• Buchanan: Where Does NATO Enlargement End?
  Buchanan: Where Does NATO Enlargement End?

  Authored by Pat Buchanan,

  After the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 and the Warsaw Pact dissolved, the breakup of the USSR began. But the dissolution did not stop with the 14 Soviet “republics” declaring their independence of Moscow.

  Decomposition had only just begun.

  Transnistria broke away from Moldova. South Ossetia and Abkhazia seceded from Georgia. Chechnya broke free of Russia but was restored to Moscow’s control after two savage wars. Crimea and the Donbass were severed from Ukraine.

  Besides these post-Cold War amputations, assisted by Russia, what do Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia have in common?

  All seek admission to NATO, and with it Article 5 war guarantees that oblige the United States to wage war against Russia to restore their sovereignty and territorial integrity if attacked.

  

  It is easy to understand why these nations would want the U.S. obligated to fight on their behalf. What is not understandable is why the U.S. would issue such war guarantees. Why would we commit to risk war with a nuclear-armed Russia on behalf of nations no one has ever regarded as vital interests of the United States of America?

  Consider how many nations have been admitted to NATO, and thus received U.S. war guarantees, after 1991.

  There are 14: Czechia, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro and North Macedonia.

  These 14 newest members of NATO represent an expansion of U.S. war commitments riskier in ways than the original creation of NATO, when we were obligated to defend 10 nations of Western Europe.

  Today, we defend 29 nations, stretching far into Eastern Europe.

  Still, further NATO expansion may be in the cards.

  As mentioned, Georgia and Ukraine are looking to join NATO and have the U.S. thereby obligated to fight Russia in their defense. Two other nations, Sweden and Finland, are talking of abandoning their traditional neutrality for NATO membership and U.S. war guarantees.

  Bosnia and Herzegovina is also a candidate member of NATO. Its capital is Sarajevo, where an assassin’s bullet fired in 1914 killed the Austrian archduke, an incident that led directly to the First World War.

  Mikhail Gorbachev, at the end of the Cold War, reportedly told U.S. Secretary of State James Baker that Russia would agree to unification of East and West Germany if the U.S. would guarantee that NATO would not be moved further east.

  Baker is said to have told Gorbachev, “Not one inch.”

  Whatever the truth, can we not understand why a Russian nationalist like Vladimir Putin would feel his country was being corralled and imperiled, if a NATO alliance created to contain Russia had lately added 14 members, most of which were former allies or republics of the USSR?

  As The New York Times editorialized on Monday:

  “Mr. Putin’s concerns cannot be entirely dismissed. Were Ukraine to join NATO, the alliance would then have a 1,200-mile land border with Russia, a situation no major power would abide, no matter how loudly the Atlantic alliance claims to be purely defensive.”

  Here is the precise language of Article 5.

  “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them … shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them … will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith … such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

  Apparently, “the North Atlantic area” now extends to the eastern Baltic and the Balkans.

  If Ukraine and Georgia are admitted to NATO, the North Atlantic area would include the Caucasus, and five of six nations on the Black Sea. Only Russia would be outside NATO.

  Friday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, “NATO never promised not to admit new members; it could not and would not.”

  But this is nonsense. There is no requirement that the U.S. admit to NATO any or all nations that apply for admission.

  For whatever reasons we choose, we can veto any applicant. And avoiding war with Russia might constitute one of those reasons.

  With NATO’s continuous post-Cold War expansion into Central and Eastern Europe, America has to ask: If the risk of war with Russia grows with each new member on its borders admitted to NATO, why are we doing this? Is there no red line of Putin’s Russia we will not cross?

  Do we believe Putin will indefinitely accept the encirclement and containment of his country by nations united in an alliance created to keep Russia surrounded?

  Presidents Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan disagreed often but did agree on this: U.S.-NATO war guarantees stopped at the Elbe. Beyond the river in Germany, we battled the USSR with weapons of diplomacy, politics and economics, not weapons of war.

  How would we have reacted if, after losing the Cold War, we were treated to Russian warships on Lake Ontario and Moscow giving Canada war guarantees?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/12/2022 – 02:00

• Chinese Communist Party Advances Agenda To Weaken US Through Stealth Tactics: Expert
  Chinese Communist Party Advances Agenda To Weaken US Through Stealth Tactics: Expert

  Authored by Ella Kietlinska and Joshua Philipp via The Epoch Times,

  Social movements such as the promotion of critical race theory, the “defund the police” movement, and wokeism, as well as stealth tactics such as intellectual property theft and drug trafficking, are used in unrestricted hybrid warfare by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to weaken the United States, BlackOps Partners CEO Casey Fleming says.

  

  Today, the United States is at war with China and with the CCP, Fleming said, explaining that “there’s only one China and it’s completely controlled by the CCP, so you can’t extract one or the other.”

  However, that war is an unrestricted hybrid war, also called “the gray zone,” which is “everything short of conventional war,” and it focuses on weakening the CCP’s opponents or targets as much as possible, Fleming said in a recent interview on Epoch TV’s “Crossroads” program.

  The CCP regime propagandizes to Chinese people that the United States is “the great evil in the world that must be overtaken, for China to have their overall destiny, which is to rule the world,” Fleming said. “They say that we are the dark, we represent the devil.”

  The CCP is “an enemy” of the United States because it calls the United States an enemy, he said.

  Fleming likened the gray zone to the strategy being used by the CCP against Taiwan:

  “Weaken your enemy … to the point of capitulation, so that they say, ‘Okay, we don’t want to go to war, we value our people. We don’t want death and destruction; we’ll just go ahead and join China.’

  “[The gray zone is] worse than conventional warfare because it’s killing an economy, it’s killing our ability to fight.”

  Fleming cited U.S. Adm. Chester Nimitz, credited with winning the Pacific War during World War II, who said a few years after that war that the United States has the most powerful military in the world, and in order to kill it, its economy needs to be killed.

  And this exactly what the CCP has been doing, Fleming said. There are over 100 different methods of unrestricted hybrid warfare, he said, explaining that the word “unrestricted” means the enemy follows no rules.

  “We follow the rule of law and international rules of order in how we transact, [do] business, and so on. Well, your enemy does not follow any of that. They say: Those are your laws and, in fact, we’re going to handcuff you with your own laws.”

  These tactics are described in the book “Unrestricted Warfare,” written in 1999 by two senior colonels of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Fleming said. The book was published by a publishing house of the PLA, the military force of the CCP.

  Tactics of Unrestricted Hybrid Warfare

  One of the gray zone methods is intellectual property (IP) theft. Developing a new product takes years of research and costs billions of dollars. These expenses are recovered through selling the product to customers, Fleming said.

  If a Chinese company steals the intellectual property related to a product developed by an American company, it doesn’t incur any development costs and can immediately start making the product in China, Fleming said.

  It then sells the product to the customers of the U.S. company at about half price, thus putting the IP owner out of business, he said.

  

  Crystal meth paste at a clandestine laboratory near La Rumorosa town in Tecate, Baja California state, Mexico, on Aug. 28, 2018. (Guillermo Arias/AFP/Getty Images)

  Drug warfare is another method being used by the CCP to weaken the United States, the expert said.

  Recently, fentanyl became a leading cause of death for Americans age 18 to 45, according to calculations (pdf) done by the organization Families Against Fentanyl that are based on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  “The fentanyl capital of the world is Wuhan, China,” Fleming said, adding that the CCP ships the precursor chemicals to manufacture crystal meth pills and fentanyl pills to Mexican drug cartels.

  “They [also] use the six drug cartels—beautiful distribution network—to get that all through North America and even to Europe.”

  Crystal meth is a form of methamphetamine—a powerful, highly addictive stimulant that looks like glass fragments, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

  Currently, most methamphetamine in the United States is produced by transnational criminal organizations in Mexico, the NIDA said.

  “The drug can be easily made in small clandestine laboratories, with relatively inexpensive over-the-counter ingredients. Methamphetamine production also involves a number of other very dangerous chemicals. Toxic effects from these chemicals can remain in the environment long after the lab has been shut down, causing a wide range of health problems for people living in the area.”

  Religious warfare is another form of the gray zone methods carried out by the CCP, Fleming noted.

  “They killed every bit of religion in China. The Christian cross has been banned. They’ve shut down churches, they’ve shut down mosques. And that same thing is happening now today in the U.S.”

  “It is Chinese communism on the streets of America and in your living room. And I’m talking critical race theory, I’m talking Black Lives Matter,” Fleming said.

  “Blacks are extremely important. They’re incredible people, but they’re being hijacked in the Black Lives Matter movement. And many blacks understand that and they’re saying: We need a different platform to move all Americans to—not just blacks but all Americans—to a new platform, to take our country back from this whole Chinese communist infiltration and subversion.”

  Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a Marxist organization. Patrisse Cullors, a BLM co-founder, said in an interview with Real News Network in 2015, “We actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia [Garza] in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists.” Alicia Garza is also a BLM co-founder.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Black Lives Matter for comment.

  The defund the police movement and wokeism are also “Chinese communist methods, unrestricted hybrid warfare methods, to weaken the United States.” Fleming said.

  Why People Should Care

  

  A man holding a phone walks past a sign for Chinese company ByteDance’s app TikTok, known locally as Douyin, at the International Artificial Products Expo in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China, on Oct. 18, 2019. (STR/Files/Reuters)

  “The ultimate goal is to weaken the United States so it weakens our will to fight, and they can just walk on. They don’t have to fire one bullet. …  It’s to take over and replace democracy and freedom worldwide with Chinese communism,” Fleming said.

  Fleming pointed out that the U.S. military wouldn’t be able to protect the country against an enemy using unrestricted hybrid warfare.

  “[The military is] still fighting in World War II technology. War is going to electronics, robots, AI [artificial intelligence], radar jamming, all these types of things,” he said.

  “Our military is not meant to protect our economy, and not meant to protect your company and your company’s intellectual property and your suppliers who have your intellectual property.”

  In order to prevent the CCP from winning this war, foreign influence through investments needs to be stopped first in any part of the country, whether it’s business, academia, or government, the expert said. His company BlackOps Partners, provides educational resources on its website to help people understand the risks.

  “When you hear of a former congressman being paid a half-million dollars a year to lobby for TikTok, or lobby for ByteDance, with the DOD [U.S. Department of Defense], there’s a problem.”

  ByteDance is a Chinese internet technology company that develops mobile apps such as TikTok.

  Many in mainstream media are compromised by the CCP, Fleming said, adding that a lot of companies actually walked back their statements critical of the CCP, e.g. statements of genocide taking place in China.

  “Even the well-renowned CEO of JPMorgan Chase had to walk back a comment.”

  JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said he regretted a joke he made in November, saying that his bank would outlast the CCP, according to Bloomberg.

  “We are in battle. It’s just a battle we’re not familiar with,” Fleming said.

  Day by day, people’s freedoms and values and their children’s freedoms and values are being eroded by media, critical race theory, defund the police movement, and wokeism, he said.

  People should care about it because their children and grandchildren “are on the balance,” said Fleming, a senior adviser on risk, strategy, and counterintelligence.

  “If you’re run by the Chinese Communist Party, they dictate what house you live in, which plant your children are going to be working in, and what they’re going to be manufacturing for 12 hours a day, seven days a week.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/12/2022 – 00:05

• Playboy Mansion Had So Much Cocaine That Poodle Became Addicted, Report Says
  Playboy Mansion Had So Much Cocaine That Poodle Became Addicted, Report Says

  A new documentary series called “Secrets of Playboy” will debut on Jan. 24 on the A&E Network explores the hidden dark truths behind the Playboy empire. 

  The Sun reports there was so much cocaine in the Playboy Mansion that Playboy magazine founder Hugh Hefner’s best friend’s poodle got addicted to it. The dog’s drug habit was so bad that it had to be locked in a room during parties because it would jump on people and lick guests’ noses for the next fix. 

  

  Sondra Theodore, an ex-girlfriend of the late sex magnate, was interviewed in the upcoming documentary series. She claims the poodle got addicted after sniffing “huge vials” of white powder that were placed around the mansion. 

  “John Dante was Hef’s best friend. He had a dog Louis and this tiny poodle got hooked on cocaine,” Theodore, 65, is quoted as saying in an upcoming documentary. “There were drugs everywhere. The dog could smell it from across the room. He had to lock that dog up when people were around.”

  

  Hefner’s former assistant, Lisa Loving Barrett, who worked at the mansion from 1977 to 1989, recalled there was more than one drug handed out to guests. She said Quaaludes were known as the “leg spreaders.” 

  Hefner lived in the mansion, located outside Beverly Hills, from 1974 until he died in 2017 at the age of 91. The ten-part series may certainly reveal other hidden secrets about the wild sex parties at the mansion. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 23:45

• Former Border Commissioner: "We Have Lost Control Of The Southwest Border"
  Former Border Commissioner: “We Have Lost Control Of The Southwest Border”

  Authored by Charlotte Cuthbertson via The Epoch Times,

  The southwest border during President Joe Biden’s first year in office reached historic levels of illegal crossings, pulling agents off the front line and leaving large swaths of the border unpatrolled. Drugs, especially fentanyl, flowed in, and overdose deaths are at an all-time high.

  “What we’re experiencing now on the southwest border is a complete, utter catastrophe,” Mark Morgan, former acting commissioner of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which oversees Border Patrol, told The Epoch Times on Jan. 7.

  “We have lost control of the southwest border.”

  During the 2021 calendar year, Border Patrol agents apprehended close to 2 million illegal immigrants from 150 different countries along the southwest border—more than double 2019, the last pre-pandemic year, according to CBP data.

  

  Last year, Border Patrol agents detected, but didn’t catch, an additional 600,000 illegal border crossers, known as “gotaways,” Morgan said.

  “That’s the equivalent to the size of the state of Vermont,” he said.

  “Think about the bad people that are in that 600,000 that got away.”

  

  A Border Patrol agent organizes illegal immigrants who have gathered by the border fence after crossing from Mexico into the United States in Yuma, Arizona, on Dec. 10 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  Mexican nationals made up 28 percent of encounters in fiscal year 2021, the lowest proportion in recorded history, according to CBP.

  The northern triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador made up 44 percent, and the remaining 28 percent were from other countries—double the previous record for the latter demographic.

  “This trend is important because the Department of Homeland Security does not currently have agreements to electronically verify nationality with these different countries of origin, making removing or expelling their nationals more resource-intensive and time-consuming,” CBP stated in a press release on Jan. 3.

  Outside of Mexico and the Northern Triangle nations, the countries accounting for the largest number of encounters in fiscal year 2021 were Ecuador, Brazil, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Haiti, and Cuba, CBP said.

  On the Mexico side of the border, across the Rio Grande in Texas, hundreds of discarded passports, visas, and identification papers can be found every day. Illegal aliens are told it’s harder to be deported from the United States without papers.

  “This is not a surge. This is an invasion,” Morgan said.

  “I mean, this is a catastrophic amount of illegal aliens trying to break into our country.”

