After a jarringly sudden announcement of its CEO’s retirement, investment giant Vanguard has tapped its first outsider to serve as the firm’s fifth CEO. On July 8, Blackrock veteran Salim Ramji will take over, facing customer service challenges, uneasiness about whether an outsider will preserve the firm’s culture, and short-lived curiosity about whether he’d chart a new course for crypto. 

In March, even the closest Vanguard watchers were taken by surprise when the Malvern, PA-headquartered company announced that Tim Buckley would be retiring. Unlike previous such departures, that announcement didn’t center on a transition to a named successor, suggesting to some that there may have been some disenchantment on the part of Buckley and/or Vanguard. 

Salim Ramji will take command of Vanguard on July 8

Tuesday’s Vanguard announcement touted the highlights of Ramji’s BlackRock tenure:  

Most recently, Mr. Ramji was Global Head of iShares & Index Investing, where he was responsible for managing a majority of the firm’s client assets and evolving the iShares platform to provide an even broader set of innovative low-cost products for investors globally.

His contributions led to expanded investment access for tens of millions of investors, a more central role for ETFs in retirement and wealth portfolios and a more efficient bond market with ETFs as an enabling technology. At BlackRock, he led the implementation of a voting choice platform, which democratizes client access to the proxy voting process.

Vanguard manages $9.3 trillion in assets for some 50 million investors. The diehards call themselves “Bogleheads” — signaling their dedication to the investment philosophy of legendary founder Jack Bogle. At the center of that philosophy you’ll find Vanguard’s unique ownership structure, in which Vanguard funds own the firm, which drives a low-expense structure that’s been essential to the firm’s growth.  

That ownership structure is also meant to instill an investor-first culture, but the firm’s once-sterling reputation for customer service has been tarnished in recent years. Alongside perceptions of deteriorating call-center service, navigating the firm’s website is often highly unintuitive and aggravating.
Tell ’em, Arjun:  

I think you’re wrong Chris. I find the Vanguard website infuriatingly difficult to navigate and moved my accounts to Schwab. Their client service is excellent and highly responsive.

— Arjun Divecha (@arjundivecha) May 14, 2024

“I’m surprised that Vanguard went with an outside hire,” Morningstar analyst Daniel Sotiroff told MarketWatch. “This is a departure from past hires, as previous CEOs came up through the ranks and were embedded in Vanguard’s culture from early on in their careers.”

With all that in mind, Bogleheads are doubt be uneasy that much of the early reporting on Ramji’s selection — and Ramji’s statements too — focus on asset and customer growth rather than righting the ship.

“I really do believe that there can be millions more people who can benefit from what Vanguard has to offer,” Ramji told the Financial Times. “Part of the opportunity over the next five years, 10 years and beyond is to scale that capability. Even with 50 million [customers], there are millions and millions more, even in this country.”

At the same time, Ramji has made an effort to reassure investors and employees that he won’t overturn the firm’s culture. “The mission and purpose started by Bogle and continued by his successors will continue under my leadership,” said Ramji. “I plan to pursue that with the zeal of a convert.”

Naval history enthusiast and investment-industry revolutionary Jack Bogle named his uniquely-structured firm after the HMS Vanguard, Admiral Nelson’s flagship at the Battle of the Nile in 1798 

Historically, Vanguard has been judicious about launching new funds, with a wariness about aiding and abetting investors chasing trends over a cliff. Consistent with that cautious philosophy, Vanguard in January announced it had no intention to launch a bitcoin ETF — nor would it offer other firms’ crypto ETFs on its brokerage platform. At that time, global ETF head Janel Jackson said: 

“When deciding what investment products to offer, we consider a range of factors, including whether we believe they have enduring investment merit and meet our clients’ needs. While the discussion about bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, in general, has increased recently, we do not currently believe that there is an appropriate role for them to play in long-term portfolios.”  

Given Ramji led BlackRock’s enormously successful spot bitcoin ETF launch, crypto-mongers were wondering if he’ll persuade the Vanguard board that it’s in investors’ best interest after all: 

Vanguard’s new CEO is Salim Ramji.

This is the same guy who oversaw the filing for BlackRock’s #Bitcoin ETF.

Probably nothing. pic.twitter.com/Ulr9YJMj2l

— Arsen | Bitcoin Therapy 📧 (@satoshibaggins) May 15, 2024

However, after his selection, Ramji signaled that Vanguard would stay the no-Bitcoin course under his leadership, telling Barron’s, “I have heard [chief investment officer] Greg Davis’ explanation and I think it is entirely consistent with Vanguard’s investment philosophy. It is a logical and consistent point of view.” 

Vanguard investors who oppose ESG madness have reason to be encouraged, as the firm’s announcement highlighted Ramji’s Blackrock experience in leading “the implementation of a voting choice platform, which democratizes client access to the proxy voting process.”

As we’d reported here, Vanguard in February expanded its own pilot program that gives investors in index funds the power to choose a proxy-voting philosophy. By passing through proxy voting picks to investors, such programs help investment firms walk the line between the blue-haired ESG screechers and sensible types who don’t want their index funds to invest in an oil company only to cast votes badgering them out of the fossil fuel business.  

