Authored by Pepe Escobar,

Get ready for what may well be the geoeconomic bombshell of 2024: the coming of a decentralized monetary ecosystem.

Welcome to The Unit  – a concept that has already been discussed by the financial services and investments working group set up by the BRICS+ Business Council and has a serious shot at becoming official BRICS+ policy as early as in 2025.

According to Alexey Subbotin, founder of Arkhangelsk Capital Management and one of the Unit’s conceptualizers, this is a new problem-solving system that addresses the key geoeconomic issue of these troubled times: a global crisis of trust.

He knows all about it first-hand: a seasoned financial professional with experience in investment banking, asset management and corporate matters, Subbotin leads the Unit project under the auspices of IRIAS, an international intergovernmental organization set up in 1976 in accordance with the UN statute.

The Global Majority has had enough of the centrally controlled monetary framework put in place 80 years ago in Bretton Woods and its endemic flaws: chronic deficits fueling irresponsible military spending; speculative bubbles; politically motivated sanctions and secondary sanctions; abuse of settlement and payment infrastructure; protectionism; and the lack of fair arbitration.

In contrast, the Unit proposes a reliable, quick and economically efficient solution for cross-border payments. The – transactional – Unit is a game-changer as a new form of international currency that can be issued in a de-centralized way, and then recognized and regulated at national level.

The Unit offers a unique solution for bottlenecks in global financial infrastructure: it is eligible for traditional banking operations as well as for the newest forms of digital banking.

The Unit can also help to upend unfair pricing in commodity trading, by means of setting up a new – fair and efficient – Eurasian Mercantile Exchange where trading and settlement can be done in a new currency bridging trade flows and capital, thus paving the way to the development of new financial products for foreign direct investment (FDI).

The strength of the Unit, conceptually, is to remove direct dependency on the currency of other nations, and to offer especially to the Global Majority a new form of apolitical money – with huge potential for anchoring fair trade and investments.

It is indeed a new concept in terms of an international currency – anchored in gold (40%) and BRICS+ currencies (60%). It is neither crypto nor stablecoin – as it’s shown here.

The Beauty of Going Fractal

The Global Majority will instantly grasp the primary purpose of the Unit: to harmonize trade and financial flows by keeping them outside of political pressure or “rules” that can be twisted at will. The inevitable consequence translates as financial sovereignty. What matters in the whole process are independent monetary policies focused on economic growth.

That’s the key appeal for the Global Majority: a full ecosystem offering independent, complementary monetary infrastructure. And that surely can be extended to willing Unit partners in the collective West.

Now to the practical level: as Subbotin explains, the Unit ecosystem may be easily scalable because it comes from a fractal architecture supported by simple rules. New Unit nodes can be set up by either sovereign or private agents, following a detailed rule-book in custody of the UN-chartered IRIAS.

The Unit organizers employ a distributed ledger: a technology that ensures transparency, precluding capital controls or any exchange rate manipulation.

This means that connection is available to all open DEX and digital platforms operated by both commercial and Central Banks around the world.

The endgame is that everyone, essentially, may use the Unit for accounting, bookkeeping, pricing, settling, paying, saving and investing.

No wonder the institutional possibilities are quite enticing – as the Unit can be used for accounting and settlement for BRICS+; payment and pricing for the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU); or as a reserve currency for Sub-Saharan Africa.

And now comes the clincher: the Unit has already received backing by the BRICS Business Council and is on the agenda at the crucial ministerial meeting in Russia next month, which will work out the road map for the summit next October in Kazan.

That means the Unit has all it takes to be on the table as a serious subject discussed by BRICS+ and eventually be adopted as early as in 2025.

Will Musk and the NDB Be on Board?

As it stands, the priority for the Unit conceptualizers – whom I followed for over a year during several, detailed meetings in Moscow – is to inform the general public about the new system.

The Unit team is not interested at all in getting straight into political hot waters or to be cornered by ideologically-laden arguments. Direct references to inspiring but sometimes controversial concepts or authors like Zoltan Pozsar may bury the Unit concept into pigeon holes, thus limiting its potential impact.

What may lie ahead could be extraordinarily exciting, as the Unit appeal could extend all the way from Elon Musk to the BRICS’s New Development Bank (NDB), hopefully engaging an array of crucial actors. After a positive evaluation by Finance Minister Anton Siluanov – who remains on the post in the new Russian government – it’s not far-fetched to imagine Putin and Xi discussing it face to face this week in Beijing.

As it stands, the major takeaway is that the Unit should be seen as a feasible, technical solution for the theoretically Unsolvable: a globally-recognized payment/trade system, immune to political pressure. It’s the only game in town – there are no others.

Meanwhile, the Unit conceptualizers are open for constructive criticism and all manners of collaboration. Yet sooner or later the battle ranks will be lined up – and then it will be a matter of seriously upping the game.

“Academically Sound, Technologically Innovative”

Vasily Zhabykin, co-author of the Unit white paper and founder of CFA.Center, Unit’s technological partner at Skolkovo Innovation Hub in Moscow, crucially stresses: the Unit “represents apolitical money and can be the connector between the Global South and the West.”

He’s keen to point out that “the Unit can keep all the wheels turning unlike most of the other concepts that feature ‘dollar killers’, etc. We do not want to harm anybody. Our goal is to improve efficiency of currently broken capital and money flows. The Unit is rather the ‘cure for centralized cancer’’’.

Subbotin and the Unit team “are keen to meet new partners who share our approach and are ready to bring additional value to our project.” If that’s the case, they should “send us 3 bullet points on how can they help and improve the Unit.”

