What Kind Of Self-Respecting Heterosexual Male Would Simp For Bill Ackman?

Going after @BillAckman’s wife is one of the dumbest moves I’ve ever seen. MIT and Business Insider don’t understand the force of nature that’s about to come after them.

This guy literally beat out Brad Pitt competing for his wife. While you were losing sleep over not having… pic.twitter.com/LQdJfYMYF0

— Robert Sterling (@RobertMSterling) January 6, 2024

guardian |  The wife of Bill Ackman, the hedge fund billionaire who accused Claudine Gay of being a plagiarist and led calls for her resignation as Harvard president, is now facing allegations of plagiarism herself.

Neri Oxman, a prominent former professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has apologized after Business Insider identified multiple instances in which she lifted passages from other scholars’ work without proper attribution in her 2010 dissertation. She also pledged to review the primary sources and request the necessary corrections.

Business Insider on Thursday initially labeled four passages of Oxman’s dissertation as plagiarized – without any attribution – from Wikipedia entries. But by Friday, the outlet had found at least 15 such passages, a turn of events that was similar to that which led to Gay’s ouster from the Harvard presidency.

Business Insider also identified research papers written by Oxman that contained plagiarism, including a 2007 paper – titled Get Real: Towards Performance Driven Computational Geometry – and a 2011 paper named Variable Property Rapid Prototyping.

The 2011 paper contained more than 100 words lifted from a book without any attribution or citation, included two sentences from another book verbatim without any attribution, and pulled material from a 2004 paper without citing it, according to Business Insider.

In response to Gay’s resignation, Ackman published a 4,000-word post on X – formerly Twitter – in which he criticized diversity, equity and inclusion efforts as well as complained about “racism against white people”. He also complained that Gay, a Black woman, was allowed to remain on Harvard’s faculty. Gay had faced plagiarism allegations over her 1997 dissertation, but she requested corrections and was cleared of academic misconduct by a three-member independent review board.

Ackman struck a different tone on X when addressing the plagiarism allegations against his wife. He wrote on X: “It is unfortunate that my actions to address problems in higher education have led to these attacks on my family. This experience has inspired me to save all news organizations from the trouble of doing plagiarism reviews.”

He went on to promise to lead plagiarism reviews against all current MIT faculty, board and committee members, and its president, Sally Kornbluth.

Ackman additionally criticized Business Insider and the reporters at the publication who authored the story investigating Oxman, saying he would spearhead plagiarism reviews against the outlet’s staff.

Previously, Ackman was a donor to the Democratic party. But the New York Times reported that the billionaire’s campaign against Harvard came because he resented the fact that years’ worth of donations to the university did not yield him more influence there.

 

Neri Oxman Caught Plagiarizing

I was forwarded an email this morning from a reporter at Business Insider who noted that there are four paragraphs in my 330-page PhD dissertation: “Material-based Design Computation,” which I completed at @MIT in 2010,https://t.co/6LE1O4FiiL

where I omitted quotation marks…

— Neri Oxman (@NeriOxman) January 4, 2024

The Fight Was Between Two Billionaires Over Control Of Cancel Culture

This is what it looks like when two people who can think clearly talk to two people who cannot think clearly but are good at emoting. https://t.co/p6NDgWd1CB

— Peter Boghossian (@peterboghossian) January 7, 2024

 

Why Didn't Claudia Gay Go After Dershowitz?

Response by Dershowitz is INSANE!

It’s alleged Epstein “forced then-minor Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with..former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz..”

Dershowitz’s response:
“..but what about Hamas!.. Me too except if you’re a Jew”
WTF?!!! pic.twitter.com/6WayHEHnH1 https://t.co/klhgPHXVoX

— أبو عمّار (@MaajidNawaz) January 4, 2024

 

Alan Dershowitz has now been outed as a pedophile according to the Epstein document dump, this is the man Netanyahu selected to defend Israel against the Genocide convention.

Once again I reiterate that the foundation of Israel's national security is *literally* pedophilia https://t.co/B8AdwEZDe0 pic.twitter.com/QM5QfE2cn5

— Benjamin Rubinstein (@BenFRubinstein) January 4, 2024

The FBI Has Possession Of The Epstein Sex Tapes

twitter  |  The Epstein Files. Today a tranche of documents were released in a case involving Jeffrey Epstein. There’s no revelations. Jeffrey Epstein’s case was covered up. I can explain why.

In 2017, my lawyer Marc Randazza found a wonky freedom of the press case. There was a defamation case, and although Jeffrey Epstein wasn’t named as a defendant, the case was central to some “conspiracy theories.” Marc asked me if I wanted to file a motion to intervene. We expected it to be a simple matter.

Media interest was almost zero. No one in the “free press” cared. Then Trump nominated Alexander Acosta to the Secretary of Labor. Acosta had handled the original Epstein criminal case, and said Epstein was given kid gloves treatments due to protection from the intelligence community.

Epstein was an asset of the FBI. What his exact relation was remains sealed.

By 2019 the case I sought to intervene in had an ORANGE MAN BAD angle because Acota was Trump’s Labor Secretary. Even if the motives were impure, at least we were on to the races.

