Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday that the US and NATO’s move to focus on countering China in the Asia Pacific has led to an increase in military cooperation between Moscow and Beijing.

“We know how seriously the People’s Republic of China regards these provocations [by NATO in the South China Sea], let alone Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait. We understand that this playing with fire by NATO in that part of the world carries threats and risks for the Russian Federation,” Lavrov said at a press conference, according to TASS.

In recent years, the US has stepped up its military presence in the South China Sea and near Taiwan, and some of its European allies have sent ships to the region, including the UK, France, and Germany.

“It’s as close to our shores and our seas as it is to Chinese territory. So, our military cooperation with the People’s Republic of China is developing. We are holding joint exercises, both counterterrorism exercises and air patrolling exercises,” Lavrov said.

NATO has identified China as a “challenge” to the alliance and has said it should forge stronger relationships with countries in the Asia Pacific, including Australia, South Korea, Japan, and India. Building new alliances in the region is a key aspect of the US strategy against China, as outlined by the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific Strategy.

Lavrov said that the US and NATO are trying to create an “explosive situation” in the Asia Pacific and pointed to the AUKUS military pact between the US, Britain, and Australia. Under AUKUS, Australia is expected to receive technology to develop nuclear-powered submarines, and the US will expand its military presence in Australia.

China has previously warned that the Biden administration’s efforts to build alliances in the Asia Pacific could lead to a Ukraine-style “tragedy” in the region. “The United States has tried to create regional tension and provoke confrontation by pushing forward the Indo-Pacific strategy,” Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said back in April.

Chinese President Xi Jinping said Tuesday China is ready to work with Russia to forge closer partnership in energy cooperationpic.twitter.com/1j4zU9cB6k

— Zhang Meifang张美芳 (@CGMeifangZhang) November 29, 2022

The increasing military cooperation between Russia and China is a natural reaction to the similar pressure they are facing from the West. In a sign of the growing ties, Russian and Chinese bombers flew a joint patrol over the western Pacific on Wednesday.

Via The Cradle,

The CEO of US weapons giant Raytheon Technologies, Gregory Hayes, revealed on Thursday that Washington is working with partner nations in West Asia to transfer a handful of their air defense systems to Ukraine.

“The [Pentagon] is going to attempt to do some trading for us where we’ll take some from the [West Asian] countries that are our friends and some from our NATO allies, and try and get those into Ukraine early next year,” Hayes said, before adding that the weapons will be  “[backfilled] with new production over the next two years.”

Hayes did not mention specific countries the US is discussing the plan with. Washington’s goal with this plan is to deliver National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) to Ukraine within the next three to six months, to avoid a two-year wait for new ones from Raytheon’s factory.

“Just because it takes 24 months to build, it doesn’t mean it’s going to take 24 months to get [to Ukraine],” he said.

NASAMS are operated by five NATO members – Hungary, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, and Spain – as well as Oman and Qatar in West Asia, according to Defense Security Cooperation Agency records. Australia, Chile, Finland, and Indonesia also operate the systems.

The White House reportedly approved the arrangement to transfer the air defense systems to Ukraine. However, a Defense Department spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment by Politico.

Hayes made the revelations just a day after the US army awarded a $1.2 billion contract to Raytheon for six NASAMS for Ukraine, which are part of the fifth Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) package with a total value of $2.98 billion. Raytheon is also waiting in the wings for the approval of a $1 billion deal to provide Qatar with anti-drone systems.

Since the start of the war in Ukraine in February, the US congress has approved $65.9 billion in Ukraine assistance through three separate supplemental funding packages.

Just two weeks ago, US President Joe Biden asked congress for an additional $38 billion in Ukraine aid. If approved, this would bring the total amount of US taxpayer money Washington has funneled into the pockets of US weapon makers and Ukrainian authorities to $104 billion in less than a year.

Update (2017ET): 

Here is the first image of the B-21 Raider. 

*   *   *

Update (2000ET): 

The wait is finally over. Northrop Grumman Corporation and the US Air Force are set to unveil the world’s first sixth-generation aircraft. 

“The unveiling of the B-21 Raider will be a historic moment for our Air Force and the nation.”

