The chaos is real. America’s not coming back. - Victoria Times Colonist

The chaos is real. America’s not coming back. - Victoria Times Colonist

Only intensification of community cooperation can repel and reject an invasion of hostile values and systems of thought

Gene Millera day ago

Dark clouds hover over the Statue of Liberty in New York. One theory floating around the internet suggests a small group of tech billionaires are are actively dismantling democratic institutions. If successful, democracy in America will be permanently replaced by a corporate-run authoritarian state. PIX4FREE

Listen to this article

00:06:05

In late February, I fell across this online. The title alone, Dark MAGA, was seductive. The more I read, the more I thought I was reading a sci-fi movie treatment (lightly edited):

If you’re a little confused about what Elon Musk is trying to achieve with DOGE, here’s the breakdown:

Musk and Peter Thiel co-founded a company that became PayPal. Other executives at PayPal went on to found or lead other huge tech companies including YouTube, LinkedIn, Reddit, Affirm, and many VC firms.

This group became known as the PayPal mafia because they basically controlled Silicon Valley. Peter Thiel mentored a young JD Vance and helped him get set up in his first VC firm.

Thiel and Musk all but forced Trump to choose JD Vance as VP in exchange for funding his presidential campaign.

The three of them, plus a lot of other tech billionaires subscribe to an ideology called the Dark Enlightenment espoused by this super weird, creepy dude: Curtis Yarvin aka Mencius Moldbug.

Yarvin preaches that the media and academia represent “The Cathedral” that secretly controls power and must be dismantled.

He advocates for a corporate run monarchy, led by a CEO-Dictator. Says that Democracy is “outdated software” and openly opposes it and that the elite tech billionaires should rule because they have the intelligence to “fix” society.

The strategy is to gut the government and to replace it with private corporations; to eliminate elections because they are “obsolete;” to use distraction and chaos to prevent public resistance.

Trump is their useful tool to be disposed of as soon as they can wrest control. They are not Trump supporters, they are “Dark MAGA” This isn’t a hypothetical. The plan is already in motion:

Musk, Thiel, and their network are actively dismantling democratic institutions. If successful, democracy in America will be permanently replaced by a corporate-run authoritarian state.

You think, “Aw, c’mon. This is some drugged-out superannuated adolescent’s takeover fantasy.”

In any case, I forgot about this paranoid riff until I caught an online episode of “Laura Flanders and Friends” with Canadian authors Naomi Klein (Shock Doctrine, This Changes Everything) and Astra Taylor (The Age of Insecurity: Coming Together as Things Fall Apart).

Klein, in particular, has been online wallpaper lately, reporting on what she calls “End Times Fascism.”

As she describes it, the tech oligarchs (the “Broligarchy,” the “Nerd Reich”) are eager to create exclusive and presumably impermeable, self-regulated minute “countries” on U.S. federal lands, and/or in Greenland and Honduras (check the existing Prospera City), as the rest of society destroys itself. At the same time, Klein warns, ultra-right Christian fascists, sensing the approach of the Rapture, are poised to overpower what’s left of American democracy.

Friends, have you noticed how hallucinatory reality has become?

 

A court blows the whistle on a fake ‘emergency’

Words & Phrases We Could Do Without

Jennifer Rubin Jun 3

READ IN APP

Donald Trump never runs out of emergencies. The border “emergency” in Trump 1.0 provided the pretext to build his wall on the Southern border. A trade “emergency” in Trump 2.0 was his justification for unilaterally imposing on-again-off-again blanket tariffs, thereby disrupting the entire international trading order. Last week, the U.S. Court of International Trade called foul on the fake trade “emergency.”

The court unanimously found that while Congress “has responded to the growing complexity of global economic relations by delegating trade authority to the President,” that delegation came with “clear limitations that retain legislative power over the imposition of duties and foreign commerce.” In claiming an “emergency” to wrest that power entirely away from Congress, Trump resorted to linguistic and legal contortion.

