Amazon has removed A CHILD'S VOICE in 70+ countries worldwide. A CHILD'S VOICE exposed "elite" #pedophile networks before #Epstein #Maxwell & showed the Satanic nature of the people running in these circles

Can’t have this going around with Bill in the news…

Source: 8kun Notables, Amazon has removed A CHILD’S VOICE in 70+ countries worldwide. A CHILD’S VOICE exposed “elite” #pedophile networks before #Epstein #Maxwell & showed the Satanic nature of the people running in these circles

UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters from the 1st Assault Helicopter Battalion, 140th Aviation Regiment over Los Angeles today

CBS only mentions blackhawks. Twatfag pic says apache.

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA) – Angelenos may catch sight of several military choppers over the skies of Los Angeles Friday.

UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters from the 1st Assault Helicopter Battalion, 140th Aviation Regiment fly over Camp Roberts on July 23, 2020, in Central California. (U.S. Army/Capt. Jason Sweeney/Facebook)

The Army National Guard will be conducting training exercises with 10 Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters. The choppers will fly in formation along the coast.

They are being flown by the 1st Assault Helicopter Battalion, 140th Aviation Regiment (I-140th AHB) based out of Joint Forces Training Base, Los Alamitos.

According to Cal Guard, the 1-140th AHB conducts both domestic and international missions, along with supporting disaster response efforts, such as wildfires. The battalion was deployed to both the Thomas and Camp fires along with the Montecito mudslides.

>UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters from the 1st Assault Helicopter Battalion, 140th Aviation Regiment fly over Camp Roberts on July 23, 2020, in Central California. (U.S. Army/Capt. Jason Sweeney/Facebook)

Sorry bakers. meant to delete that caption. The pic in the article is of July 23 Helos. But the article was from today about choppers today

National Guard To Fly Black Hawk Choppers Over LA Friday
By CBSLA Staff
July 31, 2020 at 8:40 am

Source: 8kun Notables, UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters from the 1st Assault Helicopter Battalion, 140th Aviation Regiment over Los Angeles today

SC rules border wall construction can continue with Department of Defense funds

Supreme Court hands Trump a victory, says border wall construction can continue with Department of Defense funds

The court says construction will continue but so will the lawsuit

The Trump administration prevailed at the Supreme Court in a lawsuit claiming that the president could not divert funds from the Pentagon in order to pay for the construction of the wall at the southern border.

The court ruled by a 5-4 vote on Friday that construction could continue on the wall during the pendency of the lawsuit as it proceeds through the court system.

The lawsuit will be taken up eventually for consideration by the Supreme Court, but a final decision is not likely to be made before the election is completed in November.

Justice Stephen Breyer said in his dissent to the order that it would likely serve as a final judgment.

“The Court’s decision to let construction continue nevertheless I fear, may operate, in effect, as a final judgment,” said Breyer.

The lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Sierra Club. The ACLU responded to the ruling in a statement saying that it will also seek for the parts of the border wall built with the diverted funds to be destroyed.

“The fight continues. The administration has admitted that the wall can be taken down if we ultimately prevail, and we will hold them to their word and seek the removal of every mile of unlawful wall built,” they tweeted.

The fight continues. The administration has admitted that the wall can be taken down if we ultimately prevail, and…
— ACLU (@ACLU)1596232347.0

“Every lower court to consider the question has ruled President Trump’s border wall illegal, and the Supreme Court’s temporary order does not decide the case. We’ll be back before the Supreme Court soon to put a stop to Trump’s xenophobic border wall once and for all,” they added in a second tweet.

The lawsuit applied to $2.5 billion that the president diverted from Department of Defense funding for the border wall.

The construction of the border wall was a large part of the president’s campaign for election in 2016, while on the other end of the political spectrum, Democrats have claimed that a border wall is just an expression of xenophobia and racism.

While the president has argued that a border wall is necessary to more efficiently enforce immigration law, in recent months the coronavirus pandemic has also spurred supporters of the wall to point to reports of the virus spreading through illegal immigration.

