Monday, November 30, 2020

NYU ignores academic freedom, investigates Mark Crispin Miller’s course content, blog post

Mark Crispin Miller is a tenured professor in the Department of Media, Culture, and Communications at New York University and has been on the faculty there for more than 20 years.


Open letter to the U.S. Supreme Court



Dear Supreme Court Justices: America is struggling for survival. The war between liberals and conservatives surrounding this 2020 election is ample proof that we live in a deeply divided nation.

For the last four years, liberals, including the media cartel, used "obstruct," "resist," "impeach," the Mueller investigation, riots in cities controlled by Democrats and COVID, COVID, COVID to wage war on Trump and conservatives. So how can anyone expect conservatives to blindly accept the outcome of this election?

You, as the highest court of the land, are under great pressure to save our country, our constitution, our trust in our election process. Amid the censorship by mainstream and social media, we the people get information from other sources that tell us not to trust our government any longer.

We know that our country is controlled by rich oligarchs and the deep state. We know that the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency have been compromised to do things that are illegal, including fixing elections in foreign countries, spying on the Trump campaign and threatening government officials like you. And we known that the media only gives us propaganda that is approved by those rich oligarchs.

Are the claims of election fraud in the 2020 election baseless? According to a recent poll, 97% of those who voted for Trump believe that this election is so tainted that Biden was not the winner. Ninety-seven percent. That is a huge division in America. Do Americans trust the rulings by lower courts? No. So many lower court rulings have been overturned that Americans lost faith in the lower courts for Americans to just accept what those lower courts state about this election.

The claims of election fraud make sense. Five battleground states controlled by Democratic governors in three different time zones all stopped counting votes in the middle of election night simultaneously when Trump was well ahead in all of them. America watched Biden jump ahead in each as vote counting resumed three hours later with unbelievable vote dumps and vote switching. That is why the accusations started. They range from machine-software tampering to election worker malfeasance to ballot harvesting. The amount of evidence, even if circumstantial, is overwhelming to almost half of America.

As the cases go to the Supreme Court, pressure will come from your liberal colleagues and others outside of the court to side with the deep state as Chief Justice John Roberts did concerning Obamacare. They will argue that it is for the general welfare of the nation to accept this outcome just as Roberts agreed with Sotomayer, Kagan and Breyer that COVID shut-downs of churches were for the general welfare of the nation even though the shut-downs infringed on religious freedom in the First Amendment.

If you all punt on not stopping certification of this election until very important questions are answered, then the destruction of trust in the election process will do more harm to the general welfare of the United States than COVID could ever do. If you allow the liberals to use the threat of more riots to stop you from doing what is right according to our Constitution, then you are no better than those who committed the election fraud. If you let personal threats against you and your families interfere with this, then you should never have taken the job. We Americans put our trust in you to defend our constitutional rights, not to bend to pressure, threats or mob demands.

So what needs to be done? You need to take all the election fraud cases en masse and examine them, just as many Americans have. Is there enough smoke? Enough fire to stop the certification process? If yes, then you need to issue these instructions to Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania:

1. All the ballots in each of those states shall be recounted by hand and tallied by hand by Jan. 6, 2021. and certified by Jan. 8, 2021. No machines or software are to be used to count, review, tally or calculate in any way or of any kind.

2. Election officials from both parties have the right to review every transaction concerning every ballot first hand. Any ballots that do not meet the requirements of the state shall be rejected from the vote counts.

3. Any ballots received by any state that were not received on time or that had their time stamps changed or do not have adequate documentation of when they were received shall be rejected as invalid.

4. Any changes to election processes that were made without proper state legislation shall be rejected along with the ballots that were submitted in with those processes.

5. When the number of ballots of any precinct is more than the number of registered voters, then all the ballots of that precinct shall be removed from the vote count as being from a disqualified, contaminated precinct.

6. All certifications must be reported to the federal government by Jan. 10, 2021, for a tally of electoral votes and determination of president and vice president on Jan, 12, 2021.

7. Any state that is not in compliance by any of the deadlines will be barred from submitting its Electoral College votes for this election.

8. If neither candidate can get to 270 electoral college votes as a result of the recounts, then the procedure outlined in the Constitution shall be used in selecting a president and vice president when no candidate reaches more 50% of the electoral college votes.

9. Any non-compliance shall be prosecuted as contempt of court and obstruction of justice.

Justices, if you do this and the outcome stays the same, many more Americans will accept the election results with faith in you as our last defense of our constitutional rights. If you do not, then what happens to the United States rests on your shoulders.

And last, please ask the U.S. attorney general to immediately appoint a special prosecutor to investigate all the alleged election fraud with the same powers that special counsel Robert Mueller had for his investigation.

In God we trust. May God guide you to do what is right. And God bless America.


The post Open letter to the U.S. Supreme Court appeared first on WND.


Hey media, affidavits are considered evidence



As a lawyer who once represented the Maricopa County Elections Department, it has been appalling for me to see the mainstream media (MSM) breathlessly blabbing over and over that there is no "evidence" of election fraud.

They even had the nerve to claim that Sidney Powell, a former high-level Justice Department attorney, who served as lead counsel in more than 500 appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, had no evidence of fraud in the presidential election. They pretended she just put her hard-earned reputation on the line to hold a press conference with Rudy Giuliani based on lies. Sadly, the MSM is able to fool a lot of the public, because the public doesn’t understand the law.

Powell and the Trump legal team have compiled hundreds, if not thousands, of affidavits from people swearing to election fraud in the presidential election. Affidavits are evidence.

