Search

Just another WordPress site

Game rooms near me

The BuzzFeed SPAC Fiasco Is Only Getting Worse

by nymag.com Leave a Comment

Photo-Illustration: Intelligencer; Photos: Getty Images/BuzzFeed

Earlier this month, the staggeringly bad market performance of BuzzFeed managed to get even worse. Shares of the media company fell more than 40 percent on June 6, just days after the expiration of a lockup preventing company insiders from selling their stock.

BuzzFeed is now trading at just $1.68 — a decline of nearly 85 percent since the moment it went public on December 6 by merging with a special-purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. It’s a startlingly poor return even by the low standards of SPACs, which have recently crashed en masse. Other media companies that had been planning similar maneuvers, from Vice to Forbes to Bustle, have abandoned their plans. Under pressure to be more profitable, the award-winning BuzzFeed newsroom — it won a 2021 Pulitzer Prize for reporting on mass detention camps in China — is shrinking via layoffs and buyouts.

One continuing pall over the company is a lawsuit filed by 91 former (and certain current) employees, who alleged in March that BuzzFeed had botched its public offering and prevented them from selling shares worth millions. BuzzFeed countersued in April, seeking to move the case out of arbitration and into Delaware chancery court. As the litigation played out, I talked to current and former executives and employees and found a dynamic that may be among the most toxic in all of digital media. “I’ve never seen morale worse there,” says a former reporter. One group of ex-employees, it turns out, was able to sell shares relatively easily after the SPAC deal. This subset apparently includes former editor in chief Ben Smith, who held on to his stock options for most of his tenure as media columnist at the New York Times but sold them before announcing his departure from the paper at the beginning of January. (Smith declined to comment.)

The trading difficulties experienced by some former employees come down to an issue of converting stock from one class of shares to another and whether the company gave them adequate time and notice to execute the switch. Who knew what, and when, could turn out to be expensive for BuzzFeed. Says a former executive who was part of the contingent that was able to sell, “The people I was talking to knew that was going to be a nightmare in the weeks before.”

Hannah Anderson was in her obstetrician’s office early on December 6, the day the stock she had received as part of her compensation package at BuzzFeed was finally going to be worth something. Nearly eight months pregnant with her second child, she was only half listening to the doctor, instead thinking of ways she would celebrate. “I was literally refreshing the CNBC web page while the doctor was going over the signs of labor with me,” she says. Anderson’s husband had taken the day off to stay in front of the computer and trade when the time came. They had calculated that the proceeds of the BuzzFeed SPAC would be enough to pay for college for both their kids. “We were so excited,” she says. “And then it just all came crashing down.”

SPACs, an alternative to traditional IPOs, became trendy during the market frenzy of the pandemic era. In the title of a press release issued before the listing, BuzzFeed boasted that it would be the “First Publicly Traded Digital Media Company.” (Vox Media, which owns New York Magazine, was rumored to be exploring a SPAC maneuver in 2021. After a merger this year, Vox Media also owns Group Nine SPAC LLC, the sponsor of the Group Nine Acquisition Corp SPAC.) Executives prided themselves on being in the vanguard of a new financial model for the industry; for years, they had dangled stock options as compensation for high- and low-ranking employees alike.

Anderson, who wrote sponsored content for BuzzFeed for four years until 2015, was one of dozens of former employees who planned to sell their stock at the earliest possible moment. But on the big day, to her and her husband’s horror, the shares weren’t available to trade in their brokerage account. By the time they were, the stock had fallen at least 60 percent from its first-day high.

The group now suing BuzzFeed includes staffers who started at the company in its early years, from reporters who covered politics to those who wrote quizzes or helped build the website. They remember an era of perks like free pizza and beer on Thursdays and frequent celebrity sightings in the office, which gave a heady sense that BuzzFeed was on a trajectory just like its logo, an arrow climbing skyward. Some were making as little as $35,000 a year, but the pay was augmented by stock options they purchased when they left the company, borrowing money from their parents, their significant others, or a bank.

One former staffer took a pay cut and a less prestigious title simply to join BuzzFeed. She told me, “I remember talking to HR and saying, ‘Is there any wiggle room in the salary?’ And they were like, ‘Absolutely not, but think of all the benefits,’ and they talked about the stock. There was always the hope that this could be a huge payout at some point.”

Over the years, the idea of a big payoff languished as BuzzFeed raised more venture capital and pushed an IPO farther down the road. But in the middle of 2021, when BuzzFeed announced its intentions to go public via SPAC, it renewed many workers’ dreams of a liquidity event. Those people, having started at BuzzFeed as much as a decade ago, were now in a different phase of life, with spouses, children, and mortgages. All SPAC stocks start out trading at $10, and the employees mentally added a zero to their number of shares, fueling visions of paying down student loans or buying a house. Based on that price, ex-employees held shares worth anywhere from several thousand dollars to as much as $1 million.

BuzzFeed was scheduled to debut in early December, but not until a couple of days before Thanksgiving, at 5:38 p.m., did the company begin informing its former-employee stockholders of the process by which they would be able to trade. In that email, signed by “the Stock Admin Team,” the company also delivered the news that after the merger, the ex-staffers would receive only a fraction — less than one-third — of the shares they had previously held. But the steps seemed straightforward enough, essentially involving setting up a new account to hold the stocks with a company called Continental and then moving them to a brokerage. The way BuzzFeed described it, much of the process would be automated. The top of the email read, in bold, “At this moment in time you don’t have to do anything.”

Over the following days, the former employees received a flurry of documents to print, sign, and return, but as the date of the SPAC deal approached, they still did not have their shares in hand. Some were running into problems setting up their accounts with Continental. BuzzFeed had apparently sent their login credentials to their old @buzzfeed.com addresses, despite the employees having previously confirmed their new contact info with the company. Others found that even after following all the instructions, their shares did not turn up, and they could not get an answer from anyone at Continental or BuzzFeed. Emails to the “stock admin team” went unreturned. Some even tried emailing [email protected], to no avail. Many turned to a Facebook group for ex-staffers called Buxxfeed. “It was like a madhouse of us just grasping at straws,” says Anderson.

One special feature of SPACs is that they allow initial investors to cash out their shares at $10 before a merger goes through. With BuzzFeed, 94 percent of eligible investors redeemed their shares — one of the highest redemption rates of all SPACs that went public last year, according to SPACInsider, which tracks those deals. “I definitely felt a sense of impending doom about that,” says someone who worked as a reporter at BuzzFeed in its early days. That feeling would intensify. When the stock began trading under the ticker BZFD, the group of former employees, with no access to their shares, could only watch as the price briefly rose to above $14 and then began to fall.