A bold follow-up step should be, for instance, a virtual conference on the Unit, featuring leading Russian economist Sergey Glazyev, Yannis Varoufakis, Jeffrey Sachs and Michael Hudson, among others.

By email, Glazyev, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Minister of Integration and Macroeconomics of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) , summed up the Unit’s potential:

“I have been following the development of Unit for more than a year and can confirm that Unit offers a very timely, feasible solution. It is academically sound, technologically innovative and at the same time complementary to the existing banking infrastructure.

Launching it under the auspices of an UN institution gives Unit legitimacy, which the current Bretton Woods framework is clearly lacking. Recent actions by the US administration and loud silence from IMF clearly indicate the need for change.

A decentralized approach to emission of potential global trade currency, whose intrinsic value is anchored in physical gold and BRICS+ currencies, makes Unit the most promising of several approaches being considered. It balances political priorities of all participants, while helping each sovereign economy develop along its optimal path.

The New Development Bank (NDB) and BRICS+ shall embrace the concept of Unit and help it to become the pinnacle of the new emerging global financial infrastructure, free from malign political interferences while focused instead on fair trade and sustainable economic growth.”

A clear, practical example of possible Unit problem-solving concerns Russia-Iran trade relations. These are two top BRICS members. Russian trade with Iran is unprofitable due to sanctions – and both cannot make payments in US dollars or euros.

Russian companies suffer significant losses after switching to payments in national currencies. With each transfer, Russian businesses on average lose as much as 25% due to the discrepancy between the market rate in Iran and the state rate.

And here’s the key takeaway: BRICS+ as well as the Global Majority can only be strengthened by developing closer geoeconomics ties. The removal of Western speculative capital shall free up local commodity trading, and enable the pooling of investable capital for sustainable development. To unlock such a vast potential, the Unit may well be the key.

In a survey of 38 countries carried out by Statista Consumer Insights, only between 21 and 44 percent of respondents said that they considered environmental protection a major issue for their country.

As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, respondents in Brazil were the most concerned about the environment, with those in Mexico and Colombia also rating environmental protection as more important than most countries in the survey.

You will find more infographics at Statista

The picture was more mixed in Asia, with Indonesians seeing the issue as highly important, while respondents in Indian and China hit around the survey average and Pakistan ranked lower in the international comparison. However, the countries rating the environment as a major issue typically also rated many other issues as highly problematic. Despite fewer people seeing the problem in China and India, environmental protection was still rated as the second and fourth most important issue, respectively, by respondents in these countries behind the likes of health/social security or unemployment, education and poverty.

In developed countries, climate change was typically rated more important than environmental protection, while it was the other way round in developing countries. European ratings ranked from 40 percent in Italy deeming environmental protection a major issue to just 19 percent saying the same in Ireland. Among U.S. respondents, 27 percent thought the issue was major – rank 13 among 20 issues.

Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“Whether the mask is labeled fascism, democracy, or dictatorship of the proletariat, our great adversary remains the apparatus—the bureaucracy, the police, the military.”

– Simone Weil, French philosopher

We are caught in a vicious cycle of too many laws, too many cops, and too little freedom.

It’s hard to say whether we’re dealing with a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves), a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens), or a Nanny State Idiocracy. 

Whatever the label, this overbearing despotism is what happens when government representatives (those elected and appointed to work for us) adopt the authoritarian notion that the government knows best and therefore must control, regulate and dictate almost everything about the citizenry’s public, private and professional lives.

The government’s bureaucratic attempts at muscle-flexing by way of overregulation and overcriminalization have reached such outrageous limits that federal and state governments now require on penalty of a fine that individuals apply for permission before they can grow exotic orchids, host elaborate dinner parties, gather friends in one’s home for Bible studies, give coffee to the homeless, let their kids manage a lemonade stand, keep chickens as pets, or braid someone’s hair, as ludicrous as that may seem.

As the Regulatory Transparency Project explains, “There are over 70 federal regulatory agencies, employing hundreds of thousands of people to write and implement regulations. Every year, they issue about 3,500 new rules, and the regulatory code now is over 168,000 pages long.”

In his CrimeADay Twitter feed, Mike Chase highlights some of the more arcane and inane laws that render us all guilty of violating some law or other.

As Chase notes, it’s against the law to try to make an unreasonable noise while a horse is passing by in a national park; to leave Michigan with a turkey that was hunted with a drone; to refill a liquor bottle with different liquor than it had in it when it was originally filled; to offer to buy swan feathers so you can make a woman’s hat with them; to enter a design in the Federal Duck Stamp contest if waterfowl are not the dominant feature of the design; to transport a cougar without a cougar license; to sell spray deodorant without telling people to avoid spraying it in their eyes; and to transport “meat loaf” unless it’s in loaf form.

In such a society, we are all petty criminals.

In fact, Boston lawyer Harvey Silvergate estimates that the average American now unknowingly commits three felonies a day, thanks to an overabundance of vague laws that render otherwise innocent activity illegal and an inclination on the part of prosecutors to reject the idea that there can’t be a crime without criminal intent. 

The bigger the government grows, the worse the red tape becomes.

Almost every aspect of American life today, including the job sector, is now subject to this kind of heightened scrutiny and ham-fisted control.

Whereas 70 years ago, one out of every 20 U.S. jobs required a state license, today, almost 1 in 4 American occupations requires a license.

