News

Shelby County judicial commissioner had approved suspect’s no bond release in March, despite an illegal weapons charge.

An 18-year-old man in Memphis, Tennessee, who died during a shootout with police Friday while also killing a police officer, had been recently released from jail with no bail on a violent weapons charge.

Interim Police Director CJ Davis explained the suspect, Jaylen Lobley, and a 17-year-old passenger fired on Memphis officers as police approached their vehicle around 2AM.

Following the shootout, “The suspect drove off, and police followed until the vehicle stopped a few blocks away,” reports the Associated Press.

“One suspect was taken into custody immediately,” MPD wrote on X. “One fled the scene and was located nearby.”

Memphis Police Officer Joseph McKinney died during the shootout and two other officers were also struck.

During a press conference, Davis admitted one of the suspects had been arrested in March for driving a stolen vehicle, possessing an illegally modified handgun outfitted with a “Glock switch,” and possessing a device that aids in the theft of vehicles.

“The suspect was released at that time without bond,” Davis added.

The Shelby County DA’s office reported a county judge released Lobley last month on no bond, according to the Memphis Commercial Appeal,

The Shelby County District Attorney’s office confirmed that the 18-year-old, named Jaylen Lobley, had been arrested and released in March on his own recognizance. Lobley, court records show, was arrested March 5 this year and charged with theft of property $10,000-$60,000, unlawful possession of a firearm, prohibited weapons (having a Glock switch) and vandalism.

The suspect’s ROR (release on recognizance) bond, was blasted by Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy.

“This bond was granted by a Shelby County judicial commissioner following a hearing where our office strongly argued against lowering the bond, citing the defendant’s danger to the community,” Mulroy said in a statement on his website. “Despite our arguments, the commissioner approved the ROR bond.”

---

---

If the Fed does cut rates, it encourages borrowing and spending and drives banks to create more new money in the form of loans. This adds to inflationary pressure and encourages investors to safe havens in the form of commodities like gold that can’t be so easily debased.

With a hot CPI report casting a shadow of doubt on the likelihood of a June interest rate cut, all eyes are on the Fed. But they’ve caught themselves in a “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” moment for the economy — and the news for gold is good regardless. 

With inflation running at 3.5%, it’s no surprise that gold just hit another all-time high — the dollar’s inevitable decline in purchasing power makes gold’s rise equally inevitable. The Fed wants to lower this number, and they know it won’t happen in a lower interest-rate environment. And while Peter Schiff has warned repeatedly in recent months that inflation is still red-hot, the mainstream finance media is expressing predictable surprise that inflation still isn’t under control.

The Fed also needs lower rates to reduce the massive burden of interest payments that the US owes on its existing debt, which can’t be financed through taxes in a country running a decades-long budget deficit. That means the only way to pay the interest is with more borrowed money. It doesn’t take a Ph.D. in economics to see that’s unsustainable, and even Jerome Powell has expressed concern (without addressing the role of his monetary policy in the problem).

The real estate market is desperate for a rate cut as well, with record numbers of vacant office buildings causing a ticking economic time bomb in American cities. Whether they remain offices or become apartments or something else entirely, it’s an expensive undertaking even under the best-case scenario to rezone, redevelop, and fill these buildings with actual human renters. But with high-interest rates,high prices, and a wall of loans due to mature asthe post-covid work-from-home trend settles in as a new normal, it’s a bad time to have money tied up in CRE.

A lower-interest-rate environment doesn’t solve any of these problems sustainably. At best, it delays them or replaces them with a different set of problems instead.

If the Fed does cut rates, it encourages borrowing and spending and drives banks to create more new money in the form of loans. This adds to inflationary pressure and encourages investors to safe havens in the form of commodities like gold that can’t be so easily debased. But even if they don’t cut because inflation keeps sticking as even mainstream economists now fear it might, the price of gold goes up along with almost everything else that’s being priced in dollars.