As the ex-staffers groused to one another, trying to figure out if anyone had been able to trade, it became clear that a certain contingent of their colleagues was more fortunate. This group consisted of those who had left the company relatively recently and still held unexpired options as opposed to stock — a cohort that seemed to include Smith. They had a vastly different experience in the days before and after the SPAC deal. “It was supersmooth for me,” says one former staffer who left in 2019 and sold on the first day of trading, adding that she received prompt responses each time she emailed a question to the stock-admin team.

As they stewed, the former employees who were unable to sell tried to solve the mystery of what had gone wrong. The answer didn’t appear until after BuzzFeed stock was trading publicly for two days. It turned out the workers had needed to take a crucial step, though none of the emails from BuzzFeed and Continental in the days leading up to the offering had mentioned it. A quirk in BuzzFeed’s history meant former employees held a class of shares with 50 times the votes of the shares that would trade on the exchange — an artifact of the company’s early days when management wanted to make sure investors didn’t end up with too much power. As BuzzFeed prepared to go public, this presented a problem since its executives needed to consolidate voting power among the leaders of the company. In order to sell their stock, the ex-employee stockholders would need to exchange their high-voting Class B shares for single-vote Class A shares.

At 6:23 p.m. on December 7, the company’s stock-admin team emailed again: “For context, only yesterday did we learn that holders of Class B shares would have to take additional steps to convert their shares to Class A, before they could be transferred for sale.” That paperwork was likely to take several days more to process, the email continued, expressing regret that Continental had not included that information earlier. “We understand and sympathize with your frustration with this process,” it said.

The explanation was strange for several reasons. First, one of the former employees had received a message last July from a BuzzFeed lawyer that included a document to sign to convert the shares — seeming to suggest the company had been aware of the requirement much earlier. The email referenced a conversation with Jonah Peretti, BuzzFeed’s CEO, and went on to say, “Please note that Class A common stock are the shares that are anticipated to be publicly listed.” Yet even the person who received the instructions early was ultimately unable to trade; they have since joined the lawsuit.

Of all the things in a SPAC listing to mess up, securities lawyers say, this was unusual. SPACs aren’t short on complicated procedures, but this isn’t one of them. “It is not hard to do. It’s not hard to see that these people are going to have to convert, and it’s not hard to send a letter,” says Michael Klausner, a Stanford law professor who oversees a database of securities class actions including SPAC litigation. “I don’t see an explanation, and I can understand why the employees would be suspicious that this was done on purpose.”

Yonaton Aronoff, an attorney at Harris St. Laurent & Wechsler who is part of the team representing the employees, says the alleged errors are so odd he has never seen another case like it: “It seems pretty unique in the amount of negligence, at least, that was built into the process, and dysfunction.”

In a statement, a BuzzFeed spokesperson said the company was “confident that we will prevail in any action on this issue.” A person familiar with BuzzFeed’s SPAC process says it offered training sessions to current employees and didn’t believe it was obligated to instruct former workers on how to handle their equity — that the responsibility fell to Continental. Executives also worried that telling ex-employees to convert their shares, and therefore cede voting power back to BuzzFeed, could somehow risk a securities violation. (Finance lawyers I spoke to said this sounded unlikely.)

Continental, for its part, told Axios in December that it was “sensitive to the shareholders’ inability to sell before the share price sank,” but it blamed the issues on the “timing of the records” and “directions” it had received from BuzzFeed and its lawyers.

“It all felt very rushed and unprofessional in a way because of the speed at which things were being requested of us,” says a second former executive who is part of the lawsuit. “It’s such a big oversight that I can only think, Was there something else going on behind the scenes? It’s shocking.”

One major reason BuzzFeed forged ahead with the SPAC is that it wanted to acquire Complex Networks. BuzzFeed had agreed to purchase the entertainment company with $200 million in cash and $100 million in stock and could close the deal only if it went public. A traditional IPO would have taken longer. “The timing would have meant we would have lost that deal,” says the person familiar with BuzzFeed’s SPAC. “We would have had to walk away from Complex if we were like, ‘Let’s pause and think about letting the market improve.’”

Some people involved in the listing argue that going public was the best option for the employees. Even if their shares are worth little at the moment, it’s still more than nothing — which was all they had in hand when BuzzFeed was private. “I don’t really see the employees as victims here,” says a former executive. “If you said to me, ‘Would you rather have shares at $4 or have shares that you could not sell maybe ever?,’ I think most people probably would have taken that deal. I don’t think there’s a deep issue of justice at play here. Justice for people who made $50,000 instead of $100,000? Come on.” Besides, the person adds, it’s foolish for anyone to put faith in a SPAC, a Wall Street invention that has birthed its fair share of scams: “You’re the person participating in the heist. Ultimately, you can’t really turn around and complain that your share of the takings wasn’t what you thought it should be.”

Another part of the problem is that seemingly all of BuzzFeed’s former employees had the same intention when the stock began trading. “My plan was to dump it all, day of,” says one. All the others I spoke with said the same. That meant their alleged losses — or what they believe they could have pocketed — are likely not quite what they appear to be, say market analysts, because very few could have sold at the peak. When BuzzFeed went public, only a relatively small portion of shares was available to trade (an amount known as the “float”), meaning that the price spiraled down quickly as soon as anyone really began selling. Executives like Peretti and other company insiders were legally barred from trading for six months. (Peretti has not sold any of his shares, according to BuzzFeed’s public filings.)

That’s little comfort to the former staffers who feel they were at least entitled to a shot at timing the market. “This mattered to people who didn’t matter to BuzzFeed,” says Aronoff. He says the company has shown “zero interest” in discussing a settlement.

BuzzFeed’s decision to sue its former employees seems only to have angered them further. “It felt like them punching down a little bit, showing me that they don’t give a shit,” says Anderson. “I feel like we were conned.”

Can you trust these new Intel Arc Alchemist benchmarks? | Digital Trends

by www.digitaltrends.com Leave a Comment

Intel has released official benchmarks for its Arc Alchemist mobile graphics cards, the A730M and the A770M. Found in a reviewer’s guide, these benchmarks claim that the A730M is faster than the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 Ti mobile and the A770M is faster than the RTX 3060 mobile.

While that sounds great on paper, the circumstances in which these results were achieved prompt the question — can you really trust them?

