Author Archives: sterlingcooper

FAKE CLIMATE COSTS ARE CONSTANTLY BLAMING BIG OIL FOR TRILLIONS IN LOST WEALTH BY CONSUMERS–WHAT A CROCK OF BS!…

Media shows no scrutiny of study claiming oil companies made the world $28 trillion poorer

These articles made no mention that the methodology used in the study that spawned considerable coverage was developed for the purpose of supporting climate lawsuits against oil companies. The study’s authors also worked with a lawyer who works at Sher Edling, a law firm that stands to profit from climate litigation.

A new study published in the journal Nature concludes that the world would be $28 trillion richer if we hadn’t used fossil fuels. Were it not for the “extreme heat” fossil fuel companies are causing, the researchers from Dartmouth College explain, we’d have a much wealthier planet.

With such dramatic conclusions, multiple outlets in the legacy media breathlessly reported the findings. A report in CBS News quotes celebrity climate scientist Michael Mann supporting this type of research. A D.C. court recently sanctioned Mann in his libel suit against two bloggers, saying he “acted in bad faith when they presented erroneous evidence and made false representations to the jury and the Court.” CBS News’ report makes no mention of this.

“Extreme weather events continue disrupt [sic] communities and strain finances,” a report on the study in The New York Times states. The lead paragraph in a report in the Associated Press compares using fossil fuels, which are the basis for over 80% of the globe’s energy and thousands of consumer products, to using tobacco. The study, Associated Press climate reporter Seth Borenstein claims, will “make it easier for people and governments to hold companies financially accountable.”

These articles fail to mention that the methodology used in the study wasn’t developed by impartial researchers dedicated to following science. The methodology, it turns out, was developed by anti-fossil fuel activists whose aim is to support climate lawsuits against oil companies. The study’s authors also consulted with a lawyer who works at a law firm that stands to profit from climate litigation.

“Attribution science” designed for lawsuits but robust

The study’s conclusion is based on what’s called “attribution science,” which was developed by a group of climate activists specifically to help advance litigation against oil companies. One of the leading organizations driving this approach is the World Weather Attribution (WWA) initiative. In an article about the field, its co-founder, climatologist Friederike Otto told Politico in 2019, “Unlike every other branch of climate science or science in general, event attribution was actually originally suggested with the courts in mind.”

Otto explained in a Concordia University interview last year that this field of science is part of a legal strategy to arm plaintiffs in lawsuits against oil companies with a scientific basis for their complaints. The Associated Press article quotes Otto, who didn’t take part in the Dartmouth study, stating that “all the methods they [the Dartmouth researchers] use are robust.” The reporter then characterized the WWA as a “collection of scientists who try rapid attribution studies to see if specific extreme weather events are worsened by climate change.”

In 2022, the Associated Press received $8 million in funding from anti-fossil fuel advocacy groups, including the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Quadrivium, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation. The outlet said that these are just “philanthropy partners,” and it maintains editorial control over its content.

White men need not apply

In an interview in a British feminist publication Womanthology, Otto argued that it’s important to have women doing climate research: “Who ‘does science’ is a hugely important issue, so if climate change is worked on exclusively by white men, it means that the questions asked are those that are relevant to white men.”

“But people most affected by climate change are not white men” he said, “so if all these other people are effectively excluded from the scientific process, the problems we have to face in climate change will not be properly addressed and you will not find solutions for how to best transform a society,” Otto said.

Otto didn’t explain how extreme weather events — whether they’re impacted by carbon dioxide emissions or not — specifically seek out people according to their gender and race.

Attempts to distribute blame company by company

On his “The Honest Broker” Substack, Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., retired professor of environmental science at the University of Colorado-Boulder, explained that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations consortium of the world’s leading climate researchers, disputes that single events can be attributed to climate change.

“Scientists cannot answer directly whether a particular event was caused by climate change, as extremes do occur naturally, and any specific weather and climate event is the result of a complex mix of human and natural factors. Instead, scientists quantify the relative importance of human and natural influences on the magnitude and/or probability of specific extreme weather events,” the IPCC states in its AR6 report.

The Dartmouth study attempts to distribute blame on how specific oil companies have allegedly contributed to the claimed $28 trillion in damages globally. According to the study, Chevron caused as much as $3.6 trillion in “heat-related losses” between 1991 and 2020. ExxonMobil is, according to the study, responsible for $1.91 trillion and adds that Saudi Aramco is responsible for $2.05 trillion.

The lead researcher of the Dartmouth study, Dr. Christopher Callahan, told Just the News that it is an “unfortunate misreading of the IPCC’s conclusion.” “Our research does not argue that a given heat wave was entirely caused by an emitter, but that emitters have increased the intensity of a heat wave that may have occurred naturally,” he said.

Callahan noted that the IPCC also states that “scientists can now quantify the contribution of human influences to the magnitude and probability of many extreme events,” and that “attributable increases in probability and magnitude have been identified consistently for many hot extremes.”

“Our findings are entirely in line with this consensus,” Callahan said.

Tactical science

In his article, Pielke wrote that attribution science was developed as a response to the failure of the IPCC’s conventional approach to reach a high degree of confidence with detection and attribution of trends in the frequency and intensity of most types of extreme weather events. Pielke argues that climate change due to human activities does pose a risk and shouldn’t be ignored. However, he wrote, “The importance of climate change as an issue does not mean that we can or should ignore scientific integrity.”

Pielke calls attribution science a form of “tactical science,” which is research done specifically in service to political and legal aims. He said such research is not necessarily bad research, but because it serves an agenda, it deserves greater scrutiny, especially by journalists reporting on these studies and especially those studies that aren’t peer-reviewed.