Hundreds-of-thousands of dollars later, a trip to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, and a lot of fighting, we had a batch of documents ready to be unsealed.

The weekend before the documents were made public, SDNY arrested Epstein quietly when he landed his private jet on an airport from a trip he took in France. No perp walk for Epstein.

In 2019 I wrote the following after a press conference was held re: Epstein’s arrest:

" Why didn’t the SNDY charge Jeffrey Epstein under the Mann Act? Under the Mann Act, it’s unlawful to transport an underage girl through interstate travel, including on an airplane."

"In a widely-publicized press conference the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York announced sex trafficking charges against Jeff Epstein."

"Epstein was charged for paying minors for massages from 2002 to 2005. Yet what was more newsworthy was the what the indictment left out."

"The indictment against Epstein does not charge anyone except Epstein, and there’s nothing to indicate that anyone who flew to Epstein’s private island has faced scrutiny."

"The SDNY’s actions have all of the telltale signs of containment. Because the Miami Herald and Cernovich won a civil lawsuit, leading to over 2,000 records being unsealed, it’s simply impossible for the same Feds who gave Epstein a pass years ago to continue to cover up."

"The SDNY could have charged Epstein in 2002, 2003, 2004, or at anytime until today. Yet they did not file charges until the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that previously sealed records involving Jeff Epstein would become public record.Thus they are charging him without implicating anyone else who assisted with his operation."

You know what happened next. Epstein committed suicide.

Because SDNY charged the lowest level offenses possible, they “lacked jurisdiction” to raid Epstein’s island in Little St James, as well as his New Mexico and Paris properties. Those houses were left unattended for a couple of weeks.

During that time, a safe went missing. During the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, it was reported:

Evidence from Jeffrey Epstein's safe 'went missing' after FBI raid.

What was in the safe? We’ll never know for certain. We do know that the FBI has Jeffrey Epstein’s blackmail files.

The real Jeffrey Epstein files are the blackmail material.

Very powerful forces have made sure we will never see it.

CD's in Epstein's safe labeled: "Young [Name] + [Name]"

That looks an awful lot like they found the blackmail tapes https://t.co/4tR9Mya7lL

— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) July 8, 2019

ABCNews Was In Possession Of All The Epstein Details And Covered Them Up

ABC had all the information about Jeffrey Epstein and his accomplices with photos. Chose to hide it all instead of reporting on their friends. pic.twitter.com/0HXHwUdG53

— Big Fish (@BigFish3000) January 1, 2024

 

DOJ Letting Up On SBF To Protect DNC Recipients Of Ill-Gotten Largesse

NYPost  |  The decision to avoid a second trial charging Sam Bankman-Fried with a conspiracy to make unlawful political donations and bribery of foreign officials has many conservatives up in arms.

Federal prosecutors said Friday that they do not plan to proceed with a second trial against Sam Bankman-Fried, citing public interest in a speedy resolution of the case that has seemingly irritated those who were hoping to see the disgraced FTX founder prosecuted to the fullest extent.

In a Friday letter filed in federal court in Manhattan, prosecutors said they do “not plan to proceed with a second trial” as “much of the evidence that would be offered in a second trial was already offered in the first trial and can be considered by the Court at the defendant’s March 2024 sentencing.”

“Given that practical reality, and the strong public interest in a prompt resolution of this matter, the Government intends to proceed to sentencing on the counts for which the defendant was convicted at trial,” the prosecutors added.

The decision by prosecutors not to hold a second trial against Bankman-Fried quickly drew backlash from those who had followed the case.

“So we won’t know which politicians he bribed or who’s campaigns he influenced? That collective sigh of relief you are hearing is from the DEEP STATE,” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., wrote in a Friday night post to X.

Conservative commentator John Cardillo also weighed in on the announcement from prosecutors, accusing the Department of Justice of shielding Democrats from being named as recipients of Bankman-Fried donations.

“Sam Bankman-Fried will not face second trial,” Cardillo wrote in an X post. “DOJ is protecting his Dem donation recipients.”

CryptoLaw founder John Deaton, who has consistently commented on Bankman-Fried’s case, slammed the decision by prosecutors as a “disgrace.”

“The DOJ has shown again, that it is NOT an independent agency,” Deaton said on X. “Who is the Attorney General protecting?”

 

Still Pretending Epstein Suicided And Slick Willie Didn't Partake

 

abcnews |  Former President Clinton, who ABC News has learned is identified as "Doe 36," is mentioned in more than fifty of the redacted filings, according to court records. Several of those sealed or redacted entries are focused on an effort by Giuffre's lawyers in mid-2016, first reported by ABC News, to subpoena the two-term Democratic president for deposition testimony about his relationship with Epstein.

According to portions of the court record that were not sealed, Giuffre's legal team initiated informal discussions with attorneys for the then-unnamed witness on June 9, 2016. That was a few days after the former president's wife, Hillary Clinton, clinched the Democratic nomination for president.

Representatives for Giuffre did contact the former president's attorneys in 2016 about a potential deposition, a person familiar with the situation told ABC News. Clinton's lawyers responded that his testimony would not be helpful to Giuffre because, the person said, the former president had never been on Epstein's island, as she had claimed.