Congress could not constitutionally delegate unlimited power to Trump to enact sweeping tariffs, the court determined. The decades-long imbalance of trade with certain countries is no “emergency,” the court held, nor can a “emergency” be created out of thin air simply to facilitate the president’s sensationalist tendencies or scheme to extract concessions from trading partners. This court is not alone in decrying phony “emergencies” to supercharge presidential authority.

“The Trump administration has exhibited a dangerous pattern of invoking spurious emergencies to undermine the Constitution, threatening liberty and circumventing Congress,” wrote the Cato Institute’s Ilya Somin. “This is most evident in the fields of immigration and trade policy. If not stopped, or at least curtailed, these policies could harm millions of people, imperil civil liberties, and compromise our constitutional system.”

Courts in other contexts, Congress, and the voters at large must take a similarly skeptical view of Trump’s incessant reliance on “emergencies.”

Meanwhile, when a true emergency does come along, Trump turns a blind eye. Last week, “The Federal Emergency Management Agency denied North Carolina’s request for the agency to match 100% of the state funds for Helene cleanup, according to a letter sent from the acting FEMA administrator to the governor of North Carolina,” ABC News reported. It was an emergency, apparently, when Trump claimed former president Joe Biden was not responding quickly enough; now, North Carolina can fend for itself.

Democratic Governor Josh Stein pointed out that Trump somehow cannot find the money to support his state’s emergency, forcing North Carolina to “pay toward debris removal [that] will mean less money towards supporting our small businesses, rebuilding downtown infrastructure, repairing our water and sewer systems, and other critical needs.” (Maybe Trump could use some of the self-aggrandizing June 14 parade money to help actual people?) And, due to Trump’s cuts, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is not at all prepared for the upcoming emergencies that come with hurricane season.

Trying to figure out what constitutes an emergency for Trump and his vengeful MAGA minions can be tough.

Bird flu? Nope! Cut funding.

Kids and pregnant women getting Covid? Well, anti-vaxxer nut RFK, Jr. says no funding for that, even though the CDC, which ultimately reports to him, insists that vaccines should be given to healthy kids aged 6 months to 17 years. Good luck to doctors and parents figuring out who to trust.

Dictionary.com defines “emergency” as “a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action.” But for Trump, an emergency is whatever he wants to do (usually in retaliation against perceived political enemies or in furtherance of his war on invented problems) while real “emergencies” are things he does not want to do if on behalf of blue states, democracies, political opponents, and/or in step with scientific reality. Since the word has lost all meaning in this current environment, we should stop using it, recognizing that Trump operates by whim, not by a clear-eyed assessment of what constitutes an actual “emergency.”

Upgrade to paid

Greater focus is required on the real emergencies: People legally in the U.S. getting swept up by masked ICE agents to be shipped off to foreign prisons without due process; spurious arrests of political adversaries and critics including Judge Hannah Dugan, Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.), and Newark Mayor Ras Baraca (subsequently released without charges).

Fortunately, nearly 150 former and current judges realized that Dugan’s preposterous arrest was a real emergency, prompting an unprecedented amicus brief urging dismissal of all charges. “The federal government’s prosecution of Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge Hannah C. Dugan, if permitted, threatens to undermine centuries of precedent on judicial immunity, crucial for an effective judiciary,” it states.

This is not the only true emergency. We have witnessed the economic dislocation and chaos caused by Trump’s unhinged tariff moves; the accelerated destruction of Ukraine (made more acute by Trump’s slavish devotion to Russian President Vladimir Putin); the impoundment of hundreds of millions in aid to research universities; and the unconstitutional mass layoffs and evisceration of federal agencies and departments. Trump calls such emergencies “his agenda.” Thankfully, 96% of rulings from federal judges in May recognized that many of these Trump-created emergencies justified temporary restraining orders and/or preliminary injunctions to prevent immediate harm.

If MAGA Republicans get their way, millions of Americans will experience real emergencies from loss of SNAP benefits, lack of healthcare coverage due to Medicaid cuts, and steep hikes in higher education and energy costs that the massive tax and spending bill would inflict on middle- and working-class Americans.