“We last introduced a new bomber over 30 years ago. As we look to the threats posed by our pacing challenge; we must continue to rapidly modernize. The B-21 Raider will provide formidable combat capability across a range of operations in highly contested environments of the future,” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. CQ Brown, Jr., said.  

Only a few artists’ renderings of the Air Force’s next strategic bomber have ever been released in the public domain. Defense One said the “tightly controlled rollout ceremony for the B-21 Raider is scheduled for 8 p.m. Eastern time.”

Watch it here:

*   *   *

Northrop Grumman Corporation and the US Air Force are set to unveil the world’s first sixth-generation aircraft on Friday. 

The B-21 Raider stealth bomber will be displayed at Northrop’s facility in Palmdale, California. There have been no photos, just renderings released in the public domain of the super secret aircraft that has been in development since 2015. 

A team of more than 8,000 people from Northrop, 400 suppliers across 40 states, and the Air Force have been working on the B-21 program. 

Northrop said the new stealth bomber “benefits from more than three decades of strike and stealth technology … and was developed with the next generation of stealth technology, advanced networking capabilities and an open systems architecture, the B-21 is optimized for the high-end threat environment.” 

“The B-21 is the most advanced military aircraft ever built and is a product of pioneering innovation and technological excellence.

 “The Raider showcases the dedication and skills of the thousands of people working every day to deliver this aircraft,” Doug Young, sector vice president and general manager at Northrop Grumman Aeronautics Systems, said in a press release. 

The plane, according to Northrop, will be the “backbone of the future for US air power” with new capabilities and advanced technology to deliver conventional and nuclear payloads. It will be able to “defeat the anti-access, area-denial systems,” the defense company said. 

Northrop even called the new aircraft a “digital bomber.” Here’s why: 

“Northrop Grumman uses agile software development, advanced manufacturing techniques and digital engineering tools to help mitigate production risk on the B-21 program and enable modern sustainment practices.”

At least six of these new bombers are in various stages of final assembly and testing at the company’s plant in Palmdale. Tomorrow’s big reveal will be the first time public eyes have ever viewed a sixth-gen bomber in real-life. 

Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that vaccinated and boosted people made up most of the COVID-19 deaths in August.

Of the total 6,512 deaths recorded in August 2022, 58.6 percent of the deaths were attributed to vaccinated or boosted people, and seem to be a sign of a growing trend where vaccinated individuals are increasingly becoming the majority in COVID-19 mortalities.

In January 2022, COVID-19 mortalities in the vaccinated was still the minority with 41 percent of the data related to vaccinated or boosted individuals.

However, analysis of the CDC data from June and July showed over 50 percent of deaths were being reported in vaccinated individuals, with 62 and 61 percent reported respectively.

“We can no longer say this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” Cynthia Cox, the vice-president of the Kaiser Family Foundation told the Washington Post in an article dated Nov. 23. 

Cox, while in support of COVID-19 vaccination, gave three reasons that may explain why.

One was that the majority of Americans have at least been given the primary series. Her second reason is that elderly, who have the greatest risk of dying from COVID, are also more likely to take up vaccinations.

Cox’s final reason was that the potency of the vaccine will wane over time and as variants become more resistant, and therefore recommended more booster uptake.

COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness has been shown to wane dramatically over the period of a few months, sometimes falling into negligible efficacy.

Professor Jeffrey Townsend from Yale University, biostatistician, and lead author to a research study evaluating natural and vaccinated immunity against COVID-19, wrote in an email to The Epoch Times that at this stage in the pandemic, rather than comparing the vaccinated against the unvaccinated, it is more helpful to look at an individual’s time since last exposure instead, with exposures meaning vaccinations or infections.

“Most people have had some kind of exposure, the time since last exposure, along with what the last exposure was, dictates the level of immunity and can explain most variation in susceptibility, morbidity, and mortality,” Townsend wrote.

Currently, long term studies on immunity against COVID-19 have shown that whether a person is vaccinated or infected with COVID-19, their immunity wanes over time.

Other research compared natural immunity with vaccinations often showed that vaccination tends to wane at a much higher rate than that of natural infection.

