Advertisements


"Two Words... Tucker Carlson": Greg Gutfeld Gores Fox After Musk Blasts Activist Advertisers

"Two Words... Tucker Carlson": Greg Gutfeld Gores Fox After Musk Blasts Activist Advertisers Greg Gutfeld just took a major shot at his employer, Fox News, saying what we all knew: Tucker Carlson, the highest-rated on-air host in television history, was fired due to pressure from special interest groups. While discussing Elon Musk's "fuck you" moment over advertiser attempts to blackmail the billionaire, Gutfeld joked that it would be like "extorting Jerry Nadler with salad, or blackmailing sports fans by threatening to cancel PBS." He then said that Musk was the last man standing against "the censorship-industrial complex, which is made up of government, media and tech forces." Then, Gutfeld stated what we've all suspected since it happened... "He [Musk] realizes that advertisers have no spine and can be easily cowed by special interest groups in cahoots with political allies – if you don’t believe me I got two words for ya – Tucker Carlson." Watch (h/t Modernity.news): Carlson says 'global freedom hinges on Musk and X' Meanwhile, in an interview with VC David Sacks, Tucker Carlson says he thinks that the fate of free speech hinges on X. "I'm worried about the pressure being brought to bear on X because it's the only huge international free speech platform with hundreds of millions of people," said Carlson, adding "The existence of X where anyone around the world can get for free a whole range of opinions that aren't controlled — that changes everything." Tucker Carlson Says Global Freedom Hinges on the Success of @ElonMusk & @X "I'm worried about the pressure being brought to bear on X because it's the only huge international free speech platform with hundreds of millions of people." "The existence of X where anyone around the… pic.twitter.com/WRK7tHrT9X — KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) December 2, 2023 Watch the full interview below: E155: In conversation with @TuckerCarlson (plus 25+ mins at the end breaking down the @OpenAI chaos) -- departure from Fox News -- biggest issue facing the US today: rediscovering national alignment -- why prosperity begets self-destruction -- media control -- current… pic.twitter.com/IKWQQOPl9N — The All-In Podcast (@theallinpod) December 1, 2023   Tyler Durden Sat, 12/02/2023 - 13:25.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeDec 2nd, 2023

Swisher v. Scaramucci: Is Elon Musk Killing Twitter?

This week’s Intelligence Squared U.S. debate asks the question: Is Elon Musk Killing Twitter? Journalist Kara Swisher argues Yes. Investor Anthony Scaramucci argues No. Wired’s Steven Levy and Insider’s Monica Melton chime in as well with questions. Is Elon Musk Killing Twitter? Kara Swisher vs Anthony Scaramucci Debate Transcript Guests: Arguing Yes: Kara Swisher Arguing […] This week’s Intelligence Squared U.S. debate asks the question: Is Elon Musk Killing Twitter? Journalist Kara Swisher argues Yes. Investor Anthony Scaramucci argues No. Wired’s Steven Levy and Insider’s Monica Melton chime in as well with questions. Is Elon Musk Killing Twitter? Kara Swisher vs Anthony Scaramucci Debate Transcript Guests: Arguing Yes: Kara Swisher Arguing No: Anthony Scaramucci Moderator: John Donvan John Donvan: Hi, everybody, and welcome to Intelligence Squared. I’m John Donvan. And in this program, we are debating the impact that one man is having on the future of an enterprise you have all heard of. That enterprise is called Twitter. And the man, I know you’ve heard of him, is Elon Musk. if (typeof jQuery == 'undefined') { document.write(''); } .first{clear:both;margin-left:0}.one-third{width:31.034482758621%;float:left;margin-left:3.448275862069%}.two-thirds{width:65.51724137931%;float:left}form.ebook-styles .af-element input{border:0;border-radius:0;padding:8px}form.ebook-styles .af-element{width:220px;float:left}form.ebook-styles .af-element.buttonContainer{width:115px;float:left;margin-left: 6px;}form.ebook-styles .af-element.buttonContainer input.submit{width:115px;padding:10px 6px 8px;text-transform:uppercase;border-radius:0;border:0;font-size:15px}form.ebook-styles .af-body.af-standards input.submit{width:115px}form.ebook-styles .af-element.privacyPolicy{width:100%;font-size:12px;margin:10px auto 0}form.ebook-styles .af-element.privacyPolicy p{font-size:11px;margin-bottom:0}form.ebook-styles .af-body input.text{height:40px;padding:2px 10px !important} form.ebook-styles .error, form.ebook-styles #error { color:#d00; } form.ebook-styles .formfields h1, form.ebook-styles .formfields #mg-logo, form.ebook-styles .formfields #mg-footer { display: none; } form.ebook-styles .formfields { font-size: 12px; } form.ebook-styles .formfields p { margin: 4px 0; } Get Our Activist Investing Case Study! Get the entire 10-part series on our in-depth study on activist investing in PDF. Save it to your desktop, read it on your tablet, or print it out to read anywhere! Sign up below! (function($) {window.fnames = new Array(); window.ftypes = new Array();fnames[0]='EMAIL';ftypes[0]='email';}(jQuery));var $mcj = jQuery.noConflict(true); Q4 2022 hedge fund letters, conferences and more   Boy, have we heard of him and from him, especially since he became sole owner of Twitter last fall, paying $44 billion for it, firing half of its employees, and vowing for the 230 million users of Twitter to make it better. His words: "Twitter has extraordinary potential, I will unlock it." So, has Elon Musk done that or are the steps he's made so far a lot of missteps? That is what we are debating. To be more specific, the Yes/No question: is Elon Musk killing Twitter? We recorded this one before a live virtual audience. You will not hear them but just wanted you to know that they were there. So, let's get to the debate, starting with my introduction of our two debaters. So, let's meet our debaters. Arguing Yes, Elon Musk is killing Twitter, here is host of "On with Kara Swisher," co-host of the podcast "Pivot," and editor-at-large of New York Magazine, Kara Swisher. Kara Swisher: Thank you. John Donvan: And arguing No, that Elon Musk is not killing Twitter, we have the founder and managing partner of Skybridge, former White House communications director, and host of the podcast "Open Book," Anthony Scaramucci. Thanks for joining us. Anthony Scaramucci: Thank you. John Donvan: Before we start the debate, I'm interested in your personal connections to Elon Musk because you both know him. And you've both interacted with him. And we just, as a matter of curiosity, want to sort of get a sense of how you know him. So, Anthony, why don't you go first on that? Anthony Scaramucci: Well, you know, my one of my closest friends, Antonio Gracias, is on the board of two of his companies. So, it would be SpaceX and Tesla, he was an early investor in PayPal. And so, I'm gonna say that I know Elon tangentially. We've interacted a few times over the years, but I don't have a personal relationship with Elon. Obviously, I'm very impressed with him as an investor and as a business executive. John Donvan: And what about you, Kara? Kara Swisher: Oh, I've known him since the last century, actually, when he was at a company called X.com. It was a startup, he had had other startups, he had a sort of yellow pages directory company that he sold and made a little bit of money from, and then he moved on to X. And it was competing at the time with PayPal, and where they were quite big competitors. And I covered them for The Wall Street Journal. They merged and later sold to eBay. So, I've known him for a very long time. And while the rest of them went off and did other things, he started investing in lots of interesting things like space and cars, which was unusual, because everybody else was doing a dating service and something stupid with their money. And so, he was doing some interesting things. So, I knew him for a long, long time, and covered him while he was building these companies. And I've interviewed him, I don't know dozens of times and including many live appearances at some of my events. And we've texted and emailed over the years. John Donvan: So, for neither of you is he a distant figure, you both have some connection to him. So, let's get to the debate itself. We'll go in three rounds. And our first round is going to be comprised basically of opening statements and Kara Swisher again, you are arguing Yes, in answer to the question, is he killing Twitter? So, take three to four minutes to tell us why you're a Yes. Kara Swisher: Okay. Okay, I wrote something up. So, I hope you don't mind. I think the question is not is Elon killing Twitter, but is owning Twitter, killing Elon, essentially, at least the brand, which I think has seen more deterioration in the last six months than anyone I can think of. In doing so he's created the perfect storm of self-inflicted harm. He's shot himself in the foot and then the other foot and he went back to the first foot. And while it'd be easy to focus solely on his demented daily tweets spewing homophobic misinformation to bear-hugging despicables to firing people with the stylings of the very worst of robber barons, I think the only thing you can do here is follow the money which I'm going to focus on. First of all, he blew up a stable $5 billion ad business in a few months. It wasn't that good, but it was still $5 billion losing huge opportunities like the World Cup and the holiday season. The site’s ad experience is now like 2 a.m. on cable with a series of grifty ads and come-ons and more porn than ever, which some people might like. Number two, he adopted misguided advice from one of his dumber minions to focus the company on an enterprise software company. It's failed to launch anything stable or unable not to troll corporate clients. You saw that when they did Twitter Blue and everybody faked companies. He's gotten himself into class action lawsuits and how he cloddishly handled the firing of Twitter employees. As former Twitter Blue head Tony Hale wrote: "New York's hottest club is a Zoom call with the lawyers for the Twitter class action suit." It will be a drag on him and all his companies, even if he throws lawyers at it, as he always tends to do. He's been involved in lots of lawsuits over the years, this is a big one. He's allowed the conversation to get uglier by allowing 60,000 of the very worst to return to Twitter to, wait for it, improve the conversation. That's akin to Voldemort letting all the prisoners out of Azkaban prison. He said he would make decisions for these different people via a council which doesn't exist, never happened, and it turns out it's just him late at night mainlining Cheetos, Ozempic, and conspiracy theories. So, a group of managers making decisions managers are paid to make has been replaced by essentially one guy. According to internal sources, usage has started to decline among active users, which make up a small part of the population and a large percentage of the tweets. Mine, for example, have gone from a couple hours a day to under one and it's declining every single day. I only use it for marketing and nothing else now, which as a platform I used rather actively, including where I met Anthony Scaramucci, where I trolled him for quite a lot of time. And he has such a good sense of humor that he allowed me to do so, and we've become I think friends in some way. It's allowed competitors to emerge, like Mastodon, which has been compared to a waiter handing you a gun, pointing at a cow and saying, "Get dinner." So, he's given lots of opportunity for a number of competitors to get in here when Twitter could have dominated here with someone like Elon at the top. Speaking of nothing burgers, the Twitter files. Nine, he's taking other businesses with him. Tesla has owned a lion's share of the electric light vehicle registrations in the U.S. according to a number of different measurement services, but that's down 79% in 2020. There's a surge of competition including lower price models. One Wedbush Securities person wrote, "Musk must take a more-hands on approach in 2023 at the company, as a Twitter distraction along with the current demand situation it's falling off, is a perfect storm for the stock." Tesla stock is down 70%. Even though it's way ahead in EV production, in batteries. It has four plants globally. All kinds of competitors are now– he's leaving it open to competitors to launch models from Lucid and others. He's certainly trying to do so, but his eye is definitely off the ball there and they're facing the more competition they've ever had in a really bad economic environment. And lastly, follow the money. Let me read from Bill Cohan [William D. Cohan]. Just he just wrote a piece yesterday about this. 'The banks, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America will be reporting what it's doing with the debt it has,' the $13 billion in debt, 'and what the banks will be revealing, if I'm right,' this is according to Bill Cohan, 'is that thanks to the demand of the Federal Reserve, Wall Street's prudential regulator, the Twitter bank debt has been marked on the books of both Morgan Stanley and Bank of America at 50 cents on the dollar.' That means the $13 billion of Twitter debt is now worth about half that amount, or 6.5 billion thanks to a combination of rising interest rates and Twitter's shrinking EBITA, as well as questions about whether Elon will be able to make roughly $600 million of interest payment due on the Twitter bank debt in April. And following the logic here, if the bank debt is only worth half its face amount, it has now been recorded as such, it means Twitter equity, which is owned mostly by Elon and a bunch of his rich friends is virtually wiped out after a mere two months under Elon's rule. To put it bluntly, this is an astounding and virtually unprecedented outcome in the world of leveraged buyouts. But he is doing something about income inequality, I guess. Anyway, that's my argument. John Donvan: Thanks Kara, Kara Swisher. And now, the No answer comes from Anthony Scaramucci. Anthony, it's your turn. Anthony Scaramucci: Well, I'll start out by saying that if the definition of friendship is that you can be critical of somebody and still like and enjoy their personality, then we are definitely friends, Kara, because you have been very critical of me. And I do like and enjoy your personality. And I will say this, you've made my life more interesting as a result of our relationship. But I think the specific question, Is Twitter, dying, yes or no? And I'm going to say no, for several reasons. And the main reason is something that Warren Buffett has said long ago about businesses, if it's a high-quality business, even a very bad management team or bad decisions, the high-quality business can endure, they'll take the high-quality business any day. And I think the facts are indisputable about Twitter being a high-quality business in the following sense. It is a pervasive part of our Zeitgeist, now. It is the town square, proverbially. And I think there are more active users today if you look at their numbers. This is an important metric for social media, as we both know. In addition to that, things happen on Twitter. The interaction, the FTX debacle as an example, a lot of micro-journalists covered nuances to that story on Twitter. The World Cup, while not advertising there–and we'll get into the advertising in a second. Lots of the drama that played out in social media related to the World Cup happened on Twitter. And of course, most recently, the Damar Hamlin situation in the NFL, which my heart goes out to him and his family. And seems that he's doing well, also happening on Twitter. So, I think it's indisputable that we're talking more about Twitter as a result of Elon Musk, and the user base is up, you know, you and I both know, Twitter Spaces is a pretty effective medium today, sort of replaces Clubhouse, if you will. When Elon's on Twitter Spaces, there could be upwards to 100,000 people in that town square listening and potentially asking questions. So, you are bringing up things, though, that I think are true. And so, I do, I do want to validate those things. I think you said once on CNN, I was watching, that he may have spent $44 billion for a $7 billion company. That may or may not be true. I think the financials, if they're marking down the debt, certainly people believe that there's a deterioration in the financials. And both of us know, because of our years of experience, either on Wall Street or in journalism, that large scale corporations are typically risk averse. And they certainly don't want to be caught in a negative spotlight. And there's something that Elon Musk is doing right now, that would cause those people to pull away and I just want to spend one minute on it. And then we'll go back to the debate. And that is our discussion in Zeitgeist about free speech. Ultimately, you're either a believer of free speech or not, I know that you are a believer, you know, I am. I once worked for a president of the United States that called the press the enemy of the people. Of course, I had to write an op-ed in The Hill, responding to that saying, 'Mr. President, the press is not, in fact, the enemy of the people.' But what free speech actually does for our society is not only keeps our politicians honest, but it creates economic innovation. John Donvan: More from Intelligence Squared U.S. when we return. Welcome back to Intelligence Squared U.S., let's get back to our debate. Anthony Scaramucci: We teach our second-grade children that they can think and speak freely, they go on to create Facebook and Twitter and Google and Apple Computer. In societies where that free speech is suppressed, where they're not allowed to talk about their government, or certain potential dramatic things that are going on in this society. They get curtailed, and then they end up stealing our intellectual property rights. So, for me, what Elon Musk is doing, by opening it up. You mentioned 60,000 criminals coming out of the asylum, I think we've got a big problem in our society, right now, I grew up in a blue-collar neighborhood, lower middle-class neighborhood. And I can tell you, there's a very large group of people in our society now that feel left out. And if you're going to shut those people off on Twitter or shut those people off on other realms of social media, I think that's very long-term damaging, if anything, we have to embrace those people and figure out a way to bring them back into the social contract. And I think Elon Musk is trying to do that. I see him as a radical moderate, by the way, self-described in terms of my conversations with him. And I think it's early, we'll have to see how this thing plays out. But it's far from dead. In fact, if anything, it's more vital than ever. And over the next 6, 12, 36 months, I think we'll see really good progress ahead for Twitter. John Donvan: Anthony, I have a very quick question of clarification, when you say you think Twitter is more vital than ever, are you saying it's more necessary than ever? Or are you saying it's more thriving than ever? Anthony Scaramucci: Well, I think it's a combination. Certainly advertising, corporate advertising revenues are down. The business itself has been impaired. But if you look at social media data in terms of the usage and the vibrancy of the network, that, in fact, is up. And so, it's a mixed bag, but yes, I do believe it's more vital than ever. And I think he's going to figure it out. I think it's very early in the process of him taking the company. John Donvan: Alright, thanks, Anthony. So, thanks to both of you for your opening statements. And what I think I hear are two kinds of arguments about what we mean by the survivability and the viability of Twitter. One is an argument for the business for the numbers and the direction that's taking, and the other is a description of Twitter's vitality and vibrancy having to do with its place in the culture and its relevance, its appeal to people as a place to continue to go to as a kind of public square as it's been described. So those are two different framings. They do overlap, but I want to separate them just for the start of the conversation and start with the business argument that you made Kara. Kara, do you anticipate this company being on the road to bankruptcy? Is it that extreme? Kara Swisher: Well, he's talked about it himself. I didn't– not the one to say it. Who knows if he's telling the truth when he says that? Because he often just spouts out something just to cause, you know, and Anthony should know about this, just to say something to cause a news cycle to happen. So, he's talked about bankruptcy. I don't believe it will be bankrupt, because he's one of the world's richest people. I don't believe he's the world's richest man anymore because of what's happening here. But I do think that he has plenty of rich friends who will save him from disaster. But he does have to come up, at some point, you don't love throwing good money after bad, but he will come up with money over the next year at least to pay off these bank debts. I think the danger is that this bank debt goes on Wall Street, and it's bought up by an Apollo or someone else who were much tougher on. They don't want to have lunch with Elon Musk, as other rich people, as you noticed in the text tend to want to do including Sam Bankman-Fried wanted to sort of hang out with Elon. So, I think it depends on who gets a hold of this thing. If he's unable to– if this debt goes on the market, and if he's unable to pay his debt obligations– I don't think the latter is going to happen. But he certainly puts himself at risk. That said, he could buy the debt himself and throw more of his money at this thing, and then own it completely. So, there's ways that he can keep it in business. It's just, it never was a very good business. And now it's a really bad business. And as to Anthony's thing about vitality, it's a very small business, even though it gets the attention of the media and politicians. Most people do not live their lives on Twitter. And so, it's a very small business that has a very outsized profile because of the users who are on it. John Donvan: Anthony, your response to that? Anthony Scaramucci: Again, so you know, I always want to be fair to Kara and the facts. I think she's right about the size and scale of the business. You know, listen, I have– I think Kara has 1.4 million Twitter followers. I have a million Twitter followers. I am on Twitter; I do look at it. I do scroll through it, and I sometimes tweet, I think it would be impossible– and she would have to answer this better than me as a journalist. But I think most journalists would find it to be relatively impossible not to have access to that site, because there are things that are going on. Kara will remember this. There was someone in Pakistan that basically said on Twitter, 'I hear the rumblings of helicopter, there seem to be aircraft over my house.' Shortly thereafter, Osama bin Laden's house was invaded. And so, there's relevancy to Twitter, again, going back to the original premise: is Twitter dying or not? We can debate whether it's a large or small business, we can debate whether or not Elon Musk has impaired the business. But is it dying or not? I'm going to take the position that no, it is not dying, even if Elon Musk were to leave the business and we were to write a story about the abject failure of his management team, I think Twitter goes on to live. And I think Twitter has found its niche in the society where celebrities are on there, politicians are on there, average users are on there to gather information. John Donvan: And you think that that position is somewhat ironclad? You think that's unassailable, that that can't be changed by anything? Anthony Scaramucci: Well, nothing in our lives, unfortunately, is unassailable. But I do think that this has levels of resiliency as a result of the organic nature of Twitter over the last 15-ish years. Kara Swisher: On that, Anthony, I have a couple words for you: AIM, AOL, Yahoo, MySpace. You ever heard of ‘Oy?’ – Yo, excuse me– Yo, Peach. It goes on and on and on. And now unfortunately, the conversation has moved away from Twitter and so– it was a small conversation. It never took advantage of the opportunities that it had, because of a lot of reasons. It was badly managed before. But now it's sort of malevolently managed and so it's trying to take a business that it had and change it into something else. It is, you know, you don't want to use a rocket thing, but he's building the rocket in flight. And he's also doing things that are causing the rocket to go the other direction, which is downward. And so, you wonder how these decisions are being made and who they're being made by? And it turns out, it's just literally one guy and so that's a real problem when you don't have a team around. John Donvan: Why– What do you mean by downward? Kara Swisher: Well, I think, you know, you don't kill– I'm perplexed as to why you would insult advertisers when you have a very– an okay advertising business. It's certainly tiny in comparison– John Donvan: Remind listeners what exactly you're referring to? Kara Swisher: He started tweeting. Well, it was so random and so abrupt each time. When he got there, he started insulting advertisers, and told them– and said they were un-American not to– I think that was one of them. He had, like, there's so many. It's like Trump, there's so many I don't remember the last one he did. But he basically insulted advertisers and said they were woke if they didn't advertise on Twitter. It seems to me that they would advertise on you know, 'Satan.com,' if it would sell them a Fitbit. I just– I feel like advertisers will go anywhere. And so, he insulted them. And then they got him on a call with advertisers where he seemed to have been somewhat medicated in some fashion, where he was somewhat nice to them. And then the very next day, he insulted them again. And so, a lot of these people, they really don't want controversy. They just want to sell things, and they're not woke, they're capitalists. He did that with a– He's doing that very Trump-like in insulting people. Sometimes, it doesn't make any sense why he's doing it. And maybe Anthony can talk to this because he's been with someone who does that. It is a strategy to do that, on some level, is to create chaos almost continually. So, you take away– it's sort of jazz hands in a weird way. Anthony Scaramucci: Alright, so let me just respond to the AOL, MySpace. If we're taking that standard, then listen, everything, the Roman Empire, you know, you pick– Kara Swisher: The Roman Empire! Anthony Scaramucci: We can go– I mean, it did decline, Kara. So, you know what we do know– Kara Swisher: I did, I heard. I read that.   Anthony Scaramucci: You know, in General Electric, who had started in the Dow, I think it was out of the Dow for a few years in the 1920s, and was the longest tenured Dow member, is no longer part of the Dow. So, we do know that none of these businesses are eternal. I guess what I'm saying is, in the next half a decade to decade is Twitter dying, I think it's not dying. I think if anything, it will become more relevant. And I think ultimately, as he executes this plan, and whatever the erratic nature is of his personality, we can go back to the situation with Elon Musk in 2008, where he was on the verge of bankruptcy in two companies: SpaceX and Twitter. He was able to use his guile, his relationships to save those two companies. Those two companies propelled him to be the richest person in the world. We just went through one of the worst market environments in 50 years. At least the first half of 2022 was the worst since 1970. The entire year was the worst that we've had in stock market since 2008. The NASDAQ as we both know, is down 30%. So, Elon Musk's high-growth, Tesla stock down a lot, no surprise to me. If you're going to make the case that it's down even more as a result of his erratic behavior– If Elon Musk was listening to this and he asked me that as a friend, I would say, "Yes, it is." You've got to figure out a way to comport yourself better. You don't want to be accused of being Donald Trump, by anybody, just trust me. It's not a good comparison. Because ultimately, anybody that worked for Donald Trump knows about the insanity and knows about the instability. And so, Elon Musk is a brilliant guy. He's a brilliant visionary. You certainly know him better than me. John Donvan: Well, let me jump in. Anthony Scaramucci: Let just finish this one sentence. When I step back and look at his vision for the company, despite whatever missteps he's having right now, I'm making the bet on Elon Musk, this could be 2008 SpaceX and Tesla. Kara Swisher: What is that actual vision? Because a lot of these things he's doing– Listen, I had been very critical of Twitter for years and had suggested subscriptions, we've suggested something that was more of a value, you know, a value proposition that you could pay for that'd be worth it like Amazon Prime is. I certainly pay for it. I'm very happy paying for it, because it's worth it to me. I know a lot of his ideas are retreads of ideas that lots and lots of people have had, and he's unable to execute on any of these ideas. And everyone, because he's Elon Musk, thinks he's a genius and therefore, because he's good at rockets and cars, which are physical, and have physical aspects, that he's going to be fantastic at media. Media is hard. And this is a media company. And so, I think it's a very different situation. He's got to find another business or sell something that's worthwhile in order to make it a business. Or else it’s just a plaything for a rich person. John Donvan: Kara, you're somewhat answering the question I was going to ask both of you because Anthony was kind of alluding to this. That he has been highly unpredictable in the choices he made in terms of businesses to take on and the ways that he did that. And the question was going to be: could this be one more case of that? That it's looking sort of erratic at the moment, but he's pivoting? Obviously, he's floated ideas like the blue checkmark and then pulled it off and then put it back again, that he's responding to mistakes quickly, that that's kind of his way. And that there's something about him, this thing that you refer to as the genius that I think you think is overrated, but nevertheless, it's there. Kara Swisher: I don't think it's overrated. I think it's just you assume because someone is good– It's like saying, "I'm gonna be good at basketball because I'm good at journalism." It's just not the same. I'm not good at basketball, by the way. But you know, it's just one of these things that we just take it for granted. Steve Jobs, who really truly was a visionary, stayed in his lane and kept expanding from that. Now, he certainly said controversial things over the years. Mostly– his biggest– compared to Elon Musk, he parked badly. That's really pretty much the controversy around Steve Jobs. There's a bunch of them, but one of the things that's– He stayed within his lane, and you understood the daisy chain of what he was doing. Here, it's just, it's erratic. Let Kanye West on, kick him off, do this, do that, and everything is– nothing– everything is hypocritical to everything else. And so, it doesn't make– it becomes exhausting. Twitter was already exhausting. Now it's, I find– I am a very heavy Twitter user. I was– my numbers are going down from, again, a couple hours a day, to an hour a day to six minutes. John Donvan: Why is that? Kara Swisher: Because it's exhausting. I turned off comments on Twitter, because I suddenly started getting– I put up something around the shooting in Colorado. And I got the most repulsive group of comments, which I'd never gotten. And I don't need it. I don't. I don't have the time. John Donvan: Anthony, are you still tweeting as before? Anthony Scaramucci: You know, I'm a yes. I mean, the answer is: I'm tweeting as before. I'm probably– you know, I get yelled at by my wife staring at my phone too much, so I'm probably not looking at it as much as I used to. But I think Kara's bringing up an interesting point about a circle of competence. And if you're inside the circle of competence, you do way better. And if you're outside the circle of competence, you may do less better. And so, I just want to validate something that she's saying because she is right, the media is quite different. Because you get an image in the media, it is very hard to change or turn that image. Okay. And so, the media, the mainstream establishment media, has declared a personal foul on Elon Musk and a personal foul on Twitter. Okay, why are they doing that? That's what you have to ask yourself the question of: are they doing that because he's bringing back controversial characters? Whether it's Michael Flynn, Carpe Donktum, Donald Trump, is that the reason why they're doing it? Are they doing it because they don't like his personality and some of the things that he's saying? Okay, and I think, again, if I was on Elon's board, what I would be saying to him, "Hey, listen, it is a little bit different than rockets. And it's a little bit different than cars. Because if you're in the media business, whether you like it or not, the media is going to have a say about your business. You're going to have a constant slew of critics, analyzing and critiquing your business." But you guys asked about the vision, let me just give it in less than a minute. Because I did read through the PowerPoint presentation. And through Cathie Wood's fund– I just should also point this out: I am an investor, although it's a very small amount of money, in Cathie Wood's fund that's been directed towards Twitter. The vision for the company, and Kara may say this is a retread, but I at least find it interesting that he wants to broaden the base of the social media. He wants to be more inclusive as it relates to the free speech dynamic. And he eventually wants to create a 'super app,' which is somewhat similar to WeChat, where you could have a payment structure going through Twitter. And you could have other things going on inside of Twitter, in terms of way more robust, WhatsApp-like communication. And so, when I look at all those different things, and I look at the install base of Twitter, if he gets that right– John Donvan: Let me just– I want to jump in for a point of clarification, Anthony, because you've been arguing against the argument that Twitter is dying. What we're really arguing is whether Musk's impact on Twitter is good or bad for it, is driving it to higher or lower places. Anthony Scaramucci: Well, temporarily, it's driving it lower. I think Kara is right about that again. The question was, “Is it Twitter dying?” I'm saying no, it's not dying. John Donvan: No, no, the question is: is Musk killing Twitter? Anthony Scaramucci: Is Musk killing– Musk is temporarily hurting Twitter. But I believe that Musk will be an agent for formidable positive change. John Donvan: When he wrote– when he wrote his letter to the board last year, he wrote, "Twitter has extraordinary potential. I will unlock it." Do you think he is unlocking potential there now, Anthony? Anthony Scaramucci: But you see that– but you see this is the problem with our society, okay. We're– you know, you talk about technology? We're in 100,000-year-old pieces of machinery that haven't evolved in 100,000 years. My iPhone went from one to 14 in 15 years, but we think linearly. So right now, if he's not doing well, we think that's going to be the permanent state, the same way we thought in 2008 that Tesla and SpaceX were going out of business. John Donvan: Okay, I think that's a fair point. I want to take that very point to Kara. Kara Swisher: Tesla's not at a– Tesla is buoyed by this stock that is way out of line with the other stocks and there are competitors now catching up to him. He's still ahead. Let me be clear, they're still way ahead. But it's like Netflix. Right as Disney and others started getting involved in streaming– Anthony Scaramucci: No, no. But, Kara, I'm making the point that Tesla looked like it was out of business in 2008. Kara Swisher: Yes, but making those comparisons aren't the same thing. Let me just say, when you say 'super app,' let me give you an– Guess what the 'super app' is. TikTok, right now. New apps will come in and do this. 'Super apps' have never worked in this country. It works in China. It has never worked in this country. Do you trust Elon Musk with your payments, money? I don't. I would trust Apple with it. I would trust Amazon with it way before I would do that. Each of these companies has tried to do a 'super app' or is doing a version of it. It's another retread idea that is very difficult to pull off. Because you need people, you need people behind you. You need to build this up. You have to get people using it. Let me just tell you, young people are not flocking to Twitter to use their 'super app.' And they're not going to. They're using Snapchat for communications. They're using TikTok for entertainment. They're using Facebook less and less. John Donvan: Is that Musk's fault, though? Is that Musk's fault? Kara Swisher: No, it's just the– it's just the state of competition. Now he's in a state of competition in cars, where GM, Ford, Mercedes, Volkswagen, everybody is in now the business and now they're, you know, they're not doing as well as Tesla. But they will do as well as Tesla. John Donvan: This is Intelligence Squared U.S. More debate in a moment. John Donvan: Welcome back to Intelligence Squared U.S. I'm John Donvan. Let's get back to our debate. I want to go to the point that, Anthony, you made in your opening. You said, as sort of a side point, about the fact that Musk is saying that he wants to restore free speech to the platform. Critical of some of the people who were taken down, Kara– obviously describing them as 60,000 deplorables coming back to the site. But the fact is that– Kara Swisher: Despicables. John Donvan: –Despicables, I apologize. I want to talk about its impact as we head into a new election cycle. Where Twitter is in this process. Where we are and what Musk's challenge will be in moderating or not moderating. He's obviously not a free speech absolutist because– Even since he's taken over, he's kicked people or suspended people over the platform for criticizing him and for impersonating him. So, just how free speech-y is he, really, Anthony? And where does that– where does that take us and, you know, the role of Twitter in our political cycle right now? Anthony Scaramucci: You're the moderator. You're supposed to be impartial and indifferent to the to the question, but you're fortifying me right now. And so, just want to caution you about that, because what you're basically saying is the upcoming election, Twitter is going to have this unbelievable influence in the upcoming election. And I obviously believe that it will. And so here we are. Eighteen months from now, Twitter will be very vibrant and a very big part of the upcoming election. John Donvan: So, you're saying, I'm taking your side? Anthony Scaramucci: You're making my point, you're making my point, John, that Twitter is not dying. So, I just want you to go back to your impartial position that you are supposed to be in. But I thank you for making the point. John Donvan: Well done. Well played, Anthony. Anthony Scaramucci: But here we are right now. We're discussing this, okay. And so, there's big problems. Okay. We all know that there's robotic technology on Twitter, we know there's Russian and Chinese and other adversarial states– adversarial disinformation on Twitter. We know that there's got to be a cleanup of that. We also know that there's electioneering that's done on Twitter that's loaded with disinformation. Look at this guy, George Santos as an example. He's almost the apotheosis now of The Great Lie being manifested into an individual. But here's what I would say to everybody listening. Okay. We are a free speech country. It was grounded in free speech for a lot of different reasons. But the main one would be for all of us to be free. And a result of which, when you're in a free speech country, you do have qualifications. We do know the case law, about free speech, hate speech is not protected. A threat to the public is not really protected. You know, the debate about yelling fire in the theater would be an example of that. So, we know that there has to be guardrails on free speech that you brought up the fact that Elon Musk doesn't like people being critical of him. And so, he took some of them off the platform, and he deplatformed them. But if you remember, it was a– temporary deplatform. I think one thing we can say about Elon Musk and maybe Kara will agree or disagree. But when he gets things wrong, good entrepreneurs, typically when they get something wrong, they don't stay– Kara Swisher: –Why get it– Anthony, why get it wrong in the first place? It just seems like the peak of a man at night who had too much sugar. Like that's what happened. Anthony Scaramucci: That may be the case. And I ceded those points to you, that there's some managerial erraticism that's going on. And you are right about that. But I'm talking about the broader point about the vitality of Twitter, and what will Twitter look like in 2024 and 2028, etc. And I also bring up the point, is– even with the erratic behavior, does Elon Musk manifestly get things right? Is he a value generator for his investors and for himself? And you've made the point. Yes, and rockets. Yes, and cars. But likely not in the media– John Donvan: Anthony, let me jump in because to return to the point you were making that his commitment to, to make it very blunt, to allow people like Donald Trump back in after they were suspended and others– Kara Swisher: Who's not coming, who's not showing up. John Donvan: Who you said, were in your communities, that there's a sort of disconnect and disaffection with the wokeness that you said was, to some degree, you feel influencing the decisions that Twitter made prior to Musk's takeover. And I want to know, is the return of those individuals, and I'm not sure if I'm characterizing how you would put it correctly, but the broadening of the spectrum of allowed speech on the site, going to be one of the things that he makes better about Twitter? Anthony Scaramucci: I hope, I hope so. But let me say this, you okay, John? And I got this wrong. Donald Trump got it right. So, you should really listen. I grew up in an aspirational blue-collar family. Thirty-five short years later, those very same families, they went from economically aspirational, to economically desperational, okay? And we've left them out of the story. And they're very angry about it. And somebody like Donald Trump saw that. And he became an avatar for their anger. Now, he didn't offer any policy solution for them. But when he was sticking a finger in the eye of the media establishment, the political establishment, the business establishment, they loved it. And I'm just making the point that if you want a fairer, better, broader society, we have to get those people back into the fray. Kara Swisher: But you see, Anthony, the issue is– they're not– those people aren't on Twitter. They're not using Twitter, look at the– look at the recent election, rife with election denialism on that platform, on Twitter, and many other platforms. What did the voters do? They didn't vote for that. They voted out those people, the people that were screaming. Kari Lake screams on Twitter, didn't work for her, you know. Michael Flynn screams wherever he happens to be, didn't work for him. So, I don't think it has an impact. Because I don't think these people are using the platform. Anthony Scaramucci: Kara, you just made my argument even better then, because you're just saying that those people, them being brought back on Twitter, somebody like Michael Flynn, they're not really having that big of an impact. Kara Swisher: Now it isn’t because it's a tired product. That's what I'm arguing is that it's a product that's now noisy and angry. Anthony Scaramucci: I want to beat these people– I want to beat these people in the free marketplace of ideas. I want to beat Michael Flynn or Donald Trump in the free marketplace of ideas. You brought out that Donald Trump's not back on Twitter. He's not for a specific reason. He's getting paid on Truth Social not to be back on Twitter. John Donvan: Okay, we're wandering a little bit now from the topic of whether Musk is killing Twitter. And I have to break in, Anthony, because we need to move along– Anthony Scaramucci: –Go ahead. John Donvan: –to bring in some members of the press, media– Kara Swisher: –Okay. John Donvan: –to join the conversation now. So, I want to welcome Steven Levy. Thanks for joining us. Tell people who you are and then enter the conversation please with a question. Steven Levy: Yeah. Hi. This is a fascinating debate. I'm editor-at-large at Wired Magazine. I've been writing about technology for a long time, following Twitter for a long time. And so first for Kara, you know, to me– we ask is Elon killing Twitter. As a Twitter user, I'm super concerned about whether this is going to still be usable for me. And throughout Twitter's history, it really has been the users to shape how Twitter works. They invented all kinds of stuff like the reply, the retweet and other things. And I'm wondering whether Twitter, despite Elon, might not be some sort of cockroach, where the users can figure out how to get around whatever mischief he does and, you know, erosions he does to the platform. So, I'm wondering, you know, how do you respond to say, you know, look, as a user, there's a way I can kind of like, fix my– who I follow and other things change to make that happen? Kara Swisher: I think you can do that. Sure, sure. But because, like a lot of products, you know, from using stuff, I have a box full of products that I used to use that I don't use anymore. A lot of physical products, a lot of software products, that just became either onerous or difficult or something better came along. And so, I do think you can sit there and fiddle with it. But one of the dirty secrets of Twitter for media people, as you may know, as I know, having run sites is that it doesn't really give you much business and one of the reasons you want to use this is so that you get people to listen and read what you're doing. Maybe virtue signal to other journalists of what you're up to and things like that. But in general, if I had to look at the stuff which actually got me money, like made money as a journalist, it was always Apple podcasts for example, references from them, or Facebook or LinkedIn. Twitter was always way down on that scale. And so, the question is, do you realize, suddenly, that you're putting way too much work into something that doesn't give something back? And I do think the more exhausting it gets, and the easier that other competitors make things that are attractive, the more you move to them– it's the same thing with cars. As there's more choices for Tesla, Tesla's market share is going to inevitably and should go down, because people, you know, don't want the Tesla look. They want to be in a Porsche, they want to be in, like me, a Chevy Bolt, they want to have a lesser price of something. And so, I think he's opening it up to other competitors in a lot of ways and he's made the experience more difficult to use. And why would you want to do work arounds? He himself said it. He said it to advertisers that day when he was nice to advertisers. He said, if you use it for an hour, and you feel bad, why would you come to that product? Exactly. John Donvan: Okay. Thanks, Steven. And you had a question also for Anthony. Steven Levy: Yeah, another thing that's been going on in Twitter for a long time, and early in its time, and when it first began to take off, it was sort of an assumption that they would get a billion users, right, which is really what it takes for a social media site to break through and become successful more than what Kara says is an okay business. Now, they've never been able to do that. And it seems to me that what Elon is doing by, you know, sort of arguing for his subscriptions, which is a great way to kill the number of people you have, basically creating this privileged class, which is going to like flood your timeline, if you don't pay $8, you're not getting the whole experience. It seems to me between that and the things he does, which people just don't like and make your timeline more toxic, it's going to be even tough to keep what he has now, let alone build up to that billion, which would make it a successful enterprise. How do you answer that? Anthony Scaramucci: It's one or the other, right? He's either a cockroach, where he's going to survive the nuclear blast or these types of things. So, I'm just saying to me, maybe he's just an upsetting cockroach. You know, ultimately, you know, what you're looking at is a short-term window of the Elon Musk behavior as owner of Twitter. And I'm saying to you, if you look at Elon Musk's past behavior, as owner of SpaceX and Tesla, there were near death experiences of both those great companies. And he was able to figure it out and execute bold and grand visionary strategies for those companies. The question before us right now: is Elon Musk killing Twitter? And I'm saying Elon Musk may be hurting Twitter in the short term, but I think long term, if you look at his management skill set and his capability, he is going to regrow and create great vibrancy in Twitter. I'm saying three things. I'm saying that the business is incredibly durable. I cede that to Kara that it's smaller than he would like it to be, but it's incredibly durable. Number two, it's very relevant. We're already talking about 2024. And number three, his track record is such that I do not want to bet against him. And I believe he's going to create this free intellectual marketplace of ideas that's growing and very vibrant. It may not become the 'super app' that he wants, but I bet it could become a 'Superboy-ish' app, as opposed to a 'Superman-ish' app, and I'm betting on him. John Donvan: Want to bring in Monica Melton also to jump in with a question and can you tell folks who you are and go for it? Monica Melton: Hi, everyone. I'm Monica Melton, a senior tech editor at Insider Business, formerly Business Insider. Kara, you nicely laid out how Twitter may be killing Elon. While Anthony, you mentioned Elon sort of leveraging relationships to propel himself after 2008. But do either you think Elon's reputation not only as a techno king, but as a businessperson in general is being irreparably harmed by the chaos he's created at Twitter? How does he realistically come back from this moment? Kara Swisher: Well, I don't think anyone's irreparably harmed in this society, honestly. I mean, look, Bill Gates used to be Darth Vader, and now he's the biggest giver of philanthropy. I think people can recover their reputation. And there's a whole lot of forgiveness around certain business behavior. I mean, there's certain people that aren't– Harvey Weinstein's not coming back, but lots of people can, so I don't think it's irreparable. I just think that why do it? You know, he sort of styled himself after Iron Man, right? That's what he was trying to go for here. And I think that's a very pleasant way to think of him. And I think a lot of stuff he's done, as I've said, time and again, is visionary and really interesting. That said, there's something happening here there's something– some demons that follow this guy that he has to create controversy and contrarianism just for the sake of it. And I don't know his personal life. I don't know what's going on. But one of the people I interviewed who worked for him, Yoel Roth, said it was– when you deal with them 90% of the time, it used to be very reasonable. And I think Anthony's right, it was very reasonable and interesting and sometimes odd things, he'd say odd things off the top of his head. And then 10% of it was really quite mad, like angry for no reason, overly sensitive to criticism. That part seems to have grown enormously. Unless it's all a performative act, and the other parts seem to have died down. I wish he had just stuck with the part that made him that way. He was the one most capable of doing this. And what he's doing now makes no sense to me, and it's turned his brand into something that's really unattractive. It's having impact on Tesla. It's having impact on lots of things. John Donvan: I have to call for time, we're gonna wrap up this round. I want to thank Steven and Monica, for joining us in the conversation. In our final round, you each get 90 seconds to summarize your position or move it forward on why you're a Yes or why you're a No. Anthony, I'm going to let you go first. You're the No on the question of whether Elon Musk is killing Twitter. So take 90 seconds, please. Anthony Scaramucci: Well, you know, I'll probably take less than 90 seconds, because I think I've made my points and I'll make three last ones. We'll be looking at Twitter for the 2024 election, we certainly will be looking at what candidates are writing on Twitter. And we'll be looking for what journalists are potentially reporting or getting out onto Twitter first, because that seems to be a medium of delivery for journalists that are trying to break stories. Number two, I do believe Elon Musk is a very successful and very effective executor and manager. And despite his current erraticism, I think he's going to self-correct. And I think he's going to find his way to making that 'Twitterverse,' if you will, better. And the last point, I think it's the most important point, you can call it the 'cockroach theory' or whatever you want to call it.   This is a durable business; it may be smaller than he wants it to be. But it's a durable business, and it can take a lot of hits before it quote unquote, gets killed off. So Elon Musk is not killing Twitter. If anything, we'll be looking at Twitter, in the 2024 presidential election. Kara Swisher: I'm sure we'll be looking at that. I think the politicians will be the last people out the door, to turn out the lights there. They enjoy, they're narcissistic, and they get to yell at each other. It's a perfect medium for that. The question is, 'is it an actually good product?' And it is not as good a product as it was. And they have no signs of showing anything that's valuable to a vast majority of people, except for political journalists and politicians. And increasingly, celebrities are coming off of it. Journalists that don't have anything to do with politics are coming off of it. It's become somewhat of an amusement. Now it's become a more toxic amusement, it's like sort of watching stuff that– or eating stuff that isn't very good for you, at some point, you sort of feel sick, doing it. He's got to make it a great product. That's the only way out of this as it is with most things. If it's not a great product, it, like all the other bad products, will die as every other tech product has died over time. We're not using all those things because either something better came along, or the product just wasn't as good, it wasn't as enjoyable, wasn't as relevant. You have to be relevant to a vast amount of people to be successful. And when you say you can't do that? Whatever you think of the Chinese ownership of Tiktok, it's an incredibly enjoyable product. It's really fun to use. It's addictive. It's interesting, it's creative, and he's got to do those things. Instead, he wastes his time in some sort of weird personal vendetta against himself. That's really what's so sad about it, is that, you know, I sometimes feel like that he just– I feel like some days, he just needs a hug, so he could stop doing this and actually make something beautiful. He has done in the past. He's absolutely capable of it. I'm not so sure media is as easy as building a rocket. I know it sounds crazy. But he's got to really stop the nonsense and make a product that's worth it to people and worth paying for. It's a very basic thing of capitalism. This is not about wokeism. This is not about the mind virus and all these other tiresome, petty grievances against people, it's about making a great product and making a product that people want to pay for or use in some way that's enjoyable to them. And it's as easy as that. And so, and by the way, tech is the young eats its old. What's coming next is what's going to be the cool thing, not Twitter. Twitter's had enough lives. And we'll see if he can transform for a little while longer, but it's not going to be much longer. John Donvan: And that concludes our debate. And not only did I really, really enjoy this conversation, but the way that the two of you conducted it totally embodies what we aim for when we do these debates, the fact that the two of you could disagree, and still be so, not just respectful, but amicable with one another. We appreciate that you did homework on this and that you came and you actually listened to one another. So, thank you very much for being part of this debate with us. Anthony Scaramucci: Well, it's an honor to be here, John. Kara Swisher: Thank you. John Donvan: Thank you for tuning into this episode of Intelligence Squared, made possible by a generous grant from the Laura and Gary Lauder Venture Philanthropy Fund. As a nonprofit, our work to combat extreme polarization through civil and respectful debate is generously funded by listeners like you, the Rosenkrantz Foundation and friends of Intelligence Squared. Robert Rosencrantz is our chairman. Clea Conner is CEO. David Ariosto is head of editorial, Julia Melfi, Shea O'Meara, and Marlette Sandoval are our producers. Damon Whitmore is our radio producer, and I'm your host, John Donvan. We'll see you next time. This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity. Please excuse any errors......»»

