Williams, whose office is prosecuting the FTX cases, in a statement said, “Ryan Salame agreed to advance the interests of FTX, Alameda Research, and his co-conspirators through an unlawful political influence campaign and through an unlicensed money transmitting business, which helped FTX grow faster and larger by operating outside the law.”

Meanwhile, SBF – who yesterday lost his appeal to get out of Brooklyn jail where they don’t serve adderall or vegan food. and is set to go on trial Oct. 3 on wire fraud and securities fraud charges related to his alleged looting of billions of dollars in customer funds from FTX courtesy of endorsements from some of the highest profile politicians criminals in the country.

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

U.S. officials are refusing to provide COVID-19 vaccine safety data to a U.S. senator.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the results of analyses on data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System in January. The request came after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said none of the safety signals it identified for the COVID-19 vaccines were “unexpected.”

The two agencies have run different types of analyses on the system’s reports, which are primarily made by health care professionals.

The CDC ran Proportional Reporting Ratio analyses, which involve comparing the number of reported adverse events to the number of adverse events reported after vaccination with other vaccines.

The first time the agency ran analyses using the method for the COVID-19 vaccines, in 2022, hundreds of signals were triggered, files obtained by The Epoch Times show.

The FDA in 2021 started a different type of analysis, called Empirical Bayesian (EB) data mining.

The Proportional Reporting Ratio results “were generally consistent with EB data mining, revealing no additional unexpected safety signals,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director at the time, told Mr. Johnson previously.

Mr. Johnson demanded answers on that claim, prompting the CDC to point him to the FDA.

The FDA recently responded to Mr. Johnson, telling him that it cannot provide the information he seeks.

“FDA’s EB data mining analyses of adverse events contained in VAERS reports for COVID-19 vaccines are currently the subject of pending FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] litigation. FDA is unable to comment on pending litigation or provide information or data that is currently being considered in pending litigation,” the agency told the senator.

Mr. Johnson in a new letter told FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf that the claim was wrong.

“As you are well aware, Congress has a right to information contained at U.S. federal agencies as it conducts its constitutional oversight responsibilities,” Mr. Johnson said.

“It is outrageous that FDA would assert that pending litigation, and particularly FOIA litigation, would allow your agency to obstruct my congressional oversight,” he added. “Any pending litigation FDA may have relating to its EB data mining records has no bearing on its responsibility to comply with a congressional request.”

Mr. Johnson said in the past he’s repeatedly received from the government documents subject to litigation, including from the FDA’s parent agency, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

He urged the FDA to produce the EB data mining analyses by Sept. 20.

The FDA declined to immediately provide a comment.

The agency was sued in January over its refusal to provide the results of the EB data mining to The Epoch Times and the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense, citing exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Children’s Health Defense, the litigant, said that the refusal to provide the records was illegal.

In the last update in the case, the FDA said it has 150 responsive pages but that it has to do a “page-by-page, line-by-line review” to determine whether any information on the pages should be withheld, or redacted. The agency said it is “facing an unprecedented FOIA workload” stemming from federal courts ordering it to release information it had said would be made public on the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.

Ignored Questions

In another new letter, Mr. Johnson pressed the HHS on the program it administers to provide compensation to people injured by the COVID-19 shots.

Despite injections starting in December 2020, and more than 1.5 million reports being lodged with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. HHS has compensated just four people, paying $8,592 in total.

Others have been approved for compensation but the money is still pending.

Mr. Johnson in April asked for more details on the program as the agency has not been forthcoming, including whether there are caps on the amount of money an injured person can receive and whether the government has advertised the program.

Mr. Johnson also demanded communications between HHS and COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers regarding compensation claims.

In a recent letter, HHS declined to answer many of the questions.

Mr. Johnson on Sept. 5 urged HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra to provide answers to all of his questions.

He pointed to how Mr. Becerra, when being vetted by the Senate, told senators that he would commit to providing a prompt response to any questions addressed by Senate Finance Committee members.

“As a member of the Senate Finance Committee and as ranking member of the Senate’s top investigative subcommittee, your agency’s June 23, 2023 response is completely unacceptable and calls into question the veracity of the commitment you made before the Senate during your confirmation hearing,” Mr. Johnson said. “I call on you to immediately revise HHS’s incomplete response and provide the requested information.“

HHS did not respond to a request for comment.

In retrospect, it’s surprising that it took so long.