For example, the WWA produced a study claiming that last year’s deadly Hurricane Helene was made 500 times more likely due to carbon dioxide emissions. CNN reported on the study but never mentioned it wasn’t peer-reviewed. The Dartmouth study was peer-reviewed.

Feedback from interested parties

The researchers of the Dartmouth study consulted with a lawyer from a firm representing plaintiffs who are suing oil companies. The acknowledgments list Michael Burger, a lawyer of counsel at Sher Edling. The firm is heavily involved in litigation against oil companies, particularly lawsuits that blame them for damages stemming from weather-related events.

The firm has been accused of being part of a dark money campaign, The Washington Free Beacon reported, and it was the focus of a Congressional probe in 2023, seeking more information on the “wealthy liberals” who are funding the lawsuits “aimed at bankrupting oil and gas companies.”

Callahan, the lead researcher of the Dartmouth study, said he and co-author Dr. Justin Mankin are solely responsible for the entire article. He said the research benefited from feedback from many people, including litigants and judges.

“Neither of us are involved in climate litigation, and we do not stand to financially gain from these lawsuits,” Callahan said.

Training judges

The Dartmouth study also acknowledges participants in the Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), an initiative by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI). While the project bills itself as a neutral organization providing “training” to judges overseeing proceedings in climate cases, a report last year from the American Energy Institute (AEI) argued that CJP is influencing judges in favor of the plaintiffs in these cases.

The ELI told Just the News in September that the AEI report is “full of misinformation,” and insisted it doesn’t take stances on individual cases or advocate for specific outcomes.

The Dartmouth study lists in the acknowledgments Jessica Wentz, associate director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, and also cites her research. The Sabin Center is affiliated with Columbia University’s Columbia Climate School and Columbia’s law school.

In 2016, Wentz helped coordinate a petition to the Philippines Commission on Human Rights requesting an investigation of human rights violations by the “carbon majors” — meaning oil companies — on the theory that they are causing climate change and the assumption that human rights laws are in play.

Today, oil companies, tomorrow, the world

It’s hard to square the Dartmouth study’s conclusions — which is that oil companies are costing society trillions — when the data show that in the time the globe has been exponentially increasing its use of fossil fuels, GDP has rapidly increased in that time.

Another point that critics have noted about the study is that it focuses solely on the alleged impacts of oil companies. Large emitters not included in the study include steel producers, auto manufacturers, utilities and cattle ranchers, but the study didn’t calculate how much wealthier the world would be without steel, cars, electricity and beef.

Callahan said that the research could later inform studies to go after other industries. “The goal of our research is to develop a flexible framework that can be applied to any emitter. Existing work has estimated emissions attributable to major fossil fuel firms, which includes gas, coal, oil, and some cement producers, and our research used these existing estimates as a starting point and proof-of-concept. Further research could easily apply our approach to electric utilities, the agricultural or transportation sectors, and so on,” he said.

Legal experts critical of climate litigation have warned that there’s nothing about the campaign that couldn’t eventually target every industry producing the products everyone consumes, as just about every large industry uses excessive amounts of energy, the bulk of which comes from fossil fuels. If these lawsuits are successful, critics explain, the billions in settlements will be passed down to consumers.

Multnomah County, Oregon, filed a lawsuit seeking damages from a heat dome event in 2021, which the county claims was the fault of oil companies. The event wasn’t the worst heat event in recorded history, which was 119 degrees set in 1898, long before large amounts of fossil fuels were being consumed. The county, however, blames oil companies for the 72 people that died during the 2021 event. In November, the county amended its complaint to add a natural gas utility to its list of defendants.

As this type of research develops, it’s likely the list of companies said to be costing us trillions in the course of providing consumers with the products they need or willingly buy and enjoy every day will expand.

CHINA WILL FINISH BUILDING THE WORLD’S TALLEST “UNOCCUPIED” BUILDING

Chinese skyscraper that is once again under construction after 10 years of sitting empty and abandoned

But a decade-long break seems a bit, you know, lazy:

A 117-story skyscraper in the Chinese port city of Tianjin has stood unfinished and empty for nearly a decade — but according to China’s state media, construction on Goldin Finance 117 may resume as early as next week. If plans stay on schedule this time, the nearly 1,960-foot-tall supertall structure will open its doors in 2027.

The towering structure “has remained the world’s tallest unoccupied building since 2015, when financial fallout from the Chinese stock market crash forced the liquidation of its Hong Kong-based real estate developer.”

To their credit, the builders at least managed to cap the big structure off before they called it quits:

At just under 600 meters, it will (whenever it’s completed) rank among the tallest buildings in the world, easily:

The eeriness of this supertall structure, sitting vacant in a relatively low-slung Chinese port city, cannot be overstated:

It retains the dubious distinction of being the “tallest building [in the world] unoccupied,” according to Guinness World Records.

Incredibly, the embarrassment of this disastrous project has likely ensured that no other buildings like it will be built for a while:

Goldin Finance 117 and other previously failed skyscraper projects in China were responsible for the government banning construction of buildings over 500 metres (1,640 feet). When completed, Goldin Finance 117 will be one of China’s last 500+ m towers for the foreseeable future.

CHINA STEALS BILLIONS IN AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY EVERY YEAR!

How China Steals

By Spencer P. Morrison

China claims that President Trump started the trade war against China by imposing reciprocal tariffs.

What China conveniently omits is that they have been waging a full-scale trade war against America for decades. Not only does China systematically violate just about every term of every trade agreement, they have been stealing trillions worth of American industrial technology and intellectual property.

China Steals at Least $225 Billion Every Year

According to a 2024 report from the House Committee on Homeland Security, China steals between $300 and $600 billion worth of American technology and intellectual property every year. This is in line with findings from a 2017 report from the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property.