In sum, there are true emergencies everywhere the eye can see, largely the result of an unhinged president acting in illegal and/or erratic ways. The manufactured “emergencies” and those deliberately inflicted on vulnerable Americans are part of the assault on our constitutional system, while Republicans in Congress remain largely mute. Now that is an emergency.

 

Trump’s Usurpation Proclamation

by William Kristol

On January 1, 1863, the president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, issued a proclamation ordering

that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons.

This was the Emancipation Proclamation.

On Saturday evening, June 7, 2025, the president of the United States, Donald J. Trump, issued a presidential memorandum addressed to the secretary of defense, the attorney general, and the secretary of homeland security. One might call it the Usurpation Proclamation. And while this weekend’s mobilization of two thousand National Guard troops in Los Angeles has alarmed many observers, I suspect we aren’t alarmed enough by this presidential order, which has implications far beyond this one action in one place.

Let’s take a look at it. It consists of only three paragraphs.

In the first paragraph, the president asserts that “numerous incidents of violence and disorder have recently occurred and threaten to continue” in response to the execution of federal immigration laws. And, “To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.”

This claim of “rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States” establishes the legal predicate for his action announced in the next paragraph:

In light of these incidents and credible threats of continued violence, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.

If you look at 10 U.S.C. 12406, the authority Trump is invoking, it authorizes the president to call into federal service the National Guard when “the United States . . . is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation, or when there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.” The president has claimed in the first paragraph that such a rebellion exists, and so directs the secretary of defense to mobilize at least 2,000 National Guard personnel for a duration of “60 days or at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense.”

And the president, in his proclamation, goes further than the deployment of the National Guard: “The Secretary of Defense may employ any other members of the regular Armed Forces as necessary to augment and support the protection of Federal functions and property in any number determined appropriate in his discretion.”

Note that neither Los Angeles nor the state of California is mentioned in the memorandum. Trump’s mobilization order is in no way limited as to time or place. It is an open-ended authorization for the secretary of defense to mobilize as many troops as he wishes for as long as he wishes, and to deploy them anywhere he wishes within the United States. And these military personnel can be deployed not just where protests have occurred, but anywhere protests “are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.”

The memorandum’s final paragraph states that, “To carry out this mission, the deployed military personnel may perform those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary” and ensures that the secretary of defense consults with the attorney general and the secretary of homeland security “prior to withdrawing any personnel from any location to which they are sent.”

Again: “Any personnel,” “any location,” and for any length of time.

Trump understands the breadth of his order. When asked by a reporter yesterday if he planned to send troops to Los Angeles, he answered: “We’re gonna have troops everywhere.”

 

Chain restaurants are attempting a cultural revival

Though Gen Z and millennials don't dine at mid-price spots as much as older generations, chains are desperately trying to capitalize on their yearning for youth and newfound spending power.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

ByMolly Liebergall

June 2, 2025

• less than 3 min read

You probably haven’t thought about Red Robin since the last time its “Yummm” slogan jolted you from a couch slumber. But the burger joint’s stock is enjoying a much-needed boost after the chain reported a rare swing to profitability last week.

Amid an overall downturn in consumer spending, Red Robin is one of a slew of casual chains trying to weave nostalgia into its broader comeback strategy (see: last year’s Red Robin x Juicy Couture tracksuit).

Another competitor, Chili’s, is channeling the good ol’ days especially well:

• A Saved by the Bell actress starred in a Chili’s ad campaign for margarita specials last month, and the chain opened an Office-themed location near Scranton, PA, in April.
• Viral TikToks of mozzarella stick cheese pulls helped the chain’s sales jump 31% last quarter and helped get “Chili’s back in culture again,” its parent company’s CEO said.

Children get older: Though Gen Z and millennials don’t dine at midprice spots as much as older generations, chains are desperately trying to capitalize on their yearning for youth...and their newfound spending power. A recent Rainforest Cafe pop-up at the Empire State Building reeled in thousands of diners looking to eat next to a giant plastic bird for the first time since childhood.

Many casual chains are still struggling. Hooters recently filed for bankruptcy, foot traffic is down at Outback Steakhouse, and despite its recent bright spot, Red Robin has lost more than $100 million in recent years.—ML

 

Trump’s Grotesque Military Address

The president yuks it up at Fort Bragg with his personal army and drools over the possibility of smashing protests in the capital.