In some ways, Vanguard has been leading the Big Three indexing firms away from the ESG precipice. In December 2022, the company withdrew from the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, a coalition that once had 300 asset managers signed on to reduce greenhouse gases and lower the earth’s temperature by 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2050. “[Vanguard is] not in the game of politics,” CEO Tim Buckley told Financial Times at the time.

Mr. Ramji, let’s keep it that way.

Authored by J. Kennerly Davis via RealClearPolicy,

May brings more bad economic news for hard-pressed American households. “Transitory” inflation remains firmly entrenched at rates equal to or higher than those reported at the start of 2024.

The Labor Department reports this week that the Consumer Price Index, or CPI, it’s official measure of the rate of change in the retail price of a basket of everyday goods and services, rose 0.3% in the month of April, the same as for the month of January. For twelve months, CPI increased 3.4% through April compared to 3.1% for twelve months through January. And wholesale prices, a good indicator of future retail prices, increased much more than expected in April, rising at the fastest annual rate since April 2023.

The cumulative effect of persistent inflation is devastating. Since President Biden took office in 2021 the CPI is up, and Americans’ purchasing power is down, by 19%. For basic necessities, the situation is even worse. Groceries are up 21%. Gasoline prices are up 47%. The cost of shelter 20%, and electricity almost 30%.

American workers cannot keep up. Since President Biden took office, average hourly earnings after inflation have fallen over 2.5%. A typical American family must pay $12,000 more per year simply to maintain the standard of living that it enjoyed when President Biden took office.

As bad as the official CPI numbers are, actual inflation is much worse. That is because the government calculates CPI using a methodology intentionally designed to understate actual inflation. It does so to conceal the destructive results that inevitably flow from its irresponsible policies.

Inflation is always and everywhere the result of government policies that increase the supply of money circulating in the economy faster than the productive sectors of the economy can expand their capacity to produce goods and services for purchase.

From day one, the Biden administration has flooded the economy with borrowed money in the form of transfer payments, subsidies, and grants designed to purchase the political support of favored constituencies such as those in the green tech sector. At the same time, Biden-controlled federal agencies have unleashed a tidal wave of crushing regulation designed to reduce the productive capacity of disfavored constituencies such as the oil and gas industry. The inflation that afflicts us was inevitable.

President Biden has asserted that fighting inflation is the “top economic priority” of his administration. Such a statement would be laughable if the subject matter was not so serious. This president has no intention of altering the policies that define and drive the progressive agenda. There is no war on inflation or, indeed, any serious attempt to bring it under control and stabilize prices. Inflation is baked into the progressive model of government that depends on the continuing disbursement of borrowed money to political supporters.

Under President Biden, the national debt has increased a whopping $13 Trillion and now stands at over $34.6 Trillion. Concerned commentators point out that it will require much sacrifice, potentially disruptive sacrifice, to pay off or even materially to pay down the national debt. They lament that elected officials seem to lack the will and have no plan to deal with the national debt.

In fact, the progressive political class does have a plan to deal with the national debt. Their plan is to perpetuate inflation and thereby to engineer a slow-motion stealth default on the debt that will enable them to continue to enjoy without disruption the political benefits that flow to them from their irresponsible debt-funded vote buying.

During the periodic “fiscal cliff” showdowns in Congress, it is often said that the United States cannot default on its debt. An outright default would certainly shred the government’s credibility in financial markets and dangerously undermine its ability to access those markets to raise funds in the future.

There is also a legal reason that the United States cannot default on its debt. Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, enacted to repudiate Confederate debt and put beyond question the integrity of the obligations of the United States, provides in part that “The validity of the public debt of the United States…shall not be questioned.”

Compliance with the Constitution requires that the obligations incurred by the government be repaid in full, dollar for dollar. But, over time, inflation steadily reduces the value of the dollars used by the government to repay the obligations it has incurred. The purchasing power, or value, of a dollar has decreased by 19% just since President Biden took office and is today worth only 81% of what it was worth in January 2021.

This dollar-cheapening inflation, created by irresponsible spend-to-elect policies, enables the government to pay off its debts for cents on the dollar, and effectively default on the obligations it has incurred as a result of those policies. Clearly, inflation is not a bug in the government’s financial system. It is an essential feature.

The Federal Reserve actively supports the spend-elect-inflate model of governance by pursuing policies designed to achieve and maintain a rate of inflation equal to 2% per year. Over a generation, that rate of inflation will reduce the value of a dollar by approximately 50%. That will certainly help the government avoid having to fully repay its debts, but it will be devastating to American households.

 By using inflated dollars to pay its debt, the government is failing to honor its financial obligations. It is defaulting on those obligations and cheating the institutions and individuals who purchased its securities. And it is violating the Constitution. Inflation is not only destructive economically; it is also unlawful.

 J. Kennerly Davis is a former finance executive at a Fortune 500 electric and gas company, and a former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Virginia.

There are breaking reports that Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi has been in a helicopter crash in a remote northern area of the country and that rescuers are trying to reach him and his crew. 

State media is currently calling it a “hard landing” – suggesting that the president is alive and well, however no other details on the precise nature of the helicopter incident have been revealed. 

What is known is that Raisi’s helicopter went down while in the country’s East Azerbaijan province and that it happened near the border city of Jolfa, and up to three helicopters total made up the air convoy at the time.