Some scientists also posited that mRNA vaccines may interfere with the body’s natural immune response. Since the current technology used in mRNA vaccines may “hide the mRNA from cellular defenses and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein,” according to a June 2022 paper published in Food and Chemical Toxicology. The spike protein is the main pathogenic part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Clinicians Question ‘Pandemic of the Unvaccinated’ Narrative

Internal medical physician and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough told The Epoch Times that the pandemic was only driven by the unvaccinated in 2020, where there were no vaccines available, and from 2021 it was mostly the vaccinated people who were dying from COVID-19. He reasoned that it is simply because the vaccine did little to control mortality.

“[The CDC data] is far too late in drawing that conclusion, [the vaccinated] probably assumed the majority sometime during 2021,” said McCullough.

In 2020, more than 385,000 COVID deaths were documented by the CDC, whereas in 2021, when vaccinations were rolling out, there were more than 463,000 COVID-19 deaths.

By June of 2021, around 53 percent of the U.S. population had received their first dose and 44 percent were fully vaccinated.

Yet there was little difference in COVID-19 mortality cases between the first half of 2021 and the second half, with over 244,000 cases (more than 50 percent of the whole year) reported from July to December.

“It certainly can’t be a situation where we blame the unvaccinated for COVID deaths. And we certainly wouldn’t conclude that the vaccines made any impact on us as the majority of deaths happened during the era of vaccinations,” said McCullough.

Data from other countries have also demonstrated higher rates of vaccinated patients being hospitalized with COVID as vaccination rates overall rose.

As early as January 2022, hospitalization data coming out from the state of New South Wales (NSW) in Australia showed that a greater proportion of hospitalized patients were vaccinated. The vaccinated contributed to 50.3 percent of ICU presentations as compared to the 49.1 percent who were unvaccinated.

NSW was the only state that continued to track and publicize the vaccine status of the people being hospitalized in Australia. It is one of the most vaccinated places; by Nov. 24, over 80 percent of people over the age of 16 received their first boosters.

The most recent weekly data from NSW continued to show that the vaccinated make up the majority of COVID hospitalizations, ICU admission, and deaths. The most recent report, dated to Nov. 12, showed that unvaccinated patients contributed to 21 percent of COVID deaths, and less than 1 percent of hospitalizations and ICU admissions.

However, it should be noted that there was only 24 cases of COVID deaths reported in the report, with 440 hospitalizations and 40 ICU admissions, suggestive of a decline in disease severity.

Mortality data from Manitoba in Canada in the week July 31 to Aug. 6, 2022 also showed that while the boosted population made up 70 percent of all COVID mortalities, the unvaccinated contributed to less than 10 percent of deaths. This is with 43 percent of the population boosted.

Reports out of the UK also showed similar findings. A report (pdf) published on March 31, 2022 showed that almost 73 percent of COVID mortalities were in boosted individuals while 10 percent were attributed to unvaccinated people. At the time, over 57 percent of the population received a booster shot and 73 percent received their primary doses.

Unvaccinated Mortality Rates May Not Reflect the Whole Picture

McCullough added that with the decrease in overall disease severity with Omicron, the data may not present an accurate understanding on COVID deaths.

“The CDC death data has to be interpreted with caution, because they’re not adjudicated as dying of COVID. They can actually die with COVID.”

The CDC’s website currently estimates that only 10 percent of COVID-19 deaths have COVID as the contributor of deaths. Therefore, there may be cases counted as a COVID mortality even if COVID was not the primary driver for the death.

McCullough gave the example that a person may be admitted to the hospital for a heart attack and test positive on the COVID test from having contracted the disease 6 months ago.

Read more here…

Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A federal appeals court on Thursday has put a stop to a special master’s external review of the thousands of documents seized from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.

The ruling comes after a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit heard from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Trump’s lawyers on Nov. 22 regarding the government’s motion to remove U.S. District Judge Raymond Dearie as special master.

This appointment of a special master by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, barred the DOJ from getting their hands on the documents as they pursued a criminal investigation into Trump “pending resolution” of the review.

The federal appeals court ruled that Cannon had no jurisdiction to exercise what’s known as equitable jurisdiction—or the authority of the court to act in the interest of fairness—in this scenario where an indictment hadn’t been announced and without showing that the seizure of documents was unlawful.

Exercising equitable jurisdiction should only be “exceptional” and “anomalous,” the judges said. They noted that legal precedent had limited this jurisdiction with a four-factor test. Trump’s jurisdictional arguments “fail all four factors,” they said.

