Sam Fisher (Data Drops) pinned «Verbum meum super te praevalebit LXXVII LEGIO https://youtu.be/io4CDeHebUA»
Forwarded from Rise of the New Media - Brian Cates
The two weirdest things that happened this past week:
1. Biden suddenly deciding to reveal to reporters that declaring an end to the COVID national emergency was never up to him, he doesn't have the power to do it, the Supreme Court is going to do it on May 11
and
2. Biden coming out today and babbling to reporters that he's not really running or giving orders to the US military.
It's almost as if....
Nah.
Couldn't be....
1. Biden suddenly deciding to reveal to reporters that declaring an end to the COVID national emergency was never up to him, he doesn't have the power to do it, the Supreme Court is going to do it on May 11
and
2. Biden coming out today and babbling to reporters that he's not really running or giving orders to the US military.
It's almost as if....
Nah.
Couldn't be....
The UK is in a mess, regardless of your views of this journalist, IMO he was ennoscriptd to express his views and report the news!
Forwarded from Oracle Films
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Mark Steyn quits GBNews over attempts to make him liable for Ofcom fines
Mark Steyn, who presented the station’s 8pm peak-time slot, is already subject to two investigations by the media regulator after he used his show to cast doubt on the safety of Covid vaccines.
The presenter said he used to call GB News’s in-house compliance officer “Ofcom’s bitch” when they argued about what he was allowed to say on air.
Steyn said the proposal would be untenable. “I’m on the hook for Ofcom fines but I don’t have any say in our defence against an Ofcom complaint – that’s all done by GB News. Ofcom’s bitch, as I call the compliance officer, will be making the weedy defence to Ofcom and then I’m the one who has to pay the £40,000 fine,” he added.
The contractual terms suggest GB News bosses are concerned about the impending judgment in the Ofcom investigations – which could scare away some of its remaining advertisers.
Earlier this year all staff were put on mandatory Ofcom training.
Full video
Article source
Mark Steyn, who presented the station’s 8pm peak-time slot, is already subject to two investigations by the media regulator after he used his show to cast doubt on the safety of Covid vaccines.
The presenter said he used to call GB News’s in-house compliance officer “Ofcom’s bitch” when they argued about what he was allowed to say on air.
Steyn said the proposal would be untenable. “I’m on the hook for Ofcom fines but I don’t have any say in our defence against an Ofcom complaint – that’s all done by GB News. Ofcom’s bitch, as I call the compliance officer, will be making the weedy defence to Ofcom and then I’m the one who has to pay the £40,000 fine,” he added.
The contractual terms suggest GB News bosses are concerned about the impending judgment in the Ofcom investigations – which could scare away some of its remaining advertisers.
Earlier this year all staff were put on mandatory Ofcom training.
Full video
Article source
👍2
Forwarded from The Rio Times
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
European Central Bank Preparing for Bail Ins & Banking Collapse
Bail-ins and bailouts both serve the same purpose: they are designed to prevent the complete collapse of a failing bank. But the difference between the two lies primarily in who bears the financial burden of rescuing the bank.
With bailouts, the government injects capital into banks, enabling them to continue their operations. During the financial crisis, the government bailed out major banks by injecting $700 billion into names like Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), and American International Group (AIG). Since the government doesn't have its own money, it must use taxpayer funds.
Bail-ins work a little differently, providing immediate relief. Banks use money from their unsecured creditors, including depositors and bondholders, to restructure their capital to stay afloat. Put simply, they can convert their debt into equity to increase their capital requirements.
Although depositors run the risk of losing some of their deposits, banks can only use deposits in excess of the $250,000 protection provided by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
Bailout vs. Bail-In At a Glance
Bank Bailout: The government uses taxpayer dollars to buy out toxic assets and infuse capital into failing banks to keep them from going under.
Bank Bail-In: Rather than using taxpayer money to infuse banks with capital, banks can seize money from depositors, turning debt into equity to keep the bank afloat.
Bail-ins and bailouts both serve the same purpose: they are designed to prevent the complete collapse of a failing bank. But the difference between the two lies primarily in who bears the financial burden of rescuing the bank.
With bailouts, the government injects capital into banks, enabling them to continue their operations. During the financial crisis, the government bailed out major banks by injecting $700 billion into names like Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), and American International Group (AIG). Since the government doesn't have its own money, it must use taxpayer funds.
Bail-ins work a little differently, providing immediate relief. Banks use money from their unsecured creditors, including depositors and bondholders, to restructure their capital to stay afloat. Put simply, they can convert their debt into equity to increase their capital requirements.
Although depositors run the risk of losing some of their deposits, banks can only use deposits in excess of the $250,000 protection provided by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
Bailout vs. Bail-In At a Glance
Bank Bailout: The government uses taxpayer dollars to buy out toxic assets and infuse capital into failing banks to keep them from going under.
Bank Bail-In: Rather than using taxpayer money to infuse banks with capital, banks can seize money from depositors, turning debt into equity to keep the bank afloat.
👍1🤬1