Search This Blog

Monday, December 2, 2024

Special Counsel Rejects Hunter Biden's Pardon, Files Scathing Rebuke In Court Case

 Last night Hunter Biden's lawyers filed a motion to dismiss his California tax fraud case after Joe Biden issued a blanket pardon absolving him of all crimes committed over a 10 year period.

"The President’s pardon moots Mr. Biden’s pending and yet to occur sentencing and entry of judgment in this case and requires an automatic dismissal of the Indictment with prejudice," wrote Hunter's lawyer Abbe Lowell in the filing, adding that "this Court must dismiss the Indictment against Mr. Biden with prejudice and adjourn all future proceedings in this matter."

Special Counsel David Weiss isn't having it. In a Monday response in opposition, Weiss argued that "The defendant’s motion should be denied since there is no binding authority on this Court which requires dismissal."

"As a matter of past-practice in this district, courts do not dismiss indictments when pardons are granted," Weiss wrote - citing cases involving Steve Bannon, Michael Flynn, Joe Arpaio and Ollie North, Above the Law reports. "Instead, it has been the practice of this court that once an Executive Grant of Clemency has been filed on the docket, the docket is marked closed, the disposition entry is updated to reflect the executive grant of clemency, and no further action is taken by the Court."

Although Weiss purported not to have seen the pardon itself (which Lowell inexplicably failed to docket), he took particular umbrage at the suggestion that the prosecution was politically motivated, huffing that “The court similarly found [Biden’s] vindictive prosecution claims unmoored from any evidence or even a coherent theory as to vindictiveness.”

Judge Mark Scarsi of the Central District of California has taken no action, thus far. But in Delaware, Judge Maryellen Noreika said in a minute order that she intends to terminate the proceedings, and instructing the government to say by tomorrow if it objects to termination by dismissal. Presumably it does, although no objection has hit the docket as of this writing. -Above the Law

Hunter pleaded guilty to the tax charges earlier this year, after a Delaware jury found him guilty of lying about his drug use on a background check form used to purchase a firearm. 

In Weiss' new filing, he writes:

"The defendant did not docket the pardon nor has the government seen it. If media reports are accurate, the Government does not challenge that the defendant has been the recipient of an act of mercy. But that does not mean the grand jury’s decision to charge him, based on a finding of probable cause, should be wiped away as if it never occurred. It also does not mean that his charges should be wiped away because the defendant falsely claimed that the charges were the result of some improper motive. No court has agreed with the defendant on these baseless claims, and his request to dismiss the indictment finds no support in the law or the practice of this district."

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/special-counsel-rejects-hunter-bidens-pardon-files-scathing-rebuke-court-case

Yes, Mexico Knows Exactly What It Is Doing

 by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

President-elect Donald Trump recently had a “talk” with newly elected Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum about the millions who have crossed through Mexico to enter the U.S. illegally.

Afterwards, Trump reported that their conversation went well, and supposedly both had agreed to secure the U.S. border.

But given long-standing, de facto Mexican policy to rely on and profit from an open U.S. border, it was not long afterwards that Sheinbaum claimed she had not been so accommodating.

Or, as she now put it of the Trump conversation, “I give you the certainty that we would never—and we would be incapable of it—propose that we would close the border.” And of course, she is right: Mexico never would wish for a secure U.S. border, although it is wrong that she is incapable of guaranteeing one should she choose to do so.

What, then, is going on?

Over the last half-century, Mexico has gradually, even insidiously, developed both a one-sided, asymmetrical relationship with the U.S. based on professed mutual benefit and yet sought to leverage America by claiming it is supposedly guilty for two centuries of oppressive treatment.

How does the strange U.S.-Mexico supposed co-dependence seem to work?

The Mexican government has traditionally seen the U.S. as an endlessly wealthy country, liberally governed, and more or less willing to listen to Mexico’s grievances of the sort that are common in asymmetrical partnerships.

About 60 percent of the Mexican people traditionally in polls have voiced a positive view of the United States, yet a surprisingly low number when considering the millions who try to cross its border illegally each year.

Nonetheless, Mexico for decades has conveniently explained the vast influxes across the border, unaudited and illegal, as largely in America’s interests - and mirabile dictu even to Mexico’s disadvantage. Polls tell, however, a vastly different and far more accurate story.