  The result in some border areas, he said, is that most Border Patrol agents are being pulled off the “national security mission” to be “daycare providers, processing agents, and bus drivers.”

  Morale among the Border Patrol workforce is at an all-time low.

  Upon taking office almost a year ago, President Joe Biden was quick to dismantle several key border security initiatives that the Trump administration had established, including a halt to border wall construction, and the Remain in Mexico program, which attributed to up to an 80 percent drop in “catch-and-release” by requiring asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico until their final court judgement.

  Now, instead of waiting in Mexico, most illegal immigrants are released into the United States to wait for future court dates that can be set years into the future.

  

  Border Patrol drops van loads of Haitians who crossed the U.S. border illegally at local NGO Border Humanitarian Coalition to catch a bus to San Antonio or Houston, in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 22, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  Border Security

  Although the public’s main focus is on illegal immigration numbers, Morgan said that’s just a subset of border security.

  “When you open your borders up to one threat, one crisis, it’s not mutually exclusive from the others—you’re opening your borders up to the vast set of complex threats that we face,” he said.

  “Anytime you’re so overwhelmed that you can’t perform the fundamental national security mission to secure our borders, the result [is] that every aspect of our nation’s public health, public safety, and national security is being impacted.”

  The record numbers in 2021 occurred during a year in which many Americans, under the backdrop of a pandemic, faced vaccine mandates, work-from-home orders, and school closures.

  Overcrowded border facilities were unable to test everyone for COVID-19, resulting in the release of illegal immigrants with the disease into communities. In July 2021, the city of Laredo sued the Biden administration for releasing a “flood” of illegal immigrants into Laredo, causing “irreparable harm.”

  Under the Title 42 public health order, which was instituted in March 2020, illegal immigrants could be quickly expelled back into Mexico as a pandemic precaution, rather than be processed under Title 8 immigration law, which is a much more protracted process inside the United States.

  Since March 2021, however, Title 42 has slowly been whittled down—first to allow in all unaccompanied children, then families with children under 7, then most families in general, most single females, and single adults from non-Spanish speaking countries.

  

  Border Patrol agents apprehend and transport illegal immigrants who have just crossed the river into La Joya, Texas, on Nov. 17, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  Border 2022

  Morgan predicts the southwest border metrics will continue to worsen through 2022.

  “There’s no end in sight. There’s none. And this administration, every single day, everything they’re doing is just to get better at releasing people. They’re not trying to stop the flow,” he said.

  Biden tapped Vice President Kamala Harris to lead border security efforts, with the main focus being to address the “root causes” of illegal immigration. Harris visited Mexico and Guatemala last year, but was criticized by the Guatemalan president in December for having no communication since June 2021.

  On Aug. 26, the Supreme Court ordered the Biden administration to restart the Remain in Mexico program, but CBP data through November 2021 doesn’t indicate any new enrollees in the program.

  Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has said he is working toward building a “safe, orderly, and humane immigration” system.

  

  Thousands of illegal immigrants, mostly Haitians, live in a primitive, makeshift camp under the international bridge that spans the Rio Grande between the U.S. and Mexico while waiting to be detained and processed by Border Patrol, in Del Rio, Texas, on Sept. 21, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  During the tail end of the September crisis that saw close to 15,000 mostly Haitian illegal immigrants gather under the international bridge in Del Rio, Texas, Mayorkas denied that the administration’s policies were responsible.

  “What we are learning from our interviews with individuals is that they are receiving false information and misinformation from the smuggling organizations that traffic in the exploitation of vulnerable individuals,” Mayorkas said during a congressional hearing on Sept. 21, 2021.

  During a Senate hearing in November 2021, Mayorkas gave himself high marks for his role in leading the border efforts.

  “I’m a tough grader on myself and I give myself an ‘A’ for effort, investment in mission, and support of our workforce,” Mayorkas said.

  Morgan accused Mayorkas of creating a “sanctuary country” for illegal immigrants, allowing them to come in and then shielding them from deportation.

  “They’re trying to totally demolish ICE and make illegal immigration legal,” Morgan said, referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

  “Everything that they’re doing is making our border less secure and our country less safe.”

  

  Border Patrol agents apprehend 21 illegal aliens from Mexico who had hidden in a grain hopper on a freight train heading to San Antonio, near Uvalde, Texas, on June 21, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  Looking to Governors

  Morgan said he believes the open border policies are an intentional move toward more Democratic House seats through redistricting now that illegal immigrants are counted in the Census. Secondly, eventually they expect illegal immigrants to vote Democrat.

  Republicans are also complicit, he said, because they still believe that this country needs the illegal workforce.

  “But there is a true marginalized American workforce that’s out there that’s having to compete with companies paying lower wages to illegal immigrants. That’s real,” Morgan said.

  He said concerned Americans should push their governors to do more in the immediate term, instead of waiting for the federal elections. Morgan said Florida, Texas, and Missouri have made some inroads, but more need to step up.

  “If you have a meth overdose in your state, I guarantee that meth came from the southwest border,” he said.

  “The cost to American taxpayers is unconscionable and governors should step up and say enough is enough.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 23:25

• Binance's Mysterious CEO Has Quietly Amassed A $96 Billion Fortune
  Binance’s Mysterious CEO Has Quietly Amassed A $96 Billion Fortune

  The owner of the world’s largest crypto fortune, which stands at $96 billion, is likely an unsuspecting name that you wouldn’t recognize: Changpeng Zhao. 

  But despite the fact that you’ve likely never heard of the Binance CEO, who now spends his time meeting with royalty and living in the United Arab Emirates, doesn’t mean that he isn’t gaining on the list of the world’s richest people, on the tails of well known celebrity CEOs like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos. In fact, he’s richer than Asia’s richest person, Mukesh Ambani, the report notes. 

  Described by Bloomberg as a ” former McDonald’s burger-flipper and software developer” turned “the most prominent personality” in the UAE’s crypto scene. Zhao is a Canadian citizen who was born in China’s Jiangsu province.

  And his fortune could be getting even larger: he still owns a significant amount of Bitcoin and Binance Coin, which was up 1300% last year. 

  Zhao’s rise to riches hasn’t come without its bumps in the road. Binance has been banned from China and is facing a number of regulatory probes globally, for example. The U.S. Department of Justice and Internal Revenue Service are probing one of his entities, Binance Holdings, has been used for money laundering and tax evasion. 

  

  The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is also looking into potential market manipulation and insider trading within the company, as well as whether it “illegally allowed U.S. clients to trade derivatives tied to cryptocurrencies,” Bloomberg wrote.

  The company’s future will likely hinge on whether or not it can appease regulators. Usually, in our experience, we’ve found that there’s a number that can stave off such probes. We’ll have to see if Binance finds itself as lucky. 

  DA Davidson & Co. analyst Chris Brendler says that Binance generated at least $20 billion in revenue last year, about triple what is expected from Coinbase. In a recent 24 hour span, Binanace did a whopping $170 billion in transactions. A “slow day” is about $40 billion, Zhao said recently. “I don’t care about wealth, money, rankings,” he told Bloomberg in November. 

  “Coinbase might appear to be the 800-pound gorilla from a U.S. perspective, but Binance is significantly bigger,” Brendler told Bloomberg. 

  Binance responded: “Crypto is still in its growth stage. It is susceptible to higher levels of volatility. Any number you hear one day will be different from a number you hear the next day.”

  Zhao’s fortune likely hinges on whether or not he can meet regulators in the middle, which is why it’s not surprising that he’s embracing regulation. “I’m not an anarchist. I don’t believe human civilization is advanced enough to live in a world without rules,” he said in November. 

  

  Binance makes it revenue through holding hundreds of different crypto tokens, which they don’t convert to traditional currencies. A favorable regulatory resolution will likely be paramount for the continued existence of some of these tokens. 

  Zhao said of the tokens: “We just hold them. If you calculate the number today, it’s one number, and 5 minutes later it’s a different number because every price is changing.”

  Tim Swanson, head of market intelligence at Clearmatics, cites Binanace’s user stickiness as part of their success: “They don’t even have to be the first to list a coin anymore for liquidity to aggregate there.” 

  Binance’s goal of being able to operate anywhere has made it tough for regulators to pin down to one location. Brendler commented: “Their approach was, ‘We don’t need a regulator, we are decentralized’. That worked really well for growing and scaling and product innovations.”

  But now it’s time to see how long that attitude can last. After all, Zhao’s fortune may depend on it…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 23:05

• Ivy League Cartel Sued For Price-Fixing
  Ivy League Cartel Sued For Price-Fixing

  Authored by Matt Soller bia BIG substack,

  In a comical trolling of elite America, plaintiff lawyers are suing Yale, MIT, Columbia, Duke, et al for price-fixing. The suit reveals how American universities favor the wealthy and powerful.

  Last April, Sam Haselby and I wrote a piece titled “Break up the Ivy League Cartel,’ offering a history of the elitism of top universities in America. For hundreds of years, these top schools have policed the moral, cultural, and economic boundaries of what forms the American elite, and in the post World War II era, the global elite. They are in many ways a cartel of institutions that share strategy on endowment funds, academic trends, cultural capital and student management.

  

  The lovely and fairly priced Columbia University.

  But it’s not just this informal elite-production model that makes such universities a cartel; they are also an *actual cartel.* Today, a group of class action law firms sued 16 universities for price-fixing against low-income students in the admissions process, which is the key gatekeeping mechanism designed to enhance prestige. The defendants are the wealthiest and most powerful academic institutions in America: Brown, CalTech, the University of Chicago, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Emory, Georgetown, MIT, Northwestern, Notre Dame, the University of Pennsylvania, Rice, Vanderbilt, and Yale.

  The specific charge is that these universities colluded to price-fix the terms of financial aid. Working together to provide scholarships isn’t necessarily illegal. A lot of universities give out scholarships based on income, under the premise that higher education should be an equalizing force in American society. Some schools even say they make admissions ‘need-blind,’ which means that they don’t take into account ability to pay when determining which students to accept. Instead, the admissions department accepts students based on merit, and then gives accepted students scholarships to make sure they can afford the schooling.

  But what specifically makes someone ‘needy’ in a ‘need-blind’ system? The answer to that is an accounting question, so universities work together through an organization called the 568 President’s Group to set the terms for what makes someone needy. Now, if this also sounds like open price-fixing, that’s because it is. But done properly, it’s not necessarily illegal. The reason is universities have been caught before for price-fixing, and part of the settlement of that suit was that they were given an antitrust exemption so they could work together to price scholarships, within certain bounds.

  In 1991, the Justice Department investigated 23 prestigious Northeastern universities – including Harvard, Yale, and MIT – for holding an annual meeting in which they “discussed the financial aid applications of 10,000 students who had been accepted to more than one institution in the group,” ultimately colluding to offer the same financial package to these students. The Attorney General called them a “collegiate cartel.” After the settlement, top universities agreed to stop the meetings, but it’s hard to watch the Ivy Leagues without concluding that they are watching each other and mimicking each other carefully.

  This settlement was codified when Congress passed the Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994. Universities were allowed to work together to establish standards for who is needy, and how much they would need. However, to qualify for the antitrust exemption, universities had to admit “all students” on a need-blind basis. If they aren’t need-blind for everyone, they can’t work with other universities to price admissions.

  Do these universities have a need-blind policy for all students? Most of them say that they do. But as it turns out, admissions officers have a nasty habit of letting in the children of the wealthy and powerful, in return for donations and prestige. “At Dartmouth,” so goes the complaint, “development officers meet with admissions staff to review a list created by the development office. Each year, up to 50 applicants may be considered through this special process, most of whom are admitted, accounting for 4-5% of Dartmouth’s student body.” Selling admissions to the powerful is policy at many of these schools.

  Sometimes the individual cases are jaw-dropping. For example, the CEO of Sony, Michal Lynton, was trying to get his daughter into college, and the private equity baron Leon Black, who had been on the board of Dartmouth, tried to recruit her to that school, because of the assumption that a large donation would accompany her to campus.

  

  Alas, Black failed. Lynton went to Brown, as did her father’s $1 million donation.

  

  It’s not always about money. At Georgetown, the dean of admissions said, “On the fundraising side, we also have a small number of ‘development potential’ candidates. If Bill Gates wants his kid to come to Georgetown, we’d be more than happy to have him come and talk to us.” But don’t worry, he added, “not all those special cases end up being people who give a lot of money. We have children of Supreme Court justices, senators, and so on apply. We may give extra consideration to them because of the opportunities that may bring.”

  So these schools do not accept all students on a need-blind basis. And that creates a problem, because high-end universities restrict their incoming classes, which generates scarcity and prestige. Class size doesn’t increase with increasing population size, it is fixed, with the goal of these universities turning themselves into, as Scott Galloway notes, luxury brands. For instance, in 1940, the acceptance rate at Harvard was eighty-five percent. In 1970, it was twenty percent. For the class of 2025, it was 3.4 percent.

  This zero sum situation means that if there are a preset number of slots that go to the wealthy, to alumni, or to the powerful, then that number of slots is not going to people who don’t have the money to attend. If you do favors for the wealthy in the admissions process, then you aren’t a need-blind admission system, and you don’t quality for the antitrust exemption. But the complaint also shows that, far from merely letting in the children of the wealthy while otherwise in all other areas being need-blind, many of these institutions actually discriminate against students who need scholarships. Vanderbilt, Penn, and Columbia don’t seem to be need-blind, with Penn and Vanderbilt officials conceding that who they accept off the waiting list depends in part on who needs financial aid. So they really don’t qualify for any antitrust exemption.

  Is there really harm? Yes. The complaint shows that when universities move away from the consensus methodology for calculating the cost of college, the price they charge goes down. So there are financial costs at issue, and the 170,000 alumni who were overcharged when they went to these schools with underpowered financial aid packages deserve compensation.

  It’s a very clever suit, legally speaking. No one can reasonably dispute whether universities have colluded, or whether they maintain policies favoring potential donors. There’s no need to establish a secret conspiracy, as it’s out in the open. The only real question is whether what universities have done is illegal. It’s a simple question of law, with few disputes on the facts. It’s no surprise that the suit was brought by some of the savvier plaintiff firms (Roche Freedman, Berger Montague, FeganScott, and Gilbert Litigators & Counselors).

  It’s also a profoundly embarrassing suit. Every university gets a little profile in the complaint, showing how basically the students are nearly all rich kids, and the endowments of these schools are ridiculous. Here, for instance, is the profile of the University of Pennsylvania.

  

  There’s a broader lesson here. The higher education system in the U.S. is a crown jewel of American society, but universities have also organized their financing models towards flagrant abuses of market power. And that’s not just at the elite level. Economist Marshall Steinbaum turned me on to this piece, showing that more broadly universities use government-mandated information collection to price discriminate in harmful ways against millions of students. Bringing a suit against a practice like this is much harder than showing a clear, open price-fixing conspiracy by elite universities whose behavior looks, when reading the letter of the law, as if it is a violation of Section One of the Sherman Act.