Many court cases are decided based on evidence from affidavits alone. If affidavits aren’t considered evidence, then millions of court judgments going back many years in this country must be thrown out.

The reason it's easy to fool people is analogous to something called the CSI Effect. Back when I was a prosecutor at the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, prosecutors noticed that juries started becoming less likely to convict defendants due to the TV show "CSI"(Crime Scene Investigation), because of its exaggerated emphasis on forensic science.

People began to think more evidence was needed to convict someone, particularly DNA tests. CSI viewers were less likely to convict based on circumstantial evidence alone, raising the effective standard of proof for prosecutors.

This is similar to what is happening here. The MSM has exaggerated the importance of evidence such as video showing election crimes or recreating fraud on the Dominion voting machines. The problem is both are impossible to get without a court order permitting the plaintiffs to investigate the machines or view the security camera footage. That type of access is granted later in a lawsuit.

Which leads to another legal myth the MSM has perpetuated, that the evidence must be produced now. In a trial, evidence is not introduced until after a complaint has been filed. Powell held the press conference with Guiliani before she had even filed the complaints in Georgia and Michigan. However, she still referenced the affidavits and described what was in them. But the MSM pretended none of that was evidence.

Powell not only has affidavits from witnesses, she has affidavits from whistleblowers who admit they participated in the election fraud. In criminal law — which has a much higher burden of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt — that's called a slam dunk.

This is no way near over, because the battle is being fought on multiple fronts. Trump's campaign has filed lawsuits, as well as Powell and others such as the Amistad Project and the Arizona State Republican Party. A Pennsylvania state legislative committee conducted a hearing, and Arizona's legislature will hold one on Monday.

And the FBI has started investigating ballot fraud found by the Voter Integrity Project. The bureau is looking into people who falsely used the Post Office as their address, people who were no longer a resident of a state they voted in and people who did not request a ballot but received one.

In Arizona, 44% of voters surveyed said they received a ballot but did not request one, which is a crime. The Arizona state Republican Party has asked in a complaint to look at the signatures on the envelopes of mail-in ballots, since so many do not match the signatures on file. There are enough to change the election results. Throughout the swing states, the rejection rate of mail-in ballots decreased so much that it could easily change the results.

It doesn’t matter how many lower courts rule against Trump.  Those decisions can all be appealed up to the Supreme Court, just as they were in Bush v. Gore. The standard for deciding these cases is generally whether there was enough election fraud to change the outcome. This has been clearly laid out in the lawsuits.

However, Trump has said that if the Electoral College votes to confirm Biden on Dec. 14, the deadline, he will concede. Some are holding out hope that the Republican-dominated legislatures in the swing states will not send the slates of Biden electors to Congress. But there are always RINOs who will not go along with this. An effort in Pennsylvania by Republicans in the State House to vacate the certification garnered only 26 signatures. There are 203 members in the State House.

There is so much voter fraud it is mind numbing; your eyes glaze over trying to comprehend it all. There are statistical impossibilities and anomalies everywhere — unless it was miracles for Biden! The left knows it's fraud, but they justify it by saying it is up to the courts to decide. Just a few crooked judges to do the dirty work and their consciences are clear.

If the Democrats are allowed to get away with this, it will constitute the first major breakdown of our representative democracy and Constitution. No longer will the people determine key elections, instead they will be determined by oligarchs in the Democratic Party, which has drifted toward socialism.

If this much felony voter fraud is allowed to happen in the most important election in the world by dismissing it as right-wing conspiracy theories, then there’s very little chance it will be reversed once the Democrats are in power and have even more control over it. It’s become vogue lately for the Democrats to whine about protecting our democracy, but they're the ones stripping people of their right to vote.


The post Hey media, affidavits are considered evidence appeared first on WND.


A Vaccine Won't Cure The 20-Year "Widow-Maker" Trade

A Vaccine Won't Cure The 20-Year "Widow-Maker" Trade Tyler Durden Mon, 11/30/2020 - 14:25

Authored by Lance Roberts via,

Will a vaccine cure the 20-year “Widow-Maker” trade?

In 1999, a media personality stated that “investing like Warren Buffett was like driving dad’s old Pontiac.” Of course, that was at the height of the bubble, and soon after, “value investing” paid off. Unfortunately, it didn’t stick.

The Widow-Maker Trade

It wasn’t just 1999. In 2007, individuals were chasing the “momentum” in the real estate market. Individuals left their jobs to pursue riches in housing. They were willing to “pay any price” under the assumption they would be able to sell higher. Of course, it was not long after Ben Bernanke uttered the words “the subprime market is contained,” the dreams of riches evaporated like a “morning mist.” 

In 2020, investors are again chasing “growth at any price” and rationalizing overpaying for growth. As I discussed in the “Death Of Fundamentals:”

“Such makes the mantra of using 24-month estimates to justify paying exceedingly high valuations today, even riskier.”

Chart updated as of November 2020

Given the massive government and Federal Reserve interventions over the last decade, it should be of no surprise that “growth” has outperformed. For “value investors,” it has been a “decade of pain.” The rise of passive indexing, algorithmic trading, and massive amounts of liquidity have destroyed price discovery in the markets.

Reasons For Under-Performance

In a recent discussion on “Value Is Dead,” we referenced a Research Affiliates article that noted the under-performance reasons.

An investment strategy, style, or factor can suffer a period of underperformance for many reasons.

  • First, the style may have been a product of data mining, only working during its backtest because of overfitting. 

  • Second, structural changes in the market could render the factor newly irrelevant. 

  • Third, the trade can get crowded, leading to distorted prices and low or negative expected returns. 

