India’s Silver Imports Could Double, Largely from Solar Demand

(Jon Forrest Little, Money Metals News Service) The global economic landscape has undergone a seismic shift over the past few decades, with the outsourcing of jobs from the United States to India playing a pivotal role. This transformation has had far-reaching consequences for both nations, reshaping their economies and societies in profound ways.

In the United States, the outsourcing trend has led to a significant loss of well-paying jobs, particularly in the Rust Belt and in sectors such as customer support and IT services. This exodus of employment opportunities has left many American workers grappling with economic uncertainty and diminished prospects.

Conversely, India has experienced a remarkable surge in its middle class, fueled by the influx of outsourced jobs. This rapid economic ascent has lifted millions out of poverty, dramatically altering the nation’s socio-economic landscape.

As Indian households gain increased purchasing power, they are embracing modern conveniences that were once out of reach. The demand for appliances like air conditioners, washing machines, and refrigerators has skyrocketed, along with automobile ownership.

From 2022 to 2023, only 5% of households in India had AC. India is a scorching hot country. As people are lifted out of misery (poverty) into the middle class, it’s understandable that India will require ooodles more from the power grid (silver being the #1 conductor of electricity).

This newfound prosperity, however, comes with its own set of challenges.

India’s energy infrastructure is straining under the weight of increased consumption, as millions of newly affluent citizens plug in power-hungry devices.

The surge in demand for modern amenities has also created an unexpected pressure point: the need for silver, a crucial component in many electronic devices and appliances due to its superior conductivity.

Expect Silver Prices to Rise as Demand Surges

India’s Silver Imports Set to Double: India is expected to witness a significant surge in silver imports this year. This growth is primarily fueled by the rising demand from solar panel and electronics manufacturers.

Driving Force: The significant increase in silver imports can be largely attributed to the burgeoning investment in solar energy. Silver, a crucial component in solar panel production, is driving this surge in imports.

Market Impact: The increase in silver imports reflects a broader trend of escalating demand for materials essential for renewable energy technologies.

Economic Implications: The surge in silver imports could potentially influence local silver prices and significantly impact India’s balance of trade. This is particularly significant as India heavily relies on imported silver for its manufacturing needs.

Future Projections: Analysts suggest that as solar energy initiatives expand, the demand for silver and other critical materials will continue to rise, potentially leading to further increases in imports in the coming years.


Jon Forrest Little graduated from the University of New Mexico and attended Georgetown University’s Institute for Comparative Political and Economic Systems. Jon began his career in the mining industry and now publishes “The PickAxe” which covers topics surrounding precious metals, energy, history, and politics.

RFK Jr. Reveals Key Reasons for Endorsing Trump Ahead of 2024 Election

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the former third-party presidential candidate, detailed the main reasons behind his monumental endorsement of President Donald Trump for the 2024 election. 

RFK Jr. highlighted Trump’s willingness to unite the country and specifically praised Trump’s openness to his advice on various critical issues, including ending the war in Ukraine, fighting censorship and protecting children’s health.

“He invited me to form a unity government, and we agreed to be able to continue to criticize each other on issues on which we don’t agree—but these issues are so important for unifying our country. We need, in this country, to reach a point where we love our children more than we hate each other,” RKF Jr. said during an interview on Fox News Sunday with host Shannon Bream.

In response, Bream asked about any discussions on potential cabinet positions if Trump wins the 2024 election. 

“It’s a good unifying theme that I think a lot of people could get around, it’s how we get there…” she said of the endorsement. “Have you all negotiated over or talked about a cabinet position? A position within a Trump government in exchange for your endorsement?” 

RFK Jr. clarified, “No, there’s been no commitments. I met with President Trump, with his family, with his closest advisors and we just made a general commitment that we are going to work together.” 

His endorsement of Trump has drawn vitriolic attacks from his family. The Kennedys have long been associated with the Democratic Party, with his uncle, John F. Kennedy, having served as president, and his father as attorney general, U.S. senator and presidential candidate.

In response to these attacks, RFK Jr. expressed his continued love for his family despite the attacks.

New Video Exposes MSNBC’s Hypocritical Defense of Harris’s Truancy Law

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Vice President Kamala Harris’s controversial record on truancy as California attorney general is resurfacing, as certain media figures attempt to whitewash her past actions.

A new video compilation shared on Sunday by X user “Mazemoore” contrasts MSNBC anchor Jonathan Capehart’s past and present coverage of Harris’s truancy record.

In a 2019 MSNBC segment, Capehart acknowledged that Harris faced significant criticism for championing a 2011 law that allowed district attorneys to prosecute parents whose children missed school.