Category: blogSource: valuewalkJan 20th, 2023

Why Is The Left So Afraid Of Twitter?

Why Is The Left So Afraid Of Twitter? Authored by Alan Dershowitz via The Gatestone Institute, A campaign is currently underway by left-wing organizations and politicians to demand that Twitter, now owned by Elon Musk, continue its practice of censoring hate speech and other "objectionable" postings. A letter sent to Twitter's top 20 advertisers, signed by 40 activist organizations, including the NAACP, the Center for American Progress, GLAAD and the Global Project Against Hate and extremism, contained the following veiled threat: "We, the undersigned organizations call on you to notify Musk and publicly commit that you will cease all advertising on Twitter globally if he follows through on his plans to undermine brand safety and community standards, including gutting content moderation." This means that Musk must not roll back what Twitter has on the books now, and commit to enforcing the existing rules. In other words, Twitter advertisers have been asked to boycott Twitter unless it continues to censor. Decades ago, during the height of McCarthyism, it was the hard right that demanded censorship, while the left insisted that the marketplace of ideas should be left open to all forms of speech. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1801: "[W]e have nothing to fear from the demoralizing of some if others are left free to demonstrate their errors, and especially the law stands ready to punish the first criminal act produced by false reasoning. These are safer correctives than the conscience of a judge." Jefferson's distrust of "the conscience of a judge" would probably be even greater if the censors were the CEOs of companies that rely on advertisers for their profits. At a time of growing division, hostility and violence, it is understandable to look to censorship as the easy solution to a difficult problem. But censorship requires censors, and once censors are given the ability to pick and choose what the public will hear, this slippery slope moves us away from freedom and toward repression. I certainly do not like the kind of anti-Semitic hate speech that is pervasive on many of today's internet platforms and I am the recipient of these emails and tweets on an almost daily basis. Free speech is not free. The old expression that "sticks and stone may break my bones, but names will never hurt me" is false. Names hurt me, my family and others. But that is not the issue. The issue is whether in an open society we must endure these pains in order to avoid being in even great pains of selective censorship. The Framers of the First Amendment chose to endure the pain of too much speech over the dangers of speech controlled by the government. But Twitter is not the government. Neither is Facebook or YouTube. They are giant media companies that dominate and control the flow of speech throughout the world. And the dangers of putting control of those flows in the hands of invisible elitist censors threatens to undercut our most important freedom. This is the most important free speech issue that will be faced during the remainder of the 21st century: whether to tolerate untrammeled and sometimes even dangerous freedom of speech or to demand private censorship of the kind that the government could not impose. Some have proposed that we treat giant social media companies like "common carriers," such as railroads and telegraph companies. But under the First Amendment, placing controls over public speech is different from regulating travel and even personal telegraph communications. One manifestation of the divisiveness of our nation is that complex issues of this kind are rarely debated dispassionately and intelligently. Instead, people are forced to choose sides: are you for Musk or against him? Are you for controls on internet speech or against it? The first casualty of divisive extremism is nuance. And it is nuance that is sorely needed with regard to this issue of internet censorship. Let nuanced proposals be offered and discussed. Let us not rush to judgment about so important and complex issues. And most important, let free speech not become weaponized as a partisan issue. Tyler Durden Sat, 11/05/2022 - 22:30.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeNov 5th, 2022

Live: Jan. 6 committee to hold next hearing on Thursday, Pence advisors to testify

The House select committee is investigating the Capitol riot and the role Donald Trump and his allies played in trying to overturn the 2020 election. Lawmakers on the House January 6 committee.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images The House committee investigating the Capitol riot is holding its next hearing at 1 p.m. ET Thursday. Two people who worked with Vice President Mike Pence are scheduled to testify. One is expected to say that America's democracy was "almost stolen," CBS News reported. The next January 6 committee hearing is due on Thursday, with Pence advisors set to testifyFormer Vice President Mike Pence.Meg Kinnard/APThe next hearing by the January 6 committee is due to take place on Thursday at 1 p.m. ET.Two advisors to Mike Pence, who was former President Donald Trump's vice president, are due to testify.The aides are Greg Jacob, Pence's former counsel, and J. Michael Luttig, a retired judge for the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit who served as an informal advisor to Pence.Two people familiar with Luttig's testimony told CBS News that he is expected to say tht America's democracy was "almost stolen" and that conservatives should recognize the seriousness of what Trump did on January 6.He will also say that he urged Pence to ignore Trump's pressure on the vice president to block Joe Biden's certification as president, CBS News reported.Trump had piled pressure on Pence not to recognize Biden's victory in the days running up to January 6, 2021, and some of the rioters at the Capitol had chanted "hang Mike Pence." Pence's role in the certification process was largely ceremonial.All the times GOP Rep. Loudermilk shifted his story about the Capitol tour he led a day before Jan. 6 attackVideo released by the January 6 committee shows Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia leading a tour through the Capitol complex on January 5, 2021.Screenshot / January 6 CommitteeThe explanation given by Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk about a tour that he led a day before the January 6 Capitol riot has changed several times.The committee investigating the attack said Wednesday at least one person on the tour later attended Trump's January 6 rally and march toward the Capitol. Other tour members appear to have taken photos of stairwells and a security station in the Capitol complex. There is currently no evidence that suggests any of the tour participants rioted inside the Capitol. There is also no evidence that suggests that Loudermilk knew any of the people on the tour wanted to commit violence or deface the Capitol.The January 6 committee released footage of the tour on Wednesday, saying it included areas that tourists don't typically pay much attention to, like stairwells and hallways.Capitol police said there was nothing "suspicious" about the tour, but Loudermilk's explanation of it has evolved.Read Full StoryGinni Thomas emailed Trump lawyer John Eastman ahead of January 6, report saysGinni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, arrives to watch Judge Amy Coney Barrett take the constitutional oath on the South Lawn of the White House on October 26, 2020.AP Photo/Patrick SemanskyGinni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, exchanged emails with John Eastman, a Trump lawyer who drafted a memo detailing a plan for overturning the 2020 election, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.Sources close to the House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection told the Post that the correspondence, which was obtained by the committee, showed Ginni Thomas went to greater lengths than previously known to overturn the election.A spokesman for Rep. Bennie Thompson, co-chair of the committee, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Other reports have emerged of efforts by Ginni Thomas, a right-wing activist, to overturn the election. The Post previously reported she had emailed 29 GOP lawmakers in Arizona urging them to ignore Biden's win in the state and choose pro-Trump electors.Read Full StoryPolice say tour of Capitol complex given by GOP lawmaker on eve of the January 6 attack was not suspiciousRep. Barry Loudermilk.Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesThe Capitol Police chief confirmed in a letter on Monday that GOP Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia had given 15 people a tour of the Capitol complex on the eve of the January 6 attack, adding that it was not suspicious.Chief J. Thomas Manger also said that the group didn't enter the Capitol building in his letter to Rep. Rodney Davis of Illinois, the ranking Republican member of the House Administration committee."We train our officers on being alert for people conducting surveillance or reconnaissance, and we do not consider any of the activities we observed as suspicious," Manger wrote.Citing security footage, Manger said that Loudermilk had led a group of 12 people, which later grew to 15, through the Rayburn, Cannon, and Longworth buildings, but the group never appeared at "any tunnels that would have led them to the US Capitol."Read Full StoryHeiress to Publix grocery chain sponsored Kimberly Guilfoyle's $60,000 speech on Jan. 6 that lasted 2 minutes, report saysKimberly Guilfoyle gives an address to the Republican National Convention on August 24, 2020 in Washington, DC.Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesThe daughter of the Publix grocery chain's founder sponsored the January 6, 2021, speech given by Kimberly Guilfoyle, which lasted two-and-a-half minutes and cost $60,000, The Washington Post reported.Guilfoyle, a former Fox News host who went on to work for former President Donald Trump and is now Donald Trump Jr.'s fiancée, was given $60,000 for the speech by the conservative nonprofit Turning Point Action, The Post reported, citing two sources with knowledge of the matter.The sponsoring donor for that payment was Julie Fancelli, the daughter of Publix founder George Jenkins, The Post reported.Guilfoyle's speech was at a Trump rally in Washington, DC, which preceded the Capitol riot.Read Full StoryMike Lindell says he offered to publicly testify before the January 6 committee but they didn't want to talk to himMike Lindell, political activist and CEO of MyPillow, attends a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump at the Delaware County Fairgrounds on April 23, 2022 in Delaware, Ohio.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMyPillow CEO Mike Lindell says that he tried to get a spot to testify before the January 6 committee and show them his "evidence" to prove former President Donald Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud, but they did not want to talk to him. Lindell made this statement during an appearance on Steve Bannon's podcast, "War Room: Pandemic."Bannon asked Lindell if the committee had reached out to him to go through "all the voluminous material" he has about the 2020 election. "No, they haven't. And it's really — that's sad, too, because I've offered. I'd love to come to your committee as long as you nationally televise it, Ms. Pelosi," Lindell replied, referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.Read Full StorySen. Raphael Warnock says that January 6 Capitol attack shows that 'our democracy is in peril'Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia speaks to members of the press after a Senate Democratic Caucus meeting on January 18, 2022 in Washington, DC.Alex Wong/Getty ImagesSen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat in Georgia, told NPR that democracy in the US is at risk.Warnock, who is running for reelection against Republican Herchel Walker, serves as Georgia's first Black senator since his election in 2021. He is also a pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the church where Martin Luther King Jr. attended."Democracy is hard work. Democracy is not a noun, it's a verb. And over the course of time, our democracy expands. It gets a little closer towards those ideals. There are moments when it contracts, but even contractions open the possibility for new birth and new hope," Warnock said to NPR's Mary Louise Kelly.Warnock said that the January 6 Capitol attack, in which hundreds of rioters breached the US Capitol in an effort to overturn the 2020 election, demonstrates the troubled state of democracy.Read Full StoryTrump might have to be prosecuted to save American democracy, an expert on authoritarianism arguesFormer President Donald Trump speaks on May 28, 2022 in Casper, Wyoming.Chet Strange/Getty ImagesRuth Ben-Ghiat spends a lot of time thinking about authoritarianism. An historian at New York University, she is an expert on the rise of fascism in Italy and, most recently, author of the the book, "Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present," tracing the erosion of democracy from Russia to the United States of America.She is keenly focused on what happens when those in power lose their grip on it."The authoritarian playbook has no chapter on failure," Ben-Ghiat wrote in a November 2020 piece for The Washington Post. "Nothing prepares the ruler to see his propaganda ignored and his charismatic hold weaken until his own people turn against him."When, two months later, former President Donald Trump urged his supporters to head over to the US Capitol in a last-ditch effort to overturn the 2020 election, Ben-Ghiat was not altogether surprised. Indeed, she had told people to expect it, arguing: "the rage that will grow in Trump as reality sinks in may make for a rocky transition to Biden's presidency. Americans would do well to be prepared."What stopped a failed insurrection from being a successful coup, she recently told CNN, was — at least in part — one of the lies Trump said on January 6: "I'll be there with you," he told supporters as they prepared to march on Congress.He never showed.In an interview with Insider, Ben-Ghiat expanded on why she thinks January 6 was an "attempted coup," why it did not succeed, and what the future holds.Read Full StoryConservative lawyer John Eastman was told to 'get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer': House January 6 testimonyJohn Eastman testifies before the House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, June 4, 2013.Charles Dharapak/APConservative lawyer John Eastman previously wrote a memo to former Vice President Mike Pence urging him to overturn the 2020 election results.White House lawyer Eric Herschmann told Eastman to "get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer" the day after the Capitol attack."You're going to need it," Herschmann recounted to the January 6 House committee.Read Full StoryTrump releases 12-page statement bashing the Jan. 6 investigation, saying it is merely to stop him from running for president againVideo of former President Donald Trump is played during a hearing by the Select Committee in Washington, DC, on June 13, 2022.Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump released a 12-page statement after the committee's second hearing on Monday.He spent nearly nine pages of the statement pushing bogus claims that the 2020 election was rigged against him.He also bashed the panel and claimed it was trying to stop him from running again in 2024. He has repeatedly teased a 2024 run for president.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani pushes back on testimony that he was drunk on election night 2020, says he was drinking Diet CokeRudy Giuliani.Jacquelyn Martin/APRudy Giuliani responded to claims that he was drunk on election night 2020 in a tweet on Monday night, insisting he "was drinking diet coke all night."The claim about the former New York City mayor's behavior at the White House election night party resurfaced during Monday's January 6 committee hearings.In a taped deposition, former advisor to then-President Donald Trump Jason Miller said: "I think the mayor was definitely intoxicated, but I do not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president, for example."After, Giuliani's media office tweeted about his drinking Diet Coke, attributing the claim to an unnamed "fellow guest."Read Full StoryJan. 6 committee members push back on chair Bennie Thompson's claim that they won't ask the DOJ to indict TrumpRep. Bennie Thompson at the Jan. 6 committee's first public hearing on June 9, 2022.Andrew Harnik/APRep. Bennie Thompson, chair of the January 6 committee, said it was not the group's job to refer Trump or anyone else to the Justice Department for charges."No, that's not our job," Thompson said on Monday, according to CNN. "Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6, what caused it and make recommendations after that."But some committee members disagreed with that approach, showing rare public cracks within the committee."The January 6th Select Committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," tweeted Rep. Liz Cheney, a Republican serving as the committee's vice chair.And Rep. Adam Schiff, a Democrat, told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Monday that he had not seen Thompson's comment but was not aware a decision on referrals had been made yet.Read Full Story Rudy Giuliani continued to make false claims to the January 6 panel that if they gave him 'the paper ballots,' he could overturn Biden's victoryRudy Giuliani continued to make false claims about election fraud during his testimony to the January 6 panel.Jacquelyn Martin/APTrump-allied lawyer Rudy Giuliani continued to make bizarre false claims about voter fraud in the 2020 election during his testimony to the January 6 panel, claiming he had evidence of a "big truck" of fraudulently-cast Biden votes. Giuliani's testimony to the House panel investigating the Capitol riot was aired on Monday, during the second of the committee's six public hearings on January 6. The former New York mayor doubled down on outlandish and unproven election fraud claims. "They saw a big truck bringing in 100,000 ballots in garbage cans, in wastepaper baskets, in cardboard boxes, and in shopping baskets," Giuliani claimed without substantiation.Read Full StoryFormer AG Bill Barr says Trump was fixated on 'crazy' voter fraud allegations and had no interest 'in what the actual facts were'Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former President Donald TrumpDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesFormer Attorney General William Barr said that former President Donald Trump was more fixated on "crazy" allegations of voter fraud than knowing the "actual facts" on the matter.Barr's testimony to the House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol riot was aired on Monday as part of the second of the committee's six public hearings on their investigation.In a videotaped deposition, Barr recounted a meeting with Trump on December 14, 2020. Barr said Trump "went off on a monologue" during the meeting about what he claimed to be "definitive evidence" of election fraud being carried out via the Dominion voting machines.According to Barr, Trump then "held up the report" and claimed it showed "absolute proof that the Dominion machines were rigged." Barr added that Trump then declared that the report meant that he would have a second term.Read Full StoryTrump campaign lawyer says Trump aide Peter Navarro accused him of being 'an agent of the deep state' for questioning baseless Dominion voter fraud conspiracy theoriesFormer Trump aide Peter NavarroAlex Wong/Getty ImagesAlex Cannon, a former Trump campaign lawyer, testified in front of the House Committee on January 6 and said that Trump aide Peter Navarro accused him of being a "deep state" operative because he expressed doubt over Dominion voting machine conspiracy theories. Cannon's testimony was broadcast on Monday as part of the second of six public hearings on the committee's investigation. During his deposition, Cannon said that he had a conversation with Navarro in mid-November, after the 2020 presidential election, about voter fraud allegations.Cannon said he spoke to Navarro specifically regarding the conspiracy theory that Dominion voting machines were used to flip votes from Trump to Biden. This conspiracy has continually been pushed by Trump-allied lawyers Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, as well as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell. Dominion named all three in a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit.Read Full StoryTrump campaign chief says the Trump team was split into two halves after election night — 'Team Normal' and 'Team Giuliani'Former Trump campaign chief Bill Stepien (left) says he did not mind being called part of "Team Normal," as opposed to "Team Giuliani".Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images; Matias J. Ocner/Miami Herald/Tribune News Service via Getty ImagesFormer Trump campaign chief Bill Stepien says the Trump team was split into two camps after the election – "Team Normal" and "Team Giuliani." The House Select Committee to Investigate January 6 played a clip of Stepien's testimony on Monday during the second of the committee's six public hearings. During his deposition, Stepien was asked if he had pulled back from the Trump camp to preserve his professional reputation. "You didn't want to be associated with some of what you were hearing from the Giuliani team and others that — that sort of stepped in in the wake of your departure?" an unidentified questioner asked Stepien. "I didn't mind being categorized. There were two groups of them. We called them kind of my team and Rudy's team. I — I didn't mind being characterized as being part of Team Normal, as — as reporters, you know, kind of started to do around that point in time," Stepien said.Read Full StoryFired Fox News political editor said television news as entertainment has 'really damaged' Americans' capacity to be 'good citizens'Chris Stirewalt, former Fox News political editor, testifies as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol continues to reveal its findings of a year-long investigation, at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, June 13, 2022.AP Photo/Susan WalshFormer Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt said he was surprised by the internal firestorm that erupted at his former workplace after Fox became the first major news network to call Arizona for President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.Stirewalt, who was fired from Fox in January 2021, testified before the January 6 committee investigating the Capitol riot on Monday, telling lawmakers that former President Donald Trump's chance at victory was virtually zero after most networks called the election for Biden on November 7, 2020.Trump was reportedly enraged that Fox News's decision desk called the swing state of Arizona for Biden before most other outlets did the same, but Stirewalt said he was confident in his team's work. Biden ultimately won the state by about 11,000 votes.But what Stirewalt wasn't expecting was the wave of backlash at Fox News that followed the accurate projection. Stirewalt spoke to NPR's David Folkenflik following his Monday testimony, telling the outlet that people close to Trump were hammering Fox executives and anchors to take back their Arizona call. The ordeal left Stirewalt disillusioned about the state of network news in the US, he told the outlet.READ FULL STORYWhite House lawyer asked John Eastman a day after January 6: 'Are you out of your effing mind'Eric D. Herschmann answers a question from a senator during impeachment proceedings against then-President Donald Trump in January 2020.Senate Television via Getty ImagesTrump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann confronted a conservative lawyer who pushed Trump's election lies, the day after the Capitol riot, according to a taped deposition the January 6 committee released on Monday."I said to him, 'Are you out of your effing mind,'" Herschmann told the committee about his conversation with Eastman. "'I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth for now on: orderly transition.'"Eastman was closely involved in then-President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including a push to get Vice President Mike Pence to either delay or unilaterally overturn a state's results on January 6.Read Full StoryThere's an 'obvious explanation' for Trump's loss in Pennsylvania — and it's not voter fraud, Barr saysFormer Attorney General Bill Barr says then-President Donald Trump did not have a "good idea" about what the roles of the DOJ and the President were.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer Attorney General Bill Barr laid out his frank assessment of former President Donald Trump's election loss in Pennsylvania during Monday's House Select Committee hearing — and it wasn't voter fraud."I think once you actually look at the votes, there's a [sic] obvious explanation," Barr said of Trump's election fraud conspiracy theories. "For example, in Pennsylvania, Trump ran weaker than the Republican ticket generally. He ran weaker than two of the state candidates. He ran weaker than the congressional delegation running for federal Congress."Trump campaign manager says why he quitThen-Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien alongside then-US President Donald Trump on August 28, 2020.Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien said he quit his high-profile job because he felt what unfolded after the 2020 presidential election night was not "honest or professional."He described a Trump campaign that was becoming increasingly divided because Trump chose to use baseless allegations to claim he hadn't lost the 2020 election.Read Full StoryBarr said dealing with 'bogus' 2020 voting fraud claims was like 'playing Whac-a-Mole'Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former President Donald TrumpDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesBill Barr said that dealing with baseless claims of voter fraud from Donald Trump's team was like "playing Whac-a-Mole," in testimony played Monday by the House select committee.Barr described dealing with an "avalanche" of false voter fraud claims from Trump and allies like Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who became the campaign's primary peddlers of election fraud claims.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani was 'apparently inebriated' when advising Trump on election nightRudy Giuliani.Jacquelyn Martin/APTrump rejected his campaign advisors' guidance on election night in 2020 and instead relied on counsel from his former personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who was apparently drunk, Rep. Liz Cheney said Monday.Campaign aides were advising Trump that the race was too close to call in key battlegrounds, but Trump took Giuliani's advice and just claimed he'd won in an early morning speech.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani pushed Trump to prematurely declare victory on election nightFormer New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani looks on as then-President Donald Trump speaks.Joshua Roberts/Getty ImagesFormer New York Rudy Giuliani pushed then-President Donald Trump to prematurely declare victory on election night 2020, a group of former top Trump aides testified.Bill Stepien, Trump's final 2020 campaign manager, testified to the House January 6 committee that he urged Trump to strike a measured tone and not to declare victory while votes were being counted."Ballots were still being counted, ballots were still going to be counted for days, and it was far too early to be making any proclamation like that," Stepien testified in a previous deposition that was partially aired on Monday.But Trump rejected the calls of caution and in the early morning after the election did exactly what some of his aides told him not to do."Frankly, we did win this election," Trump declared at the White House.Read Full StoryFox News' early call for Arizona takes center state at second hearingImages of Fox News personalities appear outside News Corporation headquarters in New York on July 31, 2021.AP Photo/Ted ShaffreyAs the January 6 select committee honed in on Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, Monday's hearing started off with pre-taped depositions of former White House officials on their incensed reaction to Fox News calling Arizona for then-candidate Joe Biden.Fox News had just introduced a new methodology to its decision desk, which its director, Arnon Mishkin, explained to Insider ahead of Election Day. The network called Arizona before other major TV outlets, and ultimately proved correct in its decision.Chris Stirewalt, a former Fox News political editor, described the network's decision desk as "the best in the business" in his testimony.The network's new strategy included surveying upwards of 100,000 Americans ahead of Election Day to see where people were voting by mail or in person, and using that large dataset to make sense of the returns on election night. That allowed Fox to have an assessment of how many remaining votes would be by mail and how those who intended to vote by mail indicated they would vote."We already knew Trump's chances were small and getting smaller based on what we'd seen," Stirewalt said.The second public hearing is due to start Monday morning. Here's who to expect.The former Fox News editor Chris Stirewalt being interviewed on CNN in September 2021.CNNThe second public hearing by the committee is due to start around 10:30 a.m. ET on Monday.Witnesses include the former Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt and the GOP election lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg.Stirewalt's team correctly called Arizona for Joe Biden in the 2020 election before other networks did so, and subsequently became the target of Trump supporters.He was fired as a Fox News political editor on January 19, 2021, and now works for NewsNation. It is not clear what the committee plans to ask Stirewalt.The committee said in a Monday morning update that Bill Stepien, Trump's former campaign manager, was no longer able to appear due to a family emergency. It said Stepien's lawyer would make a statement on the record instead.Rep. Jamie Raskin declines to share evidence that GOP lawmakers asked Trump for pardons after Capitol riot, says details will come 'in due course'Rep. Jamie Raskin on CNN on Sunday night.YouTube/CNNJanuary 6 committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin dodged questions from CNN for evidence that Republican lawmakers asked then-President Donald Trump for pardons after the Capitol riot.He said the details would emerge later.When asked by CNN's Dana Bash if he had evidence, Raskin responded: "It is multiple members of Congress, as the vice-chair said at our opening hearing, and all in due course the details will surface," Raskin said, referring to Cheney.When asked again if he had evidence, he said: "Everything we're doing is documented by evidence ... Everything that we are doing is based on facts and this is a bipartisan investigation which is determined to ferret out all of the facts of what happened."Read Full Story GOP governor says many Republicans are quietly seeking an 'off-ramp' from Trump's bogus election-fraud claimsArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson on June 22, 2021.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said that much of the Republican Party is looking for an "off-ramp" from former President Donald Trump's bogus theory that the 2020 election was stolen. Speaking to Fox News host Bret Baier, Hutchinson said Sunday that Trump is "politically and morally responsible" for much of the January 6 riot at the Capitol. He suggested that many Republicans are looking for alternative leadership as Trump continues to falsely insist on the claim that inspired the riot — that there was widespread election fraud. "For him to continue to push that theory, I agree is the wrong direction for the Republican Party," said Hutchinson. "I think there's many Republicans that are looking for an off-ramp, new opportunities … to find leadership in the future."He did not specify whether he meant ordinary GOP voters, or elected officials, mainly of whom have vocally endorsed Trump's claims.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee members says panel has uncovered enough 'credible evidence' to ask the DOJ to indict TrumpLawmakers on the House January 6 committee will air the inquiry's findings during a public hearing Thursday.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe members of the House panel investigating the Capitol riot on Sunday said that the panel has uncovered enough evidence for the Department of Justice to mull a criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump over his efforts to invalidate President Joe Biden's electoral win, according to The Associated Press.Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, who sits on the panel and also leads the House Intelligence Committee, said that he wanted to see the department examine Trump's efforts in seeking to halt the certification of Biden's victory."I would like to see the Justice Department investigate any credible allegation of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump," he said on ABC News on Sunday. "There are certain actions, parts of these different lines of effort to overturn the election that I don't see evidence the Justice Department is investigating."Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee to focus on Trump's 'dereliction of duty' during Capitol riot at next public hearing, committee member saysUS President Donald Trump speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House on January 6, 2021, in Washington, DC.Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty ImagesThe upcoming January 6 committee hearing will focus on a deep dive that former President Donald Trump knew he lost the election but still tried to overturn it and his "dereliction of duty," a committee member said. Democratic Rep. Elaine Lurie told NBC's "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd that the upcoming hearing will show how Trump tried to pressure local, state and federal officials to overturn the election, after baselessly claiming it was rigged against him. "We've pieced together a very comprehensive tick-tock timeline of what he did," The Virginia lawmaker said.Lurie told Todd that it's more accurate to say that the committee now has a timeline of what Trump was not doing before and during the insurrection than what he was doing. "There is a gap there that we have tried through these witnesses, we've interviewed a thousand witnesses and a lot of people who work directly in the White House for the president, in his immediate vicinity throughout the day," she said."So we've pieced together a very comprehensive tick-tock timeline of what he did."Read Full StoryRepublican Gov. Asa Hutchinson calls out Trump, says the former president is 'politically, morally responsible' for the Capitol riotArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson labeled former President Donald Trump as "politically" and "morally responsible" for the Capitol attack.His comments come after the kick-off of the Jan. 6 committee hearings last week, where officials started sharing their findings of the events of that day — where pro-Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol building in an attempt to halt the certification of President Joe Biden. During an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," Hutchinson called the hearings "an important review," however, the GOP governor doesn't think Trump is criminally responsible for the insurrection. "Trump is politically, morally responsible for much of what has happened, but in terms of criminal liability, I think the committee has a long way to go to establish that," Hutchinson said.    A lawyer for Pence told him the day before January 6 that not certifying the election would lead to a loss in court: reportDonald Trump and former US Vice President Mike Pence in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House on April 2, 2020, in Washington, DC.MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty ImagesA lawyer for former Vice President Mike Pence told him the day before the Capitol Riot that following former President Donald Trump's request to certify the election for him would eventually fail in court, according to a memo obtained by Politico. Congress was in the process of certifying the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021, when Trump supporters who falsely believed the election had been rigged stormed the US Capitol. Trump had previously asked Pence to certify the election in his favor, but attorney Greg Jacob told Pence in a memo that doing so would break multiple provisions of the Electoral Count Act. According to Politico, in the memo, Jacob said the move could fail in the courts or put America in a political crisis where Pence would find himself "in an isolated standoff against both houses of Congress … with no neutral arbiter available to break the impasse."The attorney will testify publicly in front of the House committee investigating the Capitol riots this week, however, his letter has been known to the committee for months, Politico reported. Read Full StoryGiuliani defends Trump after January 6 committee points to his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential electionRudy Giuliani, attorney for US President Donald Trump, speaks at the White House in Washington, DC, on July 1, 2020Jim Watson/Getty ImagesRudy Giuliani, former advisor and personal lawyer to Donald Trump, claimed in an episode of his podcast that the former president had "nothing to do with" the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. The episode, released Saturday, was a response to the House select committee's televised hearings related to the investigation into the events of Jan. 6, 2021. On Thursday, the committee released findings that indicated the events of the day were an attempted coup intended to keep former president Trump in power. READ FULL STORYLaura Ingraham says the Jan 6 hearings 'bombed' despite reeling in nearly 20 million views compared to Fox's 3 millionPresident Donald Trump gives Laura Ingraham a kiss after inviting her on stage during the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit at the Palm Beach County Convention Center, Saturday, Dec. 21, 2019, in West Palm Beach, Fla.Luis M. Alvarez/APFox News host Laura Ingraham claimed the January 6 Committee hearing on Thursday "bombed," despite reeling in nearly 20 million viewers. Fox was the only major news outlet not to carry the hearing live on Thursday evening, which was the House Select Committee on January 6's first major public hearing about the Capitol attack, the efforts to overturn the election, and what then-President Donald Trump knew before and during the attack.Committee members revealed that Trump and his allies staged "an attempted coup" and funded a misinformation campaign that "provoked the violence on January 6." They also said that Ivanka Trump "accepted" the attorney general's opinion that there was no election fraud, and that several Republican congressmen asked for pardons following January 6. Ingraham's claim that the hearings "bombed" came as she responded to criticism from The View's Joy Behar."Fox News did not carry the January 6 Committee's live hearings last night. Shocker isn't it? But they still had plenty to say about it," Behar said. "The usual suspects, Tucker [Carlson] and Ingraham, dusted off their greatest hits, calling it a witch hunt, saying it's political revenge from Pelosi, and downplayed what happened on the 6th."Behar added: "There were no commercial breaks last night on either show. So what does that tell you? That Rupert Murdoch is so desperate to keep his viewers away from the hearing, along with those two, that he is willing to lose millions of dollars." Ingraham swiped back at Behar in a tweet, claiming to have had "two commercial breaks Thursday night." According to PolitiFact, Carlson's and Hannity's shows had no commercial breaks, whereas Ingraham "went to commercial a few times." Read Full StoryWhat is the potential penalty if someone is convicted of 'seditious conspiracy'Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio leaves the D.C. Central Detention Facility on January 14, 2022.Evelyn Hockstein/ReutersEnrique Tarrio and four other members of the Proud Boys were charged this week with seditious conspiracy in what one constitutional expert calls a "textbook case" of sedition, but the charges themselves face an uphill battle in court.Seditious conspiracy, sometimes referred to as "sedition," is law that first originated in 1789 to prosecute speech critical of the government. Read Full StoryThe public hearings resume on Monday, June 13, at 10 a.m. ETLawmakers on the House January 6 committee will air the inquiry's findings during a public hearing Thursday.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe public hearings for the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection resume on Monday, June 13, at 10 a.m. ET.Catch up on our takeaways of the biggest moments from the first hearing on Thursday, June 9, 2022, and check out the full schedule.Read Full StoryRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Tweets at Matt Gaetz, Lauren Boebert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene wanting to know if they asked for pardons after January 6Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.Drew Angerer/Getty ImageIn a Friday tweet storm, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked several of her fellow representatives if they'd asked the White House for a pardon following the January 6 attack.Her remarks came the day after the January 6 House select committee aired its first public hearing — in which GOP co-chair Rep. Liz Cheney alleged that several members of Congress asked for pardons after the insurrection.Read Full StoryMore than 19 million people watched first public hearingFormer US President Donald Trump appears on a screen during a hearing by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 9, 2022 in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMore than 19 million people watched the first public hearing of the congressional committee investigating the January 6 insurrection, The New York Times reported Friday, citing preliminary figures from ratings company Nielsen.The actual number is higher, The Times noted, as the preliminary tally does not include all networks and streaming services that aired the hearing.The Thursday hearing aired from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. on broadcast channels and cable news networks — but not on Fox News, which elected to stick its usual programming.Trump calls William Barr a 'weak and frightened' AG after his January 6 testimonyFormer Attorney General Bill Barr says then-President Donald Trump did not have a "good idea" about what the roles of the DOJ and the President were.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump on Friday lashed out at William Barr, calling him a "weak and frightened" attorney general and a "coward" after the House January 6 committee aired his testimony debunking Trump's false claims of widespread election fraud.During Thursday's public hearing, the committee played recorded testimony from Barr in a closed-door interview saying that he didn't agree that the election was "stolen" and that he told Trump the idea was "bullshit."Trump attacked Barr, his former attorney general, on his social-media platform, Truth Social, saying he "was always being 'played' and threatened by the Democrats and was scared stiff of being Impeached." Read Full StoryTrump says Ivanka Trump doesn't understand elections after she rejected his stolen 2020 vote claimIvanka Trump.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump said his daughter Ivanka Trump doesn't understand elections after she testified that there was no fraud in the 2020 election.The committee aired her testimony on Thursday, where she said that she "accepted" former Attorney General Bill Barr finding no evidence that the vote was stolen."Ivanka Trump was not involved in looking at, or studying, Election results," Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday. "She had long since checked out and was, in my opinion, only trying to be respectful to Bill Barr and his position as Attorney General (he sucked!)."Read Full StoryTrump attacks House committee, repeats bogus fraud claims after hearing blamed him for insurrectionFormer President Donald Trump speaks at a rally on May 28, 2022 in Casper, Wyoming.Chet Strange/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump responded to the first public hearing by criticizing the House committee and repeating his fake voter fraud claims."So the Unselect Committee of political HACKS refuses to play any of the many positive witnesses and statements, refuses to talk of the Election Fraud and Irregularities that took place on a massive scale," he shared on Truth Social early Friday morning. He added: "Our Country is in such trouble!" Read Full StoryFox News hosts bragged about not airing the hearing live, and called it a 'smear campaign' against TrumpTucker Carlson on his show on June 9, 2022.Fox NewsFox News' prime-time shows refused to carry Thursday's hearing, with host Tucker Carlson bragging about the network's decision."The whole thing is insulting. In fact, it's deranged," Carlson said. "And we're not playing along.""This is the only hour on an American news channel that will not be carrying their propaganda live. They are lying, and we are not going to help them do it," he said, apparently referring to those investigating the riot.Host Sean Hannity on his own show called the hearing a "multi-hour Democratic fundraiser," without offering any evidence, and a "made-for-TV smear campaign against President Trump featuring sliced and diced video that fits their pre-determined political narrative."And host Laura Ingraham painted the hearing as boring, saying: "In the end, this was nearly two hours of an unsuccessful, laborious attempt to connect the dots back to Trump, to Trump to a coup that never happened."Read Full StoryTrump's spokesperson responded to the scathing Jan. 6 hearing by pumping out voter-fraud conspiracy theoriesLiz Harrington, a spokesperson for former President Donald Trump, tweeted out election fraud disinformation during the Thursday's hearing.She tweeted misleading claims that she said suggested voter fraud in some swing states during the 2020 election, and said: "They didn't want to talk about voter fraud then, and they don't want to talk about it now."She did not engage directly with what was said at the hearings.Read Full StorySeveral Republicans including Scott Perry sought pardons from Trump after the Capitol riot, Liz Cheney saysRep. Liz Cheney listens during the House select committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack on July 27, 2021.AP Photo/ Andrew Harnik)Rep. Liz Cheney, the vice chair of the House January 6 committee, said at Thursday's hearing that several Republican members of Congress asked for a pardon from then-President Donald Trump after the Capitol riot.She called out Rep. Scott Perry in particular, saying: "Representative Perry contacted the White House in the weeks after January 6 to seek a presidential pardon.""Multiple other Republican congressmen also sought presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election," she added.Read Full StoryRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says watching the January 6 hearings made all the trauma from the Capitol riot come 'rushing back into the body'Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said watching the first televised hearing on the Capitol riot took her back to the traumatic experience of being there on the day. Ocasio-Cortez posted a video of the hearing, where scenes of violence and sights of Trump supporters flooding the Capitol were being played. "Good Lord. The way it all comes rushing back into the body. It's like it's that day all over again," she wrote. Read Full StoryA Proud Boy told the January 6 panel that membership in the organization 'tripled' after Trump told them to 'stand back and stand by'Enrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, speaks to Black Lives Matters supporters during a commemoration of the death of George Floyd in Miami on May 25, 2021.Eva Marie Uzcategui Trinkl//GettyA high-ranking member of the Proud Boys told the January 6 panel that membership in the organization "tripled" after former President Donald Trump told them to "stand back and stand by." Trump made the comments during a debate in September 2020. The former president was asked to disavow white supremacist groups and urge them to "stand down." But instead of doing so, Trump said: "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by." A clip of an interview with Proud Boys member Jeremy Bertino aired during the televised January 6 hearings on Thursday night. He said Trump's comments were a watershed moment for the group. Bertino was asked if the number of Proud Boys members increased specifically after Trump's comments. "Exponentially," Bertino said. "I'd say, tripled, probably. With the potential for a lot more eventually." Read Full StoryNew video from the Capitol riot shows dozens of staffers fleeing Rep. Kevin McCarthy's office in a panic as rioters clashed violently with copsHouse Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe January 6 panel released a never-before-seen video from inside House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's office during the January 6 Capitol riot.In the video, the dozens of frantic staffers are seen pouring into the hallways of Rep. McCarthy's office.The staffers appeared to be fleeing McCarthy's office as a radio transmission signaled that people would be moving through the tunnels of the Capitol building. The House committee played the video during the first of six televised January 6 hearings. It pinpoints 2:28 p.m. — as violent clashes between rioters and police officers take place outside the Capitol, McCarthy staffers can be seen running through the hallway of his chambers. Read Full StoryEx-DC cop beaten by Jan. 6 rioters says it's time for America to 'wake the fuck up' to danger Trump posesFormer DC Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered a heart attack during the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, said on Friday that people need to "wake the fuck up" to the danger former President Donald Trump poses following the House select committee playing videos of what unfolded on that day.Read Full Story'I was slipping in people's blood,' says Capitol Police officerU.S. Capitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards, who was the first law enforcement officer injured by rioters storming the Capitol grounds on January 6, testifies during a hearing by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 09, 2022 in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesCapitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards said it looked to her like an "absolute war zone" on January 6, 2021, when supporters of former President Trump attacked the US Capitol, forcing officers to engage in "hours of hand-to-hand combat" beyond the scope of any law enforcement training.Edwards, who was injured in the attack, told members of the House select committee on Thursday, "I can just remember my breath catching in my throat" while looking at the "carnage" and "chaos" of the riot scene."I couldn't believe my eyes," she told the committee. "There were officers on the ground. You know, they were bleeding, they were throwing up…I mean I saw friends with blood all over their faces. I was slipping in people's blood. You know, I was catching people as they fell."Read Full StoryEx-Proud Boys leader says he'd wished he'd sold 'stand back and standby' t-shirts after Trump's debate commentEnrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, speaks to Black Lives Matters supporters during a commemoration of the death of George Floyd in Miami on May 25, 2021.Eva Marie Uzcategui Trinkl//GettyAt the first of six public hearings planned for this month, the House committee displayed video of an interview with a Proud Boy who attributed Trump's comment to exponential membership growth in the far-right group.In another interview, former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio cracked a wry smile and said he regretted not selling t-shirts brandished with the words "Stand back and stand by." "One of the vendors on my page actually beat me to it, but I wish I would've made a 'stand back stand by' t-shirt," Tarrio said in his interview with the House committee.Read Full StoryJared Kushner testified that he thought the White House counsel's threat to resign was only 'whining'President Donald Trump listens as Jared Kushner speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on September 11, 2020.Andrew Harnik/AP Photo—Bloomberg (@business) June 10, 2022 Former Trump White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner testified in front of the January 6 House Committee that he thought White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's threat to resign was nothing more than "whining.""I know that him and the team were always saying, 'We're gonna resign, we're not gonna be here' if this happens, that happens," Kushner, who is also the former president's son-in-law, said during an on-camera deposition Thursday. "I kind of took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you."Read Full StoryLiz Cheney blasts Republicans for supporting Trump: 'There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain'U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, Chairman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, Vice Chairwoman Rep. Liz Cheney, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger take part in a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 09, 2022 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesGOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming on Thursday evening issued members of her party a stark warning over their continued support of former President Donald Trump."I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible: there will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain," Cheney, vice chair of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, said during the panel's first hearing.Read Full StoryWhite House aides tried to limit access to Trump knowing he was 'too dangerous to be left alone' after his election loss, Cheney saysRep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) during a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 9, 2022.Drew Angerer/Getty Images"The White House staff knew that President Trump was willing to entertain and use conspiracy theories to achieve his ends," Rep. Cheney said during opening remarks at the first public hearing investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol."They knew that the president needed to be cut off from all of those who had encouraged him.  They knew that President Donald Trump was too dangerous to be left alone," she added.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 panel played footage of former AG William Barr calling Trump's election claims 'bullshit'Attorney General William Barr speaks during a news conference, Monday, Dec. 21, 2020 at the Justice Department in WashingtonMichael Reynolds/APFollowing the 2020 presidential election, then-Attorney General William Barr told Donald Trump that his claims of widespread election fraud were "bullshit" and entirely unsupported by evidence, it was revealed during the first January 6 committee public hearing.Video of Barr recounting his remarks to Trump in a closed-door interview with the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol was played on June 9, 2022, during the public hearing. Barr said he spoke with Trump on at least three occasions between November and December 2020, and he described Trump's claims of election malfeasance as "crazy stuff" and said the falsehoods were influencing the public, doing a "great, great disservice to the country." Barr credited the timing of his December 2020 resignation, in part, to Trump's baseless election claims. Read Full StoryIvanka Trump 'accepted' DOJ found no fraud that could overturn the 2020 electionIvanka Trump.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesVideo testimony of part of Ivanka Trump's testimony to the January 6 committee was shown during the first public hearing of the investigation into the riots at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.During the clip, Ivanka Trump was asked about then-Attorney General Bill Barr's statement that former President Donald Trump's claims that there was fraud in the 2020 election were incorrect."It affected my perspective," Ivanka Trump told the committee in recorded testimony, aired for the first time on Thursday. "I respect Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he was saying."Read Full StoryLiz Cheney says Trump oversaw a 'sophisticated 7-part plan' to overturn the election and stay in powerU.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) Vice Chairwoman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, delivers remarks during a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 9, 2022.Win McNamee/Getty ImagesRep. Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, said that during these public hearings they would reveal more information about a "seven-part plan" to overturn the 2020 presidential election, led by former President Donald Trump.—CSPAN (@cspan) June 10, 2022Read Full StoryRep. Liz Cheney: Trump backed supporters' call to 'hang Mike Pence'US Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), vice chairwoman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol, arrives for a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 09, 2022 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Win McNamee/Getty ImagesAs a riot unfolded at the US Capitol, former President Donald Trump told aides that his own vice president might deserve to die, Rep. Liz Cheney said Thursday.Cheney, a Wyoming Republican who co-chairs the House panel investigating the January 6 insurrection, made the claim in her opening remarks."Aware of the rioters chants to 'hang Mike Pence,'" Cheney said, "the president responded with this sentiment: 'Maybe our supporters have the right idea.' Mike Pence 'deserves it.'"As The New York Times reported last month, two former White House staffers testified before the January 6 committee that Mark Meadows, Trump's ex-chief of staff, told them that he heard the former president make the comment.Read Full StoryJanuary 6 committee chairman Bennie Thompson says hearings will show Trump and his allies mounted 'an attempted coup'—CSPAN (@cspan) June 10, 2022 Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat in his 13th term, recalled his upbringing in the Magnolia State and the nation's history of white supremacist violence, specifically lynching."I'm from a part of the country where people justify the actions of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, and lynching," Thompson said. "I'm reminded of that dark history as I hear voices today try and justify the actions of the insurrections on Jan. 6, 2021."The chairman of the House panel investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol described the rioters as "domestic enemies of the Constitution," and promised that the evidence his panel has collected proves former President Donald Trump and his allies attempted a coup d'etat."Donald Trump was at the center of this conspiracy, and ultimately, Donald Trump, the President of the United States, spurred a mob of domestic enemies of the Constitution to march down the Capitol and subvert American democracy," Rep. Bennie Thompson said at the start of Thursday night's prime-time hearings.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee chair will say 'democracy remains in danger'From left to right, January 6 Select Committee members Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House panel investigating the January 6 attack, will say tonight that the American people deserve answers about the insurrection."We can't sweep what happened under the rug," Thompson says in early excerpts of his opening statement. "The American people deserve answers. So I come before you this evening not as a Democrat, but as an American who swore an oath to defend the Constitution."The House Select Committee on January 6 will have its first major public hearing tonight, kicking off a series of public hearings about the attack, efforts to overturn the election, and what then-President Donald Trump was aware of in the lead up to it.Thompson will add that American democracy "remains in danger.""... Our work must do much more than just look backwards," Thompson will say. "Because our democracy remains in danger. The conspiracy to thwart the will of the people is not over. There are those in this country who thirst for power but have no love or respect for what makes America great: devotion to the Constitution, allegiance to the rule of law, our shared journey to build a more perfect Union."Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, is facing a defining career moment after nearly three decades in Congress. Thompson told Insider's Camila DeChalus that the committee is his "signature work in the United States House of Representatives."Bennie Thompson is poised to take center stage as Jan. 6 hearings start after 29 years in CongressHouse Homeland Security Committee Chair Benny Thompson (D-MS) listens as U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) discusses the formation of a select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol during a news conference in Washington, U.S., July 1, 2021.Jonathan Ernst/ReutersRep. Bennie Thompson is the chairman of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 insurrection. He has been in Congress for 29 years but views this investigation as his "signature work.""There's a lot of other pieces of legislation that basically alter the trajectory of so many people in my district, in this country, as well as other pieces of legislation, but nothing compares to the importance of this committee and why I value its work as my signature work in the United States House of Representatives," he told Insider's Camila DeChalus in a May interview.In the first public hearing of the January 6 committee, Thompson will take center stage.Read Full StorySen. Ted Cruz says watching paint dry would be more productive than tuning into a single second of the January 6 committee's first public hearingSenator Ted Cruz (R-TX) holds up a cellphone during the confirmation for Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on the third day before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on October 14, 2020 in Washington, DC.ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/POOL/AFP via Getty ImagesRepublican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas offered up three things he'd rather do Thursday night than sit through any part of the January 6 committee's highly anticipated prime-time hearing. "I've got to mow my lawn. Or comb my hair. Or maybe just watch the paint dry on the walls," Cruz said of what he considered better ways to invest one's time than validating the existence of  "a political campaign ad for the Democrats." Cruz bashed the ongoing House investigation as political theater meant to distract a recession-wary populace from all the ways he said President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats have failed them. "From the opening gavel to the close of the hearing, one hundred percent of their endeavor is a political Hail Mary pass," Cruz told Insider in the tunnels beneath the Senate chamber. "The American people are deeply unhappy with the disaster of the left-wing policy agenda we've seen for the last two years." Read Full StoryDOJ lawyers expect transcripts from the 1,000 January 6 committee witnesses to be made public in SeptemberTrump supporters clash with police and security forces as in the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.Brent Stirton/Getty ImagesA Justice Department lawyer revealed Thursday that transcripts of the 1,000 interviews conducted as part of the House January 6 committee's investigation into the Capitol attack will be made public in September. It would be an unprecedented release of documents that could shed new light on the January 6, 2021 insurrection.The revelation came during a pretrial hearing for former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio and four other members of the far-right group who were charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with their alleged role in planning and participating in the Capitol siege."The committee will release the transcripts in early September and a report of the committee's findings will be released around the same time," Assistant US Attorney Jason McCullough told a judge.Read Full StoryThe first public hearing held by House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection starts at 8 p.m. ET. Catch up on what you need to know ahead of the hearing.Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Mississippi), left, listens as Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming) speaks during the House select committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2021. Washington Metropolitan Police Department officer Michael Fanone is at center.Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via AP, PoolThe House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection is holding a much-anticipated public hearing Thursday night.The nine-member panel, chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, has spent months interviewing witnesses and examining phone and email records to try to get to the bottom of former President Donald Trump and his allies' efforts to overturn the 2020 election and prevent President Joe Biden from taking office.The committee, which includes Republican Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, is expected to hold a half-dozen public hearings in June.Here's what you need to know ahead of the broadcast at 8 p.m. ET:How to watch the hearingsThe key witnesses who are likely to testifyWhat to expectSources say the evidence will put Trump "at the center" of the eventsMeet the lawmakers and staff leading the investigationAt least 862 people have now been arrested for their actions on January 6More than 300 people have already pleaded guiltyAn oral history of the insurrection from 34 people who were thereHow the US Capitol riot led to Trump's second impeachmentLiz Cheney's break from GOP leadership on the investigationRead the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderJun 16th, 2022