With Case-Shiller reporting that the nation’s worst-by-far (not to mention feces-covered) real-estate  market is that of San Francisco, where prices have seen annual declines for the past 8 months, half of which have seen double-digit drops…

…. overnight RedFin reports more bad news for those unlucky enough to be living in the socialist utopia that is San Francisco: home sellers in this liberal bastion are four times more likely than the average U.S. home seller to take a loss, as the Bay Area metro reels from an outsized drop in home prices. In fact, according to the report, the typical San Francisco seller who takes a loss sells their home for $100,000 less than they bought it for. And when they do, they have to walk on shit-covered streets, through crowds of homeless, to buy another home one which they pray won’t be burgled in the near future because, well, good luck calling cops in San Fran.

Here are the details from Redfin:

Roughly one of every eight (12.3%) homes that sold in San Francisco during the three months ending July 31 was purchased for less than the seller bought it for, up from 5% a year earlier. That’s a higher share than any other major U.S. metro and is quadruple the national rate of 3%.

Next came Detroit (6.9%), Chicago (6.5%), New York (5.9%) and Cleveland (5.8%). 

In San Francisco, which tied with New York for the largest median loss in dollar terms, the typical homeowner who took a loss sold their home for $100,000 less than they bought it for. Nationwide, the typical homeowner who sold their home for less than they bought it for lost $35,538.

Homeowners were least likely to sell at a loss in San Diego, Boston, Providence, RI, Kansas City, MO and Fort Lauderdale, FL. In each of those metros, roughly 1% of homes sold for less than the seller originally paid.

* *  *

Turning back to San Francisco, just because it’s both terrifying and amusing to watch a formerly great city implode under the weight of Soros-funded DAs, here home sellers were most likely to lose money because the region has experienced outsized home-price declines. It was one of the first markets to see prices sink when high mortgage rates triggered a slowdown in the housing market last year. By April 2023, San Francisco’s median home sale price was down a record 13.3% year over year, more than triple the nationwide drop of 4.2%. As of July, it was down just 4.3% year over year to $1.4 million, but that compared with a national gain of 1.6%. The total value of homes in San Francisco has fallen by roughly $60 billion since last summer, a separate Redfin analysis found.

Prices in the Bay Area have fallen fast for a few reasons:

• First, it’s home to the most expensive real estate in the country, meaning housing costs had a lot of room to come down. It has also been hit hard by layoffs in the technology sector.
• Additionally, it’s not as popular as it once was; remote work has allowed scores of people to relocate to more affordable areas.

Next, read the following sentence and see if you can spot the common thread:

“San Francisco, Detroit, Chicago and New York, which top the list of metros where home sellers are most likely to take a loss, all rank among the top 10 metros Redfin.com users are looking to leave.”

If you said these are all traditionally Republican-controlled bastions… you failed.

“Some condos in the Bay Area are now worth less than their owners bought them for in 2018 and 2019, in part because commuting from Oakland and other outlying areas into downtown San Francisco isn’t really a thing anymore,” said local Redfin Premier real estate agent Andrea Chopp, who focuses on Oakland and other East Bay neighborhoods. “There are buyers out there, but they’re a lot more cautious and picky than they were when mortgage rates were low. The Bay Area housing market was unsustainable before, so this correction is probably healthy, but the unfortunate thing is prices remain unaffordable for a lot of people—especially with rates now above 7%.”

But while the liberal bastion of San Francisco is now officially America’s worst city, the vast majority of U.S. home sellers are still reaping gains, especially those

Even though home prices have fallen from their peak, a majority of home sellers are still reaping significant financial gains. Nationwide, 97% of home sellers sold for a profit during the three months ending July 31, with the typical home that sold going for 78.4% ($203,232) more than the seller bought it for.

Today’s home sellers are making money despite an ongoing housing downturn in part because a scarcity of homes for sale is fueling bidding wars and propping up home values. Most people who bought when home prices peaked would lose money if they sold now, so they’re not selling. Many of the homeowners who are selling today have owned their homes for long enough to make a profit regardless of month-to-month fluctuations in housing values.

In Boise, ID, Redfin Premier agent Shauna Pendleton has clients who will likely have to take a $100,000 loss on their home because they’re selling it after only about a year. They’re moving back to Seattle because their employer is requiring them to return to the office. Pendleton noted that it’s not common for homeowners to sell at a loss in Boise, but when it does happen, it often involves homes selling for upwards of $750,000.

More in the full Redfin report available here.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

After the spectacular collapse of his sweetheart deal with the Justice Department in court, Hunter Biden’s lawyer angrily told the prosecutors in open court to “just rip it up.”

It appears, however, that the defense team does not want to shred one part of the deal: the diversion agreement to avoid any charge over his false statement to obtain a gun permit.