State-run IRNA news agency indicated that among the officials aboard the aircraft included Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian.

The Associated Press has quoted at least one Iranian official to say it was a “crash” and that there’s an urgent rescue mission currently underway in a forested area:

One local government official used the word “crash” to describe the incident, but he acknowledged to an Iranian newspaper that he had yet to reach the site himself.

Rescuers were attempting to reach the site, state TV said, but had been hampered by poor weather conditions. There had been heavy rain and fog reported with some wind. IRNA called the area a “forest.”

It appears Raisi was traveling in connection with a trip to Azerbaijan earlier in the day, where he had overseen the inauguration of a dam with Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev this morning. Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency has stated on X Sunday:

“Some of the president’s companions on this helicopter were able to communicate with Central Headquarters, raising hopes that the incident could have ended without casualties.”

Iran President Raisi was flying from a meeting with Ilham Aliyev in Tehran when the incident occurred.

Video footage shows the head of the Islamic Republic on board shortly before the helicopter made a hard landing in mountainous terrain due to foggy conditions. pic.twitter.com/ofWEP0cL2D

— Russian Market (@runews) May 19, 2024

Thus far initial reports indicate that Raisi has survived the incident, but again the ‘hard landing’ appears to be significant – and possibly far worse – than what state media is letting on.

The fact that a rescue team has yet to even reach the location of the downed helicopter means this could be a potential casualty situation involving top officials.

Iranian Interior Minister Ahmad Vahidi confirms: Rescue teams have not yet arrived at the scene of the helicopter accident due to bad weather and fog.

President Raisi’s helicopter made a hard landing. pic.twitter.com/WRelcekVNy

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 19, 2024

Almost immediately, a number of online commenters raised the question of potential foreign involvement… “Israel?” some asked. However, it’s also well understood that helicopters become more prone to incidents in foggy or inclement weather, and over mountainous difficult terrain. Iran’s aviation industry has also long languished under Washington-led sanctions.

developing…

Jeff Bezos’ space startup, Blue Origin, will resume crewed rocket launches this morning after a two-year pause. The New Shepard rocket, carrying six passengers, will lift off from the company’s launch facilities in Van Horn, Texas, at approximately 8:30 a.m. CT (9:30 a.m. ET).

#NewShepard is vertical on the pad. We have an updated launch time of 8:52 a.m. CDT / 13:52 UTC. The #NS25 live webcast begins T-40 minutes on https://t.co/7Y4TherpLr pic.twitter.com/pepgdwt0BX

— Blue Origin (@blueorigin) May 19, 2024

This flight will be New Shepard’s first crewed mission since August 2022. The company was forced to suspend launches after an uncrewed New Shepard vehicle suffered a mid-flight engine problem in September 2022. In December 2023, the launch vehicle successfully completed an uncrewed mission, carrying dozens of science and research payloads to space. 

The #NS25 crew is certified ‘ready to fly to space’ by CrewMember 7 Laura Stiles. The launch window opens tomorrow at 8:30 a.m. CDT / 13:30 UTC.

Tune in live on https://t.co/7Y4TherpLr 🚀 pic.twitter.com/d97U8udprB

— Blue Origin (@blueorigin) May 19, 2024

Today’s crew includes six private passengers, including Ed Dwight, a former Air Force captain and first Black astronaut candidate in 1961. 

Meet Ed Dwight, a former United States Air Force Captain who was selected by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 as the nation’s first Black astronaut candidate. Watch to learn more about Ed Dwight’s incredible life story. #NS25 pic.twitter.com/ADC5XWG2nd

— Blue Origin (@blueorigin) May 17, 2024

Watch Live: 

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Police Department of Charleston, South Carolina, has finished its investigation into the death of former Boeing employee John Barnett, who could have played a prominent role in a lawsuit related to the jetliner maker’s quality issues.

The nose of a Boeing commercial airliner is seen in Sydney, Australia on March 14, 2019. (Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

In a statement provided to The Epoch Times, the Charleston police said they didn’t identify any evidence contradicting initial findings that Mr. Barnett died of “an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.”

The police were dispatched on the morning of March 9 to conduct a welfare check at a Holiday Inn hotel where Mr. Barnett, 62, was staying while preparing for his case against the aerospace giant. He was discovered sitting inside a vehicle with a “gunshot wound to the head,” with a notebook containing what resembles a “suicide note” located on the passenger seat.

A page of notebook found in John Barnett’s vehicle. (Charleston Police Department)

“No evidence of forced entry was found and there were no signs of a physical struggle within the vehicle,” the police department said. “The vehicle’s key fob was discovered in Mr. Barnett’s pants pocket.”

The police also examined Mr. Barnett’s vehicle and recovered a Smith & Wesson handgun, a projectile that “caused the defect in the headliner” and a fired cartridge case. Those items were forensically evaluated by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division Firearms Department.

“Examinations concluded the recovered projectile was discharged from the Smith & Wesson which was registered to Mr. Barnett,” reads a May 16 report shared with The Epoch Times by Charleston County Coroner’s Office. “Furthermore, during the autopsy, the trajectory of the wound path was documented. All findings were consistent with a self-inflicted gunshot wound.”

