Alex Jones asks judge to halt sale of Infowars site to The Onion
Joe Buglewicz/Getty Images
(New York) — Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones accused The Onion and Sandy Hook Elementary School families of “collusive bidding” and asked a bankruptcy court judge to halt the sale of his Infowars platform.
Jones, who defamed the Sandy Hook families by calling the 2012 massacre a hoax and the parents of the 20 first graders actors, called The Onion’s winning $1.75 million bid “sheer nonsense” because it’s half of what the losing bidder offered.
The Onion began a “systematic effort to confuse Mr. Jones’s personal public following with messages espousing gun control in a manner such that Mr Jones’s personal public following would be utterly confused and misled,” Jones said in an overnight court filing.
His request follows a similar push for an injunction by First United American Companies, which is affiliated with Jones through the sale of dietary supplements.
The plaintiffs nor the trustee immediately responded to Jones but the trustee has previously called the auction result legitimate and asked the court for approval.
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Donald Trump has proposed tariffs as the solution for a host of perceived ills: the decline of U.S. manufacturing, the arrival of undocumented immigrants and the costs of childcare, among others.
“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff,'” Trump said this week during an appearance at the Economic Club of Chicago.
On the campaign trail, Trump has rarely mentioned the threat of a potential trade war, in which foreign nations could respond to tariffs by slapping U.S. imports with taxes of their own.
Economists who spoke to ABC News said Trump’s tariff proposals would all but certainly trigger a global trade war, diminishing sales for U.S. exporters, which account for about 10% of the nation’s economy. The disruption would likely trigger job cuts and slow the nation’s economic performance, economists added.
On the other hand, the move would bring more of the supply chain back to U.S. soil, economists said, and it would likely spur growth and hiring at some firms by protecting them from foreign competition. But the same experts cautioned that such benefits would be far outweighed by the consequences.
“The essence of a trade war is you impose tariffs and other countries respond by putting high tariffs on your exports. It’s tit for tat,” Douglas Irwin, a professor of economics at Dartmouth College who specializes in the history of U.S. trade policy, told ABC News.
“Tariffs are easy to impose but hard to remove,” Irwin added.
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Trump campaign pointed to a series of statements about tariffs made by Trump and his allies, including remarks from Trump Campaign Senior Advisor Brian Hughes.
“Time warp alert! Just like 2016, Wall Street and so-called expert forecasts said that Trump policies would result in lower growth and higher inflation, the media took these forecasts at face value, and the record was never corrected when actual growth and job gains widely outperformed these opinions,” Hughes said.
“These Wall Street elites would be wise to review the record and acknowledge the shortcomings of their past work if they’d like their new forecasts to be seen as credible,” he added.
On the campaign trail, Trump has promised a sharp escalation of tariffs during his first term. He has proposed tariffs of between 60% and 100% on Chinese goods.
Envisioning a far-reaching policy, Trump has proposed a tax of between 10% and 20% on all imported products. On Tuesday, he told the audience at the Economic Club of Chicago that such a tariff could reach as high as 50%.
Economists widely expect that tariffs of this magnitude would increase prices paid by U.S. shoppers, since importers typically pass along the cost of higher taxes to consumers. Trump’s tariffs would cost the typical U.S. household about $2,600 per year, according to an estimate from the Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Meanwhile, there could be a second wave of consequences if foreign countries were to impose retaliatory tariffs, economists said.
“You might see a dramatic decrease in U.S. exports, which could then have employment effects for people working in those sectors,” Kara Reynolds, an economist at American University, told ABC News. She pointed to the manufacturing and farming as industries especially vulnerable to a trade war.
For evidence of such an outcome, one need look no further than Trump’s first term, during which a slew of tariffs often induced a retaliatory response.
Tariffs imposed during Trump’s first term often induced retaliatory tariffs. The European Union and Canada responded to tariffs on steel and aluminum with tariffs of their own. Trump slapped tariffs on about $360 billion worth of Chinese goods, but China responded with tariffs on tens of billions of dollars worth of U.S exports.
Chinese tariffs on U.S. soybean exports caused a steep decline in sales to Chinese customers, dropping exports from $12.3 billion in 2017 to $3.1 billion in 2018, according to the Georgetown University Journal of International Affairs. In response, the Trump administration paid billions of dollars in direct aid to farmers to make up for the losses.
“He felt obligated to bail out the farmers,” Robert Lawrence, a professor of trade and investment at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, told ABC News. “Now, we’re talking about potential actions on a much grander scale.”
Alongside retaliatory tariffs, many countries would seek suppliers in places where such tariffs are not on the books, Lawrence added.
“Trump is likely to isolate the U.S. and drive other countries to do business with each other,” Lawrence said. “This would have a very adverse effect.”
On the campaign trail, Trump has sharply disagreed with such fears, saying large-scale tariffs would rejuvenate U.S. manufacturing and propel economic growth.
At the Chicago Economic Club on Tuesday, Trump said tariffs would force companies to locate factories in the U.S. as a way of circumventing the tariffs, which in turn would boost domestic production and employment.