The defense is now arguing that, since the two sides signed the agreement before the implosion in court, it is final and complete.

The Justice Department thinks otherwise. It is arguing that neither the probation officer nor the Court agreed to the plea agreement to finalize it. Indeed, it was the sweeping immunity language buried in the gun charge section that led the Court to throw a flag on the play.  Accordingly, the Justice Department is now pledging to indict Hunter by the end of the month.

Hunter, however, is insisting that the Justice Department will have to pry the agreement from his cold, dead fingers. Indeed, the President’s son may be channeling more from the National Rifle Association (NRA) than its catchline. If the court rejects the diversion agreement as executed, Hunter could be making an argument that will leave the Biden White House in something of a pickle.

One obvious attack against a charge is to argue that the underlying law itself is unconstitutional.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), anyone who is an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,” including marijuana, is barred from possessing a gun and can face up to 10 years in prison.

However, recently the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled the law violated the Second Amendment in United States v. Daniels. The case involved a man who was arrested in possession of marijuana and two loaded firearms. The Fifth Circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen v. New York Rifle & Pistol Association, which established that firearms laws must conform with the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

President Biden denounced Bruen as a virtual abomination and has been a vocal supporter of the underlying law. Hunter, however, may now find himself in strange company in seeking to avoid any federal charge.

In the appellate opinion, Judge Jerry E. Smith wrote that “Our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage.”

That sounds tantalizingly familiar, but is it enough for Hunter to go full Wayne LaPierre?

If so, this would not be the first time that Hunter followed a path that his father has previously condemned in others. For example, for decades, Joe Biden has railed against “deadbeat dads” despite his son’s long effort to avoid paying child support to Lunden Alexis Roberts. Hunter spent years fighting support for his daughter Navy, even after a court confirmed that he was her father. Joe Biden himself only recently acknowledged the existence of Navy after routinely excluding her from the list of his grandchildren.

Yet, the President may not be quite ready for his son to join actual hunters in advocating for sweeping gun rights protections, including for drug users.

In making the argument, Hunter will have to claim that references to gun ownership by “law-abiding citizens” in past cases like District of Columbia v. Heller and Bruen should not be read to exclude everyone who breaks the law. Judge Smith cites a prior ruling in United States v. Rahimi, rejecting the federal ban on gun possession by people subject to domestic violence restraining orders. In that decision, the court held that the phrase should be read as “shorthand” alluding to “people who were historically ‘stripped of their Second Amendment rights.’”

The government has argued (and would likely argue in the Biden case) that there were laws from the 17th and 18th centuries barring people from publicly carrying or firing guns while intoxicated.

However, the Fifth Circuit rejected the historical claim and noted that “under the government’s reasoning, Congress could ban gun possession by anyone who has multiple alcoholic drinks a week…based on the postbellum intoxicated carry laws. The analogical reasoning Bruen prescribed cannot stretch that far.”

The government has tried to use other laws barring guns to the mentally ill and dangerous individuals as historical analogs, but the court would have none of it.

Indeed, Hunter could find himself arguing that people are too often denied rights by the government under claims that they are “insurrectionists.” Sound familiar?

The government has pointed to how “Founding-era governments took guns away from persons perceived to be dangerous.”

However, the Fifth Circuit noted that those laws targeted unpopular people, including Catholics, as akin to traitors to the Revolution. Judge Smith wrote that drug users “are not a class of political traitors, as British Loyalists were perceived to be. Nor are they like Catholics and other religious dissenters who were seen as potential insurrectionists.”

So, a rejection of the gun diversion agreement could prove an even greater diversion for the Biden family as Hunter embraces the very decisions and rights long opposed by his father.

In the meantime, the Justice Department would be citing historical precedent used against Catholics (like the Bidens) as potential insurrectionists who cannot be trusted with weapons.

Of course, White House Press Spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre could defend all of this by paraphrasing the NRA that the “only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun [case] is a good guy with a gun [case].”

A new Form 13F filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission reveals that one of the ‘wokest’ billionaires has put his stamp of approval on one of the wokest beers in America. 

The filing showed the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust bought 1.7 million shares of Anheuser-Busch, valued at around $95 million, signaling Gates has confidence in the beer company that imploded its Bud Light brand after a disastrous advertising campaign in April with transgender TikTok influencer Dylan Mulvaney. 

Gates’ Seattle-based $69 billion trust bought the shares around the latest earnings report around $59.89 per share. Shares are currently trading at a 6% discount around $56.24. 