  • Fourth, recent performance may disappoint because the style or factor is becoming cheaper as it plumbs new lows in relative valuation. 

  • Finally, flagging performance might be a result of a left-tail outlier or pure bad luck. 

If the first three reasons imply the style no longer works, and will not likely benefit investors in the future, the last two reasons have no such implications.

With today’s value vs. growth valuation gap at an extreme (the 100th percentile of historical relative valuations), it sets the stage for a potentially historic outperformance of value relative to growth over the coming decade.”

The underperformance is quite stunning. The chart shows the difference in the performance of the “value vs growth” index. The index compares the pure value to a pure growth index, with each based on a $100 investment. While value investing always provides consistent returns, there are times when growth outperforms value. The periods when “value investing” has the most significant outperformance, as noted by the “blue shaded” areas, are notable.

When things ultimately go “pear-shaped,” the return to value tends to be a swift event. For investors, it is crucial to grasp what decades of investment experience tell us about the future. When the cycle turns, we have little doubt the value-growth relationship will revert to its long-term mean.

Is The Vaccine Announcement The Turning Point

Recently, Kevin Muir published a piece with an important message:

The virus is done. The scientists won. They nailed it…markets will look through any (short term) negatives and realize the end is in sight.”

He goes on to make a case for “why” the Pfizer vaccine (and the other vaccines that will follow) may be the “silver bullet” that the market has been waiting for. Kevin’s view is the market is a discounting mechanism, and the “Smart Money” will focus on the future. Primarily, he hopes, the “Buying Value/Selling Growth” trade, which has been a widow-maker trade for the past 20 years, will be changed by the “vaccine.” 

I doubt the “vaccine” will cure the ills of “value” any time soon as it does not address the primary issues driving the “momentum chase” currently. Refer back to the Research Affiliates comments above. 

Does a vaccine change:

  • The effect of “data mining” on investment styles? No.

  • The “structural changes” to the market (i.e. proliferation of ETF’s)? No.

  • A crowded trade that leads to a distortion of prices? No.

The “vaccine” does not cure the most massive problem for value stocks – actual value.

The Lack Of Value In “Value”

As a “fundamental” and “value” based investor, the lack of performance in value versus growth has undoubtedly been frustrating. However, one of the biggest problems is the astonishing lack of value in “value.”

Be careful about what you are paying for.

— Lance Roberts (@LanceRoberts) September 18, 2020

The chart is pretty stunning but needs some explanation.

Here is the issue with intangible assets.

“Intangible assets are typically nonphysical assets used over the long-term. Intangible assets are often intellectual assets. Proper valuation and accounting of intangible assets are often problematic. Such is due in large part to how intangible assets are handled. The difficulty assigning value stems from the uncertainty of their future benefits. Also, the useful life of an intangible asset can be either identifiable or non-identifiable. Most intangible assets are long-term assets meaning they have a useful life of more than a year.” – Investopedia

Read the bolded sentence again.

In many cases, the value of intangible assets is often overly optimistic assumptions about the companies worth. We recently quoted Raconteur on this particular issue:

“Tangible assets are easy to value. They’re typically physical assets with finite monetary values, but over the years have become a smaller part of a company’s total worth. Technology disruption continues in artificial intelligence, robotics and cloud computing. As such, intangible assets have grown to represent the lion’s share of corporate valuations. But without a physical form and the ability to easily convert them into cash, working out what these assets are truly worth can be challenging.”

The Debt Problem

The most significant problem for the majority of companies in the “value” space is debt. As we have discussed previously, in just the last 10 years, the triple-B bond market has exploded from $686 billion to $2.5 trillion—an all-time high.

“To put that in perspective, 50% of the investment-grade bond market now sits on the lowest rung of the quality ladder. 

And there’s a reason BBB-rated debt is so plentiful. Ultra-low interest rates have seduced companies to pile into the bond market and corporate debt has surged to heights not seen since the global financial crisis.” – John Mauldin

The debt issuance is problematic as companies used it for non-productive investments such as stock buybacks and dividend issuance as corporate profitability remained extraordinarily weak over the last decade. 

As discussed in “The Importance Of The Buffett Indicator,” corporate profits are at the same level as in 2009, while markets are at all-time highs. Exactly where is the “value?” 

Notably, corporate profits are a reflection of economic growth rates, and a “vaccine” will not cure the problem plaguing profitability long-term—the debt.

Value Needs Strong Economic Growth & Higher Rates

The problem with the “vaccine will lead to a value rotation,” is such would require more robust economic growth and higher rates for increased profitability. 

  • Banks – need higher interest rates

  • Energy – needs higher oil prices 

  • Materials – needs more substantial economic growth driving physical investment.

  • Industrials – same as materials.

Here is where the “rotation to value” runs into problems. 

Let’s start with the banks.

If interest rates were to rise substantially, the economy contracts due to the economy’s massive debt levels. We showed this specifically in “The Fed Will Monetize All Debt Issuance..”

“In an economy laden with $75 Trillion in total debt, higher interest rates have an immediate impact on consumption, which is 70% of economic growth. The chart below shows this to be the case, which is the interest service on total credit market debt. (The chart assumes all debt is equivalent to the 10-year Treasury, which is not the case.)”

What about energy stocks?

No one believed me in 2017 when I stated that oil prices were going to remain low. 

“With respect to investors, the argument can be made that oil prices could remain range-bound for an extremely long period of time as witnessed in the 80’s and 90’s.

Energy companies still have a massive supply/demand imbalance that existed long before the “pandemic” hit the economy. While a vaccine may provide a short-term boost, the underlying fundamentals are still not supportive of a long-term rotation. 