Maxwell called the move to question Clinton "utter nonsense" and a "transparent ploy by [Giuffre] to increase media exposure for her sensational stories through deposition side-show," her attorney Laura Menninger wrote, according to an unredacted section of a court filing.

Giuffre's legal team, in contrast, described the proposed testimony of Clinton as "highly relevant" and "important to the fundamental claims and defenses" in the case. The request was ultimately denied by U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet, in a redacted ruling in late June 2016.

Giuffre's lawyers pressed the Clinton issue again at a hearing in March 2017, six weeks before a trial was scheduled to begin. According to a publicly available transcript, Giuffre's team was then seeking to preclude Maxwell's side from presenting testimony suggesting that Clinton hadn't been on Epstein's island. Her attorneys argued it would be "inherently unfair" to Giuffre because they had not been permitted to ask the former president if he had ever been to Little St. James, as Epstein's private island estate was known.

"You did not allow us to depose him because you said it was irrelevant," McCawley told Judge Sweet. "So now we're in a position where at trial they want to put forth that information against my client, and I don't have an under-oath statement from that individual saying whether or not he actually was," she added.

Maxwell's attorneys, according to the transcript, told the court Maxwell was prepared to take the stand and testify that Clinton was never on the island.

 

 

150 Balls-Deep Two Piece And A Biscuit Pedophiles About To Be Outed

yahoo  |  Hundreds of sealed court filings pertaining to the late sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein are set to be made public this week, and several prominent names -- including Britain's Prince Andrew and former President Bill Clinton -- are expected to appear in the documents.

U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska ruled earlier this month there was no legal justification for continuing to conceal the ex-president's name and more than 150 names other "John and Jane Does" mentioned in the records. Preska ordered the unsealing to begin after Jan. 1.

The documents stem from a 2015 civil lawsuit centered on allegations that Epstein's one-time paramour, Ghislaine Maxwell, facilitated the sexual abuse of Virginia Giuffre, an alleged trafficking victim. Giuffre also accused Epstein and Maxwell of directing her to have sex with Prince Andrew and several other prominent men. Prince Andrew denied the allegations and claimed he could not recall ever meeting Giuffre. He later settled a lawsuit she filed against him.

Most of the prominent names that appear in the documents are already associated in some way with Epstein; for allegations of wrongdoing, for having worked for Epstein, flown on his planes, or visited his homes. Some were mentioned during Maxwell's criminal trial in 2021. In some instances, the only appearances of the names are in potential witness lists or in proposed terms for searches of electronic records.

While Giuffre's allegations against Prince Andrew, and his denials, have been widely reported around the globe, dozens of the sealed records are expected to contain additional details from "Jane Doe 162," a witness who testified she was with Prince Andrew, Maxwell and Giuffre, then 17, at Epstein's New York mansion. Giuffre has alleged that gathering, in 2001, was one of the occasions she was directed to have sex with Andrew.

Giuffre made no allegations of wrongdoing by Clinton, and there is no indication the sealed records contain evidence of illegal conduct by Clinton. But Giuffre's claim that she met the ex-president on Epstein's private Caribbean island emerged as a contentious issue in the litigation, which was settled in 2017. Maxwell contended Clinton had never been to Little St. James -- as Epstein's island was known -- and assailed Giuffre's claim as a fabrication that shattered her credibility.

Personal flight logs kept by one of Epstein's pilots -- which surfaced in separate lawsuits against Epstein -- showed that Clinton and his entourage had flown extensively on Epstein's jumbo-jet to international destinations such as Paris, Bangkok and Brunei in 2002 and 2003. But none of the available records included the former president on a trip to Epstein's island.

The court documents to be unsealed this week represent the eighth, and likely final, round of unsealing records from the case since the Miami Herald intervened for access to the records in 2018. Previously unsealed items included multiple deposition transcripts of Maxwell and Giuffre, along with sworn, but unproven, allegations that Epstein and Maxwell directed Giuffre to have sex with several well-known men, including former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, the late model scout Jean Luc Brunel, billionaire hedge fund manager Glenn Dubin, and others.

Maxwell denied the allegations, as did all of the men identified by Giuffre when their names surfaced.

This batch will involve the names of additional Epstein associates, alleged perpetrators, alleged co-conspirators, alleged victims, witnesses and former Epstein employees. Several of the "Does" mentioned in the documents are now deceased.

Former President Clinton, who ABC News has learned is identified as "Doe 36," is mentioned in more than fifty of the redacted filings, according to court records. Several of those sealed or redacted entries are focused on an effort by Giuffre's lawyers in mid-2016, first reported by ABC News, to subpoena the two-term Democratic president for deposition testimony about his relationship with Epstein.

 

Nu Year's Eve: Turn't On Champagne And Cracked Up By The GOAT

hotnewhiphop  |   These days, Dave Chappelle is known for standing by his non-PC approach to comedy, and his new special is no exception. The Dreamer arrived on Netflix today, raising eyebrows and getting social media users talking. The special features various jokes about the trans community, disabled people, Will Smith's infamous Oscars slap, and even Lil Nas X.