In their opinion, the judges said they had considered their options: either “drastically expand” the availability of equitable jurisdiction for every subject of a search warrant, carve out an “unprecedented exception” in the law for former presidents, or apply their usual test.

They chose to apply their usual four-factor test, noting that only the “narrowest of circumstances permit a district court to invoke equitable jurisdiction” and that this was “not one of them.”

The appeals court judges remanded the district court to dismiss Trump’s civil action originally calling for the special master.

“The law is clear,” the appeals court judges wrote in their opinion (pdf). “We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so.”

“Either approach would be a radical reordering of our caselaw limiting the federal courts’ involvement in criminal investigations,” the opinion continued. “And both would violate bedrock separation-of-powers limitations.”

Jack Smith, a recently appointed special counsel, tasked with leading the investigation into whether the former president violated the Espionage Act and other federal laws through the handling of certain records, including papers with secret markings, brought the appeals court challenge.

The DOJ is looking into any obstruction of justice by Trump, as well as any legal violations involving the removal of White House records.

Read more here…

In a greatly anticipated Friday night drop of what has was expected to be a cache of information involving the censoring of Hunter Biden’s notebook story days ahead of the 2020 presidential election, moments ago Elon Musk – who worked in collaboration with the notoriously independent gonzo journalist Matt Taibbi of “Vampire Squid” fame – has published the “Twitter Files.”

Shortly before their release, Matt Taibbi sent the following email to his substack subscribers:

Dear TK Readers:

Very shortly, I’m going to begin posting a long thread of information on Twitter, at my account, @mtaibbi. This material is likely to get a lot of attention. I will absolutely understand if subscribers are angry that it is not appearing here on Substack first. I’d be angry, too.

The last 96 hours have been among the most chaotic of my life, involving multiple trips back and forth across the country, with a debate in Canada in between. There’s a long story I hope to be able to tell soon, but can’t, not quite yet anyway. What I can say is that in exchange for the opportunity to cover a unique and explosive story, I had to agree to certain conditions.

Those of you who’ve been here for years know how seriously I take my obligation to this site’s subscribers. On this one occasion, I’m going to have to simply ask you to trust me. As it happens, there may be a few more big surprises coming, and those will be here on Substack. And there will be room here to to discuss this, too, in time. In any case, thanks for your support and your patience, and please hold me to a promise to make all this up to you, and then some.

Moments later Elon confirmed that he did, in fact, work with Taibbi:

Here we go!! 🍿🍿 https://t.co/eILK9f3bAm

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 2, 2022

And this is what Taibbi has been tweeting in the past few minutes (link here):

1. Thread: THE TWITTER FILES

2. What you’re about to read is the first installment in a series, based upon thousands of internal documents obtained by sources at Twitter.

3. The “Twitter Files” tell an incredible story from inside one of the world’s largest and most influential social media platforms. It is a Frankensteinian tale of a human-built mechanism grown out the control of its designer.

4. Twitter in its conception was a brilliant tool for enabling instant mass communication, making a true real-time global conversation possible for the first time.

5. In an early conception, Twitter more than lived up to its mission statement, giving people “the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.”

6. As time progressed, however, the company was slowly forced to add those barriers. Some of the first tools for controlling speech were designed to combat the likes of spam and financial fraudsters.

7. Slowly, over time, Twitter staff and executives began to find more and more uses for these tools. Outsiders began petitioning the company to manipulate speech as well: first a little, then more often, then constantly.

8. By 2020, requests from connected actors to delete tweets were routine. One executive would write to another:  “More to review from the Biden team.” The reply would come back: “Handled.”

9. Celebrities and unknowns alike could be removed or reviewed at the behest of a political party:

10.Both parties had access to these tools. For instance, in 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored. However:

11. This system wasn’t balanced. It was based on contacts. Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation, there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right.

12. The resulting slant in content moderation decisions is visible in the documents you’re about to read. However, it’s also the assessment of multiple current and former high-level executives.

… Okay, there was more throat-clearing about the process, but screw it, let’s jump forward

16. The Twitter Files, Part One: How and Why Twitter Blocked the Hunter Biden Laptop Story

17. On October 14, 2020, the New York Post published BIDEN SECRET EMAILS, an expose based on the contents of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop:

18. Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be “unsafe.” They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography.