Energy companies, along with basic materials and industrials, need stronger economic growth.

That isn’t coming.

Weaker Economic Growth

A vaccine will not solve the longer-term problems plaguing weaker economic growth rates and stronger fundamentals.

As we discussed previously in the “One-Way Trip Of American Debt,” the economic growth rate has been undermined by the surge in debt over the last decade.  

“Before the “Financial Crisis,” the economy had a linear growth trend of real GDP of 3.2%. Following the 2008 recession, the growth rate dropped to the exponential growth trend of roughly 2.2%. Instead of reducing the debt problems, unproductive debt and leverage increased.”

As stated, the sectors believed to be part of the “value trade” requires stronger economic activity. Such would lead to higher rates of inflation and higher interest rates.

As rates rise, so do rates on credit card payments, auto loans, business loans, capital expenditures, leases, etc., while also reducing corporate profitability.

In an economy supported by debt, rates must remain low. Therefore, the Federal Reserve has no choice but to monetize as much debt issuance as is needed to keep rates from substantially rising. The byproduct of those actions is weaker economic growth and lower rates of inflation. As shown, since 2009, inflation has consistently run well below the Fed’s target.

Unfortunately, higher levels of debt continue to retard economic growth keeping the Fed trapped in a debt cycle as hopes of “growth” remain elusive. The current 5-year average inflation-adjusted growth rate is just 1.64%, a far cry from the 4.79% real growth rate in the ’80s.

“vaccine” for COVID-19 is entirely different than what is needed to cure the “debt problem.”

The Rotation Is Likely Short-Lived

Look back at the first chart above. Based on two-year forward earnings estimates, the Russell 2000 (small-capitalization companies) are trading at historical extremes. Compound valuation problems, with the debt problem, and the lack of actual “value,” the issue becomes more apparent.

Given the Federal Reserve’s monetary injections and suppression of interest rates, it is not surprising to see companies leveraging their balance sheets. As interest rates have plunged, corporations have hit a record issuance of debt to pay dividends and engage in other non-productive actions.

The increased leverage of corporate balance sheets is problematic, particularly given already weak revenue growth for S&P 500 companies.

The rotation from “growth” to “value” is inevitable. With that, we agree.

However, a  “vaccine” doesn’t solve the problems plaguing economic growth, suppressing inflation, and keeping Central Bankers flooding the markets with liquidity. 

Those problems can only get solved against a backdrop of devastation for the majority of investors. When there is a true reversion in leverage, debt, and valuations, the foundation for a “value rotation” will be laid. 


Johns Hopkins study explodes COVID death hoax; it’s re-labeling on a grand scale

Don’t blink. Johns Hopkins may delete or retract their analysis at any moment. Their author’s study is devastating. Too hot to handle. UPDATE: Yes, I wrote that opener a few hours before Johns Hopkins stepped in and DID retract the article. Boom. [1] [2] [3] [4]


"If Only Cranks Find The Election Tabulations Strange, Put Me Down As A Crank..."

"If Only Cranks Find The Election Tabulations Strange, Put Me Down As A Crank..." Tyler Durden Sun, 11/29/2020 - 22:30

Authored by Patrick Basham via The Spectator,

Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling

To say out-loud that you find the results of the 2020 presidential election odd is to invite derision. You must be a crank or a conspiracy theorist. Mark me down as a crank, then.

I am a pollster and I find this election to be deeply puzzling. I also think that the Trump campaign is still well within its rights to contest the tabulations. Something very strange happened in America’s democracy in the early hours of Wednesday November 4 and the days that followed. It’s reasonable for a lot of Americans to want to find out exactly what.

First, consider some facts.

President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent. By way of comparison, President Obama was comfortably reelected in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he received in 2008.

Trump’s vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him. He did extraordinarily well with rural male working-class whites.

He earned the highest share of all minority votes for a Republican since 1960. Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016. Nationally, Joe Biden’s black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.

Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico. Bellwether states swung further in Trump’s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America’s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the electoral college after winning this trio, and that 1960 defeat to John F. Kennedy is still the subject of great suspicion.

Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump’s direction. Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.

We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.

Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down-ballot coattails; Biden did not.

The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a ‘red wave’ in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests. Trump’s party did not lose a single state legislature and actually made gains at the state level.

Another anomaly is found in the comparison between the polls and non-polling metrics. The latter include: party registrations trends; the candidates’ respective primary votes; candidate enthusiasm; social media followings; broadcast and digital media ratings; online searches; the number of (especially small) donors; and the number of individuals betting on each candidate.

Despite poor recent performances, media and academic polls have an impressive 80 percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. But, when the polls err, non-polling metrics do not; the latter have a 100 percent record. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump’s reelection. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time; not an impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless.

Atypical voting patterns married with misses by polling and non-polling metrics should give observers pause for thought. Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted.

The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:

1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers

2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio

3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions

4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures

5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’

6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing

7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes

8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law

9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.

If you think that only weirdos have legitimate concerns about these findings and claims, maybe the weirdness lies in you.


America’s Pride In The Economy Is About To Be Greatly Shaken As Tens Of Millions Face Eviction In 2021


Unless there is emergency intervention, tens of millions of Americans could be facing eviction once the holiday season is over.  We kicked the can down the road throughout 2020, but all of the rent that was originally owed to landlords all over the country is still due, and they are very eager to collect.  Countless landlords are on the verge of financial ruin because of the rent moratoriums which were put in place, and kicking the can down the road even more would be absolutely disastrous for them.  Of course it would also be absolutely disastrous if the moratoriums are not extended, because in some states more than half of all households are behind on their rent or mortgage payments, and most of them have no way to pay.