Jan. 6 live updates: Police say GOP lawmaker"s tour of Capitol complex on eve of insurrection was not suspicious

A House select committee is investigating the Capitol riot and the role Donald Trump and his allies played in trying to overturn the 2020 election. Lawmakers on the House January 6 committee.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images The House committee investigating the Capitol riot is set to hold its next hearing on Thursday. The committee released a preview of what to expect during Thursday's hearing. Meanwhile, police said GOP Rep. Barry Loudermilk's tour of the Capitol complex on Jan. 5 was not suspicious. Police say tour of Capitol complex given by GOP lawmaker on eve of the January 6 attack was not suspiciousRep. Barry Loudermilk.Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesThe Capitol Police chief confirmed in a letter on Monday that GOP Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia had given 15 people a tour of the Capitol complex on the eve of the January 6 attack, adding that it was not suspicious.Chief J. Thomas Manger also said that the group didn't enter the Capitol building in his letter to Rep. Rodney Davis of Illinois, the ranking Republican member of the House Administration committee."We train our officers on being alert for people conducting surveillance or reconnaissance, and we do not consider any of the activities we observed as suspicious," Manger wrote.Citing security footage, Manger said that Loudermilk had led a group of 12 people, which later grew to 15, through the Rayburn, Cannon, and Longworth buildings, but the group never appeared at "any tunnels that would have led them to the US Capitol."Read Full StoryHeiress to Publix grocery chain sponsored Kimberly Guilfoyle's $60,000 speech on Jan. 6 that lasted 2 minutes, report saysKimberly Guilfoyle gives an address to the Republican National Convention on August 24, 2020 in Washington, DC.Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesThe daughter of the Publix grocery chain's founder sponsored the January 6, 2021, speech given by Kimberly Guilfoyle, which lasted two-and-a-half minutes and cost $60,000, The Washington Post reported.Guilfoyle, a former Fox News host who went on to work for former President Donald Trump and is now Donald Trump Jr.'s fiancée, was given $60,000 for the speech by the conservative nonprofit Turning Point Action, The Post reported, citing two sources with knowledge of the matter.The sponsoring donor for that payment was Julie Fancelli, the daughter of Publix founder George Jenkins, The Post reported.Guilfoyle's speech was at a Trump rally in Washington, DC, which preceded the Capitol riot.Read Full StoryMike Lindell says he offered to publicly testify before the January 6 committee but they didn't want to talk to himMike Lindell, political activist and CEO of MyPillow, attends a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump at the Delaware County Fairgrounds on April 23, 2022 in Delaware, Ohio.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMyPillow CEO Mike Lindell says that he tried to get a spot to testify before the January 6 committee and show them his "evidence" to prove former President Donald Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud, but they did not want to talk to him. Lindell made this statement during an appearance on Steve Bannon's podcast, "War Room: Pandemic."Bannon asked Lindell if the committee had reached out to him to go through "all the voluminous material" he has about the 2020 election. "No, they haven't. And it's really — that's sad, too, because I've offered. I'd love to come to your committee as long as you nationally televise it, Ms. Pelosi," Lindell replied, referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.Read Full StorySen. Raphael Warnock says that January 6 Capitol attack shows that 'our democracy is in peril'Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia speaks to members of the press after a Senate Democratic Caucus meeting on January 18, 2022 in Washington, DC.Alex Wong/Getty ImagesSen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat in Georgia, told NPR that democracy in the US is at risk.Warnock, who is running for reelection against Republican Herchel Walker, serves as Georgia's first Black senator since his election in 2021. He is also a pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the church where Martin Luther King Jr. attended."Democracy is hard work. Democracy is not a noun, it's a verb. And over the course of time, our democracy expands. It gets a little closer towards those ideals. There are moments when it contracts, but even contractions open the possibility for new birth and new hope," Warnock said to NPR's Mary Louise Kelly.Warnock said that the January 6 Capitol attack, in which hundreds of rioters breached the US Capitol in an effort to overturn the 2020 election, demonstrates the troubled state of democracy.Read Full StoryTrump might have to be prosecuted to save American democracy, an expert on authoritarianism arguesFormer President Donald Trump speaks on May 28, 2022 in Casper, Wyoming.Chet Strange/Getty ImagesRuth Ben-Ghiat spends a lot of time thinking about authoritarianism. An historian at New York University, she is an expert on the rise of fascism in Italy and, most recently, author of the the book, "Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present," tracing the erosion of democracy from Russia to the United States of America.She is keenly focused on what happens when those in power lose their grip on it."The authoritarian playbook has no chapter on failure," Ben-Ghiat wrote in a November 2020 piece for The Washington Post. "Nothing prepares the ruler to see his propaganda ignored and his charismatic hold weaken until his own people turn against him."When, two months later, former President Donald Trump urged his supporters to head over to the US Capitol in a last-ditch effort to overturn the 2020 election, Ben-Ghiat was not altogether surprised. Indeed, she had told people to expect it, arguing: "the rage that will grow in Trump as reality sinks in may make for a rocky transition to Biden's presidency. Americans would do well to be prepared."What stopped a failed insurrection from being a successful coup, she recently told CNN, was — at least in part — one of the lies Trump said on January 6: "I'll be there with you," he told supporters as they prepared to march on Congress.He never showed.In an interview with Insider, Ben-Ghiat expanded on why she thinks January 6 was an "attempted coup," why it did not succeed, and what the future holds.Read Full StoryConservative lawyer John Eastman was told to 'get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer': House January 6 testimonyJohn Eastman testifies before the House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, June 4, 2013.Charles Dharapak/APConservative lawyer John Eastman previously wrote a memo to former Vice President Mike Pence urging him to overturn the 2020 election results.White House lawyer Eric Herschmann told Eastman to "get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer" the day after the Capitol attack."You're going to need it," Herschmann recounted to the January 6 House committee.Read Full StoryTrump releases 12-page statement bashing the Jan. 6 investigation, saying it is merely to stop him from running for president againVideo of former President Donald Trump is played during a hearing by the Select Committee in Washington, DC, on June 13, 2022.Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump released a 12-page statement after the committee's second hearing on Monday.He spent nearly nine pages of the statement pushing bogus claims that the 2020 election was rigged against him.He also bashed the panel and claimed it was trying to stop him from running again in 2024. He has repeatedly teased a 2024 run for president.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani pushes back on testimony that he was drunk on election night 2020, says he was drinking Diet CokeRudy Giuliani.Jacquelyn Martin/APRudy Giuliani responded to claims that he was drunk on election night 2020 in a tweet on Monday night, insisting he "was drinking diet coke all night."The claim about the former New York City mayor's behavior at the White House election night party resurfaced during Monday's January 6 committee hearings.In a taped deposition, former advisor to then-President Donald Trump Jason Miller said: "I think the mayor was definitely intoxicated, but I do not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president, for example."After, Giuliani's media office tweeted about his drinking Diet Coke, attributing the claim to an unnamed "fellow guest."Read Full StoryJan. 6 committee members push back on chair Bennie Thompson's claim that they won't ask the DOJ to indict TrumpRep. Bennie Thompson at the Jan. 6 committee's first public hearing on June 9, 2022.Andrew Harnik/APRep. Bennie Thompson, chair of the January 6 committee, said it was not the group's job to refer Trump or anyone else to the Justice Department for charges."No, that's not our job," Thompson said on Monday, according to CNN. "Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6, what caused it and make recommendations after that."But some committee members disagreed with that approach, showing rare public cracks within the committee."The January 6th Select Committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," tweeted Rep. Liz Cheney, a Republican serving as the committee's vice chair.And Rep. Adam Schiff, a Democrat, told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Monday that he had not seen Thompson's comment but was not aware a decision on referrals had been made yet.Read Full Story Rudy Giuliani continued to make false claims to the January 6 panel that if they gave him 'the paper ballots,' he could overturn Biden's victoryRudy Giuliani continued to make false claims about election fraud during his testimony to the January 6 panel.Jacquelyn Martin/APTrump-allied lawyer Rudy Giuliani continued to make bizarre false claims about voter fraud in the 2020 election during his testimony to the January 6 panel, claiming he had evidence of a "big truck" of fraudulently-cast Biden votes. Giuliani's testimony to the House panel investigating the Capitol riot was aired on Monday, during the second of the committee's six public hearings on January 6. The former New York mayor doubled down on outlandish and unproven election fraud claims. "They saw a big truck bringing in 100,000 ballots in garbage cans, in wastepaper baskets, in cardboard boxes, and in shopping baskets," Giuliani claimed without substantiation.Read Full StoryFormer AG Bill Barr says Trump was fixated on 'crazy' voter fraud allegations and had no interest 'in what the actual facts were'Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former President Donald TrumpDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesFormer Attorney General William Barr said that former President Donald Trump was more fixated on "crazy" allegations of voter fraud than knowing the "actual facts" on the matter.Barr's testimony to the House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol riot was aired on Monday as part of the second of the committee's six public hearings on their investigation.In a videotaped deposition, Barr recounted a meeting with Trump on December 14, 2020. Barr said Trump "went off on a monologue" during the meeting about what he claimed to be "definitive evidence" of election fraud being carried out via the Dominion voting machines.According to Barr, Trump then "held up the report" and claimed it showed "absolute proof that the Dominion machines were rigged." Barr added that Trump then declared that the report meant that he would have a second term.Read Full StoryTrump campaign lawyer says Trump aide Peter Navarro accused him of being 'an agent of the deep state' for questioning baseless Dominion voter fraud conspiracy theoriesFormer Trump aide Peter NavarroAlex Wong/Getty ImagesAlex Cannon, a former Trump campaign lawyer, testified in front of the House Committee on January 6 and said that Trump aide Peter Navarro accused him of being a "deep state" operative because he expressed doubt over Dominion voting machine conspiracy theories. Cannon's testimony was broadcast on Monday as part of the second of six public hearings on the committee's investigation. During his deposition, Cannon said that he had a conversation with Navarro in mid-November, after the 2020 presidential election, about voter fraud allegations.Cannon said he spoke to Navarro specifically regarding the conspiracy theory that Dominion voting machines were used to flip votes from Trump to Biden. This conspiracy has continually been pushed by Trump-allied lawyers Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, as well as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell. Dominion named all three in a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit.Read Full StoryTrump campaign chief says the Trump team was split into two halves after election night — 'Team Normal' and 'Team Giuliani'Former Trump campaign chief Bill Stepien (left) says he did not mind being called part of "Team Normal," as opposed to "Team Giuliani".Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images; Matias J. Ocner/Miami Herald/Tribune News Service via Getty ImagesFormer Trump campaign chief Bill Stepien says the Trump team was split into two camps after the election – "Team Normal" and "Team Giuliani." The House Select Committee to Investigate January 6 played a clip of Stepien's testimony on Monday during the second of the committee's six public hearings. During his deposition, Stepien was asked if he had pulled back from the Trump camp to preserve his professional reputation. "You didn't want to be associated with some of what you were hearing from the Giuliani team and others that — that sort of stepped in in the wake of your departure?" an unidentified questioner asked Stepien. "I didn't mind being categorized. There were two groups of them. We called them kind of my team and Rudy's team. I — I didn't mind being characterized as being part of Team Normal, as — as reporters, you know, kind of started to do around that point in time," Stepien said.Read Full StoryFired Fox News political editor said television news as entertainment has 'really damaged' Americans' capacity to be 'good citizens'Chris Stirewalt, former Fox News political editor, testifies as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol continues to reveal its findings of a year-long investigation, at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, June 13, 2022.AP Photo/Susan WalshFormer Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt said he was surprised by the internal firestorm that erupted at his former workplace after Fox became the first major news network to call Arizona for President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.Stirewalt, who was fired from Fox in January 2021, testified before the January 6 committee investigating the Capitol riot on Monday, telling lawmakers that former President Donald Trump's chance at victory was virtually zero after most networks called the election for Biden on November 7, 2020.Trump was reportedly enraged that Fox News's decision desk called the swing state of Arizona for Biden before most other outlets did the same, but Stirewalt said he was confident in his team's work. Biden ultimately won the state by about 11,000 votes.But what Stirewalt wasn't expecting was the wave of backlash at Fox News that followed the accurate projection. Stirewalt spoke to NPR's David Folkenflik following his Monday testimony, telling the outlet that people close to Trump were hammering Fox executives and anchors to take back their Arizona call. The ordeal left Stirewalt disillusioned about the state of network news in the US, he told the outlet.READ FULL STORYWhite House lawyer asked John Eastman a day after January 6: 'Are you out of your effing mind'Eric D. Herschmann answers a question from a senator during impeachment proceedings against then-President Donald Trump in January 2020.Senate Television via Getty ImagesTrump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann confronted a conservative lawyer who pushed Trump's election lies, the day after the Capitol riot, according to a taped deposition the January 6 committee released on Monday."I said to him, 'Are you out of your effing mind,'" Herschmann told the committee about his conversation with Eastman. "'I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth for now on: orderly transition.'"Eastman was closely involved in then-President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including a push to get Vice President Mike Pence to either delay or unilaterally overturn a state's results on January 6.Read Full StoryThere's an 'obvious explanation' for Trump's loss in Pennsylvania — and it's not voter fraud, Barr saysFormer Attorney General Bill Barr says then-President Donald Trump did not have a "good idea" about what the roles of the DOJ and the President were.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer Attorney General Bill Barr laid out his frank assessment of former President Donald Trump's election loss in Pennsylvania during Monday's House Select Committee hearing — and it wasn't voter fraud."I think once you actually look at the votes, there's a [sic] obvious explanation," Barr said of Trump's election fraud conspiracy theories. "For example, in Pennsylvania, Trump ran weaker than the Republican ticket generally. He ran weaker than two of the state candidates. He ran weaker than the congressional delegation running for federal Congress."Trump campaign manager says why he quitThen-Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien alongside then-US President Donald Trump on August 28, 2020.Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien said he quit his high-profile job because he felt what unfolded after the 2020 presidential election night was not "honest or professional."He described a Trump campaign that was becoming increasingly divided because Trump chose to use baseless allegations to claim he hadn't lost the 2020 election.Read Full StoryBarr said dealing with 'bogus' 2020 voting fraud claims was like 'playing Whac-a-Mole'Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former President Donald TrumpDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesBill Barr said that dealing with baseless claims of voter fraud from Donald Trump's team was like "playing Whac-a-Mole," in testimony played Monday by the House select committee.Barr described dealing with an "avalanche" of false voter fraud claims from Trump and allies like Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who became the campaign's primary peddlers of election fraud claims.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani was 'apparently inebriated' when advising Trump on election nightRudy Giuliani.Jacquelyn Martin/APTrump rejected his campaign advisors' guidance on election night in 2020 and instead relied on counsel from his former personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who was apparently drunk, Rep. Liz Cheney said Monday.Campaign aides were advising Trump that the race was too close to call in key battlegrounds, but Trump took Giuliani's advice and just claimed he'd won in an early morning speech.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani pushed Trump to prematurely declare victory on election nightFormer New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani looks on as then-President Donald Trump speaks.Joshua Roberts/Getty ImagesFormer New York Rudy Giuliani pushed then-President Donald Trump to prematurely declare victory on election night 2020, a group of former top Trump aides testified.Bill Stepien, Trump's final 2020 campaign manager, testified to the House January 6 committee that he urged Trump to strike a measured tone and not to declare victory while votes were being counted."Ballots were still being counted, ballots were still going to be counted for days, and it was far too early to be making any proclamation like that," Stepien testified in a previous deposition that was partially aired on Monday.But Trump rejected the calls of caution and in the early morning after the election did exactly what some of his aides told him not to do."Frankly, we did win this election," Trump declared at the White House.Read Full StoryFox News' early call for Arizona takes center state at second hearingImages of Fox News personalities appear outside News Corporation headquarters in New York on July 31, 2021.AP Photo/Ted ShaffreyAs the January 6 select committee honed in on Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, Monday's hearing started off with pre-taped depositions of former White House officials on their incensed reaction to Fox News calling Arizona for then-candidate Joe Biden.Fox News had just introduced a new methodology to its decision desk, which its director, Arnon Mishkin, explained to Insider ahead of Election Day. The network called Arizona before other major TV outlets, and ultimately proved correct in its decision.Chris Stirewalt, a former Fox News political editor, described the network's decision desk as "the best in the business" in his testimony.The network's new strategy included surveying upwards of 100,000 Americans ahead of Election Day to see where people were voting by mail or in person, and using that large dataset to make sense of the returns on election night. That allowed Fox to have an assessment of how many remaining votes would be by mail and how those who intended to vote by mail indicated they would vote."We already knew Trump's chances were small and getting smaller based on what we'd seen," Stirewalt said.The second public hearing is due to start Monday morning. Here's who to expect.The former Fox News editor Chris Stirewalt being interviewed on CNN in September 2021.CNNThe second public hearing by the committee is due to start around 10:30 a.m. ET on Monday.Witnesses include the former Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt and the GOP election lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg.Stirewalt's team correctly called Arizona for Joe Biden in the 2020 election before other networks did so, and subsequently became the target of Trump supporters.He was fired as a Fox News political editor on January 19, 2021, and now works for NewsNation. It is not clear what the committee plans to ask Stirewalt.The committee said in a Monday morning update that Bill Stepien, Trump's former campaign manager, was no longer able to appear due to a family emergency. It said Stepien's lawyer would make a statement on the record instead.Rep. Jamie Raskin declines to share evidence that GOP lawmakers asked Trump for pardons after Capitol riot, says details will come 'in due course'Rep. Jamie Raskin on CNN on Sunday night.YouTube/CNNJanuary 6 committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin dodged questions from CNN for evidence that Republican lawmakers asked then-President Donald Trump for pardons after the Capitol riot.He said the details would emerge later.When asked by CNN's Dana Bash if he had evidence, Raskin responded: "It is multiple members of Congress, as the vice-chair said at our opening hearing, and all in due course the details will surface," Raskin said, referring to Cheney.When asked again if he had evidence, he said: "Everything we're doing is documented by evidence ... Everything that we are doing is based on facts and this is a bipartisan investigation which is determined to ferret out all of the facts of what happened."Read Full Story GOP governor says many Republicans are quietly seeking an 'off-ramp' from Trump's bogus election-fraud claimsArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson on June 22, 2021.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said that much of the Republican Party is looking for an "off-ramp" from former President Donald Trump's bogus theory that the 2020 election was stolen. Speaking to Fox News host Bret Baier, Hutchinson said Sunday that Trump is "politically and morally responsible" for much of the January 6 riot at the Capitol. He suggested that many Republicans are looking for alternative leadership as Trump continues to falsely insist on the claim that inspired the riot — that there was widespread election fraud. "For him to continue to push that theory, I agree is the wrong direction for the Republican Party," said Hutchinson. "I think there's many Republicans that are looking for an off-ramp, new opportunities … to find leadership in the future."He did not specify whether he meant ordinary GOP voters, or elected officials, mainly of whom have vocally endorsed Trump's claims.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee members says panel has uncovered enough 'credible evidence' to ask the DOJ to indict TrumpLawmakers on the House January 6 committee will air the inquiry's findings during a public hearing Thursday.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe members of the House panel investigating the Capitol riot on Sunday said that the panel has uncovered enough evidence for the Department of Justice to mull a criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump over his efforts to invalidate President Joe Biden's electoral win, according to The Associated Press.Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, who sits on the panel and also leads the House Intelligence Committee, said that he wanted to see the department examine Trump's efforts in seeking to halt the certification of Biden's victory."I would like to see the Justice Department investigate any credible allegation of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump," he said on ABC News on Sunday. "There are certain actions, parts of these different lines of effort to overturn the election that I don't see evidence the Justice Department is investigating."Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee to focus on Trump's 'dereliction of duty' during Capitol riot at next public hearing, committee member saysUS President Donald Trump speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House on January 6, 2021, in Washington, DC.Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty ImagesThe upcoming January 6 committee hearing will focus on a deep dive that former President Donald Trump knew he lost the election but still tried to overturn it and his "dereliction of duty," a committee member said. Democratic Rep. Elaine Lurie told NBC's "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd that the upcoming hearing will show how Trump tried to pressure local, state and federal officials to overturn the election, after baselessly claiming it was rigged against him. "We've pieced together a very comprehensive tick-tock timeline of what he did," The Virginia lawmaker said.Lurie told Todd that it's more accurate to say that the committee now has a timeline of what Trump was not doing before and during the insurrection than what he was doing. "There is a gap there that we have tried through these witnesses, we've interviewed a thousand witnesses and a lot of people who work directly in the White House for the president, in his immediate vicinity throughout the day," she said."So we've pieced together a very comprehensive tick-tock timeline of what he did."Read Full StoryRepublican Gov. Asa Hutchinson calls out Trump, says the former president is 'politically, morally responsible' for the Capitol riotArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson labeled former President Donald Trump as "politically" and "morally responsible" for the Capitol attack.His comments come after the kick-off of the Jan. 6 committee hearings last week, where officials started sharing their findings of the events of that day — where pro-Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol building in an attempt to halt the certification of President Joe Biden. During an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," Hutchinson called the hearings "an important review," however, the GOP governor doesn't think Trump is criminally responsible for the insurrection. "Trump is politically, morally responsible for much of what has happened, but in terms of criminal liability, I think the committee has a long way to go to establish that," Hutchinson said.    A lawyer for Pence told him the day before January 6 that not certifying the election would lead to a loss in court: reportDonald Trump and former US Vice President Mike Pence in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House on April 2, 2020, in Washington, DC.MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty ImagesA lawyer for former Vice President Mike Pence told him the day before the Capitol Riot that following former President Donald Trump's request to certify the election for him would eventually fail in court, according to a memo obtained by Politico. Congress was in the process of certifying the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021, when Trump supporters who falsely believed the election had been rigged stormed the US Capitol. Trump had previously asked Pence to certify the election in his favor, but attorney Greg Jacob told Pence in a memo that doing so would break multiple provisions of the Electoral Count Act. According to Politico, in the memo, Jacob said the move could fail in the courts or put America in a political crisis where Pence would find himself "in an isolated standoff against both houses of Congress … with no neutral arbiter available to break the impasse."The attorney will testify publicly in front of the House committee investigating the Capitol riots this week, however, his letter has been known to the committee for months, Politico reported. Read Full StoryGiuliani defends Trump after January 6 committee points to his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential electionRudy Giuliani, attorney for US President Donald Trump, speaks at the White House in Washington, DC, on July 1, 2020Jim Watson/Getty ImagesRudy Giuliani, former advisor and personal lawyer to Donald Trump, claimed in an episode of his podcast that the former president had "nothing to do with" the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. The episode, released Saturday, was a response to the House select committee's televised hearings related to the investigation into the events of Jan. 6, 2021. On Thursday, the committee released findings that indicated the events of the day were an attempted coup intended to keep former president Trump in power. READ FULL STORYLaura Ingraham says the Jan 6 hearings 'bombed' despite reeling in nearly 20 million views compared to Fox's 3 millionPresident Donald Trump gives Laura Ingraham a kiss after inviting her on stage during the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit at the Palm Beach County Convention Center, Saturday, Dec. 21, 2019, in West Palm Beach, Fla.Luis M. Alvarez/APFox News host Laura Ingraham claimed the January 6 Committee hearing on Thursday "bombed," despite reeling in nearly 20 million viewers. Fox was the only major news outlet not to carry the hearing live on Thursday evening, which was the House Select Committee on January 6's first major public hearing about the Capitol attack, the efforts to overturn the election, and what then-President Donald Trump knew before and during the attack.Committee members revealed that Trump and his allies staged "an attempted coup" and funded a misinformation campaign that "provoked the violence on January 6." They also said that Ivanka Trump "accepted" the attorney general's opinion that there was no election fraud, and that several Republican congressmen asked for pardons following January 6. Ingraham's claim that the hearings "bombed" came as she responded to criticism from The View's Joy Behar."Fox News did not carry the January 6 Committee's live hearings last night. Shocker isn't it? But they still had plenty to say about it," Behar said. "The usual suspects, Tucker [Carlson] and Ingraham, dusted off their greatest hits, calling it a witch hunt, saying it's political revenge from Pelosi, and downplayed what happened on the 6th."Behar added: "There were no commercial breaks last night on either show. So what does that tell you? That Rupert Murdoch is so desperate to keep his viewers away from the hearing, along with those two, that he is willing to lose millions of dollars." Ingraham swiped back at Behar in a tweet, claiming to have had "two commercial breaks Thursday night." According to PolitiFact, Carlson's and Hannity's shows had no commercial breaks, whereas Ingraham "went to commercial a few times." Read Full StoryWhat is the potential penalty if someone is convicted of 'seditious conspiracy'Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio leaves the D.C. Central Detention Facility on January 14, 2022.Evelyn Hockstein/ReutersEnrique Tarrio and four other members of the Proud Boys were charged this week with seditious conspiracy in what one constitutional expert calls a "textbook case" of sedition, but the charges themselves face an uphill battle in court.Seditious conspiracy, sometimes referred to as "sedition," is law that first originated in 1789 to prosecute speech critical of the government. Read Full StoryThe public hearings resume on Monday, June 13, at 10 a.m. ETLawmakers on the House January 6 committee will air the inquiry's findings during a public hearing Thursday.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe public hearings for the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection resume on Monday, June 13, at 10 a.m. ET.Catch up on our takeaways of the biggest moments from the first hearing on Thursday, June 9, 2022, and check out the full schedule.Read Full StoryRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Tweets at Matt Gaetz, Lauren Boebert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene wanting to know if they asked for pardons after January 6Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.Drew Angerer/Getty ImageIn a Friday tweet storm, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked several of her fellow representatives if they'd asked the White House for a pardon following the January 6 attack.Her remarks came the day after the January 6 House select committee aired its first public hearing — in which GOP co-chair Rep. Liz Cheney alleged that several members of Congress asked for pardons after the insurrection.Read Full StoryMore than 19 million people watched first public hearingFormer US President Donald Trump appears on a screen during a hearing by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 9, 2022 in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMore than 19 million people watched the first public hearing of the congressional committee investigating the January 6 insurrection, The New York Times reported Friday, citing preliminary figures from ratings company Nielsen.The actual number is higher, The Times noted, as the preliminary tally does not include all networks and streaming services that aired the hearing.The Thursday hearing aired from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. on broadcast channels and cable news networks — but not on Fox News, which elected to stick its usual programming.Trump calls William Barr a 'weak and frightened' AG after his January 6 testimonyFormer Attorney General Bill Barr says then-President Donald Trump did not have a "good idea" about what the roles of the DOJ and the President were.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump on Friday lashed out at William Barr, calling him a "weak and frightened" attorney general and a "coward" after the House January 6 committee aired his testimony debunking Trump's false claims of widespread election fraud.During Thursday's public hearing, the committee played recorded testimony from Barr in a closed-door interview saying that he didn't agree that the election was "stolen" and that he told Trump the idea was "bullshit."Trump attacked Barr, his former attorney general, on his social-media platform, Truth Social, saying he "was always being 'played' and threatened by the Democrats and was scared stiff of being Impeached." Read Full StoryTrump says Ivanka Trump doesn't understand elections after she rejected his stolen 2020 vote claimIvanka Trump.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump said his daughter Ivanka Trump doesn't understand elections after she testified that there was no fraud in the 2020 election.The committee aired her testimony on Thursday, where she said that she "accepted" former Attorney General Bill Barr finding no evidence that the vote was stolen."Ivanka Trump was not involved in looking at, or studying, Election results," Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday. "She had long since checked out and was, in my opinion, only trying to be respectful to Bill Barr and his position as Attorney General (he sucked!)."Read Full StoryTrump attacks House committee, repeats bogus fraud claims after hearing blamed him for insurrectionFormer President Donald Trump speaks at a rally on May 28, 2022 in Casper, Wyoming.Chet Strange/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump responded to the first public hearing by criticizing the House committee and repeating his fake voter fraud claims."So the Unselect Committee of political HACKS refuses to play any of the many positive witnesses and statements, refuses to talk of the Election Fraud and Irregularities that took place on a massive scale," he shared on Truth Social early Friday morning. He added: "Our Country is in such trouble!" Read Full StoryFox News hosts bragged about not airing the hearing live, and called it a 'smear campaign' against TrumpTucker Carlson on his show on June 9, 2022.Fox NewsFox News' prime-time shows refused to carry Thursday's hearing, with host Tucker Carlson bragging about the network's decision."The whole thing is insulting. In fact, it's deranged," Carlson said. "And we're not playing along.""This is the only hour on an American news channel that will not be carrying their propaganda live. They are lying, and we are not going to help them do it," he said, apparently referring to those investigating the riot.Host Sean Hannity on his own show called the hearing a "multi-hour Democratic fundraiser," without offering any evidence, and a "made-for-TV smear campaign against President Trump featuring sliced and diced video that fits their pre-determined political narrative."And host Laura Ingraham painted the hearing as boring, saying: "In the end, this was nearly two hours of an unsuccessful, laborious attempt to connect the dots back to Trump, to Trump to a coup that never happened."Read Full StoryTrump's spokesperson responded to the scathing Jan. 6 hearing by pumping out voter-fraud conspiracy theoriesLiz Harrington, a spokesperson for former President Donald Trump, tweeted out election fraud disinformation during the Thursday's hearing.She tweeted misleading claims that she said suggested voter fraud in some swing states during the 2020 election, and said: "They didn't want to talk about voter fraud then, and they don't want to talk about it now."She did not engage directly with what was said at the hearings.Read Full StorySeveral Republicans including Scott Perry sought pardons from Trump after the Capitol riot, Liz Cheney saysRep. Liz Cheney listens during the House select committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack on July 27, 2021.AP Photo/ Andrew Harnik)Rep. Liz Cheney, the vice chair of the House January 6 committee, said at Thursday's hearing that several Republican members of Congress asked for a pardon from then-President Donald Trump after the Capitol riot.She called out Rep. Scott Perry in particular, saying: "Representative Perry contacted the White House in the weeks after January 6 to seek a presidential pardon.""Multiple other Republican congressmen also sought presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election," she added.Read Full StoryRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says watching the January 6 hearings made all the trauma from the Capitol riot come 'rushing back into the body'Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said watching the first televised hearing on the Capitol riot took her back to the traumatic experience of being there on the day. Ocasio-Cortez posted a video of the hearing, where scenes of violence and sights of Trump supporters flooding the Capitol were being played. "Good Lord. The way it all comes rushing back into the body. It's like it's that day all over again," she wrote. Read Full StoryA Proud Boy told the January 6 panel that membership in the organization 'tripled' after Trump told them to 'stand back and stand by'Enrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, speaks to Black Lives Matters supporters during a commemoration of the death of George Floyd in Miami on May 25, 2021.Eva Marie Uzcategui Trinkl//GettyA high-ranking member of the Proud Boys told the January 6 panel that membership in the organization "tripled" after former President Donald Trump told them to "stand back and stand by." Trump made the comments during a debate in September 2020. The former president was asked to disavow white supremacist groups and urge them to "stand down." But instead of doing so, Trump said: "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by." A clip of an interview with Proud Boys member Jeremy Bertino aired during the televised January 6 hearings on Thursday night. He said Trump's comments were a watershed moment for the group. Bertino was asked if the number of Proud Boys members increased specifically after Trump's comments. "Exponentially," Bertino said. "I'd say, tripled, probably. With the potential for a lot more eventually." Read Full StoryNew video from the Capitol riot shows dozens of staffers fleeing Rep. Kevin McCarthy's office in a panic as rioters clashed violently with copsHouse Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe January 6 panel released a never-before-seen video from inside House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's office during the January 6 Capitol riot.In the video, the dozens of frantic staffers are seen pouring into the hallways of Rep. McCarthy's office.The staffers appeared to be fleeing McCarthy's office as a radio transmission signaled that people would be moving through the tunnels of the Capitol building. The House committee played the video during the first of six televised January 6 hearings. It pinpoints 2:28 p.m. — as violent clashes between rioters and police officers take place outside the Capitol, McCarthy staffers can be seen running through the hallway of his chambers. Read Full StoryEx-DC cop beaten by Jan. 6 rioters says it's time for America to 'wake the fuck up' to danger Trump posesFormer DC Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered a heart attack during the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, said on Friday that people need to "wake the fuck up" to the danger former President Donald Trump poses following the House select committee playing videos of what unfolded on that day.Read Full Story'I was slipping in people's blood,' says Capitol Police officerU.S. Capitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards, who was the first law enforcement officer injured by rioters storming the Capitol grounds on January 6, testifies during a hearing by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 09, 2022 in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesCapitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards said it looked to her like an "absolute war zone" on January 6, 2021, when supporters of former President Trump attacked the US Capitol, forcing officers to engage in "hours of hand-to-hand combat" beyond the scope of any law enforcement training.Edwards, who was injured in the attack, told members of the House select committee on Thursday, "I can just remember my breath catching in my throat" while looking at the "carnage" and "chaos" of the riot scene."I couldn't believe my eyes," she told the committee. "There were officers on the ground. You know, they were bleeding, they were throwing up…I mean I saw friends with blood all over their faces. I was slipping in people's blood. You know, I was catching people as they fell."Read Full StoryEx-Proud Boys leader says he'd wished he'd sold 'stand back and standby' t-shirts after Trump's debate commentEnrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, speaks to Black Lives Matters supporters during a commemoration of the death of George Floyd in Miami on May 25, 2021.Eva Marie Uzcategui Trinkl//GettyAt the first of six public hearings planned for this month, the House committee displayed video of an interview with a Proud Boy who attributed Trump's comment to exponential membership growth in the far-right group.In another interview, former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio cracked a wry smile and said he regretted not selling t-shirts brandished with the words "Stand back and stand by." "One of the vendors on my page actually beat me to it, but I wish I would've made a 'stand back stand by' t-shirt," Tarrio said in his interview with the House committee.Read Full StoryJared Kushner testified that he thought the White House counsel's threat to resign was only 'whining'President Donald Trump listens as Jared Kushner speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on September 11, 2020.Andrew Harnik/AP Photo—Bloomberg (@business) June 10, 2022 Former Trump White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner testified in front of the January 6 House Committee that he thought White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's threat to resign was nothing more than "whining.""I know that him and the team were always saying, 'We're gonna resign, we're not gonna be here' if this happens, that happens," Kushner, who is also the former president's son-in-law, said during an on-camera deposition Thursday. "I kind of took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you."Read Full StoryLiz Cheney blasts Republicans for supporting Trump: 'There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain'U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, Chairman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, Vice Chairwoman Rep. Liz Cheney, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger take part in a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 09, 2022 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesGOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming on Thursday evening issued members of her party a stark warning over their continued support of former President Donald Trump."I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible: there will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain," Cheney, vice chair of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, said during the panel's first hearing.Read Full StoryWhite House aides tried to limit access to Trump knowing he was 'too dangerous to be left alone' after his election loss, Cheney saysRep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) during a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 9, 2022.Drew Angerer/Getty Images"The White House staff knew that President Trump was willing to entertain and use conspiracy theories to achieve his ends," Rep. Cheney said during opening remarks at the first public hearing investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol."They knew that the president needed to be cut off from all of those who had encouraged him.  They knew that President Donald Trump was too dangerous to be left alone," she added.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 panel played footage of former AG William Barr calling Trump's election claims 'bullshit'Attorney General William Barr speaks during a news conference, Monday, Dec. 21, 2020 at the Justice Department in WashingtonMichael Reynolds/APFollowing the 2020 presidential election, then-Attorney General William Barr told Donald Trump that his claims of widespread election fraud were "bullshit" and entirely unsupported by evidence, it was revealed during the first January 6 committee public hearing.Video of Barr recounting his remarks to Trump in a closed-door interview with the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol was played on June 9, 2022, during the public hearing. Barr said he spoke with Trump on at least three occasions between November and December 2020, and he described Trump's claims of election malfeasance as "crazy stuff" and said the falsehoods were influencing the public, doing a "great, great disservice to the country." Barr credited the timing of his December 2020 resignation, in part, to Trump's baseless election claims. Read Full StoryIvanka Trump 'accepted' DOJ found no fraud that could overturn the 2020 electionIvanka Trump.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesVideo testimony of part of Ivanka Trump's testimony to the January 6 committee was shown during the first public hearing of the investigation into the riots at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.During the clip, Ivanka Trump was asked about then-Attorney General Bill Barr's statement that former President Donald Trump's claims that there was fraud in the 2020 election were incorrect."It affected my perspective," Ivanka Trump told the committee in recorded testimony, aired for the first time on Thursday. "I respect Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he was saying."Read Full StoryLiz Cheney says Trump oversaw a 'sophisticated 7-part plan' to overturn the election and stay in powerU.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) Vice Chairwoman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, delivers remarks during a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 9, 2022.Win McNamee/Getty ImagesRep. Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, said that during these public hearings they would reveal more information about a "seven-part plan" to overturn the 2020 presidential election, led by former President Donald Trump.—CSPAN (@cspan) June 10, 2022Read Full StoryRep. Liz Cheney: Trump backed supporters' call to 'hang Mike Pence'US Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), vice chairwoman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol, arrives for a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 09, 2022 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Win McNamee/Getty ImagesAs a riot unfolded at the US Capitol, former President Donald Trump told aides that his own vice president might deserve to die, Rep. Liz Cheney said Thursday.Cheney, a Wyoming Republican who co-chairs the House panel investigating the January 6 insurrection, made the claim in her opening remarks."Aware of the rioters chants to 'hang Mike Pence,'" Cheney said, "the president responded with this sentiment: 'Maybe our supporters have the right idea.' Mike Pence 'deserves it.'"As The New York Times reported last month, two former White House staffers testified before the January 6 committee that Mark Meadows, Trump's ex-chief of staff, told them that he heard the former president make the comment.Read Full StoryJanuary 6 committee chairman Bennie Thompson says hearings will show Trump and his allies mounted 'an attempted coup'—CSPAN (@cspan) June 10, 2022 Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat in his 13th term, recalled his upbringing in the Magnolia State and the nation's history of white supremacist violence, specifically lynching."I'm from a part of the country where people justify the actions of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, and lynching," Thompson said. "I'm reminded of that dark history as I hear voices today try and justify the actions of the insurrections on Jan. 6, 2021."The chairman of the House panel investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol described the rioters as "domestic enemies of the Constitution," and promised that the evidence his panel has collected proves former President Donald Trump and his allies attempted a coup d'etat."Donald Trump was at the center of this conspiracy, and ultimately, Donald Trump, the President of the United States, spurred a mob of domestic enemies of the Constitution to march down the Capitol and subvert American democracy," Rep. Bennie Thompson said at the start of Thursday night's prime-time hearings.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee chair will say 'democracy remains in danger'From left to right, January 6 Select Committee members Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House panel investigating the January 6 attack, will say tonight that the American people deserve answers about the insurrection."We can't sweep what happened under the rug," Thompson says in early excerpts of his opening statement. "The American people deserve answers. So I come before you this evening not as a Democrat, but as an American who swore an oath to defend the Constitution."The House Select Committee on January 6 will have its first major public hearing tonight, kicking off a series of public hearings about the attack, efforts to overturn the election, and what then-President Donald Trump was aware of in the lead up to it.Thompson will add that American democracy "remains in danger.""... Our work must do much more than just look backwards," Thompson will say. "Because our democracy remains in danger. The conspiracy to thwart the will of the people is not over. There are those in this country who thirst for power but have no love or respect for what makes America great: devotion to the Constitution, allegiance to the rule of law, our shared journey to build a more perfect Union."Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, is facing a defining career moment after nearly three decades in Congress. Thompson told Insider's Camila DeChalus that the committee is his "signature work in the United States House of Representatives."Bennie Thompson is poised to take center stage as Jan. 6 hearings start after 29 years in CongressHouse Homeland Security Committee Chair Benny Thompson (D-MS) listens as U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) discusses the formation of a select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol during a news conference in Washington, U.S., July 1, 2021.Jonathan Ernst/ReutersRep. Bennie Thompson is the chairman of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 insurrection. He has been in Congress for 29 years but views this investigation as his "signature work.""There's a lot of other pieces of legislation that basically alter the trajectory of so many people in my district, in this country, as well as other pieces of legislation, but nothing compares to the importance of this committee and why I value its work as my signature work in the United States House of Representatives," he told Insider's Camila DeChalus in a May interview.In the first public hearing of the January 6 committee, Thompson will take center stage.Read Full StorySen. Ted Cruz says watching paint dry would be more productive than tuning into a single second of the January 6 committee's first public hearingSenator Ted Cruz (R-TX) holds up a cellphone during the confirmation for Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on the third day before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on October 14, 2020 in Washington, DC.ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/POOL/AFP via Getty ImagesRepublican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas offered up three things he'd rather do Thursday night than sit through any part of the January 6 committee's highly anticipated prime-time hearing. "I've got to mow my lawn. Or comb my hair. Or maybe just watch the paint dry on the walls," Cruz said of what he considered better ways to invest one's time than validating the existence of  "a political campaign ad for the Democrats." Cruz bashed the ongoing House investigation as political theater meant to distract a recession-wary populace from all the ways he said President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats have failed them. "From the opening gavel to the close of the hearing, one hundred percent of their endeavor is a political Hail Mary pass," Cruz told Insider in the tunnels beneath the Senate chamber. "The American people are deeply unhappy with the disaster of the left-wing policy agenda we've seen for the last two years." Read Full StoryDOJ lawyers expect transcripts from the 1,000 January 6 committee witnesses to be made public in SeptemberTrump supporters clash with police and security forces as in the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.Brent Stirton/Getty ImagesA Justice Department lawyer revealed Thursday that transcripts of the 1,000 interviews conducted as part of the House January 6 committee's investigation into the Capitol attack will be made public in September. It would be an unprecedented release of documents that could shed new light on the January 6, 2021 insurrection.The revelation came during a pretrial hearing for former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio and four other members of the far-right group who were charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with their alleged role in planning and participating in the Capitol siege."The committee will release the transcripts in early September and a report of the committee's findings will be released around the same time," Assistant US Attorney Jason McCullough told a judge.Read Full StoryThe first public hearing held by House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection starts at 8 p.m. ET. Catch up on what you need to know ahead of the hearing.Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Mississippi), left, listens as Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming) speaks during the House select committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2021. Washington Metropolitan Police Department officer Michael Fanone is at center.Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via AP, PoolThe House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection is holding a much-anticipated public hearing Thursday night.The nine-member panel, chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, has spent months interviewing witnesses and examining phone and email records to try to get to the bottom of former President Donald Trump and his allies' efforts to overturn the 2020 election and prevent President Joe Biden from taking office.The committee, which includes Republican Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, is expected to hold a half-dozen public hearings in June.Here's what you need to know ahead of the broadcast at 8 p.m. ET:How to watch the hearingsThe key witnesses who are likely to testifyWhat to expectSources say the evidence will put Trump "at the center" of the eventsMeet the lawmakers and staff leading the investigationAt least 862 people have now been arrested for their actions on January 6More than 300 people have already pleaded guiltyAn oral history of the insurrection from 34 people who were thereHow the US Capitol riot led to Trump's second impeachmentLiz Cheney's break from GOP leadership on the investigationRead the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: dealsSource: nytJun 15th, 2022