According to business analyst Kaylyn McKenna, more than 41 states require that makeup artists be licensed. Twenty-eight states require a license before you can work as a residential painter. Funeral attendants, whose duties include placing caskets in visitation rooms, arranging flowers and directing mourners, have to be licensed to do so in Kansas, Maine and Massachusetts.

The problem of overregulation has become so bad that, as one analyst notes, “getting a license to style hair in Washington takes more instructional time than becoming an emergency medical technician or a firefighter.”

This is what happens when bureaucrats run the show, and the rule of law becomes little more than a cattle prod for forcing the citizenry to march in lockstep with the government.

Overregulation is just the other side of the coin to overcriminalization, that phenomenon in which everything is rendered illegal, and everyone becomes a lawbreaker.

As policy analyst Michael Van Beek warns, the problem with overcriminalization is that there are so many laws at the federal, state and local levels—that we can’t possibly know them all.

“It’s also impossible to enforce all these laws. Instead, law enforcement officials must choose which ones are important and which are not. The result is that they pick the laws Americans really must follow, because they’re the ones deciding which laws really matter,” concludes Van Beek. “Federal, state and local regulations — rules created by unelected government bureaucrats — carry the same force of law and can turn you into a criminal if you violate any one of them… if we violate these rules, we could be prosecuted as criminals. No matter how antiquated or ridiculous, they still carry the full force of the law. By letting so many of these sit around, just waiting to be used against us, we increase the power of law enforcement, which has lots of options to charge people with legal and regulatory violations.”

Case in point: in New Jersey, in what journalist Billy Binion describes as “yet another example of the effects of overcriminalization, which increases interactions between civilians and police with little benefit to actual public safety,” police went so far as to arrest a teenager and seize other teen’s bicycles for so-called traffic violations and a failure to register their bikes with the state.

This is the police state’s superpower: it has been vested with the authority to make our lives a bureaucratic hell.

That explains how a fisherman can be saddled with 20 years’ jail time for throwing fish that were too small back into the water. Or why police arrested a 90-year-old man for violating an ordinance that prohibits feeding the homeless in public unless portable toilets are also made available. Or how states across the country, in a misguided attempt to disperse homeless populations, have criminalized sitting, sleeping, or resting in public spaces; sharing food with people; and camping in public.

The laws can get downright silly.

For instance, in Florida, it’s against the law to eat a frog that was used in a frog-jumping contest. You could also find yourself passing time in a Florida slammer for such inane activities as singing in a public place while wearing a swimsuit, breaking more than three dishes per day, farting in a public place after 6 pm on a Thursday, and skateboarding without a license.

“Such laws,” notes journalist George Will, “which enable government zealots to accuse almost anyone of committing three felonies in a day, do not just enable government misconduct, they incite prosecutors to intimidate decent people who never had culpable intentions. And to inflict punishments without crimes.”

Unfortunately, the consequences are all too serious for those whose lives become grist for the police state’s mill.

In this way, America has gone from being a beacon of freedom to a locked down nation.

We labor today under the weight of countless tyrannies, large and small, carried out in the so-called name of the national good by an elite class of governmental and corporate officials who are largely insulated from the ill effects of their actions.

We increasingly find ourselves badgered, bullied and browbeaten into bearing the brunt of their arrogance, paying the price for their greed, suffering the backlash for their militarism, agonizing as a result of their inaction, feigning ignorance about their backroom dealings, overlooking their incompetence, turning a blind eye to their misdeeds, cowering from their heavy-handed tactics, and blindly hoping for change that never comes. 

The overt signs of the despotism exercised by the increasingly authoritarian regime that passes itself off as the United States government (and its corporate partners in crime) are all around us: censorship, criminalizing, shadow banning and de-platforming of individuals who express ideas that are politically incorrect or unpopular; warrantless surveillance of Americans’ movements and communications; SWAT team raids of Americans’ homes; shootings of unarmed citizens by police; harsh punishments meted out to schoolchildren in the name of zero tolerance; community-wide lockdowns and health mandates that strip Americans of their freedom of movement and bodily integrity; armed drones taking to the skies domestically; endless wars; out-of-control spending; militarized police; roadside strip searches; privatized prisons with a profit incentive for jailing Americans; fusion centers that spy on, collect and disseminate data on Americans’ private transactions; and militarized agencies with stockpiles of ammunition, to name some of the most appalling.

Yet as egregious as these incursions on our rights may be, it’s the endless, petty tyrannies—the heavy-handed, punitive-laden dictates inflicted by a self-righteous, Big-Brother-Knows-Best bureaucracy on an overtaxed, overregulated, and underrepresented populace—that illustrate so clearly the degree to which “we the people” are viewed as incapable of common sense, moral judgment, fairness, and intelligence, not to mention lacking a basic understanding of how to stay alive, raise a family, or be part of a functioning community.

In exchange for the promise of an end to global pandemics, lower taxes, lower crime rates, safe streets, safe schools, blight-free neighborhoods, and readily accessible technology, health care, water, food and power, we’ve opened the door to lockdowns, militarized police, government surveillance, asset forfeiture, school zero tolerance policies, license plate readers, red light cameras, SWAT team raids, health care mandates, overcriminalization, overregulation and government corruption.

We relied on the government to help us safely navigate national emergencies (terrorism, natural disasters, global pandemics, etc.) only to find ourselves forced to relinquish our freedoms on the altar of national security, yet we’re no safer (or healthier) than before.

We asked our lawmakers to be tough on crime, and we’ve been saddled with an abundance of laws that criminalize almost every aspect of our lives.