According to the coroner’s office, surveillance cameras at the hotel parking lot continuously showed Mr. Barnett’s vehicle throughout the evening of March 8 through the morning of March 9.

“From the time the vehicle was backed into the parking space until the Charleston Fire Department gained entry to the vehicle, no other individuals were seen entering or exiting Mr. Barnett’s vehicle,” the Coroner’s office said in its report.

“A review of medical records and interviews with Mr. Barnett’s family, attorneys, and healthcare professionals, revealed Mr. Barnett was under chronic stress in the context of the lawsuit, suffered from anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, and grieved the death of his wife,” the Coroner’s report read.

“During his time in Charleston, his attorneys reported Mr. Barnett discussed increasing the dose of his anti-anxiety medication,” it continued. “The writings found in the vehicle were examined by the Charleston Police Department and found only Mr. Barnett’s fingerprints on the notebook. The writings contained information known only to his family.”

“The cause of death was determined to be: Gunshot Wound of the Head. The manner of death is best deemed, ‘Suicide,’” the coroner’s report concluded.

Mr. Barnett, who had worked for more than 30 years at Boeing before retiring in 2017, had become a vocal critic of the company’s safety and production quality practices. At the time of his death, he was a key witness in a lawsuit, in which he claimed that the aerospace giant retaliated against him for raising his concerns with the U.S. Labor Department.

“We are saddened by Mr. Barnett’s passing, and our thoughts are with his family and friends,” Boeing said in a statement shared with The Epoch Times at the time.

The death of Mr. Barnett, who carried out safety checks and oversaw aircraft production while working with Boeing as a quality manager, came amid intense public scrutiny sparked by a Jan. 5 incident, where a panel covering an unused door came off an Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9 during the flight.

According to a report by the National Transportation Safety Board, this mid-air technical failure occurred because the four bolts that were supposed to be holding the panel in place were missing. The incident prompted the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to ground all 737 Max 9s, order “enhanced inspections” on the planes, and open an investigation to see if the company failed to ensure proper production safety standards.

Mr. Barnett claimed that the Jan. 5 incident it might not have been an isolated occurrence. “This is not a 737 problem; it’s a Boeing problem,” he told TMZ in January when asked whether 737s could be trusted. “I know the FAA is going in and done due diligence and inspections to ensure that the door close on the 737 are installed properly and the fasteners are stored properly.”

Authored by Ned Ryun via RealClearPolicy,

Despite all the controversy surrounding the Biden Administration’s bad economic, immigration and domestic policy, they’re wanting to go next level on their not-so-great-terrible-policies. Biden wants to put the interests of Chinese airlines before the interests of American ones. 

The Biden Administration is reportedly considering using the discretion they have to increase flights by Chinese airliners in and out of the U.S. Reuters reported last month that “in February, the U.S. Transportation Department said Chinese passenger airlines could boost weekly round-trip U.S. flights to 50 starting on March 31, up from the current 35, about a third of pre-pandemic levels. U.S. carriers were authorized as well to fly 50 flights per week but are currently not using all those flights.” U.S. air carriers can’t increase flights because they don’t fly over Russian airspace for obvious reasons. This situation gives Chinese air carriers, and other foreign carriers, a big competitive advantage because they are continuing to fly over Russian air space.

The Chairman and Co-Chair of the bipartisan Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party objected to this Biden Administration idea. They sent a letter on April 10, 2024, “we write to urge caution in the approval of new flights between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) until such time that the PRC abides by its existing bilateral agreement, and passenger demand begins to recover.” They argued that “PRC carriers are continuing to operate air routes at an anti-competitive commercial advantage that must not be allowed to increase without reciprocal parity in the number of U.S. carrier operated routes to the PRC.” They want to make sure that passenger demand, not the demands of the Chinese government, should be a factor; what a shocking concept. They also worry about the security of American passengers flying in Russian air space. 

There are estimates that U.S. carriers have been hit with $2 billion in annual lost revenues from flights because they can’t fly in Russian airspace. Foreign airliners have been using their advantage to fly more direct routes with lower fuel costs. This situation has prompted American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, United Airlines, the Air Line Pilots Association, the Allied Pilots Association and Association of Flight Attendants to sign a letter asking for this increase in flights to be stopped “until U.S. workers and businesses are guaranteed equality of access in the marketplace, free from the existing harmful anti-competitive policies of the Chinese government.” Seems like a reasonable request.

Members of Congress and everyone in the U.S. air industry think giving China a competitive advantage is a terrible idea, especially when they have been guilty of stealing American intellectual property (IP) and flooding the international market with subsidized mass-produced goods. Apparently, one must be senile to think any of this makes political or economic sense. Implementing an America First policy is what the American people want right now, and it is one reason why the smart money is on former President Donald J. Trump to return to the White House next January.

Let’s not forget that after Covid-19 hit, China stopped air service agreements with the U.S. and shut off U.S. carriers. The Chinese government imposed new limits on access and other regulations that discriminated against U.S. carriers that remain today. A strong response to these anti-competitive actions does not include rewarding Chinese carriers with increased access to U.S. markets. The same is not done for U.S. carriers operating in China. 

Fairness has been tossed out the window by the Biden Administration with this idea. Although it makes sense to allow the former bilateral agreement between China and the U.S., we can’t ignore the fact that China has a competitive advantage that should not be rewarded by the Biden Administration. 