Automated, algorithmically-traded sells can contribute to drops in gold against USD in response to economic data like (cooked) jobs reports, or new inflation numbers. But these drops are being quickly bought up by investors who see the writing on the wall. They see these dips accurately as buying opportunities, as discussed on Peter Schiff’s recent podcast episode, Any News Is Good News for Gold:

“As soon as this stronger-than-expected number came out, just like Pavlov’s dog, these programs sold gold, so gold initially went down. But it didn’t stay down. Because the real money, the real buyers came in, and bought what the programs were selling, and then gold just spiked, because this is a real move. The real gold buyers don’t care about these jobs reports…they probably realize that they’re BS.” 

That was in response to employment data that came out in March, which the government won’t tell you show “strong” jobs numbers only because struggling Americans are being forced to take on multiple income streams to feed themselves and their families. In the case of CPI, a higher number means the dollar is worth less, and a lower number means a higher likelihood of rate cuts — that’s a double-edged sword and mission impossible for the Fed, but a win-win for gold.

Whether or not inflation keeps rising and the Fed only cuts rates once, twice, or not at all in 2024, all signal economic uncertainty. Cuts also won’t solve the economic trouble brewing in China, or continuing geopolitical tensions in Ukraine and the Middle East, which the US is determined to continue meddling in. The common denominator: gold’s attractiveness remains, and its price will continue to rise.

---

Learn Why The Globalists Are Killing Their Own Monetary System

---

Science and free speech were among the earliest victims of Covid-19.

After two years of draconian lockdowns, governments around the world suddenly dismantled their unprecedented campaigns against Covid-19 in silence. From one day to another, the whole thing was supposed to be forgotten. 

Looking back, it seems appropriate to abbreviate the Covid-19 pandemic as the Covid-19 panic, or to call it the pandemic of censorship and poor science.

Science and free speech were among the earliest victims of Covid-19. Millions of papers came out, most of them of very poor quality, and authorities quickly forgot that they are obliged to base their decisions on the most reliable science. Torturing your data till they confess became acceptable. And if randomised trials did not confess to what the authorities wanted, they ignored them and based their decisions on flawed observational studies instead. 

The lockdowns went counter to what we knew about respiratory viruses, that it is impossible to lock them out, and they caused a lot of collateral damage, including an increase in deaths from other causes than Covid-19. 

Sweden did not lock down and did not mandate face masks, and it seems to be the only country where the politicians had the best possible advisors and respected their advice. Sweden ended up having one of the lowest excess mortalities in the Western world. This should ring alarm bells everywhere, but what we have seen so far are pathetic defenses of grossly failed policies.

The scientists who knew the most about the relevant science were harassed if they spoke out and argued why the policies were inappropriate and harmful. They quickly learned that it was best to keep quiet. One example is Jonas Ludvigsson, who published a ground-breaking Swedish study making it clear that it is safe to keep schools open during the pandemic, for children and teachers alike. This was taboo.

We gave up our democracies almost overnight without much thought when we needed democracy more than ever. Free debate became a thing of the past; social media removed impeccable science if it went against official announcements; and the media were complacent with this new world order and often participated uncritically in the public humiliation of those who spoke out. 

George Orwell’s novel 1984 was a dire warning that humanity can lose its way and, in the end, become inhumane. A place where truth does not exist and where history and facts are changed according to the needs of those in power. In 1984, the Thought Police use fear, control, and constant surveillance to manipulate people and suppress “wrong thinking.” You end up loving those who destroyed you and your freedom. 

In 2020, all it took to mount enough fear among people to make them give up their daily life was a health crisis. We came close to the Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” and “Big Brother is Watching You” with WHO’s mantra “Test, test, test,” and if you could not provide a fresh and negative virus test, you were a pariah. We regressed to the Middle Ages where public humiliation was the norm for those who were not mainstream.

People are slowly waking up to the disaster of misinformation we have seen, ironically under the banner of fighting misinformation. For example, it is now possible to say the obvious about the origin of Covid-19, that it is extremely likely it was a lab leak in Wuhan of an artificial virus manufactured there as part of the dangerous gain-of-function experiments. 

In September 2020, Michael Head from Southampton University sent an email to Susan Mitchie, a member of a group that advises the UK government about the pandemic, which she forwarded to other group members. Four days earlier, Carl Heneghan from the Centre for Evidence-based Medicine in Oxford and other scientists had briefed Prime Minister Boris Johnson and had argued for more targeted measures to protect the vulnerable rather than having a blanket lockdown.