We wanted criminals taken off the streets, and we didn’t want to have to pay for their incarceration. What we’ve gotten is a nation that boasts the highest incarceration rate in the world, with many doing time for relatively minor, nonviolent crimes, and a private prison industry fueling the drive for more inmates.

We wanted law enforcement agencies to have the necessary resources to fight the nation’s wars on terror, crime and drugs. What we got instead were militarized police decked out with M-16 rifles, grenade launchers, silencers, battle tanks and hollow point bullets—gear designed for the battlefield, more than 80,000 SWAT team raids carried out every year (many for routine police tasks, resulting in losses of life and property), and profit-driven schemes that add to the government’s largesse such as asset forfeiture, where police seize property from “suspected criminals.”

We fell for the government’s promise of safer roads, only to find ourselves caught in a tangle of profit-driven red light cameras, which ticket unsuspecting drivers in the so-called name of road safety while ostensibly fattening the coffers of local and state governments.

This is what happens when the American people get duped, deceived, double-crossed, cheated, lied to, swindled and conned into believing that the government and its army of bureaucrats—the people we appointed to safeguard our freedoms—actually have our best interests at heart.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the problem with these devil’s bargains is that there is always a catch, always a price to pay for whatever it is we valued so highly as to barter away our most precious possessions.

In the end, such bargains always turn sour.

In what must be the first time California’s 9th circuit has ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment, non-violent convicted felons can now own guns.

The decision stems from a 2020 case, in which California resident Steven Duarte was arrested after tossing a handgun out of a moving car during a traffic stop. He was indicted by a federal grand jury for possessing said firearm while being previously convicted of “a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” in violation of the federal “felon-in-possession” law.

A customer shops for a pistol in Tinley Park, Ill., on Dec. 17, 2012. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Duarte had five prior non-violent criminal convictions in California; vandalism, felon in possession of a firearm, drug possession, and two convictions for fleeing a police officer – each of which is punishable by one year or more in prison. After pleading not guilty, Duarte’s case proceeded to trial, where he was found guilty and sentenced to 51 months in prison.

Not so fast!

As the Epoch Times notes further, in a 2-1 decision handed down on May 9, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Mr. Duarte’s conviction violated the Second Amendment as applied to him.

Specifically, the court’s majority found that the federal government failed to prove that its felon-in-possession law supports disarming convicted felons for life under a two-step framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2022 “New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen” case.

The two-step process, put forth by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, first requires the court to determine whether the Second Amendment’s “plain text” covers an individual’s conduct. If so, then that conduct is presumptively protected, and the government must prove that its law is “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

“Because Duarte is an American citizen, he is part of the people whom the Second Amendment protects,” Senior Circuit Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the majority.

“The Government argues only that ’the people‘ in the Second Amendment excludes felons like Duarte because they are not members of the ’virtuous’ citizenry,” he wrote. “We do not share that view.”

The burden then fell back to the federal government to show that its gun possession policy aligns with the “historical tradition” of the United States.

However, during the Early Republic era, Mr. Duarte’s past convictions either would have been considered misdemeanors, didn’t exist as a crime, or may have had predecessors for which the government failed to provide evidence of their existence, Judge Bea noted.

‘Historically Understood Meaning’

“Based on this record, we cannot say that Duarte’s predicate offenses were, by Founding-era standards, of a nature serious enough to justify permanently depriving him of his fundamental Second Amendment rights,” the majority opinion read.

“The Second Amendment’s plain text and historically understood meaning therefore presumptively graduate his individual right to possess a firearm for self-defense.”

Judge Bea, a George W. Bush appointee, was joined by Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, a Donald Trump appointee. The majority opinion overturned a 2010 Ninth Circuit precedent, “U.S. v. Vongxay”, which upheld the federal prohibition on possession of firearms by felons.

Circuit Judge Milan Smith, a George W. Bush appointee who penned the Vongxay opinion, dissented and urged the appeals court to order a new hearing of Mr. Duarte’s case before a full, 11-judge panel.

He argued that Buren does not override Vongxay, at least not before the U.S. Supreme Court further clarifies the constitutionality of the federal felon-in-possession law.

“One day—likely sooner, rather than later—the Supreme Court will address the constitutionality of [the federal felon firearm ban] or otherwise provide clearer guidance on whether felons are protected by the Second Amendment,” Judge Smith wrote in his dissenting opinion.

“But it is not our role as circuit judges to anticipate how the Supreme Court will decide future cases.”

The Ninth Circuit’s vacation of Mr. Duarte’s conviction added to the post-Bruen “Circuit Split” over the scope of the Second Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit joins, at least for now, the Third Circuit to rule in favor of Americans permanently stripped of Second Amendment rights because of past non-violent offenses, while the Tenth Circuit has reaffirmed its precedent upholding the restriction on those individuals.

In a 2-1 ruling last October, the Tenth Circuit observed that the Bruen Court “didn’t appear to question the constitutionality of longstanding prohibitions on possession of firearms by convicted felons.”

Instead, it argued, “Bruen apparently approved the constitutionality of regulations requiring criminal background checks … to ensure that the applicant is a ‘law-abiding, responsible citizen.’”

Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClearPolitics,

The White House did not offer their full faith and credit to the FDIC chairman when asked by RealClearPolitics about a bombshell 234-page investigation that detailed a toxic environment within the agency.

Other than noting that Martin Gruenberg, the official in question, had already “apologized and spoke[n] to” allegations that he presided over a culture of bullying, harassment, and mismanagement, Karine Jean-Pierre, the president’s spokeswoman, mostly demurred.