One of Chappelle's jokes centered around him meeting Jim Carrey on the set of Man On The Moon, in which the actor stars as Andy Kaufman. "I was very disappointed because I wanted to meet Jim Carrey and I had to pretend he was Andy Kaufman all afternoon. It was clearly Jim Carrey. I could look at him and clearly see it was Jim Carrey," he explained, citing Carrey's method-acting. "I say all that to say … that's how trans people make me feel."

He later joked that in an attempt to mend his relationship with the trans community, he wrote a play about a trans woman. “To be honest with you, I’ve been trying to repair my relationship with the transgender community cause I don’t want them to think that I don’t like them... You know how I’ve been repairing it? I wrote a play. I did. Cause I know that gays love plays. It’s a very sad play, but it’s moving," he described, "It’s about a Black transgender woman whose pronoun is, sadly, n***a. It’s a tear-jerker. At the end of the play she dies of loneliness cause white liberals don’t know how to speak to her. It’s sad.”

Chappelle didn't stop there, however. He went on to joke that he'd now be targeting disabled people. "Tonight, I'm doing all handicapped jokes," he declared. "They're not as organized as the gays and I love punching down." What do you think of the jokes Dave Chappelle made about trans people in his new Netflix special? 

Barack Obama Created Illegal Psyops Against The American People

WOW 🚨 On The Record Testimony & Evidence That Barack Obama Created An Illegal Psyop Against The American People To Interfere In Future Elections

“2 days ago, my colleagues and I published the 1st batch of internal files from the Cyber Threat Intelligence League, which show US… pic.twitter.com/1d2WpWcNe8

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) December 27, 2023

twitter  |  Oh wait until the truth gets out on ALL the things started by Obama. That is of course if they don’t double down using new resources to mass censor and play psyops games on American citizens again. Obama was pissed when Trump won because Obama had almost completed everything going on right now. Trump stopped it. Well delayed it that is. Trump cut funding to the WHO and stopped the Obama DOD Biodefense Council from fully being formed. It is now formed under Biden using your tax dollars. 

Did the Obama and Biden Administration lay down an impressive enforcement foundation for the W.H.O., Climate agendas, global health agendas and World Economic Forum ideologies using the NDAA and DOD? Lets break it down into a few parts: FY23 NDAA: Fiscal Year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) W.H.O. & Pandemic Preparedness Did our representatives use the NDAA to establish foundations for a massive power grab under the W.H.O. U.N. Under the guise of pandemic preparedness, climate crisis & global health? https://open.substack.com/pub/matthew1315/p/fiscal-year-2023-national-defense?r=2z8r4w&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post 

2023 DOD BIODEFENSE COUNCIL: FY23 NDAA funded the DOD Biodefense Posture Review and funded the new DOD Biodefense Council Is the Biodefense Council an enforcement arm for pandemic preparedness, climate issues, global health security and other “Evergreen” agendas? https://open.substack.com/pub/matthew1315/p/fy23-ndaa-funded-the-dod-biodefense?r=2z8r4w&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post 

W.H.O. PANDEMIC TREATY: Is the Biden Administration and W.H.O. Using the new pandemic treaty to gain sovereignty over nations under the guise of “pandemic preparedness”? Is this a globalist push using the FY23 NDAA, DOD Council, W.H.O., and U.N. to push WEF ideologies and a “great reset”? https://open.substack.com/pub/matthew1315/p/is-the-biden-administration-and-who?r=2z8r4w&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post 

DOD CONTRACTS WITH BIG TECH AND PRIVATE CORPORATIONS FOR THINGS LIKE “DISINFORMATION” AI SOFTWARE BIDEN EXECUTIVE ORDERS FOR THINGS LIKE FCC, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE REGULATIONS, DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT FOR GREEN AGENDAS DOD contracts with Big Tech and private corporations for “disinformation” control Alethia, LCK strategies, Accrete - Biden Administration Executive orders and FCC changes Have they established a massive tool for the Censorship Industrial Complex? https://open.substack.com/pub/matthew1315/p/biolabs-in-wuhan-china-odessa-ukraine?r=2z8r4w&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post 

OBAMA, BIDEN, FAUCI CONNECTIONS WITH BIOLABS IN WUHAN, CHINA, ODESSA, UKRAINE, AND NIH LAB IN HAMILTON MONTANA IN REGARDS TO CORONAVIRUS AND OTHER ZOONOTIC THREATS https://open.substack.com/pub/matthew131

We're Not Going To Get The Hang Of This Thing Before NHI Correct Our Overshoot

caityjohnstone |  We could have been so much more. We have the ability to create a healthy and harmonious world and collaborate to give everyone on earth everything they need, and instead we’re killing the biosphere while arguing about whether or not it’s anti-semitic to oppose an active genocide.

We could have peace on earth and move from competition-based systems to collaboration-based ones to maximize our creative and innovative potential and spend our existence exploring the outer universe and the universes within ourselves, and instead we’re ramping up brinkmanship between nuclear-armed states and arguing about whether or not it’s ethical to rain military explosives on a giant concentration camp full of children.

We have the technology to let every scientist on earth share ideas and information with each other around the world in real time in any language, and instead we’ve fractured scientific development into atomized little echo chambers of closely-guarded secrets in the name of profit generation and “national security”.