Last month, Anheuser-Busch said US revenues slid 10% in the second quarter due to the consumer backlash of Bud Light. This allowed Modelo Especial, the nation’s new king of beers, to become the best-selling beer among US consumers. 

Gate’s bet on Anheuser-Busch ranks him as the ninth largest shareholder. 

Gates, who has previously said he’s “not a big beer drinker,” has bought other brewers, including a 3.76% stake in Heineken Holding NV earlier this year. 

A former Anheuser-Busch executive told Fox News’ Neil Cavuto that Gates’ investment into the brewer is a “mistake.” 

“Bill Gates is definitely making a mistake.

“Earlier this year, he already made a $900 million mistake when he invested into one of Anheuser-Busch’s largest rivals, Heineken. He did that earlier this year. And since that investment, Heineken’s down about 10%, whereas the broader markets are up 10%.”

“So if I was looking for advice on investing to software companies, tech companies, I might go to Bill Gates. But if you’re looking at the beer industry, he doesn’t have a great track record of investing in winners at this point,” former Anheuser-Busch executive Anson Frericks said. 

Bill has put his stamp of approval on Bud Light. 

Some on social media have called for a doubling down on the Bud Light boycott following the news Gates is now a majority shareholder of the brewer. 

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is warning physicians and caregivers about an increase in respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cases across some parts of the Southeastern United States in recent weeks.

In a Sept. 5 health advisory, the health agency said the rise in cases suggests a “continued shift toward seasonal RSV trends observed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

“Historically, such regional increases have predicted the beginning of RSV season nationally, with increased RSV activity spreading north and west over the following 2–3 months,” the CDC said.

CDC data shows increases in weekly RSV levels since July but the agency said that nationwide, RSV test positivity had remained below the season onset threshold of 3 percent for two consecutive weeks.

However, more recent data show test positivity has increased in Florida since late July, and the three-week moving average has been greater than 5 percent for the last month.

RSV hospitalizations also increased in Georgia in August, the CDC said.

From Aug. 5 through Aug. 19, the rate of RSV-related hospitalizations increased from 2 in 100,000 kids aged 4 and younger, to 7 per 100,000, with the majority of those hospitalizations being in babies less than a year old, the CDC said.

In response to the rise in cases, the health agency urged clinicians to “prepare to implement new RSV prevention options” ahead of the 2023–2024 RSV season, including administering shots of monoclonal antibody products to patients as well as a preventative antibody treatment called nirsevimab.

FDA Approves RSV Treatments

“For all infants ages <8 months, and infants and children ages 8–19 months who are at increased risk of severe RSV, clinicians should start to offer Nirsevimab when it becomes available (expected by early October),” the CDC said.

A panel of outside advisers to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) voted unanimously in July to approve nirsevimab for RSV in newborns and infants up to 24 months of age.

Sold under the brand name Beyfortus, the treatment is made by AstraZeneca and marketed by Sanofi. The companies said the drug showed efficacy in several clinical trials.

Regulators in countries including Canada and the United Kingdom have already approved Beyfortus.

A month later in August, regulators with the FDA also approved the first vaccine to be taken by pregnant women to prevent RSV infections in babies and toddlers.

Made by Pfizer, the Abrysvo single-dose injection was approved for use at 32 through 36 weeks of pregnancy. According to the pharmaceuticals giant, pregnant women who receive immunity from the shot will pass that immunity along to their unborn baby before birth, thus protecting them from lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) and severe LRTD caused by RSV until at least the age of 6 months.

In trials, a dangerous hypertensive disorder known as pre-eclampsia occurred in 1.8 percent of pregnant individuals who received Abrysvo compared to 1.4 percent of pregnant individuals who received a placebo, according to the FDA.

Read more here…

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Former President Donald Trump told former Michigan gubernatorial candidate Tudor Dixon in a recent conversation on her podcast that pharmaceutical companies have an “obligation to be honest” about vaccine side effects and should disclose all relevant data on vaccine harms.

President Trump and Ms. Dixon discussed a range of issues in an episode on the Tudor Dixon Podcast last week, ranging from corruption allegations against President Joe Biden to claims of weaponization of federal agencies against the former president.

“This is the most corrupt president in history,” President Trump alleged, referring to his successor in the Oval Office.

“And the most incompetent at the same time. It’s pretty incredible,” President Trump added, insisting that the various criminal charges that have been levied against him are attempts to interfere in the 2024 election.

At one point in the discussion, Ms. Dixon asked about President Biden’s announcement to fund a new COVID-19 vaccine.

“He wants everyone to get this vaccine,” Ms. Dixon said.

“And we’re hearing about a lot of complaints from vaccine injured. To say a lot is an understatement.”