Intel seems to have Nvidia beat

The Intel Arc A730M and the A770M are the crown jewels of the Arc Alchemist mobile range and are set to appear in gaming laptops globally starting this summer. The GPUs are already available in some capacity in China, which is where the benchmarks come from — they were found in a reviewer’s guide.

Both of the graphics cards feature Intel’s ACM-G10 GPU, but the A730M comes with a cut-down version, featuring 24 Xe-cores, 24 ray tracing units, 12GB of GDDR6 memory across a 192-bit memory bus, and a maximum clock speed of 1,100MHz. The A770M brings the specs up significantly, offering 32 Xe-cores and 32 ray tracing units, as well as a clock speed of up to 1,650MHz combined with 16GB of GDDR6 memory and a 256-bit bus.

Now, on to the benchmarks. Intel tested the GPUs in 17 games, mostly at high and ultra settings, in 1080p. According to these results, the A730M may be up to 13% faster than the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and the A770M outperformed the RTX 3060M by 12%. Unfortunately, these numbers may not be entirely accurate due to the systems that were used.

The Intel Arc A730M was found in a preproduction unit, paired with a Core i7-12700H with 14 cores, as well as 16GB of DDR5-4800 RAM. However, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile that Intel was pitted against only had a previous-gen Tiger Lake Core i7-11800H chip to accompany it, which, of course, means that DDR4-3200 RAM was used. The RTX 3050 Ti itself was also not the top version of the GPU, maxing out at 60 watts. There are 70- and 80-watt versions of the GPU, too.

The differences continue when you look at the machines used in the testing for Arc A770M versus the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060M. The A770M has a 14-core i9-12900HK CPU, as well as 16GB of DDR5-4800 RAM, while the RTX 3060M was installed inside the MSI Pulse GL66 with a Tiger Lake Core i7-11800H CPU and 16GB of DDR4-3200 RAM. Moreover, the RTX 3060M comes in TGP variants ranging from 60 watts to 115 watts, and the one used for testing maxes out at 85 watts.

Can you really trust these results?

This brings us to the question: Can these benchmark results even be trusted? The truth is, vendor benchmarks often appear a little sketchy and there is a lot of room for skewing the results in the favor of one party. Based on what Intel showed us, it’s certain that the A730M and the A770M can compete against Nvidia, but those numbers can’t be taken at face value — if only because Nvidia’s GPUs come in many flavors, each with a different TGP and performance level. Intel matched up against a version of the RTX 3050 Ti mobile and the RTX 3060M, but neither of those was the top GPU offered by Nvidia. If they were, the results may have been different — or they could have stayed largely the same. It’s really hard to tell.

Only just yesterday, Intel served up over 20 benchmarks for the desktop Arc A380 . Those results certainly redeemed the GPU a little bit after unofficial benchmarks put it in a fairly bad light, but showed how the A380 can’t even compete with the AMD Radeon RX 6400 . Intel’s own benchmarks for the A380 seem to have been done in a fairer way than what we’re seeing here, though.

In the tests for the Arc A380, Intel used the same system for all three graphics cards that were being compared to one another: The A380, the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650, and the RX 6400. This put the GPUs on an even playing ground. The same cannot be said of today’s benchmarks for the laptop-only A730M and A770M, but admittedly, it’s easier to test desktop GPUs in similar systems — all you have to do is swap out the graphics card. However, some might argue that Intel could have done a better job at picking the right sort of laptops for the rival GPUs, where the cards would have a similar TGP and the rest of the system would be on par.

It would certainly be interesting to see the flagship Intel Arc Alchemist mobile graphics cards competing against Nvidia when placed in slightly more similar systems, with full disclosure as to the power levels of both Intel and Nvidia, and compared against GPUs of a similar TGP. Until such tests emerge, it’s best to take these benchmarks (first published by Tom’s Hardware ) with a bit of skepticism. After all, Intel may have already presented us with slightly optimistic benchmark results for the A380 in the past — but that has been rectified by the refreshingly honest benchmarks it delivered soon after.

That is not to say that Intel can’t be successful with the Arc Alchemist mobile lineup. The staggered China-only release is not doing the range any favors, but it’s possible that with further driver optimizations, the GPUs will begin to shine even more. Intel can also try to be competitive on pricing when it hits the global market in the summer, and that, too, could sway customers to give Arc Alchemist a try.

Editors’ Recommendations

How To Find All Gas Veins In Ark: Survival Evolved Fjordur

by www.gamespot.com Leave a Comment

There are dozens and dozens of items to craft in Ark: Survival Evolved Fjordur. Not only did the developers release the new map, but they also released a number of new items, mechanics, dinosaurs, and other features to be included on the map. One new feature that many players have had questions about since Fjordur launched is the gas veins . Gas is an extremely valuable resource in Fjordur, as players will need it to craft a number of useful items and gear. However, collecting the gas isn’t as easy as going to a gas vein and adding it to your inventory. Although, you will first need to know where the gas veins are in Fjordur before you can think about collecting it.

On the current Fjordur map, there’s only one location where players can find gas veins. This location houses several veins, though, so there is some wiggle room in where you actually go to collect the gas. Once players have arrived at a gas vein, they will see Congealed Gas Balls on top of the vein. This is the item that you need to craft all of the items that require gas, such as Hazard gear, gasoline, charge lanterns and batteries, etc. In this guide, we’ll go over where you can find the gas veins in Fjordur as well as explain exactly how to collect the Congealed Gas Balls.

Collecting Congealed Gas Balls

Before you make the trek to find a gas vein, you want to ensure that you have the right equipment to bring the gas back with you. In order to physically add a Congealed Gas Ball to your inventory in Ark, you need to construct a Gas Collector . This item essentially allows you to collect the gas ball and add it to your inventory in real-time.

In order to build a Gas Collector, you will need the following resources:

  • 20 Red Gem or Red Crystalized Sap
  • 40 Crystal or Primal Crystal
  • 60 Cementing Paste or Achatina Paste
  • 75 Metal Ingot or Scrap Metal Ingot

Once you have those resources, go to one of the following crafting stations to actually build the Gas Collector.

  • Smithy
  • Argentavis Saddle
  • Castoroides Saddles
  • Thorny Dragon Saddle
  • Tek Replicator

With the Gas Collector fully constructed, you can place it in your inventory and bring it with you to visit a gas vein. It should be noted that the Gas Collector is considered a structure, so it will take damage by objects or creatures out in the wild. The collector will also lose health slowly over time, so you will eventually need to craft a new one depending on how much gas you collect.