  Of course, we know top universities collude to help the powerful. What makes this suit damaging is that it attacks their underlying conception of self. Elite universities want to imagine themselves as meritocratic, though in fact they cater to the wealthy professional class and the billionaires who employ them. In other words, top universities are increasingly tax-free hedge funds with educational arms attached for branding purposes. And they are price-fixers, to boot.

  As this suit goes forward, these universities may actually face some measure of justice.

  *  *  *

  Thanks for reading. If you liked this issue of BIG, you can sign up here for more issues, a newsletter on how to restore fair commerce, innovation and democracy. And consider becoming a paying subscriber to support this work, or if you are a paying subscriber, giving a gift subscription to a friend, colleague, or family member.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 22:45

• US Apartment Occupancy Hits Record High After COVID-Fueled Migration 
  US Apartment Occupancy Hits Record High After COVID-Fueled Migration 

  New data from property management software company RealPage shows apartment occupancy in the US surged to a record high in December. High occupancy rates come as renters were lured in with pandemic discounts in late 2020 and 2021 as others fled metro areas for a new life in the suburbs. 

  RealPage said 97.5% of the professionally managed apartments in the US last month were occupied, the highest on record. The figure is two percentage points higher than the occupancy rate in December 2020. Just a few percentage points equate to hundreds of thousands of households. 

  

  “I don’t think most people realize just how crazy that is,” Jay Parsons, deputy chief economist for RealPage, told Bloomberg. 

  “Not only is that a record, typically we consider 95 to 96% to be essentially full,” Parsons said.

  In the first year of the virus pandemic, apartment rents plunged as residents fled metro areas, such as ones in New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. Operators of apartment buildings panicked during the pandemic when tenants broke their leases and escaped cities due to lockdowns and soaring violent crime. As rents fell, operators began to offer substantial discounts to new tenants. The deals lured in new renters in 2021, resulting in soaring rent prices throughout the year. 

  Most new tenants are locked into a multi-year lease and have no intention of moving. Another issue for renters is the low housing supply, and surging prices have kept them on the sidelines. Prices are expected to continue rising in 2022. 

  In a separate report, Pew Research Center found rental homes and apartments across the country are experiencing the lowest vacancy rates in four decades. Despite the Covid-fueled migration patterns, a record low number of households moved between March 2020 and March 2021 because of low housing inventory. 

  

  “Rents are rising, and the discounts and concessions of 2020 are likely a thing of the past. Moreover, demand for housing continues to outpace the supply,” Bloomberg said. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 22:25

• Vaccine Mandates Are A Driver Of Wage Inflation
  Vaccine Mandates Are A Driver Of Wage Inflation

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  This is Part 2 of an exclusive interview with Doomberg, the collective that runs the Doomberg Substack. During this interview series, we discuss their outlook on 2022, China-based equities, Joe Rogan’s influence on the media, ARK Invest, silver and gold, the Elizabeth Holmes trial and inflation.

  On my last interview series with Doomberg, they predicted uranium would “double or triple” and laid out a semi-serious case for oil going to $300 per barrel.

  

  Doomberg publishes skeptical analyses through the hard money/Austrian lens and its objective is to be funny without being silly, to teach without being self-indulgent, and to provoke without being polarizing. They publish 10-12 pieces a month, which you can read for free here.

  You can read Part 1 of this interview here.

  Q: What’s your favorite piece you’ve written of late and why? How can it be informative for investors?

  That’s like asking us to select our favorite child!

  But seriously, a recent piece titled New England is an Energy Crisis Waiting to Happen went viral, with 90,000 views on Substack and a similar number when Zerohedge reprinted it to their website.

  

  We don’t give stock advice on Doomberg, but we do highlight interesting opportunities for other investors to consider. Documenting the sheer insanity of New England’s energy predicament is one such example. The piece drew on our extensive technical background and allowed us to connect the seriousness of the situation to how the reader’s own body works.

  It also gave us the opportunity to highlight the work of another great content creator, Meredith Angwin, and her excellent book Shorting the Grid.

  How do you think the Biden administration will replace the lost Fed governors, since your prognostication about Powell on his way out was incorrect. Will Biden appoint hawks?

  Given how poorly we called the Powell renomination, we are abstaining from any other prognostications on the future of the Fed.

  We would direct your readers to the formidable Danielle DiMartino Booth who, unlike us, has relevant experience at the Fed and knows what she is talking about.

  Has inflation become an issue big enough to span both political aisles? Are you a Rickards guy that thinks the worst is over in terms of prices or a Schiff guy that thinks the worst inflation is yet to come?

  We do believe inflation has become a huge issue for both sides of the aisle.

  We respect Rickards’ work, but we have a different view that stems from our extensive experience in industry. Our network of C-suite contacts is signaling that inflation is real and ongoing, especially wage inflation. These costs are being passed on to the consumer.

  

  We also believe the confusion around and heterogeneous implementation of various vaccine mandates is an underreported driver of wage inflation.

  A meaningful number of workers in the country will simply refuse to get vaccinated, which is shrinking the labor supply for some jobs. Once we do get through the pandemic, we believe a shortage of energy is on the horizon, which we wrote about in There’s Not Enough Oil.

  We fall firmly into the Schiff camp on this one.

  Any chance of a growth to value rotation this year? Which indexes will fare the best in ‘22, relative to one another?

  That seems like a popular idea which is being written about by several market observers we follow.

  Historically, if inflation runs hot, that’s bad for stocks in general, but especially growth stocks. For example, the basket of stocks in the Ark Invest portfolios would probably not stand up well to a bout of sustained inflation.

  

  Other smart people tell us we need to be watching the bond market, and especially the long bond, which doesn’t seem to be doing much right now – at least compared to how hot CPI and PPI are running.

  As a rule, with real yields this negative and valuations this elevated, all stocks are susceptible to a correction. We are the out-of-touch, cranky old folks standing on the lawn shaking our fist at the next generation on this one.

  I recently wrote that the Elizabeth Holmes trial is a reminder that “risk on” doesn’t always work out. What did you make of the jury’s decision and what does it tell you about today’s market climate?

  We are the last people to defend the actions of Elizabeth Holmes, but this sure seems like a case of selective prosecution.

  The market is filled with frauds, crypto rug pulls, NFT wash trading scams, and blatant pump-and-dump shenanigans.

  If lying to investors to raise money is a crime punishable by extended prison sentences, we need to get busy building more prisons.

  Thanks, my Doomy friend.

  *  *  *

  For the next 48 hours, readers of Zero Hedge can get 22.20% off FOR LIFE as subscribers by using this New Year’s link to help usher in 2022: Get 22% off forever

  —

  

  DISCLAIMER: 

  I am short ARKK, long KWEB, TME, XOM, CCJ, URA, URNM, oil and uranium and various gold and silver miners/names. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time. It should be assumed Doomberg has positions in any security or commodity mentioned in this article and may transact in them. Answers are the opinions of the interviewee. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. Doomberg has contributed to my podcast but this interview was not part of any sponsorship or ad deal or contract, it was initiated by me because I enjoy the blog’s content and wanted to ask questions that I believed my readers would benefit from. It is only a look into our personal opinions and portfolios. These positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe.

  MORE DISCLAIMER:  

  The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I get shit wrong a lot. If I am here listing things I got right or things I think will happen in the future, note that there are likely twice as many things I got wrong over the same period of time. I’m not a financial advisor, I hold no licenses or registrations and am not qualified to give advice on anything, let alone finance or medicine. Talk to your doctor, talk to your financial advisor or your therapist. Leave me a alone and do your research elsewhere. If you can find somewhere to rate this Substack one star, please do so as to save future readers from the misery of my often wholly incorrect prognostications.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 22:05

• Prepping For Oil Liftoff: The Permian's Largest Producer Just Went Full "Zero Hedge"
  Prepping For Oil Liftoff: The Permian’s Largest Producer Just Went Full “Zero Hedge”

  The largest oil producer in the Permian has shuttered all of its hedges on the commodity for the year, indicating a vanilla bullish outlook on the price of oil in 2022.

  Pioneer Natural Resources said in a filing on Wednesday that removing the hedges would cost $328 million but would leave the company positioned to capitalize off of a continued rise in oil prices. The company also bought back $250 million of its own shares, Yahoo Finance and Bloomberg reported. 

  RBC Capital Markets analysts Scott Hanold commented: “The hedge monetization strategically positions PXD for further strength in 2022 oil prices.”

  

  Most companies like Pioneer use instruments like swaps and options to help hedge against volatility in prices. The hedges help ensure that producers have enough capital to meet their costs of doing business. 

  Hedges worked as saviors for many companies during 2020 and 2021, when oil prices collapsed.

  Riding oil prices higher, hedges can sometimes wind up capping companies’ upside. Pioneer, for example, lost more than $2 billion last year as oil prices rose and its hedges plunged underwater.

  The company’s announcement this week makes it very clear what Pioneer’s outlook for oil is heading into 2022: plain ole’ bullish.  

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 21:45

• What To Expect From Tomorrow's "Brutal" Inflation Report
  What To Expect From Tomorrow’s “Brutal” Inflation Report

  Tomorrow may be ugly: according to Axios, the White House – or at least those who are feeding lines to the so-called president – are bracing for a “brutal” inflation report.

  • WHITE HOUSE BRACES FOR BRUTAL INFLATION REPORT – AXIOS

  While it remains to be seen if tomorrow’s report is brutal, the damage has already been done – here is a snapshot of key price changes in the past year, courtesy of Bank of America:

  • price of basic human needs such as food, heat, shelter soaring; global food prices up 27% YoY;
  • US heating costs up: 30% for natural gas, 43% for oil, 54% for propane;
  • US rents up 12%,
  • house prices 18%
  • lumber prices up 40% past 4 months

  Here is what consensus expects: according to economists, the consumer price index (CPI) increased 0.4% in December, bringing the year-ago inflation rate up from 6.8% to 7.0%, which will be the highest headline print since June 1982 when the Fed Funds rate was in the double digits.

  

  While energy prices had been jumping in earlier months, JPMorgan slook for the energy CPI to fall 1.7% in December based on weakening in a variety of related price measures (that will promptly be reversed in January when energy prices jumped again). But even with energy prices down in December, a 0.7% increase in food prices and a 0.5% increase in core prices (ex. food and energy) should push headline inflation higher in December.

  For the core index, consensus looks for a 0.5% increase, which should push year-ago inflation up from 4.9% in November to 5.4% in December. Increases in the rent measures have been especially firm lately (just as we warned they would be) and economists expect December gains close to the increases from earlier months, with tenants rent up 0.41% and owners’ equivalent rent rising 0.44%

  Meanwhile, vehicle prices have been surging in the CPI throughout much of 2021 and additional increases are expected in December, albeit with a slight moderation relative to the past few months. As such JPM forecasts that new vehicle prices increased 0.5% in December while used vehicle prices jumped 2.4%.”

  

  In its snap preview, Deutsche Bank writes that with y/y CPI set to touch 7% and core inflation come in near 5.4%, “these are ultimately not the kind of inflation numbers that will gently settle back near target, without both a huge favorable supply side reversal, and a very substantial suppression of demand that includes much tighter financial conditions that will have to include much higher real and nominal US yields.” Of course, much tighter financial conditions will also likely trigger a recession first we and then Jeff Gundlach suggested today. At the end of the day, however, the decision is entirely political: is Biden – and the Democrats – hurt more by soaring prices or by the risk of a market crash. We’ll know soon enough.

  * * *

  How will FX react to tomorrow’s CPI print? According to DB macro strategist Alan Ruskin, as per Figure 1, the two most recent CPI reports where core came in largely as expected (the release for November and September), saw the USD weaken moderately. This is one indication that going into the recent CPI releases, the market has tended to fear larger than expected core CPI numbers, and shows some relief if it gets “as expected” data.

  Note the stock market has also exhibited this behavior of recording gains on as expected data for the September and November data released in October and December respectively. For the coming CPI number, there is again a high likelihood of the market exhibiting “a relief” response if the data comes in as expected at 0.5% for core. Note that in terms of the 0.5% core median, the distribution skews slightly more to 0.4% than 0.6%.

  For broader FX context, going into the data, the USD’s performance so far in 2022 has been very disappointing (as discussed earlier today when we framed the latest market conundrum). US yields and spreads have generally moved in favor of the USD. All of EUR-USD 2y nominal, 2y real, 10y nominal and 10y real spreads have moved in favor of the USD year to date by 11bps, 15bps, 9bps, and 7bps respectively. Dec ’22 fed fund futures has moved 12bps in favor of the USD. Some of the spread adjustment in favor of the USD represents an unwind from late 2021 spread moves in favor of the EUR when the ECB briefly came into the spotlight. Either way, the USD performance has been a disappointment, and we ended Tuesday’s session knocking on the DXY technical floor at 95.50. The danger is even on as expected CPI data, the USD breaks to the downside and only finds its footing multi-week, on further evidence that the Fed will still leapfrog these readjusted rate expectations, in the next dance between the market leading the Fed, and the Fed then leapfrogging the market, signaling still higher rates.

  * * *

  A slightly different perspective comes from Bloomberg’s Vincent Cignarella, who suggests ignoring the (soraing) year-over-year inflation data (we know it will be plus or minus 7%) and to instead focus on month-over-month. According to Cignarella, “what investors need to follow is where is inflation going now, not the trend from a year ago. The forecast for this week is for some good news for bond bulls, but not so much for stocks.”

  The problem is that while inflation could roll over in the the next few months, earnings (on a 3-month moving average) appear to not be keeping pace. And while bonds would like see a moderation in inflation, without wages keeping pace, it’s difficult to see equities rallying as lower wages implies lower earnings according to the Bloomberg strategist. .

  

  Finally, if indeed the CPI numbers are truly “brutal” and well above consensus expectations, the BLS has already signaled what the next step will be: as we asked one month ago in “And Just Like That, Inflation Is About To Disappear?”, the BLS is about to make some adjustments to its CPI basket weights…

  

  … and we are 100% confident the adjustments won’t make inflation appear any higher than it already is.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 21:24

• Common Office Desk Phone Could Be Leaking Info To Chinese Government, Govt Report Alleges
  Common Office Desk Phone Could Be Leaking Info To Chinese Government, Govt Report Alleges

  A major Chinese phone maker could be putting U.S. consumers, companies, and even national security data at risk, and a U.S. senator wants to know what the Commerce Department is going to do about it.

  As DefenseOne first reported, in a Sept. 28 letter obtained by Defense One, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., described a report that “raises serious concerns about the security of audio-visual equipment produced and sold into the U.S. by Chinese firms such as Yealink.” 

  

  Yealink doesn’t have the name recognition of the controversial Chinese telecom giant Huawei, but its phones are widely installed across the United States, including in government agencies. In September, Yealink and Verizon announced plans to sell “the nation’s first 4G/LTE cellular desk phone.”

  In the letter, Van Hollen asked Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo whether her agency is aware of the report by Chain Security, a Virginia-based company that analyzes electronics for security. He asked whether she considers its analysis credible, and if so, what she wants Commerce to do about it.