How did we get here? How were we duped into trading paradise on earth for this lunatic dystopia? How did we allow ourselves to give up everything our species has the capability to be in exchange for this nightmarish paradigm of endless ecocide and exploitation and oppression and war and militarism?

Near as I can tell, it’s ultimately because our species evolved these massive brains very quickly which we still haven’t learned how to use in a mature way, like a kid learning to ride a bicycle right after the training wheels have been removed. This has allowed us to dominate the planet while still ourselves being dominated by primitive fear-based impulses which were much better suited for our early evolutionary ancestors as they strived to survive the dangerous plains of Africa as small prey animals.

We develop egos in early childhood to help us feel safe and secure in a confusing world full of giants, which most of us go on to use in highly maladaptive ways throughout the remainder of our lives. Our psychology is riddled with cognitive biases, which the clever manipulators among us can use to dupe us into mass-scale behavior which benefits them rather than behaving in a way which benefits each other and our ecosystem.

The most clever of these manipulators are able to use their cleverness to rise to the top of our political, governmental, commercial and financial systems around the world, and they use increasingly sophisticated methods of propaganda to dupe the rest of us into moving in alignment with their will. And their will is not wise or intelligent; it’s driven by the same primitive fear-based impulses that the rest of the humans trapped in egoic consciousness are driven by.

So here we are. That’s why we now find ourselves in this profoundly dysfunctional civilization where the biosphere is treated like an enemy and human beings are treated like fuel and minds are being marinated in an increasingly vapid mainstream culture where everything is fake and stupid. That’s why we don’t have paradise on earth, and that’s why the bombs are falling on Gaza today.

But it is just a phase. A kid who’s learning to ride a bike doesn’t remain on wobbly wheels forever. Eventually we’ll get the hang of this thing. Eventually we’ll grow into these giant new brains of ours and become a conscious species.

Assuming we don’t wipe ourselves out first, of course.

Armagedddon Continues To Unfold In The Information Battle Space

NEW - Lindsey Graham: "Hit Iran... blow it off the map." pic.twitter.com/5dfhVQOcja

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 28, 2023

twitter  |  If you ACTUALLY want to fight antisemitism, I am absolutely convinced that your foremost priority right now should be to not let the Netanyahu government and his coalition of far right extremists define Jewish identity.

This is the real battle against antisemitism right now. Anecdotally all the people I see on X who are starting to veer into antisemitic territory - and I do agree there are some - have clearly been led to believe that the absolute psychopaths currently leading the Israeli government define what Jews are.

And it's clearly not helping that many Western governments are playing along the utterly toxic game of the Israeli government to try to define antisemitism as opposition to their policies... when these policies obviously look so horribly wrong to an overwhelming majority of the world's population. What do you think the common man thinks when he's told he's an antisemite if he opposes Israel making an absolute mockery of humanitarian law? At best the notion of antisemitism loses all its meaning to him, and at worst he may even embrace it...

Thankfully most people are still smart enough to make the distinction and not to take the antisemitism accusations by the Israeli government at face value... but it is dangerous territory. The whole world is absolutely appalled - and rightly so - by what Israel is doing in Gaza. It is criminally short-sighted for the Israeli government to insist so much that their actions are done in the name of all Jewish people, and such a narrative should be resolutely opposed.

The Child Killing Murder Robot

Israel asks for more Apache combat helicopters, the U.S. refuses.

IDF actively uses Apaches over Gaza.

The load on the two IDF Apache squadrons is so great that the commander of the Air Force, Major General Tomer Bar, was asked to authorize a number of veteran pilots, aged… pic.twitter.com/hRDdVPSnBJ

— Clash Report (@clashreport) December 26, 2023

caityjohnstone  |  “I’m not so sure about the Child-Killing Murder Robot,” Joe said after a sip of coffee while reading the morning paper.

“What??” his wife Anne exclaimed, visibly shocked.

“It’s killed thousands of kids in its latest murder rampage,” Joe said. “I’m starting to think maybe the Child-Killing Murder Robot isn’t such a great thing after all.”

“Well of course it’s on a murder rampage!” said Anne. “Some people tried to turn it off!”

“Yeah the Child-Killing Murder Robot does that whenever anyone tries to turn it off,” replied Joe. “And you know what? I’m starting to think that maybe they’re trying to turn off the Child-Killing Murder Robot because they’re sick of the way it keeps killing children and murdering people!”

“It’s acting in self-defense!” Anne protested. “The Child-Killing Murder Robot has a right to defend itself!”

“It’s been killing people constantly ever since that team of mad scientists invented it back in the forties, Anne! After a certain amount of child-killing and murder, eventually you’ve got to figure that maybe the blame is on the Child-Killing Murder Robot. At the very least I think our government should stop sending it batteries and ammunition.”

“Look, Joe, I feel terrible about all the child-killing and murder, and I wish it wasn’t happening. But this is a very complicated situation; it’s been going on for many years, and I just don’t see what you could possibly expect the Child-Killing Murder Robot to do at this point besides continue to kill large numbers of children and commit murder at mass scale.”