Head’s email was condemned by former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption who called it an example of scientists being hounded by those who could not counter their arguments. The people singled out in the email were Carl Heneghan and his co-worker Tom Jefferson, and Peter C Gøtzsche because they had all spoken out about the harms of lockdowns.

Maliciously, Head did not discuss the science but called Jefferson and Gøtzsche “anti-vaccine activists” and noted that, “There’s quite a lot to Heneghan, and I imagine I am only aware of a small amount of it.” Head opined that Heneghan’s work “is of great interest and use to the anti-vax community, which says a lot.” It doesn’t. And the issue was the harms of lockdowns. 

Framing people by calling them ”anti-vaxxers” or ”controversial” is a dangerous path to take. It can be compared to the post-war McCarthyism in the US, where many people were falsely accused of being communists. During the pandemic governments actively used these methods to frame scientists who disagreed with them and the officials in charge. Labelling people stops all rational debate. 

Head’s derogatory email was mentioned in a newspaper article where Heneghan said: “I have never been ‘anti’ anything. I have worked tirelessly during this pandemic and the previous pandemic to reduce uncertainties and ask questions that might help improve healthcare decision making. This matters a lot to me which is why we have just carried out a review on the impact of lockdown on vital childhood vaccines.” Jefferson added that their review showed the catastrophic effect the Covid restrictions have had on the mass implementation of important childhood vaccines like those for MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella).

Gøtzsche noted that to label him as an “anti-vaccine activist” took him back to medieval times: “In science you need open debate to further scientific understanding. During the Covid-19 epidemic the debate has many times been the opposite, with only one truth, like a religious dogma…We acknowledge many of our vaccines have been of great benefit and saved millions of lives and I certainly hope the Covid-19 vaccine will save millions of lives as well. People in this pandemic have been furthering their own agenda in all ways, and this involves below the belt punches…they show that academically they have lost the argument.”

The anti-vaxxer label is so popular that it is sprinkled on everyone who dares to write critically about anything. Even psychiatrist Michael P. Hengartner was called an anti-vaxxer when he pointed out that the average treatment effect of depression pills is poor and of questionable clinical significance.

In April 2021, Twitter and Facebook representatives were brought before the UK parliament to explain their firms’ censorship of discussion around Covid. Two particularly pertinent cases were raised: A tweet by Martin Kulldorff and a statement on Facebook by Heneghan.

Someone wrote to Kulldorff on 16 March 2021 that it seems to be a religious mantra now that everyone MUST be vaccinated. Kulldorff replied, “No. Thinking that everyone must be vaccinated is as scientifically flawed as thinking that nobody should. Covid vaccines are important for older high-risk people, and their caretakers. Those with prior natural infection do not need it. Nor children.” 

Kulldorff’s tweet was measured, informative, and in accordance with good science, but it was labelled “misleading” by Twitter, and tweeters were rendered unable to interact with it and were instructed that “health officials recommend a vaccine for most people.” This was absurd to say, as Kulldorff had not contradicted it.

Some people called Heneghan “anti-science” for daring to convey the results of the randomised trials of face masks. He and Jefferson had noted that there was a troubling lack of robust evidence that they worked and that, despite being a subject of global importance, there had been a total lack of interest from governments in pursuing evidence-based medicine in this area. They also noted that the only studies that had shown face masks to be effective at stopping airborne diseases had been observational, which are prone to bias.

Heneghan posted a link on Facebook to an article he had written about the Danish trial of face masks for preventing Covid-19 that did not find an effect, and Facebook immediately labelled the article “False information. Checked by independent fact-checkers.” As Heneghan noted, there was nothing in his article that was “false.”

Kulldorff, Heneghan, and Jefferson are dissenting scientists who hold positions at esteemed institutions. So, on what basis could Twitter and Facebook declare their arguments void? The answers provided to the British parliamentarians were chilling. Someone put up a link to a video in a tweet with the appropriate handle @BigBrotherWatch:

Parliamentarian: “Who in your organisation would have been cited…and been qualified…that a professor of medicine was wrong?”