  Many of the security issues raised in the report are similar to those that the U.S. government has had for years about Huawei. In essence, there are a number of big—but possibly unintentional—security flaws that an adversary could use to steal data. But with the Yealink T54W phone in particular, there are also some concerning features that are clearly built in on purpose. 

  The report pointed to the Yealink software that connects each phone to the local network. Called the device management platform, or DMP, it allows users to make calls from their PCs and network administrators to manage the phones. But it also allows Yealink to secretly record those phone calls and even track what websites the users are visiting.

  ​​“We observed that if the phone is being managed by the device management platform, and if the user’s PC is connected to the phone in order to access a local area network, it’s collecting information about what you’re surfing” on your computer, said Chain Security CEO Jeff Stern. “The method of using the desktop IP phone such as the Yealink phone as an Ethernet switch to connect the PC to the local area network is a common business practice. The administrator on that platform can also initiate a call recording without the user’s knowledge…What they do is they issue a command to the phone to record the calls.”

  Stern clarified that “this feature is intended for use by an enterprise customer’s employee or representative. However, every system has a Superuser Administrator, or SYSADMIN. In these types of systems, the SYSADMIN typically has access to everything. Some modern systems, especially after Snowden, deny this capability to the SYSADMIN. But we need to assume that this is not the case here and that the Yealink DMP SYSADMIN is in China.”

  Chain Security’s report notes that Yealink’s service agreement requires users to accept China’s laws, while “a related set of service terms allows the active monitoring of users when required by the ‘national interest’ (this means the national interest of China).” 

  Stern also noted that the phone also doesn’t use digital certificates to prevent unauthorized changes to its software. That makes it far easier for attackers to compromise the data on the phone and potentially even the entire network it’s connected to, without attribution to Yealink. “Without some sort of monitor watching what’s going on on the phone you wouldn’t know this firmware is on there and it can do anything you want in terms of surveilling your network and the subnet. The scenario we worry about with a device like this is that it will surveil your network and then exfiltrate…essentially your network architecture or your network implementation.” 

  The lack of a firmware signature requirement isn’t exactly unheard of. Stern called it an “old mistake.” But he said, “There’s no reason that old mistakes like this should continue to be there. Like, this is bad.” 

  A Verizon spokesperson said Yealink’s DMP “has been built to meet the custom requirements of Verizon” and that the customization was related to “security; feature management exposure to the devices through the DMP; firmware management and remote diagnostics.”

  That response left Stern with more questions. “Who is doing the firmware customization? Does [Verizon] have a license to modify the source code of the firmware? Does [Verizon] plan to do penetration testing on the firmware before releasing it to their users? Does [Verizon] do source code security analysis on all firmware that it receives from Yealink?” 

  Stern also found that the phone exchanges encrypted messages with a Chinese-based cloud server, Alibaba Cloud, multiple times a day. You cannot program the phone not to do that. To stop it, you have to go to the enterprise’s network router and prohibit the exchange. But if you didn’t know that the phone was doing it in the first place, there’s little that you can do to stop it.

  There’s also a specialized microprocessor unit from a Chinese chip maker called Rockchip. Of course, Chinese chips are in all sorts of devices and security experts can test most of them for bugs. But this one hasn’t gone through that same testing because, says Stern, Rockchip designed it specifically for Yealink. “This one is clearly a specialized product, based on the model number developed for Yealink and there’s no documented vulnerabilities to mitigate against. Except there are vulnerabilities, right? Because everything has vulnerabilities. It’s just no one is reporting on it because it’s a specialized chip,” he said. 

  That doesn’t mean that something is wrong with the chip, exactly, but it hasn’t received the same sort of scrutiny that other, more widely distributed components do receive. 

  One telecom industry expert who is familiar with the report, but did not help write it and has no affiliation with Chain Security, described the firm as reputable. The expert didn’t endorse or dispute any of the report’s findings but said that the language in Yealink’s service agreement alone was enough to warrant a review by the government. “The fact that you [meaning Yealink] are bound by Chinese law, that is something the government needs to know.”

  If the Commerce Department investigates the report’s concerns and finds them valid, Yealink might find themselves on a path similar to that of Huawei, placed on a list of untrustworthy technologies that government customers are not allowed to purchase. The industry expert said there was no set process or timeline for such determinations to occur. 

  Stern said he believed that Yealink phones were in government offices, since the government market for IP phones is roughly $300 million, by his analysis, and Yealink is one of the top ten providers. A web search shows Yealink manuals uploaded for reference to the websites of many local, state, and federal agencies.

  Van Hollen’s office didn’t provide any additional detail on why they had sent the letter to the Commerce Department. A Van Hollen spokesperson said that “the letter really speaks for itself — the Senator is simply seeking more information.” 

  On Dec. 28, the Commerce Department responded to Van Hollen in a separate letter obtained by Defense One. “We take these matters seriously,” wrote Wynn W. Coggins, Acting Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary for Administration. “The Department of Commerce shares your concerns about the security of the Information and Communications Technology and Services (ICTS) supply chain and the threats to that supply chain posed by our foreign adversaries and is actively working to address those concerns.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 21:05

• China Inflation Pressures Slow As Commodity Crunch Eases
  China Inflation Pressures Slow As Commodity Crunch Eases

  Thanks to various measures by the government to increase supplies of commodities (and simultaneously crack down on speculation), Chinese inflation pressures eased significantly in December.

  • Chinese producer prices rose 10.3% YoY, slowing dramatically from November’s 12.9% and well below economists’ forecasts of a 11.3% gain.

  • Chinese consumer prices increased just 1.5% YoY, down from 2.3% in November and also lower than an expected 1.7% gain.

  

  The drop in PPI largely reflects a dramatic easing of commodity price pressures

  

  And as PPI compresses relative to CPI, margin pressures may ease modestly…

  

  And push Industrial Profits down even further…

  

  Notably, food prices fell in December, with pork prices dropping almost 37% and vegetable price gains slowing.

  

  However, this easing of inflationary pressures may itself be transitory as China’s “ZeroCOVID” policy means strict mobility restrictions are widened to contain the spread of the highly transmissible omicron variant, temporarily driving prices up due to supply-side pressures, compounded by the upcoming Lunar New Year holidays will also see a surge in demand for staple foods and thus higher prices.

  Additionally, the drop in inflation may offer Beijing more confidence in unleashing a more broad-based stimulus to bail out its property developers (or more likely the actual homeowners).

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 21:01

• Chicago Mayor Gets COVID After Striking Deal With Teachers To Return To Classrooms
  Chicago Mayor Gets COVID After Striking Deal With Teachers To Return To Classrooms

  After a week-long shutdown, Chicago Public schoolteachers will finally return to their posts on Wednesday after reaching a deal with City Hall.

  The shutdown, which had returned the nation’s third-largest school system to remote-only education after the Chicago Teachers Union voted to refuse to return to the classroom unless proper safety protocols were implemented. The shutdown has lasted almost exactly a week already.

  

  Mayor Lori Lightfoot announced the deal with the Chicago Teachers Union on Monday that would return students to classrooms on Wednesday. The deal came after the Illinois House of Delegates voted to suspend the union’s remote action, which city hall had blasted as an illegal work stoppage.

  “No one is more frustrated than I am,” Mayor Lightfoot said after the deal was reached. She added: “I’m glad that we’re hopefully putting this behind us and looking forward. But there does come a point when enough is enough.”

  By the looks of it, the “anti-science” teachers union got most of what it wanted. The agreement includes metrics on when a classroom or a school should go remote, enhances testing, and increased contact tracing. The union has insisted the city didn’t do enough to provide enough testing and vaccination opportunities.

  “I am not going to say anyone in our team feels this is a home run,” said CTU President Jesse Sharkey during a separate press conference. He added that the deal moves the union toward as much as it could get for now and its members worked hard without pay.

  A resolution to the conflict came after the Biden administration urged Lightfoot and the union to reach a deal.

  “The president’s been very clear, as we have been clear: We are on the side of schools being open,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said earlier on Monday, when asked about the standoff in Chicago.

  This latest battle between city hall and the teachers follows the union’s longest strike since 1987 in 2019, which was ordered to demand higher pay as well as more nurses and social workers in schools. And in early 2021, the union’s caused a delayed and phased-in return to school as it battled with city hall for resources and demanded certain protocols for students.

  “I’m hopeful that this is the end, at least for this school year,” Lightfoot said, adding that the agreement takes the district through the end of summer school. “I’m hopeful that we will have a stable, uneventful rest of the school year.”

  But just as this problem ended, another has reared its head for Mayor Lightfoot: she tested positive for COVID on Tuesday, meaning it would have been pretty difficult to continue negotiations, anyway.

  Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot tested positive for COVID-19, her office announces. She encourages people to get vaccinated and boosted pic.twitter.com/DFs3ZUxZDR

  — Gregory Pratt (@royalpratt) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Of course, Lightfoot’s sickness is just the latest example of a ‘breakthrough’ infection.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 20:45

• Beef Prices Jump As Omicron Spread Sickens Meat Plant Workers
  Beef Prices Jump As Omicron Spread Sickens Meat Plant Workers

  The COVID-19 Omicron variant’s spread among U.S. meatpacker workers is threatening beef output and raising prices, according to Bloomberg. 

  New data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture shows beef output last week dropped 5.3% YoY, and wholesale prices jumped 1.3% on Monday, the most significant increase since August. 

  

  Rising meat prices have been the Biden administration’s core focus as food inflation is a big concern for working poor Americans. Biden’s polling data is near an all-time low as inflation wipes out wage gains. 

  

  The administration has blamed the meat industry for price-gouging. Still, it appears they have very little knowledge or are unable to or unwilling to admit problems actually driving inflation in the industry, which is related to labor issues. 

  “The beef market is finding some strength because you’re having trouble with absentee workers,” Don Roose, president of U.S. Commodities Inc. in West Des Moines, Iowa, told Bloomberg by phone. 

  Recently absenteeism at processing, packaging, and distribution of meat plants has recorded around 8%, up from 4-5%, said Mark Lauritsen, vice president of meatpacking at the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, representing thousands of plants employees. 

   “Meat plants don’t tend to be as bad as the general population,” Lauritsen said, adding that many meat workers are fully vaccinated and kept absenteeism relatively low. 

  However, the spread of the highly contagious omicron virus variant that can infect fully vaccinated people has begun to sicken workers from meatpacking plants to supermarkets. It is producing supply problems in the new year. 

  Cargill Inc., a top U.S. meatpacker, said it was experiencing a rise in infections at its plants, though all the plants are still operating. 

  Other food makers, such as Conagra Brands Inc. and Campbell Soup Co., are seeing upticks in absenteeism among workers due to COVID. 

  Meanwhile, Americans begin to panic as many have taken to social media to voice their concerns about food shortages at supermarkets. 

  This all means that food inflation will remain elevated through 2022 despite Biden’s attempt to squash it ahead of midterms. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 20:25

• Who Is Ray Epps? DoJ Refuses To Say, Jan6 Committee Claims 'Not A Fed'
  Who Is Ray Epps? DoJ Refuses To Say, Jan6 Committee Claims ‘Not A Fed’

  In October of last year, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) questioned AG Merrick Garland about a mysterious man, Ray Epps, instructing protesters to enter the US Capitol building on January 5, and who later shepherded crowds towards the Capitol on January 6.

  I questioned Attorney General Garland about whether there were Federal Agents present on 1/6 and whether they agitated to go into the Capitol. Attorney General Garland refused to answer. pic.twitter.com/RHq3Yd2pbu

  — Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) October 21, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The strange story of the mysterious man took some crazy turns, threatening to shatter the entire official narrative of the “Capitol Breach” and expose yet another dimension of proactive federal involvement in the so-called “insurrection” of January 6th; but until last week’s remembrance of the events of that day by the Democrats, Epps had faded back to the grey man… until today.

  

  Once again, the mysterious man at the center of so much action during January 6th’s events is hitting the headlines as Ken Silva details at The Epoch Times, top federal law enforcement officials have declined to answer numerous questions about Ray Epps, the Arizona resident captured on video encouraging Jan. 6 protestors to breach Capitol Hill.

  Controversy has surrounded Epps in recent months due to questions about his possible connection to law enforcement. Despite video evidence of him making repeated calls for action, Epps has not been charged in relation to Jan. 6, and his photo has been removed from the government’s list of most wanted people from that event.

  The Democratic-led House committee investigating Jan. 6 reportedly said Jan. 11 that it has interviewed Epps, and that Epps denied any connection to law enforcement.

  But at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing earlier that day, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) were unsuccessful in obtaining answers about Epps.

  Cruz asked the FBI’s assistant director for national security, Jill Sanborn, 10 questions about Epps and other potential undercover feds, none of which received substantial answers.

  Sanborn admitted that she is aware of Epps, but said she doesn’t have “specific background for him.”

  When Cruz asked whether Epps worked with the FBI, Sanborn declined to answer—likewise for when Cruz asked about whether federal informants participated in the riots, encouraged the riots, or removed barriers.

  “I cannot answer that,” Sanborn said to each query.

  Cruz pressed further.

  “Five seconds after Mr. Epps whispered to a person, that same person began forcibly tearing down the barricades. Did Mr. Epps urge them to tear down the barricades?” Cruz asked.

  “Similar to the other answers, I cannot answer that,” Sanborn replied.

  After Cruz, it was Cotton’s turn to take a crack at the issue. Cotton asked a similar line of questions, this time directed towards Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen, the head of DOJ’s national security branch.

  Olsen said he wasn’t aware of any plain-clothes officers among the Jan. 6 crowd, and that he didn’t know whether any undercover agents entered the Capitol.

  The lack of information irked Cotton.

  “Your answers are all, ‘I don’t know,’” Cotton said. “Did you prepare for this hearing? Did you know it was happening before this morning?”

  Olsen also said he didn’t have any information about Epps.

  “This was a man on the most-wanted page for six months. Do you really expect us to believe that you don’t know anything about him?” Cotton asked.

  “I simply don’t have any information at all,” Olsen responded.

  When pressed further, Olsen said he couldn’t say how many rioters were arrested for crimes related to violence, or even name a single person from the government’s list of most wanted Capitol Hill rioters. This provoked further criticism from the Arkansas senator.

  “This is a hearing to mark the one-year anniversary of Jan. 6, and you can’t even tell us how many people have been charged with crimes of violence. Would you go into a briefing with the attorney general and not be able to answer such basic questions?” Cotton said.

  “I guess we’re going to have to seek our answers elsewhere. This was not a stellar performance.”

  Towards the end of the hearing, committee chair Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) entered into the record a fact-checking article from PolitiFact, which says there’s no evidence that Epps was a federal asset.

  Durbin said he never heard of Epps before Jan. 11.

  Epps, for his part, could not be reached for comment. His address is listed on public court records—Jan. 6 defendant Kelly Meggs has issued a subpoena for him to testify—but a number connected to that address appears to have been disconnected. Epps also had a number listed on the page for the Arizona Oath Keepers, but a call to that line went straight to Epps’ voicemail, which was full.