Source: 8kun Notables, SC rules border wall construction can continue with Department of Defense funds

Dig: CNN and the New York Times Support Chinese Communist-Funded ‘Marxist Journalism’ School

CNN and the New York Times Support Chinese Communist-Funded ‘Marxist Journalism’ School

Financial supporters of the Global Business Journalism School , which aims to “apply Marxist theory” to journalism, include Bank of America, Bloomberg, consulting giant Deloitte, and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation . The university claims the following Western news entities provide “talent, equipment, and internships” as part of a “long history of cooperation” with Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-controlled Tsinghua:
The New York Times; CNN; Financial Times; Reuters;

Also listed as collaborating on the explicitly Marxist venture are individuals such as CNN host Fareed Zakaria and Facebook Vice President Lori Goler , who both served as guest lecturers in 2017. Bloomberg’s Editor-at-Large and columnist Lee Miller is listed as a professor, while Leslie Wayne , a contributor and former business reporter at the New York Times , is a Visiting Fellow . Also included in the ranks of professors and fellows are a host of CCP apparatchiks. These companies, in collaborating with the CCP, are actively aiding and abetting President Xi Jinping and his 2016 diktat that “wherever the readers are, wherever the viewers are, that is where propaganda reports must extend their tentacles.” Given Tsinghua is wholly funded by the Chinese government, such ties appear to present a conflict of interest in the aforementioned outlets’ coverage of China. Bloomberg , for example, has supplied the program with 10 of its notorious computer terminals, “the largest such installation at any university in the world,” and program participants have even met with Michael Bloomberg. Co-founder and former Editor-in-Chief Matthew Winkler visited the school on its 10 year anniversary in 2016, coinciding with the company’s decision to provide additional funding for the school.

Collaboration with Tsinghua is also egregious given the college has reportedly launched cyberattacks against the U.S. government, has a “clear connection” to the CCP on issues of technology and national security according to the U.S. State Department, and is president Xi Jinping’s alma mater. Xi retains a close link with the university, having recently met with the institution’s advisory board at the CCP’s Great Hall of the People . The school was even highlighted by the New York Times in its article, “Professors, Beware. In China, Student Spies Might Be Watching.” “Lü Jia, a professor of Marxism, was investigated by the school’s administrators this year after students led an online campaign accusing him of speaking critically of China and socialism. The students said they were inspired by a call by Mr. Xi in March to strengthen ideological training and to prepare for a “national rejuvenation.” They started an anonymous social media account where they published line-by-line criticisms of Professor Lü’s lectures and criticized him for saying that Western civilization was still predominant in the world while China’s civilization was in decline.”

Source: 8kun Notables, Dig: CNN and the New York Times Support Chinese Communist-Funded ‘Marxist Journalism’ School

AP Top Stories July 31 P

Here are the top stories for Friday, July 31st: Florida residents brace for Hurricane Isiais; Fauci cautiously optimistic on virus vaccine; Republicans, Democrats deadlocked over virus relief; Europe facing sweltering temperatures.


Source: USA Today, AP Top Stories July 31 P

DHS Study Sheds Light on COVID-19 Best Practices

DHS Study Sheds Light on COVID-19 Best Practices

by: Anon

In March and April, the Department of Homeland Security studied the effect of environmental conditions — temperature, light and humidity — on the COVID-19 virus. [1]

Bill Bryant, director of Science and Technology, presented the findings on April 23, 2020. [2], [3], [4] “Our most striking observation to date is the powerful effect that solar light appears to have on killing the virus — on surfaces and in the air. Increasing the temperature and humidity, or both, is generally less favorable to the virus.”

DHS studied virus survival on non-porous hard surfaces such as door handles and stainless steel. They also studied its survival in aerosols — saliva droplets from sneezes and coughs.

Virus survival is measured in terms of half-life: the interval in which half the virus particles are eliminated.

Fullsized image

Tests on non-porous surfaces:

· (A) On indoor surfaces with 20% (low) humidity and no sunlight, virus survived the longest, with a half-life of 18 hours.

· (B) Raising the humidity to 80% cut the half-life by two-thirds to 6 hours.

· (C) Then raising the temperature to 95°F cut half-life to 1 hour.