Gruenberg will not skate by so easily when he testifies before Congress this week. Republicans in both the House and Senate are hell-bent for leather. And his scalp.

The report was published by law firm Cleary Gottlieb last week and followed a Wall Street Journal investigation last November that documented a federal agency akin to “a good ol’ boys club” where female employees were subjected to stalking, unwelcome illicit messages, and sexual harassment.

The episode is an embarrassment to President Biden, who promised on the first day of his administration to fire “on the spot” anyone who engaged in such behavior.

It is also a political liability. If Gruenberg, a Biden nominee who served in both the Obama and Trump administrations and the Senate confirmed by voice vote, exits under pressure, it would leave the FDIC board deadlocked during an election year. “A 2-2 vote would stall and probably doom politically sensitive banking policy,” observed Renaissance Macro Research. The regulatory policy of the administration would then hang in limbo.

These realities are not lost on many in the FDIC workforce who want reform. In a statement obtained by RCP, current employees expressed their concern that “the egregious issues documented in the Cleary report by over 500 employees have become partisan.”

Working at an agency now under scrutiny for a history of reprisals against whistleblowers, the statement was left unsigned, though the drafters noted that they “have a wide range of political views, ranging from far left to far right.”

“The FDIC employees behind this statement do not have confidence that the chairman and executive management have the willingness to truly make the cultural and structural changes necessary to fully address the [matters] identified in the report,” they write.

For his part, Gruenberg has already offered an apology.

“I want to also thank everyone who shared their experiences throughout this process. I know that doing so was difficult. To anyone who experienced sexual harassment or other misconduct at the FDIC, I again want to express how very sorry I am. I also want to apologize for any shortcomings on my part,” he said in a statement when the Cleary Gottlieb report was published.

“As chairman, I am ultimately responsible for everything that happens at our agency, including our workplace culture,” Gruenberg added.

The chairman, whom the report found has a history of anger and belittling staff, plans to announce a new, independent office devoted to professional conduct at the agency, according to prepared testimony before the House Financial Services Committee Wednesday. But the head of that committee, Republican Chairman Patrick McHenry, has already called for his resignation. And some FDIC employees are already registering their dissatisfaction.

“The Chairman has communicated the action plan that he oversaw the creation of as proof of his commitment to improving conditions at the FDIC. We, however, do not have confidence that this action plan is meaningful,” they wrote.

More than a dozen Republicans now oppose Gruenberg. South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, the ranking member on the Senate Banking Committee, has called for his resignation. Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst has called on the Department of Justice to open an investigation. Only one Democrat, however, Illinois Rep. Bill Foster, has followed suit, calling for the FDIC chairman to step down.

Rep. Maxine Waters, the top Democrat on Financial Services, blasted the report, not the FDIC chairman, for focusing too much on current leadership. Democrats are expected to circle the wagons to protect Gruenberg during his testimony – an irony given the propensity of Democrats, not Republicans, to rail against toxic workplace environments.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen signaled her displeasure, telling reporters Tuesday that “the kind of abuses that were documented in the report are a totally unacceptable way to treat employees at the FDIC and not in line with the core values of the Biden administration.” She stopped short, however, of joining Republican calls for his resignation.

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

A voter casts her ballot with her child during the midterm primary election at a polling station at Rose Hill Elementary School in Alexandria, Va., on June 21, 2022. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

“Make innocence great again.”

It’s a mantra that Juliana Ormond feels strongly about. The suburban mom of three children seeks to call attention to the importance of preserving the purity and innocence of childhood. She said she desires a return to a time when she contends innocence was valued and protected, which conflicts with the complexities and challenges of the current culture.

“The only way to bring back innocence is to keep our children away from those who want to make everything about sexual identity,” Ms. Ormond said. “I look for political candidates who support policies that align with the Bible.”

She said she has watched the culture become more progressive since she was young. From her home in suburban Orlando, Ms. Ormond told The Epoch Times that two of her children are 10 years apart. Her younger daughter had a radically different school experience from her older sister.

“One day, my younger daughter brought a girlfriend home after school,” she said. “The friend proudly proclaimed that she was nonbinary. I was shocked. That ideology wasn’t pushed when my older daughter went to school.”

Mothers such as Ms. Ormond represent a significant demographic segment of the population and make up a sizable portion of the electorate. Candidates recognize the importance of appealing to this demographic group to secure their votes. Their motivations are deeply personal, rooted in parenthood’s daily struggles and triumphs. From grassroots activism to high-profile political campaigns, mothers harness their perspectives and experiences to advocate for change on issues ranging from abortion, health care, and education to the environment and social justice.

“I believe both the Democrat and Republican parties have left the people,” Ms. Ormond said. “I am dissatisfied with our government and think they are all in cahoots with one another.”

Moms of various social and political stripes are welcomed in the corridors of strategic planning, and mothers are stepping out and striding onto the political stage with vigor and determination, reshaping the political landscape. These women assert their influence in the public arena, driven by a deep-seated desire to create a better world for their children.

Mama Bears Bite Back

With almost 89 million women eligible to vote, they represent the largest and possibly most persuasive voting bloc in the United States. Among this constituency are those who identify as “mama bears.”

The Mama Bear movement is growing and altering the nation’s political climate. These mothers represent a diverse group of everyday women who are driven to shield their children from the agendas of special interest groups who think they know what’s best for kids.

Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich talked with The Epoch Times about parents’ growing concern about public education and parental rights. In 2021, three mothers from Florida founded Moms for Liberty to combat COVID-19 restrictions.

“Moms are troubled about the country’s future and education crisis in America,” she said. “Schools have been infiltrated with woke ideologies, so moms are looking closely at private schools or homeschooling their children.”

Ms. Descovich, a former Brevard School Board member in Florida, said Moms for Liberty focuses on the 2024 state school board elections nationwide, where progressive agendas thrive.

In April, the Biden administration reversed changes made under President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos that updated Title IX regulations governing schools’ responses to sexual misconduct. The revised rules, which go into effect in August, reinterpret what constitutes harassment and sex discrimination to prohibit actions driven by sexual orientation, gender identity, sex stereotypes, and pregnancy.

To date, 15 states have sued the administration over the new policy. Moms for Liberty has elevated its effort to inform moms about the changes.

“Many moms are deeply troubled with the rewriting of Title IX,” Ms. Descovich said. “We must stand up for the parental right to raise our children and support them as they navigate significant life lessons.”

For these reasons, she said, many parents seek alternative education options such as homeschooling or private schools.

Moms for Liberty is represented in 48 states, with 300 chapters and 330,000 members. Ms. Descovich said the organization recently discovered that more than half of its members have not voted more than once in the past eight years in a primary.

“Most moms are not historically politically active,” she said. “We’re working on getting them registered to vote on our issues.”

Progressive Moms Embrace Social Diversity

Alexandria White founded Student Affairs Moms, the largest online community for mothers in the student affairs profession. She is the mother of one daughter and a seasoned diversity, leadership, and inclusive communities trainer. The resident of Oxford, Mississippi, said she understands the desire to maintain innocence with children but also said that complex social issues must be addressed.

“I believe in preparing my children for complex topics,” Ms. White said.

Such topics include, for instance, a classmate who has two moms.

“This kind of preparation reduces bullying,” she said. “Our children are more likely to be more empathetic.”

Ms. White told The Epoch Times that moms seek candidates who identify with their family needs and align with their community and family values.

“There is no perfect candidate,” she said. “We must, however, have passion in our hearts and reason in our minds. What can a particular candidate do that connects with my heart but also reasoned with my mind regarding policies?”

Ms. White consults clients who work hard to meet the financial needs of their families and women who seek “work-life harmony.” She engages moms, who evaluate these issues and demands as they vote.

“The pulse is on what candidate can make the average person’s dollar go the farthest,” Ms. White said. “Most moms are worried about their children’s overall mental, spiritual, or physical health.”

According to a survey conducted by The Current Project, nearly 70 percent of black single mothers with school-age children think the nation is headed in the wrong direction. About 90 percent of respondents said they believe that the current public school system does not adequately serve students’ needs, and 56 percent have considered transferring their children to different schools in the past year. The Current Project, a New York City-based advocacy group, surveyed 504 middle-to-low-income black mothers who are single.

Six out of 10 respondents strongly agreed they would be more inclined to support a candidate who advocated granting parents greater flexibility in selecting the school for their children. The respondents emphasized after-school child care, gifted and talented programs, respect for their child’s gender identity, and class sizes.

“I’m concerned that some of the social wedge issues are being used to defund public education,” Merisa Bowers, a mom of a 7-year-old son and City Council president of Gahanna, Ohio, told The Epoch Times. “We need vital public education systems for workforce development and a system that creates an educated population.”

She acknowledged that following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, Ohio voters last year overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment that guarantees access to abortion and reproductive health care.

“All politics is local,” Ms. Bowers said. “While presidential cycles are important and do a lot of good, most politics at the state and local level affect individuals and families. It’s important that moms evaluate what’s happening politically in their local communities.”

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

The U.S. Department of Justice determined on May 14 that Boeing violated a deferred prosecution agreement that allowed the aerospace company to evade criminal charges after two crashes of its 737 MAX jet that killed everyone on board.

The logo for Boeing appears on a screen above a trading post on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange on July 13, 2021. (Richard Drew/AP)

Justice Department prosecutors delivered the news to a federal judge on May 14 after hosting a closed-door meeting with the families of the victims of the 2018 and 2019 crashes on April 24. The agency now has until July 7 to decide whether it will file criminal charges against Boeing, during which time it will tell the court how it plans to proceed, the Justice Department said.

Glenn Leon, the head of the Justice Department’s fraud section, said in a letter that the aerospace company failed to implement measures to prevent it from running afoul of federal anti-fraud laws, which is a violation of its 2021 deferred prosecution agreement.

The Justice Department said it could prosecute the company “for any federal criminal violation of which the United States has knowledge,” including a fraud charge that Boeing hoped to sidestep with its $2.5 billion settlement with the U.S. government.

The government did not say whether it would move forward with prosecuting Boeing, one of its biggest aerospace contractors.

“The Government is determining how it will proceed in this matter,” the Justice Department said in a court document.

The 2018 and 2019 737 MAX crashes involved a new flight-control system that Boeing added to the jet without notifying airlines or their pilots, according to investigations. The aerospace company then discounted the system’s importance and failed to overhaul its application until after the second crash caused further casualties.

The Justice Department then investigated Boeing before settling the case with a deferred prosecution agreement on Jan. 7, 2021. The department agreed not to prosecute for the charge of defrauding the government in misleading the regulators who approved the 737 MAX after closed-door negotiations with Boeing.