“One of the programs that she started on truancy, which is what a lot of people have been hitting my Twitter feed about how that program … separated black children from their families,” Capehart said in the 2019 video. 

Harris herself strongly advocated for the law during her 2011 inaugural address as attorney general. “We are putting parents on notice. If you fail in your responsibility to your kids, we are going to work to make sure you face the full force and consequences of the law,” she declared at the time. 

The law disproportionately affected minority parents, quickly drawing widespread backlash. As the criticism mounted, Harris began to distance herself from the program, expressing regret that parents had been threatened under the law. 

By 2024, however, Capehart seemed to have forgotten his 2019 coverage, as he attempted to revise history. “Kamala Harris never sent parents to jail for their kids’ truancy,” he confidently asserted, echoing the tone of a spokesperson determined to defend their principal.

Capehart, who also serves as a columnist for The Washington Post in addition to hosting his MSNBC show, did not respond to a request for comment from Headline USA sent to his Post email.

Responding to these comparisons, Mazemoore remarked, “We are witnessing one of the most heavily coordinated gaslighting campaigns that the MSM has ever put together. … In 2024 the media has one message, nobody went to jail because of Kamala’s truancy policy.” 

Truancy is just the latest example of how legacy media has whitewashed Harris’s record.  

Similarly, the media has bafflingly claimed several things about Harris that are clearly inaccurate. They have falsely claimed that she was never appointed “border czar” (she was), that she didn’t target black Americans as a prosecutor (she did), that she never supported abolishing ICE (she did), and that she has never endorsed Medicare for All or a ban on fracking (she has endorsed both policies and has yet to publicly disavow them).

Videos shared by the Media Research Center below highlight the extent to which the media has gone to shield Harris, even at the cost of contradicting their own previous coverage.

 

Byron Donalds Names Shadowy Figures ‘Running the Country’

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., sounded the alarm over a leadership vacuum in D.C. as President Joe Biden vacationed at a lavish ranch and Vice President Kamala Harris campaigned nationwide. 

Speaking on Fox News’s Sunday Morning Futures, Donalds questioned if Susan Rice, the former National Security Advisor and current White House advisor, might be the one actually running the White House. 

“Who is running the country?” host Maria Bartiromo asked Sunday, noting escalating tensions in the Middle East between Israel and Hezbollah. 

“To be quite frank with you, Maria, I have no idea,” Donalds replied, pointing out Biden’s stay at a $37 million ranch in California. “I’m not quite sure who’s running the place. Maybe Susan Rice is still in charge, for all we know. I have no idea.”

Bartiromo questioned who has led the country in the past and who would if Harris emerged victorious in the 2024 presidential election.

Bartiromo prefaced her question by playing a video of former President Barack Obama expressing his wish to play a behind-the-scenes role in the White House.

“It very well might be [Obama],” Donalds said in response to the video. “Even if you look at the Biden-Harris administration, a lot of the staff are Obama holdovers from the Obama-Biden administration.” 

He added that media reports suggest Harris is already looking at retaining key people from the current administration.

After inheriting Biden’s campaign apparatus, Harris hired several key figures behind Obama’s 2008 and 2012 victories, according to New York Magazine.

These hires include 2008 Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter, organizing operative Mitch Stewart and communications director Jennifer Palmieri. 

Former Obama speechwriter Adam Frankel also assists Harris. Former Attorney General Eric Holder previously led her vice-presidential vetting.

Tom Cotton Beautifully Dismantles Reporter’s Defense of Kamala’s Medicare for All

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl attempted to defend Vice President Kamala Harris after Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., mentioned her past support for Medicare for All during a This Week interview on Sunday.

The defense did not go well, to say the least. 

During the interview, Cotton compared President Donald Trump’s policies to those of Harris, who Cotton correctly mentioned, has previously supported abolishing private health insurance. 

Karl pushed back, asking, “What do you mean taking away health insurance? What are you talking about?” 

Cotton reminded him of Harris’s 2020 support for Medicare for All, which, by her admission, would have eliminated private health insurance. 

“That is not her position now,” Karl said. 

“How do you know this? How do you know this 100%? Cotton asked. 

“I mean she said she no longer supports…” Karl replied, but Cotton quickly interrupted.  

“She has not said that, maybe anonymous aides on a Friday night said that,” the senator remarked, highlighting that Harris had not openly disavowed her Medicare for All plan. Instead, aides had told the media she no longer supported it. 

On X, critics blasted Karl for regurgitating leftist talking points. 

President Donald Trump’s campaign page, Trump War Room, shared a clip of a CNN townhall between Harris and Jake Tapper. In the clip, she openly embraced Medicare for All. 