“Well, maybe they could reprogram the Child-Killing Murder Robot so it doesn’t have to kill children and murder people all the time?”

“But then it wouldn’t be a Child-Killing Murder Robot!”

“Yeah I know, it would be a different sort of thing with a different sort of system. But at least then all the murdering would stop and we’d have peace.”

“The Child-Killing Murder Robot has a right to exist!”

“Why, Anne? Why does there absolutely need to be a homicidal android that’s always in the news because it’s constantly murdering human beings? I’ve seen people talking about one possible solution where the robot is programmed to regard everyone else as its equal so it doesn’t view them as needing to be murdered. Why couldn’t we try that?”

“There is one Child-Killing Murder Robot in the world, Joe. One. And you’re saying there should be zero. You just want to commit genocide.”

The Deep Problems Are The HARVARD CORPORATIONS Problems

——

HARVARD PRESIDENT EXPOSED!

Harvard President Claudine Gay participated in the political assassination of a brilliant black scholar at Harvard named Roland Fryer. This is just one of the many problematic aspects of her career. @BillAckman

Filmmaker Rob Montz @robmontz… pic.twitter.com/rDIDS4IrWx

— Colonel Kurtz -Controversy, Depp/MeToo/Manson Etc. (@colonelkurtz99) December 12, 2023

yahoo  |  During the weekend that the corporation met to decide Gay’s future, she participated in some of those discussions and had the opportunity to review the corporation’s Dec. 12 statement in her defense before it became public, two people involved in the process said.

According to a person consulted by the corporation, the body discussed but opted against releasing a detailed, public independent review in the style of Stanford University, whose president resigned this summer.

Harvard’s board is led by Pritzker, who was an early backer of Barack Obama’s presidency and later served as secretary of commerce under his administration. Despite her leadership role, Pritzker, a champion of Gay’s, has not spoken publicly since the controversy began, leaving the corporation to communicate through a single public statement.

The other 10 members, in addition to Gay, include relatively unknown financiers, donors, a former justice of the Supreme Court of California, a former CEO of American Express and former presidents of Princeton University and Amherst College.

The board meets several times a year, and members serve six-year terms that can be renewed once. How it identifies and chooses its members, who are known as fellows, is something of a mystery. Outgoing members help select their own replacements.

Pritzker has been the principal point of contact for major donors and others seeking to counsel Harvard on the path forward.

The board seeks to build a well-rounded group of people who have complementary expertise to help govern the university, said Richard Chait, a professor emeritus at Harvard who studied governance in higher education and was an adviser when the Harvard Corp. expanded in size more than a decade ago.

Even after expanding, the panel is still smaller than the boards of many other leading universities, according to Chait, who said the average private university has about 30 or more board members.

Board members are not paid for their role. “Not only is it unpaid, but there is an expectation of a reverse cash flow — all trustees have an expectation that the institution will be a philanthropic priority consistent with their means,” Chait said.

The corporation has weighed in on key questions — for example, in 2016, it approved a change to the shield of Harvard’s law school, which was modeled on the crest of an 18th-century enslaver.

In the past several weeks, more faculty members, donors, alumni and outsiders have raised questions about the corporation’s apparent failure to vet Gay’s scholarship before promoting her to the presidency in July and for its subsequent silence in recent weeks.

“The corporation should have done their homework, and apparently they did not,” said Avi Loeb, a Harvard science professor who has been publicly critical of the school’s response after the Hamas attack on Israel in which about 1,200 people were killed.

“They don’t engage in criticism the way they should,” Loeb said of the corporation. “They don’t want the people who disagree with them to speak with them.”

And Now We Know The Truth About Claudine Gay

glennloury  |  Roland Fryer is the most gifted economist of his generation. Not the most gifted black economist of his generation, the most gifted economist of his generation. Period.

He was tenured at Harvard at the age of 30, he was awarded the American Economics Association’s John Bates Clark Medal, he received a MacArthur “Genius” grant, his publications appeared in some of the most distinguished journals in the field, and his scholarship was regularly covered in the mainstream media. His research upends many commonly held assumptions about race, discrimination, education, and police violence. It is tremendously creative, rigorous, and consequential scholarship, and it cannot be simply written off because it happens to challenge the status quo.

To do the kind of work Roland does, you have to be more than brilliant. You have to be fearless. And I cannot help suspect that now Roland is paying the price for pursuing the truth wherever it leads. Several years ago, he was accused of sexual harassment by a disgruntled ex-assistant. In my opinion and that of many others, those accusations are baseless. But Harvard has used them as a pretext to shut down Roland’s lab, to curtail his teaching, and to marginalize him within the institution.

I’ll not mince words. Those at Harvard responsible for this state of affairs should be utterly ashamed of themselves. They have unnecessarily, heedlessly tarnished the career of an historically great economist. Again, I can't help but suspect that they have effectively buried vital research not because it was poorly done but because they found the results to be politically inconvenient. “Veritas” indeed.

Now, I have been a friend and mentor to Roland for some time, and I’ve taken great pleasure in watching him succeed. I can see how one might view my criticisms of Harvard as biased. But this matter has been investigated by others with no personal stake in Roland's career who have found Harvard’s actions and reporting on them by the New York Times to be deeply flawed. I would point readers who want to know more to Stuart Taylor Jr.’s fine reporting for Real Clear Investigations.