If we assume a middle-of-the-road figure, and extrapolate these findings back to 2001, when China joined the World Trade Organization, then we can assume that China has stolen some $9.9 trillion worth of American technology and intellectual property. As we will see below, this does not even encapsulate all the ways that China steals technology.

Perhaps surprisingly, only 29% of espionage targets were military in nature. The vast majority of China’s efforts have been focused on procuring industrial technology, including manufacturing processes, formulas, and designs. This theft costs American businesses at least $180 billion annually.

American businesses also lost out on big profits from counterfeit goods. A report from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) notes that 60% of all counterfeit goods sold globally originated in China. The proportion is even higher for America’s consumer market, with 87% of the counterfeit goods sold in America originating in China. This deprives American companies of some $291 billion in lost revenue.

Another report compiled by the United States Trade Representative discusses theft perpetrated on Chinese e-commerce markets. In particular, this “cause[s] great losses for U.S. Right holders involved in the distribution of a wide array of trademarked products, as well as legitimate film and television programming, music, software, video games, books and journals.”

Although this loss cannot be specifically quantified, it is likely significant. Consider that in 2024 Chinese e-commerce transactions were valued at an estimated $2.16 trillion USD. According to the above reports, approximately 40% of all products sold on these markets were pirated or counterfeit. Thus, we can estimate that these transactions deprived foreign — mostly American — businesses of $864 billion in profits.

How China Steals American Technology

Reports on China’s malfeasance typically focus on espionage and outright corporate theft. However, the main vectors of technological theft are not conventional theft. Instead, China focuses on acquiring ownership stakes in strategic American corporate assets, and strongarms American companies doing business in China.

America runs a large trade deficit with China, worth at least $300 billion per year over the last decade. How does America pay for this deficit? By selling assets and debts — this is called the balance of payments.

Assets include shares – ownership — of American corporations. Chinese investors coordinate to buy shares in American industrial and technology companies. They then use these shares to facilitate the transfer of proprietary technology.

Perhaps this is not technically theft, but it is a coordinated effort by the Chinese state and pseudo-state actors to acquire American technology. Further, these “owners” clearly breach their fiduciary duties to the American companies — once the technology is pillaged, they are free to liquidate their holdings.

The second main vector for technology transfers occur when American companies offshore their production to China. American companies are required to “partner” with a Chinese company, who handles all staffing and operational management of the factory. As a part of this deal, the Americans share their propriety technology with the Chinese company, and train the Chinese workers.

American businesses are happy to trade technology for short-term profits. Of course, this comes back to bite them. Once the Chinese have acquired the technology and knowhow, they often make copycat products and begin competing with their former employer.

A good example of this is the Pearl River Piano Group. They were contracted to build Steinway’s Essex line, lower-end manufactured pianos. After acquiring the technology, industrial capital, and experience in manufacturing pianos, Pearl River rolled out its own copycat lines: Pearl River and Ritmüller. In effect, Steinway created its own competitor.

This is just one example. The reality is that almost all Chinese companies have been built on stolen technology. Huawei, for example, is one of the biggest technology companies in the world. Huawei invented precisely nothing — all the foundational technologies were either “gratuitously” transferred through the above mechanisms, or stolen through outright corporate espionage.

The total amount of technology “stolen” in this way is unquantifiable. Consider that in 1983 most of China was pre-industrial — with economic development lower than that of colonial America. Since then, China’s industrial economy grown to be three times larger than America’s, and in some ways, more advanced.

America needs high and stable tariffs in order to reshore America’s factories, and stem the most egregious vectors of technological theft. If not, then America will continue to feed China until the dragon has grown past the point of taming or slaying.

MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD DISCOVERED IN WISCONSIN VOTER DATABASE, DUPLICATE FAKE VOTERS!

A Newly Discovered Algorithm in Wisconsin Voter File is Indisputable Evidence of Criminal Election Fraud

By Jerome R. Corsi,

Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., has discovered a never-before-seen algorithm in the Wisconsin Election Commission’s (WEC) voter registration database, leaving no doubt someone has penetrated the WEC’s computer system to impose a criminal reordering on the voter files. This finding alone should draw the attention of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and FBI Director Kash Patel. Yet, to date, we see no action whatsoever from the DOJ or the FBI investigating criminal election fraud.

Paquette first observed that the WEC voter role had an unusually high number of voter records that ended in zero. Assuming that the WEC voter roll assigned voter ID numbers sequentially, without breaks or outside manipulation, records ending in 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 should appear with equal distribution. As seen in Table 1, voter records ending in zero occurred in 30.6 percent of the voter records, while those ending in numbers 1 through 9 ended with each number appearing equally at 7.7 percent of the time.

Paquette was at a loss to explain this irregularity until he realized that every voter ID record ending in zero had two different Wisconsin voters assigned the same voter ID number. In searching the database, Paquette confirmed that in every case where the same voter ID number was assigned to two different voters, the voter record ended in zero.

We have labeled the two voter IDs tied to WEC voter records ending in zero as “doubles,” a term devised to distinguish this phenomenon from the “modified duplicates” that Paquette previously found in the WEC voter database. “Modified duplicates” involve making multiple voter records for the same voter, which can be done, for instance, by assigning a different birthdate or address to each duplicated record. Because duplicated voters each have different dates of birth or other addresses, the “modified duplicates” appear to be different people.

The point of the “modified duplicate” scheme is to create false voters, all of whom nevertheless get legitimate state voter ID numbers. The non-existent “multiple duplicate” voters can then be hidden back in the voter role, identifiable to the criminals by “algorithm locator numbers,” so they are available for use in fraudulent mail-in ballot schemes.

Why the “doubles” scheme assigns the same voter ID number to two different voters is more difficult to figure out. What is also not clear is whether one or both of the “doubles” are real voters or if both of the “doubles” voters could be fictitious.