Logically, some 61 percent of Mexicans in a recent 2024 Pew Center Research Poll voiced favorable views of the United States, whose open borders, generous welfare systems, billions of dollars in remittances, and now-defunct immigration laws they see as entirely in their interest. In contrast, 60 percent of Americans, one of the highest numbers on record, now hold unfavorable views of Mexico, perhaps because of the cynical harm it has done through a perforated border.

Mexico says its emigrants, along with those from Central and South America who cross its own borders with relative ease—often with tacit support—supply America with generations of industrious, low-cost labor, robbing it, in a sense, of millions of its own citizens.

It adds that the attractions of El Norte mean that Mexico must put up with human caravans crossing its own sovereign territory to supposedly meet the hungry American demand for labor, drugs, and sex. Indeed, nearly every recent Mexican president has argued that America’s thirst for lethal fentanyl is responsible for the creation of Mexican cartel lords that now run large swaths of Mexico itself.

However, the problem with such ancient and modern disingenuousness is that even if the United States accepted these excuses, apologized, and promised to close the border and keep clear of Mexican affairs, Mexico would grow even more irate. The reason why is that the current relationship has now grown unbalanced to the point of absurdity—sometimes evidenced in past polls that revealed a majority of Mexican citizens both believed in the mutually exclusive propositions that the American Southwest properly still belongs to Mexico and yet they wished to leave Mexico to emigrate to a non-Mexican northward if given the chance.

In truth, Mexico would face insolvency if it did not receive its current some $63 billion in U.S. remittances, largely sent by its own people who crossed into the U.S. illegally. Trump talks of levying a 25 percent tariff on Mexican imports should Mexico not cease undermining the American border. An additional lever would perhaps be to slap a 30 percent tax on all remittances sent from the U.S. to Mexico. That would both encourage capital to stay in the U.S. and raise over $20 billion in excise fees, more than enough proverbially to “pay for the wall.”

However, such largess is still more one-sided since much of the remittances are made available through not just the industriousness of Mexican expatriates but also the generosity of American taxpayers. Their multifaceted subsidies to the undocumented free up billions for them to help support millions of Mexico’s poor in a fashion that Mexico City apparently is either unable or unwilling to ensure.

The annual flight of millions from Mexico is a sort of updated version of Frederick Jackson Turner’s “frontier safety valve theory” of the American West. Accordingly, the Eastern poor and potentially rebellious fled westward in hopes of a new, better life rather than marching on Washington for cancellation of debts or redistribution of property. Mexico City apparently feels that without their own El Norte “frontier,” millions of southern and indigenous Mexican citizens might instead head en masse to Mexico City.

As for the cartels, Mexico knows well that China sends raw fentanyl to its country unimpeded, where cartel factories prepare it for export to America’s addicted and recreational users. There, disguised as less toxic drugs and even foodstuffs, fentanyl will end up killing up to some 100,000 Americans a year—an annual death toll nearly double the total number of U.S. fatalities in the Vietnam War.

Mexico, which also helps China avoid tariffs on its exports to the U.S. by assembling its products in NAFTA and tariff-free Mexico, certainly knows that the Chinese seek both to profit from its cartel ties and to kill Americans and undermine its security in the bargain.

The macabre gambit is likely seen as the Chinese version of an updated Opium War payback, with the twist that the former addicts are now the suppliers.

In an equally sick way, the cartels infuse into the Mexican trickle-down economy, albeit in nefarious and criminal ways, some $30 billion in additional U.S. dollars from Americans addicted to imported Mexican-made drugs tailored for the U.S. market. The presidents of Mexico usually say little about this second source of billions in U.S. foreign exchange or claim American addicts, not Mexican suppliers, explain the growing death and destruction on both sides of the border.

While in office, former President Obrador often said strange things. Two of the most pugnacious were his high-five boast that some 40 million of his own citizens had fled Mexico to cross the border: “Just imagine. There are 40 million Mexicans in the United States—40 million who were born here in Mexico, who are the children of people who were born in Mexico.” (Obrador never explained why his own citizens would willingly flee their own country to a nation habitually caricatured in the Mexican press as racist and exploitive.)

Obrador also periodically delighted in interfering in US elections by urging Mexican expatriates in the U.S. to vote against all Republicans, presumably because they seemed at times to threaten to kill the Mexican golden goose of illegal immigration.

Indeed, in 2023, Obrador urged American Hispanics to never vote for Ron DeSantis’s presidential primary campaign—an irony given Mexico’s chronic complaint of Yanqui interference in Latin American politics.

Obrador believed, as many presidents before him no doubt concurred, that the 40 million expatriates and Mexican-American children, if they were distant from Mexico long enough, would romanticize the country, and so, like most immigrants, become a powerful lobbying force on Mexico’s behalf.