Katy Minshall, head of UK public policy at Twitter: “Well, it is not Twitter saying he is wrong or misleading, it is the CDC [US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and health authorities around the world, and with that tweet you are referring to, my understanding is that it said, if you have had Covid-19 before, you have natural immunity and you don’t need the vaccine. That’s different to what the CDC and other health authorities around the world have said, which is that vaccines are effective in most people. What we want to do is that, when people see that tweet, to really quickly direct them to authoritative sources of information like the CDC or the NHS [the UK’s National Health Service] or the Department of Health, so they can see what the official guidance is and make up their own mind.”

Parliamentarian: “On these issues, some of these highly controversial, really, current issues around public health, you think there is a danger in having debate amongst acknowledged experts, and that it is far better that everybody just sees the official public health position, even though that of course in time may change.”

Minshall: “I think that’s a good question…because you are right, on the one hand, the information environment and what’s accurate with regard to the pandemic is evolving with the government providing different and sometimes competing advice…”

Minshall essentially said that anything that contradicts official guidance from public health authorities is deemed misleading by Twitter. She made the mistake that philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer in his book The Art of Always Being Right called “Appeal to authority rather than reason,” which is the antithesis of science.

Censorship with appeal to authorities is poison for our democracies. Furthermore, official advice has often been proven wrong. One of the worst examples of this is the CDC whose information about influenza vaccinations is seriously misleading. For example, even though there is no valid evidence to support the hypothesis that vaccinating healthcare workers protects patients from influenza, a CDC review that included flawed observational studies in long-term care patients found that vaccination reduced mortality by 29% in the patients. However, influenza has been estimated to contribute to less than 10% of all winter deaths among persons aged 65 years and older. Thus, even if the vaccine had been 100% effective in preventing influenza deaths, the reduction in total deaths should have been less than 10%. The CDC seemed to have deliberately ignored the existing Cochrane review about influenza vaccination for healthcare workers, which reported a very poor effect of the vaccine. 

It has never been shown in randomised trials that influenza vaccines reduce mortality, and the benefit is so poor that many doctors who know about the evidence do not get vaccinated. But if they shared their views to the public on social media, they would immediately be censored. 

The randomised trials of face masks to prevent transmission of respiratory viruses including SARS-CoV-2 have not found any effect. A large trial in Bangladesh appeared to have shown a small effect, but the 1% difference in the number of people with reported Covid-like illnesses could easily have been caused by physical distancing, which was practiced by 5% more villagers in the face mask group than in the control group.

An argument for mandating face masks is that they cannot do harm. This is not correct. Facial expressions are important for social interactions. When kids can’t see each other’s smiles or learn critically important social and verbal skills, this can be harmful, especially for children who are experiencing trauma in their lives. And recently, an 11-month-old baby died after being forced to wear a mask at a Taiwan daycare. The baby’s mask became soaked with his tears and mucus from crying, inhibiting his ability to breathe. 

Official inquiries about what happened during the pandemic are about saving face. As an example, the official UK Covid-19 inquiry is a Yes, Minister farce. The Inquiry’s starting position is that lockdowns and face masks were necessary and effective, and they are eager to dismiss the evidence that tells us otherwise.

In contrast, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak pointed to a peer-reviewed report about the first lockdown that found that “for every permutation of lives saved and GDP lost, the costs of lockdown exceed the benefits.”

The UK inquiry uncritically accepted substandard research and substandard advisors while bullying Heneghan using provocative language to suggest he didn’t have expertise in this area. Earlier, the UK’s Chief Scientific Adviser, Dame Angela McLean, called Heneghan a “fuckwit” on a WhatsApp chat during a government meeting for his dissenting views on lockdowns. This farce is slated to run until 2026 and is reported to be one of the largest public inquiries in UK history.

Even though the UK inquiry is deeply shocking, it is no different to the “head in the sand” attitude that prevails everywhere. The Minister is always right, just like in Orwell’s novel 1984. In Italy, for example, the inquiry will establish if the government’s policies agreed with the WHO’s advice. 

All knowledgeable people need to speak up now. Why? Because those who hold power don’t seem to have learned anything from their mistakes and will likely make the same mistakes the next time a pandemic haunts the globe. They will again lock down and mandate whole populations to look like bank robbers, which is ridiculous. 