A scheme this complicated must operate through a computer algorithm that creates “doubles” for every voter ID record ending in zero in a WEC database of over 7 million voters. That is, whatever rule is applied to pick the two voters who constitute the “doubles” in a database with over 7 million voters needs an algorithm if the scheme is to be applied, monitored, and updated on an ongoing basis.

Put another way, this cannot be random. Because there’s numerical consistency when it comes to all zero-ending records involving doubles and all duplicate voters having only zero-ending voter IDs, that implies a set of programming instructions (i.e., an algorithm) telling the system to create these records in formulaic fashion.

The probability that a scheme this complicated, consistent, and massive could happen by chance is near zero. The only logical conclusion is that someone penetrated the WEC server to embed the rule that would consistently alter the entire WEC voter registration database.

The WEC “doubles” scheme violates the Help America Vote Act (HAVA, 2002), which requires that each voter have a unique voter ID number and that no coded information not readily perceptible to election workers may be embedded secretly in the state voter roll database. Given the HAVA mandate that each registered voter must have a unique voter ID number, there is no administrative necessity justifying the fact that, as it now stands, every record in the WEC voter database with a voter numbering ending in zero is associated with two distinct voters.

We have previously argued that President Trump has chosen to elevate the election fraud investigation into a national security matter by bypassing a DOJ criminal investigation with Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the helm. The Department of Homeland Security has exercised authority in Arizona to review Arizona’s state voter roll to verify the citizenship of voters under the authority of President Trump’s Executive Order.

On April 23, 2025, Tulsi Gabbard referred two members of the intelligence community for criminal prosecution by the DOJ for leaking classified information to the Washington Post and the New York Times. This was information about the U.S. military strike on Houthi rebels. The leak was intended to harm Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Gabbard indicated that her action would “serve as a warning” to those “deep-state criminals” who “for partisan political purposes” sought “to undermine President Trump’s agenda.”

In that spirit, and in the absence of aggressive DOJ/FBI efforts to investigate deep-state criminals, Gabbard may have found a methodology that has a chance of spurring Bondi and Patel to action.

We now have abundant evidence that the WEC maintains a criminally infected voter registration database that was used in the 2024 general election and in the recent 2025 election for a seat on the Wisconsin State Supreme Court. Bondi needs to appoint a DOJ election integrity Task Force that will give Patel’s FBI sufficient subpoena power to seize WEC computers, voter registration files, and relevant internal documents, including emails. What’s holding Bondi and Patel back?

Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., has discovered cryptographic algorithms in the State Board of Elections voter registration databases in New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Florida, New Jersey, and Oklahoma.

439 GOVERNMENT AGENCIES CHARGE OVER $2 TRILLION IN HIDDEN TAXES, TIME TO D.O.D.G.E THEM ALL!

Average American Family Pays Thousands in Hidden Taxes, Making Case for DOGE Even Stronger

The government doesn’t just directly charge Americans in taxes—it also imposes a hidden tax that makes everything more expensive, according to a new report.

The federal government doesn’t just pass laws in Congress. Each year, many of the 438 federal agencies—nominally under the president’s control through the executive branch—publish tens of thousands of pages in regulations, red tape that increases the costs of business, transportation, and many other factors Americans often don’t consider.

This imposes a kind of hidden tax that makes everything more expensive. It also justifies the work of the Department of Government Efficiency and other efforts to streamline the federal government, according to Clyde Wayne Crews, a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and author of the annual report, “Ten Thousand Commandments.” Crews released the 2025 version of the report on Thursday.

The report “directly and indirectly makes the case that DOGE or a successor entity—but especially Congress itself through legislation—should be more aggressive on deregulation,” Crews told The Daily Signal on Thursday.

According to the report, federal regulation costs Americans at least $2.155 trillion every year—a cost of $16,016 annually per household. This sum constitutes 16% of the average household’s pre-tax income, and 21% of household expenses. Most American families spend less than that on health care, food, transportation, entertainment, apparel, services, and savings. Only the cost of housing, an average annual household expenditure of $25,436, exceeds the costs of regulation.

“Ordinary income and FICA taxes are itemized on pay stubs and calculated on tax returns,” the report notes. “Most regulatory costs are embedded in prices of goods and services, and never show up on a receipt or an annual statement.”

While the exact cost of these regulations that gets passed down to the consumer is impossible to gauge, the report provides a rough estimate that highlights the overall phenomenon.

The regulatory tax of $2.155 trillion comes close to the federal income tax, which collected $2.176 trillion in 2023, and stands at about four times the corporate income tax of $419 billion in 2023.

The report notes that the $2.155 trillion figure is likely an underestimate. The National Association of Manufacturers ran a similar analysis in October 2023, concluding that regulatory compliance costs the economy $3.079 trillion each year.

Crews emphasized to The Daily Signal the “fusion of federal spending and federal regulation over recent years.”

“Since COVID-19, we’ve had the CARES Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, the infrastructure law, and more, and these are all hyper-regulatory before bureaucrats even start writing rules,” Crews added.

While the Constitution places the authority to make laws in the hands of Congress, federal agencies issue far more regulations than Congress passes laws. During 2024, for example, agencies issued 3,248 final rules, compared with Congress passing 175 bills. That means for every one law passed by Congress and signed by the president, unelected bureaucrats finalized 19 regulations.

My book, “The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government,” exposes the leftist groups that staffed and advised the Biden administration, using this bureaucracy to force their ideology on the American people.

The Federal Register, the list of all rules promulgated by the administrative state, closed at 106,109 pages in President Joe Biden’s last full year, the highest tally on record and a 19% increase over 2023. Former President Barack Obama’s final calendar year saw 95,894 pages (the highest page count for federal regulations in U.S. history), while the administrative state only managed to publish 61,067 pages in 2017, the first calendar year of the Trump administration.