Jan. 6 live updates: Mike Lindell says he offered to publicly testify before the January 6 committee but they didn"t want to talk to him

The panel is investigating the Capitol riot and the role former President Trump and his allies played in trying to overturn the 2020 election. Lawmakers on the House January 6 committee.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images The House committee investigating the Capitol riot held its second hearing on Monday. The next hearing is scheduled for Thursday, June 16, after Wednesday's hearing was postponed. Meanwhile, the committee released a preview of what to expect during Thursday's hearing. Mike Lindell says he offered to publicly testify before the January 6 committee but they didn't want to talk to himMike Lindell, political activist and CEO of MyPillow, attends a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump at the Delaware County Fairgrounds on April 23, 2022 in Delaware, Ohio.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMyPillow CEO Mike Lindell says that he tried to get a spot to testify before the January 6 committee and show them his "evidence" to prove former President Donald Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud, but they did not want to talk to him. Lindell made this statement during an appearance on Steve Bannon's podcast, "War Room: Pandemic."Bannon asked Lindell if the committee had reached out to him to go through "all the voluminous material" he has about the 2020 election. "No, they haven't. And it's really — that's sad, too, because I've offered. I'd love to come to your committee as long as you nationally televise it, Ms. Pelosi," Lindell replied, referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.Read Full StorySen. Raphael Warnock says that January 6 Capitol attack shows that 'our democracy is in peril'Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia speaks to members of the press after a Senate Democratic Caucus meeting on January 18, 2022 in Washington, DC.Alex Wong/Getty ImagesSen. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat in Georgia, told NPR that democracy in the US is at risk.Warnock, who is running for reelection against Republican Herchel Walker, serves as Georgia's first Black senator since his election in 2021. He is also a pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the church where Martin Luther King Jr. attended."Democracy is hard work. Democracy is not a noun, it's a verb. And over the course of time, our democracy expands. It gets a little closer towards those ideals. There are moments when it contracts, but even contractions open the possibility for new birth and new hope," Warnock said to NPR's Mary Louise Kelly.Warnock said that the January 6 Capitol attack, in which hundreds of rioters breached the US Capitol in an effort to overturn the 2020 election, demonstrates the troubled state of democracy.Read Full StoryTrump might have to be prosecuted to save American democracy, an expert on authoritarianism arguesFormer President Donald Trump speaks on May 28, 2022 in Casper, Wyoming.Chet Strange/Getty ImagesRuth Ben-Ghiat spends a lot of time thinking about authoritarianism. An historian at New York University, she is an expert on the rise of fascism in Italy and, most recently, author of the the book, "Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present," tracing the erosion of democracy from Russia to the United States of America.She is keenly focused on what happens when those in power lose their grip on it."The authoritarian playbook has no chapter on failure," Ben-Ghiat wrote in a November 2020 piece for The Washington Post. "Nothing prepares the ruler to see his propaganda ignored and his charismatic hold weaken until his own people turn against him."When, two months later, former President Donald Trump urged his supporters to head over to the US Capitol in a last-ditch effort to overturn the 2020 election, Ben-Ghiat was not altogether surprised. Indeed, she had told people to expect it, arguing: "the rage that will grow in Trump as reality sinks in may make for a rocky transition to Biden's presidency. Americans would do well to be prepared."What stopped a failed insurrection from being a successful coup, she recently told CNN, was — at least in part — one of the lies Trump said on January 6: "I'll be there with you," he told supporters as they prepared to march on Congress.He never showed.In an interview with Insider, Ben-Ghiat expanded on why she thinks January 6 was an "attempted coup," why it did not succeed, and what the future holds.Read Full StoryConservative lawyer John Eastman was told to 'get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer': House January 6 testimonyJohn Eastman testifies before the House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, June 4, 2013.Charles Dharapak/APConservative lawyer John Eastman previously wrote a memo to former Vice President Mike Pence urging him to overturn the 2020 election results.White House lawyer Eric Herschmann told Eastman to "get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer" the day after the Capitol attack."You're going to need it," Herschmann recounted to the January 6 House committee.Read Full StoryTrump releases 12-page statement bashing the Jan. 6 investigation, saying it is merely to stop him from running for president againVideo of former President Donald Trump is played during a hearing by the Select Committee in Washington, DC, on June 13, 2022.Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump released a 12-page statement after the committee's second hearing on Monday.He spent nearly nine pages of the statement pushing bogus claims that the 2020 election was rigged against him.He also bashed the panel and claimed it was trying to stop him from running again in 2024. He has repeatedly teased a 2024 run for president.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani pushes back on testimony that he was drunk on election night 2020, says he was drinking Diet CokeRudy Giuliani.Jacquelyn Martin/APRudy Giuliani responded to claims that he was drunk on election night 2020 in a tweet on Monday night, insisting he "was drinking diet coke all night."The claim about the former New York City mayor's behavior at the White House election night party resurfaced during Monday's January 6 committee hearings.In a taped deposition, former advisor to then-President Donald Trump Jason Miller said: "I think the mayor was definitely intoxicated, but I do not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president, for example."After, Giuliani's media office tweeted about his drinking Diet Coke, attributing the claim to an unnamed "fellow guest."Read Full StoryJan. 6 committee members push back on chair Bennie Thompson's claim that they won't ask the DOJ to indict TrumpRep. Bennie Thompson at the Jan. 6 committee's first public hearing on June 9, 2022.Andrew Harnik/APRep. Bennie Thompson, chair of the January 6 committee, said it was not the group's job to refer Trump or anyone else to the Justice Department for charges."No, that's not our job," Thompson said on Monday, according to CNN. "Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6, what caused it and make recommendations after that."But some committee members disagreed with that approach, showing rare public cracks within the committee."The January 6th Select Committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," tweeted Rep. Liz Cheney, a Republican serving as the committee's vice chair.And Rep. Adam Schiff, a Democrat, told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Monday that he had not seen Thompson's comment but was not aware a decision on referrals had been made yet.Read Full Story Rudy Giuliani continued to make false claims to the January 6 panel that if they gave him 'the paper ballots,' he could overturn Biden's victoryRudy Giuliani continued to make false claims about election fraud during his testimony to the January 6 panel.Jacquelyn Martin/APTrump-allied lawyer Rudy Giuliani continued to make bizarre false claims about voter fraud in the 2020 election during his testimony to the January 6 panel, claiming he had evidence of a "big truck" of fraudulently-cast Biden votes. Giuliani's testimony to the House panel investigating the Capitol riot was aired on Monday, during the second of the committee's six public hearings on January 6. The former New York mayor doubled down on outlandish and unproven election fraud claims. "They saw a big truck bringing in 100,000 ballots in garbage cans, in wastepaper baskets, in cardboard boxes, and in shopping baskets," Giuliani claimed without substantiation.Read Full StoryFormer AG Bill Barr says Trump was fixated on 'crazy' voter fraud allegations and had no interest 'in what the actual facts were'Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former President Donald TrumpDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesFormer Attorney General William Barr said that former President Donald Trump was more fixated on "crazy" allegations of voter fraud than knowing the "actual facts" on the matter.Barr's testimony to the House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol riot was aired on Monday as part of the second of the committee's six public hearings on their investigation.In a videotaped deposition, Barr recounted a meeting with Trump on December 14, 2020. Barr said Trump "went off on a monologue" during the meeting about what he claimed to be "definitive evidence" of election fraud being carried out via the Dominion voting machines.According to Barr, Trump then "held up the report" and claimed it showed "absolute proof that the Dominion machines were rigged." Barr added that Trump then declared that the report meant that he would have a second term.Read Full StoryTrump campaign lawyer says Trump aide Peter Navarro accused him of being 'an agent of the deep state' for questioning baseless Dominion voter fraud conspiracy theoriesFormer Trump aide Peter NavarroAlex Wong/Getty ImagesAlex Cannon, a former Trump campaign lawyer, testified in front of the House Committee on January 6 and said that Trump aide Peter Navarro accused him of being a "deep state" operative because he expressed doubt over Dominion voting machine conspiracy theories. Cannon's testimony was broadcast on Monday as part of the second of six public hearings on the committee's investigation. During his deposition, Cannon said that he had a conversation with Navarro in mid-November, after the 2020 presidential election, about voter fraud allegations.Cannon said he spoke to Navarro specifically regarding the conspiracy theory that Dominion voting machines were used to flip votes from Trump to Biden. This conspiracy has continually been pushed by Trump-allied lawyers Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, as well as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell. Dominion named all three in a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit.Read Full StoryTrump campaign chief says the Trump team was split into two halves after election night — 'Team Normal' and 'Team Giuliani'Former Trump campaign chief Bill Stepien (left) says he did not mind being called part of "Team Normal," as opposed to "Team Giuliani".Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images; Matias J. Ocner/Miami Herald/Tribune News Service via Getty ImagesFormer Trump campaign chief Bill Stepien says the Trump team was split into two camps after the election – "Team Normal" and "Team Giuliani." The House Select Committee to Investigate January 6 played a clip of Stepien's testimony on Monday during the second of the committee's six public hearings. During his deposition, Stepien was asked if he had pulled back from the Trump camp to preserve his professional reputation. "You didn't want to be associated with some of what you were hearing from the Giuliani team and others that — that sort of stepped in in the wake of your departure?" an unidentified questioner asked Stepien. "I didn't mind being categorized. There were two groups of them. We called them kind of my team and Rudy's team. I — I didn't mind being characterized as being part of Team Normal, as — as reporters, you know, kind of started to do around that point in time," Stepien said.Read Full StoryFired Fox News political editor said television news as entertainment has 'really damaged' Americans' capacity to be 'good citizens'Chris Stirewalt, former Fox News political editor, testifies as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol continues to reveal its findings of a year-long investigation, at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, June 13, 2022.AP Photo/Susan WalshFormer Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt said he was surprised by the internal firestorm that erupted at his former workplace after Fox became the first major news network to call Arizona for President Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.Stirewalt, who was fired from Fox in January 2021, testified before the January 6 committee investigating the Capitol riot on Monday, telling lawmakers that former President Donald Trump's chance at victory was virtually zero after most networks called the election for Biden on November 7, 2020.Trump was reportedly enraged that Fox News's decision desk called the swing state of Arizona for Biden before most other outlets did the same, but Stirewalt said he was confident in his team's work. Biden ultimately won the state by about 11,000 votes.But what Stirewalt wasn't expecting was the wave of backlash at Fox News that followed the accurate projection. Stirewalt spoke to NPR's David Folkenflik following his Monday testimony, telling the outlet that people close to Trump were hammering Fox executives and anchors to take back their Arizona call. The ordeal left Stirewalt disillusioned about the state of network news in the US, he told the outlet.READ FULL STORYWhite House lawyer asked John Eastman a day after January 6: 'Are you out of your effing mind'Eric D. Herschmann answers a question from a senator during impeachment proceedings against then-President Donald Trump in January 2020.Senate Television via Getty ImagesTrump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann confronted a conservative lawyer who pushed Trump's election lies, the day after the Capitol riot, according to a taped deposition the January 6 committee released on Monday."I said to him, 'Are you out of your effing mind,'" Herschmann told the committee about his conversation with Eastman. "'I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth for now on: orderly transition.'"Eastman was closely involved in then-President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including a push to get Vice President Mike Pence to either delay or unilaterally overturn a state's results on January 6.Read Full StoryThere's an 'obvious explanation' for Trump's loss in Pennsylvania — and it's not voter fraud, Barr saysFormer Attorney General Bill Barr says then-President Donald Trump did not have a "good idea" about what the roles of the DOJ and the President were.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer Attorney General Bill Barr laid out his frank assessment of former President Donald Trump's election loss in Pennsylvania during Monday's House Select Committee hearing — and it wasn't voter fraud."I think once you actually look at the votes, there's a [sic] obvious explanation," Barr said of Trump's election fraud conspiracy theories. "For example, in Pennsylvania, Trump ran weaker than the Republican ticket generally. He ran weaker than two of the state candidates. He ran weaker than the congressional delegation running for federal Congress."Trump campaign manager says why he quitThen-Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien alongside then-US President Donald Trump on August 28, 2020.Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien said he quit his high-profile job because he felt what unfolded after the 2020 presidential election night was not "honest or professional."He described a Trump campaign that was becoming increasingly divided because Trump chose to use baseless allegations to claim he hadn't lost the 2020 election.Read Full StoryBarr said dealing with 'bogus' 2020 voting fraud claims was like 'playing Whac-a-Mole'Former Attorney General Bill Barr and former President Donald TrumpDrew Angerer/Getty ImagesBill Barr said that dealing with baseless claims of voter fraud from Donald Trump's team was like "playing Whac-a-Mole," in testimony played Monday by the House select committee.Barr described dealing with an "avalanche" of false voter fraud claims from Trump and allies like Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who became the campaign's primary peddlers of election fraud claims.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani was 'apparently inebriated' when advising Trump on election nightRudy Giuliani.Jacquelyn Martin/APTrump rejected his campaign advisors' guidance on election night in 2020 and instead relied on counsel from his former personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who was apparently drunk, Rep. Liz Cheney said Monday.Campaign aides were advising Trump that the race was too close to call in key battlegrounds, but Trump took Giuliani's advice and just claimed he'd won in an early morning speech.Read Full StoryRudy Giuliani pushed Trump to prematurely declare victory on election nightFormer New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani looks on as then-President Donald Trump speaks.Joshua Roberts/Getty ImagesFormer New York Rudy Giuliani pushed then-President Donald Trump to prematurely declare victory on election night 2020, a group of former top Trump aides testified.Bill Stepien, Trump's final 2020 campaign manager, testified to the House January 6 committee that he urged Trump to strike a measured tone and not to declare victory while votes were being counted."Ballots were still being counted, ballots were still going to be counted for days, and it was far too early to be making any proclamation like that," Stepien testified in a previous deposition that was partially aired on Monday.But Trump rejected the calls of caution and in the early morning after the election did exactly what some of his aides told him not to do."Frankly, we did win this election," Trump declared at the White House.Read Full StoryFox News' early call for Arizona takes center state at second hearingImages of Fox News personalities appear outside News Corporation headquarters in New York on July 31, 2021.AP Photo/Ted ShaffreyAs the January 6 select committee honed in on Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, Monday's hearing started off with pre-taped depositions of former White House officials on their incensed reaction to Fox News calling Arizona for then-candidate Joe Biden.Fox News had just introduced a new methodology to its decision desk, which its director, Arnon Mishkin, explained to Insider ahead of Election Day. The network called Arizona before other major TV outlets, and ultimately proved correct in its decision.Chris Stirewalt, a former Fox News political editor, described the network's decision desk as "the best in the business" in his testimony.The network's new strategy included surveying upwards of 100,000 Americans ahead of Election Day to see where people were voting by mail or in person, and using that large dataset to make sense of the returns on election night. That allowed Fox to have an assessment of how many remaining votes would be by mail and how those who intended to vote by mail indicated they would vote."We already knew Trump's chances were small and getting smaller based on what we'd seen," Stirewalt said.The second public hearing is due to start Monday morning. Here's who to expect.The former Fox News editor Chris Stirewalt being interviewed on CNN in September 2021.CNNThe second public hearing by the committee is due to start around 10:30 a.m. ET on Monday.Witnesses include the former Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt and the GOP election lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg.Stirewalt's team correctly called Arizona for Joe Biden in the 2020 election before other networks did so, and subsequently became the target of Trump supporters.He was fired as a Fox News political editor on January 19, 2021, and now works for NewsNation. It is not clear what the committee plans to ask Stirewalt.The committee said in a Monday morning update that Bill Stepien, Trump's former campaign manager, was no longer able to appear due to a family emergency. It said Stepien's lawyer would make a statement on the record instead.Rep. Jamie Raskin declines to share evidence that GOP lawmakers asked Trump for pardons after Capitol riot, says details will come 'in due course'Rep. Jamie Raskin on CNN on Sunday night.YouTube/CNNJanuary 6 committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin dodged questions from CNN for evidence that Republican lawmakers asked then-President Donald Trump for pardons after the Capitol riot.He said the details would emerge later.When asked by CNN's Dana Bash if he had evidence, Raskin responded: "It is multiple members of Congress, as the vice-chair said at our opening hearing, and all in due course the details will surface," Raskin said, referring to Cheney.When asked again if he had evidence, he said: "Everything we're doing is documented by evidence ... Everything that we are doing is based on facts and this is a bipartisan investigation which is determined to ferret out all of the facts of what happened."Read Full Story GOP governor says many Republicans are quietly seeking an 'off-ramp' from Trump's bogus election-fraud claimsArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson on June 22, 2021.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson said that much of the Republican Party is looking for an "off-ramp" from former President Donald Trump's bogus theory that the 2020 election was stolen. Speaking to Fox News host Bret Baier, Hutchinson said Sunday that Trump is "politically and morally responsible" for much of the January 6 riot at the Capitol. He suggested that many Republicans are looking for alternative leadership as Trump continues to falsely insist on the claim that inspired the riot — that there was widespread election fraud. "For him to continue to push that theory, I agree is the wrong direction for the Republican Party," said Hutchinson. "I think there's many Republicans that are looking for an off-ramp, new opportunities … to find leadership in the future."He did not specify whether he meant ordinary GOP voters, or elected officials, mainly of whom have vocally endorsed Trump's claims.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee members says panel has uncovered enough 'credible evidence' to ask the DOJ to indict TrumpLawmakers on the House January 6 committee will air the inquiry's findings during a public hearing Thursday.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe members of the House panel investigating the Capitol riot on Sunday said that the panel has uncovered enough evidence for the Department of Justice to mull a criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump over his efforts to invalidate President Joe Biden's electoral win, according to The Associated Press.Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, who sits on the panel and also leads the House Intelligence Committee, said that he wanted to see the department examine Trump's efforts in seeking to halt the certification of Biden's victory."I would like to see the Justice Department investigate any credible allegation of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump," he said on ABC News on Sunday. "There are certain actions, parts of these different lines of effort to overturn the election that I don't see evidence the Justice Department is investigating."Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee to focus on Trump's 'dereliction of duty' during Capitol riot at next public hearing, committee member saysUS President Donald Trump speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House on January 6, 2021, in Washington, DC.Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty ImagesThe upcoming January 6 committee hearing will focus on a deep dive that former President Donald Trump knew he lost the election but still tried to overturn it and his "dereliction of duty," a committee member said. Democratic Rep. Elaine Lurie told NBC's "Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd that the upcoming hearing will show how Trump tried to pressure local, state and federal officials to overturn the election, after baselessly claiming it was rigged against him. "We've pieced together a very comprehensive tick-tock timeline of what he did," The Virginia lawmaker said.Lurie told Todd that it's more accurate to say that the committee now has a timeline of what Trump was not doing before and during the insurrection than what he was doing. "There is a gap there that we have tried through these witnesses, we've interviewed a thousand witnesses and a lot of people who work directly in the White House for the president, in his immediate vicinity throughout the day," she said."So we've pieced together a very comprehensive tick-tock timeline of what he did."Read Full StoryRepublican Gov. Asa Hutchinson calls out Trump, says the former president is 'politically, morally responsible' for the Capitol riotArkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson labeled former President Donald Trump as "politically" and "morally responsible" for the Capitol attack.His comments come after the kick-off of the Jan. 6 committee hearings last week, where officials started sharing their findings of the events of that day — where pro-Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol building in an attempt to halt the certification of President Joe Biden. During an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," Hutchinson called the hearings "an important review," however, the GOP governor doesn't think Trump is criminally responsible for the insurrection. "Trump is politically, morally responsible for much of what has happened, but in terms of criminal liability, I think the committee has a long way to go to establish that," Hutchinson said.    A lawyer for Pence told him the day before January 6 that not certifying the election would lead to a loss in court: reportDonald Trump and former US Vice President Mike Pence in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House on April 2, 2020, in Washington, DC.MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty ImagesA lawyer for former Vice President Mike Pence told him the day before the Capitol Riot that following former President Donald Trump's request to certify the election for him would eventually fail in court, according to a memo obtained by Politico. Congress was in the process of certifying the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021, when Trump supporters who falsely believed the election had been rigged stormed the US Capitol. Trump had previously asked Pence to certify the election in his favor, but attorney Greg Jacob told Pence in a memo that doing so would break multiple provisions of the Electoral Count Act. According to Politico, in the memo, Jacob said the move could fail in the courts or put America in a political crisis where Pence would find himself "in an isolated standoff against both houses of Congress … with no neutral arbiter available to break the impasse."The attorney will testify publicly in front of the House committee investigating the Capitol riots this week, however, his letter has been known to the committee for months, Politico reported. Read Full StoryGiuliani defends Trump after January 6 committee points to his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential electionRudy Giuliani, attorney for US President Donald Trump, speaks at the White House in Washington, DC, on July 1, 2020Jim Watson/Getty ImagesRudy Giuliani, former advisor and personal lawyer to Donald Trump, claimed in an episode of his podcast that the former president had "nothing to do with" the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. The episode, released Saturday, was a response to the House select committee's televised hearings related to the investigation into the events of Jan. 6, 2021. On Thursday, the committee released findings that indicated the events of the day were an attempted coup intended to keep former president Trump in power. READ FULL STORYLaura Ingraham says the Jan 6 hearings 'bombed' despite reeling in nearly 20 million views compared to Fox's 3 millionPresident Donald Trump gives Laura Ingraham a kiss after inviting her on stage during the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit at the Palm Beach County Convention Center, Saturday, Dec. 21, 2019, in West Palm Beach, Fla.Luis M. Alvarez/APFox News host Laura Ingraham claimed the January 6 Committee hearing on Thursday "bombed," despite reeling in nearly 20 million viewers. Fox was the only major news outlet not to carry the hearing live on Thursday evening, which was the House Select Committee on January 6's first major public hearing about the Capitol attack, the efforts to overturn the election, and what then-President Donald Trump knew before and during the attack.Committee members revealed that Trump and his allies staged "an attempted coup" and funded a misinformation campaign that "provoked the violence on January 6." They also said that Ivanka Trump "accepted" the attorney general's opinion that there was no election fraud, and that several Republican congressmen asked for pardons following January 6. Ingraham's claim that the hearings "bombed" came as she responded to criticism from The View's Joy Behar."Fox News did not carry the January 6 Committee's live hearings last night. Shocker isn't it? But they still had plenty to say about it," Behar said. "The usual suspects, Tucker [Carlson] and Ingraham, dusted off their greatest hits, calling it a witch hunt, saying it's political revenge from Pelosi, and downplayed what happened on the 6th."Behar added: "There were no commercial breaks last night on either show. So what does that tell you? That Rupert Murdoch is so desperate to keep his viewers away from the hearing, along with those two, that he is willing to lose millions of dollars." Ingraham swiped back at Behar in a tweet, claiming to have had "two commercial breaks Thursday night." According to PolitiFact, Carlson's and Hannity's shows had no commercial breaks, whereas Ingraham "went to commercial a few times." Read Full StoryWhat is the potential penalty if someone is convicted of 'seditious conspiracy'Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio leaves the D.C. Central Detention Facility on January 14, 2022.Evelyn Hockstein/ReutersEnrique Tarrio and four other members of the Proud Boys were charged this week with seditious conspiracy in what one constitutional expert calls a "textbook case" of sedition, but the charges themselves face an uphill battle in court.Seditious conspiracy, sometimes referred to as "sedition," is law that first originated in 1789 to prosecute speech critical of the government. Read Full StoryThe public hearings resume on Monday, June 13, at 10 a.m. ETLawmakers on the House January 6 committee will air the inquiry's findings during a public hearing Thursday.Kent Nishimura / Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe public hearings for the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection resume on Monday, June 13, at 10 a.m. ET.Catch up on our takeaways of the biggest moments from the first hearing on Thursday, June 9, 2022, and check out the full schedule.Read Full StoryRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Tweets at Matt Gaetz, Lauren Boebert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene wanting to know if they asked for pardons after January 6Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.Drew Angerer/Getty ImageIn a Friday tweet storm, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked several of her fellow representatives if they'd asked the White House for a pardon following the January 6 attack.Her remarks came the day after the January 6 House select committee aired its first public hearing — in which GOP co-chair Rep. Liz Cheney alleged that several members of Congress asked for pardons after the insurrection.Read Full StoryMore than 19 million people watched first public hearingFormer US President Donald Trump appears on a screen during a hearing by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 9, 2022 in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMore than 19 million people watched the first public hearing of the congressional committee investigating the January 6 insurrection, The New York Times reported Friday, citing preliminary figures from ratings company Nielsen.The actual number is higher, The Times noted, as the preliminary tally does not include all networks and streaming services that aired the hearing.The Thursday hearing aired from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. on broadcast channels and cable news networks — but not on Fox News, which elected to stick its usual programming.Trump calls William Barr a 'weak and frightened' AG after his January 6 testimonyFormer Attorney General Bill Barr says then-President Donald Trump did not have a "good idea" about what the roles of the DOJ and the President were.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump on Friday lashed out at William Barr, calling him a "weak and frightened" attorney general and a "coward" after the House January 6 committee aired his testimony debunking Trump's false claims of widespread election fraud.During Thursday's public hearing, the committee played recorded testimony from Barr in a closed-door interview saying that he didn't agree that the election was "stolen" and that he told Trump the idea was "bullshit."Trump attacked Barr, his former attorney general, on his social-media platform, Truth Social, saying he "was always being 'played' and threatened by the Democrats and was scared stiff of being Impeached." Read Full StoryTrump says Ivanka Trump doesn't understand elections after she rejected his stolen 2020 vote claimIvanka Trump.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump said his daughter Ivanka Trump doesn't understand elections after she testified that there was no fraud in the 2020 election.The committee aired her testimony on Thursday, where she said that she "accepted" former Attorney General Bill Barr finding no evidence that the vote was stolen."Ivanka Trump was not involved in looking at, or studying, Election results," Trump wrote on Truth Social Friday. "She had long since checked out and was, in my opinion, only trying to be respectful to Bill Barr and his position as Attorney General (he sucked!)."Read Full StoryTrump attacks House committee, repeats bogus fraud claims after hearing blamed him for insurrectionFormer President Donald Trump speaks at a rally on May 28, 2022 in Casper, Wyoming.Chet Strange/Getty ImagesFormer President Donald Trump responded to the first public hearing by criticizing the House committee and repeating his fake voter fraud claims."So the Unselect Committee of political HACKS refuses to play any of the many positive witnesses and statements, refuses to talk of the Election Fraud and Irregularities that took place on a massive scale," he shared on Truth Social early Friday morning. He added: "Our Country is in such trouble!" Read Full StoryFox News hosts bragged about not airing the hearing live, and called it a 'smear campaign' against TrumpTucker Carlson on his show on June 9, 2022.Fox NewsFox News' prime-time shows refused to carry Thursday's hearing, with host Tucker Carlson bragging about the network's decision."The whole thing is insulting. In fact, it's deranged," Carlson said. "And we're not playing along.""This is the only hour on an American news channel that will not be carrying their propaganda live. They are lying, and we are not going to help them do it," he said, apparently referring to those investigating the riot.Host Sean Hannity on his own show called the hearing a "multi-hour Democratic fundraiser," without offering any evidence, and a "made-for-TV smear campaign against President Trump featuring sliced and diced video that fits their pre-determined political narrative."And host Laura Ingraham painted the hearing as boring, saying: "In the end, this was nearly two hours of an unsuccessful, laborious attempt to connect the dots back to Trump, to Trump to a coup that never happened."Read Full StoryTrump's spokesperson responded to the scathing Jan. 6 hearing by pumping out voter-fraud conspiracy theoriesLiz Harrington, a spokesperson for former President Donald Trump, tweeted out election fraud disinformation during the Thursday's hearing.She tweeted misleading claims that she said suggested voter fraud in some swing states during the 2020 election, and said: "They didn't want to talk about voter fraud then, and they don't want to talk about it now."She did not engage directly with what was said at the hearings.Read Full StorySeveral Republicans including Scott Perry sought pardons from Trump after the Capitol riot, Liz Cheney saysRep. Liz Cheney listens during the House select committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack on July 27, 2021.AP Photo/ Andrew Harnik)Rep. Liz Cheney, the vice chair of the House January 6 committee, said at Thursday's hearing that several Republican members of Congress asked for a pardon from then-President Donald Trump after the Capitol riot.She called out Rep. Scott Perry in particular, saying: "Representative Perry contacted the White House in the weeks after January 6 to seek a presidential pardon.""Multiple other Republican congressmen also sought presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election," she added.Read Full StoryRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says watching the January 6 hearings made all the trauma from the Capitol riot come 'rushing back into the body'Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said watching the first televised hearing on the Capitol riot took her back to the traumatic experience of being there on the day. Ocasio-Cortez posted a video of the hearing, where scenes of violence and sights of Trump supporters flooding the Capitol were being played. "Good Lord. The way it all comes rushing back into the body. It's like it's that day all over again," she wrote. Read Full StoryA Proud Boy told the January 6 panel that membership in the organization 'tripled' after Trump told them to 'stand back and stand by'Enrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, speaks to Black Lives Matters supporters during a commemoration of the death of George Floyd in Miami on May 25, 2021.Eva Marie Uzcategui Trinkl//GettyA high-ranking member of the Proud Boys told the January 6 panel that membership in the organization "tripled" after former President Donald Trump told them to "stand back and stand by." Trump made the comments during a debate in September 2020. The former president was asked to disavow white supremacist groups and urge them to "stand down." But instead of doing so, Trump said: "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by." A clip of an interview with Proud Boys member Jeremy Bertino aired during the televised January 6 hearings on Thursday night. He said Trump's comments were a watershed moment for the group. Bertino was asked if the number of Proud Boys members increased specifically after Trump's comments. "Exponentially," Bertino said. "I'd say, tripled, probably. With the potential for a lot more eventually." Read Full StoryNew video from the Capitol riot shows dozens of staffers fleeing Rep. Kevin McCarthy's office in a panic as rioters clashed violently with copsHouse Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty ImagesThe January 6 panel released a never-before-seen video from inside House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy's office during the January 6 Capitol riot.In the video, the dozens of frantic staffers are seen pouring into the hallways of Rep. McCarthy's office.The staffers appeared to be fleeing McCarthy's office as a radio transmission signaled that people would be moving through the tunnels of the Capitol building. The House committee played the video during the first of six televised January 6 hearings. It pinpoints 2:28 p.m. — as violent clashes between rioters and police officers take place outside the Capitol, McCarthy staffers can be seen running through the hallway of his chambers. Read Full StoryEx-DC cop beaten by Jan. 6 rioters says it's time for America to 'wake the fuck up' to danger Trump posesFormer DC Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone, who suffered a heart attack during the January 6 attack on the US Capitol, said on Friday that people need to "wake the fuck up" to the danger former President Donald Trump poses following the House select committee playing videos of what unfolded on that day.Read Full Story'I was slipping in people's blood,' says Capitol Police officerU.S. Capitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards, who was the first law enforcement officer injured by rioters storming the Capitol grounds on January 6, testifies during a hearing by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 09, 2022 in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesCapitol Police Officer Caroline Edwards said it looked to her like an "absolute war zone" on January 6, 2021, when supporters of former President Trump attacked the US Capitol, forcing officers to engage in "hours of hand-to-hand combat" beyond the scope of any law enforcement training.Edwards, who was injured in the attack, told members of the House select committee on Thursday, "I can just remember my breath catching in my throat" while looking at the "carnage" and "chaos" of the riot scene."I couldn't believe my eyes," she told the committee. "There were officers on the ground. You know, they were bleeding, they were throwing up…I mean I saw friends with blood all over their faces. I was slipping in people's blood. You know, I was catching people as they fell."Read Full StoryEx-Proud Boys leader says he'd wished he'd sold 'stand back and standby' t-shirts after Trump's debate commentEnrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, speaks to Black Lives Matters supporters during a commemoration of the death of George Floyd in Miami on May 25, 2021.Eva Marie Uzcategui Trinkl//GettyAt the first of six public hearings planned for this month, the House committee displayed video of an interview with a Proud Boy who attributed Trump's comment to exponential membership growth in the far-right group.In another interview, former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio cracked a wry smile and said he regretted not selling t-shirts brandished with the words "Stand back and stand by." "One of the vendors on my page actually beat me to it, but I wish I would've made a 'stand back stand by' t-shirt," Tarrio said in his interview with the House committee.Read Full StoryJared Kushner testified that he thought the White House counsel's threat to resign was only 'whining'President Donald Trump listens as Jared Kushner speaks in the Oval Office of the White House on September 11, 2020.Andrew Harnik/AP Photo—Bloomberg (@business) June 10, 2022 Former Trump White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner testified in front of the January 6 House Committee that he thought White House Counsel Pat Cipollone's threat to resign was nothing more than "whining.""I know that him and the team were always saying, 'We're gonna resign, we're not gonna be here' if this happens, that happens," Kushner, who is also the former president's son-in-law, said during an on-camera deposition Thursday. "I kind of took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you."Read Full StoryLiz Cheney blasts Republicans for supporting Trump: 'There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain'U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, Chairman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, Vice Chairwoman Rep. Liz Cheney, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger take part in a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 09, 2022 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesGOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming on Thursday evening issued members of her party a stark warning over their continued support of former President Donald Trump."I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible: there will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain," Cheney, vice chair of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, said during the panel's first hearing.Read Full StoryWhite House aides tried to limit access to Trump knowing he was 'too dangerous to be left alone' after his election loss, Cheney saysRep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) during a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 9, 2022.Drew Angerer/Getty Images"The White House staff knew that President Trump was willing to entertain and use conspiracy theories to achieve his ends," Rep. Cheney said during opening remarks at the first public hearing investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol."They knew that the president needed to be cut off from all of those who had encouraged him.  They knew that President Donald Trump was too dangerous to be left alone," she added.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 panel played footage of former AG William Barr calling Trump's election claims 'bullshit'Attorney General William Barr speaks during a news conference, Monday, Dec. 21, 2020 at the Justice Department in WashingtonMichael Reynolds/APFollowing the 2020 presidential election, then-Attorney General William Barr told Donald Trump that his claims of widespread election fraud were "bullshit" and entirely unsupported by evidence, it was revealed during the first January 6 committee public hearing.Video of Barr recounting his remarks to Trump in a closed-door interview with the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol was played on June 9, 2022, during the public hearing. Barr said he spoke with Trump on at least three occasions between November and December 2020, and he described Trump's claims of election malfeasance as "crazy stuff" and said the falsehoods were influencing the public, doing a "great, great disservice to the country." Barr credited the timing of his December 2020 resignation, in part, to Trump's baseless election claims. Read Full StoryIvanka Trump 'accepted' DOJ found no fraud that could overturn the 2020 electionIvanka Trump.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesVideo testimony of part of Ivanka Trump's testimony to the January 6 committee was shown during the first public hearing of the investigation into the riots at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.During the clip, Ivanka Trump was asked about then-Attorney General Bill Barr's statement that former President Donald Trump's claims that there was fraud in the 2020 election were incorrect."It affected my perspective," Ivanka Trump told the committee in recorded testimony, aired for the first time on Thursday. "I respect Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he was saying."Read Full StoryLiz Cheney says Trump oversaw a 'sophisticated 7-part plan' to overturn the election and stay in powerU.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) Vice Chairwoman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, delivers remarks during a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 9, 2022.Win McNamee/Getty ImagesRep. Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, said that during these public hearings they would reveal more information about a "seven-part plan" to overturn the 2020 presidential election, led by former President Donald Trump.—CSPAN (@cspan) June 10, 2022Read Full StoryRep. Liz Cheney: Trump backed supporters' call to 'hang Mike Pence'US Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), vice chairwoman of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol, arrives for a hearing on the January 6th investigation on June 09, 2022 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.Win McNamee/Getty ImagesAs a riot unfolded at the US Capitol, former President Donald Trump told aides that his own vice president might deserve to die, Rep. Liz Cheney said Thursday.Cheney, a Wyoming Republican who co-chairs the House panel investigating the January 6 insurrection, made the claim in her opening remarks."Aware of the rioters chants to 'hang Mike Pence,'" Cheney said, "the president responded with this sentiment: 'Maybe our supporters have the right idea.' Mike Pence 'deserves it.'"As The New York Times reported last month, two former White House staffers testified before the January 6 committee that Mark Meadows, Trump's ex-chief of staff, told them that he heard the former president make the comment.Read Full StoryJanuary 6 committee chairman Bennie Thompson says hearings will show Trump and his allies mounted 'an attempted coup'—CSPAN (@cspan) June 10, 2022 Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat in his 13th term, recalled his upbringing in the Magnolia State and the nation's history of white supremacist violence, specifically lynching."I'm from a part of the country where people justify the actions of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan, and lynching," Thompson said. "I'm reminded of that dark history as I hear voices today try and justify the actions of the insurrections on Jan. 6, 2021."The chairman of the House panel investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol described the rioters as "domestic enemies of the Constitution," and promised that the evidence his panel has collected proves former President Donald Trump and his allies attempted a coup d'etat."Donald Trump was at the center of this conspiracy, and ultimately, Donald Trump, the President of the United States, spurred a mob of domestic enemies of the Constitution to march down the Capitol and subvert American democracy," Rep. Bennie Thompson said at the start of Thursday night's prime-time hearings.Read Full StoryHouse Jan. 6 committee chair will say 'democracy remains in danger'From left to right, January 6 Select Committee members Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md.Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty ImagesRep. Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House panel investigating the January 6 attack, will say tonight that the American people deserve answers about the insurrection."We can't sweep what happened under the rug," Thompson says in early excerpts of his opening statement. "The American people deserve answers. So I come before you this evening not as a Democrat, but as an American who swore an oath to defend the Constitution."The House Select Committee on January 6 will have its first major public hearing tonight, kicking off a series of public hearings about the attack, efforts to overturn the election, and what then-President Donald Trump was aware of in the lead up to it.Thompson will add that American democracy "remains in danger.""... Our work must do much more than just look backwards," Thompson will say. "Because our democracy remains in danger. The conspiracy to thwart the will of the people is not over. There are those in this country who thirst for power but have no love or respect for what makes America great: devotion to the Constitution, allegiance to the rule of law, our shared journey to build a more perfect Union."Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, is facing a defining career moment after nearly three decades in Congress. Thompson told Insider's Camila DeChalus that the committee is his "signature work in the United States House of Representatives."Bennie Thompson is poised to take center stage as Jan. 6 hearings start after 29 years in CongressHouse Homeland Security Committee Chair Benny Thompson (D-MS) listens as U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) discusses the formation of a select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol during a news conference in Washington, U.S., July 1, 2021.Jonathan Ernst/ReutersRep. Bennie Thompson is the chairman of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021 insurrection. He has been in Congress for 29 years but views this investigation as his "signature work.""There's a lot of other pieces of legislation that basically alter the trajectory of so many people in my district, in this country, as well as other pieces of legislation, but nothing compares to the importance of this committee and why I value its work as my signature work in the United States House of Representatives," he told Insider's Camila DeChalus in a May interview.In the first public hearing of the January 6 committee, Thompson will take center stage.Read Full StorySen. Ted Cruz says watching paint dry would be more productive than tuning into a single second of the January 6 committee's first public hearingSenator Ted Cruz (R-TX) holds up a cellphone during the confirmation for Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on the third day before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on October 14, 2020 in Washington, DC.ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/POOL/AFP via Getty ImagesRepublican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas offered up three things he'd rather do Thursday night than sit through any part of the January 6 committee's highly anticipated prime-time hearing. "I've got to mow my lawn. Or comb my hair. Or maybe just watch the paint dry on the walls," Cruz said of what he considered better ways to invest one's time than validating the existence of  "a political campaign ad for the Democrats." Cruz bashed the ongoing House investigation as political theater meant to distract a recession-wary populace from all the ways he said President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats have failed them. "From the opening gavel to the close of the hearing, one hundred percent of their endeavor is a political Hail Mary pass," Cruz told Insider in the tunnels beneath the Senate chamber. "The American people are deeply unhappy with the disaster of the left-wing policy agenda we've seen for the last two years." Read Full StoryDOJ lawyers expect transcripts from the 1,000 January 6 committee witnesses to be made public in SeptemberTrump supporters clash with police and security forces as in the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.Brent Stirton/Getty ImagesA Justice Department lawyer revealed Thursday that transcripts of the 1,000 interviews conducted as part of the House January 6 committee's investigation into the Capitol attack will be made public in September. It would be an unprecedented release of documents that could shed new light on the January 6, 2021 insurrection.The revelation came during a pretrial hearing for former Proud Boys chairman Enrique Tarrio and four other members of the far-right group who were charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with their alleged role in planning and participating in the Capitol siege."The committee will release the transcripts in early September and a report of the committee's findings will be released around the same time," Assistant US Attorney Jason McCullough told a judge.Read Full StoryThe first public hearing held by House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection starts at 8 p.m. ET. Catch up on what you need to know ahead of the hearing.Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Mississippi), left, listens as Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming) speaks during the House select committee hearing on the Jan. 6 attack in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2021. Washington Metropolitan Police Department officer Michael Fanone is at center.Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via AP, PoolThe House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection is holding a much-anticipated public hearing Thursday night.The nine-member panel, chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, has spent months interviewing witnesses and examining phone and email records to try to get to the bottom of former President Donald Trump and his allies' efforts to overturn the 2020 election and prevent President Joe Biden from taking office.The committee, which includes Republican Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, is expected to hold a half-dozen public hearings in June.Here's what you need to know ahead of the broadcast at 8 p.m. ET:How to watch the hearingsThe key witnesses who are likely to testifyWhat to expectSources say the evidence will put Trump "at the center" of the eventsMeet the lawmakers and staff leading the investigationAt least 862 people have now been arrested for their actions on January 6More than 300 people have already pleaded guiltyAn oral history of the insurrection from 34 people who were thereHow the US Capitol riot led to Trump's second impeachmentLiz Cheney's break from GOP leadership on the investigationRead the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: personnelSource: nytJun 15th, 2022