19. White House spokeswoman Kaleigh McEnany was locked out of her account for tweeting about the story, prompting a furious letter from Trump campaign staffer Mike Hahn, who seethed: “At least pretend to care for the next 20 days.”

20.This led public policy executive Caroline Strom to send out a polite WTF query. Several employees noted that there was tension between the comms/policy teams, who had little/less control over moderation, and the safety/trust teams:

21. Strom’s note returned the answer that the laptop story had been removed for violation of the company’s “hacked materials” policy:  https://web.archive.org/web/20190717143909/https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hacked-materials

22. Although several sources recalled hearing about a “general” warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence – that I’ve seen – of any government involvement in the laptop story. In fact, that might have been the problem…

23. The decision was made at the highest levels of the company, but without the knowledge of CEO Jack Dorsey, with former head of legal, policy and trust Vijaya Gadde playing a key role.

24. “They just freelanced it,” is how one former employee characterized the decision. “Hacking was the excuse, but within a few hours, pretty much everyone realized that wasn’t going to hold. But no one had the guts to reverse it.”

25.You can see the confusion in the following lengthy exchange, which ends up including Gadde and former Trust and safety chief Yoel Roth. Comms official Trenton Kennedy writes, “I’m struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this as unsafe”:

26. By this point “everyone knew this was fucked,” said one former employee, but the response was essentially to err on the side of… continuing to err.

27. Former VP of Global Comms Brandon Borrman asks, “Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?”

28. To which former Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker again seems to advise staying the non-course, because “caution is warranted”:

29. A fundamental problem with tech companies and content moderation: many people in charge of speech know/care little about speech, and have to be told the basics by outsiders. To wit:

30. In one humorous exchange on day 1, Democratic congressman Ro Khanna reaches out to Gadde to gently suggest she hop on the phone to talk about the “backlash re speech.” Khanna was the only Democratic official I could find in the files who expressed concern.

31. Gadde replies quickly, immediately diving into the weeds of Twitter policy, unaware Khanna is more worried about the Bill of Rights:

32.Khanna tries to reroute the conversation to the First Amendment, mention of which is generally hard to find in the files:

33.Within a day, head of Public Policy Lauren Culbertson receives a ghastly letter/report from Carl Szabo of the research firm NetChoice, which had already polled 12 members of congress – 9 Rs and 3 Democrats, from “the House Judiciary Committee to Rep. Judy Chu’s office.”

34.NetChoice lets Twitter know a “blood bath” awaits in upcoming Hill hearings, with members saying it’s a “tipping point,” complaining tech has “grown so big that they can’t even regulate themselves, so government may need to intervene.”

35.Szabo reports to Twitter that some Hill figures are characterizing the laptop story as “tech’s Access Hollywood moment”:

36.Twitter files continued:  “THE FIRST AMENDMENT ISN’T ABSOLUTE” 

Szabo’s letter contains chilling passages relaying Democratic lawmakers’ attitudes. They want “more” moderation, and as for the Bill of Rights, it’s “not absolute”

37. An amazing subplot of the Twitter/Hunter Biden laptop affair was how much was done without the knowledge of CEO Jack Dorsey, and how long it took for the situation to get “unfucked” (as one ex-employee put it) even after Dorsey jumped in.

38. While reviewing Gadde’s emails, I saw a familiar name – my own. Dorsey sent her a copy of my Substack article blasting the incident

39. There are multiple instances in the files of Dorsey intervening to question suspensions and other moderation actions, for accounts across the political spectrum

Developing

*  *  *

The release was telegraphed one week ago, when Musk acknowledged that revealing Twitter’s internal discussions surrounding the censorship of the New York Post‘s Hunter Biden laptop story right before the 2020 US election is “necessary to restore public trust.”

This is necessary to restore public trust

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2022

Recall that the Post had its Twitter account locked in October 2020 for reporting on the now-confirmed-to-be-real “laptop from hell,” which contained still-unprosecuted evidence of foreign influence peddling through then-Vice President Joe Biden – including a 2015 meeting with an executive of Ukrainian gas giant Burisma.

Users who tried to share the link to the article were greeted with a message saying, “We can’t complete this request because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful.”

Then, days after Musk’s tweet, Twitter’s former head of Trust and Safety, Yoel Roth, admitted it was a ‘mistake’ to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story.