Biden’s China First policy, in addition to attempting to force Americans to buy an expensive electric vehicle by 2032 (likely made in China), is sending independent voters right back over to the Trump column this fall. The good news is that ideas like this are opening the eyes of the American people to the America Last policies being pushed by the Biden administration; in fact, so much so that even members of his own party in Congress are resisting allowing China to grab a bigger part of the aviation flight market share.

Ned Ryun is the Founder and CEO of American Majority.

Authored byh Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) on May 15 unveiled the Taiwan Interpol Endorsement and Inclusion Act, which would require the U.S. administration to advocate for the democratic island’s membership in the international police organization.

The Interpol logo during the 89th Interpol General Assembly in Istanbul on Nov. 23, 2021. (Ozan Kose/AFP via Getty Images)

The bill, first obtained by The Epoch Times, acknowledges Taiwan’s role in maintaining global peace and asks the U.S. government, including the president or his “designees,” to advocate directly for Taiwan’s inclusion in Interpol and any other “appropriate international organizations.” It suggests that leaving Taiwan out of Interpol, a global collective police force, is harmful to international crime-fighting efforts.

Co-sponsored by Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), the bill states that Taiwan is an “important contributor to peace and stability around the world.”

Since the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, U.S. policy has been to “preserve and promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan.” In 1994, this was extended to the Taiwan Policy Review to support the country in participating in various international organizations.

Taiwan, a self-governing island claimed by the Chinese regime even though it has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, has been excluded from participation from international bodies due to Beijing’s objections.

Mr. Gooden’s bill asks the United States to “advocate, as appropriate” for Taiwan’s full membership status in all “appropriate international organizations,” including Interpol. It instructs U.S. government representatives to “use the voice, vote, and influence of the United States” to push for Taiwan’s membership or “observer status” in those organizations.

Additionally, the bill instructs the U.S. president or his “designees” to use any “relevant bilateral engagements” between the Chinese regime and the United States, including leader summits and the U.S.-China Comprehensive Economic Dialogue.

It seeks to develop a strategy to make Taiwan a member of Interpol and other related organizations to include Taiwan in global crime-fighting efforts.

Mr. Gooden said that Taiwan has shown a capacity to “significantly contribute to international efforts, particularly in areas like drug control and global crime fighting.”

“It is common sense for Taiwan to be included as a full member in global security bodies like Interpol to enhance mutual safety and security.”

The bill notes that Taiwan was granted a full Interpol membership in 1964 but was ejected in 1984 when the People’s Republic of China applied for membership.

Additionally, the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of the World Health Organization (WHO), granted Taiwan “observer status” between 2009 and 2016 under the name “Chinese Taipei.” During that time, Taiwan contributed “significantly” to international efforts in pandemic control, monitoring, early warning, and “other related matters.”

However, since 2016, the World Health Assembly has rejected further bids to include Taiwan as an observer. A group of bipartisan senators sent a May 15 letter asking WHO to include Taiwan in the organization.

“Taiwan is unable to swiftly share information on criminals and suspicious activity with the international community, leaving a huge void in global crime-fighting efforts and leaving the entire world at risk,” the bill states.

Mr. Gooden says that leaving Taiwan out of Interpol affects global security.

“Denying Taiwan membership in Interpol does not just hurt Taiwan; it leaves a gap in the global security network that criminals can exploit,” he said.

The bill suggests that including Taiwan as a member of Interpol is “beneficial for all nations and their police authorities,” as information sharing is “vital to peacekeeping efforts.”

The bill asks for a report no later than 90 days after it is enacted that details the United States strategy for obtaining Taiwan’s observer or membership status within Interpol and other appropriate international organizations, possibly the WHO as well.

“Including this key U.S. ally as a full member in Interpol is not only about supporting Taiwan but reinforcing the integrity and effectiveness of international law enforcement cooperation,” Mr. Gooden said.

By Brian McGlinchey at Stark Realities 

As war rages in Gaza, the intensifying debate over the US-Israel relationship spotlights a political paradox: Those Americans who view George Washington with deepest reverence — that is, would-be “conservatives” — are often the ones who most zealously violate the central tenet of his foreign policy philosophy.

Specifically, their fierce devotion to the State of Israel defies Washington’s admonition against “passionate attachments” to other countries — attachments that, he said, inevitably lead America “astray from its duty and its interest.”

That’s not to say that excessive advocacy for Israel is confined to the American right: As demonstrated by President Biden’s backing of Israel’s destruction of Gaza, the championing of policies that serve Israel to America’s detriment also runs rampant among establishment Democrats.

Regardless of your position on the political spectrum, Washington’s foreign policy advice merits your attention, and the US-Israel relationship serves as a case study that validates his warnings about the many evils that spring from “habitual fondness” for a foreign nation…including one that didn’t exist when his warnings were issued.

After deciding not to pursue a third term as America’s first president, Washington gave the country a parting gift: a farewell address delivered not from a podium, but from the front page of Philadelphia’s Daily American Advertiser.

Washington’s 7,641-word address reads like an owner’s manual for the young republic. He asked Americans to give “solemn contemplation” and “frequent review” to his guidance, which was “the result of much reflection, and no inconsiderable observation.”