Instead, Boeing paid a total of $2.5 billion in settlement fees. That included nearly $1.8 billion to airlines whose 737 MAX jets were grounded, a $500 million fund for compensating victims, and a $243.6 million fine to the U.S. Government.

“The tragic crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 exposed fraudulent and deceptive conduct by employees of one of the world’s leading commercial airplane manufacturers,” Acting Assistant Attorney General David P. Burns of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division said in 2021.

“Boeing’s employees chose the path of profit over candor by concealing material information from the FAA concerning the operation of its 737 Max airplane and engaging in an effort to cover up their deception.”

U.S. Attorney Erin Nealy Cox, for the Northern District of Texas, was also featured in the Justice Department’s 2021 statement on the Boeing agreement.

“The misleading statements, half-truths, and omissions communicated by Boeing employees to the FAA impeded the government’s ability to ensure the safety of the flying public,” she said.

The agreement between Boeing and the U.S. Government was set to expire on Jan. 7, two days after a mid-air blowout of a door panel on an Alaskan Airlines flight, also featuring a 737 MAX. That incident triggered the Justice Department’s 2024 investigation into whether Boeing violated the 2021 settlement.

As a result of the various crashes and incidents, Boeing has faced multiple civil lawsuits, Senate and House investigations, and increased public scrutiny of its business practices.

Paul Cassell, the attorney representing the 737 MAX crash victims’ families, said in late April that he was worried the Justice Department was giving Boeing “preferential treatment” after the April 24 closed-door meeting with the agency yielded no decisive updates on its investigation.

“We don’t understand how it could possibly be in the public interest to dismiss the charges and avoid a trial that could shed light on so many of the safety issues that continue to surface regarding the 737 Max that’s made by Boeing,” he told The Epoch Times.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

It was only on Tuesday night that Antony Blinken was leading a bizarre rock anthem as the guitar and vocals front man at a Kiev bar, singing Neil Young’s “Rockin’ in the Free World” — and the internet collectively cringed. But only the next morning, on Wednesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky declared he was canceling all upcoming foreign trips at a moment his forces are getting hammered in the Kharkiv region.

“Volodymyr Zelenskyy has instructed that all international events scheduled for the coming days be postponed and new dates coordinated. We are grateful to partners for their understanding,” said Zelensky’s press secretary Sergii Nykyforov.

Just a quick reminder that you and your family can’t afford rent, gas, and groceries because inflation is out of control and your tax dollars are being spent on things like Secretary of State Tony Blinken playing guitar at a bar in Ukraine.

Please be more pissed off. pic.twitter.com/bbyXMuiG0p

— NotKennyRogers (@NotKennyRogers) May 14, 2024

Ukraine’s military leaders are “making all decisions based on comprehensive information. Additional forces are being deployed, reserves are available,” Nykyforov stated.

Among the foreign trips which have been postponed were expected visits of Zelensky to Spain and Portugal. Spain has just recently given up at least one of its Patriot missile batteries for Ukraine after considerable pressure from EU and NATO leaders.

Commenting on these developments, journalist Glenn Greenwald has made an important prediction and point…

By this time next year, there will be about 15 people still admitting they supported this bloodshed and debacle of the US blocking diplomatic solutions and instead fueling this futile war in Ukraine.

Everyone else will pretend they opposed it. US war propaganda is always false. https://t.co/VOycKd5QLH

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) May 15, 2024

He wrote Wednesday, “By this time next year, there will be about 15 people still admitting they supported this bloodshed and debacle of the US blocking diplomatic solutions and instead fueling this futile war in Ukraine.”

“Everyone else will pretend they opposed it. US war propaganda is always false,” Greenwald concluded.

Indeed this is very similar with how the Iraq war turned out: “everyone” was on board, until they weren’t.  

And those who had it horribly wrong all along suddenly fell silent and ‘forgot’ their past gatekeeping and rabid denunciations of the minority ‘other side’ whose ‘unpopular’ predictions proved accurate.

Never forget pic.twitter.com/9PdsEwNwLy

— Mark Ames (@MarkAmesExiled) May 15, 2024

…Behold the predictable pattern of US Empire in a long, slow decline.

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

The FBI and U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a public service announcement saying that foreign terrorist organizations like ISIS and related terrorist organizations could target certain events across the United States during “Pride Month”-related events in June.

“Organizations like ISIS may seek to exploit increased gatherings associated with the upcoming June 2024 Pride Month,” the announcement said. The two agencies said the terror threat is “compounded” by the “current heightened threat environment” in the United States.

The terrorist threats could come via the mail, in person, or online, the agencies said, without elaborating or providing specific details.

The bulletin noted that June 12, 2024, is the eighth anniversary of the mass shooting at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando in which 49 people died. After the incident, pro-ISIS groups “praised this attack as one of the high-profile attacks in Western countries” and “supporters celebrated it,” the FBI and DHS said.

There was no evidence that the ISIS terrorist group was directly involved in plotting that shooting, the shooter, Omar Mateen, called 911 after the incident started and pledged allegiance to the group.

The agencies cited that in February 2023, an ISIS-related message board had included “rhetoric and rallied against the growth and promotion” of LGBT groups, the FBI said. “Messages also called for ISIS followers to conduct attacks on soft targets, though they weren’t specific” to those venues, it added.

Last June, three ISIS sympathizers tried to attack a parade in Austria, using vehicles and knives, according to the FBI and DHS.

The two agencies revealed “possible indicators” of what they called “potential threat activity,” which includes “unusual surveillance or interest in buildings, gatherings, or events” as well as “unusual or prolonged testing or probing of security measures at events or venues,” violent threats made online or in person, or photography of security related equipment or personnel.