“We’re going to have thousands of companies coming into this country,” Trump said. “We’re going to grow it like it’s never grown before, and we’re going to protect them when they come in because we’re not going to have somebody undercut them.”
Economists said higher tariffs could expand certain areas of U.S. manufacturing that face stiff competition from abroad, but the policy also risks raising input costs and slowing output at U.S. producers that import their raw materials.
Trump’s tariffs decreased U.S. employment by 166,000 jobs, according to a study from the nonprofit Tax Foundation, which cited an increase in import costs for U.S. employers. A separate study from the U.S.-China Business Council estimated up to nearly 250,000 lost jobs as a result of the tariffs.
“It certainly would make the U.S. more self-reliant, but it would come with far greater costs,” Lawrence said.
(NEW YORK) — Americans’ credit card debt has hit a record high, the Federal Reserve of New York said in a report released this week.
Credit card debt climbed $24 billion over a three-month stretch ending in September, soaring to a level 8% higher than where it stood a year ago, the report said.
Debt holders may seek solace in a string of recent interest rate cuts at the Federal Reserve, which typically reduce borrowing rates for credit cards. But credit card interest rates have proven stubborn, leaving borrowers saddled with near record-high average payments even after the rate cuts.
The average credit card interest rate stands at 20.35%, just slightly below a record-high of 20.79% attained in August before the Fed began cutting rates, Bankrate data showed.
Credit card interest rates remain high, in part, because the Fed’s benchmark rate still stands at a historically high level, experts told ABC News. The incremental cuts in recent months have only partially reversed the previous escalation of rates meant to fight the nation’s worst bout of inflation in decades.
That high baseline rate has collided with a rise in the average credit card margin, or the borrowing cost that companies place on top of the benchmark rate to weather default risk, cover overhead costs and recoup profits, experts added.
“Credit card rates are high, and they’re staying high,” Ted Rossman, a senior industry analyst at Bankrate, told ABC News.
To set credit card interest rates, the industry relies on what’s called a “prime rate,” which is the rate paid by the most creditworthy borrowers. That rate is calculated by adding three percentage points to the Fed’s benchmark interest rate. The prime rate, which acts as a baseline for credit card rates faced by all borrowers, currently stands at 7.75%.
The prime rate remains historically high because the Fed has, so far, taken just a few, incremental steps toward dialing back a yearslong series of rate hikes. In recent months, the Fed has cut interest rates by three-quarters of a percentage point, but such relief offers little savings for credit card borrowers, experts said.
Policymakers at the Fed forecast another quarter-point cut next month, and cuts next year totaling one percentage point, but that will still leave interest rates at an elevated level, according to projections released in September.
“I don’t think the Fed wants a rapid fall in rates,” John Sedunov, a finance professor at Villanova University’s School of Business, told ABC News. “It wants to gradually ease rates back.”
The persistence of high interest rates has coincided with a rise in the margin charged by credit companies over and above the prime rate, some experts said.
The average margin charged by credit card firms reached an all-time high of 14.3% last year, according to a U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau analysis of Federal Reserve data. The margin increased sharply from a rate of 9.3% in 2013, the CFPB found.
The rise in credit card delinquency owes, in part, to a decline in personal savings, as Americans have spent down pandemic-era economic stimulus and turned to credit card loans, Sedunov said.
“Banks may view the amount of risk in credit card lending as higher than it was a few years ago, even though the Fed is lowering rates,” Sedunov said.
Growth in credit card margins also stems from old-fashioned profit-taking on the part of credit card companies, some experts said.
Credit card profitability has increased over the past five years, and has outpaced the profitability of other business drivers at the companies that offer them, according to the CFPB report.
“Banks, especially large banks, are trying to make as much profit as they can,” Fariz Huseynov, a professor of corporate finance at North Dakota State University, told ABC News.
Credit card rates may gradually decline in the coming months, since the Fed plans to make additional interest rate cuts, experts said. However, consumers should expect a gradual decrease that could be tempered by a bout of resurgent inflation or higher credit card delinquency rates, they added.
“If you’re in credit card debt, my advice is: Don’t make the hole even deeper, and shift to a debit card or cash if you can,” Rossman said, pointing to the likely persistence of high credit card rates.
“The point is you have to do something,” Rossman added.
(NEW YORK) — A bankruptcy judge rejected the sale of Infowars to The Onion, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones said during his podcast on Tuesday.
“We are deeply disappointed in today’s decision but The Onion will continue to seek a resolution that helps the Sandy Hook families receive a positive outcome for the horror they endured,” The Onion CEO Ben Collins said on social media.
“We will also continue to seek a path towards purchasing InfoWars in the coming weeks,” Collins’ statement continued.
Jones accused The Onion and Sandy Hook Elementary School families of “collusive bidding” and asked a bankruptcy court judge to halt the sale of his Infowars platform in November.
Jones, who defamed the Sandy Hook families by calling the 2012 massacre a hoax and the parents of the 20 first graders actors, called The Onion’s winning $1.75 million bid “sheer nonsense” because it’s half of what the losing bidder offered.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