One way or the other, we are about to hit a breaking point.  The Aspen Institute is telling us that a whopping 40 million people “could face eviction over the next several months”

According to research by the Aspen Institute, nearly 40 million Americans could face eviction over the next several months. The only thing holding back the flood right now is the CDC’s eviction moratorium order and a patchwork of state and local protections for renters.

But these moratoriums are only kicking the can down the road. Chief economist for Moody’s Analytics Mark Zandi told the Washington Post that tenants could owe nearly $70 billion in back rent by year’s end. And for landlords left holding the bag, there’s been little relief, as they’ve been forced to take on the role of government — subsidizing housing for millions even as their own taxes, mortgage payments, and other expenses are due.

That is about 12 percent of the entire country.

If they get evicted, where are they going to go?

Into the streets?

Vox recently interviewed a 48-year-old Texas resident named “Kimberly”, and she says that is exactly where she is headed if she gets evicted…

But after Covid-19 hit, she lost hours at her job as a crew trainer at Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers and found herself on the brink of financial collapse. She fell behind on her rent and when she tried to work with her landlord to set up a repayment plan, she told Vox that she was served an eviction notice. Now, the only thing keeping her in her home is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) national eviction moratorium, which prohibits landlords from evicting qualifying tenants for failing to make rent.

If she’s evicted, Kimberly says she has nowhere to go — and will be homeless for the second time in five years.

And there are countless others out there that are just like her.

According to Zero Hedge, “at least half of households in Arkansas, Florida and Nevada are not current on rent and mortgage payments”.

We have never seen anything like this in modern American history, and the new lockdowns that are being instituted across the nation will just make things even worse.

Of course there are many Americans that will be able to move in with family, and this has already been happening in very large numbers.  In particular, young people are moving back in with their parents on a massive scale.  According to the Pew Research Center, “a majority of young adults in the U.S. live with their parents for the first time since the Great Depression”.

The phrase “since the Great Depression” has been popping up a lot lately, hasn’t it?

That is because this is literally the first economic depression that the U.S. has experienced since that time.

Everywhere we look, we can see the sort of economic devastation that I have been warning was coming for a very long time.

In New Jersey, approximately one-third of all small businesses “have closed down in 2020”

A third of small businesses in New Jersey have closed down in 2020, according to a report from The Star-Ledger newspaper.

“It’s really bad… And without federal dollars coming into New Jersey, the Main Street stores and other establishments are not gonna make it through the winter.” said Eileen Kean, the state director of the National Federation of Independent Business.

New Jersey’s number is higher than the national average, but not by very much.

Of course Atlantic City has been hit particularly hard because it is so dependent on tourism.  At this point, it is being called “the city without a pulse”

The boardwalk is empty, the beaches are deserted, and the casinos, though partially reopen, are limping into their fifth month of severely curtailed operations after four months of shutdowns. The coronavirus pandemic skewered the economic engine of this beachside town, taking the city’s vibrancy and its residents’ livelihoods out with it.

Sadly, things are inevitably going to get worse in the months ahead thanks to the new lockdowns.  The number of Americans filing new claims for unemployment has risen significantly for the past two weeks, and more bad weeks are almost certainly ahead.

Needless to say, rising unemployment will mean more Americans being pushed out of their homes and more Americans being pushed into poverty.  According to a survey that was released in October, the number of Americans living in poverty has risen by 8 million since May…

The number of Americans living in poverty grew by 8 million since May, according to a Columbia University study, which found an increase in poverty rates after early coronavirus relief ended without more to follow.

Although the federal Cares Act, which gave Americans a one-time stimulus check of $1,200 and unemployed workers an extra $600 each week, was successful at offsetting growing poverty rates in the spring, the effects were short-lived, researchers found in the study published Thursday.

Of course that number is more than a month old, and so the true number of Americans that have been forced into poverty is substantially higher by now.

This is what an economic collapse looks like, and even worse days are ahead of us.

The good news is that those that were warned in advance that an economic collapse was coming had time to make preparations for this sort of a scenario.

But most Americans never wanted to listen to the warnings, and so now they find themselves in the middle of a storm without an umbrella.

Unfortunately, what we have experienced so far is just the leading edge of the storm, and most people still do not realize that.

***Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on including The Beginning Of The EndGet Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on FacebookTwitter and Parler, and any way that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.

The post America’s Pride In The Economy Is About To Be Greatly Shaken As Tens Of Millions Face Eviction In 2021 appeared first on The Economic Collapse.


UK Government Running 'Orwellian' Unit To Block Release Of "Sensitive" Information

UK Government Running 'Orwellian' Unit To Block Release Of "Sensitive" Information Tyler Durden Mon, 11/30/2020 - 02:00

Authored by Peter Geoghegan, Jenna Corderoy, and Lucas Amin via,

The British government has been accused of running an ‘Orwellian’ unit in Michael Gove’s office that instructs Whitehall departments on how to respond to Freedom of Information requests and shares personal information about journalists, openDemocracy can reveal today.

Experts warn that the practice could be breaking the law – and openDemocracy is now working with the law firm Leigh Day on a legal bid to force Gove’s Cabinet Office to reveal full details of how its secretive ‘Clearing House’ unit operates.

Freedom of Information (FOI) requests are supposed to be ‘applicant-blind’: meaning who makes the request should not matter. But it now emerges that government departments and non-departmental public bodies have been referring ‘sensitive’ FOI requests from journalists and researchers to the Clearing House in Gove’s department in a move described by a shadow cabinet minister as “blacklisting”.