  Epps gave an interview to The Arizona Republic last January. He reportedly said of his comments caught on video: “The only thing that meant is we would go in the doors like everyone else. It was totally, totally wrong the way they went in.”

  Following the hearing, right-wing pundits took to Twitter to congratulate Cruz and Cotton for their questions. Cruz had been dragged through the coals by Fox News host Tucker Carlson a week earlier for referring to the Capitol Hill riots as “domestic terrorism.”

  “Constructive criticism works,” said Darren Beattie, the author of the Revolver News articles on Epps.

  The Jan. 6 Committee reportedly issued the following statement shortly after the hearing: “Committee is aware of unsupported claims that Ray Epps was an FBI informant based on the fact that he was on the FBI Wanted list and then was removed from that list without being charged.

  “The Select Committee has interviewed Mr. Epps. Mr. Epps informed us that he was not employed by, working with, or acting at the direction of any law enforcement agency”

  To which, none other than Glenn Greenwald had the perfect – if not very uncomfortable – retort:

  This may be, but then why isn’t Epps among the more than 700 people charged in connection with 1/6 when there are multiple videos showing him doing far more than many if not most than those who have been charged? https://t.co/gL6ZeBhEv1

  — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  So, once again we are left asking: who is Ray Epps?

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 20:05

• China Halts Some US Flights As Omicron Wave Spreads
  China Halts Some US Flights As Omicron Wave Spreads

  The rate at which new infections of COVID-19 have spread worldwide is rapidly increasing, forcing China’s civil aviation regulator to suspend some flights from the US to Shanghai, according to Shanghai Daily. 

  

  Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) said five flights to Shanghai operated by Delta Air Lines, American Airlines, United Airlines, and China Eastern Airlines have been suspended beginning next week.

  Over 50 passengers on these flights have tested positive since the end of 2021 at Shanghai Pudong International Airport, the Civil Aviation Administration of China said.

  Among the most severely affected, Delta Air Lines Flight DL287 from Seattle to Shanghai will be suspended through the end of February.

  Six travelers on the flight tested positive at the Pudong airport on January 1, while another 11 on the same flight tested positive on January 6.

  American Airlines Flight AA127 will be put on hold for four weeks beginning January 24 after 10 passengers tested positive upon arrival at Pudong Airport on December 31.

  Other flights, such as China Eastern’s MU588 from New York to Shanghai and United Airlines Flight UA857 from San Francisco to Shanghai, will be suspended for two weeks beginning next week. -Shanghai Daily 

  CAAC further explained that flight suspensions would end if an airline’s inbound passengers all test negative for three weeks. Then it would be allowed to add two flights per week.

  The move comes as the US faces a surge in Omicron infections. New cases are set to triple last year’s quarter-million daily caseload. The seven-day average is around 704k. 

  Since the virus pandemic began, China and the US have slapped each other with flight restrictions to minimize the spread of the virus. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 19:45

• Biden's Education Secretary Allegedly Requested 'Domestic Terrorism' Letter From School Boards Group
  Biden’s Education Secretary Allegedly Requested ‘Domestic Terrorism’ Letter From School Boards Group

  Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Newly surfaced emails suggest that the U.S. Department of Education might have played a more important role than previously thought in the creation of a highly controversial letter, which likened concerned parents to domestic terrorists.

  

  In a letter (pdf) sent to President Joe Biden on Sept. 29, 2021, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) characterized disruptions at school board meetings as “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crime.” The organization also urged the federal government to invoke counterterrorism laws to quell “angry mobs” of parents seeking to hold school officials accountable for teaching Marxist critical race theory and for imposing COVID-19 restrictions such as mask mandates on their children.

  Just five days later, on Oct. 5, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo directing federal law enforcement to help address an alleged “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against teachers and school leaders. The memo remains in effect, despite the NSBA having since apologized for and rescinded the letter.

  According to email exchanges obtained by advocacy group Parents Defending Education (PDE), the NSBA letter appears to be a response to a request for information by U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona.

  On Oct. 5, NSBA board member Marnie Maldonado sent an email (pdf) to fellow board member Kristi Swett, asking her whether the NSBA had gone through all the correct procedures before sending the letter to Biden.

  “I am very concerned about the process by which the statement was made and the tone that essentially allowed the White House to direct the Attorney General to consider members of our community ‘domestic terrorists,’” Maldonado wrote, adding that she wanted the NSBA “to focus on civility.”

  In response, Swett said she agreed that there were “communication issues” within the NSBA. She also mentioned that Chip Slaven, then-interim director of the NSBA, “told officers he was writing a letter to provide information to the White House, from a request by Secretary Cordona [sic].”

  In an interview with Fox News, PDE President Nicole Neily indicated that the letter Cardona allegedly requested and the “domestic terrorism” letter are the same thing.

  “Should this allegation be true, it would reveal that this administration’s pretextual war on parents came from the highest levels,” Neily told Fox News.

  “Attorney General Merrick Garland unequivocally stated that he based his memo on the NSBA’s letter—which in turn mobilized the FBI and U.S. attorneys,” she said. “If Secretary Cardona was truly involved in this ugly episode, it is a significant breach of public trust, and he should be held accountable.”

  The new information comes amid questions over the Biden administration’s involvement in the creation of the NSBA letter, which still serves as the basis of a series of actions taken by the Justice Department.

  According to internal files leaked to Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division has created a new “threat tag” titled “EDUOFFICIALS,” and directed agents to apply the tag to all “investigations and assessments of threats” relating to school boards.

  “This disclosure provides specific evidence that federal law enforcement operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents,” Jordan said in a letter to Garland. “The FBI’s actions were an entirely foreseeable—and perhaps intended—result of your October 4 memorandum.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 19:25

• China Auto Sales Rise 4.5% In 2021, Tesla Sells Record 70,602 Vehicles In December
  China Auto Sales Rise 4.5% In 2021, Tesla Sells Record 70,602 Vehicles In December

  New energy vehicles continue to steal the show in China, with sales totalling 2.99 million units for 2021, according to newly released data from China’s Passenger Car Association.

  2021 battery electric vehicle sales led the charge, according to Bloomberg, with sales up 168.6% to 2.44 million units.

  China’s Passenger Car Association said that overall passenger vehicle sales finished the year at 20.5 million units, up 4.5% for the year.

  Shares of Tesla higher in pre-market trading on Tuesday after it was announced the EV maker sold 70,602 cars in China during December. This marks a 34% sequential rise in sales, according to Bloomberg data, and a record sales month for Elon Musk’s automaker in China. 

  

  The overall rise in vehicles sales for 2021 in China comes after a torrid November, where we noted weeks ago that sales fell for the seventh straight month in November. Sales were down 9.1% from the year prior as the industry continued to struggle with what is now becoming a year’s long semiconductor shortage. 

  The country posted total sales of 2.52 million vehicles in November, once again led by sales of new energy and electric vehicles.

  CAAM spokesperson Chen Shihua commented last month: “Consumer acceptance of new energy vehicles continues to rise. The market has shifted from policy-motivated to demand-driven.”

  

  Recall, we wrote in September that the heads of many auto manufacturers have suggested that the semi shortage “may not just disappear” in 2022.

  Volkswagen Chief Executive Officer Herbert Diess said on Bloomberg TV in September: “Probably we will remain in shortages for the next months or even years because semiconductors are in high demand. The internet of things is growing and the capacity ramp-up will take time. It will be probably a bottleneck for the next months and years to come.”

  Ola Kallenius at Daimler and Oliver Zipse of BMW also added to the pessimism. Kallenius said that the shortage “may not entirely go away” in 2022, according to Bloomberg. Zipse said there could be another 6 to 12 months left in the shortage.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 19:05

• Bill Gates Flip Flops After Turning Omicron 'FUD' Up To '11'
  Bill Gates Flip Flops After Turning Omicron ‘FUD’ Up To ’11’

  After initially turning the “FUD” dial up to ’11’ in response to the initial reports and data about the omicron variant, Microsoft founder and billionaire wannabe global vaccine czar Bill Gates has apparently had a change of heart.

  Gates on Tuesday joined Professor Devi Sridhar, a professor and chair of global health policy at the University of Edinburgh, for a Twitter discussion about the COVID pandemic.

  

  Following a few questions about vaccines where Gates seems to actually acknowledge their shortcomings for once, Gates tells Dr. Sridhar that after an omicron wave has subsided, the rest of the year should see far fewer cases and deaths, leaving COVID to retreat to the intensity of a bad flu.

  “Once Omicron goes through a country then the rest of the year should see far fewer cases so Covid can be treated more like seasonal flu.”

  A more infectious variant is “not likely,” according to Gates, although he acknowledges that the world has been “surprised a lot” before, and that the WHO is already hard at work trying to prepare for the “next” pandemic.

  Final question- what everyone wants to know -> how and when will the pandemic be over? Does omicron show that we can ‘live with COVID’? Or are other dangerous variants around the corner in 2022?

  — Prof. Devi Sridhar 🌈 (@devisridhar) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  As countries experience their Omicron wave health systems will be challenged. Most of the severe cases will be unvaccinated people. Once Omicron goes through a country then the rest of the year should see far fewer cases so Covid can be treated more like seasonal flu.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  .@DrTedros has started the conversation about how we avoid the next pandemic which is important. I appreciate your work on this. We can do a lot better next time!!#

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Circling back to the beginning of the conversation, Dr. Sridhar asks Gates what would make the “biggest difference” to ending the COVID pandemic? To our surprise, Gates acknowledged that better vaccines would make the biggest difference.

  To kick-off the conversation with @BillGates, what scientific or tech breakthrough would make the biggest difference now to ending the COVID pandemic?

  — Prof. Devi Sridhar 🌈 (@devisridhar) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The vaccines we have are missing two “key things”: 1) they don’t actually do much to prevent the spread of the virus, and 2) their duration is “limited”.

  The vaccines we have prevent severe disease and death very well but they are missing two key things.

  First they still allow infections (“breakthrough”) and the duration appears to be limited.

  We need vaccines that prevent re-infection and have many years of duration.#

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Of course, this isn’t the first time that Gates has expressed constructive criticism about his beloved vaccines.

  The conversation takes an almost humorous turn when the doctor asks Gates about the “obstacles” to “global vaccination access?”.

  Agree 100%- next gen vaccines with sterilising immunity. 2nd question: What are the current challenges in reaching global vaccination access? What are the obstacles?

  — Prof. Devi Sridhar 🌈 (@devisridhar) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Gates offers his usual boilerplate reply. But we would like to remind readers – before they simply and uncritically swallow this – that the biggest obstacle to global vaccine access just might be Bill Gates himself, since the Microsoft billionaire became perhaps the biggest opponent of the “open vaccine” movement which demanded that companies like Pfizer and Moderna make their vaccine creations open source for all countries to try and produce, instead of coveting the recipes and charging top dollar, ensuring the developing world would be last in line, only after the developed west has gotten its fill of boosters.

  During 2021 the supply of vaccines was limited and they mostly went to wealthy countries. Now we have a lot of supply overall and the problems are logistics and demand. The health systems in developing countries are a limiting factor.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  mRna vaccines still can’t meet all the demand so figuring out who gets what is complicated.#

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And when the good doctor brings up the question of vaccine “access”, Gates started talking out of both sides of his mouth.

  There’s been a lot of discussion on responsibility of pharma companies like Pfizer/Moderna for access. What is the role of these companies in ensuring pricing and availability esp in low and middle income contexts?

  — Prof. Devi Sridhar 🌈 (@devisridhar) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  When we have adequate supply then tiered pricing is used where the rich countries pay a lot more than middle income and low income pay the least which is funded by @gavi. When supply is limited rich countries have to not outbid the others so governments are key to this. #

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  Suddenly, deep in the twitter thread, Gates touched a nerve – especially considering what’s going on in Australia regarding the saga of unvaccinated tennis pro Novak Djokovic. Asked what countries could have done to be better prepared, Gates appeared to endorse the “COVID zero” strategies embraced by Australia and China.

  A few countries like Australia moved fast to diagnose cases at scale and isolate people who were infected. They were able to limit deaths dramatically. Once the numbers get large in a country it is too late. So the first few months made a lot of difference.

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Also some countries did a better job of reducing mobility, using masks and protecting the elderly.

  We weren’t prepared – no practice in advance.#

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Do you think the world will come together to get ready for the next one? I hope so but I am not sure.#

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Finally, an interview with Gates is never complete without a discussion of the role that online “misinformation” has played during the pandemic. Apparently, Gates is still dumbfounded by the notion that people think he’s conspiring to microchip them via the vaccines.

  One major problem has been online misinformation on Facebook & other platforms around vaccines, masks and other interventions- how do we deal with this challenge? When expertise is neglected and conspiracy theories are spread as if they are truth?

  — Prof. Devi Sridhar 🌈 (@devisridhar) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Trusted authorities like @WHO and @CDCgov need more resources to see the pandemic early (surveillance) and to communicate better. Social media got behind on trying to get factual information out – there will be a lot of debate about how to do better on that…

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  People like you and I and Tony Fauci have been subject to a lot of misinformation. I didn’t expect that. Some of it like me putting chips in arms doesn’t make sense to me – why would I want to do that?#

  — Bill Gates (@BillGates) January 11, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Spoken like somebody who’s conspiring to microchip the population.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 18:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Turkmenistan To Close "Gates Of Hell" Gas Fire
  Turkmenistan To Close “Gates Of Hell” Gas Fire

  Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

  Turkmenistan’s president has ordered the government to find a way to extinguish a colossal gas fire burning since the 1970s.

  

  Dubbed the “Gates of Hell,” the fire was rumored to be started deliberately in 1971 when a gas-drilling site collapsed into a gas reservoir, and geologists decided to set it on fire to keep the methane from spewing into the atmosphere—in the expectation that the fire would die out on its own in a few weeks.

  It didn’t.

  

  The crater currently measures more than 230 feet by 65 feet and is a major tourist attraction in Turkmenistan, which has proven reserves of 19.5 trillion cubic meters of natural gas, which makes them the world’s fourth-largest.

  Production stood at a little over 60 billion cubic meters annually as of 2019, with half of that exported to China.

  The “Gates of Hell” crater’s official name is the “Shining of Karakum,” but it is also known as the Darvaza Crater, named so after the nearby village. The site is located some 160 miles from the Turken capital Ashgabad.

  

  According to long-time president Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov, the fire is having an adverse impact on the environment and affecting the health of people living in the vicinity, according to a report by the AP citing Turkmen media.

  What’s more, the country, which has ambitious gas export expansion plans, is losing a valuable commodity in the fire “for which we could get significant profits,” Berdymukhamedov said.

  Turkmenistan plans to boost export to destinations including Pakistan, India, Iran, and even Western Europe over the next nine years.