· (D) On surfaces in summer-like conditions of 70-75°F, 80% humidity and bright sunlight, half-life was sharply reduced to only 2 minutes. Virus was eliminated over 500 times faster compared with (A).

The same tests were done on respiratory droplets.

· (E) Half-life in aerosols, in 20% humidity, 70-75°F, and no sunlight, was around 60 minutes. That is, virus in aerosols disappeared 18 times faster than on indoor surfaces under conditions (A).

· (F) Adding summer-like sunlight cut the half-life down to about 1.5 minutes. Sunlight eliminated the virus 40 times faster than (E), and 720 times faster than (A).

The virus survives best on surfaces in dry indoor conditions. It does not survive as well in saliva droplets. And it dies the quickest in the presence of direct sunlight under these conditions. Summarizing the aerosol data, Mr. Bryan said, “in a room, 70 to 75 degrees, 20 percent humidity, low humidity, the half-life is about an hour. But you get outside, and it cuts down to a minute and a half. A very significant difference when it gets hit with UV rays. And, Mr. President, while there are many unknown links in the COVID-19 transmission chain, we believe these trends can support practical decision making to lower the risks associated with the virus.”

The data has stunning implications. It suggests that Americans worried about virus can benefit from spending more time outdoors in sunlight, humidity, and warm summer temperatures. It suggests that outdoor mask mandates and prohibition of normal summertime outdoor activities could promote the spread of virus, not contain it.

Mr. Bryan then discussed experiments on disinfecting environmental surfaces. “We’re also testing disinfectants readily available. We’ve tested bleach and isopropyl alcohol on the virus, specifically in saliva or in respiratory fluids. And I can tell you that bleach will kill the virus in five minutes; isopropyl alcohol will kill the virus in 30 seconds, and that’s with no manipulation, no rubbing — just spraying it on and letting it go. If you rub it, it goes away even faster. We’re also looking at other disinfectants, specifically looking at the COVID-19 virus in saliva.”

Fullsized image

· Heat and Humidity Suppress COVID-19 indoors and outdoors

· Move Activities Outside – sunlight impedes virus transmission

· Commonly Available Disinfectants (Bleach & Isopropyl Alcohol) work to kill the virus. (This third point depicting a spray bottle was obviously about disinfecting hard surfaces.)

The mainstream media spun the DHS presentation immediately. [5], [6] The study contradicted the globalists’ goal of forcing heathy individuals to stay indoors and refrain from normal summer activities, with a short-term goal of maximizing the death count and a long-term goal of justifying fraud-laden universal vote-by-mail this autumn.

One article assaulted Mr. Bryan’s integrity by calling him a “non-scientist” and attacking his military background.[7] The writer begs to differ: military background is relevant in defense against biological agents. DHS’s innovative multidisciplinary approach examines problems from all sides, whereas medical research limits itself to a narrow silo where the answer is always more expensive and profitable drugs.

The media instantly jumped on President Trump’s subsequent questions to Mr. Bryan and the task force doctors. The President asked two separate questions [9]:

(1) Whether light could somehow be introduced into the body to kill virus (it can, according to a new treatment protocol) [8]

(2) Whether research should investigate other potential ways to kill virus using disinfectants.

In light of DHS’s “best practices” slide, Mr. Trump’s disinfectant question was obviously about cleaning environmental surfaces. The press maliciously conflated the two separate questions to imply that the President wanted people injected with bleach. By twisting the President’s remarks, plainly intended to spur outside-the-box thinking, the media managed to almost completely sweep this groundbreaking research under the rug.

The First Amendment enshrines our right to discuss these matters freely and to form our own opinions on research that could have a bearing on our health.

In light of the data, shouldn’t we be spending plenty of time outside in sunlight, humidity, and heat, without a mask?


