yYAXssKCQaUWZcXZ79RJTBLvo-c;SfREtjZ9NYeQnnVMC-CsZ9qN6L0 Finance, Economics, Globus, Brokers, Banks, Collateral-Oriano Mattei

mercoledì 20 ottobre 2021

The growing military, political, and economic threat coming from the West has forced Russia and Belarus to take retaliatory measures and develop a unified doctrine for the defense of both nations, it was claimed on Wednesday..........

 

Russia & Belarus were FORCED to work on unified military doctrine because of increased pressure from West – Russian army chief
The growing military, political, and economic threat coming from the West has forced Russia and Belarus to take retaliatory measures and develop a unified doctrine for the defense of both nations, it was claimed on Wednesday.

The move was announced by Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, who outlined a new five-year strategic partnership program, including further cooperation on the training of troops and command authority.

“As well as military threats, we continue to face political and economic pressure on our countries from the so-called collective West,” Shoigu said. “Under the circumstances, we are forced to take retaliatory measures.”

According to the minister, the two nations have a level of significant military cooperation, which already allows for timely adaption in reaction to “changes taking place in the world.”

ALSO ON RT.COMWATCH: Hundreds of thousands of Russian & Belarusian troops perform huge war games at joint Zapad 2021 quadrennial exercises

Shoigu also noted that NATO nations are strengthening their military infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of the borders of Russia and Belarus, particularly in Poland and the Baltic States.

Russia and Belarus are both members of the Union State, an agreement signed in 1999 that foresaw deep cooperation and integration between the two nations. However, many of its proposals have not been realized. According to the document’s text, the two nations planned to create a joint parliament, court, and cabinet. Moscow and Minsk also pledged to develop a shared currency, military, and customs space, as well as share a flag, constitution, and head of state. None of these ideas has come to fruition.

However, in September, following a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Belarusian counterpart Alexander Lukashenko, Putin revealed that both sides had agreed on 28 joint programs for the Union State, including the consolidation of the gas market.


da "rt.com"

The incompetence of the Biden administration is never-ending. It has turned the longest-running American crisis, illegal immigration on our southern border, from a failure of liberal policy to a failure of liberal processes...........

 

Biden obviously doesn’t care about border security or human trafficking, since the government has lost 45,000 kids
The incompetence of the Biden administration is never-ending. It has turned the longest-running American crisis, illegal immigration on our southern border, from a failure of liberal policy to a failure of liberal processes.

This shouldn’t surprise anyone, because if there is one thing worse than liberal ideas, it’s liberal implementation of liberal ideas.

Hello? Obamacare?

According to the progressive site Axios, Biden’s immigration czar – Hello? Vice President Harris? – has somehow managed to lose contact with 45,000 unaccompanied minors she let into the United States after they appeared at the border this year.

Justthenews said that, in part, the loss of these children is because the administration has weakened the vetting process for adult sponsors. And Biden weakened the process because they just want the kids to disappear rather than ending up in US facilities as part of a photo-op. 

“The decision to weaken the vetting process contributed, in part, to the Biden administration’s loss of contact with 40% of the more than 114,000 unaccompanied children who entered the US illegally, according to a report by Axios. The report is based on data received through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request,” according to Justthenews

So now the kids, through the fault of the thousands of adults who have let them down, most especially the supposed adults in the Democrat Party, are subject to all the heinous torments that human traffickers can get away with here in the USA.

And we know this because it’s happened before. Hello? President Joe?

“If all this sounds familiar, that’s because it's redolent of a 2014 incident in which UACs [unaccompanied minors] were found to have been placed with traffickers, who then forced them to work up to 12 hours a day, six to seven days a week, on egg farms in and around Marion, Ohio,” said the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).

2014, you might remember, was the last time Joe Biden was responsible for enforcing border security, albeit when Joe was the lower of the two people billed on the Obama-Biden marquee – just as Kamala Harris is today.

ALSO ON RT.COMI’ve lived and worked in the US for 20 years but can’t get citizenship… yet the doors are open for thousands of illegal migrants

The Democrats subsequently had the nerve to criticize the Trump administration for detaining “kids in cages” at the border in 2018 rather than releasing them to human traffickers. Democrats even sicced their Canadian fact-checkers at the Associated Press on Trump to support the lie.

But the liberals, at least at Axios, aren’t buying that anymore. That’s how bad the Democrats’ immigration policy and process have become.

“In 2018, the Trump administration was criticized for being unable to account for the whereabouts of around 1,500 children released from HHS shelters during a three-month period,” said Axios, comparing this with the Biden failures.

Missing 1,500 kids is cause for grave concern. But missing 45,000 is scandalous, Axios agrees.

And that’s not necessarily the worst part of the crisis at the border.