In La Raza literature of the past, and in Mexico’s chauvinistic moments, illegal immigration was envisioned as the ironic response to the ancient “theft’ of the American Southwest. The problem with that thesis is that most Mexicans, as polls have shown, would prefer to live in an American Southwest than a Mexican south.

And it is also increasingly likely that Mexican-Americans will be more prone to vote for border security than open borders—again further proof that their self-interest as patriotic Americans trumps Mexico’s cynical attempts to use them as political pawns. If those trends continue, the American Left and the Mexican government may well lobby for a secure border, in fear they are only augmenting a growing MAGA constituency.

In sum, Mexico understands the myriad ways that an open border, the destruction of U.S. immigration law, illegal immigration, and emigration of millions of its own citizens to America are entirely in its own interests and so hopes to see the continuation of the Biden-Harris-Mayorkas appeasement.

But, given the huge numbers of human trafficking, the chaos, the drugs, the violence, and the financial costs of supporting millions, an open border is increasingly seen by Americans as not to their advantage—as we saw in the recent Trump victory. That reality, not the rhetoric of Mexican presidents, will govern all future negotiations—a truth that President Sheinbaum should digest before she sounds off about a border that she knows her country has done so much to deliberately destroy—and to America’s detriment.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/yes-mexico-knows-exactly-what-it-doing

Novocure's Pancreatic Cancer Treatment Meets Main Goal in Late-stage Study

 Novocure said on Monday its experimental therapy extended the lives of patients with a form of advanced pancreatic cancer when combined with chemotherapy, achieving the primary goal in a late-stage trial.

The therapy uses Tumor Treating Fields, or electric fields, to kill cancer cells while sparing most nearby healthy cells, using a portable device placed on the skin near the tumor.

In the study, TTFields therapy concomitant with chemotherapy helped patients live for an average of 16.20 months, compared to 14.16 months in patients treated with chemotherapy alone, Novocure said.

The treatment's safety was consistent with prior clinical studies, the company said.

The therapy also helped improve survival rates over time, according to Novocure. The rate of overall survival, or the length of time a patient lives from the start of treatment, improved by 13% at 12 months and by 33% at 24 months, the company said.

Novocure said it would present full data from the study at an upcoming medical meeting and file for regulatory approval in the United States, the EU, Japan and other markets.

The therapy is approved for use in some patients with a type of lung cancer, a type of cancer that starts in the brain and spinal cord as well as a rare cancer that grows in the membrane lining the walls of the chest and lungs. Branded Optune Gio and Optune Lua, it brought in about $509 million in revenue globally in 2023.

The device had failed to improve survival rates in patients with a type of ovarian cancer last year.

The latest study enrolled 571 patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, which cannot be removed surgically, who received either TTFields therapy along with chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone for at least 18 months.

Pancreatic cancer accounts for about 3% of all cancers in the U.S. and about 7% of all cancer deaths, according to the American Cancer Society.

https://www.medscape.com/s/viewarticle/novocures-pancreatic-cancer-treatment-meets-main-goal-late-2024a1000lym

Belly Fat Beats BMI in Predicting Colorectal Cancer Risk

 Individuals with normal body mass index (BMI) measurements may still face an increased risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) if they have central obesity, characterized by excess fat around the abdomen.

METHODOLOGY:

  • General obesity, often measured using BMI, is a recognized risk factor for CRC, but how much of this association is due to central obesity is unclear.
  • Researchers assessed the associations between BMI, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and waist circumference (WC) with CRC risk and the degree of independence among these associations in patients aged 40-69 years recruited in the UK Biobank cohort study from 2006 to 2010.
  • Anthropometric measurements were performed using standardized methods.
  • Cancer registry and hospital data linkage identified CRC cases in the UK Biobank.

TAKEAWAY:

  • Researchers included 460,784 participants (mean age, 56.3 years; 46.7% men), of whom 67.1% had either overweight or obesity, and 49.4% and 60.5% had high or very high WHR and WC, respectively.
  • During the median 12.5-year follow-up period, 5977 participants developed CRC.
  • Every SD increase in WHR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.18) showed a stronger association with CRC risk than in BMI (HR, 1.10).
  • After adjustment for BMI, the association between WHR and CRC risk became slightly attenuated while still staying robust (HR, 1.15); however, after adjusting for WHR, the association between BMI and CRC risk became substantially weakened (HR, 1.04).
  • WHR showed strongly significant associations with CRC risk across all BMI categories, whereas associations of BMI with CRC risk were weak and not statistically significant within all WHR categories.
  • Central obesity demonstrated consistent associations with both colon and rectal cancer risks in both sexes before and after adjustment for BMI, whereas BMI showed no significant association with CRC risk in women or with rectal cancer risk after WHR adjustment.