Snap CEO: We Expect More Platform Policy Changes From Google

Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC exclusive interview with Snap Inc (NYSE:SNAP) Co-Founder & CEO Evan Spiegel on CNBC’s “TechCheck” (M-F, 11AM-12PM ET) today, Friday, April 29th. Following is a link to video on CNBC.com: ‘We Expect More Platform Policy Changes From Google,’ Says Snap Co-Founder And CEO JULIA BOORSTIN: Hi, Carl. That’s […] Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC exclusive interview with Snap Inc (NYSE:SNAP) Co-Founder & CEO Evan Spiegel on CNBC’s “TechCheck” (M-F, 11AM-12PM ET) today, Friday, April 29th. Following is a link to video on CNBC.com: ‘We Expect More Platform Policy Changes From Google,’ Says Snap Co-Founder And CEO JULIA BOORSTIN: Hi, Carl. That’s right. We are joined now by Evan Spiegel, the CEO and founder of Snap. Thanks so much for talking to us today. if (typeof jQuery == 'undefined') { document.write(''); } .first{clear:both;margin-left:0}.one-third{width:31.034482758621%;float:left;margin-left:3.448275862069%}.two-thirds{width:65.51724137931%;float:left}form.ebook-styles .af-element input{border:0;border-radius:0;padding:8px}form.ebook-styles .af-element{width:220px;float:left}form.ebook-styles .af-element.buttonContainer{width:115px;float:left;margin-left: 6px;}form.ebook-styles .af-element.buttonContainer input.submit{width:115px;padding:10px 6px 8px;text-transform:uppercase;border-radius:0;border:0;font-size:15px}form.ebook-styles .af-body.af-standards input.submit{width:115px}form.ebook-styles .af-element.privacyPolicy{width:100%;font-size:12px;margin:10px auto 0}form.ebook-styles .af-element.privacyPolicy p{font-size:11px;margin-bottom:0}form.ebook-styles .af-body input.text{height:40px;padding:2px 10px !important} form.ebook-styles .error, form.ebook-styles #error { color:#d00; } form.ebook-styles .formfields h1, form.ebook-styles .formfields #mg-logo, form.ebook-styles .formfields #mg-footer { display: none; } form.ebook-styles .formfields { font-size: 12px; } form.ebook-styles .formfields p { margin: 4px 0; } Get Our Activist Investing Case Study! Get the entire 10-part series on our in-depth study on activist investing in PDF. Save it to your desktop, read it on your tablet, or print it out to read anywhere! Sign up below! (function($) {window.fnames = new Array(); window.ftypes = new Array();fnames[0]='EMAIL';ftypes[0]='email';}(jQuery));var $mcj = jQuery.noConflict(true); Q1 2022 hedge fund letters, conferences and more EVAN SPIEGEL: Hey Julia, it's great to be here. Thanks so much for having me. BOORSTIN: So Evan, we have so much ground to cover, augmented reality ads, the new hardware that you introduced yesterday at your Partner’s Summit but I want to start with the very foundational issue of user growth. You just reported much faster than expected 20% monthly active user growth to 600 million, your daily active users have consistently been growing faster than expected. My question to you is can you keep up this rate of growth? SPIEGEL: Well, we certainly have a huge opportunity globally. There are still billions and billions of people who don't yet use Snapchat to communicate with their close friends and family and so, we're very focused on that opportunity. We've been making lots of investments to improve our application, make it easier to use on a wider range of devices, to partner with Telcos to make our service more affordable. So there's plenty of opportunity around the world and we're really excited to stay focused on our community’s growth. BOORSTIN: And what about competition with TikTok? What kind of impact are you seeing from TikTok or are there other services that are more focused on messaging that are having a bigger competitive impact? SPIEGEL: Well, the video entertainment business certainly a huge opportunity, but it's also very competitive. So whether it's TikTok, or Instagram or YouTube, there's many folks who are investing a lot in this space. We have our own competitive product called Spotlight, which we shared grew time spent 230% year over year last quarter, so we're making steady progress there. But as you pointed out, the engagement on Snapchat is really diversified. So people are using Snapchat to communicate with their friends and family to use our AR platform with all sorts of amazing lenses to see where their friends are out at the map and discover new places to save, save and edit their memories. So people are using Snapchat in all sorts of different ways which helps us with our competitive positioning because we play such different roles in people's lives. We're not just a single service. BOORSTIN: Evan, shifting gears over to your revenue outlook. You outlined how revenue growth is slowing dramatically in the wake of the war in Ukraine and all these inflationary pressures. But I want to ask you about a different revenue pressure and that is Apple's operating systems changes. You've talked in the past about how challenging it has been to work around them, but have you fully addressed that issue and when, if not now, will you fully have found workarounds to that Apple iOS issue? SPIEGEL: Yeah, we've been making steady progress there. I believe we shared in the lead up to the invasion, our DR revenue was, our direct response revenue was growing about 50% year over year and, you know, the full quarter year over year growth rate was actually higher than our overall revenue growth rate, which grew about 30% year over year. So we've been making very steady progress there. I think we also shared on the earnings call that advertisers representing about 90% of our revenue have now implemented our first party solutions that allow them to measure and optimize their advertising campaigns. So, you know, it's going to be an ongoing journey, you know, and we expect more platform policy changes, of course, from from Google as well. So we're just focused on serving our advertisers, making sure that they can achieve great ROI on their advertising campaigns and, you know, it's it's a it's an ongoing journey. It was before the platform policy changes, and it will continue to be because we always want to be improving the return on investment for our advertising partners. BOORSTIN: Yeah, and we certainly expect some more of those privacy focus changes ahead. But returning to those macro-economic factors, you know, there’s inflation or supply chain constraints putting pressure on advertisers, what's your outlook for how long those pressures as you see them now will impact the business and is there anything that you're doing to help brands work around them or make Snap more appealing considering those constraints? SPIEGEL: Well, I certainly wish I was an economist so it's too hard to say the macro environment is obviously very complex right now. I think when you have a nuclear power going to war, it just creates a lot of uncertainty and, and, you know, I wish I was able to predict the future but I don't think that's possible at this point. So we've just stayed focused on helping our advertisers meet their business goals, whether that's with our video advertising and performance products or with augmented reality, which has been a huge focus of ours. We've seen how augmented reality try-on, for example, can drive much higher conversions for advertisers. And so we've been working to scale that out including with some announcements yesterday at our Snap Partner Summit. We've found that brands often say, gosh, you know, I want to engage with augmented reality, but I don't have a whole catalog of 3D assets. How can I get involved with my 2D product catalog? So we released a product that allows advertisers to bring their 2D product catalog into augmented reality and enable product try-on with those 2D images so that users can try-on thousands of different looks or outfits without ever changing their clothes. And, of course, that helps with exploration and consideration, but also higher conversion and that's something we're really excited about. DEIRDRE BOSA: Hey Evan, good morning. It's Deirdre. I got to ask, what do you make of what's going on over at Twitter? Do you see Elon Musk's takeover as perhaps an opportunity for Snap to gain advertisers or users or even engineers amid so much uncertainty or do you think that he could ultimately change the whole landscape that could make it more difficult or different for you to compete? SPIEGEL: It's hard to say because the platforms are so different, you know, Twitter is this public square and Snapchat’s about communicating visually with your close friends and family. So, you know, I don't think there's a lot of overlap. I think the strategies are going to continue to be very different, but who knows, you know, Elon is so passionate about the Twitter product, and I'm excited to see what they come up with over there. JON FORTT: You guys are announcing this Pixy drone for $230 in a way that seems a lot more practical to me even than Spectacles. What's the role of this kind of hardware in your strategy? I mean, it doesn't seem like you're looking to do mass market, Apple or even Sonos numbers with these things. Should we think of this even in terms of how Roku is using a hardware or is it more inspirational? SPIEGEL: Well as a camera company, we're always experimenting with evolving what the camera can be and what we learned with Spectacles when we first released them is that people love capturing hands free video because they can explore the world without having to hold their camera in front of their face. So we started experimenting with free flying cameras because they give you a totally new perspective. They situate you in your world with your friends, and they allow you to create a totally new type of content. So it's still an early experiment, but it's a really fun product and and I think people are really going to enjoy playing with Pixy. BOORSTIN: But what can we tell from this product or learn from this product in terms of what your strategy is going to be for hardware going forward? Will there be many more devices that you're launching and do you see some of them as being mass market plays? SPIEGEL: Potentially mass market plays over time, but the important thing with our strategy is just to extend the software experience that we have in Snapchat with hardware. That that's the case of course with Spectacles. We found that using augmented reality on this tiny little screen where you have to use your thumbs just isn't as compelling as overlaying augmented reality in the world around you, being able to walk around and use your hands and your voice to interact with all sorts of new experiences. So Spectacles are a way for us to extend the engagement we see with augmented reality on Snapchat today where over 250 million people are engaging with AR daily just in Snapchat alone. That doesn't include our camera kit partners who have taken our augmented reality tools and embedded them in their own applications and services. So hardware for us is really a way to extend the core of our business and to see how we can, you know, unlock new engagement in the future. BOORSTIN: Now at your your event yesterday, you unveiled all sorts of new augmented reality tools for advertisers specifically focused on ecommerce and you also had some pretty impressive numbers about how many people are already using lenses to try on clothes? Draw the connection between us between those lenses and advertising on the platform? Are you seeing that kind of technology actually increase ad spending? SPIEGEL: Yeah, this has been really exciting for us. What we saw very early on, you know, we've been working on AR inside of Snapchat for seven or eight years now I think and what we found is that people were using augmented reality to express themselves, right? Whether they were vomiting a rainbow or trying on a pair of virtual glasses and so as we partnered with brands, we found that bringing their products, you know, whether those are accessories or clothing or, you know, a new pair of sunglasses into augmented reality allows people to express themselves with that product, but also see how it looks on them. And when they can see that something's a good fit or complements their style, they can easily, you know, convert in one tap from that AR experience. So what we've seen brands do is build these AR lenses that allow people to try on their products, add them to their brand profiles, so they're easy for people to find and experiment with and then they're buying distribution for those lenses in our carousel, our lens carousel, which is in our camera and Snapchat, as you know, opens into the camera so it's a really big advertising opportunity for us because our advertisers are front and center in the Snapchat lens carousel allowing people to try on and play with their products. BOSA: Yeah so Evan, you are making this big bet on augmented reality and you had recent comments about the metaverse which you said was pretty ambiguous and hypothetical. What makes you so sure about AR? I mean you could make the same argument for the internet in the early days hypothetical and ambiguous. Why not hedge? Why solely focus on AR? SPIEGEL: Well, I think what's so exciting about augmented reality is, as I mentioned, 250 million people are already engaging with AR on a daily basis in Snapchat. There are hundreds of thousands of developers, there are more than two and a half million lenses that developers have created on Snapchat. So, it isn't hypothetical. It's real today and our community is really getting a ton of value from our augmented reality experiences. So, we're really doubling down on that momentum and continuing to expand our service. And you know, what really I was referring to, technology is complicated enough so we don't like to use fancy words at Snapchat. We just like to speak directly with our community about the products that we're creating. BOORSTIN: Well Evan, I'm sure you use fancy words sometimes. But of course, when we talk about the metaverse, we have to talk about what Mark Zuckerberg is doing at Meta and the fact that they're recently been talking a lot about bringing this Metaverse Horizon Worlds into this 2D world and trying to make it more accessible without those VR headsets. What do you make of Meta’s moves and do you see it as more of a competitive threat coming into your AR space? SPIEGEL: Well, I haven't seen anything yet. So, you know, I'll be eagerly awaiting some of their product developments. We'll we'll see what happens. BOORSTIN: Well, we look forward to hearing more from you and getting the latest and also trying out that very cool flying camera ourselves. Thanks so much for joining us Evan Spiegel on the heels of all of those announcements yesterday and your earnings last week. SPIEGEL: Thanks so much, Julia. Take care. Updated on Apr 29, 2022, 2:42 pm (function() { var sc = document.createElement("script"); sc.type = "text/javascript"; sc.async = true;sc.src = "//mixi.media/data/js/95481.js"; sc.charset = "utf-8";var s = document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(sc, s); }()); window._F20 = window._F20 || []; _F20.push({container: 'F20WidgetContainer', placement: '', count: 3}); _F20.push({finish: true});.....»»

Category: blogSource: valuewalkApr 29th, 2022

Deodorant Brands You Should Never Buy

Never ask a dirty hippie to write about 19 deodorant brands to avoid. Their initial reaction will be why stop at 19? As a full-fledged fragrant hippie, I haven’t used deodorant or antiperspirant since the Ban roll-on my mother purchased for me before 7th grade telling me that everyone would appreciate it if I would […] The post Deodorant Brands You Should Never Buy appeared first on 24/7 Wall St.. Never ask a dirty hippie to write about 19 deodorant brands to avoid. Their initial reaction will be why stop at 19? As a full-fledged fragrant hippie, I haven’t used deodorant or antiperspirant since the Ban roll-on my mother purchased for me before 7th grade telling me that everyone would appreciate it if I would start using deodorant. I rolled it on my pits a couple of times before deciding I’d rather stink than have an unnatural, distracting scent about me. Thankfully, my grandmother stepped in telling me that she relied on white vinegar or lemon juice on special occasions. She then explained the science behind it. Vinegar has been my odor neutralizer of choice ever since, though I would dab my pits with lemon juice before Saturday night cotillion. Body odor aka B.O. results when secretions from apocrine sweat glands, principally located in the armpits and the groin, come in contact with bacteria on the epidermis, the outer layer of skin. The deodorant’s goal is to mask the associated odor. Antiperspirants aim to control the odor by eliminating secretions. Most of the products on today’s market offer dual-protection. Hyperhidrosis, a condition that causes excessive perspiration is treated with prescription-strength antiperspirants that contain aluminum-based compounds. Aluminum chloride, aluminum zirconium, and aluminum chlorohydrate are also found to a lesser degree in OTC antiperspirants. They work by forming a gel-like plug in the sweat ducts, reducing or eliminating sweat production. I prefer my ducts to be unplugged. Like Bob Dylan before Newport. Our criteria for determining the 19 deodorant brands to avoid included the propensity to have a too-strong or too-longlasting scent, the number of difficult-to-unpronounceable ingredients, and value. Because the appeal of personal hygiene products is highly subjective our list is presented in alphabetical order. 19. Arm and Hammer Advanced Sweat Control Fresh parent/owner: Church and Dwight established: 1846 price point: $3.00/2.6 oz. High In Aluminum From the name you’d think the active ingredient in Arm and Hammer would be baking soda. But it’s not, it’s aluminum chlorohydrate – a whopping 19%! This is high enough to warrant a warning on the label for those who have kidney disease. Your kidneys are responsible for flushing aluminum out of the body, as well as all of your un-sweated sweat. This product also includes talc which is problematic thanks to the probability that it contains asbestos, a known carcinogen. Baking soda is listed as an inactive ingredient, however. Let’s hope this is because it is not prevalent enough to cause the skin irritation associated with baking soda found in other personal care products. Bottom line: The talc alone is reason enough to keep your distance. 18. Axe Apollo Long Lasting Spray Sage and Cedarwood parent/owner: Unilever established: 1983 (EU)/2002 (USA) price point: $6.00/4.0 oz. Bad For The Earth This product contains an astounding 23.3 % aluminum chlorohydrate and hydrofluorocarbon 152A, a propellant, that was created as a presumably safe alternative to chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), an ozone-depleting greenhouse gas. While hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) don’t deplete the ozone, they are super greenhouse gases. Axe Apollo Sage and Cedarwood is also 23.3% duct-clogging aluminum chlorohydrate, butane, a handful of other difficult-to-pronounce chemicals, as well as the all-encompassing, exceptionally vague fragrance. Fragrance is an Axe specialty, but not one everyone especially appreciates. Used correctly, Axe products are probably still over-scented, but in the hands of pubescent middle schoolers who have been conditioned to believe natural body odor must be masked at all costs? Eye-watering nostril-stinging, breathtakingly cloying. Bottom line: Be a good Earth steward and avoid products that contain hydrofluorocarbon 152A. 17. BLEU DE CHANEL parent/owner: House of Chanel established: 2010 price point: $40.00/2.0 oz. Smell That Sticks Around The ingredients in this product aren’t all that sinister, but they’re also nothing special, certainly not $20.00 an ounce special. Two of the first three ingredients are alcohol and water. The website also boasts that the woodsy, sandalwood scent leaves a trail. Personal scents should not leave a trail. Bottom line: You’re paying for the label and a scent that remains long after you’re gone. 16. Carpe Underarm Fresh Powder Scent parent/owner: Clutch, Inc. established: 2015 price point: 20.00/1.69 oz. Too Expensive With 15% Aluminum Sesquicholorhydrate and talc, this isn’t the safest antiperspirant around. That said, it has a compelling backstory. No spoiler alerts here, but sweaty palms are annoying. Carpe is a bit overpriced, at over ten dollars an ounce, but if you can afford it, you’ll be supporting a small business. Bottom line: Better than some and no worse than some others, seize the day with Carpe! 15. Certain Dri Prescription Strength Clinical Dry Spray parent/owner: Clarion Brands, LLC established: price point: $10.00/2.0 0z. Showers Won’t Wash It Off Among a host of other chemicals, Certain Dri ups the ante with 25% aluminum chlorohydrate plus the greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon 152A. This product lasts up to 72 hours – even factoring in showering.  Where some view its long-lastingness as a perk, others find it frightening? Concerning? Perhaps I’m projecting but if a shower can’t wash it away, I’m keeping my distance. Bottom line: Lower your carbon footprint; choose a deodorant that doesn’t contain hydrofluorocarbon 152A. 14. Degree Original Protection- Cool Rush parent/owner: Unilever established:1908 price point: 2.00/2.0 0z. Too Strong Of a Scent The price is certainly right, but Degree Original is 18.2% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly and talc. The 48-hour protection Degree provides translates into a strong scent that is permeating. Does your scent announce your arrival or stay after you’ve gone? Then it’s time to consider an alternative. Just like no one wishes to smell your stench, no one cares to smell your deodorant, either. Bottom line: An exceptionally inexpensive choice, but be cautious in its application. 13. Eau Dynamisante Antiperspirant parent/owner: Clarins established: 1987 price point: $34.00/3.3 oz. Natural Ingredients Don’t Always Cut It They tout 92% natural ingredients and claim that they have a herbarium in which they grow the plants that are at the core of their products, and for the most part, I believe them. The Eau Dynamisante label has a variety of unfamiliar words, however, most of them are simply fancy ways of saying coconut oil. Two of the fragrance ingredients, hexyl cinnamal and ethylene brassylate are concerning. The Environmental Working Group lists hexyl cinnamal as high for allergies and immunotoxins, which negatively affect the immune system. Ethylene brassylate, a synthetic fragrance in the musk family, is considered safe enough, but for $10.00/oz. you deserve the real deal! Bottom line: While there is nothing inherently bad about this brand, there are other equally not-bad options with much lower price points. 12. Gold Bond Body Powder Spray Clear parent/owner: Chattem Inc./Sanofi S.A. established: 1882 price point: $8.00/7.0 oz. Aerosol Poisons The Air It’s a fact that label ingredients are listed from highest to lowest amounts, and the very first ingredient on the list for Gold Bond Body Powder Spray Clear is the dreaded greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon 152A. Hydrofluorocarbon 152A is, thankfully, being phased out. As of October 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has passed regulations that should lower HFC emissions by over one billion metric tons by 2050. Bottom line: Why wait until your favorite aerosol brand is phased out? Roll-ons and sticks are excellent, more environmentally friendly ways of keeping fresh. 11. Jungle Bravo Untamed Pheromone Deodorant parent/owner: Jungle Bravo established: c. 2023 price point: $35.00/3.0 oz. Sadly You’re Not An Alpha Of the 19 deodorant brands to avoid, this one’s my favorite. Do yourself a solid and check out this brand’s website. From the graphics to the comments, there is a lot of entertaining content, if you have critical thinking skills. Jungle Bravo touts itself as a natural, aluminum-free deodorant, however, they do not provide the label ingredients, beyond alpha pheromones. And sorry, suckers, but according to Jungle Bravo 90% of men simply do not produce enough alpha pheromones on their own. Since they tout their ingredients as all-natural, I’m wondering where they’re sourcing their alpha pheromones. I’m envisioning one of the lucky 10% hooked up to an alpha pheromone extractor. It looks painful. And, if the comments and reviews are to be trusted, Jungle Bravo is one of those gifts that keeps on giving, long after you’ve cruised through the casino. Bottom line: There’s a sucker born every minute and 90% of them cannot produce enough alpha pheromones. -P.T. Barnum 10. Metro Sexual – Deodorant Stick parent/owner: Sea Of Spa Labs Ltd. established: 1996 price point: $23.00/2.5 oz Out of Style Besides the fact that it’s fairly expensive and contains the very unnecessary FD&C Blue No. 1 and FD&C Red No. 40., there’s nothing precisely bad about this brand, Oh wait, yes there is. It’s the name. It screams 1990s. Bottom line: No 21st-century metrosexual would be caught dead wearing something called Metro Sexual. 9. Old Spice Red Collection Captain Scent of Command Deodorant parent/owner: Procter & Gamble established: 1937 price point: $5.00/3.0 oz. Seriously Old Chances are your grandfather was an Old Spice aftershave guy. Old Spice is about as American as you can get. With a desirable price point and a formula that is absent of HFCs and aluminum, it continues to be a trusted brand. Something changed recently, however, that has consumers questioning the rashes and stinging sensations that experience after applying Old Spice deodorant. Bottom line: If you have sensitive skin, it would behoove you to steer your ship leeward. 8. Patchouli parent/owner: various established: 5oo A.D. price point: $7.00/1.0 oz. Scent Gives Some People Headaches There’s no more polarizing scent than patchouli. A member of the mint family, patchouli has been used medicinally since 500 B.C. in China and India. Now, you might think that because I’m a hippie I love patchouli, but you’d be wrong. I don’t mind the scent, per se, it’s the resulting migraine that I like to avoid. And I’m not alone. Recent studies at the University of West Georgia and the American Academy of Dermatology, et al., suggest that 1/3 of consumers find scented products irritating. The strength of its aroma is one of its original selling points: Patchouli was used in funeral rites in which its scent was used to mask odors associated with decomposition. While I have your attention, I’d like to point out the misconception that just because it’s natural, doesn’t mean it’s harmless. Some well-meaning individuals have told me that the scent they’re wearing couldn’t possibly be making me ill because, like patchouli, it’s all-natural. Snake venom, bee venom, and hemlock are all-natural, too. Bottom Line: Unless you smell like death, think twice before applying patchouli. 7. R De Revillon Deodorant Spray parent/owner: Revillon Frères (Revillon Brothers) established: 1723/1839 price point: $15.00/5.0 oz. Might Cause Cancers Revillion Brothers is a luxury brand that trades in furs and perfumes. Luxury deodorant is just the sort of decadence that the 21st century embraces. And while three dollars an ounce isn’t outlandish, it’s still twice as much as your proletarian brands. This brand originally counted benzene among its ingredients. Classified by the State of California as a carcinogen, benzene has been shown to cause leukemia, as well as birth defects. It would appear that Revillon has removed benzene from its listed ingredients, after the class action lawsuit. However, they didn’t replace the faulty nozzles that reportedly clog on the regular. Though my pioneer spirit would attempt to unclog the sprayer before tossing out a can of deodorant, it is a frustrating drawback. Bottom line: Benzene or not, R de Revillion is not a great value. 6. Right Guard Extreme Defense parent/owner: Thriving Brands LLC established: 1960 (by The Gillette Company) price point: $5.00/2.6 oz. Bad For Your Kidneys By now it should be apparent that any antiperspirant/deodorant that offers three days of protection is going to contain some form of gland-blocking aluminum. Right Guard Extreme Defense has 16.4% Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly, which obstructs the ducts that aid perspiration. What’s happening to all of the obstructed secretions? Processed through the kidneys, all. Bottom line: Give your kidneys a break – opt for an aluminum-free deodorant. 5. Secret Invisible Solid Paris Rose parent/owner: Procter & Gamble established: 1964 price point: $6.00/2.6 oz Same Ingredients As Pesticides The Environmental Working Group scored Secret Invisible Solid Antiperspirant/Deodorant, Paris Rose 9/10, with 10 being the worst. The offending agents included the ever-ambiguous fragrance, cetrimonium chloride, and methylisothiazolinone, as a high risk for allergies and immunotoxins, and a moderate risk of endocrine disruption, which affects hormones. A preservative, methylisothiazolinone has been banned in the EU in leave-on products (like antiperspirants) and highly regulated in rinse-off products (like soap). Methylisothiazolinone, also found in pesticides, is regulated by the EPA and has restrictions placed on where it may be used. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has yet to place any restrictions on its use. This is reminiscent of triclosan, an antimicrobial that was classified as a carcinogen and an endocrine disruptor by the EPA long before the FDA. Triclosan was omnipresent. It was in everything from hand soap and deodorant to sneakers and toothpaste, until 2016 when the FDA finally banned it. Bottom line: Just because the government says it’s safe, doesn’t make it true. 4. Speed Stick Power Ultimate Sport parent/owner: Colgate-Palmolive established: 1963 ( by The Mennen Company) price point: $2.00/3.0 oz. Full of Palm Oil With 18% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly, Speed Stick Power Antiperspirant Deodorant, Ultimate Sport will definitely keep the sweat off your body. But re-routing it to your kidneys, like busing asylum seekers to Martha’s Vineyard, isn’t the best solution. Speed Stick also contains palm kernel oil. Palm kernel oil, along with palm oil, is responsible for deforestation and habitat destruction around the globe, as land is cleared for industrial palm farms. Bottom line: Without much trouble, you can find a similar product that doesn’t contribute to the destruction of the world. 3. Suave Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom parent/owner: Yellow Wood Partners LLC established: 1937 price point:46.00/1.2 oz Messes Up People’s Hormones With a name like Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom, you can easily picture Suave’s target demographic – picture and smell. Fresh Vibes is the Axe for adolescent girls. Ironically, according to the Environmental Workers Group, the only concerning ingredient in Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom is the fragrance. It should be alarming that the ingredients used to scent this product are endocrine disruptors. The endocrine system is responsible for producing and regulating hormones. Adolescents are surging with hormones. Disrupting that system seems like a bad idea. Bottom line: Skip the wild scents and trendy names. 2. Teen Spirit Pink Crush Antiperspirant and Deodorant. parent/owner: Colgate-Palmolive established: 1991 Just Masks the Sweat Of the 19 worst deodorant beads, this one is a classic – immortalized by the legendary band Nirvana. Beyond the 15.9% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly and deforestation culprit palm kernel oil, Teen Spirit Pink Crush also contains, as you might have guessed, fragrance. And what have we learned about fragrance? It could be just about anything and at least some of those things pose risks to a teenager’s developing endocrine system. Bottom line: Find a fragrance-free alternative. Be aware that unscented is not the same thing as fragrance-free! Many unscented products contain a masking fragrance. 1. ZeroSweat Clinical Strength parent/owner: ‎ZeroSweat Inc. established: 2011 price point: $20.00/1.2 oz. Just Clogs Your Pores Offering up to seven days of protection, ZeroSweat Clinical Strength contains 12% aluminum chloride. The strongest of the aluminum additives, aluminum chloride is most commonly found in RX-strength antiperspirants. Seven days? That’s a mighty long time to keep your glands sealed without a breather, so to speak. Also, at almost $20.00 an ounce, it has a higher price point than other brands with similar gland-clogging abilities. Bottom line: You can clog your glands for less. Sponsored: Attention Savvy Investors: Speak to 3 Financial Experts – FREE Ever wanted an extra set of eyes on an investment you’re considering? Now you can speak with up to 3 financial experts in your area for FREE. By simply clicking here you can begin to match with financial professionals who can help guide you through the financial decisions you’re making. And the best part? The first conversation with them is free. Click here to match with up to 3 financial pros who would be excited to help you make financial decisions. The post Deodorant Brands You Should Never Buy appeared first on 24/7 Wall St.......»»

Category: blogSource: 247wallst1 hr. 45 min. ago

JP Morgan Pulls Out Of $68 Trillion "Climate Action 100+" Group

JP Morgan Pulls Out Of $68 Trillion "Climate Action 100+" Group We have been covering the full on implosion of ESG and "green" investing for the better part of the last 6 months and today, the wreckage continues. That's because mega-bank JP Morgan has officially left a $68 trillion investor coalition that is "focused on pressing the world’s biggest emitters of greenhouse gases to decarbonize," according to Bloomberg. In other words, the "fight" to decarbonize is imploding.  JP Morgan said it is leaving the Climate Action 100+ because it has "made significant investments in developing its own climate risk engagement framework", the report says. The bank claims to have 40 professionals now focused on sustainable investing.  And the damage for the Climate Action 100+ may only be getting started. Lance Dial, a Boston-based partner at law firm K&L Gates LLP, told Bloomberg: “I wouldn’t be surprised if we see more defections, especially given that there’s now a cost, such as potential litigation, that wasn’t there when companies joined.” He added: “Attorneys general have subpoenaed firms about their membership of these groups.” The group responded by saying its 700+ members are “committed to managing climate risk and preserving shareholder value through their participation in the initiative.” The bank's involvement in CA100+ was initially seen as a significant step in its ESG investment journey. However, the initiative, alongside its participants, has faced increasing criticism from Republican circles in the U.S., labeling it and similar ESG efforts as politically motivated. This criticism has led many investment firms to retreat from publicly aligning with net zero commitments and downplay their involvement in climate-focused finance groups, which are now considered more of a political burden than a merit. Originally, CA100+ aimed to engage major companies like BP, Exxon Mobil, and Glencore in enhancing governance, cutting emissions, and improving climate financial disclosures, the report says. As the initiative enters a more proactive stage, asking members to ensure companies transition from plans to tangible emission reductions, the heightened activist stance poses additional difficulties for investors wishing to keep a lower profile in climate advocacy. “The political winds aren’t rewarding climate-active firms today, but climate risk and regulations aren’t going away in the mid to long run, so short-term decisions may need to be undone when those longer term threats begin to manifest or regulators clamp down harder,” said Michael Sheren, a former senior adviser at the Bank of England who’s now a fellow at the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership. “JPMorgan pulling out matters because it sends the wrong, short-sighted signal and gives cover for others to do the same," he added. And we're sure they will... We noted earlier this year, "ESG" has become a "dirty word" on Wall Street.  For some context, peak ESG and related synonyms, such as "climate change" and "clean energy" and green energy" and net zero," among other terms, peaked at 28,000 mentions in the first quarter of 2022. Ever since, the number of mentions has rapidly plunged. Halfway through the first quarter earnings season, mentions are around 4,800.  Recall, we have written about the dying off of ESG and "green" investment products over the last few months. Most recently, at the end of 2023, Goldman Sachs shuttered its ActiveBeta Paris-Aligned Climate U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF.  Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas pointed out last month that "there was just way too much supply for the demand" with the ETF and that "it's going to get worse too". Balchunas says the ETF only took in $7 million over the course of 2 years.  We also wrote about Jeff Ubben late last year, who shuttered his sustainability fund - calling traditional climate summitry an “echo chamber” of diplomats.  Less than a week before that we noted that $30 billion had been shaved off the value of clean energy stocks over the preceding 6 months.  Finally, we pointed out last year how the ESG grift was reaching endgame after Markus Müller, chief investment officer ESG at Deutsche Bank's Private Bank stated that sustainability funds should include traditional energy stocks, arguing that not doing so deprives investors of a prime opportunity to invest in the transition to renewable energy. Tyler Durden Thu, 02/15/2024 - 12:00.....»»

Category: blogSource: zerohedgeFeb 15th, 2024

Byrna Technologies Reports Fiscal Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2023 Results

Company Provides Updates on the Continued Success of Its Celebrity Endorsement Program ANDOVER, Mass., Feb. 14, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Byrna Technologies Inc. ("Byrna" or the "Company") (NASDAQ:BYRN), a personal defense technology company specializing in the development, manufacture, and sale of innovative less-lethal personal security solutions, today reported select financial results for its fiscal fourth quarter ("Q4 2023") and full year ("FY 2023") ended November 30, 2023. Fiscal Fourth Quarter 2023 and Recent Operational Highlights Welcomed Glenn Beck, Judge Jeanine Pirro, and Bill O'Reilly to Byrna's celebrity influencer roster, building upon the success of the Sean Hannity partnership and further enhancing the Company's direct-to-consumer marketing program across multiple channels, with a focus on radio, television, and social media. Increased daily average web sessions to 32,500 in Q4 2023, an increase of 174% sequentially from 11,870 in Q3 2023 and a year-over-year increase of 21.5% from 26,750 in Q4 2022. Secured a record $6 million order, which included 5,000 Byrna launchers, from Córdoba Provincial Police in Argentina through Byrna's Argentine distributor. This is the largest single order for Byrna launchers in the Company's history. Received the first order from the Hawaii Sheriff's Division, further strengthening the Company's position in the domestic law enforcement market. Added 25% more production workers at its Fort Wayne manufacturing facility, increasing launcher production capacity from 10,000 to 12,500 units per month during a single shift, in response to rising demand resulting from the Company's celebrity endorsement marketing campaign. Introduced the Byrna Universal Kit (legal in all 50 states and Canada) for the Byrna LE and Byrna SD launchers, simplifying online checkout for new customers and cutting in half the number of SKUs that the Company must carry in inventory. Fiscal Fourth Quarter 2023 Financial ResultsResults compare the 2023 fiscal fourth quarter ended November 30, 2023 to the 2022 fiscal fourth quarter ended November 30, 2022 unless otherwise indicated. Net revenue for Q4 2023 was $15.6 million, compared to $16.0 million in the fiscal fourth quarter of 2022 ("Q4 2022"). The slightly lower net revenue resulted from the exceptionally strong international sales recorded in Q4 2022, including a $3.4 million stocking order for the Company's distributor in Argentina. Setting aside this one-time surge in international sales, Q4 2023 displayed strong growth, with domestic revenue up 32% year-over-year from Q4 2022, and up 122% sequentially compared to Q3 2023. Gross profit for Q4 2023 was $9.0 million (58% of net revenue), up from $8.7 million (54% of net revenue) in Q4 2022. The increase in gross margin was primarily due to a higher percentage of the Company's sales being derived from the higher margin direct-to-consumer (DTC) channel. Operating expenses for Q4 2023 were $9.7 million, compared to $8.8 million for Q4 2022. The increase in operating expenses was primarily driven by an increase in marketing spend as part of the Company's new celebrity endorsement strategy. Net loss for Q4 2023 was $(0.8) million, compared to approximately breakeven for Q4 2022. The slight increase in net loss was primarily due to the increase in marketing spend and additional bonus accruals taken in Q4 2023, stemming from improved sales associated with new marketing campaigns. Adjusted EBITDA1, a non-GAAP metric reconciled below, for Q4 2023 totaled $0.4 million, compared to $1.4 million for Q4 2022. Cash and cash equivalents at November 30, 2023 totaled $20.5 million compared to $13.7 million at August 31, 2023. Inventory at November 30, 2023 totaled $13.9 million compared to $16.7 million at August 31, 2023. The Company has no current or long-term debt. Fiscal Year 2023 Financial ResultsResults compare the 2023 fiscal year ended November 30, 2023 to the 2022 fiscal year ended November 30, 2022 unless otherwise indicated. Net revenue for FY 2023 was $42.6 million, compared to $48.0 million in the fiscal year ended November 30, 2022 ("FY 2022"). This decline was due to a $7.6 million decline in international sales from South Africa, South America, and Asia, partially offset by a $0.9 million increase in sales on Amazon and a $0.4 million increase in Fox Labs sales. Domestic dealer and distributor sales, which are less dependent on online advertising than DTC sales, grew by $1.6 million. Gross profit for FY 2023 was $23.6 million (56% of net revenue), compared to $26.3 million (55% of net revenue) for FY 2022. Gross margins remained stable year-over-year as savings recognized from reduced freight costs were largely offset by unfavorable manufacturing variances resulting from lower production volumes and challenges encountered during the initial rollout of the Byrna LE launcher. Operating expenses for FY 2023 were $31.4 million, compared to $34.0 million for FY 2022. The decrease in operating expenses was largely the result of the reduction in marketing expenses earlier in the year when Byrna was banned from advertising on most social media sites. Net loss for FY 2023 was $(8.2) million, compared to $(7.9) million for FY 2022. The slight increase in net loss was primarily due to the decrease in revenue, largely offset by a decrease in operating expenses. Adjusted EBITDA1 for FY 2023 totaled $(2.0) million, compared to $(1.0) million for FY 2022. The decrease in adjusted EBITDA was primarily due to lower-than-expected sales during the first nine months of 2023. 1 See non-GAAP financial measures at the end of this press release for a reconciliation and a discussion of non-GAAP financial measures. Management CommentaryByrna CEO Bryan Ganz stated: "2023 was a transformational year for Byrna. Early in the year, we encountered two significant challenges. The first challenge stemmed from an early rollout of the groundbreaking Byrna LE launcher. We eagerly introduced the Byrna LE at SHOT Show in January 2023, where it received an enthusiastic reception and generated a flood of orders. However, as we ramped up production in late January, we encountered production and quality challenges that necessitated a temporary halt in production. In response, we worked closely with our vendors with an eye to improving DFM (design for manufacturability), which would ensure greater ease of manufacturability and higher incoming component quality. Following these adjustments, we successfully relaunched in May, and since then, the demand for and production of the Byrna LE has been strong. "The second challenge Byrna faced in early 2023 was an almost total ban on the ability to advertise our products online. Specifically, in March we were prohibited from advertising on most major social media platforms, including Facebook, Google, Instagram, and Twitter (X). This led to an immediate 60% drop in web traffic. Initially, sales were somewhat resilient, supported by the residual effect of our advertising prior to the ban, but by the third quarter, we experienced a significant decline in online sales. With this social media advertising ban, and the earlier mainstream media advertising bans, Byrna faced a significant challenge as the Company struggled to find an effective way to work around these advertising prohibitions and communicate its message. "The Byrna management team was relentless in its pursuit of a solution, exploring multiple options and considering a host of marketing strategies which could be used to both educate the public on the benefits of non-lethal self-defense and drive demand for Byrna's suite of non-lethal self-defense products. In September of 2023, Byrna implemented the strategy of using celebrity endorsers to build awareness and drive demand. This approach proved to be extremely effective, almost from the start, helping the Company post a record $15.4 million in domestic sales in the fourth quarter, up 122% from the prior quarter. I am extremely proud of the entire team at Byrna and what they have accomplished. The early success of these programs is a testament to not only their resiliency, ingenuity, and creativity, but also their ability to react quickly, decisively, and effectively under pressure. "Our new marketing strategy, leveraging celebrity influencers who are closely aligned with our brand and our mission of saving lives, has boosted both web traffic and sales. In the fourth quarter, daily web sessions jumped to 32,500, up 174% from 11,870 in the third quarter of 2023 and up 21.5% from 26,750 in the fourth quarter of 2022, before the social media advertising ban took place. Moreover, conversion rates have stayed relatively consistent through the surge in web traffic, and our average order value (AOV) has increased by 15.2%, driven by a 20% rise in sales to first-time customers. This has contributed to a 41.2% increase in fourth quarter DTC sales year-over-year. "Our strategic partnership with key influencers has led to an impressive return on advertising spend (ROAS), driving significant sales growth, especially with new customers. Since implementing the celebrity endorsement campaign, our ROAS has consistently exceeded our minimum threshold of 5.0X. Specifically, our ROAS was 7.5X for the fourth quarter of 2023. In the first two months of fiscal 2024 (December and January), we maintained this momentum with a 5.9X ROAS, an impressive feat during the post-holiday shopping period, when sales are typically slower. During Q4 2023, our first-time customer rate rose significantly, reaching 66.5% of daily orders, up from 55.5% in the same period the prior year. This 11% increase in first-time customers drove a higher average order value (AOV) and has given us the opportunity to target these new customers with special offers on ammo and accessories to realize their lifetime value. "Beyond direct-to-consumer sales, our dealer sales have also increased, which we also attribute to the celebrity endorsement campaign. We are seeing positive momentum in the public safety market as well, with orders from Argentina, Mexico, and Hawaii. These law enforcement wins clearly indicate Byrna's growing relevance among public safety professionals. "In anticipation of growing demand in 2024, we have added to the headcount of production workers in Fort Wayne, increasing our daily launcher production capacity by 25% while still operating on a single shift. This gives Byrna significant additional production capacity if needed. We are also taking proactive measures to expand our ammo production by adding additional resources in both the U.S. and South Africa. "Byrna's strong financial footing provides a stable foundation to pursue our growth plan. With over $23.0 million in cash and cash equivalents at the end of January 2024, and no debt, we believe that our robust balance sheet positions us for growth in 2024." Conference CallThe Company's management will host a conference call today, February 14, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern time (6:00 a.m. Pacific time) to discuss these results, followed by a question-and-answer period. Toll-Free Dial-In: 877-709-8150International Dial-In: +1 201-689-8354Confirmation: 13743409 Please call the conference telephone number 5-10 minutes prior to the start time of the conference call. An operator will register your name and organization. If you have any difficulty connecting with the conference call, please contact Gateway Group at 949-574-3860. The conference call will be broadcast live and available for replay here and via the Investor Relations section of Byrna's website. About Byrna Technologies Inc.Byrna is a technology company specializing in the development, manufacture, and sale of innovative less-lethal personal security solutions. For more information on the Company, please visit the corporate website here or the Company's investor relations site here. The Company is the manufacturer of the Byrna® SD personal security device, a state-of-the-art handheld CO2 powered launcher designed to provide a less-lethal alternative to a firearm for the consumer, private security, and law enforcement markets. To purchase Byrna products, visit the Company's e-commerce store. Forward-Looking StatementsThis news release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the securities laws. All statements contained in this news release, other than statements of current and historical fact, are forward-looking. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as "plans," "expects," "intends," "anticipates," and "believes" and statements that certain actions, events or results "may," "could," "would," "should," "might," "occur," or "be achieved," or "will be taken." Forward-looking statements include descriptions of currently occurring matters which may continue in the future. Forward-looking statements in this news release include but are not limited to our statements related to our ability to continue to grow web traffic and sales as a result of our celebrity endorser marketing strategy, our ability to continue to expand our presence in the law enforcement market, our ability to further expand production capacity, and our ability to pursue our growth plan with existing cash resources. Forward-looking statements are not, and cannot be, a guarantee of future results or events. Forward-looking statements are based on, among other things, opinions, assumptions, estimates, and analyses that, while considered reasonable by the Company at the date the forward-looking information is provided, inherently are subject to significant risks, uncertainties, contingencies, and other factors that may cause actual results and events to be materially different from those expressed or implied. Any number of risk factors could affect our actual results and cause them to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements in this news release, including, but not limited to, disappointing market responses to current or future products or services; prolonged, new, or exacerbated disruption of our supply chain; the further or prolonged disruption of new product development; production or distribution disruption or delays in entry or penetration of sales channels due to inventory constraints, competitive factors, increased transportation costs or interruptions, including due to weather, flooding or fires; prototype, parts and material shortages, particularly of parts sourced from limited or sole source providers; determinations by third party controlled distribution channels, including Amazon, not to carry or reduce inventory of the Company's products; determinations by advertisers or social media platforms, or legislation that prevents or limits marketing of some or all Byrna products; the loss of marketing partners; increases in marketing expenditure may not yield expected revenue increases; potential cancellations of existing or future orders including as a result of any fulfillment delays, introduction of competing products, negative publicity, or other factors; product design or manufacturing defects or recalls; litigation, enforcement proceedings or other regulatory or legal developments; changes in consumer or political sentiment affecting product demand; regulatory factors including the impact of commerce and trade laws and regulations; and future restrictions on the Company's cash resources, increased costs and other events that could potentially reduce demand for the Company's products or result in order cancellations. The order in which these factors appear should not be construed to indicate their relative importance or priority. We caution that these factors may not be exhaustive; accordingly, any forward-looking statements contained herein should not be relied upon as a prediction of actual results. Investors should carefully consider these and other relevant factors, including those risk factors in Part I, Item 1A, ("Risk Factors") in the Company's most recent Form 10-K and Part II, Item 1A ("Risk Factors") in the Company's most recent Form 10-Q, should understand it is impossible to predict or identify all such factors or risks, should not consider the foregoing list, or the risks identified in the Company's SEC filings, to be a complete discussion of all potential risks or uncertainties, and should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. The Company assumes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, except as required by applicable law. [Financial Tables to Follow]   BYRNA TECHNOLOGIES INC.Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss(Amounts in thousands except share and per share data)(Unaudited) For the Three Months EndedNovember 30, For the Years EndedNovember 30,.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzingaFeb 14th, 2024