“Here you go,” the page said, directing the video to Karl’s X page. It also included a separate video of Karl discussing the 2020 Democratic candidates’ endorsements of Medicare for All and abolishing ICE.

Other critics joined in. 

“Jon Karl is one of the most incompetent uninformed ideologues I’ve ever seen get a Sunday morning show. Just breathtaking,” commented podcast host Stephen L. Miller.

“Tom Cotton applies the number one rule when dealing with the press in this clip: Never accept their false premises,” added writer Bonchie.

“Kamala doesn’t have to do interviews because she knows that the would-be interviewers are more than happy to just make her arguments on her behalf,” said Jerry Dunleavy IV, journalist and author of Kabul – The Untold Story of Biden’s Fiasco and the American Warriors Who Fought to the End.

Karl did not reply to Headline USA’s request for an interview or written response sent to his ABC News email on Sunday evening.

CNN Shocks Booker by Calling Kamala’s ‘Change’ Bluff

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., was on the defensive when questioned about Vice President Kamala Harris’s promise to bring a “new chapter” to the nation, despite her nearly four-year tenure in the Biden administration. 

Booker seemed caught off guard when CNN’s Jake Tapper confronted Harris’s nonsensical pledge during a Sunday interview on State of the Union, where he played clips of party leaders labeling Harris as a so-called candidate of change.

“A new chapter? I mean, she’s the incumbent vice president,” Tapper pressed. “Democrats have controlled the White House for 12 of the last 16 years. How can Democrats talk about a new chapter? Turning the page? You guys were the ones writing the book.” 

In response, Booker deflected by claiming Tapper’s assertions were “not true.” Booker pointed out that Republicans have held control of the House since 2022.

“Right now, we see the MAGA Republicans in Congress killing all kind of pragmatic policies that we need to get done,” he said, sidestepping the question. 

Booker further deflected by mentioning the Supreme Court and its conservative majority. He claimed that the high court has posed a challenge to the Biden-Harris administration. However, this line of reasoning did not directly address the fact that Harris is part of the incumbent government. 

The senator’s evasive answers followed the DNC speeches by Harris, her running mate Tim Walz and former President Barack Obama, all of whom echoed the new “chapter” rhetoric. 

“Our nation, with this election, has a precious, fleeting opportunity, a chance to chart a new way forward,” Harris declared. 

Echoing this sentiment, Walz remarked, “So I don’t know about you, but I’m ready to turn the page on these guys. … We’re not going back!” 

Similarly, Obama added, “America’s ready for a new chapter. America’s ready for a better story.” 

These talking points nearly suggest that former President Donald Trump, the current Republican nominee, is the incumbent. In reality, Democrats have wielded significant power for much of the past two decades.

Although Trump secured the presidency in 2016, Democrats reclaimed the House majority in 2018, won the Senate in 2020, and regained the White House that same year.

Even with a conservative Supreme Court majority, the justices appointed by Trump have occasionally frustrated conservatives by siding with the liberal minority in several cases. 

Trump-Appointed Postmaster Gen. Seeks to Streamline USPS, Save $3B

(Headline USA) The U.S. Postal Service wants to save $3 billion annually on changes that reflect its greater reliance on streamlined regional networks — while retaining local mail delivery times of one to three days and allowing customers to track some delivery schedules with greater precision.

Election mail won’t be affected, officials said.

The proposal, announced Thursday, would adjust mail delivery times while maintaining a commitment to a maximum five-day delivery for the flagship Ground Advantage program nationwide and a maximum three-day delivery for local first-class mail.

Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, said the changes to take place next year are necessary to “enable us to operate more efficiently and reliably, grow our business and give us a chance for a viable future” after an 80% drop in first-class mail since 1997 and a corresponding growth in packages. All told, the Postal Service has amassed more than $87 billion in losses from 2007 through 2020.

The details were unveiled by the Postal Service ahead of a Sept. 5 meeting in which the proposed changes will be discussed with stakeholders before they are submitted to the Postal Regulatory Commission.

Election mail and holiday shipments won’t be affected because the proposed changes would not take place until the next calendar year, officials said. Medications also should continue to be delivered at their current speed, or faster, under the proposal, officials said.

The proposal reflects the Postal Service’s move to overhaul its processing and transportation network with an emphasis on regional hubs, something that is already beginning to take place in Atlanta; Richmond, Virginia; and Portland, Oregon. Changes to better utilize existing ground networks mean the Postal Service must adjust pickup and drop-off times between post offices and processing plants, a process that will increase the speed of some of the mail, officials said.