Let’s review some key excerpts of Washington’s foreign policy guidance, starting with the principle he put above all others:

“Nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated.”

With this guidance, Washington echoed the wisdom of other American founders. Thomas Jefferson urged “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” John Quincy Adams approvingly said, “[America] has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings…She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”

In addition to “passionate attachments,” Washington denounced habitual hostility toward other countries. As we’ll discuss later, the US government’s passionate attachment to Israel is itself the font of hostilities equally unrooted in American interest.

“The nation which indulges towards another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.”

While it’s a little less universal these days, “habitual fondness” for Israel remains widespread in American politics, particularly on the right and center-left, and more so among government officials than citizens.

That habitual fondness is routinely manifested by pronouncements that would make Washington, Jefferson and Madison cringe. Drawing from a common well of fawning rhetoric, politicians frequently refer to a supposedly “unbreakable bond” between America and Israel. Another cliche sees officials stating there must be “no daylight” between the two countries. Endorsing DC’s unconditional backing of Israel, and showing utter disregard for future contingencies, President Obama proclaimed that “our alliance is eternal, it is forever.”

Many politicians go so far as to say Israel is America’s “greatest ally.” One can only imagine reactions in the UK, Canada, Australia and many other countries that have gone to war alongside the United States on multiple occasions in this century, sacrificing lives and limbs as Israel offers little more than encouragement.

Taking things to mind-bending extremes, you’ll even encounter declarations that “real Americans stand with Israel” — perversely measuring American patriotism by the extent to which one is devoted to a foreign country.

“I will always stand with Israel”: Congressman Brian Mast (R-FL)  wearing his IDF uniform on Capitol Hill (Bill Clark/Getty via Daily Beast)

For many — especially evangelical Christians — habitual fondness for Israel has a religious dynamic. Viewed through religious, rose-colored glasses, the State of Israel is transformed from a modern, man-made political entity — led, like all governments, by manipulative, power-hungry politicians who pursue all manner of ungodly policies — into something sacred that supposedly represents and carries out God’s will.

Exploiting the religious angle, Israel’s advocates — even a US representative speaking in a recent congressional hearing — claim that America is compelled to serve the State of Israel because the bible says God will bless those who bless the nation of Abraham and curse those who curse it — as if today’s modern political entity and what’s referenced in the bible are one and the same.

Validating Washington’s warning that habitual fondness for a foreign country makes one an unthinking slave to that affection, these same people ignore the Israeli government’s killing of Christians in Gaza and the mistreatment endured by West Bank Christians — to say nothing of recurring incidents of ultra-orthodox Israeli Jews spitting on followers of Christ.

Israel killed 18 people sheltering at Gaza’s historic Greek Orthodox Christian Church of St. Porphyrius, in a devastating strike in October (Dawood Nemer / AFP via Getty Images)

Especially where government officials are concerned, passionate attachments to Israel can bring enormous financial rewards.

Case in point: Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, who’s arguably the most extreme advancer of Israeli interests on Capitol Hill. When he ascended to the Senate in 2014, Cotton benefitted from $960,000 in spending on his behalf by the Emergency Committee for Israel, in addition to $250,000 contributed to a Cotton-backing PAC by New York hedge fund billionaire and Israel-backer Paul Singer, and $100,000 from pro-Israel Boston billionaire Seth Klarman.

Then there’s Donald Trump, who’s not only made pandering to Israel a staple of his speeches, but, as president, took a variety of actions that had long been on the Israeli agenda. His reward: $20 million for his 2020 re-election bid from Las Vegas casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, in what was reportedly a quid pro quo for moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has personally affirmed the idea that habitual fondness has made America “in some degree a slave” to Israel. In a moment of candid conversation with West Bank settlers, Netanyahu was caught on video as he boasted, “I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily.”

Those who champion Israel’s interest on Capitol Hill do their own bragging. American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobbyist Steven Rosen famously pushed a napkin across a table and said, “You see this napkin? In 24 hours, we could have the signatures of 70 senators on this napkin.”

Patriotic Americans aren’t the only ones put off by that kind of influence. Marveling at the extraordinary sway his tiny country holds over the world’s foremost power, Israeli journalist and author Gideon Levy wrote:

“A new chapter is being written in the history of nations. Never before has a small country dictated to a superpower; never before has the chirp of the cricket sounded like a roar; never has the elephant resembled the ant – and vice versa. No Roman province dared tell Julius Caesar what to do, no tribe ever dreamed of forcing Genghis Khan to act in accordance with its own tribal interests.”

President Clinton used a different kind of colorful language as he confronted the upside-down power dynamic. After being lectured by Netanyahu during his first meeting with the Israeli prime minister, an angry Clinton exploded, asking his aides, “Who the fuck does he think he is? Who’s the fucking superpower here?!”

…read the rest at Stark Realities

Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Read more and subscribe at starkrealities.substack.com  

* * *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Dr. Robert Redfield, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said Thursday that many officials who tried to warn the public about potential problems with COVID-19 vaccines were pressured into silence and that it’s high time to admit that there were “significant” side effects that made people sick.