There have been reports linking spike protein-based COVID-19 vaccines to skin problems, a dull ringing in the ears known as tinnitus, visual impairments, blood clotting, and even death.

Studies have also revealed a number of other issues affecting vaccinated children. For example, one recent study, published in the journal Frontiers in Immunology, shows that the mRNA-based vaccine for COVID-19 reduced children’s immune responses to other infections, making them more prone to getting sick after coming into contact with other pathogens.

Another study published by Circulation showed that some children who experienced heart inflammation after COVID-19 vaccination had scarring on their hearts months later.

‘We’re All In This Together’

Ms. Dixon then asked President Trump about vaccine data transparency, citing reports of various adverse events, including heart inflammation and blood clots.

“Numerous pharmaceutical companies have refused to release their data on vaccine side effects,” she said.

“But we’ve seen cases of myocarditis, blood clots, and heart attacks; they’re all increasing. The research has never been released.”

She then asked if President Trump would “demand that the vaccine companies, that the pharmaceutical companies release their vaccine data to the public so that we can see what they’re actually seeing about the side effects of this vaccine?”

President Trump replied by saying that pharmaceutical companies “should do that,” adding that “we’re all in this together, and they should be doing that.”

In context of President Biden’s remarks about funding a new COVID-19 vaccine, the former president said that “anything new has got to be looked at very carefully.”

He then reiterated the point that pharmaceutical companies should release any data on vaccine side effects.

“They should be made public immediately. People should understand that, and they should know what research is showing,” President Trump said.

Ms. Dixon then noted that under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, pharmaceutical companies are shielded from liability from vaccine injuries until December 2024.

“So once that sunsets, then they can be held liable for any type of vaccine injuries, will you tell these companies that they must be honest about what has happened with this vaccine?” Ms. Dixon asked.

President Trump replied by saying that the companies would be wrong to withhold any information on vaccine harms.

“They have to be honest with the numbers, the facts, and they have an obligation to be honest,” he said, “And if they are going to hold back, that means they’re holding back something that’s not good.”

“We’ll stand for them in many ways,” President Trump said of people who suffered vaccine injuries.

Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been ordered to accelerate the pace at which it releases to the public data it relied on to license COVID-19 vaccines.

Watch the full interview below:

COVID-19 Vaccine Trial Data

In May, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the FDA must hurry up with disclosing data that underpinned its decision to license COVID-19 vaccines, ordering all documents to be made public by mid-2025 rather than, as the FDA wanted, over the course of about 23.5 years.

“Democracy dies behind closed doors,” is how U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman opened his order (pdf), which requires the FDA to produce the data on Moderna’s and Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines at an average rate of at least 180,000 pages per month.

The FDA had argued it would be “impractical” to release the estimated 4.8 million pages at more than between 1,000 and 16,000 pages per month: a rate which would see packets of information released for at least 23.5 years.

While the judge noted in his order that the court recognizes the FDA’s limited resources dedicated to freedom of information requests (FOIA), he stated that “the number of resources an agency dedicates to such requests does not dictate the bounds of an individual’s FOIA rights.”

“Instead, the Court must ensure that the fullest possible disclosure of the information sought is timely provided—as ‘stale information is of little value,'” Mr. Pittman wrote.

Confidence in the FDA over COVID-19 vaccine approvals was shaken by the disclosure that regulators sped up the approval of Pfizer’s vaccine in order to facilitate mandates.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) continues to recommend that people of all ages receive a COVID-19 vaccine, despite the risk of heart inflammation and other side effects.

Authored by Newt Gingrich via The American Spectator,

We are faced with a totalitarian cancer that will have to be confronted and defeated at every level.

Author’s Note: The complex patterns that have led to the greatest crisis of constitutional government and rule of law since the Civil War are far bigger, involve far more people, and are ultimately more dangerous to American freedom than the personal dishonesty and criminality of the Biden family. This “American Despotism” series in The American Spectator will provide a clear history of the weaponization of government, which has violated the Constitution and corrupted the rule of law. While each article will be complete and stand-alone, together they will combine to fully describe the patterns that now threaten to destroy the foundation of individual freedom — the hallmark of the American system.

America is now in the deepest, most dangerous constitutional crisis since the hostility in the 1850s that led to secession and civil war.

This constitutional crisis is so widespread and threatening that House Republicans must dramatically widen their investigations. Hunter Biden and President Joe Biden are only a tiny part of a spiderweb of corruption, dishonesty, criminal behavior, and state weaponization. The rule of law is steadily being replaced by a frightening new rule of power.

