2) Boris Johnson has proposed dropping biofuel mandates as an approach to quickly produce more food for people. Germany agrees but Joe Biden is blocking.
3) In the U.S. the Biden administration has mandated (they call it a waiver, but that's a misnomer) that ethanol must increase from 10% to 15% for use in gasoline. That's the E15 "waiver."
4) All gasoline refineries must prove they are using the biofuel by sending receipts for their purchase. These are called purchase credits (known as Renewable Identification Numbers, or RINs).
The purchase receipts or RIN credits must be sent to the EPA.
5) Any gasoline refinery that does not use E15 must purchase these RIN credits from parties that blended or imported biofuels directly.
This sets up a secondary income stream, a trading market for the larger oil companies, refineries and importers.
6) E15 requires a complete change in the infrastructure of the gasoline company from the refinery to storage, to transportation and eventually to the retailer.
E15 infrastructure does not widely exist. So, most gasoline refineries use the RIN credit system to sell non E15 gas.
7) The price of the RIN credits becomes embedded in the price of the gasoline.
When a mandate for E15 year-round is in place, that drives up the cost of gasoline, because more RIN credits need to be purchased. (Current Biden policy)
8) Think of it this way. Metaphor: The govt requires that margarine be used instead of butter in making bread.
The bread makers do not have equipment that will support the use of margarine instead of butter (and the bread customer does not want margarine).
9) The govt gives the bread maker the option of paying $1 to the USDA for not using margarine and to continue using butter.
The bread maker is forced to make a decision. Change equipment ($$$) or pay $1 to govt for each continued loaf of bread using butter.
10) The result of bread makers not switching to margarine means each loaf of bread now costs an additional $1 to you the customer.
This bread example is analogous to the RIN credit gasoline refinery issue with biofuels.
11) Mandating increased use of biofuels for gasoline is one part of the climate change agenda. ie. The Green New Deal and/or 'Build Back Better' policy agenda.
12) Mandating increased use of biofuels also means farmland used for human food production is now switched to create biofuel.
PM Johnson proposed dropping this approach in order to quickly produce more food with a pending global food shortage looming.
13) Justin Trudeau (Canada) and Joe Biden (USA) blocked the approach to increase food production, saying the climate change agenda is more important than feeding people.
14) NATO and Western Govt, led by the policy of Joe Biden have placed oil and gas sanctions against Russia.
Those U.S-led Russian energy sanctions follow similar sanctions already in place against oil and gas from Iran and Venezuela.
15) Simultaneously the G7, Western Alliance will not allow Africa to develop their own use of natural gas to produce fertilizer to increase crop yield/harvest.
The G7 control food production in Africa by controlling the energy company investment needed to manufacture fertilizer.
16) Again, as with the biofuel issue, the G7 and Western Alliance are prioritizing Climate Change energy policy over food production. Which will ultimately cause food shortages and famine.
17) However, now the "WEST" has an ideological problem.
People will figure this out. The absence of food will change things. People will get angry once they realize the absence of food is being caused by Western Govt prioritizing Climate Change over people.
18) Things will get intense. Things will get ugly. The Western "leaders" need a scapegoat, a way to focus the world's anger away from them... and toward something else.
19) Their already visible plan (Kirby example) is to place the blame here 👇
20) When the food shortage becomes serious, I mean when it really becomes serious, the blame escalation will need to increase in direct proportion to the hunger, famine and starvation.
This means they will need a direct war with Russia.
21) All of this "globally," which includes the energy driven inflation surfacing in the nations participating in the Build Back Better energy policy approach, is being driven by nations in Yellow.👇
This is the geopolitical battle, a narrative war, ahead of the looming hot war.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. The absolute key to the first quarter GDP result is to remember that ‘imports‘ are a deduction in the economic equation of Gross Domestic Product. The GDP is the valuation of all goods and services produced in the USA *minus* the value of imports.
2. The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) releases the results of the first quarter GDP. The overall economic growth seems low at 0.3% until you look at how U.S. companies responded in February and March to the tariff announcement.
Companies proactively purchased massive amounts of products in advance of the tariffs leading to an overall increase in imports of 41.3%. Which results in a 5.3% deduction to GDP. Every dollar of those imports is a deduction to the GDP equation, giving the false appearance of lower domestic production.
3. There was a massive surge in import goods purchases of 50.9% versus the prior period [Table 1, line 20]. That’s the largest periodic increase in import purchases I have ever seen. Simultaneously, fixed asset investment in equipment for domestic production surged 22.5% [Table 1, line 11].
Put both of these metrics together and what you see are U.S. companies building consumer inventory from overseas (imports) while simultaneously preparing themselves to shift production into the USA.
The massive import purchases are a bridge to cover the time needed to shift the manufacturing from overseas to the USA. This is exactly what we want to see.
1. I'm getting hit with a lot of newly awakened people wondering about AG Pam Bondi; wondering if the stuff from her old days surfacing is accurate.
I will try to encapsulate and provide receipts. The issues with Pam Bondi are much more serious than most understand.
Pam Bondi was the Florida Attorney General during the incident when George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.
“When I worked with Governor Scott to appoint State Attorney Angela Corey to the case involving Trayvon Martin, I did so with the full confidence that a swift and thorough investigation would be conducted."
2. On the evening of February 26, 2012, in Sanford Florida, George Zimmerman fired one shot into the heart of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, fatally killing him.