WILLIAM KRISTOL, ANDREW EGGER, AND JIM SWIFT JUN 11

READ IN APP

The catfight heard ’round the world seems to have fully sputtered out: “I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week,” Elon Musk tweeted shortly after 3 a.m. this morning. “They went too far.”

It’s unclear what early-morning intelligence Musk might have received to have made him reevaluate his former claims that Trump had been alarmingly close to Jeffrey Epstein and was now making the federal government cover that fact up. Must have been pretty convincing, though! Happy Wednesday.

---

Members of the Army cheer as US President Donald Trump arrives to speak at Fort Bragg, on June 10, 2025. (Photo by Brendan SMIALOWSKI / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Less Donald, More George

by William Kristol

“It is safer,” the philosopher Leo Strauss cautioned, “to try to understand the low in the light of the high than the high in the light of the low. In doing the latter one necessarily distorts the high, whereas in doing the former one does not deprive the low of the freedom to reveal itself as fully as what it is.”

This week bids fair to be a low moment in American history, as Donald Trump chooses to reveal himself fully for what he is.

First, the president used protests against his mass deportation policy as an excuse to deploy national guard soldiers—activated against the wishes of the state’s governor and the city’s mayor—and then active-duty marines to the streets of Los Angeles. He also issued a presidential memorandum authorizing future domestic use of the U.S. military anywhere at any time he judges appropriate.

Then, in the Oval Office yesterday, the president was asked about the military parade he’s ordered for Saturday in Washington. President Trump will watch from on high, on a reviewing stand, as 150 military vehicles, including 28 tanks and 28 armored troop carriers, roll down Constitution Avenue.

Trump doesn’t want there to be any distraction from this grandiose and, I dare say, un-American spectacle. He’s not interested in any Americans nearby choosing to exercise their First Amendment rights. And so he warned: “For those people that want to protest, they’re going to be met with very big force. And I haven’t even heard about a protest, but you know, these are people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force.”

Now, one reason Trump hasn’t heard about a protest in Washington may be that those who have encouraged hundreds of peaceful and patriotic “No Kings Day” demonstrations around the country have in fact urged protesters not to assemble in Washington. They want to avoid possible confrontations, so as to provide no excuse for Trump to use force.

Trump clearly wants such an excuse. He’s always admired the action of the Chinese government in Tiananmen Square in 1989: “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength.”

Having embraced the power of strength against peaceful protests yesterday, Trump then flew to Fort Bragg. There he boasted in an unseemly, and I dare say again un-American, way of the power and strength of the U.S. Army. Trump spoke almost exclusively about power rather than principle, about strength rather than purpose. He also told the assembled soldiers various lies big and small, including that the 2020 presidential election was “rigged.” He urged them on to jeer the press, President Biden, and Democratic office holders in California.

Un-American once more.

If you still believe that America’s old ideals are noble and worth emulating, join our community. Help us build something good together.

Join

But in line with Strauss’s injunction, I turn away from Trump to remind myself of another address to soldiers by an American president, though this one delivered before the speaker became president.

It was March 1783, and the Continental Army seemed near mutiny against the civil government over its failure to fulfill various commitments to the soldiers, including appropriating funds for their back pay. Matters were coming to a head, and on March 15 Gen. George Washington chose to directly address the threat of military rebellion in a speech to his officers in Newburgh, New York.

Washington argued eloquently and emotionally both against mutiny and against soldiers deserting their station. “This dreadful alternative, of either deserting our country in the extremest hour of her distress, or turning our arms against it . . . has something so shocking in it, that humanity revolts at the idea.”

A bit later in his address, Washington pulled out a letter from a member of Congress to read from it. He paused for a moment, and then reached into his pocket to take out a pair of reading glasses, which most of the officers had never seen him wear. Washington put them on. “Gentlemen,” he said, “you must pardon me. I have grown gray in your service and now find myself growing blind.”