Of course, it is important to get to the bottom of the Biden corruption. It is critical that we understand how a drug-addicted, out-of-control drunk with no business experience attracted millions of dollars from Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Romania, and Communist China. It is vital to learn what involvement the then–vice president and now-president had in the scheme. It seems clear President Biden was doing favors for foreign billionaires while publicly claiming he knew nothing of his son’s business dealings.

House Republicans must recognize, however, that they are currently focused on one tree in a forest of illegality and totalitarian behavior. A powerful and growing faction of the American Left would undermine the Constitution, turn the government into an instrument of coercing Americans to do what it wants, and use the law as a weapon to destroy its political opponents.

The Problem Is Much Bigger Than Hunter Biden

Most of modern American history can only be understood within this broader system of coercion and corruption. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Biden are major players — but they are supported by a cast of hundreds and possibly thousands of eager totalitarians ready to impose their views on the American people. These would-be coercers have been enriching themselves with impunity because they know their establishment allies will never question them or hold them to account.

If you think I am exaggerating the distance between normal Americans and the totalitarians of the left, consider the reality in which we are all living. 

A clear example of this split is the 84 percent who believe parents have the right to know what is being taught to their children in school. Meanwhile, teachers unions oppose parental rights, and the FBI investigates concerned parents as potential terrorists. This is a clear example of the left-wing minority’s effort to use government to force extreme cultural and societal change.

One of the great questions for our generation is whether a ruthless minority weaponizing government and destroying the American rule of law can use sheer force and threat of force to make Americans accept things in which they do not believe.

We established America’s New Majority Project to find and develop a set of issues on which most Americans agree. We were delighted to find a wide range of issues that have 70 percent to 90 percent support. 

For example: 

• 83 percent prefer to identify themselves as Americans rather than by their racial or ethnic backgrounds.

• 82 percent prefer free-market capitalism to big-government socialism.

• 79 percent believe that people who believe in the values found in the Bible have the right to express them publicly.

• 74 percent believe able-bodied adults should have to work to receive taxpayer-funded benefits such as food stamps, health care, or welfare.

If you go to our website, you will see a huge majority of Americans favor positions for which they would be canceled, ridiculed, fired, or even prosecuted by the current coercive left-wing dominated system.

Instead of having a government that serves the American people, we have degenerated into a government that wants the American people to serve and obey it. All of this has led to the rule of law being replaced by the rule of power.

The warnings in George Orwell’s 1984, Friedrich Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom, Arthur Koestler’s Darkness at Noon, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, and virtually all the works of Alexander Solzhenitsyn seem to all be coming true. A startling movement of totalitarian thought and behavior control is growing. It is eager to use government and the threat of prosecution to coerce the rest of us.

The Corruption Goes Deeper Than We Think

While focusing on Hunter Biden’s laptop and the trails of foreign corruption leading to President Biden, we have missed the vastly bigger, more frightening, and far more complex story of illegal and anti-constitutional behavior undermining the American system of law.

The turning point for me was reading Andy McCarthy’s remarkable book Ball of Collusion. Published in 2019, it should have been required reading for every American before the 2020 election. McCarthy is a solid professional prosecutor with almost two decades of experience in the Justice Department. He was the lead prosecutor in the trials of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing terrorists.

He used his prosecutorial skills to take apart the entire effort to tie candidate- and then-President Donald Trump to Russia. The Russian hoax was a deliberate lie funded by the Clinton campaign and seized upon by the FBI and the CIA. It was an opportunity for the system in power to defeat a candidate it didn’t like. After the lie failed to defeat Trump as a candidate, it was used to hamstring his presidency.

Ball of Collusion was a stunning revelation to me. I knew a lot about the general story — and had lived through it — but I had never connected the dots in such a methodical way. McCarthy’s research convinced him that the conspiracy to destroy Trump involved much more of the government than I would have thought possible. It was like looking through a kaleidoscope that suddenly came into focus. 

Ball of Collusion opened a whole new line of thinking for me. Suddenly, many of the things I have lived through in American politics started to fit the pattern of corruption and coercion — Clinton’s cattle futures windfall, Lois Lerner’s weaponization of the IRS (on the advice of federal prosecutor Jack Smith), and the flagrant corruption of the Clinton Foundation. 

Some policy decisions made by then–Secretary of State Clinton — including permitting the sale of 20 percent of America’s uranium to a Russian company that gave the Clinton Foundation a $2.3 million gift — made sense in this pattern. I then thought about Smith’s legal attack on Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (which was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court because Smith lied to the jury about the law). Unsurprisingly, this is the same Smith the Biden administration picked to attack Trump ahead of the 2024 election. The list goes on and on.