Sweden Halts Nord Stream Investigation, Hands Off To Germany, As Hersh Fills In More Blanks

Sweden Halts Nord Stream Investigation, Hands Off To Germany, As Hersh Fills In More Blanks Prosecutors in Stockholm announced Wednesday they have shut down the investigation into who was behind the 2022 sabotage explosions that crippled Russia's Nord Stream pipelines to Germany. Sweden has long said it suspected an unknown state actor, and an official statement from its top prosecutor's office now claims "The conclusion of the investigation is that there is no Swedish jurisdiction and that the investigation should therefore be closed." This is because "nothing has emerged to indicate that Sweden or Swedish citizens were involved in the attack that took place in international waters." Still, the same statement says they now have a "good picture" of the incident after a "systematic and thorough" investigation and this has ultimately led to the conclusion that "Swedish jurisdiction is missing" - according to Swedish Public Prosecutor Mats Ljungqvist. "It is not Sweden's task to continue this investigation." Image source: nord-stream2.com "We have had good international cooperation with several countries, above all Denmark and Germany, where we have continuously shared information and situational images," it said, also underscoring that Germany's investigation continues, but necessarily under the "secrecy that prevails for international judicial cooperation." Also disappointing is the following: "I will also not be able to comment anything further on the conclusions of the Swedish investigation or comment on any suspected persons in the Swedish investigation," Ljungqvist said. Presumably, Russia fully cooperated as well, given the statement is absent some kind of censure on this front, and long gone are the early days after the blast of blaming Russia for the destruction of its own vital pipeline, as was common in Western media in the weeks that followed Sept. 26, 2022. However, the Kremlin has repeatedly complained that it has been denied access or any insight into the ongoing Western investigations. At the same time, Russia has at various times laid blame on the US, Britain and Ukraine for the covert operation which permanently severed this key method of access supplying energy to the lucrative European market. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Wednesday Russia will now follow closely what Germany will do to investigate the explosions. "Of course, now we need to see how Germany itself reacts to this, as a country that has lost a lot in relation to this terrorist attack," he said. Moscow further suspects that given the likelihood of Western intelligence services or Ukraine being behind the sabotage attack, this is all a big stall tactic and that each investigation will ultimately point nowhere.  Responsible Statecraft points out that "All signs since the year anniversary of the blasts have been pointing — in bright neon — to Ukraine as the culprit." However, legendary journalist Seymour Hersh has been reporting since February 2023 that an elite team of US Navy deep sea divers with the assistance of the CIA as well as Norwegian intelligence did it. He has not backed off his bombshell findings despite the mainstream press seeming to settle on a narrative saying a rogue group of Ukrainian operators sailing on a small boat were behind it. Hersh said the covert op had the full knowledge and oversight of the Biden administration, but naturally US officials have consistently denied it in those rare instances they are publicly asked about Hersh's reporting. Hersh has written a follow-up and bit of a retrospective this week, saying "Thursday marks one year since I reported President Joe Biden’s decision in the fall of 2022 to send a signal of resolve to Vladimir Putin by destroying Nord Stream 1 and 2, the Russian natural gas pipelines. Nord Stream 1 had turned Germany into the most powerful economic force in Western Europe." Sweden closes investigation into Nord Stream explosion: Because.. because the Swedish public prosecutor's office was unable to identify Russian suspects? pic.twitter.com/h6pW193nFL — Russian Market (@runews) February 7, 2024 "I won’t dwell on the failure of the mainstream media to follow up on that story—some reporters, as I learned decades ago, have inside sources and others do not," Hersh wrote. And on the failed investigations: Nothing more about the cause of the underwater bombings has been heard since from either Sweden or Denmark, although both nations knew, as I have written, that the US was practicing underwater diving in the Baltic Sea for months before the explosions. The failure of the two nations to complete their inquiry may have stemmed from the fact, as I was told, that some senior officials in both countries understood precisely what was going on. Below are more excerpts from Hersh's latest piece entitled The Nord Stream Pipelines and the Perils of Containment... * * * Putin would have canceled the invasion It is now widely accepted that Putin would have delayed or canceled the invasion if Secretary of State Antony Blinken had assured him that Ukraine would not be permitted to join NATO. That promise was not made. Instead, Biden publicly warned Putin two weeks before the Russians attacked that America would destroy the newly constructed pipeline, Nord Stream 2, that was prepared to funnel Russian gas to Germany. Putin had already slowed down and then cut off the earlier pipeline, Nord Stream 1, that began delivering gas to Germany a decade earlier. The cheap gas helped propel Germany into becoming the dominant manufacturing entity in Western Europe. Since the late 1950s, the United States and its Western European allies had worried about the political impact of Russian energy. A CIA plan to convince Putin to "back off" The idea of blowing up Nord Stream 1 and 2 had come from the American intelligence community, spearheaded at the time by the CIA. The community had been asked in late 2021 for options—American actions—that could convince Putin to back off. It was with this understanding that a most secret CIA unit was organized to find a way to do what President Biden wanted: to present Putin with a threat that could stop the Russian president from going to war. Bolstered by the CIA’s confidence, Biden stunned the intelligence community by threatening to blow up Nord Stream at a White House news conference on February 7, 2022, with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz standing at his side. The CIA team, ensconced in secrecy in Norway, continued to work on its assignment, and found a way to get the complicated job done by early spring. The understanding then, in the view of some of the planners, was for Biden to pull the trigger and publicly tell Putin that he had done what he threatened to do and he, Putin, had to understand that he was dealing with an American president whose words were to be taken seriously. But Biden changed his mind at the last minute—a time had been set for the underwater detonation of bombs that had been planted  earlier—and the operation was put on hold. The CIA team was given no explanation, and the American bombs were left in place, to be triggered whenever Biden chose to do so. Sullivan blamed Russia first Sullivan—who, as I reported last February, was the major player in generating a secret potential pre-war threat to Russia—provided an answer that was breathtaking in its obfuscation. “First,” he responded, “Russia has done what it frequently does when it is responsible for something . . . which is to make accusations that it was really someone else who did it. We’ve seen that repeatedly over time.” He said that the president was also clear—which he was not –that “there is more work to do on the investigation before the United States government is prepared to make an attribution in this case.” The White House, he said, would not make a “definitive determination” until its allies in the region concluded their work.  Sullivan said that Russia’s suggestion that the US was involved in the bombing was “flat out false. Russian know they’re false. But, of course, that is part of their playbook.” Russia excluded from investigations Sweden and Denmark, whose governments had every reason to know what had taken place, announced within days of the explosions that they would work together to investigate the explosions. On October 2, Germany said it would work with Sweden and Denmark on the inquiry. Twelve days later the Russian foreign ministry expressed its “bewilderment” at being excluded from the inquiry. On that day, too, Sweden said it would not join in the inquiries because it would involve the transfer of information related to Sweden’s national security.  Hersh in his new note goes on to cite Emmanuel Todd, a French demographer and political scientist, who explains that that "one of the great goals of American politics, and therefore of NATO, was to stop the inevitable reconciliation of Russia and Germany" given that despite US-led sanctions it remained that Russia was “evincing economic stability." Hersh cites him to conclude: "This was a great source of fear," Todd said, "and that is why the Americans"—he cited my Nord Stream exposé—"blew up the Nord Stream pipeline."  The full Hersh piece can be accessed at this Substack here. Tyler Durden Wed, 02/07/2024 - 10:20.....»»

Category: dealsSource: nytFeb 7th, 2024

The feud between "Charmed" costars Alyssa Milano and Shannen Doherty just got even messier

There have long been rumors among "Charmed" fans of a feud between Alyssa Milano and Shannen Doherty. New accusations have reignited the drama. Alyssa Milano, Holly Marie Combs, and Shannen Doherty of "Charmed" in 1999.Getty ImagesA long-running feud between the stars of the 1990s show "Charmed" is back in the spotlight.In December, Shannen Doherty accused Alyssa Milano of getting her fired from the show.Now Milano has responded, denying she had any hand in the producers' decision to write Doherty out.For fans of "Charmed" and its long-running behind-the-scenes drama, the show's legacy has always been tough to parse.The TV hit, about three sisters who happened to be witches, premiered in 1998, building on the success of other supernatural "girl power" stories of the era like "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "The Craft."For eight years, The Charmed Ones fought literal demons while hitting viewers over the head with the script's unsubtle emphasis on morality, sisterhood, and female empowerment. But off-screen, stories of bitter feuds between costars, reported attempts at sexualizing the female actors, and the abrupt replacement of its star Shannen Doherty with Rose McGowan in its fourth season told a different story.Doherty's departure was initially framed as her decision. But in December 2023, more than 20 years later, she claimed that was far from the truth, an allegation costar Holly Marie Combs has cosigned.However, Milano, who recently broke her silence on the claims, has painted a different story of how everything went down.Milano said she didn't have the power to get Doherty firedAlyssa Milano speaks at MegaCon Orlando 2024 at Orange County Convention Center on February 2, 2024.Gerardo Mora/Getty ImagesAppearing on a panel at MegaCon in Orlando on February 2, Milano responded to claims that she was responsible for the "Beverly Hills, 90210" alum's abrupt departure from "Charmed" following its third season in 2001.On the show, Milano played Phoebe Halliwell, alongside Combs, who played her on-screen sister, Piper Halliwell, and Doherty, who was initially cast as their older sister, Prue Halliwell."I knew this was going to come up in one way or another, and I want to be very thoughtful in how I respond to any of this, and I will just say that I'm sad," Milano said when asked about the situation, Deadline reported."I'm the most sad for the fans," she continued. "I am the most sad that a show that has meant so much to so many people has been tarnished by a toxicity that is still to this day almost a quarter of a century later still happening."Milano followed up her comments at the event with a post shared to Instagram, in which she said she "did not have the power to get anyone fired." View this post on Instagram A post shared by Alyssa Milano (@milano_alyssa) "I don't know one other show that has had the success that 'Charmed' had where the cast still speaks ill of the experience a quarter of a century later," Milano wrote in the caption on the post, which featured screenshots of her transcribed comments from the MegaCon panel.Writing about her time working on "Charmed," Milano added in the caption that she had "absolute certainty" that "everything was documented.""There was a professional mediator (I was told Holly and Shannen would not participate in any mediation) and an on-set producer/babysitter who were both brought in to investigate all claims," she wrote."The studio, Aaron Spelling, and network made the decision to protect the international hit that was Charmed," Milano added. "I did not have the power to get anyone fired. Once Shannen left we had 5 more successful seasons and I am forever grateful."Doherty addressed Milano's denial during a separate MegaCon panel she participated in with McGowan and Combs on February 4."A lot of things have been said and a lot of them are very hurtful," Doherty began. She said that she and Combs were not "mean" when discussing their history with Milano on her podcast and that they stand by what they said."We simply told the truth, because the truth actually does matter. But we wanted to try to save you, the fans, from heartbreak as much as humanly possible," she continued."At this point in my life, with my health diagnosis — sorry if I start crying — with fighting horrific disease every day of my life, it is also incredibly important to me that the truth actually be told, as opposed to the narrative that others put out there for me," Doherty said, referencing her terminal cancer diagnosis in 2020. @disadventurelife Charmed panel where Shannon adresses Alyssa at Megacon orlando #shannondonerty #alyssamilano #charmedpanel #charmedreuinion #megaconorlando #megaconorlando2024 ♬ original sound - Disadventurelife Combs also responded to Milano's post a day later, saying in a lengthy Instagram post on Monday that she felt the need to defend herself after Milano "stepped out on the stage and essentially called Shannen and I liars."Combs added that she was "shocked and a little disappointed," particularly by Milano's Instagram post the day after her comments at the panel, claiming that Milano had been texting her "words to the contrary" at the same time as her post."This is not revisionist history. This is just the history she didn't want people to know about. And the history Shannen wasn't ready to talk about until one month ago," she wrote, in part. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Holly Combs (@thehmc) The drama between Milano and Doherty kicked off in December 2023, when Combs said Milano threatened to sue 'Charmed' producers if they didn't fire DohertyHolly Marie Combs and Shannen Doherty together in 2001.Vince Bucci/Getty ImagesOn her podcast "Let's Be Clear," which launched in late 2023, Doherty discussed her time on the show with her longtime friend and former costar Combs.Combs claimed that one of the show's producers, Jonathan Levin, told her Doherty was fired after Milano threatened to sue producers, People reported."We didn't mean to, but we've been backed into this corner — we're basically in this position where it's one or the other. We were told [by Alyssa] it's her or [Shannen] and Alyssa has threatened to sue us for a hostile workplace environment," Levin reportedly said.Doherty added: "The narrative that I quit was assigned to me by other people. I didn't assign it to myself. And I think I'm just at that point in my life where I don't want to keep lying about something," she said."I don't think that there's anybody in their right mind that would quit a hit show that's paying them a good amount of money that they actually really enjoy working on."Representatives for Milano, Doherty, Combs, and CBS Studios, which now owns "Charmed" production company Spelling Television, did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.Doherty suggested at least part of the rivalry had to do with her and Milano fighting for Combs' friendship. She accused Milano of blocking Doherty from visiting Combs in the hospital while filming season two of the show and said she cried every night during that period.Doherty's "bad girl" reputation was, at the time, believed to be to blame for her departure from "Charmed." Rumors resurfaced that she'd been previously fired from a starring role on "Beverly Hills 90210" after a series of on-set issues, per People.Following her statements, many fans took to social media to side with Doherty, suggesting she was unfairly vilified by the "Charmed" fandom.But it's not the only off-air relationship they're discussing. @thoughtswgracie2.0 #charmed #charmedtvseries #hollymariecombs #piperhalliwell #shannendoherty #pruehalliwell #phoebehalliwell #alyssamilano #rosemcgowan #jonathanlevin #paigematthews #tvseries #letsbeclearpodcast #tvnews #hollywood #hollywooddrama #Popculture #thoughtswgracie #kerusso#popcultureanalysis #popculturenews #popculturemedia #popculturetiktok #marketing #marketingdigital#fyp #foryoupage #letsbeclear #celebrity #celebritytiktok #celebritynews #celebrityanalysis #celebrityrelationship #influencer #influencernews #influencermedia #influenceranalysis #influencertiktok #podcast #podcastanalysis #podcastnews#greenscreen ♬ original sound - Kerusso The resurfaced drama has reignited speculation about feuds between other 'Charmed' starsOn Reddit, where "Charmed" fans still passionately debate every aspect of the show, a thread about Doherty's claims about Milano has very active. One of the key questions surrounds Combs' relationship history with the two women.Just a year ago, Milano posted on Instagram in celebration of Combs' birthday, writing, "Love you so much," suggesting the pair were friends at the time.Combs and Doherty have had ups and downs. Combs said in a 2020 interview that despite years of friendship, she and Doherty were no longer in touch after becoming "too close."But Combs' participation in Doherty's podcast — in particular, her supporting Doherty's allegations and saying she wanted to quit "Charmed" in solidarity but was threatened with a lawsuit — has caused speculation among fans. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Alyssa Milano (@milano_alyssa) Milano also has a fraught relationship with costar Rose McGowan, who joined the show following Doherty's exit in 2002. This dates back at least to their separate involvement with the #MeToo movement.In early October 2017, The New York Times and The New Yorker published exposés about the sexual assault and harassment allegations against Harvey Weinstein. A week after the story broke, McGowan tweeted that she had been raped by "HW," later clarifying she was referring to Weinstein, BI previously reported.Three days later, Milano tweeted asking women to reply "Me Too" if they had been sexually harassed or assaulted. It went mega-viral and has been credited with popularizing the #MeToo hashtag.In 2020, multiple outlets reported that during a Twitter spat over politics, McGowan accused Milano of stealing the MeToo movement from activist Tarana Burke, who founded it in 2006 to support survivors of sexual violence, in particular women of color. (Burke and Milano have made many public appearances together and Burke was a guest on the inaugural episode of Milano's podcast "Sorry Not Sorry" in 2019, along with Joe Biden.)McGowan's tweets are no longer available to view, but she also reportedly said Milano made the set of "Charmed" toxic and called her a fraud. At the time, a representative for Milano told People: "Hurt people hurt people. Commenting any further doesn't align with my wellness plan."McGowan did not respond to a request for comment from BI.Generations of fans are left reckoning with the show's messy legacyAcross social media, many fans are saying they're seeing the show through a different lens since the recent developments. Some are re-evaluating the acting for being so believable despite the behind-the-scenes tension and saying Combs' portrayal of grief after Doherty's character was killed off takes on new depth with the added context.Add to years of feuds a 2018 reboot that was vocally slammed by some of the original show's cast and writers, and it seems the "Charmed" reckoning may never end. Ironically, for a show where most characters fit neatly into a "good" or "evil" box, much of the real-life drama seems to live in a gray area.S4 is special to me cuz that emotion was real! Mourning and all. I wonder if these 2 BONDED or just existed at this point because I know Alyssa knew Holly knew lol... The change helped on screen and stretched Holly in real life as well cuz she stepped the hell up. #charmed pic.twitter.com/FWtV88mHpE— RoJay (@itsRoJay) December 19, 2023Since the show ended nearly 18 years ago, Milano and McGowan have thrown themselves into politics and activism, while Combs hosts a "Charmed" rewatch podcast with co-stars Brian Krause, who played her husband on the show, and Drew Fuller, who played their adult, time-traveling son. Doherty, meanwhile, has been outspoken in her experience living with cancer, which she was first diagnosed with in 2015 and announced had returned and was terminal in 2020.Despite everything, Combs and Doherty said during the December 2023 podcast episode that they're open to reprising their "Charmed" roles, echoing McGowan's statement at a panel in 2023 that she'd "love" to do the same."I just think there's three generations now that have watched the show," Combs said. "Some things are bigger than you, and some things are more important than personal feelings."As for how the actors might make it work given the cast dynamics, she said: "There's also split screen and green screen, and people don't have to work with each other if they don't want to.""We can just make it look like you do."Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: topSource: businessinsiderFeb 6th, 2024

"Apprentice" host blasts WFH, saying it"s bad for morale and learning — while giving a remote interview

British business mogul and "The Apprentice" host Lord Alan Sugar recently criticized remote working in an interview with the BBC. Lord Alan Sugar, business titan and star of "The Apprentice" UK. NurPhoto/Getty Images"The Apprentice" host and entrepreneur Lord Alan Sugar recently blasted remote work in a BBC interview. "You don't learn sitting at home in your Pajamas," he said.He's now being criticized for making these comments while doing the interview remotely via video. British business mogul and "The Apprentice" host Lord Alan Sugar recently criticized remote working saying it's bad for morale and learning. Lord Sugar, who has been the star of the popular reality competition series "The Apprentice" since 2005, was giving a remote interview with BBC Breakfast after season 18 of the series premiered this month."You don't learn sitting at home in your pajamas." Lord Sugar said during the virtual interview. "I think it's bad for morale, bad for learning. I know I learned from being with other people in an office.""I'm totally against it," he said. Lord Sugar's PR advisor, Andrew Bloch, wrote on X that he was out of the country at the time. But the video posted by the BBC on TikTok has been flooded with critical comments from users calling Lord Sugar hypocritical for his views. One user wrote: "Why didn't he show up to the interview at the studio?"Another said: "He says while sitting at home." Business Insider contacted Bloch for comment regarding Lord Sugar's comments but did not immediately hear back.Lord Sugar recently shared some harsh words about the younger generation during an interview with The Daily Mail, where he criticized their sense of entitlement. He said: "I see that in all walks of life now. Lack of hunger, wanting a quick fix, not wanting to put the graft in and get there through hard work. It's a different culture."The battle between older generations and Gen Z has intensified in recent years as the younger generation enters the workplace. Whoopi Goldberg, John Catsimatidis, and Whole Foods' former CEO John Mackey are among those who have called out younger workers for having a poor work ethic.Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: worldSource: nytFeb 5th, 2024

New Ad Agency Fights Back Against The Woke Advertising Cabal

New Ad Agency Fights Back Against The Woke Advertising Cabal Authored by Lee Taylor of Uncommon Sense via the Daily Sceptic (emphasis ours), Are we in the final stages of mainstream media dominance? Over the last 15 years the market has certainly shifted – the mainstream’s sluggish adoption of nascent technology and that technology’s ever expanding reach has opened the door to new media.  It takes a long time for a whale washed up on a beach to decay to just bones. Scavengers pick over the rotting carcass for years before it finally disappears. One could argue that since 2020 the decay of mainstream media has quickened in pace. The mainstream media’s bias and lack of integrity is unravelling. Whether it was the failure of the mainstream to interrogate the Covid narrative, the one-sided and often mistaken coverage of the BLM protests after the murder of George Floyd or the lack of interest and then cover up of a certain laptop, perception of impartiality is difficult to justify. What has stopped mainstream media asking the most pertinent and relevant questions? Recent events highlight either a lack of journalistic integrity or, more concerning, ideological capture. The New York Times is no longer the paper of record, seemingly reporting Hamas press releases verbatim. The once great BBC seems to be more interested in teaching about white privilege, while the Associated Press is now the communications arm of the climate change lobby. Dissenting opinions, alternative and independent views and traditional values are being deconstructed to an alarming degree. This has left many people feeling unseen and de-prioritised in the cultural conversation. Reading, viewing and listening figures are all down across the mainstream. The public is departing the mainstream in droves. But the question is, where are they going?  Figures show they are going to new media. Joe Rogan is now arguably the world’s most powerful journalist; his popularity is largely due to him offering long form content where viewers and listeners get a better understanding of the issues than they would from clickbait headlines or snippets. Matt Taibbi, an American author, journalist, podcaster and former Contributing Editor for Rolling Stone, broke the Twitter files on his Substack, and Dr. Carl Heneghan and Dr. Tom Jefferson, two medical researchers whose Covid advice was different from the Government’s, can review and respond to the U.K.’s Covid Inquiry on Substack. Funding Traditionally the mainstream was funded by advertisers. Brands would place ads for their products and services in the pages of publications and pay for the privilege. Potential customers would see the ads and buy the products or services. With the digitalisation of the news this moved to website ads and then led to the centralisation of ad inventory. This all worked out quite nicely for everyone. But then… Independent news media represent a double threat to the established mainstream. Firstly, the mainstream is haemorrhaging readers, viewers and listeners to them; advertisers pay per impression in the digital world, thus less impressions mean less advertising revenue. Secondly and more dangerously, alt-media sites are subverting the mainstream media’s control of the narrative. Wiser men have written about the censorship industrial complex, a phrase coined by Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger; it is a growing, international, multi-billion dollar sector. The establishment has a number of tactics to censor and thwart independent publishers. Some are easy to spot, while others are more covert. YouTubers and podcasters can simply be taken off the platforms: Jordan Peterson has had a number of episodes taken off YouTube and Dr. Robert W. Malone has been banned completely. It is a little more difficult to impede independent news publishers. One way is for the Global Disinformation Index (GDI) and other NGOs like NewsGuard and Graphika to deem alt-news websites to be ‘unsafe’ because they publish ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’ – often relying on ‘fact-checkers’ funded by these websites’ mainstream rivals – thus removing their ability to sell advertising space. Media Matters monitors media outlets for “conservative misinformation” then notifies activist journalists so they can take “direct action against offending media institutions”. They sometimes do this in nefarious ways – as revealed in the recent Musk lawsuit.  The big social media platforms offer a new way to connect with users. But with the exception of X, they do not tolerate free speech. Calling a man dressed up as a woman a man will get you banned on Facebook and Instagram quicker than you can say “XY”. YouTube has what it is calling a ‘hate speech’ policy that is applied so arbitrarily that it is near impossible to guess what content it will tolerate and what will be removed because it’s ‘hate speech’.  Twitter 1.0 said it was not shadow-banning but the Twitter Files revealed that was clearly a lie. Twitter 2.0 is better than Twitter 1.0, but it still shadow-bans some content under a policy described as “freedom of speech, not reach” and we know Google tweaks its algorithms to promote content it approves of and suppress content it doesn’t. The mainstream media and their backers are doing all they can to suppress and demonetise independent media creators.  Independent media funding  Yet against all odds, independent media channels are thriving, attracting millions of page views, viewers and listeners. Without access to advertisers and with the sword of Damocles hanging over them, independent content creators are forced to rely on donations from supporters and fans or premium content subscription models.  Independent media are what they say, independent, and so trying to get them all in one place is a bit like herding cats. However, there is now a way to seamlessly advertise across all independent publishers. Through my agency’s new advertising platform, you can simultaneously reach the readers of the Daily Sceptic or Spiked, access viewers of Triggernometry or Real America’s Voice, or sponsor the Zero Hedge Debates.  Uncommon Ad Space, a new advertising platform my agency has created, represents a unique opportunity to promote your brand to a largely untapped audience of millions of fiercely loyal, independent thinkers and heavy purchasers. The mission is to bring independent media outlets together in one place so brands and advertisers who want to reach this market can do so easily. Not only can brands get access to a rapidly growing audience, but they can also help support independent content creators and circumvent efforts by the censorship-industrial complex to demonetise them.  As the utopian globalist ideologues abandon everything of value, beauty, truth, justice and genuine merit, they create huge opportunities for independent websites and content creators. New media are the future. Old media sites are rapidly piling up in the dustbin of history.   Lee Taylor is the Managing Director of marketing agency Uncommon Sense. You can contact him on email here. Find Uncommon Ad Space on X. The Uncommon Ad Space website can be found here. Tyler Durden Thu, 02/01/2024 - 17:40.....»»

Category: smallbizSource: nytFeb 1st, 2024

New Ad Agency Fights Back Against The Woke Advertising Cabal

New Ad Agency Fights Back Against The Woke Advertising Cabal Authored by Lee Taylor of Uncommon Sense via the Daily Sceptic (emphasis ours), Are we in the final stages of mainstream media dominance? Over the last 15 years the market has certainly shifted – the mainstream’s sluggish adoption of nascent technology and that technology’s ever expanding reach has opened the door to new media.  It takes a long time for a whale washed up on a beach to decay to just bones. Scavengers pick over the rotting carcass for years before it finally disappears. One could argue that since 2020 the decay of mainstream media has quickened in pace. The mainstream media’s bias and lack of integrity is unravelling. Whether it was the failure of the mainstream to interrogate the Covid narrative, the one-sided and often mistaken coverage of the BLM protests after the murder of George Floyd or the lack of interest and then cover up of a certain laptop, perception of impartiality is difficult to justify. What has stopped mainstream media asking the most pertinent and relevant questions? Recent events highlight either a lack of journalistic integrity or, more concerning, ideological capture. The New York Times is no longer the paper of record, seemingly reporting Hamas press releases verbatim. The once great BBC seems to be more interested in teaching about white privilege, while the Associated Press is now the communications arm of the climate change lobby. Dissenting opinions, alternative and independent views and traditional values are being deconstructed to an alarming degree. This has left many people feeling unseen and de-prioritised in the cultural conversation. Reading, viewing and listening figures are all down across the mainstream. The public is departing the mainstream in droves. But the question is, where are they going?  Figures show they are going to new media. Joe Rogan is now arguably the world’s most powerful journalist; his popularity is largely due to him offering long form content where viewers and listeners get a better understanding of the issues than they would from clickbait headlines or snippets. Matt Taibbi, an American author, journalist, podcaster and former Contributing Editor for Rolling Stone, broke the Twitter files on his Substack, and Dr. Carl Heneghan and Dr. Tom Jefferson, two medical researchers whose Covid advice was different from the Government’s, can review and respond to the U.K.’s Covid Inquiry on Substack. Funding Traditionally the mainstream was funded by advertisers. Brands would place ads for their products and services in the pages of publications and pay for the privilege. Potential customers would see the ads and buy the products or services. With the digitalisation of the news this moved to website ads and then led to the centralisation of ad inventory. This all worked out quite nicely for everyone. But then… Independent news media represent a double threat to the established mainstream. Firstly, the mainstream is haemorrhaging readers, viewers and listeners to them; advertisers pay per impression in the digital world, thus less impressions mean less advertising revenue. Secondly and more dangerously, alt-media sites are subverting the mainstream media’s control of the narrative. Wiser men have written about the censorship industrial complex, a phrase coined by Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger; it is a growing, international, multi-billion dollar sector. The establishment has a number of tactics to censor and thwart independent publishers. Some are easy to spot, while others are more covert. YouTubers and podcasters can simply be taken off the platforms: Jordan Peterson has had a number of episodes taken off YouTube and Dr. Robert W. Malone has been banned completely. It is a little more difficult to impede independent news publishers. One way is for the Global Disinformation Index (GDI) and other NGOs like NewsGuard and Graphika to deem alt-news websites to be ‘unsafe’ because they publish ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’ – often relying on ‘fact-checkers’ funded by these websites’ mainstream rivals – thus removing their ability to sell advertising space. Media Matters monitors media outlets for “conservative misinformation” then notifies activist journalists so they can take “direct action against offending media institutions”. They sometimes do this in nefarious ways – as revealed in the recent Musk lawsuit.  The big social media platforms offer a new way to connect with users. But with the exception of X, they do not tolerate free speech. Calling a man dressed up as a woman a man will get you banned on Facebook and Instagram quicker than you can say “XY”. YouTube has what it is calling a ‘hate speech’ policy that is applied so arbitrarily that it is near impossible to guess what content it will tolerate and what will be removed because it’s ‘hate speech’.  Twitter 1.0 said it was not shadow-banning but the Twitter Files revealed that was clearly a lie. Twitter 2.0 is better than Twitter 1.0, but it still shadow-bans some content under a policy described as “freedom of speech, not reach” and we know Google tweaks its algorithms to promote content it approves of and suppress content it doesn’t. The mainstream media and their backers are doing all they can to suppress and demonetise independent media creators.  Independent media funding  Yet against all odds, independent media channels are thriving, attracting millions of page views, viewers and listeners. Without access to advertisers and with the sword of Damocles hanging over them, independent content creators are forced to rely on donations from supporters and fans or premium content subscription models.  Independent media are what they say, independent, and so trying to get them all in one place is a bit like herding cats. However, there is now a way to seamlessly advertise across all independent publishers. Through my agency’s new advertising platform, you can simultaneously reach the readers of the Daily Sceptic or Spiked, access viewers of Triggernometry or Real America’s Voice, or sponsor the Zero Hedge Debates.  Uncommon Ad Space, a new advertising platform my agency has created, represents a unique opportunity to promote your brand to a largely untapped audience of millions of fiercely loyal, independent thinkers and heavy purchasers. The mission is to bring independent media outlets together in one place so brands and advertisers who want to reach this market can do so easily. Not only can brands get access to a rapidly growing audience, but they can also help support independent content creators and circumvent efforts by the censorship-industrial complex to demonetise them.  As the utopian globalist ideologues abandon everything of value, beauty, truth, justice and genuine merit, they create huge opportunities for independent websites and content creators. New media are the future. Old media sites are rapidly piling up in the dustbin of history.   Lee Taylor is the Managing Director of marketing agency Uncommon Sense. You can contact him on email here. Find Uncommon Ad Space on X. The Uncommon Ad Space website can be found here. Tyler Durden Thu, 02/01/2024 - 17:40.....»»