  This would not be the first attempt to put out the fire that has been burning for five decades. One previous attempt failed back in Soviet times. Then, in 2010, Berdymukhamedov again ordered experts to find a way to extinguish the fire, but was unsuccessful as well.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/11/2022 – 02:00

• JFK Assassination: What’s In The Newest Batch Of Declassified Documents?
  JFK Assassination: What’s In The Newest Batch Of Declassified Documents?

  Authored by Enrico Trigoso via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Last month, the Biden administration released a batch of classified documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

  The National Archives and Records Administration published the new 1,491 documents, of which 958 are from the CIA.

  That means 9 out of 10 of the total number of documents are still being withheld from declassification.

  “It’s very little and very late,” Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the president’s nephew, told The Epoch Times.

  “There’s only 10 percent of the documents that legally have to be released in that data dump. But even those documents are clearly showing that the CIA lied outright to the Warren Commission about its relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald.”

  

  The 1992 JFK Records Act, signed by Congress into law, mandated that all the documents be released by Oct. 26, 2017.

  However, one person had the power to stop it—the incumbent president.

  When the time for total declassification finally came, President Donald Trump put a six-month delay on the final declassification. Then he put a three-year delay on it.

  Some documents were declassified, however, and by the time President Joe Biden took office, about 15,000 documents were either being withheld or redacted in part.

  

  Jim DiEugenio is a JFK assassination expert and the scriptwriter for the 2021 film “JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass,” an intense film that highlights information that had not previously been made known widely to the public in a clear manner.

  “So you get this situation where 58 years after Kennedy was killed, you still have something like 14,300 pages of classified documents, which I believe is really a kind of defiance of the law,” DiEugenio told The Epoch Times.

  “For a couple of different reasons—one of them being that in the JFK Records Collection Act, it said that if the president chose to keep a document classified, he had to have a written reason.

  “To my knowledge that has not happened yet, either under Biden, or under Trump. And they’ve also made the National Archives a part of this process, which I don’t understand at all because the National Archives is only a repository. In the law, it doesn’t say anything about them being part of the declassification process. It’s between the President and the agencies of government, whether that be the FBI, the CIA, State Department, or whatever.

  “So this is very, very disappointing. In other words, if Biden follows through and declassifies everything next year, that means we’ll have waited 59 years. 59 years—when in fact the Warren Commission says that there is no question that Oswald acted alone.”

  Did Oswald Leave Mexico City by Automobile or by Bus?

  The Warren Commission, appointed by President Lyndon B. Johnson to report on the assassination of JFK, concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald acted entirely alone in the assassination, and that he went to Mexico and returned to the United States by bus.

  The newly declassified documents show that the Nov. 26, 1963 CIA summary, which documents Oswald’s activities, was made about seven weeks after he had left Mexico City.

  

  “They have Oswald leaving Mexico City by automobile,” DiEugenio said (pdf).

  “Which is very, very interesting for a lot of different reasons. Number one, Oswald did not have a driver’s license. Secondly, Oswald did not have a car. And third, the Warren Commission, which is going to be issued about 10 months later, they’re going to say that Oswald went down by bus, and that he returned by bus.”

  

  “It denotes that either he went down with somebody else, or there was an impersonator of Oswald down there. So, that changed over time.”

  ‘Was There More Than One Stretcher With a Bullet On It?’

  In the very early days of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Select Committee on Assassinations, there was a meeting between then chief counsel Richard Sprague and some of the representatives on the commission.

  “Sprague said that he had a witness from Parkland Hospital, which is where Kennedy and Connally were taken to after the assassination, who was a nurse,” DiEugenio said.

  “And she said, that as she came out of one of the trauma rooms, there was a stretcher up against the wall near the elevator, and she saw a bullet on it.”

  During this meeting, Sprague wouldn’t tell the others what her name was, or where she was.

  “The Warren Commission would say that there were two stretchers there, not just one, and that the bullet was underneath the mat of the stretcher, and it only emerged after the custodian Darrell Tomlinson pushed it up against the wall.

  “So I thought that was utterly fascinating because it leaves one with the impression that: ‘was there more than one stretcher with a bullet on it?’ And there have been reports that such was the case.”

  Also during the meeting, Sprague told the congressmen that he’s having problems with the credibility of former CIA officer David Phillips.

  “[Sprague] suspects that Phillips is not being completely candid with them about Oswald’s alleged activities in Mexico City,” said DiEugenio.

  “Especially about his calls to the Russian embassy from the Cuban embassy, that he’s found certain discrepancies in the adduced record that the CIA has given him, and in fact, he wants to go down and interview the translators down there. Because he is under the suspicion that there might have been some kind of alteration of the transcripts of Oswald’s alleged conversations with the Russian embassy, because he cannot find the information that Phillips talked about at their first interview in the transcripts that were given to him by the CIA.”

  Edgar Stern Had a CIA Clearance

  The new document dump also reveals that Edgar Stern, the husband of the heiress (Edith Stern) to the Sears Roebuck fortune who was a big backer of Clay Shaw against Jim Garrison, had a CIA clearance (pdf) that was not publically known about before.

  

  New Orleans DA Jim Garrison had accused Clay Shaw of being part of a conspiracy to assassinate JFK.

  “The Sterns would bring reporters to their mansion. They would wine them and dine them, [and] they would push certain angles to attack Garrison. Well, turns out Edgar Stern had a CIA clearance in the 1950s for about three years,” said DiEugenio.

  Clay Shaw’s Former Boss Was Recruiting Lawyers for the CIA

  According to DiEugenio, it is now determined that Clay Shaw’s former boss at the New Orleans International Trade Mart, Lloyd Cobb, was recruiting lawyers for the CIA to place them on a panel of attorneys that possessed special clearance.

  “We knew that Cobb was on the CIA’s cleared attorneys panel in New Orleans. Which was [composed] of certain people that the CIA would choose, and if somebody was in trouble—and there were several people in trouble during the Garrison investigation—they would pick an attorney from this chosen panel to defend this person, and of course the CIA would pay for it,” DiEugenio said.

  

  “It turns out that Cobb was actually one of the people who was contacting other lawyers and evaluating them for the CIA to put on this panel. He wasn’t just a member of it. He was sort of like their agent on this scene in New Orleans conducting these clearance evaluations for who to hire to put on this panel.

  “In other words, here you have Clay Shaw’s former boss at the International Trade Mart, running a panel of lawyers to block and impede Jim Garrison’s investigation. Very, very, interesting if you ask me.”

  CIA Knew That Boxley Was a Staffer for Them

  An alleged investigator who ended up working for Jim Garrison and was apparently unloyal to him turned out to be a former CIA staffer.

  His name was William Wood, his alias—Bill Boxley.

  “In this newest batch of documents, it reveals that the CIA knew that Boxley actually was a staffer for the CIA in the 1950s before he went to work for Jim Garrison,” DiEugenio noted.

  “And if you take a look at Jim Garrison’s book ‘On The Trail the Assassins,’ it turns out that Mr. Wood—alias Bill Boxley—did end up betraying Mr. Garrison. It’s in one of the chapters of his book.”

  CIA Reveals Names of Two Assassins

  In the newest batch of documents, the CIA reveals the real names of the assassins that they had hired under the code names WI Rogue and QJ Win.

  “This had been an assignment that was given to CIA officer William Harvey. He was supposed to go around the world and hire people of disrepute to engage in felonious activities for the Central Intelligence Agency; things like safecracking, breaking and entering,” DiEugenio explained.

  “And it turned out that these guys were actually sent to Congo to assassinate Patrice Lumumba.”

  

  Qj Win was Jose Mankel.

  WI Rogue was David Dato. His real last name was Tzitzichvilli.

  DiEugenio finally noted that most of these documents are not ones that have been previously classified in full, most of these new documents have been redacted before.

  “Now we can more cleanly see what is in them,” he said.

  Full disclosure of the rest of the documents is expected next year.

  “At the end of next year, it’s going to be very, very interesting.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 23:50

• Morgan Stanley Says US Omicron Wave Will Peak In 3 Weeks
  Morgan Stanley Says US Omicron Wave Will Peak In 3 Weeks

  Morgan Stanley has called the top on Omicron, or at least offered a range of when the peak might arrive.

  In their latest note to clients, a team led by equity analyst Matthew Harrison projected that the omicron wave in North America would likely peak within 3-6 weeks, which would place the peak of this wave at a slightly later point than last year’s winter top in new cases identified.

  By using an “established relationship” between the virus’s effective reproduction rate and the number of new case, the bank’s analysts can look at the situation in South Africa, and help postulate what might happen in Europe and the US.

  The case wave reaches a peak when R returns to 1. Currently in South Africa, R is below 1 and lower than last week, reflecting the steep decrease in cases. R is still growing (and thus cases are as well) in the US, UK,and EU, so, according to Morgan Stanley, the peak isn’t in yet.

  The bank used data from South Africa as a basis for its projections for the US and Europe. For example, it took South Africa 4-5 weeks to reach peak cases (mid-Nov to mid-Dec), which is faster than Delta (~9 weeks). And R peaked ~2-3 weeks ahead of the case peak and decreased from ~2 to ~1 in 20 days.

  Assuming a similar trajectory in the US, Morgan Stanley laid out its bull base and bear cases for the omicron wave in the US.

  

  And here’s a comparison of the rate of viral reproduction in the US and South Africa.

  

  The MS team explained that their bull case assumes a peak 1-2 weeks from now, while their bear case would mean the peak might be as many as 8 weeks distant.

  

  The note also included some insights about omicron’s ability to crowd out the competition. Using the strain sequencing data from GISAID, the MS team was able to determine that omicron displaced delta as the dominant strain in under two weeks.

  

  Finally, here’s a comparison of the rate of transmission in various countries this week vs. last.

  

  * * *
  Source: Morgan Stanley

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 23:30

• "Think Twice Before You Vaccinate Your Kids", Dr. Robert Malone Warns Parents On COVID-19 Shots
  “Think Twice Before You Vaccinate Your Kids”, Dr. Robert Malone Warns Parents On COVID-19 Shots

  Authored by Mimi Nguyen Ly and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

  Dr. Robert Malone, a virologist and immunologist who has contributed significantly to the technology of mRNA vaccines, issued a strong caution for those who seek to have their children vaccinated against COVID-19.

  “Think twice before you vaccinate your kids. Because if something bad happens, you can’t go back and say, ‘whoops, I want a do-over,’” Malone told EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program in an interview, Part 1 of which premiered on Sunday.

  He also said, “It is clear that parents should think twice about vaccinating their child,” adding that serious adverse events can occur and can be “so severe that it puts your child in the hospital.”

  

  Malone noted that with regard to myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart, “there’s a good chance that if your child takes the vaccine, they won’t be damaged, they won’t show clinical symptoms—[but] they may have subclinical damage.”

  “But the question is, do you want to take that chance with your child? Because if you draw the short straw and your child was damaged, most of these things, if not all of them, are irreversible. There is no way to fix it,” he said.

  “And I get these emails all the time: ‘Doctor, doctor, what can we do? This has happened.’ And that once it’s happened, there’s … you can’t go back you can’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.”

  He pointed to information compiled on his website, which includes a list of peer-reviewed studies related to COVID-19 vaccine adverse events in children, the main one being myocarditis. The website also includes a collection of adverse events reports as well as death reports in the pediatric community, submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

  “They’re there as links to the VAERS database, and if you click on them, you can see the actual VAERS report that was filed by a physician saying this is what happened,” Malone said. “And you can make your own decision about whether or not you think that that’s vaccine-related. So all of those data are there.”

  

  A 5-year-old girl looks at her arm after getting a Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in New York City on Nov. 8, 2021. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

  One page on Malone’s website points to a paper published in the Toxicology Reports journal in which authors noted, using data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), that normalized data on COVID-19 deaths per capita are “negligible in children,” while deaths after COVID-19 vaccination are “small, but not negligible, in children.”

  “For children the chances of death from COVID-19 are negligible, but the chances of serious damage over their lifetime from the toxic inoculations are not negligible,” the authors wrote in the paper, titled “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?”

  Malone’s latest warning comes after he issued a prepared statement in mid-December 2021 aimed at parents, in which he said that with regard to mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, “a viral gene will be injected into your children’s cells” that “forces your child’s body to make toxic spike proteins.”

  “These proteins often cause permanent damage in children’s critical organs, including their brain and nervous system, their heart and blood vessels, including blood clots, their reproductive system, and this vaccine can trigger fundamental changes to their immune system.”

  Malone is strongly opposed to COVID-19 vaccine mandates for children. He is the chief science officer and regulatory officer for The Unity Project, a movement seeking to resist COVID-19 vaccine mandates for K–12 children.

  “The Unity Project’s position is one based on the logic of informed consent versus forced vaccination—that mandates should not happen,” Malone told EpochTV.

  “The state should not be forcing itself into the family. The decisions belong at the level of parents not at the level of the state or the school board. School boards and schools and teachers have no right to understand and seek out medical information about their students‚ that’s illegal. And yet, it’s being done all the time. And students are being bullied if they haven’t taken vaccine.”

  Malone is also the president of the International Alliance of Physicians and Medical Scientists—a group of 16,000 professionals who have signed a declaration that says healthy children “shall not be subject to forced vaccination.”

  “Mandates are illegal based on the Nuremberg Code, Helsinki Accord, the Belmont Report,” Malone said.

  “These continued to be unlicensed products, they’re only available through emergency use authorization … These are not licensed products, and they’re being forced on your children, and they have risks. And the media, through its censorship, and Big Tech is blocking your ability to even learn what those risks are. So you can make an informed decision for your children yourself. That is a huge crime in my mind.”

  

  Municipal workers hold placards and shout slogans as they march across Brooklyn Bridge during a protest against the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, in New York on Oct. 25, 2021. (Ed Jones/AFP via Getty Images)

  Malone said that people can join a “Defeat the Mandates” rally and march in Washington, D.C., scheduled for Jan. 23, to unite against mandatory vaccinations.

  Two mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are currently available in the United States under emergency use authorization (EUA)—one from Pfizer-BioNTech and the other from Moderna.

  The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty, is the only one that has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for people 16 and older. The approval is only for Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine doses produced in the future, according to FDA documents, while the existing supply of COVID-19 vaccines under Pfizer-BioNTech in the United States continue to be administered under an updated EUA.

  The FDA granted an EUA for Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine for those aged 12–15 in May 2021, and for children aged 5–11 in October 2021.

  California in October 2021 became the first state to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for children, followed by Louisiana in December 2021. Both states said they will only enforce the mandate if the FDA fully authorizes the vaccines for children.

  The Pfizer vaccine remains the only jab against COVID-19 available for people aged under 18 in the United States. The FDA in October 2021 delayed a decision on whether to grant Moderna an EUA for its COVID-19 for those aged 12 to 17, saying it needs more time to further review the vaccine’s risk for myocarditis in this population.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to Pfizer-BioNTech and the FDA for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 23:10

• Amidst A Historic Shortage Of Drivers, Debate About Autonomous 18-Wheelers Has Begun
  Amidst A Historic Shortage Of Drivers, Debate About Autonomous 18-Wheelers Has Begun

  While the debate about the safety of self-driving cars rages on between automakers and regulators, another debate is about to begin: can massive self-driving 40 ton 18-wheeler trucks be safe on the roads?