IN PRACTICE:

"[The study] results also underline the importance of integrating additional anthropometric measures such as WHR alongside BMI into routine clinical practice for more effective prevention and management of obesity, whose prevalence is steadily increasing in many countries worldwide, in order to limit the global burden of CRC and many other obesity-related adverse health outcomes," the authors wrote.

SOURCE:

The study was led by Fatemeh Safizadeh, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. It was published online in the International Journal of Obesity.

LIMITATIONS:

This study relied on only one-time measurements of anthropometric measures at baseline, without considering previous lifetime history of overweight and obesity or changes during follow-up. Additionally, WHR and WC may not be the most accurate measures of central obesity, as WC includes both visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue. The study population also showed evidence of healthy volunteer bias, with more health-conscious and socioeconomically advantaged participants being somewhat overrepresented.

DISCLOSURES:

The authors declared no competing interests.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/belly-fat-beats-bmi-predicting-colorectal-cancer-risk-2024a1000lwe

'Cognitive Decline in AF Not Reduced by Anticoagulation'

 A randomized placebo-controlled trial testing a direct oral anticoagulant for the prevention of cognitive decline in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has been halted early for futility.

After a median follow-up of 3.7 years, there was no difference between rivaroxaban 15 mg and placebo for a composite primary endpoint that included cognitive decline, stroke, and transient ischemic attack, said Léna Rivard, MD, an electrophysiologist and associate professor at the Montreal Heart Institute in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

When the BRAIN-AF trial was halted by the Data Monitoring Committee, 256 primary events had occurred, most of which involved cognitive decline. However, the rate of cognitive decline, defined as a reduction of at least 2 points from baseline on the validated Montreal Cognitive Assessment test, was essentially identical.

"There was no difference between rivaroxaban and placebo, even with a very high rate of cognitive decline detected overall," Rivard said during a late-breaker at the American Heart Association (AHA) Scientific Sessions 2024. By the end of follow-up, 18% of study participants met the definition of cognitive loss.

Cognitive Decline in 18% of Patients

One limitation of the BRAIN-AF study was that it enrolled patients with a risk for stroke that did not meet the guideline criteria for oral anticoagulation. This was necessary to allow study participants to be randomized to placebo.

With this criterion, an age range of 30-62 years, and exclusions for previous stroke, hypertension, diabetes, and congestive heart failure, the study population was at low risk, but not no risk, for AF events. In addition to the observed rates of cognitive loss that accrued during a median follow-up of less than 4 years, the estimated stroke rate in this low-risk population was 0.5%-1.0% per year. The observed incidence was 2.5%.

The data presented by Rivard were on the basis of 1235 patients randomized at 53 sites. The median age was 53 years, 78% of study participants had a history of paroxysmal AF, 96% were White, and about 25% were women.

There are a number of explanations for the outcome of this study, including the fact that patients were too young and too healthy, said Andrea M. Russo, MD, an electrophysiologist and professor of medicine at the Cooper Medical School at Rowan University in Camden, New Jersey.

In addition, although a 2-year history of AF was a study criterion, the burden of AF, which might be an independent risk factor for cognitive loss, was not described, Russo pointed out.

Overall, this result is unlikely to rule out microemboli in the pathophysiology of AF-related cognitive decline, but other mechanisms should be explored on the basis of the trial result, she pointed out.

Cognitive loss related to AF "could be a hemodynamic effect," Russo speculated. With fluctuations in blood flow due to the abnormal rhythm, "hypoperfusion is a possibility."

This study addresses a highly relevant clinical question that should be the basis for further work, given the substantial risk for cognitive decline related to AF in observational studies, and is reinforced by the BRAIN-AF data, she explained.

Relatively Low Rivaroxaban Dose

Because of concern about increased bleeding in a patient group without an indication for anticoagulation, the rivaroxaban dose in BRAIN-AF was 15 mg once daily, rather than the 20 mg typically used for stroke prophylaxis in patients with AF. There were no fatal bleeding events in either group. Although numerically lower in the rivaroxaban group than in the placebo group, the differences in major bleeding (0.3% vs 0.8%) and stroke (2.5% vs 2.7%) were not significant.