To collect Congealed Gas Balls, you need to place the Gas Collector over a gas vein and let it fill up. You can tell how much of the collector’s inventory is left by looking at the glass side panel and seeing how much of it is filled. In total, the Gas Collector can hold 24 stacks of 100 Congealed Gas Balls and it takes roughly 900 minutes for it to completely fill up. Of course, if you don’t need that many gas balls, then you can just take however much you need and then store the Gas Collector back in your inventory.

Locating Gas Veins

Now for the information you need. There is one rough location where gas veins are located on the Fjordur map. They are only found on the island of Vardiland, which is the southwestern island. More specifically, the veins are located in the Vardiland Valley, which is on the western side of the island but more towards the center, near the lake. The veins are found at coordinates 81-84 – 16-13. You’ll know you’re getting close to a gas vein if you see pink smoke hovering over the ground.

The gas veins aren’t difficult to spot and using a Gas Collector is simple enough. However, you might need to wear protective gear to shield yourself from any gas bursts that arise from the veins. With all of this information, you’re ready to start collecting gas and make a plethora of items in Ark Fjordur.

If you’re new to the game, don’t miss our Ark: Survival Evolved tips for beginners . You can also check out where to find all of the unique creatures on Fjordur.

Jan 6. Hearing Live Updates: Witness tampering a “serious problem” for Trump

by www.newsweek.com Leave a Comment

Live Updates

  • The House Select Committee investigating the events of January 6 held its sixth hearing Tuesday.
  • Cassidy Hutchinson, the aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, testified.
  • Hutchinson previously told the Committee that several Republican lawmakers sought pardons for spreading claims of election fraud following the riot at the U.S. Capitol.
  • The Committee played video clips of Hutchinson’s previously recorded deposition during previous hearings. She said Meadows burned several documents after a meeting with Republican Representative Scott Perry.
  • Hearings were not expected to resume until July, but the Committee made a last-minute announcement of this hearing Monday afternoon.

Follow Newsweek’s live blog for the latest updates.

Trump Driver May Dispute Altercation Report

The head of former President Donald Trump’s security detail and the former president’s driver may dispute a reported physical altercation involving Trump that reportedly occurred on January 6, 2021.

Cassidy Hutchinson, who worked as an aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, testified on Tuesday that she was told about the altercation by Tony Ornato, the assistant director of the U.S. Secret Service Office of Training.

Hutchinson said Trump was “irate” when he was told the presidential vehicle known as “The Beast” would be taking him to the White House instead of the U.S. Capitol Building. Trump had wanted to go to the Capitol after his speech that morning at the Ellipse, Hutchinson said.

Ornato told Hutchinson Trump had said to Bobby Engel, then the head of the president’s security detail, something along the lines of, “I’m the effing president. Take me up to the Capitol now.” When Engel refused, Hutchinson said Trump “reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel.” After one of his arms was grabbed, Trump “used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel,” Hutchinson said Ornato had told her.

Trump disputed Hutchinson’s account of the altercation in a Tuesday post on Truth Social.

After the hearing concluded, Peter Alexander, the chief White House correspondent at NBC News, reported that he had been told Engel and Trump’s driver on that day were “prepared to testify under oath” and dispute Hutchinson’s retelling of the incident.

Witness Tampering a ‘Serious Problem’ for Trump

Mick Mulvaney, who once served as the acting White House chief of staff under former President Donald Trump, said the House Jan. 6 Committee’s apparent belief that it has evidence of witness tampering could be “a serious problem” for Trump if proven true.

Rep. Liz Cheney, the select committee’s vice chair, shared two examples of people who had reported witness intimidation before speaking with the committee. She did not identify the witnesses.

“I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns,” Cheney said during her closing statement.

Mulvaney described the suggestion of witness tampering as “the real bomb that got dropped” at the select committee’s Tuesday public hearing, where committee members heard testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson. Hutchinson worked as an aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows leading up to and during the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021.

“If there is hard evidence, that is a serious problem for the former President,” Mulvaney said of potential witness tampering.

Mulvaney posted several tweets about the committee’s Tuesday hearing, which he said presented “explosive stuff.” He listed five of the main points the committee explored during the hearing, ending with potential witness tampering.

“That is a very, very bad day for Trump,” Mulvaney tweeted.

Trump Threw Dishes More Than Once: Hutchinson

Before Cassidy Hutchinson testified publicly in front of the House Jan. 6 Committee on Tuesday, Rep. Liz Cheney said the former White House aide had provided information on more than one instance in which Trump physically expressed anger related to the 2020 presidential election.

Hutchinson, who worked as an aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, told the select committee on Tuesday about a physical altercation she had been told Trump was involved in with the head of his security detail while inside a presidential vehicle on January 6, 2021.

That altercation “was not the first time that the president had become very angry about issues relating to the election,” Cheney noted.

The Republican congresswoman then mentioned an interview former Attorney General Bill Barr did with The Associated Press on December 1, in which Barr said the U.S. Department of Justice had not found evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election. Cheney asked Hutchinson to share how the president reacted to Barr’s interview.

Hutchinson said she remembered hearing noise down the hall from where she was working in the White House that day. A valet arrived and told Meadows Trump wanted to speak with him in the dining room. After Meadows left to see Trump and returned, Hutchinson said she too went to the dining room and found the doors open.

“The valet was inside the dining room, changing the tablecloth off the dining room table,” she said.

“He motioned for me to come in,” she said of the valet, “and then pointed towards the front of the room near the fireplace mantle and the TV, where I first noticed there was ketchup dripping down the wall, and there was a shattered porcelain plate on the floor.”

Hutchinson said the valet “had articulated that the president was extremely angry at the attorney general’s AP interview, and had thrown his lunch against the wall.”

As Hutchinson helped the valet clean up, she said he encouraged her to “stay clear” of Trump because he was “really ticked off” about the interview.

Cheney asked Hutchinson if this incident was the only time she knew of where Trump had thrown dishes.

“It’s not,” Hutchinson said, adding that she had told Meadows of other times when Trump had thrown dishes or flipped the tablecloth in the dining room.

Trump disputed this element of Hutchinson’s testimony in a Truth Social post. The post began by disputing her recount of the physical altercation in the presidential vehicle before Trump shifted his focus to the broken dishes.

“Her story of me throwing food is also false…and why would SHE have to clean it up, I hardly knew who she was,” the post said.

‘I Never Said’ Pence Deserved Threats, Trump Says

Former President Donald Trump disputed Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony that Trump believed former Vice President Mike Pence was deserving of rioters’ threats of violence on January 6, 2021.