History will judge those who were responsible. They knew what they were doing when they intentionally stopped the free debate in the scientific community, which even became a crime. In September 2020, Zoe Lee Buhler, a pregnant woman, was arrested in her home and handcuffed in front of her two small children while in pyjamas over a Facebook post. Her crime was that she had arranged and promoted an upcoming event about freedom and human rights as a protest against the lockdown in Victoria. When Buhler insisted that she wasn’t breaking any laws, the police told her that she was, and she was charged with incitement.

We must fight with everything we have against governments that behave in a dictatorial manner, against the evidence, using substandard experts, “for our own good,” as they say. The best way forward is to learn as much as possible about the methods governments used to suppress and distort the science. The Great Barrington Declaration, which has received almost a million signatures, was an important milestone. We need to establish an international cooperation of scientists at the highest level who will stand together and never again accept to be silenced when the next pandemic hits us.

[This article was coauthored with documentary filmmaker Janus Bang]

---

Alex Jones Responds To Revelation That FBI/CIA Attempted To Silence Him And Shut Down Infowars

---

America is in most cases far less educated about its government than citizens of even less freedom-oriented nations.

It’s no secret that the American public is wildly ignorant of many issues that are central to the success of our nation. Just a generation ago it would have been unthinkable that less than half of the American population could recognize all three branches of government. America is in most cases far less educated about its government than citizens of even less freedom-oriented nations.

The American Public School System was created to prepare people for democratic citizenship. Now it seems that it has failed to prepare people for even regular citizenship. Even in a country rife with other examples of government inefficiency and inadequacy, the public education system stands out as an emblem of wasteful spending without nearing its intended effect. While public education has led to a crisis of citizenship, it has also failed to give individuals the economic intuition needed to make wise financial decisions. Less than half of U.S. high school students have taken an economics class by graduation, and far less than that have spent time developing practical financial knowledge. The results of this inadequacy are becoming quite clear as Americans, and young people in particular, demonstrate an unprecedented lack of preparation for the financial choices that adulthood brings.

The current lack of economic education can be seen by an examination of the ideas that have become popular in the public sphere. Both liberal and conservative candidates have been able to gain traction by describing trade as a zero-sum game. A significant portion of the general public believes that America is “losing” if it imports more than it exports. They don’t understand that both countries are still better off, regardless of whether their trade is even. This lack of knowledge will rarely be corrected, because citizens only vaguely see the consequences of their votes long after they have voted. Even when their economic misinformation manifests itself in poor candidate selection, it is easy for the media to disguise the full extent of a specific mistake’s damage. Economic policy misinformation does not often self-correct, so the role of public education is exacerbated. If economic common sense is ingrained before they can even vote, the future of America as a country will be much more secure.

While economic ignorance is detrimental in the public sphere, financial folly leads lives to ruin in a much more tangible way. The current state of personal finance knowledge can be seen through a few depressing metrics. 40% of Americans have less than 300$ in savings. Even in a world where the internet has made sound financial information extremely accessible, bankruptcy filings have increased. Even by their own standard, 15% of Americans lost over 10,000$ in 2022 because of a lack of financial literacy. Because this was self-assessed, the reality is probably much more alarming. Financially illiterate consumers do not even possess the knowledge to assess how much their ignorance is harming them. Their ignorance is radical, as they are not even aware of the knowledge they lack. If they were fully aware of the avoidability of their poor decisions and willingly chose to ruin their credit and security, some would still choose to, but many would make better choices.

The problem that has arisen is systemic rather than individual. While parents used to be more involved in their children’s upbringings, they now generally expect the public education system to teach their children many basic life skills. This expectation coupled with the system’s failure leads to an uncomfortable reality for the nation. An entire generation of citizens lacks the skills needed for survival and civic life that the last generation took for granted. The weakness of parental guidance must either be remedied or supplemented if democracy is to survive. The public school system is doing neither, so the American public will soon be unworthy and incapable of self-rule. Even aside from the citizenship question, the direct practical effects of parental and educational neglect should be clear enough to spur institutional change.

