🫨5.3 magnitude earthquake hits near Labuan Bajo, Indonesia
🫨5.2 magnitude earthquake hits southeast Indian Ridge
🫨5.0 magnitude earthquake hits the northern East Pacific Rise
🫨5.0 magnitude earthquake hits near western Xizang
🫨5.0 magnitude earthquake hits near Fuji, China
🫨5.0 magnitude earthquake hits near Isangel, Vanuatu
🫨5.0 magnitude earthquake hits near Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Russia
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, the world’s fifth-richest man, thinks that Communist China should be praised for the way it has handled poverty.
New York Times Magazine columnist David Wallace-Wells, the author of “The Uninhabitable Earth,” opined that progress on poverty around the globe “has been really remarkable.” Asserting that said progress reflected “progress in China,” he asked Gates if the trend toward eradicating poverty would continue since China has “sort of finished eradicating real poverty.”
“If you’re allowed to say the truth about things in China, they’ve done a very good job,” Gates responded. “They’re now a middle-income country, in fact, one of the wealthier middle-income countries.”
In 2018, an article written by a professor of economics at Peking University, Beijing and a then PhD scholar at Peking University surmised that China had initially used a repressive financial policy in order to stimulate the economy.
The article stated that the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) was still guiding commercial banks’ settings of deposit and lending rates, adding that “repressive financial policies have not stopped China from achieving rapid economic growth,” but that “economic growth has decelerated and systemic financial risks have escalated sharply.”
by Jim Hᴏft
Jul. 28, 2026 8:15 am
“Look, I mean, I don’t know what you’re referring to in terms of defending him,” Gottlieb responded.
But Kernen refused to let him escape.
The CNBC host asked whether Fauci orchestrated a cover-up of COVID-19’s possible laboratory origin because of the scrutiny it could bring to U.S.-funded gain-of-function research in China.
“He knew that would come back to haunt him and then basically told his colleagues, ‘Go with the natural origin,’” Kernen said. “It was obvious three years ago, Scott, to me anyway and everybody else, that he orchestrated that!”
Gottlieb conceded that evidence supporting a potential laboratory origin has grown while evidence supporting natural spillover has not.
“I think the side of the ledger that speaks to this potentially coming out of a lab has grown over time,” Gottlieb said, “and we haven’t had any new evidence suggesting that this came out of a natural origin or spillover.”
Kernen then confronted Gottlieb over emails showing Fauci instructing colleagues to delete communications.
“I think it’s disappointing to see him trying to suppress alternative opinions,” Gottlieb admitted. “And that clearly was evident from the emails.”
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Senator Paul released emails in 2025 showing Fauci repeatedly telling colleagues to “delete this after you read it.”
One February 2020 exchange, sent one day after the infamous “Proximal Origins” conference call, showed Fauci, former NIH Director Francis Collins, and Jeremy Farrar discussing how to “get ahead of the science and narrative.”
The committee says the emails conflict with Fauci’s previous congressional testimony that he had not deleted federal records or sought to obstruct their release. Fauci has denied allegations that he covered up COVID-19’s origins.
Kernen continued hammering Gottlieb, asking whether Fauci’s shattered reputation was the only accountability the 85-year-old former bureaucrat would ever face.
“Does having a reputation totally in the toilet at 85 years, does that hold him to account for what he was responsible for?” Kernen asked.
A noted expert on China says he sees signs that the Asian behemoth is making preparations to go to war — possibly over Taiwan — and very soon.
Gordon Chang, writing on the 1945 blog, said Communist Party cadres are ordering businesses and entrepreneurs to convert their production over to manufacturing equipment, a sure sign that Beijing is stocking up for war.
“Last month, a Chinese entrepreneur making medical equipment for consumers told me that local officials had demanded he convert his production lines in China so that they could turn out items for the military. Communist Party cadres, he said, were issuing similar orders to other manufacturers,” Chang wrote. “Moreover, Chinese academics privately say the ongoing expulsion of foreign colleagues from China’s universities appears to be a preparation for hostilities.”
Eyes were locked on the skies Saturday as a suspected Chinese spy balloon slowly drifted toward the U.S. Atlantic Coast and remained in clear view over the Carolinas — where local authorities warned civilians against taking potshots at the floating orb — before it was shot down when it drifted over the Atlantic Ocean.
Eyes were locked on the skies Saturday as a suspected Chinese spy balloon passed over the U.S. Eastern Seaboard — where local authorities warned civilians against taking potshots with rifles — before it was shot down when it drifted over the Atlantic Ocean.
Software engineer and storm chaser Brian Branch captured photographs of the balloon high above western North Carolina just hours before it was shot down.
He could see a payload hanging from the round, white balloon, which officials have said was about the size of three school buses.
It was shot down off the Carolina coast Saturday afternoon and an operation was launched to recover the debris. The Biden administration had previously hesitated to shoot the balloon because of risks to people on the ground from falling debris.
The reported strategy appears intended to provide choices between conventional defeat and a massive strategic nuclear attack.
Instead of immediately striking cities or launching intercontinental missiles, the United States could theoretically use a lower-yield weapon against a military formation, naval force, hardened command center or isolated target. The hope would be to stop an enemy advance, restore deterrence and force negotiations without triggering an all-out exchange.
But this logic contains a potentially fatal assumption: that nuclear escalation can be controlled.
A weapon may be described as “tactical” because of its range, yield or battlefield purpose. The country receiving the strike may not view the distinction as meaningful.
Russia or China would have only minutes to determine whether an explosion was an isolated warning or the beginning of a wider attack. Leaders would be forced to make decisions while communications were disrupted, military installations were being destroyed and additional missiles might already be in flight.
A supposedly limited strike could produce retaliation against an American base. Washington could then answer by striking additional military targets. Each side might believe it was responding proportionately even as the conflict moved closer to attacks on major cities.
The escalation ladder may be easy to climb and impossible to descend.
–
The strategic relationship between Moscow and Beijing makes the problem even more dangerous.
China has provided Russia with dual-use components that support its military-industrial base. Russia can offer China battlefield knowledge, advanced military technology and lessons from years of sustained warfare. The two countries also conduct joint exercises and share a desire to weaken American influence.
Their interests are not identical, and neither government fully trusts the other. But a formal alliance is unnecessary.
China benefits when Russia absorbs American resources in Europe. Russia benefits when China forces the United States to concentrate ships, aircraft and missiles in Asia. Every American weapon sent to one theater is a weapon unavailable in the other.
This creates a strategic form of cooperation even without coordinated battle plans.