This secretive FOI unit gives advice to other departments “to protect sensitive information”, and collates lists of journalists with details about their work. These lists have included journalists from openDemocracy, The Guardian, The Times, the BBC, and many more, as well as researchers from Privacy International and Big Brother Watch and elsewhere.

The unit has also signed off on FOI responses from other Whitehall departments – effectively centralising control within Gove’s office over what information is released to the public.

Conservative MP David Davis called on government ministers to “explain to the House of Commons precisely why they continue” with a Clearing House operation that is “certainly against the spirit of that Act – and probably the letter, too.”

Labour shadow Cabinet Office minister Helen Hayes said:

This is extremely troubling. If the cabinet office is interfering in FOI requests and seeking to work around the requirements of the Act by blacklisting journalists, it is a grave threat to our values and transparency in our democracy.”

Details of the Clearing House are revealed in a new report on Freedom of Information published today by openDemocracy.

‘Art of Darkness’ finds that the UK government has granted fewer and rejected more FOI requests than ever before – with standards falling particularly sharply in the most important Whitehall departments.

The Clearing House circulates a daily list of FOI requests to up to 70 departments and public bodies that contains details of all requests that it is advising on. This list covers FOI requests about “sensitive subjects” as well as ‘round robin’ requests made to multiple government departments.

Press freedom campaigners have sharply criticised the Clearing House operation and have called for full transparency.

Michelle Stanistreet, NUJ general secretary, said:

“The existence of this clearing house in the Cabinet Office is positively Orwellian. It poses serious questions about the government’s approach to access to information, its attitude to the public’s right to know and the collation of journalists’ personal information.”

Jon Baines, a data protection expert at the law firm Mischon de Reya and chair of the National Association of Data Protection Officers, said that he was “far from assured that the operation of the Clearing House complies with data protection law.”

“Data protection law requires, as a basic principle, that personal data be processed fairly and in a transparent manner – on the evidence that I have seen, I do not feel that the Clearing House meets these requirements,” Baines added.

‘Art of Darkness’: the worst offenders

The new report published by openDemocracy paints a disturbing picture of the state of Freedom of Information in Britain.

In 2019, central UK government departments granted fewer and rejected more FOI requests than ever before. In the last five years, the Cabinet Office – as well as the Treasury, Foreign Office and Home Office – have all withheld more requests than they granted, according to the report.

The Cabinet Office – which is the government department responsible for Freedom of Information policy – has one of the worst records on access to information. Last year, Michael Gove’s department was the branch of Whitehall most likely to have its decisions referred to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which regulates information rights in the UK.

New analysis by openDemocracy also shows that some public bodies are cynically undermining requests for information by failing to respond to requests in any way – a tactic described in openDemocracy’s report as ‘stonewalling’. Decision Notices, which are issued by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about stonewalling, have increased by 70 per cent in the last five years. Again, the Cabinet Office is a repeat offender.

The study reveals that the ICO fully or partially upheld complaints about mishandled requests in 48 per cent of its Decision Notices last year: the highest proportion in five years.

Yet the ICO’s capacity to investigate complaints and enforce the Act is diminishing. The regulator has seen its budget cut by 41 per cent over the last decade, while its complaint caseload has increased by 46 per cent in the same period.

The ICO’s enforcement may also be hampered by its governance structure – under which it is accountable on FOI to the Cabinet Office. Michael Gove’s department also is involved in setting the ICO’s annual budget.

Responding to openDemocracy’s questions about the Clearing House, a government spokesperson said:

“The Cabinet Office plays an important role through the FOI Clearing House of ensuring there is a standard approach across government in the way we consider and respond to requests.

“With increasing transparency, we receive increasingly more complex requests under Freedom of Information. We must balance the public need to make information available with our duty to protect sensitive information and ensure national security.”

‘Jenna Corderoy is a journalist’

openDemocracy has had first hand experience of how the Clearing House slows down or obstructs FOI requests, and profiles journalists, on a number of different occasions.

In February 2020, openDemocracy journalist Jenna Corderoy sent an FOI request to the Ministry of Defence about meetings with short-lived special advisor Andrew Sabisky. The MoD subsequently complained internally that “due to the time spent in getting an approval from Clearing House, the FOI requestor has put in a complaint to [the FOI regulator] the ICO”.

The MoD refused the Sabisky request after 196 days, which is more than six times the normal limit for responding to an FOI request.

Separately, when Corderoy sent a Freedom of Information request to the Attorney General’s Office, staff at the office wrote in internal emails:

“Just flagging that Jenna Corderoy is a journalist” and “once the response is confirmed, I’ll just need [redacted] to sign off on this before it goes out, since Jenna Corderoy is a reporter for openDemocracy”.

Today’s findings on the operation of the Clearing House add to mounting questions about the British government’s approach to transparency and press freedom.

Earlier this year, Number 10 was heavily criticised after it barred openDemocracy from COVID press briefings. The Ministry of Defence was also subsequently accused of ‘blacklisting’ DeclassifiedUK after the department refused to provide comment to the investigative website.

Edin Omanovic, advocacy director at Privacy International said that

“the point of Freedom of Information is to access information from individual authorities themselves, not from a centralised body within the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office should not be interfering.”

Silke Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch said,

“We’re appalled that such important information rights have been so disrespected by the government. The centralisation of difficult FOIs, the secrecy of this list and the fact that our names have been circulated around Whitehall is seriously chilling. This is a shameful reflection on the government’s attitude towards transparency.”