  Forcing the issue are companies like J.B. Hunt , Uber’s freight division and FedEx – all of whom are testing autonomous big rigs. The technology, which could be useful now during the current driver shortage, is likely still years away. But that hasn’t stopped the issue from being hotly contested, according to a new Bloomberg report.

  Sterling Anderson, co-founder of Aurora Innovation Inc., sees the obvious benefits: “Human drivers, by our nature, have to eat, sleep and take breaks. What that leads to is enormous underutilization of these trucks and much slower movement of goods.”

  Haven’t these drivers learned anything from Amazon yet? You’re supposed to use the bathroom in your vehicles to save time. 

  While legislation hasn’t been put in place yet, the idea of tractor trailers barreling down highways without drivers has caught the attention of safety advocates. The NHTSA, for example, is quick to point out that 12.6% of all crashes on U.S. roads in 2020 involved a large truck. 

  

  Cathy Chase, president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, commented: “What we see playing out on roads with some cars claiming to have self-driving capabilities crashing into barriers and people is giving people some pause. We should not be putting test products on the roads.”

  Chase says its “unclear” if self-driving tractor trailers would solve problems related to the nation’s supply chain at this point. 

  But technology companies continue to press on with testing. Waymo’s trucking division has also started to test driverless trucks, helping along efforts by J.B. Hunt. 

  Meanwhile, the industry is currently about 80,000 drivers short of what it needs to meet demand, the report says. Drivers are down 6.8% in 2020, from 2019, The American Trucking Associations said. 

  Ariel Wolf, general counsel to the Self-Driving Coalition, concluded: “It has to be safe, but we have to get these vehicles on the road as swiftly as possible.”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 22:50

• China Dismisses Official Who Speaks Truth About COVID Lockdown
  China Dismisses Official Who Speaks Truth About COVID Lockdown

  Authored by Nicole Hao via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Chinese regime dismissed an official who posted on social media the real situation in Xi’an under its strict COVID-19 rules.

  

  The facts that the official posted include a 31-year-old man who walked eight days and nights to his hometown because of a lack of income, no public transportation, and fear of quarantine in Xi’an.

  Two other Xi’an migrant workers had the same purpose, with one riding a bike for 10 hours in the icy night, and another swimming across a frozen river.

  However, the official’s post was designated as a rumor, removed from the internet, and censored by the regime.

  “An ordinary official knows the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) rules very well. They don’t dare to say the things which might anger the regime, not to mention the dismissed official is a senior official,” U.S.-based China affair commentator Tang Jingyuan told The Epoch Times on Jan. 8. “Even a self-censored official is dismissed because of an online post, you can imagine how tightly the Chinese regime controls people’s speech.”

  “After studying, we decided to dismiss Song Wentao from the position of deputy director of the Organization Department of the Grass-roots Construction Division,” the All-China Federation of Returned Overseas Chinese (ACFROC) announced on Jan. 6.

  The ACFROC is a key organ of the Chinese regime’s United Front Work Department, whose role is influencing elite individuals and organizations inside and outside China to support the regime. Song, as a senior official from ACFROC, used to visit different Chinese cities to check their performance in reintegrating Chinese people who returned from overseas.

  Shaanxi Provincial Network Reporting Center’s notification on Jan. 4 explained the reason for Song’s dismissal.

  “The account Qingfengmingyue Lou posted an article headlined ‘Xi’an people’s sorrows: why some of them fled Xi’an even risked their lives and broke the law’ on WeChat on Jan. 2,” The center announced. “The account is held by Song Wentao.”

  The center claimed that Song’s post collected people’s complaints online, “ignoring all the residents’ efforts against the epidemic.”

  Although the center said what Song posted isn’t true, Xi’an residents and announcements by local police confirmed the cases that Song detailed in his post.

  

  Song detailed the situations of Xi’an residents’ lives under the strict lockdown in his post, such as people not having a solution to buy food and other necessaries, and not being able to visit hospitals.

  “Xi’an residents are worried about death from sickness and hunger, rather than COVID-19,” Song concluded in his post.

  In the post, Song listed three men who fled the city when the regime announced the lockdown, but were detained by police before they could arrive at home in other cities in Shaanxi Province. Xi’an is the capital of northwestern China’s Shaanxi. Due to the lockdown, the regime stopped all public transportation in Xi’an, and people couldn’t get out by train, bus, car, or airplane.

  “Without supplements and GPS, [the 31-year-old man] walked eight days and nights, climbed over the vast mountains, waded through the icy rivers, entered Yangtze River Basin from Yellow River Basin, and crossed the Qinling—the line separated north and south in China,” Song wrote.

  The man Song mentioned is from a rural area in Ankang city in southern Shaanxi, where people eat the food they plant. In Xi’an, the man rented a room in a village close to Xianyang Airport and made a living by selling clothes at a street vendor stand.

  After the city was locked down, the man couldn’t make any money but needed to buy food and pay rent. He decided to go home although there’s no public transportation and checkpoints to prevent people from traveling at every village and township.

  The man left his rented room on Dec. 16 and was detained by police in Ningshan County on Dec. 24, about 75 miles away from the airport. During the eight days, he only took naps in the early afternoons when there’s sunshine. All other times, he kept on walking because it was too cold to sleep.

  Song cried for the medical workers who performed the tests on streets in Xi’an. “After a snow, the wind was big and cold. The medical workers on the streets had to spray disinfection between tests. Almost all their hands were blue because of the cold.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 22:30

• "Trade Of 2022" Surges As China's Most Distressed Property Developers Near Bailout
  “Trade Of 2022” Surges As China’s Most Distressed Property Developers Near Bailout

  On Saturday, we discussed that what may arguably be the trade of the year, one with the most convex, best Upside/Downside opportunities we have encountered in a while, had emerged in China courtesy of the latest panic in Beijing which saw China’s authorities finally realize they need to step in and bail out the imploding property development (and housing) sector.

  Specifically, in the latest gradual easing of financial conditions in the property market, regulators told banks to step up lending to developers after at least two quarters of consecutive declines. At the same time, borrowing by major property firms used to fund mergers and acquisitions will no longer be counted toward the notorious three red lines metrics that limit debt, which as we said, suggested that “a wave of consolidation is about to sweep China which should stabilize the property market at least in the short-term as insolvent firms are absorbed by their viable peers.”

  We didn’t have long to wait because just one day later, on Monday, shares of massively beaten down Shimao Group which we previously said had become a distressed bellwether for financial contagion in the property industry due to its recent investment grade rating and sudden collapse in bond prices…

  

  … soared as much as 14% in Hong Kong – a surge that continued on Tuesday morning – after a report in REDD that state-backed property giant China Vanke was in talks with the developer for asset acquisitions (i.e. a soft nationalization), a move made possible just days earlier by Beijing’s latest directive easing loans for M&A in the space. Incidentally, this took place just as Moody’s and S&P both downgraded Shimao’s credit rating.

  And with a growing likelihood of a white knight bailout, Shimao’s deeply beaten down dollar bonds also climbed after the report, with a note due in July rising 3 cents on the dollar to 47.6 cents after cratering as low as a record 26.6 cents last week.

  Now, of course, none of the above suggests that China’s property sector is fixed; in fact as Bloomberg’s Sofia Horta e Costa writes, Shimao’s unprecedented 19% rally on Monday was more a result of short covering rather than a shift in sentiment, noting that it doesn’t take much for a short squeeze. And since the developer had lost almost 90% of its market value since a record in 2020, betting against the stock was a popular trade among hedge funds, meaning that more than 16% of its free float was sold short as of Friday, according to IHS Markit data, near the highest level since 2012.

  But that’s precisely the reason why the risk/return on Chinese housing is so extremely high: with virtually all bad news priced in, the real convexity is in the explosive move higher that any piece of good news would trigger, whether it be a state-mandated white knight bailout, or even more easing from China which has now clearly ended its experiment with crushing the most important asset in its economy.

  It’s also why we said on Saturday that a pair trade of shorting US homebuilders – especially with the Fed set to hike rates, pushing mortgage rates higher and hitting US homebuilders in the process – and with going long Chinese property developers now that China is officially panicking and soon willing to do anything to support its housing market could be the best trade of 2022.

  Will this be the trade of 2022https://t.co/4rH2QdDUv7 pic.twitter.com/dLZO3p0Npp

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 9, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Sure enough, just one day later, having hit an all time low just this past Friday, the pair trade is already starting to move rapidly higher…

  

  … a move which will only accelerate as the squeezed shorts flee to cover.

  Which is not to say this is a risk-free trade: on the contrary, this week will be a major test for China’s real estate sectoras Guangzhou R&F has a $725 million bond coming due on Thursday, plus another $21 million in interest, while Evergrande is seeking to avoid its first default on a yuan bond the same day when bondholders vote on whether to allow the firm to defer payment. However, if recent overtures from Beijing are any indication, China’s authorities have decided that there has been enough pain in the property sector and it is now time to ease the pain.

  If that is the case the only question is not if but when the ratio of Chinese to US housing recover all of the losses observed in the post-Covid era.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 22:10

• Hedge Funds Flood Into Oil As Threat Of Omicron Disruption Recedes
  Hedge Funds Flood Into Oil As Threat Of Omicron Disruption Recedes

  by John Kemp, Reuters senior energy market analyst

  Oil markets attracted a new wave of interest from investors at the end of 2021 and start of 2022, as the threat of widespread economic and aviation disruption from Omicron seemed to recede. 

  Hedge funds and other money managers purchased the equivalent of 31 million barrels in the six most important petroleum-related futures and options contracts in the week to Jan. 4.

  

  Portfolio managers have purchased a total of 102 million barrels in the three most recent weeks, after selling 327 million barrels in the previous 10 weeks (https://tmsnrt.rs/3f5QZ5B).

  In the most recent week, most of the buying came from the creation of new bullish long positions (+27 million barrels) rather than closure of old bearish short ones (-5 million). 

  

  Bullish long positions now outnumber bearish short ones by a ratio of 5.18:1 (in the 67th percentile for all weeks since 2013) up from 3.83:1 (47th percentile) on Dec. 14.

  

  Last week’s buying was broadly based, with purchases in Brent (+19 million barrels), U.S. gasoline (+7 million), U.S. diesel (+4 million) and European gas oil (+3 million), with sales only in NYMEX and ICE WTI (-2 million).

  

  The number of confirmed coronavirus infections per day worldwide has almost quadrupled to 308 per million in the seven days ending on Jan. 10 up from 78 per million on the seven days ending Dec. 14. 

  But the link between confirmed cases, hospitalisations and deaths appears to have weakened, with the result many governments are imposing more limited restrictions on business activity and travel than in previous waves.

  The more limited response to this latest wave of the pandemic has encouraged bulls in their view that the impact on oil consumption will be relatively limited and short duration.

  As the current wave of infections fades in the spring, the continued cyclical upturn in the global economy is expected to result in further growth in oil consumption from the second quarter onwards.

  Coupled with limited production growth from OPEC, its allies, and U.S. shale producers, global petroleum inventories are likely to tighten further by the end of 2022.

  Hedge fund oil buyers are anticipating, accelerating and amplifying the move to an even tighter market by the end of this year.

  In consequence, front-month Brent futures prices have rebounded to within $5 per barrel of their previous cyclical highs in October 2021 and October 2018, and the gap is even closer if inflation is taken into account. 

  Brent’s six-month calendar spread has tightened into a backwardation of around $3.80 per barrel (93rd percentile for all trading days since 1990) up from $1.54 (67th percentile) in the middle of December.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 21:50

• Senate Bill Would Force States To Pair Voter ID With Vaccine Passports
  Senate Bill Would Force States To Pair Voter ID With Vaccine Passports

  As Democratic lawmakers push America towards vaccine passports to participate in society – they’re also pushing to weaken safeguards on voting, under the guise of ‘voting rights,’ a new Senate bill would force states to pair voter ID requirements with vaccine passports.

  

  The legislation is the idea of Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota who says if a state forces people to prove their vaccination status, they should also have to prove who they are when they go to vote.

  Sen. Cramer says he wants to point out the hypocrisy in Democrats who support vaccine passports but oppose voter ID –Fox5

  “It seems just logical that if I had to show Bill Deblasio something that’s personal and private just to have a steak dinner in New York City, the least he should do is require people to prove they are who they say they are before they take on the very important responsibility of voting,” says Cramer.

  Virginia’s newly elected Attorney General Jason Miayes agrees with the idea.

  “The standard should be easy to vote and hard to cheat,” he tells Fox5. “I think we all should have an interest in making sure that we trust our election system and voter ID is a very simple safe way to do that.”

  Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin, meanwhile, says he’ll block vaccine passports altogether.

  According to the report, Cramer acknowledges that trying to tie voter ID to vaccine passports will be difficult, but he hopes it will at least highlight the hypocrisy from the left.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 21:30

• Saturday Night Fight… At The Pharmacy
  Saturday Night Fight… At The Pharmacy

  Via Pierre Kory’s Medical Musings Substack,

  In the Omicron wildfire, with hundreds of thousands ill each day, U.S physicians and patients need their pharmacists support.. but most block access to generic medicines, fearfully and/or willfully.

  

  I am exhausted.. physically and emotionally and morally. Although I am not sure moral exhaustion is “a thing,” the daily witnessing of masses of physicians and pharmacists abandoning their core responsibility of placing the welfare of the patient as their primary consideration.. is beyond wearying. As my friend and COVID expert Dr. Hector Carvallo has long ago said, “it’s time for the lawyers.” It is becoming increasingly critical that the law profession aid the medical profession as it has long ago been led astray by captured federal pharmaceutical agencies. Note that I no longer call them “federal health agencies” as all their actions have been 100% consistent with what a pharmaceutical or vaccine manufacturer would want them to do. To prove that point, I simply ask that, when you read an announcement in corporate media that reports a new decision or action by the federal pharmaceutical agencies (FPA’s for short), simply ask yourself “is that what a pharmaceutical company would do?”

  Perfect example of this exercise was 2 days ago when it was announced that the “FPA” had authorized boosters for 12-17 year old’s against omicron (a generally mild cold in kids), using a vaccine designed for older, fundamentally different variants that have already spectacularly failed at giving protection against omicron given ever-increasing data of “negative efficacy” (i.e. vaccinated people are getting omicron more frequently than the unvaccinated). Yet the FPA “doubles down” with yet another “non-scientific policy” so that Pharma can increase the total market size of those eligible for a vaccine… and who cares if this decision ends up sending more kids to hospital than the disease ever would. Another brutal assault on public health. Another day in the United States of Pharma.