Category: worldSource: nytFeb 1st, 2024

Celestica Announces Fourth Quarter 2023 Financial Results

Q4 2023 non-IFRS adjusted EPS* above high end of guidance rangeQ4 2023 non-IFRS operating margin* reaches 6.0% (All amounts in U.S. dollars. Per share information based on dilutedshares outstanding unless otherwise noted.) TORONTO, Jan. 29, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Celestica Inc. (TSX:CLS) (NYSE:CLS), a leader in design, manufacturing, hardware platform and supply chain solutions for the world's most innovative companies, today announced financial results for the quarter ended December 31, 2023 (Q4 2023)†. "We are pleased with our solid fourth quarter results, delivering non-IFRS operating margin* of 6.0%, and non-IFRS adjusted EPS* of $0.76. We had a strong finish to 2023 and achieved 10% revenue growth for the full year compared to 2022, while our non-IFRS adjusted EPS* of $2.43 and non-IFRS operating margin* of 5.6% were each the highest in our company's history" said Rob Mionis, President and CEO, Celestica. "The strong momentum we had in 2023 is continuing into 2024 and we remain confident in our long term strategy". Q4 2023 Highlights • Key measures: Revenue: $2.14 billion, increased 5% compared to $2.04 billion for the fourth quarter of 2022 (Q4 2022). Non-IFRS operating margin*: 6.0%, compared to 5.3% for Q4 2022. ATS segment revenue decreased 2% compared to Q4 2022; ATS segment margin was 4.7% compared to 4.4% for Q4 2022. CCS segment revenue increased 10% compared to Q4 2022; CCS segment margin was 6.7% compared to 5.9% for Q4 2022. Adjusted earnings per share (EPS) (non-IFRS)*: $0.76, compared to $0.56 for Q4 2022. Adjusted return on invested capital (adjusted ROIC) (non-IFRS)*: 23.3%, compared to 20.7% for Q4 2022. Adjusted free cash flow (non-IFRS)*: $83.8 million, compared to $42.6 million for Q4 2022. • Most directly comparable IFRS financial measures to non-IFRS measures above: Earnings from operations as a percentage of revenue: 5.5% compared to 4.0% for Q4 2022. EPS: $0.70 compared to $0.35 for Q4 2022. Return on invested capital (IFRS ROIC): 21.6% compared to 15.7% for Q4 2022. Cash provided by operations: $138.8 million compared to $101.3 million for Q4 2022. • Repurchased 0.4 million subordinate voting shares (SVS) for cancellation for $10.0 million. † Celestica has two operating and reportable segments: Advanced Technology Solutions (ATS) and Connectivity & Cloud Solutions (CCS). Our ATS segment consists of our ATS end market and is comprised of our Aerospace and Defense (A&D), Industrial, HealthTech and Capital Equipment businesses. Our CCS segment consists of our Communications and Enterprise (servers and storage) end markets. Segment performance is evaluated based on segment revenue, segment income and segment margin (segment income as a percentage of segment revenue). See note 3 to our December 31, 2023 unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements (Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements) for further detail.* Non-International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) financial measures (including ratios based on non-IFRS financial measures) do not have any standardized meaning prescribed by IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar financial measures presented by other public companies that report under IFRS or U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). See "Non-IFRS Supplementary Information" below for information on our rationale for the use of non-IFRS financial measures. See Schedule 1 for, among other items, non-IFRS financial measures included in this press release, their definitions, uses, and a reconciliation of historical non-IFRS financial measures to the most directly comparable IFRS financial measures. Schedule 1 also includes a description of modifications to the calculation of certain non-IFRS financial measures resulting from: (x) a recently-applicable exclusion related to our total return swap (TRS); and (y) the recent addition of certain costs to Other Charges, substantially all of which consist of additional Transition Costs and Secondary Offering Costs (each as defined therein). The most directly comparable IFRS financial measures to non-IFRS operating margin, non-IFRS adjusted EPS, non-IFRS adjusted ROIC and non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow are earnings from operations as a percentage of revenue, EPS, IFRS ROIC, and cash provided by operations, respectively. First Quarter of 2024 (Q1 2024) Guidance‡   Q1 2024 Guidance Revenue (in billions) $2.025 to $2.175 Non-IFRS operating margin* 6.0% at the mid-point of ourrevenue and non-IFRS adjustedEPS guidance ranges Adjusted SG&A (non-IFRS)* (in millions) $62 to $64 Adjusted EPS (non-IFRS)* $0.67 to $0.77 For Q1 2024, we expect a negative $0.26 to $0.32 per share (pre-tax) aggregate impact on net earnings on an IFRS basis for employee stock-based compensation (SBC) expense, amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software), and restructuring charges. For Q1 2024, we also expect a non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate* of approximately 20% (which does not account for foreign exchange impacts or unanticipated tax settlements), assuming that our income will be subject to Pillar Two global minimum tax, as legislation that has been introduced in Canada may become applicable before the end of Q1 2024 with retroactive impact to January 1, 2024‡. If this legislation is not substantively enacted in Q1 2024, we expect that our non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate* for the quarter would be approximately 15%. 2024 Annual Outlook Update‡ We are updating the 2024 annual non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow* outlook provided in our November 29, 2023 press release from $175 million, or more, to $200 million, or more; other 2024 annual outlook items provided therein remain unchanged. * See Schedule 1 for the definitions of, and recent modifications to certain of, these non-IFRS financial measures. We do not provide reconciliations for forward-looking non-IFRS financial measures, as we are unable to provide a meaningful or accurate calculation or estimation of reconciling items and the information is not available without unreasonable effort. This is due to the inherent difficulty of forecasting the timing or amount of various events that have not yet occurred, are out of our control and/or cannot be reasonably predicted, and that would impact the most directly comparable forward-looking IFRS financial measure. For these same reasons, we are unable to address the probable significance of the unavailable information. Forward-looking non-IFRS financial measures may vary materially from the corresponding IFRS financial measures. ‡ Our Q1 2024 guidance and 2024 annual outlook each assume: (i) accelerated applicability of Pillar Two global minimum tax legislation to reporting periods in 2024 instead of 2025 (see note 2 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements); and (ii) anticipated operational adjustments, including tax efficiencies. However, the timing of global minimum tax legislation effectiveness and its impact on our tax expense cannot currently be estimated with certainty, and may differ materially from our expectations. In addition, although we have incorporated the anticipated impact of demand softness in our Capital Equipment business into our Q1 2024 financial guidance and 2024 annual outlook to the best of our ability, its adverse impact (in terms of duration and severity) cannot be estimated with certainty, and may be materially in excess of our expectations. Summary of Selected Q4 2023 Results   Q4 2023 Actual   Q4 2023 Guidance (2) Key measures:       Revenue (in billions) $2.14     $2.00 to $2.15 Non-IFRS operating margin*   6.0%     5.7% at the mid-point of ourrevenue and non-IFRS adjustedEPS guidance ranges Adjusted SG&A (non-IFRS)* (in millions) $76.7     $67 to $69 Adjusted EPS (non-IFRS)* $0.76     $0.65 to $0.71         Most directly comparable IFRS financial measures:       Earnings from operations as a % of revenue   5.5%     N/A SG&A (in millions) $75.7     N/A EPS (1) $0.70     N/A *See Schedule 1 for, among other things, the definitions of, and recent modifications to, these non-IFRS financial measures, as well as a reconciliation of these non-IFRS financial measures to the most directly comparable IFRS financial measures for Q4 2023. (1) IFRS EPS of $0.70 for Q4 2023 included an aggregate charge of $0.17 (pre-tax) per share for employee SBC expense, amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software), and restructuring charges (excluding restructuring recoveries). See the tables in Schedule 1 and note 9 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements for per-item charges. This aggregate charge was within our Q4 2023 guidance range of between $0.15 to $0.21 per share for these items. IFRS EPS for Q4 2023 included: a $0.10 per share positive impact attributable to a fair value gain on our TRS (TRS Gain), substantially all of which was offset by: (i) a $0.04 per share negative tax impact arising from the repatriation of undistributed earnings, net of the reversal of previously-recorded tax expense from then-anticipated repatriations, from certain of our Asian subsidiaries; (ii) a $0.04 per share negative impact arising from tax uncertainties relating to one of our Asian subsidiaries (Tax Uncertainties); and (iii) a $0.01 per share negative impact attributable to restructuring charges. See notes 8, 9 and 10 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements. IFRS EPS of $0.35 for Q4 2022 included a $0.03 per share negative impact arising from taxable temporary differences associated with the anticipated repatriation of undistributed earnings from certain of our Chinese subsidiaries (Repatriation Expense), a $0.02 per share negative impact attributable to restructuring charges, and a $0.01 per share negative taxable foreign exchange impact arising from the fluctuation of the Chinese renminbi relative to the U.S. dollar (Currency Impact). See notes 9 and 10 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements. (2) For Q4 2023, our revenue was towards the high end of our guidance range; our non-IFRS adjusted EPS exceeded the high end of our guidance range, and our non-IFRS operating margin exceeded the mid-point of our revenue and non-IFRS adjusted EPS guidance ranges, driven by unanticipated volume leverage and production efficiencies in our CCS segment. Our non-IFRS adjusted SG&A for Q4 2023 exceeded the high end of our guidance range as a result of an audit settlement of certain historical value-added tax filings for one of our subsidiaries in Asia. Our IFRS effective tax rate for Q4 2023 was 19%. As anticipated, our non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate for Q4 2023 was 20%. Summary of Selected Full Year 2023 Results 2023 was another successful year for Celestica, in which we continued to demonstrate solid performance, including the following achievements:   2022 Actual   2023 Actual   2023 Outlook           (previously provided in November 29, 2023 press release) Key measures:           Revenue (in billions) $7.25   $7.96   $7.90 Non-IFRS operating margin* 4.9%   5.6%   5.5% Adjusted EPS (non-IFRS)* $1.90   $2.43   $2.36 Adjusted ROIC (non-IFRS)* 17.5%   20.7%   N/A Adjusted free cash flow (non-IFRS)* (in millions) $93.8   $193.9   $150.0 Most directly comparable IFRS financial measures:           Earnings from operations as a % of revenue 3.6%   4.8%   N/A EPS (1) $1.18   $2.03   N/A IFRS ROIC 12.9%   17.8%   N/A Cash provided by operations (in millions) $297.9   $429.7   N/A             * See Schedule 1 for, among other things, the definitions of, and exclusions used to determine, these non-IFRS financial measures, and a reconciliation of such non-IFRS financial measures to the most directly comparable IFRS financial measures for 2023 and 2022. Schedule 1 also includes a description of modifications to the calculation of certain non-IFRS financial measures as a result of: (x) a recently-applicable exclusion related to our TRS; and (y) the recent addition of certain costs to Other Charges, substantially all of which consist of additional Transition Costs and Secondary Offering Costs (each as defined therein). (1) IFRS EPS of $2.03 for 2023 included: (i) a $0.38 per share TRS Gain and (ii) a $0.05 favorable tax impact attributable to the reversals of previously-recorded tax uncertainties in one of our Asian subsidiaries; partially offset by: (x) a $0.12 per share negative impact attributable to net other charges (consisting primarily of a $0.10 per share negative impact attributable to restructuring charges, a $0.03 per share negative impact attributable to Transition Costs, a $0.01 per share negative impact attributable to Acquisition Costs, and a $0.01 per share negative impact, substantially of which was attributable to Secondary Offering Costs (each defined in Schedule 1), offset in part by a $0.02 per share positive impact attributable to legal recoveries and a $0.01 per share positive impact attributable to restructuring recoveries); and (y) a $0.09 per share negative tax impact from both the repatriation of undistributed earnings and taxable temporary differences associated with the then-anticipated repatriation of undistributed earnings from certain of our Asian subsidiaries, and a $0.04 per share negative impact from Tax Uncertainties. See notes 8, 9 and 10 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements. IFRS EPS of $1.18 for 2022 included: (i) a $0.05 per share negative impact attributable to net other charges (consisting most significantly of a $0.07 per share negative impact attributable to restructuring charges and a $0.01 per share negative impact attributable to Transition Costs, partially offset by a $0.03 per share positive impact attributable to Transition Recoveries (each defined in Schedule 1)); (ii) a $0.03 per share negative impact attributable to estimated Constraint Costs (defined as both direct and indirect costs, including manufacturing inefficiencies related to lost revenue due to our inability to secure materials, idled labor costs and incremental costs for labor, expedite fees and freight premiums, cleaning supplies, personal protective equipment, and/or IT-related services to support our work-from-home arrangements as a result of supply chain constraints, or COVID-19-related periodic lockdowns or workforce constraints); (iii) a $0.03 per share negative Currency Impact; and (iv) a $0.03 per share negative Repatriation Expense, all offset in part by a $0.04 per share favorable tax impact attributable to the reversal of previously-recorded tax uncertainties in one of our Asian subsidiaries. See notes 9 and 10 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements. Acceptance of Normal Course Issuer Bid (NCIB) On December 12, 2023, the Toronto Stock Exchange accepted our notice to launch a new NCIB (2023 NCIB). The 2023 NCIB allows us to repurchase, at our discretion, from December 14, 2023 until the earlier of December 13, 2024 or the completion of purchases thereunder, up to approximately 11.8 million SVS in the open market, or as otherwise permitted, subject to the normal terms and limitations of such bids. See note 8 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements. Q4 2023 Webcast Management will host its Q4 2023 results conference call on January 30, 2024 at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). The webcast can be accessed at www.celestica.com. Non-IFRS Supplementary Information In addition to disclosing detailed operating results in accordance with IFRS, Celestica provides supplementary non-IFRS financial measures to consider in evaluating the company's operating performance. Management uses adjusted net earnings and other non-IFRS financial measures to assess operating performance and the effective use and allocation of resources; to provide more meaningful period-to-period comparisons of operating results; to enhance investors' understanding of the core operating results of Celestica's business; and to set management incentive targets. We believe investors use both IFRS and non-IFRS financial measures to assess management's past, current and future decisions associated with our priorities and our allocation of capital, as well as to analyze how our business operates in, or responds to, swings in economic cycles or to other events that impact our core operations. See Schedule 1 below. About Celestica Celestica enables the world's best brands. Through our recognized customer-centric approach, we partner with leading companies in Aerospace and Defense, Communications, Enterprise, HealthTech, Industrial, and Capital Equipment to deliver solutions for their most complex challenges. As a leader in design, manufacturing, hardware platform and supply chain solutions, Celestica brings global expertise and insight at every stage of product development - from the drawing board to full-scale production and after-market services. With talented teams across North America, Europe and Asia, we imagine, develop and deliver a better future with our customers. For more information on Celestica, visit www.celestica.com. Our securities filings can be accessed at www.sedarplus.com and www.sec.gov. Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, those related to: our anticipated financial and/or operational results, guidance and outlook, including statements under the headings "First Quarter of 2024 (Q1 2024) Guidance", and "2024 Annual Outlook Update"; our credit risk; our liquidity; anticipated charges and expenses, including restructuring charges; the potential impact of tax and litigation outcomes; mandatory prepayments under our credit facility; anticipated sublease recoveries; and expected insurance recoveries for tangible losses in connection with the June 2022 fire at our Batam facility in Indonesia (Batam Fire). Such forward-looking statements may, without limitation, be preceded by, followed by, or include words such as "believes," "expects," "anticipates," "estimates," "intends," "plans," "continues," "project," "target," "outlook," "goal," "guidance", "potential," "possible," "contemplate," "seek," or similar expressions, or may employ such future or conditional verbs as "may," "might," "will," "could," "should," or "would," or may otherwise be indicated as forward-looking statements by grammatical construction, phrasing or context. For those statements, we claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements contained in the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, where applicable, and for forward-looking information under applicable Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking statements are provided to assist readers in understanding management's current expectations and plans relating to the future. Readers are cautioned that such information may not be appropriate for other purposes. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements, including, among others, risks related to: customer and segment concentration; challenges of replacing revenue from completed, lost or non-renewed programs or customer disengagements; managing our business during uncertain market, political and economic conditions, including among others, global inflation and/or recession, and geopolitical and other risks associated with our international operations, including military actions/wars, protectionism and reactive countermeasures, economic or other sanctions or trade barriers, including in relation to the Russia/Ukraine conflict and/or conflicts in the Middle East, including the Israel/Hamas conflict and those related to Houthi attacks in the Red Sea; shipping delays and increased shipping costs (including as a result of shipping disruptions in the Red Sea); managing changes in customer demand; our customers' ability to compete and succeed using our products and services; delays in the delivery and availability of components, services and/or materials, as well as their costs and quality; our inventory levels and practices; the cyclical and volatile nature of our semiconductor business; changes in our mix of customers and/or the types of products or services we provide, including negative impacts of higher concentrations of lower margin programs; price, margin pressures, and other competitive factors and adverse market conditions affecting, and the highly competitive nature of, the electronic manufacturing services (EMS) and original design manufacturer (ODM) industries in general and our segments in particular (including the risk that anticipated market conditions do not materialize); challenges associated with new customers or programs, or the provision of new services; interest rate fluctuations; rising commodity, materials and component costs as well as rising labor costs and changing labor conditions; changes in U.S. policies or legislation; customer relationships with emerging companies; recruiting or retaining skilled talent; our ability to adequately protect intellectual property and confidential information; the variability of revenue and operating results; unanticipated disruptions to our cash flows; deterioration in financial markets or the macro-economic environment, including as a result of global inflation and/or recession; maintaining sufficient financial resources to fund currently anticipated financial actions and obligations and to pursue desirable business opportunities; the expansion or consolidation of our operations; the inability to maintain adequate utilization of our workforce; integrating and achieving the anticipated benefits from acquisitions and "operate-in-place" arrangements; execution and/or quality issues (including our ability to successfully resolve these challenges); non-performance by counterparties; negative impacts on our business resulting from any significant uses of cash, securities issuances, and/or additional increases in third-party indebtedness (including as a result of an inability to sell desired amounts under our uncommitted accounts receivable sales program or supplier financing programs); disruptions to our operations, or those of our customers, component suppliers and/or logistics partners, including as a result of events outside of our control (including those described in "External factors that may impact our business" in our most recent Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A)); defects or deficiencies in our products, services or designs; volatility in the commercial aerospace industry; compliance with customer-driven policies and standards, and third-party certification requirements; negative impacts on our business resulting from our third-party indebtedness; the scope, duration and impact of materials constraints; coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mutations or resurgences; declines in U.S. and other government budgets, changes in government spending or budgetary priorities, or delays in contract awards; changes to our operating model; foreign currency volatility; our global operations and supply chain; competitive bid selection processes; our dependence on industries affected by rapid technological change; rapidly evolving and changing technologies, and changes in our customers' business or outsourcing strategies; increasing taxes (including as a result of global tax reform) and potential ineffectiveness of related operational adjustments; tax audits, and challenges of defending our tax positions; obtaining, renewing or meeting the conditions of tax incentives and credits; the management of our information technology systems, and the fact that while we have not been materially impacted by computer viruses, malware, ransomware, hacking incidents or outages, we have been (and may in the future be) the target of such events; the impact of our restructuring actions and/or productivity initiatives, including a failure to achieve anticipated benefits therefrom; the incurrence of future restructuring charges, impairment charges, other unrecovered write-downs of assets (including inventory) or operating losses; the inability to prevent or detect all errors or fraud; compliance with applicable laws and regulations; our pension and other benefit plan obligations; changes in accounting judgments, estimates and assumptions; our ability to maintain compliance with applicable credit facility covenants; our total return swap agreement; our ability to refinance our indebtedness from time to time; our credit rating; our eligibility for foreign private issuer status; activist shareholders; current or future litigation, governmental actions, and/or changes in legislation or accounting standards; volatility in our SVS price; the impermissibility of SVS repurchases, or a determination not to repurchase SVS, under any NCIB; potential unenforceability of judgments; negative publicity; the impact of climate change; our ability to achieve our environmental, social and governance targets and goals, including with respect to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions reduction; and our potential vulnerability to take-over or tender offer. The foregoing and other material risks and uncertainties are discussed in our public filings at www.sedarplus.com and www.sec.gov, including in our most recent MD&A, our 2022 Annual Report on Form 20-F filed with, and subsequent reports on Form 6-K furnished to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and as applicable, the Canadian Securities Administrators. The forward-looking statements contained in this press release are based on various assumptions, many of which involve factors that are beyond our control. Our material assumptions include: no significant decline in the global economy or in economic activity in our end markets due to a major recession or otherwise; growth in manufacturing outsourcing from customers in diversified markets; continued growth in the advancement and commercialization of artificial intelligence technologies and cloud computing, supporting sustained high levels of capital expenditure investments by leading hyperscaler customers; no unforeseen disruptions due to geopolitical factors (including war) causing significant negative impacts to economic activity, global or regional supply chains or normal business operations; no unexpected transfers, losses or disengagements; no unforeseen adverse changes in our mix of businesses; no unforeseen adverse changes in the regulatory environment; no undue negative impact on our customers' ability to compete and succeed using our products and services; continued growth in our end markets; no significant unforeseen negative impacts to our operations (including from mutations or resurgences of COVID-19); no unforeseen materials price increases, margin pressures, or other competitive factors affecting the EMS or ODM industries in general or our segments in particular, as well as those related to the following: the scope and duration of materials constraints (i.e., that they do not materially worsen), and their impact on our sites, customers and suppliers; our ability to fully recover our tangible losses caused by the Batam Fire through insurance claims; fluctuation of production schedules from our customers in terms of volume and mix of products or services; the timing and execution of, and investments associated with, ramping new business; our ability to retain programs and customers; the stability of currency exchange rates; supplier performance and quality, pricing and terms; compliance by third parties with their contractual obligations; the costs and availability of components, materials, services, equipment, labor, energy and transportation; that our customers will retain liability for product/component tariffs and countermeasures; global tax legislation changes (including accelerated applicability of Pillar Two legislation) and anticipated related operational adjustments; our ability to keep pace with rapidly changing technological developments; the timing, execution and effect of restructuring actions; the successful resolution of quality issues that arise from time to time; the components of our leverage ratio (as defined in our credit facility); our ability to successfully diversify our customer base and develop new capabilities; the availability of capital resources for, and the permissibility under our credit facility of, repurchases of outstanding SVS under NCIBs, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations pertaining to NCIBs; compliance with applicable credit facility covenants; anticipated demand levels across our businesses; the impact of anticipated market conditions on our businesses; that global inflation will not have a material impact on our revenues or expenses; and our maintenance of sufficient financial resources to fund currently anticipated financial actions and obligations and to pursue desirable business opportunities. Although management believes its assumptions to be reasonable under the current circumstances, they may prove to be inaccurate, which could cause actual results to differ materially (and adversely) from those that would have been achieved had such assumptions been accurate. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made, and we disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law. All forward-looking statements attributable to us are expressly qualified by these cautionary statements. Contacts:   Celestica Global Communications Celestica Investor Relations (416) 448-2200 (416) 448-2211 media@celestica.com clsir@celestica.com     Schedule 1Supplementary Non-IFRS Financial Measures The non-IFRS financial measures (including ratios based on non-IFRS financial measures) included in this press release are: adjusted gross profit, adjusted gross margin (adjusted gross profit as a percentage of revenue), adjusted selling, general and administrative expenses (SG&A), adjusted SG&A as a percentage of revenue, non-IFRS operating earnings (or adjusted EBIAT), non-IFRS operating margin (non-IFRS operating earnings or adjusted EBIAT as a percentage of revenue), adjusted net earnings, adjusted EPS, adjusted return on invested capital (adjusted ROIC), adjusted free cash flow, adjusted tax expense and adjusted effective tax rate. Adjusted EBIAT, adjusted ROIC, adjusted free cash flow, adjusted tax expense and adjusted effective tax rate are further described in the tables below. As used herein, "Q1," "Q2," "Q3," and "Q4" followed by a year refers to the first quarter, second quarter, third quarter and fourth quarter of such year, respectively. In Q4 2022, we entered into a total return swap (TRS) agreement (TRS Agreement). Similar to employee stock-based compensation (SBC) expense, quarterly fair value adjustments of our TRS (TRS FVAs) are classified in cost of sales and SG&A expenses in our consolidated statement of operations. Commencing in Q1 2023, TRS FVAs are excluded in our determination of the following non-IFRS financial measures included herein: adjusted gross profit, adjusted gross margin, adjusted SG&A, adjusted SG&A as a percentage of revenue, non-IFRS operating earnings, non-IFRS operating margin, adjusted net earnings and adjusted EPS (for the reasons described below). TRS FVAs also impact the determination of our non-IFRS adjusted tax expense and non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate. However, as the impact of TRS FVAs on our Q4 2022 Interim Financial Statements was de minimis, no such exclusion was applicable to such non-IFRS financial measures in either Q4 2022 or the full year 2022. We believe the non-IFRS financial measures we present herein are useful to investors, as they enable investors to evaluate and compare our results from operations in a more consistent manner (by excluding specific items that we do not consider to be reflective of our core operations), to evaluate cash resources that we generate from our business each period, and to provide an analysis of operating results using the same measures our chief operating decision makers use to measure performance. In addition, management believes that the use of a non-IFRS adjusted tax expense and a non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate provide improved insight into the tax effects of our core operations, and are useful to management and investors for historical comparisons and forecasting. These non-IFRS financial measures result largely from management's determination that the facts and circumstances surrounding the excluded charges or recoveries are not indicative of our core operations. Non-IFRS financial measures do not have any standardized meaning prescribed by IFRS and therefore may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies that report under IFRS, or who report under U.S. GAAP and use non-GAAP financial measures to describe similar financial metrics. Non-IFRS financial measures are not measures of performance under IFRS and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for any IFRS financial measure. The most significant limitation to management's use of non-IFRS financial measures is that the charges or credits excluded from the non-IFRS financial measures are nonetheless recognized under IFRS and have an economic impact on us. Management compensates for these limitations primarily by issuing IFRS results to show a complete picture of our performance, and reconciling non-IFRS financial measures back to the most directly comparable financial measures determined under IFRS. In calculating the following non-IFRS financial measures: adjusted gross profit, adjusted gross margin, adjusted SG&A, adjusted SG&A as a percentage of revenue, non-IFRS operating earnings, non-IFRS operating margin, adjusted net earnings, adjusted EPS, and adjusted tax expense, management excludes the following items (where indicated): employee SBC expense, TRS FVAs, amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software), and Other Charges (Recoveries) (defined below), all net of the associated tax adjustments (quantified in the table below), and any non-core tax impacts (tax adjustments related to acquisitions, and certain other tax costs or recoveries related to restructuring actions or restructured sites).The economic substance of these exclusions (where applicable to the periods presented) and management's rationale for excluding them from non-IFRS financial measures is provided below. The determination of our non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate, adjusted free cash flow, and adjusted ROIC is described in footnote 2, 3 and 4 to the table below, respectively. Employee SBC expense, which represents the estimated fair value of stock options, restricted share units and performance share units granted to employees, is excluded because grant activities vary significantly from quarter-to-quarter in both quantity and fair value. In addition, excluding this expense allows us to better compare core operating results with those of our competitors who also generally exclude employee SBC expense in assessing operating performance, who may have different granting patterns and types of equity awards, and who may use different valuation assumptions than we do. TRS FVAs represent mark-to-market adjustments to our TRS, as the TRS is recorded at fair value at each quarter end. We exclude the impact of these non-cash fair value adjustments (both positive and negative), as they reflect fluctuations in the market price of our SVS from period to period, and not our ongoing operating performance. In addition, we believe that excluding these non-cash adjustments permits a better comparison of our core operating results to those of our competitors. Amortization charges (excluding computer software) consist of non-cash charges against intangible assets that are impacted by the timing and magnitude of acquired businesses. Amortization of intangible assets varies among our competitors, and we believe that excluding these charges permits a better comparison of core operating results with those of our competitors who also generally exclude amortization charges in assessing operating performance. Other Charges (Recoveries) consist of, when applicable: Restructuring Charges, net of recoveries (defined below); Transition Costs (Recoveries) (defined below); net Impairment charges (defined below); consulting, transaction and integration costs related to potential and completed acquisitions, and charges or releases related to the subsequent re-measurement of indemnification assets or the release of indemnification or other liabilities recorded in connection with acquisitions; legal settlements (recoveries); specified credit facility-related charges; post-employment benefit plan losses; in Q2 2023 and Q3 2023, Secondary Offering Costs (defined below) and, commencing in Q2 2023, related costs pertaining to certain accounting considerations. We exclude these charges and recoveries because we believe that they are not directly related to ongoing operating results and do not reflect expected future operating expenses after completion of these activities or incurrence of the relevant costs or recoveries. Our competitors may record similar charges and recoveries at different times, and we believe these exclusions permit a better comparison of our core operating results with those of our competitors who also generally exclude these types of charges and recoveries in assessing operating performance. In addition, Other Charges (Recoveries) for Q4 2022 and full year 2022 included nil and approximately $95 million, respectively, in charges and equivalent recoveries resulting from the Batam Fire. See note 13 to the Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements. Restructuring Charges, net of recoveries, consist of costs relating to: employee severance, lease terminations, site closings and consolidations, accelerated depreciation of owned property and equipment which are no longer used and are available for sale and reductions in infrastructure. Transition Costs consist of costs recorded in connection with: (i) the transfer of manufacturing lines from closed sites to other sites within our global network; (ii) the sale of real properties unrelated to restructuring actions (Property Dispositions); and (iii) with respect to full year 2023, the Purchaser Lease Charge (defined below). In connection with our March 2019 Toronto real property sale, we treated associated relocation and duplicate costs as Transition Costs. As part of such sale, we entered into a 10-year lease with the purchaser of such property for our then-anticipated headquarters, to be built by such purchaser on the site of our former location (Purchaser Lease). However, as previously disclosed, we were informed that due to construction issues, the commencement date of the Purchaser Lease would be delayed beyond the prior target of May 2023. As a result, in November 2022, we extended (on a long-term basis) the lease on our current corporate headquarters. Subsequently, we were informed that the Purchaser Lease would commence in June 2024. In Q3 2023, we executed a sublease for a portion of the space under the Purchaser Lease. Consistent with our prior treatment of duplicate costs incurred as a result of our 2019 Toronto real property sale, we recorded Transition Costs of $3.9 million (Purchaser Lease Charge) in full year 2023, representing the excess of rental expenses under the Purchaser Lease (with respect to the subleased space) over anticipated rental recoveries under the sublease. Transition Costs consist of direct relocation and duplicate costs (such as rent expense, utility costs, depreciation charges, and personnel costs) incurred during the transition periods, as well as cease-use and other costs incurred in connection with idle or vacated portions of the relevant premises that we would not have incurred but for these relocations, transfers and dispositions. Transition Recoveries consist of any gains recorded in connection with Property Dispositions. We believe that excluding these costs and recoveries permits a better comparison of our core operating results from period-to-period, as these costs or recoveries do not reflect our ongoing operations once these specified events are complete. Impairment charges, which consist of non-cash charges against goodwill, intangible assets, property, plant and equipment, and right-of-use (ROU) assets, result primarily when the carrying value of these assets exceeds their recoverable amount. Secondary Offering Costs consist of costs associated with conversion and sale of our shares by Onex Corporation (Onex). Onex, our then-controlling shareholder, completed underwritten secondary public offerings in June 2023 and August 2023. Nil Secondary Offering Costs were incurred in Q4 2023 and an aggregate of approximately $1.6 million of such costs were incurred in the full year 2023. We believe that excluding Secondary Offering Costs permits a better comparison of our core operating results from period-to-period, as they do not reflect our ongoing operations, and are no longer applicable as such conversions and sales have been completed. Non-core tax impacts are excluded, as we believe that these costs or recoveries do not reflect core operating performance and vary significantly among those of our competitors who also generally exclude these costs or recoveries in assessing operating performance. The following table (which is unaudited) sets forth, for the periods indicated, the various non-IFRS financial measures discussed above, and a reconciliation of non-IFRS financial measures to the most directly comparable financial measures determined under IFRS (in millions, except percentages and per share amounts):   Three months ended December 31   Year ended December 31     2022       2023       2022       2023       % of revenue     % of revenue     % of revenue     % of revenue IFRS revenue $ 2,042.6       $ 2,140.5       $ 7,250.0       $ 7,961.0                             IFRS gross profit $ 186.2     9.1 %   $ 223.2     10.4 %   $ 636.3     8.8 %   $ 778.5     9.8 % Employee SBC expense   5.6         4.2         20.3         22.6     TRS FVAs (gains)   —         (4.8 )       —         (18.6 )   Non-IFRS adjusted gross profit $ 191.8     9.4 %   $ 222.6     10.4 %   $ 656.6     9.1 %   $ 782.5     9.8 %                         IFRS SG&A $ 77.1     3.8 %   $ 75.7     3.5 %   $ 279.9     3.9 %   $ 279.6     3.5 % Employee SBC expense   (8.6 )       (5.6 )       (30.7 )       (33.0 )   TRS FVAs (gains)   —         6.6         —         27.0     Non-IFRS adjusted SG&A $ 68.5     3.4 %   $ 76.7     3.6 %   $ 249.2     3.4 %   $ 273.6     3.4 %                         IFRS earnings from operations $ 81.6     4.0 %   $ 118.6     5.5 %   $ 263.3     3.6 %   $ 383.2     4.8 % Employee SBC expense   14.2         9.8         51.0         55.6     TRS FVAs (gains)   —         (11.4 )       —         (45.6 )   Amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software)   9.2         9.2         37.0         36.8     Other Charges (Recoveries)   2.8         1.5         6.7         15.2     Non-IFRS operating earnings (adjusted EBIAT)(1) $ 107.8     5.3 %   $ 127.7     6.0 %   $ 358.0     4.9 %   $ 445.2     5.6 %                         IFRS net earnings $ 42.4     2.1 %   $ 84.2     3.9 %   $ 145.5     2.0 %   $ 244.6     3.1 % Employee SBC expense   14.2         9.8         51.0         55.6     TRS FVAs (gains)   —         (11.4 )       —         (45.6 )   Amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software)   9.2         9.2         37.0         36.8     Other Charges (Recoveries)   2.8         1.5         6.7         15.2     Adjustments for taxes(2)   (0.2 )       (3.0 )       (5.8 )       (14.3 )   Non-IFRS adjusted net earnings $ 68.4       $ 90.3       $ 234.4       $ 292.3                             Diluted EPS                       Weighted average # of shares (in millions)   122.4         119.5         123.6         120.3     IFRS earnings per share $ 0.35       $ 0.70       $ 1.18       $ 2.03     Non-IFRS adjusted earnings per share $ 0.56       $ 0.76       $ 1.90       $ 2.43     # of shares outstanding at period end (in millions)   121.6         119.0         121.6         119.0                             IFRS cash provided by operations $ 101.3       $ 138.8       $ 297.9       $ 429.7     Purchase of property, plant and equipment, net of sales proceeds   (32.3 )       (31.9 )       (108.9 )       (122.4 )   Lease payments   (9.9 )       (11.4 )       (46.0 )       (48.3 )   Finance Costs paid (excluding debt issuance costs paid)   (16.5 )       (11.7 )       (49.2 )       (65.1 )   Non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow (3) $ 42.6       $ 83.8       $ 93.8       $ 193.9                             IFRS ROIC % (4)   15.7 %       21.6 %       12.9 %       17.8 %   Non-IFRS adjusted ROIC % (4)   20.7 %       23.3 %       17.5 %       20.7 %                                           (1) Management uses non-IFRS operating earnings (adjusted EBIAT) as a measure to assess performance related to our core operations. Non-IFRS operating earnings is defined as earnings from operations before employee SBC expense, TRS FVAs (defined above), amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software), and Other Charges (Recoveries) (defined above). See note 9 to our Q4 2023 Interim Financial Statements for separate quantification and discussion of the components of Other Charges (Recoveries). Non-IFRS operating margin is non-IFRS operating earnings as a percentage of revenue. (2) The adjustments for taxes, as applicable, represent the tax effects of our non-IFRS adjustments (see below). The following table sets forth a reconciliation of our non-IFRS adjusted tax expense and our non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate to our IFRS tax expense and IFRS effective tax rate, respectively, for the periods indicated, in each case determined by excluding the tax benefits or costs associated with the listed items (in millions, except percentages) from our IFRS tax expense for such periods. Our IFRS effective tax rate is determined by dividing (i) IFRS tax expense by (ii) earnings from operations minus Finance Costs (defined in footnote (3) below); our non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate is determined by dividing (i) non-IFRS adjusted tax expense by (ii) non-IFRS operating earnings minus Finance Costs.   Three months ended December 31   Year ended December 31     2022       2023       2022       2023   IFRS tax expense $ 19.9     $ 19.9     $ 58.1     $ 62.0                   Tax costs (benefits) of the following items excluded from IFRS tax expense:               Employee SBC expense   (1.0 )     2.4       2.5       10.6   TRS FVAs   —       —       —       (0.6 ) Amortization of intangible assets (excluding computer software)   0.7       0.8       3.0       3.0   Other Charges (Recoveries)   0.5       (0.2 )     0.3       1.3   Non-IFRS adjusted tax expense $ 20.1     $ 22.9     $ 63.9     $ 76.3                   IFRS tax expense $ 19.9     $ 19.9     $ 58.1     $ 62.0                   Earnings from operations $ 81.6     $ 118.6     $ 263.3     $ 383.2   Finance Costs   (19.3 )     (14.5 )     (59.7 )     (76.6 )   $ 62.3     $ 104.1     $ 203.6     $ 306.6                   IFRS effective tax rate   32 %     19 %     29 %     20 %                 Non-IFRS adjusted tax expense $ 20.1     $ 22.9     $ 63.9     $ 76.3                   Non-IFRS operating earnings $ 107.8     $ 127.7     $ 358.0     $ 445.2   Finance Costs   (19.3 )     (14.5 )     (59.7 )     (76.6 )   $ 88.5     $ 113.2     $ 298.3     $ 368.6                   Non-IFRS adjusted effective tax rate   23 %     20 %     21 %     21 %                                 (3) Management uses non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow as a measure, in addition to IFRS cash provided by (used in) operations, to assess our operational cash flow performance. We believe non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow provides another level of transparency to our liquidity. Non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow is defined as cash provided by (used in) operations after the purchase of property, plant and equipment (net of proceeds from the sale of certain surplus equipment and property), lease payments, and Finance Costs (defined below) paid (excluding any debt issuance costs and when applicable, credit facility waiver fees paid). Finance Costs consist of interest expense and fees related to our credit facility (including debt issuance and related amortization costs), our interest rate swap agreements, our TRS Agreement, our accounts receivable sales program and customers' supplier financing programs, and interest expense on our lease obligations, net of interest income earned. We do not consider debt issuance costs paid (nil and $0.4 million in Q4 2023 and full year 2023, respectively; nil and $0.8 million in Q4 2022 and full year 2022, respectively) or such waiver fees (when applicable) to be part of our ongoing financing expenses. As a result, these costs are excluded from total Finance Costs paid in our determination of non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow. We believe that excluding Finance Costs paid (other than debt issuance costs and credit-agreement-related waiver fees paid) from cash provided by operations in the determination of non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow provides useful insight for assessing the performance of our core operations. Note, however, that non-IFRS adjusted free cash flow does not represent residual cash flow available to Celestica for discretionary expenditures. (4) Management uses non-IFRS adjusted ROIC as a measure to assess the effectiveness of the invested capital we use to build products or provide services to our customers, by quantifying how well we generate earnings relative to the capital we have invested in our business. Non-IFRS adjusted ROIC is calculated by dividing annualized non-IFRS adjusted EBIAT by average net invested capital for the period. Net invested capital (calculated in the tables below) is derived from IFRS financial measures, and is defined as total assets less: cash, ROU assets, accounts payable, accrued and other current liabilities, provisions, and income taxes payable. We use a two-point average to calculate average net invested capital for the quarter and a five-point average to calculate average net invested capital for the year. Average net invested capital for Q4 2023 is the average of net invested capital as at September 30, 2023 and December 31, 2023, and average net invested capital for the full year 2023 is the average of net invested capital at December 31, 2022, March 31, 2023, June 30, 2023, September 30 2023 and December 31, 2023. A comparable financial measure to non-IFRS adjusted ROIC determined using IFRS measures would be calculated by dividing annualized IFRS earnings from operations by average net invested capital for the period. The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, our calculation of IFRS ROIC % and non-IFRS adjusted ROIC % (in millions, except IFRS ROIC % and non-IFRS adjusted ROIC %).     Three months ended   Year ended     December 31   December 31       2022       2023       2022       2023                     IFRS earnings from operations $ 81.6     $ 118.6     $ 263.3     $ 383.2   Multiplier to annualize earnings   4       4       1       1   Annualized IFRS earnings from operations $ 326.4     $ 474.4     $ 263.3     $ 383.2   Average net invested capital for the period $ 2,085.4     $ 2,193.7     $ 2,040.3     $ 2,152.8   IFRS ROIC % (1)   15.7 %     21.6 %     12.9 %     17.8 %                       Three months ended   Year ended     December 31   December 31       2022       2023       2022       2023                     Non-IFRS operating earnings (adjusted EBIAT) $ 107.8     $ 127.7     $ 358.0     $ 445.2   Multiplier to annualize earnings   4       4       1       1   Annualized non-IFRS adjusted EBIAT $ 431.2.....»»

Category: earningsSource: benzingaJan 29th, 2024

Logically.AI Of Britain And The Expanding Global Reach Of Censorship

Logically.AI Of Britain And The Expanding Global Reach Of Censorship Authored by Lee Fang via RealClear Wire, Brian Murphy, a former FBI agent who once led the intelligence wing of the Department of Homeland Security, reflected last summer on the failures of the Disinformation Governance Board – the panel formed to actively police misinformation. The board, which was proposed in April 2022 after he left DHS, was quickly shelved by the Biden administration in a few short months in the face of criticism that it would be an Orwellian state-sponsored "Ministry of Truth." In a July podcast, Murphy said the threat of state-sponsored disinformation meant the executive branch has an “ethical responsibility” to rein in the social media companies. American citizens, he said, must give up "some of your freedoms that you need and deserve so that you get security back." The legal problems and public backlash to the Disinformation Governance Board also demonstrated to him that "the government has a major role to play, but they cannot be out in front.” Murphy, who made headlines late in the Trump administration for improperly building dossiers on journalists, has spent the last few years trying to help the government find ways to suppress and censor speech it doesn’t like without being so “out in front” that it runs afoul of the Constitution. He has proposed that law enforcement and intelligence agencies formalize the process of sharing tips with private sector actors – a “hybrid constellation” including the press, academia, researchers, non-partisan organizations, and social media companies – to dismantle “misinformation” campaigns before they take hold. More recently, Murphy has worked to make his vision of countering misinformation a reality by joining a United Kingdom-based tech firm, Logically.AI, whose eponymous product identifies and removes content from social media. Since joining the firm, Murphy has met with military and other government officials in the U.S., many of whom have gone on to contract or pilot Logically’s platform. Logically says it uses artificial intelligence to keep tabs on over one million conversations. It also maintains a public-facing editorial team that produces viral content and liaisons with the traditional news media. It differs from other players in this industry by actively deploying what they call “countermeasures” to dispute or remove problematic content from social media platforms.  The business is even experimenting with natural language models, according to one corporate disclosure, “to generate effective counter speech outputs that can be leveraged to deliver novel solutions for content moderation and fact-checking.” In other words, artificial intelligence-powered bots that produce, in real-time, original arguments to dispute content labeled as misinformation. In many respects, Logically is fulfilling the role Murphy has articulated for a vast public-private partnership to shape social media content decisions. Its technology has already become a key player in a much larger movement that seeks to clamp down on what the government and others deem misinformation or disinformation. A raft of developing evidence – including the Twitter Files, the Moderna Reports, the proposed Government Disinformation Panel, and other reports – has shown how governments and industry are determined to monitor, delegitimize, and sometimes censor protected speech. The story of Logically.AI illustrates how sophisticated this effort has become and its global reach. The use of its technology in Britain and Canada raises red flags as it seeks a stronger foothold in the United States. Logically was founded in 2017 by a then-22-year-old British entrepreneur named Lyric Jain, who was inspired to form the company to combat what he believed were the lies that pushed the U.K. into voting in favor of Brexit, or leaving the European Union. The once-minor startup now has broad contracts across Europe and India, and has worked closely with Microsoft, Google, PwC, TikTok, and other major firms. Meta contracts with Logically to help the company fact-check content on all of its platforms: WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook. The close ties to Silicon Valley provide unusual reach. “When Logically rates a piece of content as false, Facebook will significantly reduce its distribution so that fewer people see it, apply a warning label to let people know that the content has been rated false, and notify people who try to share it,” Meta and Logically announced in a 2021 press release on the partnership. Meta and Logically did not respond to repeated requests for comment.  During the 2021 local elections in the U.K., Logically monitored up to “one million pieces of harmful content,” some of which they relayed to government officials, according to a document reviewed by RealClearInvestigations. The firm claimed to spot coordinated activity to manipulate narratives around the election, information they reported to tech giants for takedowns. The following year, the state of Oregon negotiated with Logically for a wide-ranging effort to monitor campaign-related content during the 2022 midterm elections. In a redacted proposal for the project, Logically noted that it would check claims against its “single source of truth database,” which relied on government data, and would also crack down on “malinformation” – a term of art that refers to accurate information that fuels dangerous narratives. The firm similarly sold Oregon on its ability to pressure social media platforms for content removal. Oregon State Rep. Ed Diehl has a led push against the state from renewing its work with Logically for the election this year. The company, he said in an interview, violates "our constitutional rights to free speech and privacy" by "flagging true information as false, claiming legitimate dissent is a threat, and then promoting "counter-narratives" against valid forms of public debate. In response, the Oregon Secretary of State’s office, which initiated the contract with Logically, claimed “no authority, ability, or desire to censor speech.” Diehl disputes this. He pointed out that the original proposal with Logically clearly states that its service “enables the opportunity for unlimited takedown attempts” of alleged misinformation content and the ability for the Oregon Secretary of State’s office to “flag for removal” any “problematic narratives and content.” The contract document touts Logically as a “trusted entity within the social media community” that gives it “preferred status that enables us to support our client’s needs at a moment’s notice.” Diehl, who shared a copy of the Logically contract with RCI, called the issue a vital “civil rights” fight, and noted that in an ironic twist, the state’s anti-misinformation speech suppression work further inflames distrust in “election systems and government institutions in general.” Logically’s reach into the U.S. market is quickly growing. The company has piloted programs for the Chicago Police Department to use artificial intelligence to analyze local rap music and deploy predictions on violence in the community, according to a confidential proposal obtained by RCI. Pentagon records show that the firm is a subcontractor to a program run by the U.S. Army’s elite Special Operations Command for work conducted in 2022 and 2023. Via funding from DHS, Logically also conducts research on gamer culture and radicalization. The company has claimed in its ethics statements that it will not employ any person who holds “a salaried or prominent position” in government. But records show closely entrenched state influence. For instance, Kevin Gross, a director the U.S Navy NAVAIR division, was previously embedded within Logically's team during a 2022 fellowship program. The exchange program supported Logically’s efforts to assist NATO on the analysis of Russian social media. Other contracts in the U.S. may be shrouded in secrecy. Logically partners with ThunderCat Technologies, a contracting firm that assists tech companies when competing for government work. Such arrangements have helped tech giants conceal secretive work in the past. Google previously attempted to hide its artificial intelligence drone-targeting contracts with the Defense Department through a similar third party contracting vendor. But questions swirl over the methods and reach of the firm as it entrenches itself into American life, especially as Logically angles to play a prominent role in the 2024 presidential election.  Pandemic Policing In March 2020, as Britain confronted the spread of COVID-19, the government convened a new task force, the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU). The secretive task force was created with little fanfare, but was advertised as a public health measure to protect against dangerous misinformation. Caroline Dinenage, the member of parliament overseeing media issues, later explained that the unit’s purpose was to provide authoritative sources of information and to “take action to remove misinformation” relating to “misleading narratives related to COVID-19.” The CDU, it later emerged, had largely outsourced its work to private contractors such as Logically. In January 2021, the company received its first contract from the agency overseeing the CDU, for £400,000, to monitor ”potentially harmful disinformation online.” The contracts later swelled, with the U.K. agency that pertains to media issues eventually providing contracts with a combined value of £1.2 million and the Department of Health providing another £1.3 million, for a total of roughly $3.2 million. That money went into far-reaching surveillance that monitored journalists, activists, and lawmakers who criticized pandemic policies. Logically, according to an investigation last year in the Telegraph, recorded comments from activist Silkie Carlo criticizing vaccine passports in its “Mis/Disinformation” reports. Logically’s reports similarly collected information on Dr. Alexandre de Figueiredo, a research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Figueiredo had published reports on the negative ways in which vaccine passports could undermine vaccine confidence and had publicly criticized policies aimed at the mass vaccination of children. Despite his expertise, Logically filed his tweet in a disinformation report to the government. While some of the reports were categorized as evidence of terms of service violations, many were, in fact, routine forms of dissent aired by prominent voices in the U.K. on policies hotly contested by expert opinion. The documents showing Logically’s role were later uncovered by Carlo’s watchdog group, Big Brother Watch, which produced a detailed report on the surveillance effort. The CDU reports targeted a former judge who argued against coercive lockdowns as a violation of civil liberties and journalists criticizing government corruption. Some of the surveillance documents suggest a mission creep for the unit, as media monitoring emails show that the agency targeted anti-war groups that were vocal against NATO’s policies. Carlo was surprised to even find her name on posts closely monitored and flagged by Logically. “We found that the company exploits millions of online posts to monitor, record and flag online political dissent to the central government under the banner of countering ‘disinformation,’” she noted in a statement to RCI. Marketing materials published by Logically suggest its view of COVID-19 went well beyond fact-checking and veered into suppressing dissenting opinions. A case study published by the firm claimed that the #KBF hashtag, referring to Keep Britain Free, an activist group against school and business shutdowns, was a dangerous “anti-vax” narrative. The case study also claimed that the suggestion that “the virus was created in a Chinese laboratory” was one of the “conspiracy theories’’ that “have received government support” in the U.S. – despite the fact that a preponderance of evidence now points to a likely lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the origin of the pandemic. Logically was also involved in pandemic work that blurred the line with traditional fact-checking operations. In India, the firm helped actively persuade patients to take the vaccine. In 2021, Jain, the founder and CEO of the company, said in an interview with an Indian news outlet that his company worked “closely with communities that are today vaccine hesitant.” The company, he said, recruited “advocates and evangelists” to shape local opinion. Questionable Fact-Checking In 2022, Logically used its technology on behalf of Canadian law enforcement to target the trucker-led “Freedom Convoy” against COVID-19 mandates, according to government records. Logically’s team floated theories that the truckers were “likely influenced by foreign adversaries,” a widely repeated claim used to denigrate the protests as inauthentic. The push to discredit the Canadian protests showed the overlapping power of Logically’s multiple arms. While its social media surveillance wing fed reports to the Canadian government, its editorial team worked to influence opinion through the news media. When the Financial Times reported on the protest phenomenon, the outlet quoted Murphy, the former FBI man who now works for Logically, who asserted that the truckers were influenced by coordinated "conspiracy theorist groups" in the U.S. and Canada. Vice similarly quoted Joe Ondrak, Logically's head of investigations, to report that the "Freedom Convoy" had generated excitement among global conspiracy theorists. Neither outlet disclosed Logically's work for Canadian law enforcement at the time. Other targets of Logically are quick to point out that the firm has taken liberties with what it classifies as misinformation. Will Jones, the editor of the Daily Sceptic, a British news outlet with a libertarian bent, has detailed an unusual fact-check from Logically Facts, the company’s editorial site. Jones said the site targeted him for pointing out that data in 2022 showed 71% of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were vaccinated. Logically’s fact-check acknowledged Jones had accurately used statistics from the U.K. Health Security Agency, but tried to undermine him by asserting that he was still misleading by suggesting that “vaccines are ineffective.” But Jones, in a reply, noted that he never made that argument and that, Logically was batting away at a straw man. In fact, his original piece plainly took issue with a Guardian article that incorrectly claimed that "COVID-19 has largely become a disease of the unvaccinated." Other Logically fact-checks have bizarrely targeted the Daily Sceptic for reporting on news in January 2022 that vaccine mandates might soon be lifted. The site dinged the Daily Sceptic for challenging the evidence behind the vaccine policy and declared, “COVID-19 vaccines have been proven effective in fighting the pandemic.” And yet, at the end of that month, the mandate was lifted for healthcare workers and the following month, all other pandemic restrictions were revoked, just as the Daily Sceptic had reported. “As far as I can work out, it’s a grift,” said Daily Sceptic founder Toby Young, of Logically. “A group of shysters offer to help the government censor any criticism of its policies under the pretense that they’re not silencing dissent – God forbid! – but merely ‘cleansing’ social media of misinformation, disinformation and hate speech.” Jones was similarly dismissive of the company, which he said disputes anything that runs contrary to popular consensus. “The consensus of course is that set by the people who pay Logically for their services,” Jones added. “The company claims to protect democratic debate by providing access to ‘reliable information, but in reality, it is paid to bark and savage on command whenever genuine free speech makes an inconvenient appearance.” In some cases, Logically has piled on to news stories to help discredit voices of dissent. Last September,  the anti-misinformation site leaped into action after British news outlets published reports about sexual misconduct allegations surrounding comedian and online broadcaster Russell Brand -- one of the outspoken critics of government policy in Britain, who has been compared to Joe Rogan for his heterodox views and large audience.  Brand, a vocal opponent of pandemic policies, had been targeted by Logically in the past for airing opinions critical of the U.S. and U.K. response to the virus outbreak, and in other moments for criticizing new laws in the European Union that compel social media platforms to take down content. But the site took dramatic action when the sexual allegations, none of which have been proved in court, were published in the media. Ondrak, Logically’s investigations head, provided different quotes to nearly half a dozen news outlets – including Vice, Wired, the BBC, and two separate articles in The Times – that depicted Brand as a dangerous purveyor of misinformation who had finally been held to account. “He follows a lot of the ostensibly health yoga retreat, kind of left-leaning, anti-capitalist figures, who got really suckered into Covid skepticism, Covid denialism, and anti-vax, and then spat out of the Great Reset at the other end,” Ondrak told Wired. In one of the articles published by The Times, Ondrak aired frustration on the obstacles of demonetizing Brand from the Rumble streaming network. In an interview with the BBC, Ondrak gave a curious condemnation, noting Brand stops short of airing any actual conspiracy theories or falsehoods, but is guilty of giving audiences "the ingredients to make the disinformation themselves.” Dinenage, the member of parliament who spearheaded the CDU anti-misinformation push with Logically during the pandemic, also leapt into action. In the immediate aftermath of the scandal, she sent nearly identical letters to Rumble, TikTok and Meta to demand that the platforms follow YouTube’s lead in demonetizing Brand. Dinenage couched her official request to censor Brand as a part of a public interest inquiry, to protect the "welfare of victims of inappropriate and potentially illegal behaviour." Logically's editorial team went a step further. In its report on the Brand allegations published on Logically Facts, it claimed that social media accounts "trotting out the 'innocent until proven guilty' refrain" for the comedian were among those perpetuating “common myths about sexual assault.” The site published a follow-up video reiterating the claim that those seeking the presumption of innocence for Brand, a principle dating back to the Magna Carta, were spreading a dangerous "myth." The unusual advocacy campaign against Brand represented a typical approach for a company that has long touted itself as a hammer against spreaders of misinformation. The opportunity to remove Brand from the media ecosystem meant throwing as much at him as possible, despite any clear misinformation or disinformation angle in the sexual assault allegations. Rather, he was a leading critic of government censorship and pandemic policy, so the scandal represented a weakness to be exploited. Such heavy-handed tactics may be on the horizon for American voters. The firm is now a member of the U.S. Election Infrastructure Information Sharing & Analysis Center, the group managed by the Center for Internet Security that helps facilitate misinformation reports on behalf of election officials across the country. Logically has been in talks with Oregon and other states, as well as DHS, to expand its social media surveillance role for the presidential election later this year. Previous targets of the company, though, are issuing a warning.  “It appears that Logically’s lucrative and frankly sinister business effectively produced multi-million pound misinformation for the government that may have played a role in the censorship of citizens’ lawful speech,” said Carlo of Big Brother Watch. “Politicians and senior officials happily pay these grifters millions of pounds to wield the red pen, telling themselves that they’re ‘protecting’ democracy rather than undermining it,” said Young of the Daily Sceptic. “It’s a boondoggle and it should be against the law.” Tyler Durden Mon, 01/29/2024 - 02:00.....»»