In his first public appearance since becoming an ex-employee, Roth suggested that the Hunter Biden laptop story was simply ‘too difficult’ for Twitter to verify. Alternatively, the company could have perhaps simply trusted the Post, one of America’s oldest publications that doesn’t have a reputation for fabricating bombshell stories – like Twitter does with countless anonymous bombshells from other major publications.

“We didn’t know what to believe. We didn’t know what was true. There was smoke,” Roth said during an interview at the Knight Foundation conference, as noted by the Epoch Times. “And ultimately for me, it didn’t reach a place where I was comfortable removing this content from Twitter.”

“It set off every single one of my finely tuned APT28 ‘hack and leak campaign’ alarm bells,” he said, referring to a notorious team of cyberspies affiliated with Russian military intelligence. “Everything about it looked like a hack and leak.”

When asked whether if it was a mistake to censor the story, Roth replied, “In my opinion, yes.”

Would Roth have suppressed the story if it was a Don Jr. laptop full of incriminating evidence?

* * *

Finally, it will be very interesting to see which “independent”, “impartial” and “objective” members of the Mainstream Media cover the Twitter Files, which unlike all that Russia collusion bullshit, was a real and actionable attempt to interfere with US democracy by covering up one of the most explosive political stories of a generation, not to mention an event that would have swayed the 2020 presidential election. 

Between 2016 and 2016, Los Angeles County experienced a 1,280% spike in overdose deaths from fentanyl, according to a recent report from the county Department of Public Health.

In a joint statement, the LA County District Attorney’s Office (which regularly refuses to charge drug dealers) and the health department announced the creation of a working group to address the situation “through prevention, education and enforcement.”

The ‘enforcement’ part will of course mark a radical departure from DA George Gascón’s ‘catch-and-release’ policy when it comes to criminals.

According to the health department, there were 104 deaths in 2016 attributed to fentanyl, which ballooned to 1,662 in 2001.

According to City News Service, black residents had the highest overdose rate based on the population, at 30.6 per 100,000 residents. White residents are overdosing at a rate of 22.5 per 100,000, while Latinos are at 11.1 per 100,000 residents.

The overdoses also occurred much more frequently in less affluent areas – which came in at 38.4 deaths per 100,000 vs. 12.3 per 100,000.

“Fentanyl overdoses are a significant and growing public health problem across the United States and in [the county], across sociodemographic groups and geographic areas,” reads the report, which adds “The increases among youth and the widening inequities between under-resourced and more affluent groups underscore the need to target prevention efforts to those at highest risk to decrease fentanyl overdoses and advance health equity in [LA County].”

Gascón, acting like he isn’t a huge part of the problem, said in a statement that the working group is “bringing together the county’s public health experts, education leaders, community advocates, and law enforcement professionals to support and utilize evidence-based and effective approaches to stopping the toll fentanyl is taking,” Gascón said in a statement.”

Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Six of 11 alleged assailants connected with Antifa, a far-left extremist group, have taken plea deals and pled guilty to charges related to violent attacks on supporters of outgoing President Donald Trump at a “Patriot March” in San Diego shortly after the 2020 election.

Five defendants pled guilty on Nov. 18, just over a week after Erich “Nikki” Louis Yach was sentenced to four years and eight months in prison for his role in the violence near Crystal Pier in Pacific Beach on Jan. 9, 2021. Yach was the first of the 11 to be sentenced.

Yach earlier pled guilty to charges of conspiracy, assault, and the unlawful use of tear gas.

At his sentencing hearing, GG Hubbard, Yach’s spouse, urged the court to send Yach—a biological male who identifies as female—to a women’s prison. Yach has spent nearly the last two years in a men’s prison and will be credited for time already served.

“I want to make sure she gets put in the correct facility according to her gender,” Hubbard told the court.

Hubbard claimed Yach is “not violent” and said incarceration in anything but a women’s facility was “violating the law” and “political and fascist nonsense.”

San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan announced in June that a criminal grand jury had two weeks earlier delivered 29 indictments against all 11 defendants, including “conspiracy to commit a riot, use of tear gas, assault with a deadly weapon, and assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury.”