In clips of video testimony the House Jan. 6 Committee played on Tuesday, Hutchinson, who worked as a top aide for former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, recalled a conversation on the day of the riot between Meadows and former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

Hutchinson said Cipollone told Meadows some of the Capitol rioters were calling for Pence to be hung.

“Mark had responded something to the effect of, ‘You heard him, Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong,'” Hutchinson told the select committee.

Trump rejected that section of Hutchinson’s pre-recorded testimony in a post on Truth Social .

“I NEVER SAID, “MIKE PENCE DESERVES IT (to be hung),” Trump’s post said. “Another made up statement by a third rate social climber!”

Trump Says Limo Altercation Is ‘Fake Story’

Former President Donald Trump disputed several elements of Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony before the House Jan. 6 Committee on Tuesday.

Trump posted more than 10 reactions to Hutchinson’s testimony on his Truth Social account in the first three hours after the select committee began streaming Hutchinson’s appearance live Tuesday afternoon.

One of the elements of Hutchinson’s testimony that Trump disputed was about a physical altercation she said occurred within the Presidential limo on January 6, 2021.

Hutchinson said she had heard from Tony Ornato, the assistant director of the U.S. Secret Service Office of Training, that Trump believed he would be going to the U.S. Capitol Building after his speech that day at the Ellipse. When the head of his security detail informed Trump they would instead be going to the White House, Hutchinson said Trump had tried to grab the steering wheel before using “his free hand to lunge” at the security official.

Trump described the account as “fake” in one of his posts on Truth Social.

“Her fake story that I tried to grab the steering wheel of the White House Limousine in order to steer it to the Capitol Building is ‘sick’ and fraudulent, very much like the Unselect Committee itself,” Trump’s post said.

“Wouldn’t even have been possible to do such a ridiculous thing,” he added.

Some Witnesses Report Intimidation

Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming suggested during her closing statement before the Jan. 6 House Committee’s Tuesday public hearing that witness tampering may be occurring as the select committee continues its investigation.

Cheney, a Republican, began her closing remarks by thanking the day’s witness, Cassidy Hutchinson, for her cooperation. Hutchinson served as a top aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows during the end of former President Donald Trump’s administration.

While Cheney said the committee has interacted with many witnesses who testified “fully and forthrightly,” she said that “has not been true of every witness.”

The select committee often asks witnesses who are linked to the former President’s administration or Presidential campaign if they have been contacted by anyone attempting to influence what they tell the committee, Cheney said.

Cheney then shared two examples of these tries at testimony influence. One witness, whom Cheney did not identify, said they were told, “as long as I continue to be a team player, they know that I’m on the team, I’m doing the right thing, I’m protecting who I need to protect, you know, I’m going to stay in good graces in Trump World.”

That witness added the person who had spoken with them “reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts and just to keep that in mind as I proceeded through my depositions and interviews with the committee.”

Another witness told the committee they had received a phone call ahead of their testimony, during which the person on the other end of the line said, “[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal, and you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.”

“I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns,” Cheney said.

Trump Cabinet Discussed 25th Amendment

Top officials in the Trump administration had conversations about invoking the 25th Amendment following the events of Jan. 6, Cassidy Hutchinson testified.

After the Jan. 6 riot on the U.S. Capitol, there were discussions among Trump’s Cabinet about “stripping the full power of the Presidency from Donald Trump,” Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney said.

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reached out to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to make him aware of conversations he was hearing about the 25th Amendment.

The 25th Amendment gives the Cabinet the power to remove the President from office if his is unable to fulfill his duties.

Hutchinson said Pompeo wanted Meadows to be aware of it and put it on his radar, as Meadow was the “boss of the Cabinet secretaries.”

Pompeo told Meadows that, “if conversations progress, you should be ready to take action on this,” adding that he was “concerned” for him and his position, Hutchinson said.

Hutchinson added that White House staffers were adamant that Donald Trump needed to give a speech on Jan. 7 because they were worries his Cabinet would invoke the 25th Amendment. She said they believed Trump needed “cover.”

Trump did not agree with the draft of the speech. Hutchinson said Trump wanted to include lines about not prosecuting rioters and even pardoning them.

“This is just with the increased emphasis of his mindset at the time which was he didn’t think they did anything wrong,” she said. “The person who did something wrong that day was Mike Pence.”

Fox News host Sean Hannity texted former White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany after the Jan. 6 riot. He said there should be “no more stolen election talk” and that “impeachment and the 25th Amendment are real and many people will quit.”

Giuliani, Meadows Had Interest in Pardons

Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows both expressed interest in receiving Presidential pardons related to the events that unfolded on January 6, 2021, Cassidy Hutchinson testified Tuesday.

Rep. Liz Cheney, the Vice Chair of the House Jan. 6 Committee, asked Hutchinson about discussions that took place in the White House surrounding a video statement former President Donald Trump released the day after the Capitol riot.

In earlier discussions with the select committee, Hutchinson said Trump had wanted to include language within the statement about potentially granting Presidential pardons to the rioters, according to a video clip of that earlier testimony the committee played on Tuesday.

Hutchinson told the committee again on Tuesday that she had heard Trump was interested in including language about Presidential pardons within his January 7, 2021 video statement and added, “I understand that Mr. Meadows was encouraging that language, as well.”

Cheney later asked if Giuliani, an attorney for Trump at that time, had ever indicated interest in getting a Presidential pardon related to January 6.

“He did,” Hutchinson said.

Cheney then asked if Meadows had expressed interest in receiving a pardon related to the events on January 6.

“Mr. Meadows did seek that pardon, yes ma’am,” Hutchinson said.

Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity Asked Trump to Call Rioters Off

Several people urged former President Donald Trump to send the rioters home on Jan. 6, Cassidy Hutchinson testified.

There were three camps advising Trump, Hutchinson said. Ivanka Trump was among those urging Trump to take immediate action. Then there was a neutral group that tried to “toe the line” because they knew Trump did not want to take immediate action.

The final group wanted to “deflect and blame,” Hutchinson said. They wanted to blame ANTIFA for the rioting. She said White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows was in the deflect and blame category, but ultimately remained more neutral.

Many people texted Mark Meadows, asking him to tell Trump to tell the rioters to go home on Jan. 6, including Fox News hosts Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity.

Ingraham texted Meadows that the riot is “hurting us all” and would destroy Trump’s legacy.