1. DHS initiating crucial research to mitigate COVID-19,


3. Virus does less well in sunlight and warm, humid conditions,

4. DHS Science and Technology Directorate collaborates with CDC, FDA, HHS, and DoD to study, characterize, analyze, and develop countermeasures for biological threats against the homeland

5. ‘Sunlight won’t magic its way into your lungs to fight coronavirus’: Scientists rubbish Donald Trump’s claim hitting the body with UV rays could cure the illness after President rolled out unscrutinised Homeland Security study claiming they kill the virus,

6. Coronavirus dies in SUNLIGHT in minutes, groundbreaking Homeland Security study claims,

7. Homeland Security official who detailed effect of temperature on coronavirus isn’t a scientist but has a long military background,

8. Cedars-Sinai-Developed ‘Healight’ Medical Device Platform Technology Being Studied as a Potential First-in-Class COVID-19 Treatment,

9. THE PRESIDENT: So I asked Bill a question that probably some of you are thinking of, if you’re totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous — whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light — and I think you said that that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you’re going to test that too. It sounds interesting. ACTING UNDER SECRETARY BRYAN: We’ll get to the right folks who could. THE PRESIDENT: Right. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that. So, that, you’re going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me. So we’ll see. But the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute, that’s — that’s pretty powerful.

Universal Basic Income Is Not An Economic Savior

Universal Basic Income Is Not An Economic Savior

Tyler Durden

Fri, 07/31/2020 – 20:05

Authored by Lance Roberts via,

According to a new study by the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute, a universal basic income could permanently make U.S. economy trillions of dollars larger. While such socialistic policies sound great in theory, history, and data, show it isn’t the economic savior it is touted to be.

What Is A Universal Basic Income (UBI)

To understand why the theory of universal basic incomes (UBI) is heavily flawed, we need to understand what UBI is.

Basic income, also called universal basic income (UBI), is a public governmental program for a periodic payment delivered to all citizens of a given population without a means test or work requirement. Basic income can be implemented nationally, regionally, or locally, and is an unconditional income sufficient to meet a person’s basic needs (i.e., at or above the poverty line).

The idea of guaranteed income is not a new thing. According to Wikipedia:

“The concept of a state-run basic income dates back to the early 16th century when Sir Thomas More’s “Utopia” depicted a society where every person receives a guaranteed income. 

In the late 18th century, English radical Thomas Spence, and American revolutionary Thomas Paine, declared their support for a welfare system that guaranteed an assured basic income. Nineteenth-century debate on basic income was limited, but during the early part of the 20th century, a basic income called a “state bonus” was widely discussed. 

In 1946, the United Kingdom implemented unconditional family allowances for every family’s second and subsequent children. In the 1960s and 1970s, the United States and Canada conducted several experiments with negative income taxation, a related welfare system. From the 1980s and onward, the debate in Europe took off more broadly, and since then, it has expanded to many countries around the world. “ 

While the idea of a UBI sounds good in theory, as discussed previously, they fail to work in reality.

UBI Won’t Increase Economic Growth

“More money in people’s pockets will lead to stronger economic growth.” – J.M. Keynes

Such is the underlying sentiment behind a universal basic income and its impact on economic growth. Unfortunately, it simply isn’t true.

Let’s run a hypothetical example using GDP from 2007 to the present. (I am using estimates of -4.3% for 2020 GDP growth) In 2008, in response to the “Financial Crisis,” Congress passes a bill providing $1000/month ($12,000 annually) to 190 million families in the U.S. 

The chart below shows the economy’s annual GDP growth trend assuming the entire UBI program shows up in economic growth. For those supporting programs like UBI, it certainly appears as if GDP is permanently elevated to a higher level. 

When you look at the annual rate of change in economic growth, which is how we measure GDP for economic purposes, a different picture emerges. In 2008, when the $12,000 arrives at households, GDP spikes, printing a 17% growth rate versus the actual 1.81% rate.

However, beginning in 2009, the benefit disappears. The reason is that after UBI is injected into the system, the economy normalizes to the new level after the first year. Also, notice that GDP grows at a slightly slower rate as dollar changes to GDP at higher levels print a lower growth rate.

UBI’s Dark Side

Of course, the money to provide the $12,000 UBI benefit had to come from somewhere.

According to the Center On Budget & Policy Priorities, in 2019, roughly 75% of every tax dollar went to non-productive spending. 

“In the fiscal year 2019, the Federal Government spent $4.4 trillion, amounting to 21 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP). Of that $4.4 trillion, federal revenues financed only $3.5 trillion. The remaining $984 billion came from debt issuance. As the chart below shows, three major areas of spending make up most of the budget.”