Because now shots are being fired on the southern border by the very cartel members who are trafficking kids into the US as unaccompanied minors. 

CIS says that the current law encourages smuggling along the border, especially involving children, some of whom may have already been released to labor traffickers according to Bloomberg Law.

Hence the men on the borders are showing up with guns and flak jackets to keep Texas and immigration officials away.

“What’s been happening actually this past week is we see a group of individuals that are coming across – they’re smuggling people – but what they’re doing is they come across the river into the US and smuggle people, they go back into Mexico, and they get their weapons,” Texas Department of Public Safety spokesman Lt. Christopher Olivarez said during an interview on Wednesday, according to Yahoo News.

“These are assault rifles, OK, AK-47s. They’ll stand in the middle of the river, and then they’re brandishing their weapons and taunting the National Guard, who’s across on the US side,” Olivarez said.

ALSO ON RT.COMBiden has let 160,000 illegal immigrants into the US in the past few months. When will he level with Americans as to why?

Photos by Fox News’ Bill Megulin shared on Twitter show the men holding semi-automatic or automatic rifles, which Megulin says are being used to take shots across the river toward the Texas National Guard.  

Do you suppose the cartel people who are smuggling kids across the river know the people up in Ohio – or anywhere else in the US – who use child labor from Mexico?

Hello? Human traffickers?

Because there is only one good reason for smugglers to use gun play at this point. It’s because they have a great deal of money at stake in keeping the smuggling on the southern border going.

“Some of these situations appear to involve dozens of unaccompanied minors all being released to the same sponsor and then exploited for labor in poultry processing or similar industries without access to education,” said the US Justice Department’s Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit director Hilary Axam on July 21 in an email obtained by Bloomberg Law about the numbers of unaccompanied minors arriving in at the border.

When Trump was president, there was a caravan of House and Senate members who investigated the border and the supposed abuse of “kids locked in cages.”

Those investigations culminated in the famous manufactured photo-op by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) (D-NY), crying at an empty parking lot, at a facility where kids were never locked in cages. 

ALSO ON RT.COMThe horror of the Haitian migrant camp in Texas shows why America MUST end its woke approach to immigration now

Liberals even deployed their ultimate weapon, the PoliticFact fact-checkers, to support AOC’s photo-op lie.

But now it’s not just a parking lot of missing cars that’s at issue. It’s real kids who are missing, 45,000 of them. But AOC and her Democrat friends don’t care.

Ask yourself this: If it were 45,000 missing blonde girls, what would the government do? 

We all know the answer to that one. 

Hello? Congress?


da "rt.com"

Fitch Ratings ha confermato il Long-Term Issuer Default Rating ('IDR') di UniCredit a BBB-, il Short-Term Rating a F3 e il Viability Rating (il rating standalone) a bbb-. L'outlook è stato confermato a "stabile". Anche i rating degli strumenti SNP, Tier2 e AT1 sono stati confermati.........

 


(Teleborsa) - Fitch Ratings ha confermato il Long-Term Issuer Default Rating ('IDR') di UniCredit a BBB-, il Short-Term Rating a F3 e il Viability Rating (il rating standalone) a bbb-. L'outlook è stato confermato a "stabile". Anche i rating degli strumenti SNP, Tier2 e AT1 sono stati confermati.

L'agenzia di rating ha detto che i suoi giudizi riflettono prospettive stabili per la banca italiana, che "beneficia della diversificazione geografica in economie in ripresa, soprattutto nel suo mercato più grande, l'Italia, che dovrebbe supportare il miglioramento della redditività operativa". Inoltre, "il de-risking degli asset che ha ottenuto finora e la solida capitalizzazione forniscono un certo margine per assorbire le pressioni sulla qualità degli asset che prevediamo emergere nei prossimi trimestri a causa della pandemia".


da "ilmessaggero.it"

martedì 19 ottobre 2021

As the United States faces an unprecedented surge in opioid overdoses, harm reduction groups are seeing shortages in naloxone, a usually affordable and easy-to-use medication that reverses overdoses and has been credited with saving many lives...........

 

A mobile medical truck outside the Baltimore city jail distributes naloxone for free.
A mobile medical truck outside the Baltimore city jail distributes naloxone for free. Photograph: Shawn Thew/EP

As the United States faces an unprecedented surge in opioid overdoses, harm reduction groups are seeing shortages in naloxone, a usually affordable and easy-to-use medication that reverses overdoses and has been credited with saving many lives.

But it’s not because of a lack of supply; there’s actually plenty of naloxone out there. Instead, the dangerous shortage of naloxone is all about soaring prices.

Community groups working to prevent overdose deaths are now paying up to 30 times more for the life-saving medication – at a time when more Americans than ever are dying from overdoses.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Wednesday that nearly 100,000 people died of overdoses during the first year of the pandemic – a record high and a 30% increase from the year before. A majority of those deaths were caused by opioids, especially drugs tainted with fentanyl, an extremely dangerous substance that is 100 times more potent than morphine.