Postal customers who live closer to regional hubs will see the greatest reductions in transit time for mail; transit times for some rural customers could grow while still falling within existing service standards, an official said.

Democratic U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., a frequent critic of changes under DeJoy, was unimpressed by the proposal.

“Any effort to degrade service while raising prices is a recipe for a death spiral at the Postal Service,” Connolly said in a statement.

“This is the second time Postmaster General DeJoy has proposed lower service standards,” Connolly added. “He might as well announce a return to delivering mail by horse and buggy.”

This proposal aligns with the organization’s mandate to be financially self-sufficient while continuing to deliver to every address across the nation six days a week.

If adopted, 75% of first-class mail will see no change from the current service standards, and around two-thirds of mail will be delivered in three or or fewer days, the Postal Service said.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Yellen Imposes New Sanctions on Firms Linked to Russia’s War Effort

(Headline USA) The Biden administration imposed sweeping sanctions Friday on hundreds of firms in Russia and across Europe, Asia and the Middle East, accusing them of providing products and services that enable Russia’s war effort and aiding its ability to evade sanctions.

Among those sanctioned by the Treasury Department were 60 Russian-based technology and defense companies, including three Russian financial tech companies. Also sanctioned were firms in Turkey, France and Hong Kong that act as suppliers to Russia-based Promtekh, a wholesale distributor of transportation equipment, and an ammunition procurement network connected to Italian and Turkish nationals, who also face sanctions.

Friday’s action is the latest in a series of thousands of U.S. sanctions that have been imposed on Russian firms and their suppliers in other nations since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The effectiveness of the sanctions has been questioned, especially as Russia has continued to support its economy by selling oil and gas on international markets.

Additionally, the State Department designated people and firms involved in Russia’s energy, metals and mining exports; drone production; subsidiaries of Russian state-owned nuclear energy corporation Rosatom; and people the U.S. says were involved in kidnapping Ukrainian children and making them identify as Russian.

The announcement comes one day before Ukraine’s independence day and as Ukrainian forces push into Russia’s Kursk region.

Friday’s action is intended to make good on commitments that President Joe Biden made with his Group of Seven counterparts in Italy this summer to disrupt Russia’s military supply chains and drive up costs for its war machine.

“Russia has turned its economy into a tool in service of the Kremlin’s military industrial complex,” Treasury Deputy Secretary Wally Adeyemo said in a statement announcing the sanctions. “Companies, financial institutions, and governments around the world need to ensure they are not supporting Russia’s military-industrial supply chains.”

Earlier this year, the U.S. passed an aid package for Ukraine that allows the administration to seize Russian state assets located in the U.S. and use them for the benefit of Kyiv.

Shortly thereafter, the leaders of the Group of Seven wealthy democracies agreed to engineer a $50 billion loan to help Ukraine in its fight for survival. Interest earned on profits from Russia’s $300 billion in frozen central bank assets mostly in Europe would be used as collateral.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Film Documents Nuclear Tests Poisoning American Citizens

(Headline USA) It was the summer of 1945 when the United States dropped atomic bombs on Japan, killing thousands of people as waves of destructive energy obliterated two cites. It was a decisive move that helped bring about the end of World War II, but survivors and the generations that followed were left to grapple with sickness from radiation exposure.

At the time, U.S. President Harry Truman called it “the greatest scientific gamble in history,” saying the rain of ruin from the air would usher in a new concept of force and power. What he didn’t mention was that the federal government had already tested this new force on U.S. soil.

Just weeks earlier in southern New Mexico, the early morning sky erupted with an incredible flash of light. Windows rattled hundreds of miles away and a trail of fallout stretched to the East Coast.

Ash from the Trinity Test rained down for days. Children played in it, thinking it was snow. It covered fresh laundry that was hanging out to dry. It contaminated crops, singed livestock and found its way into cisterns used for drinking water.

The story of New Mexico’s downwinders — the survivors of the world’s first atomic blast and those who helped mine the uranium needed for the nation’s arsenal — is little known. But that’s changing as the documentary “First We Bombed New Mexico” racks up awards from film festivals across the United States.

It’s now screening in the northern New Mexico community of Los Alamos as part of the Oppenheimer Film Festival. It marks a rare chance for the once secret city that has long celebrated the scientific discoveries of J. Robert Oppenheimer — the father of the atomic bomb — to contemplate another more painful piece of the nation’s nuclear legacy.

The film, directed and produced by Lois Lipman, highlights the displacement of Hispanic ranching families when the Manhattan Project took over the Pajarito Plateau in the early 1940s, the lives forever altered in the Tularosa Basin where the bomb was detonated and the Native American miners who were never warned about the health risks of working in the uranium industry.