The gargantuan impact of the administrative state highlights the necessity of DOGE, according to the author’s report. Yet Crews also noted that DOGE has a sunset date—July 4, 2026.

“Note that DOGE goes away in a year, so there needs to be an infrastructure built that maintains the regulatory streamlining along with the slashing of spending,” he told The Daily Signal. “To me, real regulatory reform has to start with termination of departments and agencies.”

President Donald Trump has been terminating some agencies and departments—by directing that the U.S. Agency for International Development merge back into the State Department and by directing the ultimate closure of the Department of Education.

These changes save Americans money directly—with USAID grants terminated—but as the Trump administration decreases the size and scope of the federal government, that may also save American households money in decreased regulatory burdens.

IT IS TIME TO SUNSET THESE AGENCIES OR HAVE AN ANNUAL REVIEW, AND GIVE TAXPAYERS THEIR MONEY BACK TO SPEND ON THE JOYS OF LIFE.

CREEPY SWISS BILLIONAIRE SECRETLY WANTS TO FLAUNT FOREIGN DONATION LAWS TO SUPPORT LEFT WING CAUSES IN THE USA

Who Is the Mysterious Swiss Billionaire Spending Hundreds of Millions Bankrolling Leftist Causes in the U.S.?

Wansjörg Wyss, 89, a Swiss national with an estimated net worth of roughly five billion dollars, has quietly become one of the most influential donors on the American left. He has spent more than $800 million bankrolling hundreds of left-wing causes across the United States, donating millions to climate change groups, abortion activists, and the Clinton Foundation.

Information about him is sparse, but his sister once wrote that Wyss seeks to “(re)interpret the American Constitution in the light of progressive politics.”

Foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to candidates or PACs under federal law. Even though Wyss is not a citizen, or even a green card holder, he has developed a sophisticated system to become a “leading source of difficult-to-trace money to groups associated with Democrats,” according to the New York Times.

A report from election watchdog Americans for Public Trust (APT) reveals that Wyss created two nonprofits—the Wyss Foundation and the Berger Action Fund — which have funneled close to $500 million into a vast network of Democratic-aligned dark money groups. Much of this funding has gone to organizations managed by Arabella Advisors, the “mothership” of left-wing dark money.

The largest beneficiary has been the Sixteen Thirty Fund (1630), a key Arabella-affiliated group which The Atlantic described as the “indisputable heavyweight of Democratic dark money.” The Berger Action Fund alone has given over $200 million to 1630, which has in turn distributed it to hundreds of progressive organizations.

Though foreign nationals are barred from directly supporting candidates or super PACs, Wyss’ groups have exploited a loophole that allows foreign money to finance state ballot initiatives, according to APT. Namely, 1630 has spent more than $130 million on ballot campaigns in 25 states, advancing policies such as late-term abortion and drug decriminalization by embedding them directly into state constitutions—where they can only be reversed by another constitutional amendment.

In Michigan, 1630 spent over $33 million, where ballot initiatives recently enshrined a right to abortion and a right to no-excuse absentee voting in the state constitution.

The group also funneled almost $13 million into Missouri, where marijuana legalization and Medicaid expansion were recently written into the state constitution through ballot initiatives.

When foreign money flows into states, it is also used to support Democratic candidates. Earlier this year, APT uncovered that 1630 gave $1 million to a “progressive communications hub” that spent $9 million boosting the Democratic candidate in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court race.

Multiple states have passed legislation to stop foreign money from financing local ballot campaigns. Even though red states have taken the lead, Janae Stracke, Vice President of Outreach and Advocacy at Heritage Action for America, said the interest in this issue has been bi-partisan.

Five states have already passed bans — Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, and Wyoming — and several others have similar bills currently moving through their legislatures. Stracke expects more to follow.

Republican Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon signed one of these bans, House Bill 0337 into law March.

“This bill, a key plank of our conservative election integrity agenda, is a landmark piece of legislation and pivotal to ensuring foreign nationals are banned from meddling in Wyoming elections,” Wyoming Secretary of State’s Office wrote on X after Gordon signed the legislation.

“Foreign money in state ballot initiatives thwarts the American voice,” Stracke said. “This is an 80/20 issue.”

Even though the foreign funding loophole has been exploited primarily by billionaire activists, millions of dollars from Chinese entities have gone to groups promoting progressive climate policies.

Why would anyone oppose this legislation? “It’s the money,” Stracke said.

When reached for comment, a representative for the Wyss Foundation confirmed the Berger Action Fund contributes to 1630 but declined to say if Wyss supports legislation that bans foreign funding of state ballot initiatives.

US AUTO INDUSTRY RELATED JOBS BY STATE

Ranked: The Top 10 U.S. States by Auto Manufacturing Jobs

Automobile manufacturing continues to be a major source of employment across America, employing over a million people in 2025.

From Detroit’s “Motor City” heritage in Michigan to emerging plants in Southern states like Kentucky and Alabama, the U.S. has several vehicle manufacturing hubs.

This infographic ranks the top 10 U.S. states by total auto manufacturing jobs as of February 2025, using preliminary data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which only provides data for the top 10 states. It breaks down employment by vehicle manufacturing and assembly, body/trailer manufacturing, and vehicle parts manufacturing.

America’s Auto Manufacturing Hubs by Employees

Together, the top 10 states employ over 520,000 workers in auto manufacturing—making up more than half of the industry’s nationwide employment.