Along the same lines, the filmmaker Rob Montz has made a short documentary about this subject. I’m interviewed in it alongside others who see this fiasco for what it is, some of whom have much to lose by publicly coming to Roland’s defense. People need to see this film. They need to know the truth about Roland Fryer. So I ask you to watch and to judge for yourself, and if you feel so moved, to share it as widely as possible.

Cathedral of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation

 

Seems More Like Planned Demolition Than Organic System Failure

strategic-culture  |  American President Joe Biden likes to talk about “inflexion points” when he is lecturing about world affairs and the supposed superiority of the United States. This year is indeed an inflexion point.

It was the year that the entire world saw the truly hideous and criminal nature of U.S. power.

Washington’s fueling of the futile conflict in Ukraine and the despicable slaughter in Gaza is a wake-up call for the entire world. The United States stands barefaced and grotesque as the primary purveyor of war. There can be no doubt about that. For many it is shocking, scandalous and frightening.

Tragically, it seems, for the world, every year’s end is an occasion to witness and lament conflicts, wars and suffering over the preceding 12 months. Often the causes of wars and suffering are seemingly unfathomable.

However, this year seems to be unique. The year ends with a horrendous massacre in Gaza that is unprecedented and perpetrated by Israel with the full support of the United States. The scale of deliberate mass killing in Gaza makes it a genocide. The fact that this abomination is occurring at Christmas time when the world is supposed to celebrate the divine birth of Jesus Christ – the Prince of Peace – in the very place where he was born some 2,000 years ago makes the abomination all the more profane and damning.

What is particularly wretched is that the heinous destruction of children is happening in full view of the world. There is no remorse or pretence. It is full-blown premeditated murder done with cruelty and sickening impunity.

Virtually the whole world is horrified by the devastating, relentless violence and absolute violation of international law. The butchery by the Israeli regime cannot in any way be rationalized by the previous attack on Israel by Palestinian militants on October 7. Those killings by Hamas have been cynically used as a pretext for the subsequent and ongoing annihilation of Palestinian civilians.

This genocide could not happen without the crucial support of the United States for the Israeli regime. Financially, militarily and diplomatically, Washington is sponsoring the horror in Gaza as well as the Occupied West Bank.

This week saw the U.S. once again obstructing calls at the United Nations for a ceasefire and the urgent supply of humanitarian aid to more than two million people. The World Food Program has declared a catastrophic famine in the coastal enclave after more than 70 days of bombing and blockade by the Israeli regime. More than 20,000 people – mainly women and children – have been slaughtered with up to 7,000 more missing, presumably dead. Israeli troops are carrying out mass executions of terrified and traumatized human beings, according to UN rights monitors.

The United States is arming Israel to the hilt and enabling it. U.S. President Joe Biden has pointedly refused to join international demands for a ceasefire. The United Nations has voted by an overwhelming majority for a cessation of the violence. Washington has repeatedly rejected the world’s pleas because the Biden administration is obscenely amplifying Israeli lies and distortions. “Unwavering, unshakable support” is how the White House arrogantly boasts about it without a hint of shame that it is self-indicting.

Tens of thousands of tonnes of munitions have been flown to Israel to carry out “indiscriminate bombing” (Biden’s own admission). One-tonne bunker-buster bombs have been dropped deliberately on refugee camps and hospitals. And still, the Pentagon shamelessly refuses to impose any red lines on the use of its munitions.

This genocide has Israeli fingers on the triggers but it is ultimately an American-sponsored genocide. Based on Nuremberg principles, Joe Biden and Benjamin Netanyahu would be both in the dock, accompanied by Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Lloyd Austin and their counterparts in Tel Aviv.

If there were previous international doubts about Washington’s systematic criminality, the whole world knows for certain now.

The Colorado High Court Jumped The Lawfare Shark

kunstler  |  And just like that — snap ! — the news about the Colorado Supreme Court’s droll action against candidate DJ Trump vanished from the front page (or top screens) of The New York Times. Do you know why? I’ll tell you: Because the political Left has finally managed to embarrass itself with a “lawfare” gambit so nakedly fatuous that it exposes the faction’s drive to destroy the election process, and with it our country.

      This is what you get from a regime that faked its way to power and now must strain to cover up its long train of crimes, abuses, and effronteries to common sense, while running out of tricks to keep fooling even its own deranged followers. Somehow, the act of kicking a leading candidate off the ballot has finally registered as inconsistent with “defending our democracy.”

     Of course, the reckless abuse of law — “lawfare” — proceeds from the Left’s disrespect for boundaries and limits, which is exactly what law in principle concerns itself with. And from there it’s a quick leap into totalizing bad faith, the operating system for government under an imposter president, “Joe Biden.” Suddenly, mere days before Christmas, when the people want to be preoccupied with things other than politics, events merge explosively to shape the fate of the nation.