The Sanford Police lead investigator into the shooting was Chris Serino; the Police Chief was Bill Lee, and the local prosecutor was Norm Wolfinger.
Detective Chris Serino questioned and investigated George Zimmerman, who used a traditional “self-defense” justification for the shooting. Eventually the case went to trial and the same “self-defense” justification was used in court. Despite what you might have heard in the media, it was never a “stand your ground” defense. It simply was not needed.
In addition to questioning Zimmerman, Serino documented two eye-witnesses to the shooting. One woman in an apartment who saw the initial encounter between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, and another eye-witness, a man in an adjacent apartment who saw and partially recorded, the entire confrontation as it unfolded on the pathway approximately 20 feet from him.
The second witness called 911 and described in real time what he was seeing. Trayvon was straddling George in an “MMA style” position and slamming Zimmerman’s head into the sidewalk. During the 911 recording you can hear Zimmerman calling out, “help me; somebody help me.” [NOTE: Both of those witnesses as well as the recording were later buried but came out at trial.]
After a thorough investigation, all of the statements by George Zimmerman were corroborated by the eye-witnesses, the forensic evidence, the audio recording, and all the physical evidence found at the scene. Detective Chris Serino gave his investigative report to Police Chief Lee along with the recommendation that Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense was valid and justified. Serino and Lee then consulted with prosecutor Norm Wolfinger who reviewed the evidence and agreed.
3. Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin, was in a new relationship with his girlfriend Brandy Greene. Ms. Greene was a corrections officer.
Ms. Brandy Greene was eventually put into contact with a Florida “civil rights lawyer” named Benjamin Crump. After some back-and-forth positioning and discussion, Crump decided to champion a wrongful death case for the Martin family against George Zimmerman, the City of Sanford and the Sanford Police Department.
Benjamin Crump hired a PR firm run by Ryan Julison to create media pressure. Using his civil rights contacts, Crump requested support from groups like Al Sharpton, Dream Defenders, and allies in the DOJ. That approach led to AG Eric Holder and eventually President Barack Obama.
Additionally, having worked previously (2007) with Florida prosecutor Pam Bondi in the Martin Lee Anderson case, Benjamin Crump called the now Florida Attorney General Bondi for support.
The detective (Serino) sided with George Zimmerman. The Police Chief, Bill Lee, agreed with Serino and the evidence. The local Sanford prosecutor (Norm Wolfinger) refused to bring a case against Zimmerman based on the evidence.
…. Enter Florida AG Pam Bondi, who told Florida Governor Rick Scott a special prosecutor was needed for her friend Ben Crump.
2. 40 FBI agents investigated Trump for two years, knowing there was nothing to investigate.
"mistakes were made?"
3. “If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are – and have been – institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law. Attorney General Garland and Director Wray, simply put, based on the allegations that I’ve received from numerous whistleblowers, you have systemic and existential problems within your agencies.”
1) **ahem** Also, every argument for retention of 702 is a false premise. Americans either have a 4th Amendment, or we do not. It really is that simple.
Want to conduct electronic surveillance on an American; want to read their "private papers," GET A WARRANT!
This is my hill!
2) Why is this my hill?
Because every downstream action for the surveillance state is predicated on the legal arguments behind FISA 702.
Real ID, facial recognition surveillance, metadata collection, AI enhanced trace and tracking, etc, all of it is contingent upon the arguments within the FISA 702 issue as it relates to the 4th amendment.
If FISA 702 is not a violation of the 4th amendment protection against unlawful search and seizure, then all domestic downstream DHS surveillance, collection and exploitation is similarly not a violation.
If FISA 702 is determined to be a violation of privacy, a violation of the 4th amendment to be secure in your papers and effects (which it is), then all approaches to conduct domestic electronic surveillance through the network of DHS data assembly is also a violation of privacy.
This is a privacy argument that has not reached SCOTUS. It is still being fought with success at state level.
If you are being monitored without a warrant, you have no privacy. The core argument behind 702 authorizes warrantless monitoring.
3) This is why the DC system supports FISA 702 with such severity. It is essentially the path through which the U.S. Govt is authorizing itself to conduct surveillance.
This is why the SSCI will not confirm a nominee without them supporting 702. Congress demands every member of the national security apparatus approve domestic surveillance, on behalf of the Intelligence Community who create and operate the systems.
Remove 702 authority and Palantir stock drops overnight. Why? Because the predicate of their domestic product intents, the surveillance software, are dependent on the legal arguments behind it.
Billions of dollars of German auto manufacturing (assembly) investment in Mexico were just vaporized by President Trump.
This is a very big kick in the teeth to Germany. Previously in a long-term strategy to avoid U.S. tariffs, German automakers invested billions in auto assembly plants in Mexico. Ex. the BMW parts were shipped from Germany and the cars assembled in Mexico. Now that investment is worthless as the vehicle will be taxed at a rate of 25% regardless of whether it is assembled in Germany or Mexico.
It cannot be overstated how big a hit this will be to the German economy specifically. That’s why EU President Ursula von der Leyen is couching her words very carefully.
Germany drives the economic engine of the EU, and the Germans care about their money far more than they care about the security of Ukraine.
“As I have said before, tariffs are taxes – bad for businesses, worse for consumers equally in the US and the European Union,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement. “We will now assess this announcement, together with other measures the US is envisaging in the next days.”
The EU outlook, specifically financial support, toward the EU/NATO Ukraine strategy will change in 3.... 2....1....