“Antifa uses force, fear, and violence to further their interests and suppress the interests of others. The objective of this conspiracy was to incite and participate in a riot,” the district attorney’s office said at the time.

The defendants named in the indictments are from Los Angeles and San Diego counties and are all “affiliated with Antifa” according to a statement from the district attorney’s office last December. The named are Alexander Akridgejacobs, Jesse Merel Cannon, Brian Cortez Lightfoot Jr., Christian Martinez, Luis Francisco Mora, Samuel Howard Ogden, Bryan Rivera, Faraz Martin Talab, and Jeremy White.

Antifa supporters posted on social media on Jan. 2, 2021 calls for a “counterprotest” and “direct action” against Trump supporters, and then a week later gathered with other “uncharged co-conspirators” dressed in black garb with Antifa insignia to confront those participating in the Patriot March, the office stated.

According to the district attorney’s office, such alleged action included “assault, battery, assault with deadly weapons, arson, and vandalism.”

Videos posted online showed one of the masked, black-clad protesters carrying an “Antifascist Action” banner and another with a sign saying “No Nazis in PB”—a reference to Pacific Beach—as the group of about 100 shouted “Racists go home!” at Trump supporters.

“Antifa uses force, fear, and violence to further their interests and suppress the interests of others. The objective of this conspiracy was to incite and participate in a riot,” the district attorney’s office said.

The indictments accused the Antifa-affiliated group of planning the attacks and using a baseball bat, flagpole, stun gun, and tear gas on their victims. They were also accused of throwing a wooden lawn chair at a woman.

Prosecutors also allege some Antifa members in the crowd chased down several minors whom they thought were part of the Patriot March, sprayed them with mace, and pushed one to the ground. The victim was later transported to a hospital for treatment of a concussion.

Other “victims included a journalist [taking] photos, a dog that was maced and a business that was also vandalized,” prosecutors said.

The San Diego Police Department reported a total of 16 separate attacks on eight people.

The Antifa rioters allegedly threw eggs, rocks and bottles and sprayed mace at officers after police declared the dueling protests an unlawful assembly and tried to disperse the crowd.

All the defendants pleaded not guilty in June.

None of the Trump supporters or other bystanders were charged with any crimes.

“Video evidence analysis shows that overwhelmingly the violence in this incident was perpetrated by the Antifa affiliates and was not a mutual fray with both sides crossing out of lawful First Amendment,” the district attorney’s office stated in June.

Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

The city of Minneapolis on Wednesday reached a $600,000 settlement with the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota (ACLU-MN) over alleged police mistreatment of protestors following the death of George Floyd.

The lawsuit was filed in 2020 by ACLU-MN, Fish & Richardson P.C., and Gustafson Gluek PLLC on behalf of 12 protesters who were injured when they took to the streets to peacefully demonstrate.

According to ACLU-MN, the class action lawsuit awards a $600,000 payment, to be split among the plaintiffs, and includes “numerous reforms.”

Specifically, it bans the city from “arresting, threatening to arrest, or using physical force,” which includes the use of chemical agents, flash-bang or concussion grenades, and foam-tipped bullets to stop people from engaging in lawful protests or demonstrations.

It also limits police use of chemical agents to disperse peaceful protests and requires that officers deployed to protests are wearing body cameras that are recording and are “unobstructed.”

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit claim to have suffered an array of injuries, including bruising, “lingering respiratory issues from tear gas, and psychological trauma “due to Minneapolis police using “unnecessary and excessive force” to suppress the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights to protests, including tear gas and rubber bullets.

A police officer stands amid smoke and debris as buildings continue to burn in the aftermath of a night of protests and violence following the death of George Floyd, in Minneapolis, Minn., on May 29, 2020. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

Protesters face police as the latter move in with tear gas to take over the chaotic streets outside the Minneapolis Police 5th Precinct during the fourth night of protests and violence following the death of George Floyd, in Minneapolis, Minn., on May 29, 2020. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

They also alleged that officers often fired without warning or orders to leave.

The plaintiffs claimed that the psychological trauma they suffered as a result of this “excessive force” had quashed their desire to protest in the future.