Category: personnelSource: nytJan 29th, 2024

Young Audiences Question Climate Alarmism, Prompting Calls To Censor Content

Young Audiences Question Climate Alarmism, Prompting Calls To Censor Content Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours), A recent study has revealed significant skepticism among young audiences regarding climate alarmism, a development that poses a challenge to advocates of urgent climate action but is likely to be welcomed by those who see stoking fear about the supposed ills of global warming as exaggerated. Swedish teen climate activist Greta Thunberg (C) takes part in protest over climate change, in Hamburg, Germany, on Feb. 21, 2020. (Morris Mac Matzen/AFP/Getty Images) The study was released on Jan. 16 by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a left-leaning organization that was sued by Elon Musk for allegedly engaging in a “scare campaign” to drive away advertisers. The study reveals a significant increase between 2018 and 2023 in YouTube content that expresses one of the following three viewpoints: “climate solutions won’t work,” “climate science and the climate movement are unreliable,” or “the impacts of global warming are beneficial or harmless.” Researchers also found that roughly one-third of teenagers (the predominant YouTube audience) hold views such as “climate policies cause more harm than good” or consider “climate change a hoax to control and oppress people.” The findings—which the CCDH calls alarming and “startling”—suggest that there’s a growing rejection of climate narratives that emphasize imminent global catastrophe. The group says it finds the trend troubling—and is urging big tech platforms such as YouTube to censor content that “contradicts the authoritative scientific consensus” on climate change. However, the trend revealed by the research is likely to be seen as a breath of fresh air by skeptics of climate alarmism, as well as by those who believe that climate activism is about political control or has morphed into some kind of secular religion, which is sometimes labeled the “climate cult.” ‘New Climate Denial’ Researchers at the CCDH gathered transcripts from more than 12,000 videos posted across 96 YouTube channels between 2018 and 2023, then analyzed the content from the perspective of climate change-related narratives. They found a sharp increase in what they call a “new climate denial,” defined as three increasingly prevalent narratives: “climate solutions won’t work,” “climate science and the climate movement are unreliable,” and “the impacts of global warming are beneficial or harmless.” The prevalence of these three narratives among climate-skeptical content on YouTube has risen sharply between 2018 and 2023, the study found. The narrative that “climate solutions won’t work” surged to 30 percent from 9 percent of climate-skeptical YouTube content in that time period. Content expressing the view that “climate science and the climate movement are unreliable” is up to 35 percent from 23 percent, while the narrative that “the impacts of global warming are beneficial or harmless” has jumped to 6 percent from 4 percent. This shift, labeled the “new denial,” now constitutes a majority (70 percent) of climate-skeptical content on YouTube. At the same time, content expressing the view that “global warming is not happening” is down to 14 percent (2023) from 48 percent (2018) among climate-skeptical YouTube content. A poll carried out as part of the study also found that 33 percent of teenagers think that “climate policies cause more harm than good” and 30 percent believe that “climate science and the climate movement can’t be trusted.” Participants hold placards as they take part in a demonstration demanding that the government take immediate action against climate change in Sydney, Australia, on Jan. 10, 2020. (Mohammed Farooq/AFP via Getty Images) “The spread of New Climate Denial can have a catastrophic impact on climate action,” the CCDH said in a statement in which the group called on Google, which owns YouTube, to dial up its policy of demonetizing and de-amplifying climate-skeptical content. Charlie Cray, senior strategist at Greenpeace USA, made a similar point in a statement regarding the study: “Climate deniers now have access to vast global audiences through digital platforms. Allowing them to steadily chip away at public support for climate action—especially among younger viewers–could have devastating consequences for the future of our planet.” By contrast, more than 1,600 scientists and informed professionals recently signed a pledge declaring that there’s “no climate emergency,” arguing that flawed modeling and alarmist rhetoric have drowned out scientific reality for the sake of money and power. “Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific,” the declaration reads. “Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.” The signatories include Nobel laureates, theoretical physicists, meteorologists, professors, and environmental scientists from across the world. ‘Almost a Nothingburger’ Climate change, or the “climate emergency” as many activists insist on calling it, has become an increasingly vocal globalist rallying cry in recent years. Former Vice President Al Gore warned of “rain bombs” and “boiling” oceans in an emotional speech about climate change at a gathering of global elites at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland last year. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres made a similarly alarmist speech at the event, saying that “we are flirting with climate disaster” and that “every week brings a new climate horror story.” Former Vice President Al Gore makes a speech during the COP24 U.N. climate summit in Katowice, Poland, on Dec. 12, 2018. (Czarek Sokolowski/AP Photo) But a number of experts say such alarmism is unhelpful and that, while some aspects of climate change are a problem, there’s no need to panic. Among them is Steven Koonin, a professor at New York University’s Department of Civil and Urban Engineering, who once served as undersecretary for science at the Department of Energy and holds a doctorate in theoretical physics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He threw cold water on the U.N. chief’s alarmism in a recent interview with psychology professor Jordan Peterson, arguing that humanity adapting to climate change may be a challenge, but it’s far from an emergency. Responding to a question by Mr. Peterson about what percentage of scientists “take an apocalyptic view” on the climate change issue, Mr. Koonin said he thinks that about 95 percent aren’t in the climate panic camp. “None of them are kind of jumping off the roof and saying ‘My God, we’d better do something or we’re headed for the climate highway to hell' or something, which is what the secretary-general of the U.N. said a couple of months ago,” Mr. Koonin said, referring to Mr. Guterres’s remarks at the COP27 climate conference. “It’s an issue. It’s a long-term problem. We can deal with it. But there’s no reason to ring alarm bells. “If I wanted to be a little snarky, it’s almost a nothingburger. The science says that, if you read the reports. “But the detrimental effects get hyped up by various players.” While the detrimental effects of global warming are exaggerated, its benefits are ignored by climate alarmists, he said. For example, higher concentrations of carbon dioxide have benefits such as greater greening of the planet, as well as increased agricultural yields. ‘Hard to Find Trends’ Mr. Koonin also discussed a widely cited report from the International Panel on Climate Change; he argued that policymakers tend to read summaries rather than the detailed report itself and, as a consequence, formulate incorrect conclusions. The detailed report acknowledges natural variation in temperature, not just human-caused, and that, aside from things directly associated with warming such as record-high temperatures, there are basically no extreme weather event trends, he said. “You don’t see much [in terms of] trends, globally,” Mr. Koonin said. “Drought—hard to see a trend. Hurricanes or tropical cyclones—hard to see any trend at all over a century.” He acknowledged that there’s a “little thing” that warrants some discussion—namely a rise in sea level—but this is proceeding at about 1 foot per century. “It’s hard to find trends,” Mr. Koonin said. “Doesn’t mean that the trends aren’t there. But they’ve just not emerged from the data.” Tyler Durden Thu, 01/18/2024 - 06:30.....»»

Category: personnelSource: nytJan 18th, 2024

19 Deodorant Brands to Avoid

Never ask a dirty hippie to write about 19 deodorant brands to avoid. Their initial reaction will be why stop at 19? As a full-fledged fragrant hippie, I haven’t used deodorant or antiperspirant since the Ban roll-on my mother purchased for me before 7th grade telling me that everyone would appreciate it if I would […] The post 19 Deodorant Brands to Avoid appeared first on 24/7 Wall St.. Never ask a dirty hippie to write about 19 deodorant brands to avoid. Their initial reaction will be why stop at 19? As a full-fledged fragrant hippie, I haven’t used deodorant or antiperspirant since the Ban roll-on my mother purchased for me before 7th grade telling me that everyone would appreciate it if I would start using deodorant. I rolled it on my pits a couple of times before deciding I’d rather stink than have an unnatural, distracting scent about me. Thankfully, my grandmother stepped in telling me that she relied on white vinegar or lemon juice on special occasions. She then explained the science behind it. Vinegar has been my odor neutralizer of choice ever since, though I would dab my pits with lemon juice before Saturday night cotillion. Body odor aka B.O. results when secretions from apocrine sweat glands, principally located in the armpits and the groin, come in contact with bacteria on the epidermis, the outer layer of skin. The deodorant’s goal is to mask the associated odor. Antiperspirants aim to control the odor by eliminating secretions. Most of the products on today’s market offer dual-protection. Hyperhidrosis, a condition that causes excessive perspiration is treated with prescription-strength antiperspirants that contain aluminum-based compounds. Aluminum chloride, aluminum zirconium, and aluminum chlorohydrate are also found to a lesser degree in OTC antiperspirants. They work by forming a gel-like plug in the sweat ducts, reducing or eliminating sweat production. I prefer my ducts to be unplugged. Like Bob Dylan before Newport. Our criteria for determining the 19 deodorant brands to avoid included the propensity to have a too-strong or too-longlasting scent, the number of difficult-to-unpronounceable ingredients, and value. Because the appeal of personal hygiene products is highly subjective our list is presented in alphabetical order. Arm and Hammer Advanced Sweat Control Fresh parent/owner: Church and Dwight established: 1846 price point: $3.00/2.6 oz. From the name you’d think the active ingredient in Arm and Hammer would be baking soda. But it’s not, it’s aluminum chlorohydrate – a whopping 19%! This is high enough to warrant a warning on the label for those who have kidney disease. Your kidneys are responsible for flushing aluminum out of the body, as well as all of your un-sweated sweat. This product also includes talc which is problematic thanks to the probability that it contains asbestos, a known carcinogen. Baking soda is listed as an inactive ingredient, however. Let’s hope this is because it is not prevalent enough to cause the skin irritation associated with baking soda found in other personal care products. Bottom line: The talc alone is reason enough to keep your distance. Axe Apollo Long Lasting Spray Sage and Cedarwood parent/owner: Unilever established: 1983 (EU)/2002 (USA) price point: $6.00/4.0 oz. This product contains an astounding 23.3 % aluminum chlorohydrate and hydrofluorocarbon 152A, a propellant, that was created as a presumably safe alternative to chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), an ozone-depleting greenhouse gas. While hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) don’t deplete the ozone, they are super greenhouse gases. Axe Apollo Sage and Cedarwood is also 23.3% duct-clogging aluminum chlorohydrate, butane, a handful of other difficult-to-pronounce chemicals, as well as the all-encompassing, exceptionally vague fragrance. Fragrance is an Axe specialty, but not one everyone especially appreciates. Used correctly, Axe products are probably still over-scented, but in the hands of pubescent middle schoolers who have been conditioned to believe natural body odor must be masked at all costs? Eye-watering nostril-stinging, breathtakingly cloying. Bottom line: Be a good Earth steward and avoid products that contain hydrofluorocarbon 152A. BLEU DE CHANEL parent/owner: House of Chanel established: 2010 price point: $40.00/2.0 oz. The ingredients in this product aren’t all that sinister, but they’re also nothing special, certainly not 20.00 and ounce special. Two of the first three ingredients are alcohol and water. The website also boasts that the woodsy, sandalwood scent leaves a trail. Personal scents should not leave a trail. Bottom line: You’re paying for the label and a scent that remains long after you’re gone. Carpe Underarm Fresh Powder Scent parent/owner: Clutch, Inc. established: 2015 price point: 20.00/1.69 oz. With 15% Aluminum Sesquicholorhydrate and talc, this isn’t the safest antiperspirant around. That said, it has a compelling backstory. No spoiler alerts here, but sweaty palms are annoying. Carpe is a bit overpriced, at over ten dollars an ounce, but if you can afford it, you’ll be supporting a small business. Bottom line: Better than some and no worse than some others, seize the day with Carpe! Certain Dri Prescription Strength Clinical Dry Spray parent/owner: Clarion Brands, LLC established: price point: $10.00/2.0 0z. Among a host of other chemicals, Certain Dri ups the ante with 25% aluminum chlorohydrate plus the greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon 152A. This product lasts up to 72 hours – even factoring in showering.  Where some view its long-lastingness as a perk, others find it frightening? Concerning? Perhaps I’m projecting but if a shower can’t wash it away, I’m keeping my distance. Bottom line: Lower your carbon footprint; choose a deodorant that doesn’t contain hydrofluorocarbon 152A. Degree Original Protection- Cool Rush parent/owner: Unilever established:1908 price point: 2.00/2.0 0z. The price is certainly right, but Degree Original is 18.2% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly and talc. The 48-hour protection Degree provides translates into a strong scent that is permeating. Does your scent announce your arrival or stay after you’ve gone? Then it’s time to consider an alternative. Just like no one wishes to smell your stench, no one cares to smell your deodorant, either. Bottom line: An exceptionally inexpensive choice, but be cautious in its application. Eau Dynamisante Antiperspirant parent/owner: Clarins established: 1987 price point: $34.00/3.3 oz. They tout 92% natural ingredients and claim that they have an herbarium in which they grow the plants that are at the core of their products, and for the most part, I believe them. The Eau Dynamisante label has a variety of unfamiliar words, however, most of them are simply fancy ways of saying coconut oil. Two of the fragrance ingredients, hexyl cinnamal and ethylene brassylate are concerning. The Environmental Working Group lists hexyl cinnamal as high for allergies and immunotoxins, which negatively affect the immune system. Ethylene brassylate, a synthetic fragrance in the musk family, is considered safe enough, but for $10.00/oz. you deserve the real deal! Bottom line: While there is nothing inherently bad about this brand, there are other equally not bad options with much lower price points. Gold Bond Body Powder Spray Clear parent/owner: Chattem Inc./Sanofi S.A. established: 1882 price point: $8.00/7.0 oz. It’s a fact that label ingredients are listed from highest to lowest amounts, and the very first ingredient on the list for Gold Bond Body Powder Spray Clear is the dreaded greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon 152A. Hydrofluorocarbon 152A is, thankfully, being phased out. As of October 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has passed regulations that should lower HFC emissions by over one billion metric tons by 2050. Bottom line: Why wait until your favorite aerosol brand is phased out? Roll-ons and sticks are excellent, more environmentally friendly ways of keeping fresh. Jungle Bravo Untamed Pheromone Deodorant parent/owner: Jungle Bravo established: c. 2023 price point: $35.00/3.0 oz. Of the 19 deodorant brands to avoid, this one’s my favorite. Do yourself a solid and check out this brand’s website. From the graphics to the comments, there is a lot of entertaining content, if you have critical thinking skills. Jungle Bravo touts itself as a natural, aluminum-free deodorant, however, they do not provide the label ingredients, beyond alpha pheromones. And sorry, suckers, but according to Jungle Bravo 90% of men simply do not produce enough alpha pheromones on their own. Since they tout their ingredients as all-natural, I’m wondering where they’re sourcing their alpha pheromones. I’m envisioning one of the lucky 10% hooked up to an alpha pheromone extractor. It looks painful. And, if the comments and reviews are to be trusted, Jungle Bravo is one of those gifts that keeps on giving, long after you’ve cruised through the casino. Bottom line: There’s a sucker born every minute and 90% of them cannot produce enough alpha pheromones. -P.T. Barnum Metro Sexual – Deodorant Stick parent/owner: Sea Of Spa Labs Ltd. established: 1996 price point: $23.00/2.5 oz Besides the fact that it’s fairly expensive and contains the very unnecessary FD&C Blue No. 1 and FD&C Red No. 40., there’s nothing precisely bad about this brand, Oh wait, yes there is. It’s the name. It screams 1990s. Bottom line: No 21st-century metrosexual would be caught dead wearing something called Metro Sexual. Old Spice Red Collection Captain Scent of Command Deodorant parent/owner: Procter & Gamble established: 1937 price point: $5.00/3.0 oz. Chances are your grandfather was an Old Spice aftershave guy. Old Spice is about as American as you can get. With a desirable price point and a formula that is absent of HFCs and aluminum, it continues to be a trusted brand. Something changed recently, however, that has consumers questioning the rashes and stinging sensations that experience after applying Old Spice deodorant. Bottom line: If you have sensitive skin, it would behoove you to steer your ship leeward. Patchouli parent/owner: various established: 5oo A.D. price point: $7.00/1.0 oz. There’s no more polarizing scent than patchouli. A member of the mint family, patchouli has been used medicinally since 500 B.C. in China and India. Now, you might think that because I’m a hippie I love patchouli, but you’d be wrong. I don’t mind the scent, per se, it’s the resulting migraine that I like to avoid. And I’m not alone. Recent studies at the University of West Georgia and the American Academy of Dermatology, et al., suggest that 1/3 of consumers find scented products irritating. The strength of its aroma is one of its original selling points: Patchouli was used in funeral rites in which its scent was used to mask odors associated with decomposition. While I have your attention, I’d like to point out the misconception that just because it’s natural, doesn’t mean it’s harmless. Some well-meaning individuals have told me that the scent they’re wearing couldn’t possibly be making me ill because, like patchouli, it’s all-natural. Snake venom, bee venom, and hemlock are all-natural, too. Bottom Line: Unless you smell like death, think twice before applying patchouli. R De Revillon Deodorant Spray parent/owner: Revillon Frères (Revillon Brothers) established: 1723/1839 price point: $15.00/5.0 oz. Revillion Brothers is a luxury brand that trades in furs and perfumes. Luxury deodorant is just the sort of decadence that the 21st century embraces. And while three dollars an ounce isn’t outlandish, it’s still twice as much as your proletarian brands. This brand originally counted benzene among its ingredients. Classified by the State of California as a carcinogen, benzene has been shown to cause leukemia, as well as birth defects. It would appear that Revillon has removed benzene from its listed ingredients, after the class action lawsuit. However, they didn’t replace the faulty nozzles that reportedly clog on the regular. Though my pioneer spirit would attempt to unclog the sprayer before tossing out a can of deodorant, it is a frustrating drawback. Bottom line: Benzene or not, R de Revillion is not a great value. Right Guard Extreme Defense parent/owner: Thriving Brands LLC established: 1960 (by The Gillette Company) price point: $5.00/2.6 oz. By now it should be apparent that any antiperspirant/deodorant that offers three days of protection is going to contain some form of gland-blocking aluminum. Right Guard Extreme Defense has 16.4% Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly, which obstructs the ducts that aid perspiration. What’s happening to all of the obstructed secretions? Processed through the kidneys, all. Bottom line: Give your kidneys a break – opt for an aluminum-free deodorant. Secret Invisible Solid Paris Rose parent/owner: Procter & Gamble established: 1964 price point: $6.00/2.6 oz The Environmental Working Group scored Secret Invisible Solid Antiperspirant/Deodorant, Paris Rose 9/10, with 10 being the worst. The offending agents included the ever-ambiguous fragrance, cetrimonium chloride, and methylisothiazolinone, as a high risk for allergies and immunotoxins, and a moderate risk of endocrine disruption, which affects hormones. A preservative, methylisothiazolinone has been banned in the EU in leave-on products (like antiperspirants) and highly regulated in rinse-off products (like soap). Methylisothiazolinone, also found in pesticides, is regulated by the EPA and has restrictions placed on where it may be used. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has yet to place any restrictions on its use. This is reminiscent of triclosan, an antimicrobial that was classified as a carcinogen and an endocrine disruptor by the EPA long before the FDA. Triclosan was omnipresent. It was in everything from hand soap and deodorant to sneakers and toothpaste, until 2016 when the FDA finally banned it. Bottom line: Just because the government says it’s safe, doesn’t make it true. Speed Stick Power Ultimate Sport parent/owner: Colgate-Palmolive established: 1963 ( by The Mennen Company) price point: $2.00/3.0 oz. With 18% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly, Speed Stick Power Antiperspirant Deodorant, Ultimate Sport will definitely keep the sweat off your body. But re-routing it to your kidneys, like busing asylum seekers to Martha’s Vineyard, isn’t the best solution. Speed Stick also contains palm kernel oil. Palm kernel oil, along with palm oil, is responsible for deforestation and habitat destruction around the globe, as land is cleared for industrial palm farms. Bottom line: Without much trouble, you can find a similar product that doesn’t contribute to the destruction of the world. Suave Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom parent/owner: Yellow Wood Partners LLC established: 1937 price point:46.00/1.2 oz With a name like Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom, you can easily picture Suave’s target demographic – picture and smell. Fresh Vibes is the Axe for adolescent girls. Ironically, according to the Environmental Workers Group, the only concerning ingredient in Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom is the fragrance. It should be alarming that the ingredients used to scent this product are endocrine disruptors. The endocrine system is responsible for producing and regulating hormones. Adolescents are surging with hormones. Disrupting that system seems like a bad idea. Bottom line: Skip the wild scents and trendy names. Teen Spirit Pink Crush Antiperspirant and Deodorant. parent/owner: Colgate-Palmolive established: 1991 price point: Of the 19 worst deodorant beads, this one is a classic – immortalized by the legendary band Nirvana. Beyond the 15.9% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly and deforestation culprit palm kernel oil, Teen Spirit Pink Crush also contains, as you might have guessed, fragrance. And what have we learned about fragrance? It could be just about anything and at least some of those things pose risks to a teenager’s developing endocrine system. Bottom line: Find a fragrance-free alternative. Be aware that unscented is not the same thing as fragrance-free! Many unscented products contain a masking fragrance. ZeroSweat Clinical Strength parent/owner: ‎ZeroSweat Inc. established: 2011 price point: $20.00/1.2 oz. Offering up to seven days of protection, ZeroSweat Clinical Strength contains 12% aluminum chloride. The strongest of the aluminum additives, aluminum chloride is most commonly found in RX-strength antiperspirants. Seven days? That’s a mighty long time to keep your glands sealed without a breather, so to speak. Also, at almost $20.00 an ounce, it has a higher price point than other brands with similar gland-clogging abilities. Bottom line: You can clog your glands for less. Sponsored: Tips for Investing A financial advisor can help you understand the advantages and disadvantages of investment properties. Finding a qualified financial advisor doesn’t have to be hard. SmartAsset’s free tool matches you with up to three financial advisors who serve your area, and you can interview your advisor matches at no cost to decide which one is right for you. If you’re ready to find an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals, get started now. Investing in real estate can diversify your portfolio. But expanding your horizons may add additional costs. If you’re an investor looking to minimize expenses, consider checking out online brokerages. They often offer low investment fees, helping you maximize your profit. The post 19 Deodorant Brands to Avoid appeared first on 24/7 Wall St.......»»

Category: dealsSource: nytJan 16th, 2024

19 Deodorant Brands To Avoid

Never ask a dirty hippie to write about 19 deodorant brands to avoid. Their initial reaction will be why stop at 19? As a full-fledged fragrant hippie, I haven’t used deodorant or antiperspirant since the Ban roll-on my mother purchased for me before 7th grade telling me that everyone would appreciate it if I would […] The post 19 Deodorant Brands To Avoid appeared first on 24/7 Wall St.. Never ask a dirty hippie to write about 19 deodorant brands to avoid. Their initial reaction will be why stop at 19? As a full-fledged fragrant hippie, I haven’t used deodorant or antiperspirant since the Ban roll-on my mother purchased for me before 7th grade telling me that everyone would appreciate it if I would start using deodorant. I rolled it on my pits a couple of times before deciding I’d rather stink than have an unnatural, distracting scent about me. Thankfully, my grandmother stepped in telling me that she relied on white vinegar or lemon juice on special occasions. She then explained the science behind it. Vinegar has been my odor neutralizer of choice ever since, though I would dab my pits with lemon juice before Saturday night cotillion. Body odor aka B.O. results when secretions from apocrine sweat glands, principally located in the armpits and the groin, come in contact with bacteria on the epidermis, the outer layer of skin. The deodorant’s goal is to mask the associated odor. Antiperspirants aim to control the odor by eliminating secretions. Most of the products on today’s market offer dual-protection. Hyperhidrosis, a condition that causes excessive perspiration is treated with prescription-strength antiperspirants that contain aluminum-based compounds. Aluminum chloride, aluminum zirconium, and aluminum chlorohydrate are also found to a lesser degree in OTC antiperspirants. They work by forming a gel-like plug in the sweat ducts, reducing or eliminating sweat production. I prefer my ducts to be unplugged. Like Bob Dylan before Newport. Our criteria for determining the 19 deodorant brands to avoid included the propensity to have a too-strong or too-longlasting scent, the number of difficult-to-unpronounceable ingredients, and value. Because the appeal of personal hygiene products is highly subjective our list is presented in alphabetical order. Arm and Hammer Advanced Sweat Control Fresh parent/owner: Church and Dwight established: 1846 price point: $3.00/2.6 oz. From the name you’d think the active ingredient in Arm and Hammer would be baking soda. But it’s not, it’s aluminum chlorohydrate – a whopping 19%! This is high enough to warrant a warning on the label for those who have kidney disease. Your kidneys are responsible for flushing aluminum out of the body, as well as all of your un-sweated sweat. This product also includes talc which is problematic thanks to the probability that it contains asbestos, a known carcinogen. Baking soda is listed as an inactive ingredient, however. Let’s hope this is because it is not prevalent enough to cause the skin irritation associated with baking soda found in other personal care products. Bottom line: The talc alone is reason enough to keep your distance. Axe Apollo Long Lasting Spray Sage and Cedarwood parent/owner: Unilever established: 1983 (EU)/2002 (USA) price point: $6.00/4.0 oz. This product contains an astounding 23.3 % aluminum chlorohydrate and hydrofluorocarbon 152A, a propellant, that was created as a presumably safe alternative to chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), an ozone-depleting greenhouse gas. While hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) don’t deplete the ozone, they are super greenhouse gases. Axe Apollo Sage and Cedarwood is also 23.3% duct-clogging aluminum chlorohydrate, butane, a handful of other difficult-to-pronounce chemicals, as well as the all-encompassing, exceptionally vague fragrance. Fragrance is an Axe specialty, but not one everyone especially appreciates. Used correctly, Axe products are probably still over-scented, but in the hands of pubescent middle schoolers who have been conditioned to believe natural body odor must be masked at all costs? Eye-watering nostril-stinging, breathtakingly cloying. Bottom line: Be a good Earth steward and avoid products that contain hydrofluorocarbon 152A. BLEU DE CHANEL parent/owner: House of Chanel established: 2010 price point: $40.00/2.0 oz. The ingredients in this product aren’t all that sinister, but they’re also nothing special, certainly not 20.00 and ounce special. Two of the first three ingredients are alcohol and water. The website also boasts that the woodsy, sandalwood scent leaves a trail. Personal scents should not leave a trail. Bottom line: You’re paying for the label and a scent that remains long after you’re gone. Carpe Underarm Fresh Powder Scent parent/owner: Clutch, Inc. established: 2015 price point: 20.00/1.69 oz. With 15% Aluminum Sesquicholorhydrate and talc, this isn’t the safest antiperspirant around. That said, it has a compelling backstory. No spoiler alerts here, but sweaty palms are annoying. Carpe is a bit overpriced, at over ten dollars an ounce, but if you can afford it, you’ll be supporting a small business. Bottom line: Better than some and no worse than some others, seize the day with Carpe! Certain Dri Prescription Strength Clinical Dry Spray parent/owner: Clarion Brands, LLC established: price point: $10.00/2.0 0z. Among a host of other chemicals, Certain Dri ups the ante with 25% aluminum chlorohydrate plus the greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon 152A. This product lasts up to 72 hours – even factoring in showering.  Where some view its long-lastingness as a perk, others find it frightening? Concerning? Perhaps I’m projecting but if a shower can’t wash it away, I’m keeping my distance. Bottom line: Lower your carbon footprint; choose a deodorant that doesn’t contain hydrofluorocarbon 152A. Degree Original Protection- Cool Rush parent/owner: Unilever established:1908 price point: 2.00/2.0 0z. The price is certainly right, but Degree Original is 18.2% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly and talc. The 48-hour protection Degree provides translates into a strong scent that is permeating. Does your scent announce your arrival or stay after you’ve gone? Then it’s time to consider an alternative. Just like no one wishes to smell your stench, no one cares to smell your deodorant, either. Bottom line: An exceptionally inexpensive choice, but be cautious in its application. Eau Dynamisante Antiperspirant parent/owner: Clarins established: 1987 price point: $34.00/3.3 oz. They tout 92% natural ingredients and claim that they have an herbarium in which they grow the plants that are at the core of their products, and for the most part, I believe them. The Eau Dynamisante label has a variety of unfamiliar words, however, most of them are simply fancy ways of saying coconut oil. Two of the fragrance ingredients, hexyl cinnamal and ethylene brassylate are concerning. The Environmental Working Group lists hexyl cinnamal as high for allergies and immunotoxins, which negatively affect the immune system. Ethylene brassylate, a synthetic fragrance in the musk family, is considered safe enough, but for $10.00/oz. you deserve the real deal! Bottom line: While there is nothing inherently bad about this brand, there are other equally not bad options with much lower price points. Gold Bond Body Powder Spray Clear parent/owner: Chattem Inc./Sanofi S.A. established: 1882 price point: $8.00/7.0 oz. It’s a fact that label ingredients are listed from highest to lowest amounts, and the very first ingredient on the list for Gold Bond Body Powder Spray Clear is the dreaded greenhouse gas hydrofluorocarbon 152A. Hydrofluorocarbon 152A is, thankfully, being phased out. As of October 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has passed regulations that should lower HFC emissions by over one billion metric tons by 2050. Bottom line: Why wait until your favorite aerosol brand is phased out? Roll-ons and sticks are excellent, more environmentally friendly ways of keeping fresh. Jungle Bravo Untamed Pheromone Deodorant parent/owner: Jungle Bravo established: c. 2023 price point: $35.00/3.0 oz. Of the 19 deodorant brands to avoid, this one’s my favorite. Do yourself a solid and check out this brand’s website. From the graphics to the comments, there is a lot of entertaining content, if you have critical thinking skills. Jungle Bravo touts itself as a natural, aluminum-free deodorant, however, they do not provide the label ingredients, beyond alpha pheromones. And sorry, suckers, but according to Jungle Bravo 90% of men simply do not produce enough alpha pheromones on their own. Since they tout their ingredients as all-natural, I’m wondering where they’re sourcing their alpha pheromones. I’m envisioning one of the lucky 10% hooked up to an alpha pheromone extractor. It looks painful. And, if the comments and reviews are to be trusted, Jungle Bravo is one of those gifts that keeps on giving, long after you’ve cruised through the casino. Bottom line: There’s a sucker born every minute and 90% of them cannot produce enough alpha pheromones. -P.T. Barnum Metro Sexual – Deodorant Stick parent/owner: Sea Of Spa Labs Ltd. established: 1996 price point: $23.00/2.5 oz Besides the fact that it’s fairly expensive and contains the very unnecessary FD&C Blue No. 1 and FD&C Red No. 40., there’s nothing precisely bad about this brand, Oh wait, yes there is. It’s the name. It screams 1990s. Bottom line: No 21st-century metrosexual would be caught dead wearing something called Metro Sexual. Old Spice Red Collection Captain Scent of Command Deodorant parent/owner: Procter & Gamble established: 1937 price point: $5.00/3.0 oz. Chances are your grandfather was an Old Spice aftershave guy. Old Spice is about as American as you can get. With a desirable price point and a formula that is absent of HFCs and aluminum, it continues to be a trusted brand. Something changed recently, however, that has consumers questioning the rashes and stinging sensations that experience after applying Old Spice deodorant. Bottom line: If you have sensitive skin, it would behoove you to steer your ship leeward. Patchouli parent/owner: various established: 5oo A.D. price point: $7.00/1.0 oz. There’s no more polarizing scent than patchouli. A member of the mint family, patchouli has been used medicinally since 500 B.C. in China and India. Now, you might think that because I’m a hippie I love patchouli, but you’d be wrong. I don’t mind the scent, per se, it’s the resulting migraine that I like to avoid. And I’m not alone. Recent studies at the University of West Georgia and the American Academy of Dermatology, et al., suggest that 1/3 of consumers find scented products irritating. The strength of its aroma is one of its original selling points: Patchouli was used in funeral rites in which its scent was used to mask odors associated with decomposition. While I have your attention, I’d like to point out the misconception that just because it’s natural, doesn’t mean it’s harmless. Some well-meaning individuals have told me that the scent they’re wearing couldn’t possibly be making me ill because, like patchouli, it’s all-natural. Snake venom, bee venom, and hemlock are all-natural, too. Bottom Line: Unless you smell like death, think twice before applying patchouli. R De Revillon Deodorant Spray parent/owner: Revillon Frères (Revillon Brothers) established: 1723/1839 price point: $15.00/5.0 oz. Revillion Brothers is a luxury brand that trades in furs and perfumes. Luxury deodorant is just the sort of decadence that the 21st century embraces. And while three dollars an ounce isn’t outlandish, it’s still twice as much as your proletarian brands. This brand originally counted benzene among its ingredients. Classified by the State of California as a carcinogen, benzene has been shown to cause leukemia, as well as birth defects. It would appear that Revillon has removed benzene from its listed ingredients, after the class action lawsuit. However, they didn’t replace the faulty nozzles that reportedly clog on the regular. Though my pioneer spirit would attempt to unclog the sprayer before tossing out a can of deodorant, it is a frustrating drawback. Bottom line: Benzene or not, R de Revillion is not a great value. Right Guard Extreme Defense parent/owner: Thriving Brands LLC established: 1960 (by The Gillette Company) price point: $5.00/2.6 oz. By now it should be apparent that any antiperspirant/deodorant that offers three days of protection is going to contain some form of gland-blocking aluminum. Right Guard Extreme Defense has 16.4% Aluminum Zirconium Trichlorohydrex Gly, which obstructs the ducts that aid perspiration. What’s happening to all of the obstructed secretions? Processed through the kidneys, all. Bottom line: Give your kidneys a break – opt for an aluminum-free deodorant. Secret Invisible Solid Paris Rose parent/owner: Procter & Gamble established: 1964 price point: $6.00/2.6 oz The Environmental Working Group scored Secret Invisible Solid Antiperspirant/Deodorant, Paris Rose 9/10, with 10 being the worst. The offending agents included the ever-ambiguous fragrance, cetrimonium chloride, and methylisothiazolinone, as a high risk for allergies and immunotoxins, and a moderate risk of endocrine disruption, which affects hormones. A preservative, methylisothiazolinone has been banned in the EU in leave-on products (like antiperspirants) and highly regulated in rinse-off products (like soap). Methylisothiazolinone, also found in pesticides, is regulated by the EPA and has restrictions placed on where it may be used. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has yet to place any restrictions on its use. This is reminiscent of triclosan, an antimicrobial that was classified as a carcinogen and an endocrine disruptor by the EPA long before the FDA. Triclosan was omnipresent. It was in everything from hand soap and deodorant to sneakers and toothpaste, until 2016 when the FDA finally banned it. Bottom line: Just because the government says it’s safe, doesn’t make it true. Speed Stick Power Ultimate Sport parent/owner: Colgate-Palmolive established: 1963 ( by The Mennen Company) price point: $2.00/3.0 oz. With 18% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly, Speed Stick Power Antiperspirant Deodorant, Ultimate Sport will definitely keep the sweat off your body. But re-routing it to your kidneys, like busing asylum seekers to Martha’s Vineyard, isn’t the best solution. Speed Stick also contains palm kernel oil. Palm kernel oil, along with palm oil, is responsible for deforestation and habitat destruction around the globe, as land is cleared for industrial palm farms. Bottom line: Without much trouble, you can find a similar product that doesn’t contribute to the destruction of the world. Suave Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom parent/owner: Yellow Wood Partners LLC established: 1937 price point:46.00/1.2 oz With a name like Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom, you can easily picture Suave’s target demographic – picture and smell. Fresh Vibes is the Axe for adolescent girls. Ironically, according to the Environmental Workers Group, the only concerning ingredient in Fresh Vibes Awesome Blossom is the fragrance. It should be alarming that the ingredients used to scent this product are endocrine disruptors. The endocrine system is responsible for producing and regulating hormones. Adolescents are surging with hormones. Disrupting that system seems like a bad idea. Bottom line: Skip the wild scents and trendy names. Teen Spirit Pink Crush Antiperspirant and Deodorant. parent/owner: Colgate-Palmolive established: 1991 price point: Of the 19 worst deodorant beads, this one is a classic – immortalized by the legendary band Nirvana. Beyond the 15.9% Aluminum Zirconium Tetrachlorohydrex Gly and deforestation culprit palm kernel oil, Teen Spirit Pink Crush also contains, as you might have guessed, fragrance. And what have we learned about fragrance? It could be just about anything and at least some of those things pose risks to a teenager’s developing endocrine system. Bottom line: Find a fragrance-free alternative. Be aware that unscented is not the same thing as fragrance-free! Many unscented products contain a masking fragrance. ZeroSweat Clinical Strength parent/owner: ‎ZeroSweat Inc. established: 2011 price point: $20.00/1.2 oz. Offering up to seven days of protection, ZeroSweat Clinical Strength contains 12% aluminum chloride. The strongest of the aluminum additives, aluminum chloride is most commonly found in RX-strength antiperspirants. Seven days? That’s a mighty long time to keep your glands sealed without a breather, so to speak. Also, at almost $20.00 an ounce, it has a higher price point than other brands with similar gland-clogging abilities. Bottom line: You can clog your glands for less. The post 19 Deodorant Brands To Avoid appeared first on 24/7 Wall St.......»»

Category: dealsSource: nytJan 15th, 2024

After racist threats forced a Southeast Asian restaurant to close down, the owner reopened a new restaurant as an homage to his immigrant parents

The stereotype of Asians eating dogs is rooted in outdated beliefs. David Rasavong opened his restaurant as a homage to his immigrant parents. He closed his previous restaurant after false accusations of serving dog meat.Richard Vogel/AP PhotoA Southeast Asian restaurant closed down last year after facing false accusations of serving dog meat.The accusations are grounded in the racist stereotype of Asians eating dogs.The restaurant reopened recently with support from the community.David Rasavong first noticed strange reviews for his Fresno restaurant on a Monday night in May. He had just put his kids to bed when he saw several Google reviews mentioning dog meat. Rasavong didn't think too much of it; just reported them to Google before going to sleep.The next morning, Rasavong woke up to find his restaurant's Yelp, Facebook, Instagram, and email accounts flooded with dozens of scathing reviews and comments. Rasavong recalled some of them: "Disgusting." "How can you do this?" "You guys should be arrested."They accused the restaurant of killing, selling, and serving dog meat.Rasavong soon discovered that a supposed animal rights activist had taken to social media to imply that a dog tied up at someone else's house next door would be served on his restaurant Tasty Thai's menu.Within days of the accusation — grounded in the racist stereotype of Asians eating dogs — Rasavong shuttered his restaurant, which he had opened just seven months earlier as a homage to his immigrant parents. It no longer felt safe with the continuing stream of harassment and the people lingering outside the restaurant.Rasavong's parents are from Laos and spent about two years in refugee camps in Thailand before immigrating to the United States in 1981.Courtesy of David RasavongA harmful racist stereotypeRasavong particularly remembers the phone calls he fielded at the restaurant."Naively, I thought we could talk sense to people," Rasavong told Business Insider. "But when I started listening to the voice mails and taking calls, it was, 'Go back to your country, you're disgusting. You guys are all dog eaters.'"There were also vitriolic comments online, including people who said, "This is why I don't eat at Chinese restaurants," falsely conflating all Asians, according to Rasavong.The harassment didn't stop there. After Tasty Thai received the barrage of negative reviews, Rasavong said a handful of other Asian restaurants in the area also began getting phone calls and verbal attacks."It broke my heart," Rasavong said.Anna Le Nguyen and Minh Rasavong Oriyavong help out in the kitchen of Love & Thai.Richard Vogel/APThe stereotype of Asians eating dog meat is rooted in outdated and exaggerated beliefs, harnessed as a means of othering and exoticizing Asian people. The practice has persisted in the US for more than 150 years, grounded in xenophobia toward the arrival of Chinese immigrants in the 1800s.During the 1904 World's Fair in St. Louis, a replica of a Filipino village featuring a group of Igorot tribe members grilling dogs. Staged just two years after the US won the Philippine-American War, the exhibition was advertised as "The Call of the Wild: Head-Hunting, Dog-Eating, Wild People from the Philippines."More recently in 2016, an Oregon senate candidate apologized after he said Vietnamese refugees were a "huge problem" because they were "harvesting people's dogs and cats."The stereotype has only intensified amid a surge in anti-Asian sentiment and hate crimes during the coronavirus pandemic. In 2022, Asian-owned businesses saw the largest increase in hate speech on Yelp, according to the review platform's latest annual trust and safety report. In 2021, Yelp removed just nine anti-Asian posts. In 2022, it removed 475.Rallying togetherIn November, Rasavong reopened his restaurant under a new name: Love & Thai."The name means the world to us. It's how I pay homage to my parents," he told Business Insider.Rasavong's parents have three children and eight grandchildren.Courtesy of David RasavongRasavong was surprised and heartened by the support he received from the community around him. Local and international graphic designers, interior designers, and artists offered their services for free, while local organizations helped get the word out.A mural in the new restaurant, painted by local artist Hana Luna Her, depicts Rasavong's mother when she was young, dressed in traditional Laotian clothing. She stands next to an elephant, the national animal of Laos, and expansive rice fields that blend into the Golden Gate Bridge, where Rasavong's parents immigrated to in 1981, and Fresno, where the restaurant is located. Above the mural are the words, "Spread the love."The mural by Hana Luna Her at Love & Thai pays homage to Rasavong's family's journey to America.Courtesy of David Rasavong"We believe that's the most important thing. There's too much hate and anger toward each other in this day and age," Rasavong said.Customers have flocked to Love & Thai and shown their support, and Rasavong wants to share that support with others in the community."I want the community to continue to support each other, to give each other the benefit of the doubt before assuming things based on stereotypes," Rasavong said. "We'll all be in a better place for it."Read the original article on Business Insider.....»»

Category: worldSource: nytJan 13th, 2024