Here’s how the top 10 states stack up by auto manufacturing employment, as of February 2025:

Rank	State	Vehicles Manufacturing	Bodies and Trailers	Vehicle Parts Manufacturing	Total Employees	Annual growth rate

Rank	State	Vehicles Manufacturing	Bodies and Trailers	Vehicle Parts Manufacturing	Total Employees	Annual growth rate
1	Michigan	49K	0	115K	164K	-3.8%
2	Indiana	0	39K	53K	92K	-2.0%
3	Ohio	19K	0	65K	84K	-1.9%
4	Kentucky	24K	0	34K	58K	-0.7%
5	Alabama	23K	0	30K	53K	0.1%
6	California	25K	0	0	25K	-6.5%
7	Texas	16K	0	0	16K	-0.7%
8	Missouri	14K	0	0	14K	0.0%
9	New York	0	0	8K	8K	-0.5%
10	Mississippi	0	0	6K	6K	-0.1%

States in the Midwest remain the centers of auto manufacturing in America.

Michigan leads the pack with 164,000 auto manufacturing jobs, accounting for over 15% of all such jobs in the country. Its dominance is driven by legacy automakers like Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis (previously Chrysler), who have significant manufacturing footprints in Detroit.

States like Indiana and Ohio are also heavily invested in parts production, with Indiana also leading in bodies and trailers manufacturing.

Meanwhile, Southern states are becoming increasingly important for vehicle manufacturing, with Kentucky and Alabama attracting investments from foreign automakers like Toyota, Hyundai, and Mercedes-Benz.

Overall, employment in U.S. auto manufacturing is down 12.7% from a year ago, with the parts manufacturing segment taking the biggest hit at -17.8%. California has seen the biggest decline in jobs in this segment, dropping 6.5% from February 2024 levels.

The State of the U.S. Auto Industry

The U.S. auto industry is facing speed bumps from the latest round of tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, which include a 25% levy on imported auto parts and completely built up vehicles.

S&P Global forecasts that U.S. light vehicle sales will fall by 700,000 units in 2025, and North American production will decline by nearly 1.3 million units as a result of the new tariffs. Increased manufacturing costs from tariffs on auto parts are also likely to result in higher vehicle prices.

MARXIST POPE, SUPPORTER OF ILLEGAL MIGRATION TO THE USA OF THE DRAGS OF SOCIETY FINALLY DIES…ON EASTER MONDAY…GOD FINALLY SAID “ENOUGH”

Pope Francis Dies Aged 88 FINALLY WE HAD ENOUGH OF HIS FAILURE TO CRITICIZE THE KILLING OF CHRISTIANS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD! SUPPORTER OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION TO THE USA!

The Pontiff, who died at 88 years old, leaves behind a legacy of attempted reform that was not without controversy AND SUPPORT OF MARXIST IDEAS!

first leader of the Roman Catholic Church to come from Latin America, has died.

Pope Francis I—previously known as Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Archbishop of Buenos Aires in Argentina—passed away on April 21 at 7:35 a.m. He was 88 years old.

Hours before he died, the pope emerged on Easter Sunday to bless the thousands of people in St Peter’s Square in the Vatican, an independent enclave in the center of Rome.

Cardinal Kevin Farrell, the Vatican camerlengo, said, “At 7.35 this morning, the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the home of the Father. His entire life was dedicated to the service of the Lord and of his Church. He taught us to live the values of the Gospel with faithfulness, courage, and universal love, especially for the poorest and most marginalised.”

Farrell’s duties include announcing the pope’s death, overseeing funeral and burial preparations, and organizing the conclave to elect the new Pope.

“With immense gratitude for his example as a true disciple of the Lord Jesus, we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite, merciful love of God, one and tribune,″ he added.

The pope, who had part of one of his lungs removed as a young man, experienced a respiratory crisis in February that developed into double pneumonia.

He spent 38 days in the hospital before being released, but he remained frail.

He leaves behind a global church 1.3 billion strong, and a legacy that strove to inspire social and political reforms in and out of that church rooted in his interpretation of Jesus Christ’s teachings on mercy.

However, those reforms—particularly those concerning tolerance and care for the environment, illegal immigrants, and the LGBT community—were no stranger to controversy and conservative backlash.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni told RAI’s TG1 program that the whole world will remember Francis for being the pope of the people.

“I will miss him too, we had an extraordinary personal relationship, he was a pontiff with whom you could talk about everything, he was very special,” Meloni said. ”This news saddens us deeply, because a great man and a great shepherd has left us.”

Before He Was Pope

Francis, then Bergoglio, was ordained a priest on Dec. 13, 1969, and dedicated more than 50 years to religious life. He was ordained auxiliary bishop of Buenos Aires in 1992 and later installed as the Archbishop on Feb. 28, 1998. He was elevated to Cardinal in 2001, and participated in the conclave to elect Pope Benedict XVI in 2005.

But the road of his priestly vocation began on Sept. 21, 1953, when the sudden urge to go to confession on his way to a party ignited within the then-17-year-old Bergoglio the desire to become a priest.

“After confession, I felt that something had changed,” he recalled in 2013. “I was not the same. I had heard just like a voice, a call: I was convinced that I had to become a priest. This experience in faith is important. We say that we must seek God, go to Him to ask forgiveness, but when we go, He is waiting for us, He is first! … You go [a] sinner, but He is waiting to forgive you.”

He entered the Jesuit Novitiate, the order’s extensive education and training program, on March 11, 1958, after battling a severe case of pneumonia the year before, and losing part of his right lung in the process.

He professed his perpetual vows as a Jesuit in 1973 and served as the superior of the Jesuit Province of Argentina and Uruguay from that year through 1979.

During that time, he faced the abduction of two Jesuit priests, Fathers Ferenc Jalics and Orlando Yorio, by the military junta during Argentina’s “Dirty War.”

“In the neighborhood where he worked, there was a guerrilla cell. But the two Jesuits had nothing to do with them: They were pastors, not politicians,” the pope told a meeting of Hungarian Jesuits in Budapest in 2023. “They were innocent when taken prisoner. The military found nothing to charge them with but they had to spend nine months in prison, suffering threats and torture. Then, they were released but these things leave deep wounds.”