     In a sane world, the US Supreme Court would not just summarily strike down the Colorado ruling, but would issue a career-ending rebuke to the brain-damaged state justices who managed to not learn a basic principle of due process: innocent until proven guilty — that to brand someone a criminal, there must be a record of indictment and conviction for a particular crime, and that, in the case of Mr. Trump, a politically-motived fairy tale about an “insurrection” doesn’t cut it.

    Also, in a sane world interested in truth and justice, the Republican-majority Congress would have months ago convened new hearings about the Jan 6/21 Capitol riot to undo the manifold perfidious frauds instigated by the previous Democrat-majority committee under Chairman Bennie Thompson. By now, testimony should have been compelled from Nancy Pelosi, the then Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, and former Defense Secretary Chris Miller about Ms. Pelosi’s refusal to call in national guard troops to reinforce security around the building, and to answer for the odd behavior of the Capitol Police, such as opening doors for the mob and then serving as ushers to show off the place. It seems obvious that many elected Republicans also have an interest in supporting the Jan 6/21 “insurrection” fairy tale. Do you still wonder why the evil entity infesting Washington is called “the blob”?

      The Substack blogger who styles himself as El Gato Malo offers the alluring theory that a SCOTUS ruling on whether the 14^th Amendment clauses that were applied to the presidency in the Colorado case, could enable Special Counsel Jack Smith to slip-in a superseding indictment (replacing the original indictment) in his DC  Jan 6 case against Mr. Trump with new insurrection / rebellion charges, thus setting-up a fortified argument for states to chuck Mr. Trump off any ballot. More “lawfare,” you see. Whatever it takes. . .!

      More curiously even, we learn today, that an amicus brief has been filed in the SCOTUS by former Attorney General Ed Meese (under Ronald Reagan), and two constitutional law professors, Steven Calabresi and Gary S. Lawson, challenging the legality altogether of Jack Smith’s appointment as special counsel for prosecuting Mr. Trump. The amicus is filed in the matter of Jack Smith’s certiorari petition to the court to schedule Mr. Trump’s DC trial the same day as the Super Tuesday primary —against the defendant’s objections. The amicus presents compelling arguments that Attorney General Merrick Garland acted illegally in appointing Mr. Smith, and if SCOTUS chucks him out of the special counsel job, the whole mendaciously constructed scaffold of the Jan 6 prosecution goes out the window, along with the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

     Those of you with a deep interest in blob lawfare treachery may also be interested in the courtroom win, this week, by Brandon Straka, who launched the 2018 “Walk Away” movement to persuade gays to leave the Democratic Party. He was present on the US Capitol grounds the day of the Jan 6/21 riot, and was later sued by eight “black and brown” Capitol Police officers, with the help of a Soros-funded nonprofit law firm, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Straka was accused of causing the officers’ injuries (pepper spray and “exhaustion”) and of conspiring to deprive them of their civil rights (under the KKK Act of 1871). It came out in the course of testimony that seven of the officers were on the other side of the enormous Capitol building from Mr. Straka’s position the entire time alleged, and that one of the officers was not even present at the Capitol or even in the District of Columbia at the time. Such are the sordid dreams of lawfare warriors and their useful idiots. . . .

     Next up, as we turn the corner into a fateful 2024 — and lately eclipsed by all these lawfare election interference shenanigans — will be the perhaps even more consequential hearings on the Biden family’s extensive international bribery operations, which may shed some light on how come we suffer a president and a party bent on destroying our country.

Huntergate's IC Letter WAS Conspicuously Obvious Election Interference

thecrimson  |  Former President Donald Trump’s lies about election fraud and enthusiasm for his re-election drove supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to a study from the Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center.

In the most comprehensive study to date of what motivated the Trump supporters to attack the Capitol, Shorenstein Center researchers found that 20.6 percent of the rioters, a plurality, were motivated to take part in the riot because they supported Trump. Another 20.6 percent of the rioters cited Trump’s fraudulent claims that the 2020 presidential election was rigged as their primary reason for participating in the Jan. 6 riot.

The authors of the study — Joan Donovan, Kaylee Fagan, and Frances E. Lee — wrote that their analysis found that the largest proportion of defendants “were motivated, in part, to invade the US Capitol Building by Donald Trump.”

The third most common reason for attacking the Capitol: a desire to start a civil war or an armed revolution, according to the study. Almost 8 percent of defendants indicated it was their main motivation.

In an interview, Fagan said she was surprised by how frequently support for Trump and concerns about the election were cited as primary motivations for joining the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

“I don’t think I expected the result to be this stark,” Fagan said. “I also certainly didn’t expect those two motivations to come up nearly exactly as often as they both did.”

Though more than 800 have been federally prosecuted for their participation in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, the study focused on 417 defendants charged with federal crimes in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The study, which was released as a working paper because it has not been peer-reviewed, analyzed 469 court documents from the 417 defendants to determine why the rioters decided to join the Jan. 6 attack in Washington.

“The documents show that Trump and his allies convinced an unquantifiable number of Americans that representative democracy in the United States was not only in decline, but in imminent, existential danger,” the study said. “This belief translated into a widespread fear of democratic and societal breakdown, which, in turn, motivated hundreds of Americans to travel to DC from far corners of the country in what they were convinced was the nation’s most desperate hour.”