The study draws attention to the need for strategies to prevent cognitive decline in patients with AF, said Hooman Kamel, MD, vice chair of research and chief of neurocritical care at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City, who was the study discussant for BRAIN-AF. He called for far more attention to be paid to this issue, including routine measures of cognitive change in trials of new AF treatments.

Kamel also expressed an interest in looking elsewhere for modifiable mechanisms of cognitive decline in patients with AF. As an example, he cited an echocardiographic study that showed an association between cognitive decline and left atrial impairment. Although that study assessed patients with atrial myopathy but no AF, it suggested a potential relation between cardiovascular and cerebrovascular pathology that might be more complex than emboli in the blood.

He questioned whether any controlled trial exploring the ability of anticoagulation to prevent cognitive decline by preventing microemboli from reaching the brain is feasible, now that the benefits of anticoagulation are so well established in higher-risk patients.

"It may be too late to test anticoagulation for dementia prevention in AF," Kamel said.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/cognitive-decline-af-not-reduced-anticoagulation-2024a1000lvq

Trump Warns Hamas Of "Hell To Pay" If Hostages Aren't Freed Before Inauguration

 It's no secret that President-elect Donald Trump is firmly in support of Israel, despite that after a year of Israeli war in Gaza the civilian death toll is in the multiple tens of thousands. Trump has stacked key national security positions with pro-Israel hawks. 

This is why it comes as no surprise that he's already talking tough, threatening escalation if Hamas and Palestinian militants in Gaza don't immediately free the remaining Israeli hostages. "Everybody is talking about the hostages who are being held so violently, inhumanely, and against the will of the entire World, in the Middle East - But it’s all talk, and no action!" Trump began a post on his Truth Social.

He is warning that there will be "hell to pay" if Hamas doesn't release the captives. "Please let this TRUTH serve to represent that if the hostages are not released prior to January 20, 2025, the date that I proudly assume Office as President of the United States, there will be ALL HELL TO PAY in the Middle East, and for those in charge who perpetrated these atrocities against Humanity," Trump continued in the statement.

He then warned in the stern statement [emphasis ZH]:

Those responsible will be hit harder than anybody has been hit in the long and storied History of the United States of America. RELEASE THE HOSTAGES NOW!

Given broad swathes of Gaza have already been pulverized into dust, it's hard to see how the Strip could be hit any harder, also given US-supplied bunker buster bombs have been used against dense urban areas.

A total of 97 hostages remain unaccounted for, though many have been feared dead after over a year of fighting in the Strip. Israel has said that 251 Israelis and foreigners were taken on October 7, 2023.

Recent analysis in The Washington Post tallied that 117 hostages have been freed or rescued, with the bulk of this figure having come as a result of the November 2023 short-lived truce deal.

Israel's military and intelligence believes that a total of 63 hostages remain alive. They have been in captivity for over 420 days, amid worsening conditions. Israel says that 71 have been confirmed killed, but without revealing the precise circumstances of their deaths.

"The hostage whose death was most recently confirmed by Israel is Idan Shtivi," Washington Post writes. "There are 34 hostages reported killed whose bodies have not been recovered and remain in Gaza."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will surely take this new statement as a mandate from Trump to keep fighting. Efforts at achieving a new truce completely fell apart within the last weeks, and Israel appears bent on pursuing a military solution.

Given the situation is now essentially a 'fight to the death' scenario, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are unlikely to care much about Trump's threat. The terror groups likely see the remnant hostages as the only remaining leverage they have left.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-warns-hamas-hell-pay-if-hostages-arent-freed-inauguration

Olema, Novartis to Collaborate on Breast Cancer with $250 M Equity Private Placement

 

  • Clinical trial collaboration and supply agreement enables pivotal Phase 3 OPERA-02 clinical trial of palazestrant in combination with ribociclib in frontline ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer; trial initiation expected in mid-2025
  • $250.0 million equity private placement with participation by new and existing investors including Adage Capital Partners LP, Bain Capital Life Sciences, BVF Partners L.P., Driehaus Capital Management, Janus Henderson Investors, Paradigm BioCapital Advisors, Wellington Management, Woodline Partners LP, and a large investment manager
  • Olema well capitalized to fund operations beyond key milestones including OPERA-01 Phase 3 top-line data in 2026, initial OP-3136 KAT6 Phase 1/2 monotherapy and combination data, and execution of the Phase 3 OPERA-02 clinical trial