Think about that for a minute. In 2019, 75% of all expenditures went to social welfare and interest on the debt. Those payments required $3.3 Trillion of the $3.5 Trillion (or 95%) of the total revenue collected.

That was BEFORE the shutdown of the economy due to COVID-19. Given the subsequent decline in economic activity occurring this year, those numbers become markedly worse. Given this bit of data, all universal basic income payments would have had to come solely from debt.

The table below shows the increase in total Federal Debt adjusting for the annual UBI payment. 

The chart below takes our hypothetical example and compares the impact of the additional debt on the Federal deficit from the implementation of UBI.

While the “theoretical models” assume that UBI will create enough economic growth and prosperity to “offset” the increase in debt, 40-years of history suggest otherwise.

UBI Won’t Increase Economic Growth

As discussed previously, there is a high correlation between debts, deficits, and economic prosperity. 

“The relevance of debt growth versus economic growth is all too evident, as shown below. Since 1980, the overall increase in debt has surged to levels that currently usurp the entirety of economic growth. The growth in debt continues to divert more tax dollars away from productive investments into the service of debt and social welfare.”

However, simply looking at Federal debt levels is misleading.

It is the total debt that weighs on the economy.

Under the current economic situation, it currently requires nearly $4.00 of debt to create $1 of economic growth. However, if you added UBI into the equation, it would require roughly $5 per $1 of growth. (Unfortunately, at the current spending rate, the U.S. will be approaching the $5 mark by the end of 2020)

If you don’t understand the implications of debt on economic growth, let me rephrase the analysis for you.

For instance, in the 30-years from 1952 to 1982, the economy ran at a surplus. That surplus fostered rising economic prosperity in the U.S. which averaged roughly 8%. 

Since 1980, the economic deficit has continued to erode economic prosperity. As shown, there has been no organic growth without increases in debt. Due to the need to increase debt to fund it, UBI would only succeed in exacerbating the situation.

The UBI Test Has Already Failed

The United States already has a semi-UBI plan. It is an effectively bankrupt system called “Social Security.” 

The collapse in economic growth has resulted in a collapse in Federal Tax revenue needed to pay for the massive social welfare schemes in the U.S.

It now requires more than of 100% of tax receipts just to meet the mandatory spending of social welfare and interest on the debt. In other words, we are now going into debt more just to provide social assistance.

How bad is it?

Social Security will be insolvent and unable to pay the full value of promised benefits by 2035. Social Security’s costs will exceed its income by 2020, according to a new report published Monday by the program’s trustees.

At the end of 2018, Social Security was providing income to about 67 million Americans. About 47 million of them were over age 65, and the majority of the rest were disabled. If nothing changes, the Social Security Trust Fund will be fully depleted by 2035. If such occurs, the program will impose across-the-board cuts of 20 percent to all beneficiaries.”

Getting Worse

That report, dire in its warning already, was issued before the “Pandemic” and “economic shutdown.”

Meanwhile, demographics are blowing up the basic premise of the funding of Social Security. There were 2.8 workers for every Social Security recipient in 2017. That’s down from 3.3 in 2007, and that’s way down from the 5.1 workers per beneficiary that existed in 1960.

Furthermore, the two programs function mostly as a giant conveyor belt to transfer wealth from the young and relatively poor to the old and relatively rich. Such allows the average person (who now lives to be 78) more than a decade of taxpayer-funded retirement.

Welfare now makes up the highest percentage of disposable personal incomes in history despite record low unemployment, rising wage growth, and the longest economic expansion in U.S. history.

During the “Great Depression,” the economically devastated masses would form “breadlines.” Today, those “breadlines” form at the mailbox. Without government largesse, many individuals would be living on the street.

The chart above shows all the government “welfare” programs and current levels to date. The black line represents the sum of the underlying sub-components. Since the onset of the “pandemic,”  both unemployment insurance and “other benefits” have surged by $3 trillion. Those increases are in excess of the continued increases in all other benefits, like social security, Medicaid, and Veterans’ benefits.