The current state of public schooling needs some serious revision if Americans are to be prepared for life and citizenship. The basis of this nation is personal responsibility bolstered with knowledge. Even citizens who want to be responsible are unable to see where they need mental growth. Knowledge of economic issues and personal financial responsibility are two areas that do not easily self-correct, so it is much more effective for them to be taught while citizens are still young. The current situation may be bleak, but some initiatives look to make future Americans more well-informed through increasing access to economic and financial education. As inflation rises and the budgets become ever tighter, the skills needed to survive and be a responsible citizen are more in demand than ever before.

---

Alex Jones Responds To Revelation That FBI/CIA Attempted To Silence Him And Shut Down Infowars

---

Black citizens are jumping from the sinking Democrat Party ship

A woman who went viral on Wednesday for her interaction with GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump at an Atlanta, Georgia, Chick-fil-A restaurant recently joined Fox News to describe the experience.

The Trump supporter, Michaelah Montgomery, told “Fox and Friends” host Lawrence Jones, “Young people feel like [Trump] is honest. They feel like this is somebody, while we may not agree with how he says things, how he goes about things, at least he’s telling us what it is. We don’t feel like this is a snake in the grass waiting for his chance to bite us.”

Asked about what Joe Biden has done for the black community, Montgomery answered, “When it comes to what Joe Biden has done for black America, if we look at his record as a senator, it wasn’t something that benefited us at all, if anything, one could argue he dedicated his senatorial career to disrupting the way of life for black people. He did not want black kids going to the same school as his kid, he did not want black people walking on the sidewalk along with his mother and grandmother.”

She added:

“So the fact that we ignore these things that were said on the Senate floor, like this is somebody who passed legislation with the sole intent of oppressing a certain community and we’re going to act like that didn’t happen or can be overshadowed by somebody’s comments down the line made us feel some type of way. Feeling some type of way is different when you can feel that way at home. There are people who are, you know, as of right now, spending their lives in jail because Joe Biden thought they deserved it. And then you had somebody like Trump come in and give us the First Step Act to try to right the wrongs that were done with the three strikes rule and nobody is talking about that.”

• Our fan-favorite Turbo Force Plus is now 40% off! See for yourself the delicious one-of-a-kind energy boost infowarriors CRAVE!

Check out Montgomery’s encounter with Trump below:

---

Masked thugs wielding guns steal nearly entire inventory before owner storms out of back room with firearm

Masked thugs wielding guns stormed a California jewelry shop this week and stole nearly the entire inventory before an owner could grab a firearm of his own and scare them off, according to reports.

The shocking incident unfolded just after noon on Wednesday in Oakland.

Eight thieves charged into Phuong Jewelry in the city’s Chinatown neighborhood and began smashing glass cases and grabbing merchandise.

Surveillance footage of the brazen, broad-daylight robbery was published on social media by ABC7 reporter Dion Lim.

Owner Diane Trinh, 69, can be seen pleading with the gang to stop before running into a back room.

Moments later, Diane’s 76-year-old husband emerges brandishing a long-barreled firearm, forcing the suspects to flee.

“If he hadn’t done that they would have kept going,” the couple’s son, Tony, told ABC7.

The Trinhs say up to 90% of their inventory was cleared out in under a minute.

“The business let their insurance lapse because they kept getting dropped during the pandemic and premiums were so high,” Lim reports.

It is unclear if any suspects have been identified or apprehended at the time of this writing.

Businesses have been plagued by an explosion of crime in the Bay Area, which is driving many to close or move away.

In January, thieves in Oakland were seen dragging a stolen Bank of America ATM behind a van during a heist that unfolded just blocks away from the only In-N-Out eatery in the city – which recently closed due to unbridled lawlessness in the area.

Other restaurant chains, including Taco Bell and Denny’s, have also reduced services in Oakland or closed altogether due to rampant crime and insecurity.

InfoWars has been documenting the surge of crime across the United States, including carjackings, ‘street takeovers,’ smash-and-grab loot mobs, home invasions, and physical attacks on innocent victims.

---

Penn Station was slammed by hundreds of illegal aliens arriving to New York City this week.

Dan Lyman on X | Gab