Importantly, McCarthy focused on a Jan. 5, 2017, meeting in which then-President Barack Obama personally coordinated the joint FBI–CIA effort to cripple and derail the Trump administration. It became clear to me this was an absolute smoking gun of guilt. The incumbent president of the United States openly coordinated the law enforcement and intelligence agencies in a deliberate, methodical effort to hinder the next president of the United States. It was an act verging on treason. Once I understood that Obama was capable of this level of viciousness and dishonesty, a lot of other things began to fall in place.

The Obama administration’s treatment of the Benghazi attack that killed an American ambassador was one example. Susan Rice appeared on five national news shows the Sunday after the attack to repeat a narrative that was completely false and misleading. After all, Sept. 11, 2012, was close to the election. Obama did not want Americans to understand that an Islamist terrorist group had just killed an American ambassador and three other Americans. That would have deflated the Obama triumphalism that asserted killing Osama Bin Laden had ended the terrorist threat.

Given Obama’s willingness to corrupt the Justice Department and the intelligence community, it is little wonder that Clinton deleted 33,000 emails and had her staff destroy her hard drive with a hammer. She knew she was never going to be prosecuted. The fix was in. In the post-Obama world, Democrats do not get prosecuted, and Republicans do not get protected. The sickness has become more institutional than personal. There are entire networks of people willing to lie for the Left and against the rest of us.

An Example of Corruption: The Biden Laptop Story

Consider the remarkable story of the Hunter Biden laptop. On Oct. 14, 2020, the New York Post broke the story about the laptop and its amazing revelations about international business deals and corrupt personal behavior on a grand scale. Within hours, the social media giants — advised by the FBI that the story might be a Russian disinformation effort — blocked the nation’s oldest and fourth-largest newspaper from being seen on the internet.

With a presidential debate coming up, the collective advocates of the left went to work. Within five days of the Post story, on Oct. 19, 2020, Antony Blinken (now secretary of state) got 51 former intelligence officials to sign a letter saying — with no evidence — that the Hunter Biden laptop was probably Russian disinformation.

During the presidential debate three days later, Joe Biden smugly said:

Look, there are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what this, he’s accusing me of is a Russian plan. They have said that this has all the characteristics — four/five former heads of the CIA, both parties, say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage. Nobody believes it except him and his good friend Rudy Giuliani.

What could have been a devastating disclosure about the Biden family’s corrupt behavior was turned into a non-event through censorship and lying. Even as president, how could Trump successfully discredit 51 intelligence officials in the middle of a debate — especially when most Americans did not know what he was talking about because the laptop story had been censored and suppressed?

And make no mistake: The laptop story would have made an impact. According to pollster John McLaughlin, “36% of Biden’s voters were not aware of Hunter’s laptop and if they had been, enough Biden voters would have left Biden so that Trump would have won AZ, GA, PA and WI.”

The Obama-created weaponized system had survived the Trump presidency. Within a few days, it could develop and validate a complete lie with professional legitimacy committed to defeating Trump and electing Biden.

On the Edge of the Totalitarian Takeover

The more you study these various events, the more you realize that there are entire systems and cultures of dedicated totalitarians who recognize that a Trump presidency could be a disaster for their worldview. 

Their hatred and fear of Donald Trump is not a function of his personality or his tweets. They would hate and fear any candidate who was serious about disrupting the patterns of institutional corruption, coercion, and power. They would be equally offended by anyone who stood for a color-blind America or recognized two definable sexes. They would despise anyone who thought America was a good country (which, coincidentally, includes 88 percent of Americans).

Once you accept that we are dealing with much more than a few corrupt people, you begin asking a lot of questions. Why is the hatred so intense? Why do they think they can get away with blatant corruption? Why do they have contempt for the rule of law and relish the rule of power? Why are they so willing to coerce their fellow Americans to change their deeply held beliefs?

If you simply Google “the totalitarian impulse,” you will be stunned at the number of sophisticated, intelligent people who have been writing about it. There is a clear and growing understanding among many smart people that we are on the edge of a totalitarian takeover of our culture, institutions, and lives. It really is the greatest crisis of our constitutional system, individual liberty, and the rule of law that we have faced in 160 years.

I am writing this series about the weaponization of government and American despotism because I realized that the story is so complex, has such a long development time, and involves so many people that a clear narrative must be developed. The more you study modern American government, the more you realize that totalitarian efforts are all around us — and they have been winning on many fronts.