Other FBI Warnings

In April, the FBI announced that it had arrested an 18-year-old Idaho man for allegedly plotting to carry out a terrorist attack targeting local churches. The man, identified in court documents as Alexander Mercurio, is accused of telling an FBI informant about his alleged plans and that he wanted to launch an attack last Sunday, April 7, but was thwarted by officials.

“The defendant allegedly pledged loyalty to ISIS and sought to attack people attending churches in Idaho, a truly horrific plan which was detected and thwarted by the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force,” the FBI said in a statement issued at the time

It comes as FBI Director Chris Wray last month that foreign terrorist groups are again looking to attack the United States in an “increasingly concerning” way, adding that his agency is attempting to prevent an attack on U.S. soil via terrorist groups such as ISIS-K, a regional branch of ISIS mainly in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Foreign terrorists, including ISIS, al-Qaeda, and their adherents, have renewed calls for attacks against Jewish communities here in the United States and across the West in statements and propaganda,” Mr. Wray said at the event. He then made reference to a terrorist attack claimed by ISIS in Moscow, Russia, that left more than 140 people dead.

“The foreign terrorist threat and the potential for a coordinated attack here in the homeland, like the ISIS-K attack we saw at the Russia Concert Hall a couple weeks ago, is now increasingly concerning. Oct. 7 and the conflict that’s followed will feed a pipeline of radicalization and mobilization for years to come,” he added.

In the meantime, Mr. Wray has been issuing warnings about the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), often warning this year that the regime is actively targeting U.S. systems. The CCP’s hacking programs are much larger than the U.S.’s cybersecurity structure.

“To put it simply, [the Chinese Communist Party] is throwing its whole government at undermining the security and economy of the rule-of-law world,” the FBI director said earlier this year.

French President Emmanuel Macron has declared a 12-day state of emergency starting Wednesday as a result of deadly riots which have gripped France’s Indo-Pacific territory of New Caledonia.

Four people died and many others were wounded in clashes with police Tuesday night, with reports of looting and buildings burned to the ground. The mayhem was sparked by a vote in France’s parliament, the National Assembly, which authorizes residents who’ve resided in New Caledonia for 10 years to cast ballots in provincial elections.

Car with flag of the Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front, AFP

But the archipelago’s indigenous Kanak people have for decades chafed over what they see as a power grab favoring the descendants of colonizers who want to remain part of France. These ethnic tensions have simmered for many years, and have boiled over this week.

The French territory lies east of Australia and is ten time zones ahead of Paris, and it has about 270,000 people. The new state of emergency aims “to restore order in the shortest time possible” – according to a parliament statement.

There are widespread reports that French military troops have been deployed to put down the pro-independence riots, and a ban on TikTok has also reportedly been issued, but Paris officials have sought to downplay these draconian measures.

According to the Associated Press, “Asked if France could deploy the French military to the island, Thevenot said it’s not the army’s job to maintain order but that it is helping with the transport of police reinforcements.”

A montage view of the destruction and fires raging:

New Caledonia hit by deadly unrest as France approves local voting system change

Follow us on Rumblehttps://t.co/Nuc9nUzlmx pic.twitter.com/3SwO7U95LK

— RT (@RT_com) May 15, 2024

However, later the AFP news agency wrote that France has deployed army personnel at New Caledonia ports as well as the main airport.

New Caledonia’s president Louis Mapou has said that the deaths from the last 24 hours of unrest included three young indigenous Kanak people and a French gendarmerie police officer who had previously sustained wounds. Hundreds of protesters and police have been injured.

“The moblie gendarme seriously wounded by a bullet in New Caledonia has just died,” Darmanin announced. “Our thoughts are with his family, those close to him and his friends. Nothing, absolutely nothing, justifies violence. Order will be restored.”

Paris has confirmed an extra 500 French police officers have been sent to the territory to help restore order.

The French Empire has deployed its military to put down insurgents in the Pacific island of New Caledonia, which is near Australia!

And France has also banned TikTok in that island to hide human rights violations.

Freedom, democracy and Western values on displaypic.twitter.com/0PViDdpt74

— S.L. Kanthan (@Kanthan2030) May 15, 2024

All schools and public buildings in the capital of Noumea have remained shut. Hundreds of buildings have been damaged or have been set on fire.

Fresh reporting in The New York Times demonstrates how seriously France is taking it, with President Macron having canceled an overseas trip:

The French authorities have undertaken what they called a “massive” mobilization of security forces since violent protests broke out in New Caledonia this week over a proposed amendment to the French Constitution that would change local voting rules in the territory. A vote in France’s Parliament approving the amendment on Tuesday ignited riots overnight that left four people dead, including a law enforcement officer.

#UPDATE ⚡️🇫🇷 —Events are growing in New Caledonia.

At least 4 people were killed in the riot in New Caledonia. – LS pic.twitter.com/yEsNWZ2ONH

— UK R REPORT (@UKR_Report) May 15, 2024

According to more:

The French government said that more than 1,800 security officers were already in the territory and that 500 reinforcements would arrive in the next 24 hours.

At a crisis meeting, Mr. Attal said that the army was being deployed to secure ports and the airport.

Following a crisis security meeting chaired by Macron on Wednesday, the French president’s office issued a statement expressing “strong emotion” of the deaths as a result of the riots.

The statement further said that “All violence is intolerable and will be subject to a relentless response” to ensure that order and peace are restored.