Hannity asked if Trump could make a statement asking people to “peacefully leave the Capitol.”

Donald Trump Jr. also texted Meadows asking him to tell his father to condemn the rioters “ASAP.”

Trump Believed Pence ‘Deserved’ Threats from Rioters

As rioters approached the Capitol Building around 2 p.m. on Jan. 6, Cassidy Hutchinson said it was like “watching a bad car accident about the happen.”

“You cant stop it but you want to do something,” she said.

She urged Mark Meadows to “snap out of it” and do something. Former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone told Meadows that Donald Trump needed to take action.

Meadows said Trump “wants to be alone right now” and “he doesn’t want anything to do with Pat.”

Hutchinson said Cipollone told Meadows that if he did not do anything, people were going to die and “blood is going to be on your hands.”

Only then did Meadows take action. Hutchinson then recalls Meadows on the phone with Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio.

Then Cipollone told Meadows that rioters were chanting to “hang Mike Pence.”

Meadows said that Trump believed Pence “deserved it” and that the rioters were not doing anything wrong, Hutchinson testified.

Then, Trump sent a tweet about Pence no having the courage to “do what should be done to protect out Country and our Constitution.”

Hutchinson said she felt frustrated and disappointed after reading the tweet, adding that it “felt personal.”

“As an American, I was disgusted,” she said. “It was unpatriotic. It was un-American. We were watching the Capitol Building get defaced over a lie.”

WH Lawyer Warned Against Trump Capitol Visit

Pat Cipollone, a White House lawyer during former President Donald Trump’s administration, warned members of the White House staff about the legal consequences that could follow if Trump went through with his intention to go to the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021.

Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide for former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, testified during the House Jan. 6 Committee’s Tuesday public hearing that the former President had wanted to go to the Capitol following his speech that morning at the Ellipse.

Hutchinson said she spoke with Cipollone that morning before she went to the Ellipse to watch the president’s speech.

“Mr. Cipollone said something to the effect of, ‘please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that visit happen’,” she said.

In earlier conversations with the Committee, Hutchinson testified that Cipollone had been concerned before January 6 that a visit to the Capitol on that day from Trump “would look like we were obstructing justice or obstructing the Electoral College count,” according to a video clip from her earlier testimony that the select committee played on Tuesday.

Cipollone was “also worried that it would look like we were inciting a riot, or encouraging a riot” at the Capitol, Hutchinson said in her earlier testimony.

Trump Involved in Physical Altercation in Limo

Former President Donald Trump was involved in a physical altercation in the Presidential limo after he learned he would not be taken to the Capitol Building on January 6, Cassidy Hutchinson said Tuesday.

Hutchinson, the former aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, said Trump had wanted to go to the Capitol following his speech at the Ellipse as the joint session of Congress was certifying the results of the 2020 Presidential election.

When Hutchinson returned to the White House after Trump’s Ellipse speech, she said Tony Ornato, the assistant director of the U.S. Secret Service Office of Training, waved her into his office. Ornato said Trump had been under the impression that he would be taken to the Capitol when he got inside the Presidential limo, known as “The Beast,” after his speech.

Trump was “irate” to learn he was being taken to the White House instead of the Capitol, Hutchinson said.

Speaking to Bobby Engel, then the head of Trump’s security detail, Trump “said something to the effect of, ‘I’m the effing president. Take me up to the Capitol now,'” Hutchinson said Ornato had told her.

When Engel refused, “the President reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel,” Hutchinson said. “Mr. Engel grabbed his arm and said, ‘sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel. We’re going back to the West Wing. We’re not going to the Capitol.”

Trump then “used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel,” Hutchinson continued. She recalled that, as Ornato told her the story, “he had motioned towards his clavicle.”

Trump Says Hutchinson is ‘Bad News’

Former President Donald Trump called Cassidy Hutchinson a “total phony and leaker” in a statement, as she testified before the House Select Committee Tuesday.

“I hardly know who this person, Cassidy Hutchinson, is, other than I heard very negative things about her (a total phony and “leaker”),” Trump said on his Truth Social account.

He said Hutchinson requested to go with others on Trump’s team to Florida aftert his term as President. Trump said he “personally turned her request down.”

“Why did she want to go with us if she felt we were so terrible? I understand that she was very upset and angry that I didn’t want her to go, or be a member of the team,” he added. “She is bad news!”

Congressional Republicans are also taking aim at the testimony presented in today’s Jan. 6 hearing.

The Republicans of the House Judiciary Committee called the hearing “a joke,” saying Hutchinson’s testimony is “all hearsay evidence.”

That Twitter account said “lol no one is watching” the hearing, noting the current spike in gas prices across the country.

Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene also chimed in. She questioned why the House Select Committee is not talking about Trump’s request for the National Guard to be present on Jan. 6

“Why was [President] Trump’s [National Guard] requests denied with all the known intelligence reports leading up to the 6th???” Greene tweeted.

Trump Was Aware Attendees Had Weapons

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe warned that what the White House was pursuing on Jan. 6 could be “dangerous” for Donald Trump’s legacy and the state of democracy, Cassidy Hutchinson testified Tuesday.

Ratcliff was apprehensive about Trump’s plan to fight the 2020 Presidential election results, Hutchinson said. She recalled Ratcliffe was afraid things would “spiral out of control” on Jan. 6.

There were intelligence reports about members of the Proud Boys attending Trump’s rally.

“I remember hearing the word Oath Keeper and Proud Boys closer to the planning of the January 6 rally when [Rudy] Giuliani would be around,” Hutchinson said.

On the morning of Jan. 6, Metro and Capitol Police reported people at the rally with a slew of weapons. While those who went to Trump’s rally at the Ellipse went through security, the thousands of others who watched from the lawn did not.

Police recordings showed people has guns, including AR-15 rifles, ballistic helmets, body armor and military-grade backpacks.

Tony Ornato, the Assistant Director of the United States Secret Service Office of Training, told former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows at around 10 a.m. on Jan. 6, that people at the rally had several weapons, including knifes, guns and spears, Hutchinson recalled.

When Ornato was relaying this information, Hutchinson said Meadows did not look up from his phone and did not seem concerned. Trump was also not concerned about reports that people were coming through magnetometers with weapons, she said.

Hutchinson said she overheard the President asking to “let my people in” as they “march to the Capitol after the rally is over.”

Trump wanted the attendees inside the official rally space and was aware a number of individuals in the crowd had weapons and was encouraging them to walk down to the Capitol. He also wanted secret service to remove the magnetometers.