The Alinskyian Roots of American Totalitarianism

Behind the movement is a powerful belief system that opposes the American system of constitutional law. It is hostile to American history and patriotic pride, contemptuous of the American people, and dedicated to seizing power through any means. 

The historic roots of this American despotism can be found in the French Revolution. That movement held a passion for uprooting and replacing everything (including the calendar). Its roots can also be found in Leninism and its effort to create a New Soviet Man to replace the failed types of personalities that it found occupying Russia before the revolution. The origins of rising totalitarianism can also be found in Maoism and its mass brainwashing, enforced conformity, groupthink, and the need to purge yourself of sins by confessing in front of the community.

However, there is also a powerful American source for this totalitarian drive to remake America. That drive can be found in the writings and teachings of Saul Alinsky. Obama and Clinton were both students of Alinsky or his disciples. 

Obama’s first job in Chicago was with an Alinsky institution. He learned how to be a neighborhood organizer from the Alinsky disciples. This was so alien to our way of thinking that, in 2008, only Sean Hannity understood how deeply radical Obama was. The rest of us translated neighborhood organizer into something like a Boys and Girls Club worker. I am embarrassed to admit that even though I had studied all the major modern revolutions — and had read Alinsky — the concept of an Alinsky disciple pretending to be a pleasant, harmless, normal politician was too wild for me to grasp at the time.

Clinton knew Alinsky. She met with him and wrote her senior thesis about him. She agreed with his aims but thought his strategies were impractical. She wanted to change America from within — not by agitating from without.

Biden was just a lucky local politician from a small state. He was only a moderate Democrat when he got elected to the Senate at 29 years old in 1972. He was not particularly intellectual, but he was a chameleon. As the Democratic Party moved to the left, so did he. He also understood from watching Clinton and others that you could be corrupt — the Obama-politicized Justice Department would never bother you. He saw his chance, and he took it.

The Biden investigation will inevitably grow until all the horrors of the corruption, government weaponization, and destruction of the rule of law become known to the American people.

However, it is vital we understand that the Biden family corruption is a small piece of the larger crisis of our constitutional system. We are faced with a totalitarian cancer that will have to be confronted and defeated at every level. The Bidens’ corruption is merely a symptom.

Jobless claims at 2023 lows and an upward revision to unit labor costs both indicated strength in the labor market, which together with robust growth in the US economy, could indicate some unease that the monetary policy stance could remain tighter for a bit longer.

But it was the Semis and AAPL that ignited the pain trade after Beijing reportedly extended its iPhone ban to other state agencies.

Apple’s worst 2-day drop in a year (AAPL market cap is down around $200BN) dragged it below its 100DMA…

And that weighed on the broad indices. The Dow managed modest gains on the day as Small Caps and Nasdaq lagged. The S&P ended lower

The Nasdaq dropped below its 50DMA, and Small Caps fell to the 100DMA/200DMA and found support

Did the ‘Magnificent 7’ just form a mega-double-top?

Source: Bloomberg

‘Most Shorted’ stocks were slammed for the 3rd straight day, erasing the squeeze higher that started last Tuesday…

Source: Bloomberg

Since September started, both Defensives and Cyclicals have been sold but today saw a divergence with Defensives bid and Cyclicals sold…

Source: Bloomberg

Bonds were bid today with the short-end outperforming (2Y -6bps, 30Y unch) but all yields are still higher on the week…

Source: Bloomberg

2Y Yields tumbled back below 5.00%, erasing all of yesterday’s spike…

Source: Bloomberg

The yield curve steepened, erasing yesterday’s flattening

Source: Bloomberg

The dollar rallied for the 5th day of the last 6, closing at new highs back to March (though the pace of acceleration has slowed)…

Source: Bloomberg

After yesterday’s volatility (illiquidity), Bitcoin managed gains today, but was unable to get back tro $26,000

Source: Bloomberg

Gold dipped to $1920, erasing last week’s spike higher…

Source: Bloomberg

Oil prices puked today… despite plunging inventories, production cuts, and price-hikes…

Makes you wonder, eh?

“With a largely-drained US Strategic Petroleum Reserve, if the Fed really are active in oil futures, as some whisper, they need to get busy again soon.” – Rabobank

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) September 7, 2023

Finally, we note that The Fed’s reverse repo facility continued its plunge this week…

Source: Bloomberg

Which has been supportive for stocks in the recent regime BUT at the same time, reserves are being drained…

Source: Bloomberg

And so putting them together, we now know what to watch for equity swings – when reserves drop faster than rev repo balances, equities are unsupported…

Source: Bloomberg

And we get the latest Fed balance sheet data after the bell today.