Peaceful vs. Violent Expression

Demonstrators gather for a rally in memory of George Floyd and Daunte Wright outside Cup Foods in Minneapolis, Minn., on April 18, 2021. (John Minchillo/AP Photo)

Wednesday’s agreed settlement and injunction resolve two lawsuits filed in 2020 against the City of Minneapolis, Police Chief Medaria Arradondo, and various Minneapolis Police Department officers. Those lawsuits were later consolidated into one lawsuit.

The settlement dismisses claims against individual officers.

“People who are demonstrating peacefully should never be met with police violence as they were in Minneapolis during protests over MPD’s murder of George Floyd,” said ACLU-MN Legal Director Teresa Nelson in a statement.

“Tear gas, foam bullets, and pepper spray became weapons for intimidating and hurting protesters, making it dangerous for people to exercise their First Amendment rights. We hope this settlement sends a message to law enforcement across Minnesota that this violation of our constitutional rights will not be tolerated.”

A poster with George Floyd’s picture and a sign reads that “I Can’t Breathe” hang from a security fence outside the Hennepin County Government Center in Minneapolis, Minn. on March 31, 2021. (Kerem Yucel/AFP via Getty Images)

Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, was killed in May 2020 by then-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin during an arrest after Floyd allegedly tried to use a counterfeit $20 bill to purchase cigarettes.

Chauvin held his knee against Floyd’s neck and back for approximately nine-and-a-half minutes as Floyd lay handcuffed and face-down on the pavement while, another officer, Thomas Lane, restrained his lower body and J. Alexander Kueng knelt on Floyd’s back.

Video of the incident quickly went viral online, sparking protests across the country, in which thousands of peaceful protesters but also many non-peaceful rioters participated, resulting in damage to some businesses from looting and arson. Many of the protests continued into early 2021 and prompted calls to defund the police.

A destroyed building still smolders near the Minneapolis Police 3rd Precinct the day after it was attacked and burned by rioters following the death of George Floyd, in Minneapolis, Minn., on May 29, 2020. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

State Police stand guard as smoke billows from buildings that continue to burn in the aftermath of a night of protests and violence following the death of George Floyd, in Minneapolis, Minn., on May 29, 2020. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

According to a report from Axios, the destruction that occurred as a result of the demonstrations was estimated to see at least $1 billion to $2 billion of paid insurance claims.

Chauvin was convicted of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter charges in Floyd’s death in April 2021, and sentenced to more than 22 years in prison.

The Epoch Times has contacted Minneapolis Police for comment.

California taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as $223,200 for each descendant of slavery living in the Golden State, in order to compensate them for “housing discrimination,” according to the New York Times.

The nine-member Reparations Task Force, formed by California Governor Gavin Newsom, has been focusing on ways to counter the claimed housing discrimination. Overall reparations would cost approximately $569 billion to compensate the roughly 2.5 million black Californians for ‘setbacks’ between 1933 and 1977 – eclipsing the state’s $512.8 billion expenditure in 2021.

“We want to see the land and economic wealth stolen from Black families all across this country returned,” said activist Kavon Ward.

The panel is still mulling how payments should be made – with some suggesting tuition and housing grants, while others are suggesting cash. Final figures will be released in a 2023 report, which would then be up to the state Legislature to act upon the recommendations and figure out how to fund them.

They have also identified four other reasons for reparations – mass incarceration, unjust property seizures, devaluation of black businesses and health care. The $223,200 figure only applies to housing discrimination.

“We are looking at reparations on a scale that is the largest since Reconstruction,” task force member Jovan Scott Lewis, a Berkeley professor, told the Times.

Every year for almost three decades, Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan introduced legislation that would have created a commission to explore reparations, but the measure consistently stalled in Congress. After Mr. Conyers retired in 2017, Representative Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas began championing the measure, which passed a House committee for the first time last year, but stalled on the floor.

Underscoring the political hurdles, opinions on reparations are sharply divided by race. Last year, an online survey by the University of Massachusetts Amherst found that 86 percent of African Americans supported compensating the descendants of slaves, compared with 28 percent of white people. Other polls have also shown wide splits. -NYT

The Times points to Russell City, California as an example of housing discrimination. The city, once home to many black families who fled racial terror, was bulldozed and repolaced with an industrial park. Former resident Monique Henderson-Ford told the Times she was paid $2,200 for her home – less than 1/3 of what she paid.

“Imagine if the houses were still here,” she said, adding “We would all be sitting on a fortune.“