This dramatic moment reportedly broke the fever of revolt. After Washington’s speech the officers voted to reject any appeals to mutiny or to desert, and simply asked Washington to negotiate with Congress to redress the wrongs they had suffered.

Washington’s speech concluded:

And let me conjure you, in the name of our common country—as you value your own sacred honor—as you respect the rights of humanity, and as you regard the military and national character of America, to express your utmost horror and detestation of the man who wishes, under any specious pretences, to overturn the liberties of our country, and who wickedly attempts to open the floodgates of civil discord, and deluge our rising empire in blood.

We have today such a man, a man “who wishes, under any specious pretences, to overturn the liberties of our country” and “open the floodgates of civil discord.” He’s our president.

And here’s the question before us: Is this now the country of Donald Trump? Or does it remain the country of George Washington?

Team New Zealand hits back at ‘unreasonable’ Challengers

 Team New Zealand hits back at ‘unreasonable’ Challengers 

by Helen Fretter · All latest posts

Biting back against charges of a lack of transparency, Team New Zealand has taken the unprecedented step of releasing the Protocol draft - we take a look at some of the key changes (including stored power, women’s crew positions, and much more)

19/03/21 - Auckland (NZL) 36th America’s Cup presented by Prada America’s Cup Match - Hall of Fame America’s Cup Trophy

America’s Cup defenders Team New Zealand have returned fire in the America’s Cup war of words – by unveiling the draft Protocol.

The battle was initiated in public this afternoon with statements issued by both the Challenger of Record Athena Racing and American Magic, who accused the defender of a lack of transparency.

A statement issued from Emirates Team New Zealand read:

“The Defender has been working closely and positively with all teams on moving the America’s Cup to a new collaborative Partnership and structure to strengthen the future of the America’s Cup for the benefit of the event and all current and future teams.”

It continues regarding the Protocol: “In an unprecedented move, the Defender in conjunction with the Challenger of Record has been working with all teams on the development of the Protocol for the 38th America’s Cup over the past few months. This has resulted in the current Protocol incorporating many ideas and positions of the teams. As a result of the significant teams input the completion of the Protocol has been prolonged.

“The latest version of the Protocol went back to the Challenger of Record Athena Racing, 10 days ago, prior to the announcement of Naples. The Defender has not had any feedback back from the Challenger of Record on the latest version other than acknowledgement it had been well received by the teams.”

Grant Dalton of Emirates Team New Zealand has been holding onto the America’s Cup since Bermuda 2017. Photo: ACE

Protocol draft released

In what can only be described as a ‘hold my beer’ move, ENTZ continued: “However, the Defender now feels due to the unreasonable allegations that have been levelled at it by Athena Racing and American Magic, that it is appropriate to publicly release the latest draft version of the 38th America’s Cup Protocol today as an illustration of complete transparency.”

If the aim of Athena Racing and American Magic’s statement was to flush Protocol discussions into the open, it has certainly achieved that. That Protocol is now available for all to see here

New Cup organisation?

One of the most striking elements in the Protocol draft includes the previously leaked idea of a new structure behind the America’s Cup organisation. It reads:

“The Defender, COR and other prospective AC38 Competitors have reached agreement for the establishment of a partnership of founding teams (“Founding Teams”) to be responsible for the management of AC38 and future cycles of the America’s Cup (“AC Partnership” or “ACP”). It is agreed that ACP or its designated entity will be appointed as the Event Authority for AC38 and commence operation as soon as practicable after 30 June 2025.

“ACP shall be bound by all pre-existing commitments in respect of AC38 matters which are contracted or otherwise agreed by ACE in the course of negotiation prior to ACP’s commencement of operation.”

Some of the sweeping responsibilities of the ACP are listed, including management of timing and format, commercial and media rights and ‘endeavouring to raise funds, to meet its costs of AC38.’

There are also structural changes proposed to how the Challenger of Record can be selected: “If the Challenger of Record withdraws its challenge, then the Defender shall promptly appoint one of the other remaining Challengers as the new Challenger of Record, such appointment to be at the sole discretion of the Defender.”