Long legal battle for transparency 

openDemocracy first asked for copies of the Clearing House lists back in 2018. The Cabinet Office refused this Freedom of Information request but, 23 months later, in July 2020 the ICO finally decided that the lists – including the advice that the Cabinet Office provides on dealing with FOI requests – should be disclosed to the public.

While the Cabinet Office eventually disclosed some material from the Clearing House list, it is keeping its advice to departments secret and is appealing against the ICO’s decision.

openDemocracy, represented by the law firm Leigh Day, will now be submitting evidence to an information tribunal hearing to determine whether this information about the Clearing House should be made public.

According to ICO guidance, a public authority can only look up a requester’s identity if the request is repeated – potentially a vexatious request – or whether the cost of two or more requests made by the requester can be aggregated under FOI.

The ICO has been aware of the Clearing House’s existence for some time. In 2005, the Clearing House’s annual budget was reported to be £700,000.

The Clearing House was initially housed within the then Department for Constitutional Affairs then later moved to the Ministry of Justice. In 2015, when the Cabinet Office took responsibility for freedom of information policy, the department also took over the Clearing House, despite concerns about its operation.

The Cabinet Office has previously advertised roles to work in the Cabinet Office’s Clearing House. Specific responsibilities listed for the positions included “creating a weekly FOI tracker of new cases and releases”, and “forwarding drafts for clearance, reverting to departments with advice and negotiating redrafted responses”.

But openDemocracy’s findings – and the upcoming tribunal case – have highlighted fresh and pressing concerns, including among rights advocates who campaigned for the initial, groundbreaking Freedom of Information legislation more than 15 years ago. The Campaign for Freedom of Information’s Katherine Gundersen has said: “It’s time the clearing house was subjected to proper scrutiny.”

Meanwhile Gavin Freeguard, head of data and transparency at the Institute for Government, said that, 15 years after the Freedom of Information act came into effect, it was not right that the public was still having to fight to access information.

“With delayed responses, more requests being rejected than ever before and these reports of a Clearing House it feels like we’re having to fight for the right to information all over again,” said Freeguard.

“And all this at a time when it’s vital for politicians, the press and the public to be able to scrutinise government.”

The Cabinet Office organises quarterly engagement meetings and biannual information rights forums with other government departments. openDemocracy sent an FOI requesting materials from these meetings and forums, but the request was denied.


Sunday, November 29, 2020

Candace Owens schools fact-checker, gets them to admit their fact check was wrong


Candace Owens challenged PolitiFact, a left-leaning site that fact-checks in partnership with Facebook, over a video she had posted that was labeled as "false," and she won.

On Nov. 12, the conservative political commentator and author posted a video regarding Joe Biden and the controversy of calling him the next president.

"Anybody who understands politics, who passed a basic level of civics knows that right now, in this moment, Joe Biden is literally and legally, not the president-elect," Owens said in the beginning of the video. (Available on Owens' Facebook page here.)

"This information cannot be fact-checked because it is the truth, so they cannot take that off. They cannot censor that. It is a fact."

PolitiFact seemed to disagree and gave the video a "false" rating, which led to Owens fighting back.

She submitted an appeal on Nov. 20 and on Nov. 26, Politifact retracted its "false" label and offered a correction.

"Correction: PolitiFact originally labeled this video false in our capacity as a third-party fact-checker for Facebook," Politico posted on Facebook.

"On Nov. 20, an appeal to that decision was made on behalf of Ms. Owens. PolitiFact approved the appeal on Nov. 20, determined that a correction was appropriate, and removed the false rating."

Owens took to Twitter to spread the news:

Weeks ago, @Facebook censored a post of mine which truthfully stated that @JoeBiden is NOT the President-elect.
So I got lawyers involved.
Conclusion? @PolitiFact uncensored the post & admitted that they LIED by rating my post false.
The fact-checkers are lying for Democrats.

— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) November 28, 2020

"Weeks ago, @Facebook censored a post of mine which truthfully stated that @JoeBiden is NOT the President-elect," she wrote.

"So I got lawyers involved. Conclusion? @PolitiFact uncensored the post & admitted that they LIED by rating my post false. The fact-checkers are lying for Democrats."

Owens, who married George Farmer, the son of a conservative member of the British House of Lords, in a ceremony last year at the Trump Winery near Charlottesville, Virginia, wrote that her activities are limited because she is expecting a child, but she's still battling.

At 8 Months pregnant, I unfortunately cannot fight on the ground alongside patriots like I am used to, but I am taking every measure to fight these communists in the court room. It is my goal to expose these lying “fact-checkers” one by one. @JoeBiden is NOT the President-elect.

— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) November 28, 2020

"At 8 Months pregnant, I unfortunately cannot fight on the ground alongside patriots like I am used to, but I am taking every measure to fight these communists in the court room," Owens added in another tweet.

"It is my goal to expose these lying 'fact-checkers' one by one. @JoeBiden is NOT the President-elect."

In addition to rating Owens' post false, Politico had also published an article claiming Biden is the president-elect, Owens wrote.

Incredibly— they didn’t just rate my post false, they authored an entire article along w/ it, explaining why Joe-Biden IS the President-elect.
Once I lawyered up, they retracted the article & issued a correction.

This is why I am suing fact-checkers:

— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) November 28, 2020

Owens made it clear she's determined to take on the titans of social media. She noted that her lawyer is Todd McMurtry, the attorney who also represented Nicholas Sandmann, the Catholic high school student who was portrayed as a racist by national media outlets after a confrontation with a Native American in January 2019 after the March for Life in Washington.