Bergoglio then served as the rector and theology professor at Argentina’s Colegio Maximo until 1985, then traveling to Germany to finish his doctoral thesis.

He took inspiration for his religious life from the story of Saint Matthew, the tax collector and public sinner that Jesus called to become an Apostle.

“It is the struggle between mercy and sin,” he said of St. Matthew’s story during a homily in 2017. “But how did the love of Jesus enter that man’s heart? What was the door for it to enter? Because the man knew he was a sinner: he knew it. The first condition to be saved is to feel in danger; the first condition to be healed is to feel sick.

“To feel oneself a sinner is the first condition for receiving this merciful gaze.”

Bergoglio Becomes Francis

His papacy began on March 13, 2013, and featured several firsts beyond his namesake. He was the first pope belonging to the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), the first pope to come from the Western Hemisphere, the first pope to address the G7 Summit, and he was the first pope to dedicate an encyclical, a papal teaching document, entirely to faith and climate change.

He was immediately praised as a man of humility, making his first appearance in simple white vestments instead of the more opulent royal vestments of his predecessors, and he immediately began attempting to demonstrate the mercy that inspired him.

His first Easter, he changed a Holy Thursday ritual where the pontiff washes and kisses the feet of 12 clergymen in remembrance of Jesus’s washing the feet of the 12 Apostles to washing and kissing the feet of 12 prisoners, including some Muslims.

The following year, he presided over the marriage of several couples who had been living together and had children out of wedlock, an opportunity one of the brides said she thought she would never have.

He canonized nearly 1,000 Saints, 813 of which were canonized together as the Martyrs of Otranto. These were fishermen, farmers, artisans, and shepherds who were beheaded by the Ottomans in 1480 for refusing to convert to Islam.

Other Saints included past pontiffs who oversaw the Second Vatican Council, Pope Saint John XXIII, Pope Saint Paul VI, and Pope Saint John Paul II. He also canonized Saint Junipero Serra, a Franciscan friar called the “Apostle of California,” credited with establishing nine California missions, including San Diego, San Francisco, and Santa Clara.

He was also very active politically, addressing the European Union, World Economic Forum, G7, and G20 summits on matters ranging from immigration and environmentalism to artificial intelligence, hosting his own climate summit, and recently pushing his city-state into diplomatic matters between the United States and Cuba.

He called for immediate action on climate change and implored governments of Western nations to protect illegal immigrants in their countries while also criticizing both of the Trump administrations’ closed border policies.

His reign comes to an end during the Jubilee Year of Hope, which he hoped would be a year marked by, among other things, an end to ongoing conflicts the world over, peaceful resettlements of war torn regions, cures for diseases, and the forgiveness of debts.

Disputes

Francis’s time as pontiff, however, was not free of controversy and was outright born of it. He assumed the position after his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, decided to step down in 2013. This was only the third time in the Catholic Church’s history, and the first time in more than 600 years, that a pope stepped down rather than held his position until death.

Some of his teachings on compassion—specifically recent letters instructing on the blessing of homosexual couples, his stance against the U.S.’s crackdowns on illegal immigration, and his criticisms of capitalism—sparked dissent among conservative Christians, particularly in the United States, with some going so far as to label him a Marxist.

Francis seemed to address and defend allegations that he was a Marxist and communist, saying in an interview, “If I see the Gospel in a sociological way only, yes, I am a communist, and so too is Jesus. Behind these Beatitudes and Matthew 25, there is a message that is Jesus’s own, and that is to be Christian. The communists stole some of our Christian values.”

He also held fast throughout his reign to a level of tolerance of other faiths and practices that are in conflict with those of the church, sparking concern among many practicing Catholics that he had fallen into a moral relativism that sees all religions as equally right.

Speaking to priests, nuns, and lay church leaders in Indonesia in September 2024, he said, “This is important, because proclaiming the Gospel does not mean imposing our faith or placing it in opposition to that of others, but giving and sharing the joy of encountering Christ always with great respect and fraternal affection for everyone.”

Francis also entered into agreements with China’s ruling Chinese Communist Party that gave it a say in who he appointed to serve as Bishops in China, a stark contrast to the reign of Pope Saint John Paul II, during which the Catholic Church, especially in Europe, was seen as a weapon against atheistic communist regimes.

At the same time, Francis ordered investigations into some of the more conservative U.S. Bishops who spoke out in opposition against him, removing Bishop Joseph Strickland from his post as head of the Diocese of Tyler, Texas, in 2023. The Vatican did not give a reason for Stickland’s departure.

On top of that, his supposed emphasis on dialogue restricted the use of the Traditional Latin Mass and antagonized the “backwardness” of the growing conservative traditional movement among the young faithful.

However, he has come out in defense of several of the Church’s beliefs and traditions, making clear that some things will never change, such as the necessity of the Sacraments, the openness of Holy Matrimony only between a man and a woman, an exclusively-male priesthood, and the necessity of Catholics to be pro-life.

One of his last messages came in a letter commemorating the 20th anniversary of the Theology Faculty of Triveneto, Italy, urging all educators to instill in their students an understanding of the faith while also being open to changing times.

“I encourage the entire academic family to persevere in its collaboration with the mission of the Church, to spread the message of Christ in the world, faithful to the genuine tradition, but open to reading the signs of the times,” he said on Jan. 28. “This means courageously taking on new challenges to effectively bring the truth of the Gospel to contemporary man.”

What Comes Next

In the coming days, Farrell will call the more than 100 Cardinals from around the world to gather in the Vatican Palace to elect the new pope.

Completely secluded from the outside world, they will pray, discuss, and vote in a secret ballot. This election requires a 2/3 majority vote and can take several days, with up to four votes happening in a single day. Ballots are burned after each vote sending a smoke signal to the outside world: black smoke means no majority, white smoke means majority has been reached.