Their heart-wrenching stories woven together with the testimony of professors and doctors spurred tears in Los Alamos, as they have in Austin, Texas, Annapolis, Maryland, and every other city where the film has been screened.

Andi Kron, a long-time Los Alamos resident, was in awe of the cinematography but also horrified as she learned more.

“Just unbelievable,” she said, noting that even people who have been involved in studying different aspects of the Trinity Test decades later remain unaware of the downwinders’ plight.

Lipman and others hope to distribute the documentary more widely as part of an awareness campaign as downwinders push for the federal Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to be reauthorized and expanded to include more people who have been exposed by nuclear weapons work carried out by the federal government.

Over the past 10 years, Lipman has followed Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium co-founder Tina Cordova as she has appeared before Congress, held countless town halls and shared meals and prayers with community members.

Lipman expressed her frustrations during the premiere in Los Alamos, noting that despite testimony about the injustices that followed the Trinity Test, the federal government has yet to acknowledge its failures in recognizing the damage that was done nearly 80 years ago.

As the film notes, there were about a half-million people living within a 150-mile radius of the blast. The area was neither remote nor unpopulated, despite government claims that no one lived there and no one was harmed.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Three Years After Withdrawal, Taliban Rules Afghanistan

(Casey Harper, The Center Square) This week will mark the three-year anniversary of President Joe Biden’s chaotic and deadly withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.

Biden committed on the campaign trail to withdraw U.S. troops, a move supported by his predecessor Donald Trump, but the process left 13 U.S. service members killed and the country within the hands of the Taliban.

The Taliban also received billions of dollars in U.S. military equipment because it was left behind.

Federal officials have pointed to an effort to render that equipment unusable, but the rapid collapse in the country left little time to actually finish and accomplish that destruction of equipment.

The Taliban held a military parade featuring U.S. military equipment earlier this month.

“What added insult to injury to all of this was the way in which it was conducted, the unnecessary impetus behind it which led to the … collapse” and even “armed our adversaries,” Robert Greenway, a former top intelligence and national security official in the U.S. government for decades who is now at the Heritage Foundation, told The Center Square.

He added that Biden left them “as the best armed terrorist state in the history of the world.”

An eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan has long been on the table as a possibility for both parties, but letting the country fall back into the hands of the Taliban was at one time considered unthinkable and eventually became expected by many experts.

“The Taliban never really had entirety of control over Afghanistan,” Greenway said. “This is the closest they’ve been to it.”

But he added that that grip is “tenuous” and “devolving.”

In the July before the withdrawal, Biden said that Taliban takeover of Afghanistan was “not inevitable and that he trusted Afghanistan’s government.

“It’s a – it’s a silly question,” Biden continued, when asked by a reporter if he trusts the Taliban. “Do I trust the Taliban? No. But I trust the capacity of the Afghan military, who is better trained, better equipped, and more re- – more competent in terms of conducting war.”

Afghanistan fell into the Taliban’s hands almost immediately, something intelligence and security experts predicted.

Greenway said the Taliban has called on the “faithful” to return to Afghanistan, which increases the threat to the U.S. homeland. The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. were planned and launched from Afghanistan.

“Ultimately means a regional threat but more importantly means a threat against the U.S. homeland is on the march and actively coalescing,” Greenway said.

Greenway said Afghanistan’s Taliban takeover affects the Iran, Israel and Hamas conflict “a great deal.”

The loss of presence in Afghanistan has removed a sort of regional forward operating base across the world by which to act quickly in the Middle East, and that loss of deterrence leads to a more volatile region, Greenway said.

He also said the withdrawal sent a message to other powers like Russia, Iran and Ukraine that the U.S. didn’t have the will to act decisively and efficiently militarily, lowering the deterrence threat.

“I feel sorry for the people that are going to have to go back into Afghanistan when an attack happens on the U.S. homeland,” Greenway said.

Meanwhile, the U.S. armed forces are in a recruiting crisis, falling short of target recruitment goals across branches, something Greenway argues escalated after the Afghanistan withdrawal.

“If you don’t have confidence in leadership, in the commander in chief, you don’t have anything,” Greenway said.

Women in particular have suffered since the U.S. left, with the Taliban banning education for women over the sixth grade among other laws that essentially ban women from showing their faces or speaking loudly in public.

“Since 2021, the situation has worsened with the collapse of the economy and restrictions on women’s rights,” Gallup said in a release of a recent survey. “Gallup surveys have found that 96% of Afghan women are suffering under the Taliban, and most do not feel that women in Afghanistan are treated with respect.”