Todd McMurtry is my lawyer.
I confided to him last year that I was deadly serious about going after both Facebook & Twitter, and if we have to swim through an alligator moat of fact-checkers first—so be it.
STOP lying about this election.
STOP lying about Covid.
STOP censorship.

— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) November 28, 2020

"Todd McMurtry is my lawyer," she wrote."I confided to him last year that I was deadly serious about going after both Facebook & Twitter, and if we have to swim through an alligator moat of fact-checkers first--so be it. STOP lying about this election. STOP lying about Covid. STOP censorship."

It was this kind of treatment that has inspired Owens to go up against the fact-checkers. Earlier this month, she announced that she and her lawyers were going to sue Facebook fact-checkers.

"I'm pleased to announce... I am suing Facebook fact-checkers and it is going to be a bomb of a lawsuit," she announced in a Facebook video.

Owens launched a special website, Candace vs. Zuck, to raise funds for the legal battle.

"Our freedoms are being stripped away," the home page states.

"The overlords of Big Tech are determining what Americans can and cannot say, share, like, and post. Support our legal efforts today as we fight back against Facebook's fact-checkers, confronting those who are suppressing free speech, thought, and expression across our great country."

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Candace Owens schools fact-checker, gets them to admit their fact check was wrong appeared first on WND.


Report: 'Smartest man in the room' has joined Sidney Powell's team


Sidney Powell (Video screenshot)

In a brand-new analysis published in American Thinker, a prominent witness has reportedly joined the team of attorney Sidney Powell and has "stated under oath that there was massive computer fraud in the 2020 election, all of it intended to secure a victory for Joe Biden."

The report, authored by Andrea Widburg, identifies the expert as Dr. Navid Kershavarz-Nia, whom she calls "one of the weightiest names in the world when it comes to sniffing out cyber-security problems."

"We know how important Dr. Kershavarz-Nia is because, just two and a half months ago, the New York Times ran one of its Sunday long-form articles about a massive, multi-million-dollar fraud that a talented grifter ran against the American intelligence and military communities" Widburg writes. "Dr. Kershavarz-Nia is one of the few people who comes off looking good:"

Navid Keshavarz-Nia, those who worked with him said, "was always the smartest person in the room." In doing cybersecurity and technical counterintelligence work for the C.I.A., N.S.A. and F.B.I., he had spent decades connecting top-secret dots. After several months of working with Mr. Courtney, he began connecting those dots too. He did not like where they led.

The piece in American Thinker touts the doctor's "extraordinary academic and practical skills in cyber-fraud detection and analysis," explaining it took "seven paragraphs for him to list them in the declaration he signed to support the Georgia complaint."

Among his qualifications are a B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. in a variety of electrical and computer engineering.

Keshavarz-Nia noted: "I have advanced trained from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), DHS office of Intelligence & Analysis (I&A) and Massachusetts Institution of Technology (MIT)."

"My experience spans 35 years performing technical assessment, mathematical modeling, cyber-attack pattern analysis, and security intelligence[.]"

Widburg says, "Take it as given that Dr. Kershavarz-Nia may know more about cyber-security than anyone else in America."

Her analysis highlights some of the doctor's top concerns, including:

1. Hammer and Scorecard is real, not a hoax (as Democrats allege), and both are used to manipulate election outcomes.

2. Dominion, ES&S, Scytl, and Smartmatic are all vulnerable to fraud and vote manipulation – and the mainstream media reported on these vulnerabilities in the past.

3. Dominion has been used in other countries to "forge election results."

4. Dominion's corporate structure is deliberately confusing to hide relationships with Venezuela, China, and Cuba.

5. Dominion machines are easily hackable.

6. Dominion memory cards with cryptographic key access to the systems were stolen in 2019.

Despite not having access to the voting machines used in 2020, Dr. Kershavarz examined election data and results of the balloting, and concluded:

1. The counts in the disputed states (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia) show electronic manipulation.

2. The simultaneous decision in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia to pretend to halt counting votes was unprecedented and demonstrated a coordinated effort to collude toward desired results.

3. One to two percent of votes were forged in Biden's favor.

4. Optical scanners were set to accept unverified, un-validated ballots.

5. The scanners failed to keep records for audits, an outcome that must have been deliberately programmed.

6. The stolen cryptographic key, which applied to all voting systems, was used to alter vote counts.

7. The favorable votes pouring in after hours for Biden could not be accounted for by a Democrat preference for mailed in ballots. They demonstrated manipulation. For example, in Pennsylvania, it was physically impossible to feed 400,000 ballots into the machines within 2–3 hours.

8. Dominion used Chinese parts, and there's reason to believe that China, Venezuela, Cuba interfered in the election.

9. There was a Hammer and Scorecard cyber-attack that altered votes in the battleground states, and then forwarded the results to Scytl servers in Frankfurt, Germany, to avoid detection.

10. The systems failed to produce any auditable results.

The doctor concluded with "high confidence that the election 2020 data were altered in all battleground states resulting in a [sic] hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump to be transferred [sic] to Vice President Biden."

Widburg noted: "This is going to be tough evidence for Democrats to counter. Back when the naïve Democrats thought Trump would be the one to commit fraud, they held congressional hearings and wrote articles about the voting machines' vulnerability. And with the New York Times touting Dr. Keshavarz-Nia's brilliance and his ability to sniff out fraud, they'll struggle to that he's not a reliable expert."


The post Report: 'Smartest man in the room' has joined Sidney Powell's team appeared first on WND.


Saying, 'Trust The Science' Showcases Democrat Ignorance



When Democrats tell you to "trust the science" about lockdowns, they're refuting science. Science is to be questioned, not trusted.