HIGHEST CELEBRITIES NET WORTH, SURPRISE WHO IS LISTED IN THE TOP 31!!!

Top 31 Highest Net Worth Celebrities

Net worth is defined as the total value of an individual’s assets minus their liabilities. It is often used as a measure of wealth and financial success. With the rise of technology and easy access to information, there has been a surge in websites that claim to estimate one’s net worth.

As of 2025, the list of the top 31 highest net worth celebrities spans various industries, including film, music, literature, and business. Here’s a summary:

Jami Gertz – $8 billion (Actress, philanthropist, sports team owner).
Steven Spielberg – $8 billion (Director).
George Lucas – $7 billion (Film creator).
Oprah Winfrey – $3.5 billion (Media mogul, host, author).
Rihanna – $1.7 billion (Singer, businesswoman).
Tyler Perry – $1 billion (Actor, director, producer).
David Copperfield – $1 billion (Illusionist).
JK Rowling – $1 billion (Author, producer).
Peter Jackson – $1 billion (Director, producer).
Jerry Seinfeld – $925 million (Comedian, actor).
Jacqueline Gold – $860 million (Businesswoman).
Herb Alpert – $850 million (Musician, executive).
Madonna – $850 million (Singer, actress).
P Diddy – $850 million (Rapper, entrepreneur).
Celine Dion – $800 million (Singer, actress).
Ivanka Trump – $800 million (Businesswoman, author).
James Cameron – $800 million (Director).
James Patterson – $800 million (Author).
Jim Davis – $800 million (Cartoonist).
Bono – $700 million (Musician).
Kylie Jenner – $700 million (Model, entrepreneur).
Matt Stone – $700 million (Actor, writer, producer).
Yoko Ono – $700 million (Artist, activist).
Dolly Parton – $650 million (Singer, songwriter).
Howard Stern – $650 million (Radio and TV personality).
Tom Cruise – $600 million (Actor, producer).
Taylor Swift – $600 million (Singer, songwriter).
Jay Z – $2.5 billion (Rapper, entrepreneur).
Kanye West – $400 million (Rapper, fashion designer).
Jackie Chan – $400 million (Actor, producer).
Arnold Schwarzenegger – $400 million (Actor, politician, businessman).

WARREN BUFFET BILLIONAIRE STILL LIVES IN HIS $31,500 HOUSE

Born in Nebraska, USA, Warren Buffett, nicknamed the “Oracle of Omaha,” is one of the most successful investors ever. His net worth and how he made it is the stuff of legend, yet he lives a modest and frugal lifestyle.

Testament to that is the billionaire has lived in the same house in the same neighborhood with his late wife for over 60 years. After renting 5505 for a few years back in the mid-50s for $175 a month, Buffett and his wife loved the stately home so much that he put in an offer.

Built in 1921, Buffett purchased the house in 1958 for $31,500, the equivalent of $329,505 in today’s dollars. Realtors have appraised it at between $1.2 and $1.5 million if put on the market today.

Location

The five-bedroom, 2.5-bathroom house is situated in downtown Fairview, a well-to-do, leafy suburb, with the University of Nebraska within walking distance. It is only a five-minute-long drive from McDonald’s, which is what Buffett starts his day with for breakfast.

Located on the corner of Farnam and S 55th Streets, passers-by will likely not notice that the Buffett residence has two frontages. Access to the double garage and ample parking area is via S 55th Street. The entrance to the house interior is through the large mahogany front door on Farnam Street.

The front facade of Warren Buffetts Nebraska home

Architectural style

Buffett’s house is an eclectic mix of styles. One aspect of the beige-bricked house looks like it belongs on farmland, with its barn-shaped roofline. Rectangular lead-paned windows let in copious amounts of light. A giant chimney stack and a long verandah complement the front facade.

It’s edged on the two sides by a mix of hedges, wooden gates, and wrought iron fencing. Buffett’s car can often be seen on the spacious driveway, though there’s a double garage at right angles to the street.

Interior

As you move inside, white is the dominant color running throughout the house, offset by shades of black, grey, and biscuit.

The heart of the home is U-shaped and features a chandelier in the center. The breakfast nook overlooks an informal lounge. This cozy area is where Buffett relaxes.

The mansion also has a more formal lounge with lofty, white-beamed ceilings mimicking the barnlike roof structure you see from outside.

The second-floor access is via the hardwood and white, wrought-iron banistered staircase.

A Romeo and Juliet-like balcony at the top allows a novel view of the simple but supremely elegant parlor.

A stunning chandelier takes center stage in the compact dining room, just off the formal lounge. It has undoubtedly seen its share of famous and distinguished diners for small, intimate soirees.

An invitation to dine at Chez Buffett is highly prized.

Upstairs, you will find the five bedrooms, the en suite, and the guest bathroom. The master is tastefully furnished and decorated in white, with black accents.

One can’t help but notice a recurring theme of arched doorways, and the entrance to the sunroom is no exception.

This room, just off the master bedroom, has a special place in Buffett’s heart as it is where he began his ascent to become one of the wealthiest and most respected financial boffins the last and this century has seen.

Hand written across the top of the door is “The Birthplace of Buffett Associates,” “May 1956,” “Warren E Buffett.” This inscription alone could be worth a lot of money when the house is sold.

Sunroom Door personally inscribed by Buffett

Lifestyle

It’s no secret that Buffett is notoriously frugal. Never one to splash his billions around, he changes his car around every decade; his double garage has sadly not seen many high-end, expensive cars over the years. He proudly claims to only buy pre-loved cars like Cadillacs and Lincolns.

It’s not all work and no play for the billionaire. He loves a good game of bridge, and his several grandchildren have filled the bedrooms of this much-loved house.

As seen on