Importantly, for the average person, these social benefits are critical to their survival. Government assistance now makes up ~38% of real disposable personal incomes. With more than 1/3rd of incomes dependent on Federal assistance, it should not be surprising the economy continues to struggle. Recycled tax dollars used for consumptive purposes, has virtually no impact on increasing economic activity.


In its essential framework, a universal basic income sounds excellent. Everyone has their basic needs covered. Then they can go out and produce and not worry about covering critical bills. In reality, the additional income is quickly absorbed into the economy as prices rise (inflation) to compensate for the extra spending. After the first year, the UBI has to be increased or no longer has any benefit. 

Therein lies the trap with all socialistic programs.

While UBI, along with free healthcare, education, childcare, etc., sounds great, they are NOT productive investments that have a higher return than the carrying cost of the debt. In actuality, history suggests these welfare supports have a negative multiplier effect in the economy.

Most telling is the inability of the current economists, who maintain our monetary and fiscal policies, to realize the problem of trying to “cure a debt problem with more debt.”

The Keynesian view that “more money in people’s pockets” will drive up consumer spending, with a boost to GDP being the result, has been wrong. It hasn’t happened in 40 years.

We fear that these socialistic programs, which promises “free everything” with no consequences, instead delivers inflation, generates further income inequality, and ultimately higher social instability and populism. Such has been the result in every other country which has run such programs of unbridled debts and deficits.

While UBI sounds excellent at the conversational level, so does “communism” and “socialism.” In practice, the outcomes have been vastly different than the theory.

As Dr. Woody Brock aptly argues:

“It is truly ‘American Gridlock’ as the real crisis lies between the choices of ‘austerity’ and continued government ‘largesse.’ One choice leads to long-term economic prosperity for all; the other doesn’t.”

Take your pick. 

Source: Zero Hedge, Universal Basic Income Is Not An Economic Savior

Chris Wallace challenges Biden to follow Trump on 'Fox News Sunday,' says ex-VP must 'get into game shape' – Fox News

  1. Chris Wallace challenges Biden to follow Trump on ‘Fox News Sunday,’ says ex-VP must ‘get into game shape’  Fox News
  2. New poll: Majority of Democrats want Biden to pick a Black woman for vice president  AOL
  3. It’s Time for Conservatives to Take the New Coronavirus Outbreak Seriously  National Review
  4. Would Kamala Harris be disloyal if she were VP? | TheHill  The Hill
  5. The Democrats Need a Plan to Fight Corruption—the Usual Kind as Well as the Trump Kind  The New Yorker
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Source: Google News, Chris Wallace challenges Biden to follow Trump on ‘Fox News Sunday,’ says ex-VP must ‘get into game shape’ – Fox News

Researchers revive bacteria from the era of the dinosaurs – The Economist

  1. Researchers revive bacteria from the era of the dinosaurs  The Economist
  2. In a first, scientists revive 100-million-year-old microbes, prove some lifeforms have ‘no age limit’  Jagran English
  3. Scientists Revive 100-Million-Year-Old Lifeforms – IGN Now  IGN
  4. Sleeping microbes wake up after 100 million years buried under the seafloor  Live Science
  5. Scientists revive 100-million-year-old deep-sea lifeforms  MSN Money
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Source: Google News, Researchers revive bacteria from the era of the dinosaurs – The Economist

GAME THREAD: Dallas Mavericks vs. Houston Rockets – Mavs Moneyball

  1. GAME THREAD: Dallas Mavericks vs. Houston Rockets  Mavs Moneyball
  2. Rockets vs. Mavericks score: Live updates as Houston and Dallas make their season debuts inside NBA bubble
  3. Houston Rockets vs. Dallas Mavericks FREE LIVE STREAM (7/31/20): How to watch NBA basketball, time, channel  PennLive
  4. As NBA season restarts, all Rockets kneel during national anthem  Rockets Wire
  5. Houston Rockets vs. Dallas Mavericks FREE LIVE STREAM (7/31/20): Watch James Harden vs. Luka Doncic in NBA re
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Source: Google News, GAME THREAD: Dallas Mavericks vs. Houston Rockets – Mavs Moneyball