The simultaneous rise in overdoses and the lack of affordable naloxone is a “perfect storm”, Amanda Latimore, director of the Center for Addiction Research and Effective Solutions, told the Guardian.

“Not having this life-saving medication to reduce overdose deaths, during a time when we’re seeing the greatest increase we’ve ever seen, is a public health crisis. There hasn’t been a more important time than right now to have an overdose reversal drug available. And now that we’re seeing this shortage, we can expect even more fatal overdoses,” she said.

Opioid overdoses can often be reversed with naloxone, which is sold under brand names including Narcan and Nevzio, is safe and effective when administered quickly. The medication can be injected or inhaled.

Drug giant Pfizer reached a deal with the Opioid Safety and Naloxone Network (OSNN) Buyers Club in 2012 to provide its injectable medication at low cost for harm reduction groups, which work closely with people with substance abuse disorders to prevent overdose deaths. But Pfizer ran into problems in manufacturing doses of naloxone earlier this year, and the company temporarily stopped supplying the affordable medication to the community groups battling overdoses. The issues are now fixed, and Pfizer expects to be fully stocked again by the end of the year.

But meanwhile, thousands of people are dying from overdoses without enough medication to reverse them, as other drug firms have not responded to the supply problems by lowering their prices. The drug is now far more expensive for the very providers that need it the most.

“We are being asked to attend a lot more funerals than we ever have before,” said Nabarun Dasgupta, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and an adviser for the OSNN Buyers Club.

“I estimated 12,000 to 18,000 excess deaths if we didn’t get the shortage handled, and I think a good chunk of those deaths have already happened,”he told the Guardian.

There is no reason other companies couldn’t cut their prices to help fill the gaps left by Pfizer’s manufacturing issues, Dasgupta said, except for one:

“Profit. There’s no other way to put it.”

But even if pharmaceutical companies dropped the price for harm reduction groups, he said, they were still “making their profit off institutional buyers”. Hospitals and other care systems can still buy the treatments at previously negotiated prices.

Harm reduction groups used to buy naloxone from Pfizer to create kits that cost about $2.50 each. Now they have to pay $37 for a different generic medication or $75 for Narcan – a 15- to 30-fold increase. They simply haven’t been able to afford enough kits to save everyone’s lives.

“To put it in stark terms, you could be saving one life or you could be saving 10 lives for the same price,” Leo Beletsky, a professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University, told the Guardian.

Emergent BioSolutions, the company that produces Narcan, has not raised the price since the medication was launched in 2016, a spokesperson told the Guardian in an email, and “provides a discounted price to national, state, and local governmental health and safety entities closest to at-risk populations, including public health clinics, fire departments, and police departments”. But discounts are not offered to harm-reduction organizations.

One harm-reduction group in Colorado is almost out of supplies. “We’re experiencing a shortage in injectable Naloxone in CO and nasal Narcan is expensive at the moment,” the group tweeted this week, with a photo of the nearly empty drawer of medication. “We’re in the worst overdose crisis we’ve ever seen.”

The coronavirus pandemic has “really sparked a surge” and exacerbated existing disparities of who lives and who dies after an overdose, Beletsky said. “It is an absolute crisis.”

And the true extent of pandemic pressures and naloxone shortages is yet unclear. “It takes six months to a year for it to show up in some of the federal datasets,” Latimore said.

The experts wonder why other naloxone producers don’t drop their prices, even temporarily, to cover the gaps.

“For something that is so effective and so safe, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t be more affordable,” Latimore said.

Naloxone is an inexpensive medication that’s been around since the 1970s. Other life-saving medications such as insulin and EpiPens are also sold at prohibitively high costs.

“This is a symptom of broader dysfunction in the US pharmaceutical industry, where public health concerns are secondary to financial concerns,” Beletsky said.

But “it’s not enough to criticize the pharmaceutical industry,” he added. “We should be using the regulatory tools that we have to compel them to act in a different way.”

The federal government could step in to make the prices more affordable and consistent, “but that just hasn’t happened yet”, Latimore said.

Because there are no gaps in supply – only in price – the US Food and Drug Administration hasn’t declared a naloxone shortage.

One solution could be creating public benefit corporations – organizations that produce essential medications for low prices. Such a corporation was proposed in the Purdue Pharma settlement, Beletsky pointed out. The Biden administration could also invoke the Defense Production Act to compel private entities to prioritize manufacturing naloxone under the rationale that the opioid epidemic is a national crisis.

The pandemic may, in fact, pave the way for action. The Cares Act passed last year granted new powers to the FDA for making prescription drugs like naloxone available over the counter, which would significantly reduce ordering issues, Dasgupta said.