Then director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Dr. Robert Redfield, holds up a document while testifying in Washington, DC, on Sept. 16, 2020 in (Andrew Harnik-Pool/Getty Images)

Dr. Redfield made the remarks in a May 16 interview with Chris Cuomo on NewsNation, during which he lamented the loss of public confidence in public health agencies because of a lack of transparency around the vaccines, which he said “saved a lot of lives” but also made some people “quite ill.”

“Those of us that tried to suggest there may be significant side effects from vaccines … we kind of got canceled because no one wanted to talk about the potential that there was a problem from the vaccines, because they were afraid that that would cause people not to want to get vaccinated,” Dr. Redfield said.

In his role as head of the CDC, Dr. Redfield was part of the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed, a project to surge COVID-19 vaccine development at a time during the pandemic when little was known about the virus and rapid vaccine rollout was widely seen as key to getting the outbreak under control and lockdowns lifted.

In September 2020, a few months before the first COVID-19 vaccines were given in the United States, Dr. Redfield testified before the Senate that COVID-19 represented the “most significant public health challenge to face our nation in more than a century,” and that the prevailing view among scientists at the time was that the overall case fatality rate of the disease was somewhere between 0.4 and 0.6 percent in the United States.

“If you were to look right now, individuals under the age of 18, it’s about 0.01 percent, 19 to say 69, it’s more like 0.3 percent. And if you’re over the age of 70, it’s about 5 percent now,” he testified at the time.

While there’s lingering controversy about the severity of COVID-19, a recent study estimates that the global case fatality rate was 8.5 percent in February 2020 but had plunged to 0.27 percent in August 2022, meaning that the estimated relative risk reduction over that time was a whopping 96.8 percent.

In his interview on NewsNation, Dr. Redfield said that the vaccines that were developed as part of Operation Warp Speed were “important” and saved “a lot of lives.” However, despite their benefits, the drawbacks of the vaccines must be a matter of open discussion, he said.

“They’re important for the most vulnerable people, those over 60, 65 years of age. They really aren’t that critical for those that are under 50 or younger. But those vaccines saved a lot of lives, but they also—we have to be honest, some people got significant side effects from the vaccine,” he said.

“I have a number of people that are quite ill and they never had COVID, but they are ill from the vaccine,” he continued. “And we just have to acknowledge that.”

Vaccine Controversy

The severity of COVID-19 remains a matter of debate because it’s unclear whether deaths were overcounted or undercounted due to various factors, such as lack of clarity around the role of underlying medical conditions in fatalities in cases where COVID-19 was listed as the primary cause, or underreporting of asymptomatic infections. Aside from the issue of whether people died “from” COVID-19 or “with” a positive test for SARS-CoV-2, there have also been questions about the role of secondary pneumonia caused by mechanical ventilation.

Either way, a study from January 2023 indicates that the global case fatality rate from COVID-19 has dropped dramatically over the course of the pandemic. Global case fatalities ranged from 1.7 to 39.0 percent in February to March of 2020, according to the study—but fell to below 0.3 percent in July to August 2022.

The researchers estimate that the risk of death from COVID-19 has dropped by 96.8 percent over the course of the pandemic.

Along with a decline in COVID-19 fatalities, there have been growing concerns about vaccine side effects, given that a significant number of vaccinated people have reported various adverse reactions.

The most common COVID-19 vaccine adverse events are those that affect the body generally, with fever, fatigue, and overall discomfort being the top three, according to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). But there are others.

For instance, heart muscle inflammation (myocarditis) and inflammation of the lining outside the heart (pericarditis) have both officially been acknowledged by the CDC as a known side effect of Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Nervous system disorders have also been reported, with such disorders being the third most common in the Pfizer trials, coming after general and muscle-related adverse events.

There have also been papers linking spike-protein-based COVID-19 vaccines to skin problems, a dull ringing in the ears known as tinnitus, visual impairments, blood clotting, and even death. Recent reporting from EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders“ program indicates that the likelihood of death associated with COVID-19 vaccines (in close proximity to the shot rather than proven as caused by it) was over 100 times greater than for flu vaccines.

There are also concerns about a post-vaccination jump in excess deaths and disability.

The CDC still recommends that people of all ages receive a COVID-19 vaccine, saying that the potential side effects do not outweigh the potential harms of getting sick with COVID-19.

In a notice published in late April, the agency again called for adults aged 65 and older to get the latest version of the vaccines.

Authored by Darlene McCormick Sanchez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Republicans on the House Homeland Security subcommittee expressed concern as the surge of illegal Chinese migrants hit an all-time high in April after the Biden administration relaxed vetting rules last year.

Chinese migrants settle at Willow Camp before being processed by Border Patrol agents in Jacumba, Calif., on Dec. 6, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability Chairman Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) held the hearing on May 16 to address the “unprecedented flow of Chinese nationals” illegally crossing the U.S. southern border, which has topped 27,000 since Oct. 1.

The latest CBP numbers show that 3,324 Chinese nationals crossed the southwest border in April alone—more than the total crossings for the entire 2022 fiscal year.

This year’s total tops 27,000 encounters, surpassing the 24,000 illegal southwest border crossings during the entire 2023 fiscal year.

That’s a massive jump from recent years. In 2022, the number of Chinese migrant encounters was slightly more than  2,000 at the U.S. southern border. In 2021, that number was 450.