Hutchinson testified that Trump said, “I don’t f’in care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me. Take the f’ing mags away… then they can march to the Capitol.”

Hutchinson Was ‘Scared’ About Jan. 6 Plans

Cassidy Hutchinson testified that she was nervous about the events planned for Jan. 6, 2021.

After a meeting on Jan. 2 between Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani, Giuliani told Hutchinson that the 6th was “going to be a great day,” she said.

“We’re going to the Capitol, it’s going to be great,” Giuliani told her, adding that then-President Donald Trump was going to be there with members of Congress and is going to “look powerful.”

When Hutchinson asked Meadows about what Giuliani just told her, the White House Chief of Staff said, “things might get real, real bad on January 6,” she testified.

Hutchinson said that she remembers being apprehensive about the planned rally on Jan. 6.

“That evening was the first moment that I remember feeling scared and nervous for what could happen on January 6,” she told the Committee.

Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney noted that Meadows has avoided testifying before the Committee.

Hutchinson to Share Observations of Trump

Cassidy Hutchinson is expected to share “firsthand observations” of former President Donald Trump’s “conduct” on January 6, 2021 while testifying Tuesday before the House Jan. 6 Committee.

Hutchinson, who worked as a top aide for former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, “was in a position to know a great deal about the happenings in the Trump White House,” Rep. Liz Cheney said during her opening statement before the select committee Tuesday.

Cheney described Hutchinson as a “familiar face on Capitol Hill” who spoke “daily” with members of Congress, top Trump administration officials, White House lawyers and members of the Secret Service who were based in the White House.

Hutchinson has spoken with the committee four times previously, Cheney noted.

During Tuesday’s hearing, those following along “will hear Ms. Hutchinson relate certain firsthand observations of President Trump’s conduct on January 6,” Cheney said. “You will also hear new information regarding the actions and statements of Mr. Trump’s senior advisors that day, including his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and his White House counsel.”

The select committee “will begin to examine evidence bearing on what President Trump and members of the White House staff knew about the prospect for violence on January 6, even before that violence began,” Cheney said.

The Hearing Has Started

The sixth hearing from the House Select Committee investigating Jan. 6 has begun.

This hearing will focus on what was going on in the White House on and before Jan. 6, based on newly obtained information, Committee Chair Bennie Thompson said in his opening statement.

Specifically, the Committee received “detailed information about what the former President and his top aides were doing and saying in those critical hours.”

What Happened During the Fifth Hearing

The House Jan. 6 Committee held its fifth and most recent public hearing last week on June 23.

While earlier hearings explored the “pressure campaign” committee members said former President Donald Trump and his team placed on election officials and on former Vice President Mike Pence, the June 23 hearing focused on the ways in which the committee said Trump pressured U.S. Department of Justice officials in an attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

Three witnesses appeared before the committee for last week’s hearing: former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, former acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue and former assistant Attorney General of the Office of Legal Counsel Steven Engel.

Donoghue told the committee Trump had encouraged Rosen to say the election was “corrupt.” The former President later told Donoghue and Rosen that he was considering replacing them with attorney Jeff Clark, Donoghue testified. Donoghue also noted several top department officials were prepared to resign if Trump replaced Rosen with Clark.

The testimony delivered publicly on June 23 and witness testimony gathered earlier by the committee showed that Trump “pressured the Justice Department to act as an arm of his re-election campaign,” Committee Chair Bennie Thompson said in his closing statement.

The committee shared a three-minute video recap of last week’s hearing on Twitter hours before the sixth public hearing was due to start. Accompanying the video was a brief text recap that read, “Trump’s pressure campaign spread to every level of government. During our last hearing, we showed the American people about the pressure he applied to the Department of Justice.

Eric Trump Justified Violence After ‘Stolen’ Election

One of former President Donald Trump’s sons was reportedly not concerned about violence that could arise as a result of the unproven claims of fraud surrounding the 2020 Presidential election, according to British documentarian Alex Holder.

Holder interviewed Trump and his children in the days following the 2020 Presidential election for his film. He recently turned over footage to the House Select Committee investigating Jan. 6.

Holder told The Independent that Eric Trump did not appear to be concerned about any acts of violence that could have been caused by his father’s claims that the election was stolen. Trump felt such a response would be justified.

“When I asked Eric about the potential danger of the sort of rhetoric and the sort of belligerence, he felt that it was… fair game in that it… was sort of the equivalent on the other side of the political discourse, or he felt that it was the right thing to do… because the election was stolen,” Holder told the British online outlet.

Holder added that he personally thought violence would break out as a result of the Trumps’ claims.

“The idea of violence, to me, seemed likely because of the fact that when you tell 75 million people that their vote didn’t count, and the person that’s telling you that is not just the guy you voted for, but also the incumbent President of the United States, the chance of violence was always there,” he said.

Video Shows FBI Seizing John Eastman’s Phone

John Eastman said the FBI conducted an “unlawful” seizure of his phone in New Mexico last week, according to a Monday court filing.

The former election attorney for former President Donald Trump has been of particular interest to the House Jan. 6 Committee, which is set to begin its sixth day of public hearings Tuesday afternoon.

In the court filing, Eastman argued the agents’ search and seizure of his phone was “unlawful” because their warrant was “overbroad” and violated his Fifth Amendment rights. The filing also said the FBI agents “appeared to be” carrying out their search warrant “at the behest” of the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General, which Eastman noted is a department that has not employed him.

The filing requested the return of Eastman’s phone “and ‘all information’ in it, as well as to destroy all copies of any information that has already been retrieved or copied from the device.”

Eastman’s filing also asked that “any access to the cell phone and its information be stayed until he has a full and fair opportunity to assert and protect his Constitutional rights and the privileged communications of his numerous clients.”

The FBI’s June 22 interaction with Eastman was caught on video . The video clip spread Monday on social media and was also aired during Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight . By Tuesday morning, the clip had been viewed on social media more than 500,000 times.

How to Watch Sixth Jan. 6 Hearing

The sixth hearing from the House Select Committee investigating the events of January 6 will begin this afternoon.

Former aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Cassidy Hutchinson, is expected to testify.

The hearing is set to begin at 1 p.m. ET. It will stream on all major network and cable news channels, as well as C-SPAN and the Committee’s website.

Former Mark Meadows Aide to Testify

Today’s surprise hearing will feature a mystery witness, according to the House Select Committee.

Cassidy Hutchinson, the aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, is expected to testify as the surprise witness, according to Punchbowl News.