“Let me tell you what they’ve used it for: wart removers, anti-flatulence medications and ingrown toenails,” he said.

It’s not that leaders don’t care, Dasgupta said. “What’s been really fascinating in our conversations with federal officials has been not a lack of compassion, but a total blindness to how the system operates in practice,” he said. “​​There’s a huge disconnect between policy and what happens on the ground.”

Requiring pharmaceutical companies to lower prices for naloxone, or creating federally or philanthropically funded programs to buy the drugs, would be relatively inexpensive, he argued. Last year, the buyers club provided 1.3m doses.

“We’re talking about a couple million dollars,” Dasgupta said. “It’s just so small in terms of the [financial] impact around this. It’s really heartbreaking.”


di  per "theguardian.com"

Steve Bannon and other former top officials in the Trump administration are facing legal peril for defying subpoenas issued by the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack, as the panel prepares to pursue criminal referrals for non-compliance...........

 

Steve Bannon listens as Trump speaks at the White House in March 2017.
Steve Bannon listens as Trump speaks at the White House in March 2017. Photograph: Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

Steve Bannon and other former top officials in the Trump administration are facing legal peril for defying subpoenas issued by the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack, as the panel prepares to pursue criminal referrals for non-compliance.

The legal jeopardy for Bannon – who is expected to be held in contempt by the committee on Tuesday – is anticipated after it emerged in a letter to his attorney, obtained by the Guardian on Monday, that he had claimed executive privilege protections on materials unrelated to the executive branch.

The House select committee chairman, Bennie Thompson, also said in the letter that even if the panel entertained the claims of executive privilege, Bannon had no basis to ignore the order since not even a president could grant him immunity from a House subpoena.

The dual legal arguments in the letter, which served as Bannon’s final warning to cooperate a day before the select committee is expected to hold him in contempt of Congress, underscores the weakness of the executive privilege claim advanced by Donald Trump.

The Guardian first reported that the former president would instruct his top four aides subpoenaed by the select committee – White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, his deputy Dan Scavino, defense department aide Kash Patel, as well as Bannon, his former chief strategist – to defy the orders.

But even though Bannon is alone in defying a subpoena after Meadows and Patel were “engaging” with the panel over the potential scope of their cooperation and Scavino was served late, the letter shows similar attempts to invoke executive privilege appear treacherous.

The missive from the select committee came in response to a previous letter from Bannon’s attorney, Robert Costello, who insisted his client was precluded from complying with the subpoena until claims about executive privilege by Trump were settled in a court ruling.

Thompson said in his response that he rejected the entire argument leaning on Trump and considered Bannon as having violated federal law after he “wilfully failed to both produce a single document and to appear for his scheduled deposition”.

The chairman of the select committee said the executive privilege claim could not apply in Bannon’s case, because the panel had in part sought his contacts with members of Congress and the Trump campaign, which are not covered by the presidential protection.

Thompson added that even if the select committee accepted that some materials demanded by the panel were shielded by executive privilege, Bannon would not be exempt from complying with a congressional subpoena.

The chairman also said that the select committee believed Costello’s interpretation of a previous case involving the testimony of a Trump administration official – the former White House counsel Don McGahn – actually undermined Bannon’s argument to defy his subpoena.

In the case with McGahn, said Thompson, the US district court for the District of Columbia ruled that even senior White House aides were not entitled to absolute immunity from testifying. McGahn, pursuant to that ruling, ultimately testified to Congress in July.

Furthermore, the citation referring to McGahn used by Costello “makes clear that a president lacks legal authority to order an aide not to appear before Congress based on a claim of executive privilege,” Thompson said.

The legal rebuttals outlined in the letter were specific to Bannon’s non-compliance. But a source close to the select committee said the same arguments would be pressed against Meadows, Scavino and Patel should they also attempt an executive privilege claim.

And with a reversal in position from Bannon not forthcoming before a 6pm ET deadline on Monday, the select committee is now expected to proceed with a vote recommending the House refer him to the US Attorney for the District of Columbia for criminal prosecution.

The letter outlining the select committee’s arguments was earlier reported by the Washington Post.

The developing contours of the select committee’s move to secure Bannon’s conviction – which would carry a maximum penalty of a one year sentence in federal prison and up to $100,000 in fines – came as Trump filed a lawsuit blocking the release of his White House records.

Trump filed a lawsuit with the DC district court to stop the National Archives from releasing records to the select committee a tranche of records, after Joe Biden’s White House counsel, Dana Remus, declined to assert executive privilege protections.

The Guardian first reported that Trump would sue to block the release of records from his administration last month. Trump’s legal counsel has indicated the former president is seeking to shield about 50 documents from scrutiny.


di  per "theguardian.com"