Nationwide encounters of Chinese migrants entering unlawfully are even higher.

When looking at encounters across the country this fiscal year, CBP data shows more than 48,000 encounters so far with illegal Chinese migrants, which includes migrants coming through ports of entry.

Mr. Bishop said during the hearing he is concerned that the vetting process, which has been decreased from 40 to five questions for Chinese migrants, does little to protect America’s national security. 

“As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) continues its quest for geopolitical dominance and threatens our sovereignty, we must examine the risks presented by releasing ever-increasing numbers of minimally vetted Chinese nationals into our communities,” Mr. Bishop said in a statement.

The Democrats’ Homeland Security website dismissed those concerns, characterizing it as “another Republican Border ‘hearing’ with invasion rhetoric and fear-mongering.”

Mr. Bishop said Chinese migrants crossing illegally into the U.S. could have “nefarious motives,” noting federal indictments in North Carolina last month showed partnerships between Mexican drug cartels and Chinese transnational criminal organizations engaged in money laundering operations throughout the United States. 

Experts invited to testify indicated that the vetting process was unlikely to find any criminal background information on Chinese nationals who have never been in the United States because China does not readily share that information with American authorities. Border Patrol officers must rely on foreign nationals to answer questions truthfully.

Simon Hankinson, senior research fellow with the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, told the committee that the vetting process was insufficient.

“At best, this is a mockery of U.S. immigration law and sovereignty, and at worst, it is a huge national security and community safety risk. In addition to many Chinese with connections to the Communist Party, People’s Liberation Army, and other state entities, it is statistically probable that [Department of Homeland Security] DHS is releasing people with criminal records,” he said.

Migrants line up for immigration processing in Lajas Blancas as merchants offer services in both Spanish and Chinese in Panama on Feb. 17, 2024. (Bobby Sanchez for The Epoch Times)

Todd Bensman, a national security fellow with the Center for Immigration Studies, brought along passports and identification cards he found near the border. The stamps inside the passports prove their holders traveled through safe countries that would have granted protection, therefore disqualifying them for U.S. asylum, he said.

While most Chinese nationals were likely coming to work, Mr. Bensman said there was little doubt that “Beijing spymasters” also noticed a new opportunity at the wide open U.S. southern border.

However, Meredith Owen, an associate history professor at the University of Maryland, testified that most Chinese are coming to the United States to flee oppression and find jobs.

She highlighted past actions by the U.S. government targeting Chinese immigrants, which had dire consequences. The Chinese became the first and only nation to be singled out by U.S. immigration law with the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, she said.

The anti-Chinese movement that drove the creation of the act cited Chinese migration as a unique threat to the United States, she said.

“These fears led to extreme violence against Chinese immigrants, including mob violence and the burning of Chinatowns,” she said.

Committee member Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) said during the hearing she is concerned about how to fix America’s “broken“ immigration system and implied racism was the reason behind opposition to migration.

Chinese trash sits in a migrant encampment in Jacoumba, Calif., on Jan. 10, 2024. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

“We’re here today because Republicans are demagoguing and exploiting the xenophobic and white supremacist ideologies that are fueling the immigration debate in this nation,“ she said.

Since President Joe Biden took office, there have been more than 9 million encounters nationwide and some 7.6 million encounters at the southwest border alone.

House Republicans blame Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorka’s policies under the Biden administration for the border crisis. 

The House voted Feb. 13 to impeach the secretary for “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law“ and for the “breach of public trust.”

However, the Democrat-controlled Senate dismissed impeachment charges against him before holding a trial, leaving Mr. Mayorkas in office.

Democrats have pointed out that America was built on immigrants and benefits from their labor.

Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said during an immigration subcommittee hearing in January that “many illegal immigrants“ were needed for agriculture production or “our vegetables would rot in the ground.”

The House of Representatives impeachment team delivers the Articles of Impeachment of Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Alejandro Mayorkas to the Senate in Washington on April 16, 2024. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

Republicans, however, question the surge of Chinese nationals coming across the U.S. southern border.

In April 2023, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) instructed Border Patrol agents to reduce the number of questions they asked Chinese migrants.

At the time, agents were facing a record number of illegal crossings from all nationalities.

The hearing became contentious at times, with committee member Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) saying Mr. Bensman’s organization had been labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. 

This leftwing group has listed many conservative organizations as “hate” groups, such as parental rights groups headed by moms.

Ms. Ramirez accused Mr. Bensman of “uplifting the same invasion rhetoric central to the white nationalist and antisemitic Great Replacement conspiracy theory” on social media.

“There is no hateful antisemitic speech in my Twitter [now called X] feed,“ Mr. Bensman responded. “I am Jewish, and we don’t really get with white nationalists; that’s not our thing, so get your facts straight.”

Mr. Bensman also suggested she read a book titled, “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center.” 

In 2023, Republican senators led by Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) wrote to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorka, suggesting some Chinese migrants entering the U.S. illegally may be tied to the CCP.

“There have been numerous documented instances of Chinese nationals, at the direction of the CCP, engaging in espionage, stealing military and economic secrets,“ according to the letter.

 The letter also noted that China is a significant source of drugs such as fentanyl being trafficked across the U.S. southern border.