The Committee said it will “present recently obtained evidence” and receive witness testimony.

While the topic of today’s hearing has not been announced, Hutchinson is expected to discuss Republican lawmakers who sought pardons following the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

In previous hearings, the Committee played video of Hutchinson testifying that Republicans lawmakers asked Donald Trump for pardons before he left office.

Hutchinson named Representatives Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs, Louie Gohmert , Scott Perry, and Marjorie Taylor Greene as those who had requested a pardon after January 6 over their alleged attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 Election.

She added that Rep. Matt Gaetz had been “personally pushing” for a pardon since early December 2020 and that Congressman Jim Jordan had asked about updates in Congressional pardons, but never asked for one himself.

This hearing has been shrouded in secrecy, as the Committee gave only a 24 hour notice that it was happening. The Committee did not announce the witnesses’ identity

[Lifehacks] Catch some z’s under the roof of a traditional hanok this summer vacation

by koreajoongangdaily.joins.com Leave a Comment

A view of a hanok (traditional Korean home) which is part of Nongam Jongtaek in Andong, North Gyeongsang. [LEE SUN-MIN]

A view of a hanok (traditional Korean home) which is part of Nongam Jongtaek in Andong, North Gyeongsang. [LEE SUN-MIN]

Make your vacation different from the get-go by staying at a traditional Korean home, or hanok . Different from the modern buildings that fill Korean cities now, hanok is a popular choice for those who want a different overnight experience away from the fancy high-rise hotels and busy rooftop pools.

The traditional Korean-style home is usually a one-story building. The roof is covered with tiles called giwa , and the floor uses Korea’s own floor heating system called ondol , though there won’t be any need for it in the summer. Traditionally, all doors and windows are made with Korean paper called hanji . The entire building is built without using any nails or adhesives: the carpenters cut the wood in a way that the entire house can be assembled by itself, which means it is even possible to take the entire house apart and move it to a different location.

Most hanok resorts are built close to mountains and rivers so as to be near to nature and away from the hustle and bustle of city life.

Still, there are some hanok across the country that have withstood the centuries. Some of the families that kept their traditional house still live in it, or even open some parts of their house to paying guests.

The typical hanok with giwa roofing was usually owned by aristocrats who were relatively better off than others, and would have many rooms to spare. Unless frequently used, the hanok could quickly turn into something like an abandoned house, so many hanok homeowners opt to keep their house partially open for guests, so as to keep the house alive.

Some newly built hanok resorts provide the same comforts available at hotels while still keeping all the traditional elements that make the overnight experience more Korean.

The cliff and the river right by Nongam Jongtaek in Andong, North Gyeongsang [ELLYEOP PYUNJOO]

The cliff and the river right by Nongam Jongtaek in Andong, North Gyeongsang [ELLYEOP PYUNJOO]



Nongam Jongtaek

Located in Andong, South Gyeongsang, this hanok is located right by a cliff and river. Guests are welcome to go by the river and set out their own chairs for a drink or even an outdoor barbecue. On a clear night, the sky is filled with stars.

A bottle of Ellyeop Pyunjoo made at Nongam Jongtaek [ELLYEOP PYUNJOO]

A bottle of Ellyeop Pyunjoo made at Nongam Jongtaek [ELLYEOP PYUNJOO]

The elderly homeowners still live on the premise and greet the overnight guests each day. The husband checks people in, and the wife makes guests’ stays even more memorable by making alcoholic drinks made of rice, similar to makgeolli. The murky alcoholic rice drink is made by fermenting rice with traditional Korean yeast called nuruk . While bottles of the same traditional drink sell out quickly at liquor shops in Seoul, there is enough here to drink and even bring home. The drink is called Ellyeop Pyunjoo, and a bottle goes for 30,000 won ($23).

Accommodations can be booked for an entire house with friends and family, all the way down to just a single room. If you plan on spending more time outside by the river or in the garden area, the cheapest option available would be a small room for two, starting from 70,000 won.

www.nongam.com

Awon Museum & Hotel in Wanju, North Jeolla, is where BTS members came for a photo shoot in 2019. [LEE SUN-MIN]

Awon Museum & Hotel in Wanju, North Jeolla, is where BTS members came for a photo shoot in 2019. [LEE SUN-MIN]



Awon Museum & Hotel

This particular hanok hotel in Wanju, North Jeolla, gained much of its popularity due to global star BTS. The boy band visited the property for a summer photo shoot for one of their albums in 2019.

Though the full experience would require an overnight stay, many come just to make a quick day trip. The hotel is often photographed with its white linen hanging in front of the windows, dancing in the wind, and many guests take a photo with the dancing curtains in the background. The hanok was reassembled with the same wood as those used to make the hanok village in Jinju, South Gyeongsang.

The hotel is open from noon till 4 p.m. to anyone that visits without a reservation. Such passersby cannot go inside the rooms but are allowed to sit down on the maru , the balcony area of hanok, or walk around the garden. For overnight guests, rooms start from 270,000 won.

Inside the art museum of Awon Museum & Hotel in Wanju, North Jeolla [LEE SUN-MIN]

Inside the art museum of Awon Museum & Hotel in Wanju, North Jeolla [LEE SUN-MIN]

There is an art museum right next to the hotel that features artworks of different artists specializing in media art. The gallery is open from noon till 5 p.m. and admission is 10,000 won.

www.awon.kr

A nighttime view of the hanok at Namwonyechon by Kensington in Namwon, North Jeolla [NAMWONYECHON]

A nighttime view of the hanok at Namwonyechon by Kensington in Namwon, North Jeolla [NAMWONYECHON]



Namwonyechon by Kensington

The resort in Namwon, North Jeolla, is operated by the company Kensington.

All the buildings here were built by professional Korean hanok carpenters. The resort mixes new and old, and some of its suite rooms are equipped with Western-style beds for those who want a more modern hotel experience.

Summer delight bingsu (shaved ice) is available at Namwonyechon. [NAMWONYECHON]

Summer delight bingsu (shaved ice) is available at Namwonyechon. [NAMWONYECHON]

To make the stay more eventful, guests can rent out hanbok , traditional Korean dress, to wear on the hotel premise. Guests can also play traditional games like yutnori , a Korean board game, or try learning pansori , a traditional Korean genre of musical storytelling or learn the most well-known folksong, “Arirang,” with professionals playing gayageum, a traditional Korean stringed instrument, alongside.

The rooms start from 189,000 won per night.

www.kensington.co.kr/hnw/

BY LEE SUN-MIN [[email protected]]