And a deeply complicated clause which bonds competitors to agree to using the AC75 class for AC39, or risk forfeiting  $20 million (yes, that’s USD20m).

INEOS Britannia battling it out with Emirates Team New Zealand off Barcelona during Race 7 of the 37th America’s Cup. ETNZ went on to win the Cup 7-2. Photo: Ricardo Pinto/America’s Cup

Six crew, 1 woman, no cyclors

Other big changes drafted include a requirement under the AC75 rule that boats will have six crew members, including one youth (under 25) and one female.

The Protocol continues: “Manual power input will not be permitted, except in steering, and the AC75 Class Rule will allow power equivalent to that generated by four cyclors to be supplied to control sail functions with a supplied battery-powered system.

“It is envisaged that this supplied power system will mimic the capability of human cyclors in terms of average power output, peak power, fatigue, and other relevant data enabling crews to determine how best to use the power available during a race. Sailing data from AC37 will be used to quantify such power requirement.”

The Protocol notes that the above two points “have been included in response to COR feedback for the purposes of further discussion only, not yet agreed to by the Defender”.

Guest slots will also be created onboard.

The AC75s will have just six crew under the draft Protocol proposal. Photo: LUNA ROSSA PRADA PIRELLI TEAM

Key dates for 38th America’s Cup

Other key dates in the draft Protocol include the rule that nobody can sail an AC75 until 15 January 2026.

The intention is to run up to three Initial Preliminary Regattas during 2026 and one possibly in early 2027, with a final Preliminary Regatta at the Match Venue.

These Preliminary events will be raced in AC40s in 2026 (with each Competitor able to enter two AC40s). In 2027 the Preliminary Regattas will be raced in AC75s ‘competing in the same AC75 Yacht hull in which Competitors shall compete during the Challenger Selection Series (CSS) and the Match’.

The Defender will again be eligible to compete in the early stage of the challenger series, but not the Semi-Final or Final.

The women’s and youth America’s Cups are also to return.

Crew rules for AC38

The rumoured ‘Burling clause’ is included, and reads: “up to two non-nationals may participate as crew on a Competitor’s yacht in a race in the AC38 Events, provided such non-nationals did not participate as crew in any races of the following AC37 Events – the AC37 Final Preliminary Regatta, the Challenger Selection Series or the AC37 Match.”

The nationality rule can also be waived, on agreement by the Defender and Challenger of Record, “for a particular crew member who they are satisfied was unable to fully comply with those requirements only due to circumstances outside his/her control such as the COVID 19 pandemic”.

Peter Burling has left Emirates Team New Zealand, but under the draft Protocol would not be able to move to another team.

The 75-page draft Protocol document also lists many, many other rules and changes, such as country of build, the recon system, and so on, plus intellectual property and media rights (a likely significant area of change with the formation of the ACP)

Perhaps key to Naples, it notes that “the TWS range referred to is between 6.5 knots and 23 knots.”

And, perhaps key to some skippers more than others, there’s a ‘profanity’ clause in case any non-PC language is caught on the live broadcast.

However, this Protocol document is still a draft, that has not been signed off with full agreement, and there are likely to be changes still to be made and details thrashed out further.

Venue transparency

ETNZ’s statement concluded by disputing the claim in the Athena Racing statement that the host venue of Naples had been signed without due transparency. It reads:

“It is the responsibility of the Defender and has been an obligation of an agreement with the Challenger of Record, to secure the Host Venue by June 19th 2025 so all teams have clarity on one of the most important foundations of any America’s Cup.

“Ahead of time, the teams now have that knowledge and understanding with the exciting announcement of Naples, Italy in 2027.

It was recently announced that the Cup is headed to Naples, Italy for AC38.

“In contrast to the statement by Athena Racing, all teams have already been offered full access and transparency to the Host Venue Agreement (HVA), which was signed just last week, upon their signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). Such a requirement is standard practice in any contract that contains commercial sensitivities.”

“The Defender is yet to receive the returned NDA’s from Athena Racing as Challenger of Record.”

The post America’s Cup: Team New Zealand hits back at ‘unreasonable’ Challengers – and releases draft Protocol appeared first on Yachting World.