  In the United States of Pharma, individual docs and pharmacists have been led so far astray, forgivably or unforgivably, due to the relentless barrage of dis-information targeted at them by the FPA’s (further supported by relentless, daily propaganda appearing in both major media and medical journals). The resulting proportion of these two professions that have failed to display even a modicum of either critical thinking or moral conviction.. is terrifying. It is also causing lots of problems for patients and physicians (a colleague of mine now differentiates “doctors” from “physicians”, reserving the latter term for those who follow our guiding principles and ethics by always, always, putting the patient’s welfare as their primary goal above all else, even at personal sacrifice).

  What prompted me to write this substack was my most recent failure (and the resulting distress that led to crap sleep last night) over not being able to get a pharmacist to fill my orders in the hours prior to closing of pharmacies for an acutely ill COVID patient that had contacted me reporting high fevers, sore throat, and body aches. I immediately wanted to start him on a short course combination regimen of three, old, safe, cheap generic medications, all with large clinical trials evidence bases showing high efficacy against COVID (ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, fluvoxamine). What is important to note is that, months ago I stopped trying to contact ANY pharmacy unless I KNEW they would fill my scripts for these off-patients medications because unless I knew a pharmacy was “safe”, I ran a high probability of entering an un-affordably time-wasting and ultimately losing argument with some smug, obstinate pharmacist. As a result, we early treatment docs have long since been forced to build lists of “safe haven” pharmacies where we know we can easily get access to these medicines for our patients.

  However, last night, I was inspired to make an attempt on a new, unknown pharmacy on behalf of my new patient as I had just read Steve Kirsch’s substack about my colleague and early COVID-treatment pioneer/expert Dr. Brian Tyson, in which was included the letter written by Dr. Brian Tyson’s attorney (also with the last name Tyson) that was used to “sway” a local pharmacy that had suddenly refused to fill.

  The letter is thorough , deeply well-argued, and informs the pharmacists that they are; 1) violating the civil rights of patients, 2) interfering with a physicians ability to practice medicine and 3) exhibiting behavior that constitutes the unlicensed and negligent practice of medicine. Now, I had argued all these points before in previous “conflicts” with pharmacists, but never all at the same time, and rarely threatening a lawsuit. Duly and newly emboldened.. I made the call.

  4:20 Pacific time (pharmacies close there at 6pm).

  Transcript (from memory):

  “Hi, I’d like to call in a prescription for a couple of patients.”

  “OK, what’s the first patients name and date of birth?”

  “Timothy Thomas (not his real name), born Nov. 6th, 1977.”

  (pause, clacking of keyboard)

  “OK, what does he need?”

  (Wait for it)

  “He needs ivermectin, 3 milligram tablets, I want him to take 15 each day as he is a big guy, and for 5 days with a refill. Then he needs, hydroxychloro…

  “Doctor, I am sorry but I cannot fill the ivermectin. The owner has said we are not to fill for COVID, there is no evidence it works.”

  “Listen, I don’t know who the owner is but you are the pharmacist on duty, and I am calling in a prescription to you, not the owner.”

  “I,I, I am sorry but I can’t..”

  I look at the letter, and then start spewing rapid fire arguments at him, “well unfortunately for you, my patient is an executive of a company and their lawyer is prepared to and will send a letter of intent to sue if it has not been filled because you are violating his civil rights, blocking my licensed ability to practice medicine and care for my sick patient, and you are clearly practicing medicine illegally and highly ignorantly. You should at least know what you are doing if you are going to do it without a license man”

  “But I am allowed to refuse doctor.”

  “That is what you think and what you have been told… But, I can promise you, that when you bring your arguments up in court as to why you refused, they will not hold up if any harm comes to my patient by your refusal. They will NOT HOLD UP, but you can try. The lawyer will serve the letter on Monday, I promise you, we are fed up out here and are fighting back, all of my fellow physicians being blocked by pharmacists are now using legal action (OK, so I overstated things a bit), I am sorry you are in the position you are in, but you have no rational or scientific evidence to support a refusal, but if you want to go to court to find out, we can make that happen for you”

  “I..I.. feel intimidated.”

  “Well, I am sorry for that, but you are hurting my patient and my ability to care for them. It is THEY who YOU are intimidating Sir. All you have to do is take my script, fill it, and we don’t have to go on like this. These medications are FDA approved, I am using them off-label based on a large body of evidence and experience in COVID, and off label prescribing is both legal and historically encouraged by the FDA. You are clearly practicing medicine and I promise that will be proven to you in a court of law. Please just fill it and you wont have to hear from me or my patient again.”

  (Pause, silence)

  “I cannot do it, I am not supposed to.”

  “OK then, I will also remind you that you are legally required to provide me your name and license number as we will be pursuing legal action against you.”

  “I am not giving you my name, I am not comfortable with that.”

  “OK, so you think I can’t find it out? Fine, I am also documenting this refusal. Again, I am not interested in a contentious argument, I am asking you simply to fill the prescriptions for two sick patients who need my help, and if you do, you won’t have to hear from me or the patient’s lawyer.”

  He whispers.. “OK, tell me the rest of the prescriptions.”

  I tell him the rest, then say, “my patient will be there by closing time, thank you and I apologize for my tone but I am just trying to do the best for my sick patients.”

  Victory? Yes! Haven’t won one of these in months.. the letter and it’s well articulated legal threats worked! Thanks Steve! Thanks Bryan (and your attorney)!

  I finish telling him the rest of the scripts for my patient and his wife (I also needed to call in medicines for her so she could have some on hand and also begin ivermectin as a prophylactic agent given it ensures an easier course even if she is already or eventually becomes infected).

  I then happily call the patient, tell him to get his wife to pick up the medicines along with the other over-the-counter compounds that have clinical trials supporting their use. And then I go to the couch to literally lay down (insane day of dozens of patient care requests, other zooms and phone calls, maybe 12+ hours on the phone).

  30 minutes later.. patients texts me.. my wife went there and the pharmacist wont fill.

  Now, despite the fact that I co-wrote a document with Executive Director Kelly Bumann of the FLCCC and Unity Project Founder Jeff Hanson, called “Overcoming the Barriers to Access,” which is a document full of sound, pragmatic tactics and dialogue examples offered to patients (and docs) in order to help them navigate such pharmacist obstructions, they typically will not work when it is an hour before closing on a weekend. So, here I am the next morning. Fortunately I was able to get 2 of the medicines filled through another pharmacy, with enough for his wife as she unsurprisingly fell ill overnight (omicron moves fast). Unfortunately, they will have to wait until tomorrow to get the 3rd medicine from a “friendly” or “underground” pharmacy (not really underground but you get the analogy).

  This is what it is like out here trying to fight for patients sick with COVID – widespread delays in care as blocking access to medicines by ignorant/arrogant pharmacists is ubiquitous. The majority of pharmacists (not all!) have simply stopped thinking critically or devoting effort to review the evidence base, instead simply believe what they are told by their Boards (a.k.a. their Ministries of Truth). As if the insane numbers of ill omicron patients to care for is not challenging enough.

  In the words of Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, who went after his state’s Pharmacy Board when they tried to scare the states pharmacists away from prescribing ivermectin by sending them threatening letters, “it is shocking that pharmacists are suddenly developing a conscience after spending the last decade handing out opiates like they were M & M’s”. Well said and tragically absurd.

  This newfound conscience influencing such actions is likely further fueled by a sometime resident psychology of pharmacists who may feel “less than” a physician given their limited scope of patient care tasks. Emboldened by a seemingly legal opportunity to assert superiority and control over physicians, many find these too irresistible to resist. Instead, they seem to be clearly “getting off” from pointing out to the “stupid” doctors that the Ministry of Truth has done the research for them and have found that in the name of science, doctors must be stopped from using “ineffective horse de-wormer” to treat COVID. Good times. Just another day in the life of an early COVID treatment expert.

  Let me end with the following disturbing data and observations. Take a look at this chart compiled by the FLCCC data analyst, Juan Chamie.

  

  From the above, it should be noted that prior to our FLCCC ivermectin paper being posted on a pre-print server (Nov 13, 2020) and prior to my testimony in the Senate hearings of Senator Ron Johnson noted above (Dec. 8, 2020), nursing home residents made up about 30% of all COVID deaths in the U.S. (also note that Senator Johnson’s efforts have made him one of the most (if not the most) impactful of the early treatment advocates for COVID in this country.. (and in history?).

  As you can see from above, suddenly, by mid-to-late December 2020, the proportion of dying U.S COVID patients that were residents in nursing homes started to plummet to now around 5-6% of all U.S COVID deaths.. and it has stayed stably low at this level ever since (notice how you never read any more newspaper reports of legions of people dying in nursing homes?). Hmmm. Was it the vaccines? Nope – nursing home resident vaccination rates were equal to or lower than the over 65 non-nursing home population, and the latter continued to make up a large proportion of COVID deaths in the U.S. So, why did nursing homes become such “safe havens” relative to the rest of society after December of 2020?

  I maintain there are two reasons; 1) nursing homes often have their own in-house pharmacy so do have to rely on negotiating with arrogant/ignorant retail pharmacists for access to medications like ivermectin, and 2) nursing home directors across the country learned that ivermectin is highly effective at preventing hospitalization and death, and thus they have widely used it across the U.S to treat COVID outbreaks in nursing homes (here, here, here, and here). Turns out, this practice makes for really good business since dead or hospitalized nursing home residents.. no longer generate income for the nursing home. Once again, all about the Benjamins. Shocker.

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to Pierre Kory’s Medical Musings. Exploring the dysfunction in American medicine & the effects of the captured health agencies’ relentless war on generic drugs.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 21:10

• Dozens Of Hong Kong Top Officials In Quarantine After Embarrassing 'Covid Birthday Bash'
  Dozens Of Hong Kong Top Officials In Quarantine After Embarrassing ‘Covid Birthday Bash’

  Beijing is demanding that officials be swiftly punished for what’s become known as the Hong Kong Covid birthday party scandal, after last week some 200 people including top officials were exposed to the virus at a large indoor bash, which also didn’t have much in the way of ‘social distancing’ given the very tight quarters, with the exception of masks.

  At least 13 high-ranking bureaucrats under the government of Chief Executive Carrie Lam are still in quarantine Monday, and up to a couple dozen officials. And more embarrassing for China is that the birthday party was for a representative of a mainland China agency. Currently HK officials are scrambling to track down the whereabouts of everyone in attendance, given the presence of many individuals who were not on the invitee list: 

  The public health scandal erupted last week after it emerged that 14 officials and 20 lawmakers were among some 200 guests who last Monday attended the 53rd birthday party of Witman Hung Wai-man, a delegate to the national legislature. They were exposed to a coronavirus-infected guest, Celia Wong, 37, a member of the Chinese Manufacturers’ Association’s youth committee.

  

  Subsequently it’s believed that multiple local Chinese officials were exposed to the Covid Omicron variant in the aftermath of the party, sending additional local Chinese deputies to the National People’s Congress into quarantine. At this point no less than 20% of officials in HK’s so-called “patriot’s” political party have been sent into lockdown.

  While only 100 people were supposed to be at the birthday event in question, so far health authorities have traced at least 214 who were actually in attendance. Many have reportedly attempted to dodge contact tracing, given especially the scandal has been all over the pages of regional media. 

  On Monday, The South China Morning Post reported that the Chinese government is demanding answers, putting immense pressure on the pro-mainland HK government as its “credibility” is on the line over the scandal:

  Beijing has asked Hong Kong’s leader to “take swift action” against officials who attended a big birthday party in the midst of an outbreak of Covid-19 cases, the Post has learned.

  Observers echoed the need for a prompt response to resolve the controversy and said any delay could deal a “serious blow to the credibility of governance”. Should a breach of discipline be confirmed, government advisers said suspension, demotion, pay cuts or even dismissal should be considered.

  HONG KONG | MASS QUARANTINE

  More than two dozen Hong Kong politicians and top government officials were ordered into a spartan quarantine facility after they were exposed to suspected COVID-19 cases at a birthday party. https://t.co/I3tHxYmVbU

  — Nikkei Asia (@NikkeiAsia) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Further the report includes: “Sources also said mainland China officials were piling pressure on Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor’s government to punish Cathay Pacific, the city’s flagship carrier, especially after Beijing health experts had earlier identified aircrew as a potential risk area in their trip to the city.”

  Lam herself has ordered an investigation after expressing “deep disappointment” over the ordeal, even singling out home affairs chief Caspar Tsui Ying-wai, who is said to have stayed late at the party, for public rebuke.

  After harsh pro-China censorship laws have resulted in the shuttering of several news agencies, independent press outlets which have remained are highlighting that such “ridiculousness would become the norm”…

  As #Hongkongers are banned from dine-in eating after 6pm, top gov officials attended 100-guest birthday party for a mainland Chinese agency rep.

  Without supervision from reliable media like #StandNews we fear this ridiculousness would become the norm.https://t.co/n8f4EuWRQh

  — Hong Kong Liberty 攬炒團隊 (@HKLiberty_Team) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  However, it stopped short of an official apology issued to the public – a populace which has long lived under strict Covid protocols enforced from nearly the beginning of the pandemic. And now HK leadership has its own do as I say not as I do scandal to contend with, such as what recently happened with UK government Christmas parties, which involved top officials flaunting Britain’s own strict Covid rules.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 20:50

• T Cells From Common Colds Cross-Protect Against Infection With COVID-19: Study
  T Cells From Common Colds Cross-Protect Against Infection With COVID-19: Study

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  A type of cells produced by the body when fighting common cold viruses cross-protect people against infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, according to a study published Monday.

  

  A 3D print of a spike protein of SARS-CoV-2—the virus that causes COVID-19—in front of a 3D print of a SARS-CoV-2 virus particle. (Courtesy of NIAID/RML)

  T cells have been recognized as a measure of protection against severe COVID-19 and previous research indicated that recovery from common colds may provide some level of shielding against the virus that causes COVID-19.

  Researchers with Imperial College London found in the new study that the presence of such cells can also prevent infection by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, also known as SARS-CoV-2, which causes the disease.

  The scientists assessed 52 contacts of newly diagnosed COVID-19 cases to pinpoint when they were first exposed and determined that people who tested negative for COVID-19 had higher cross-reactive T cell levels. They also took blood samples from the participants within 6 days of exposure.

  “Being exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t always result in infection, and we’ve been keen to understand why. We found that high levels of pre-existing T cells, created by the body when infected with other human coronaviruses like the common cold, can protect against COVID-19 infection,” Dr. Rhia Kundu, the lead author, of Imperial’s National Heart & Lung Institute, said in a statement.

  Professor Ajit Lalvani, another author, said the study “provides the clearest evidence to date that T cells induced by common cold coronaviruses play a protective role against SARS-CoV-2 infection,” adding that “these T cells provide protection by attacking proteins within the virus, rather than the spike protein on its surface.”

  The discovery could help scientists develop a new version of the COVID-19 vaccine, the researchers said.

  “The spike protein is under intense immune pressure from vaccine-induced antibody which drives evolution of vaccine escape mutants. In contrast, the internal proteins targeted by the protective T cells we identified mutate much less. Consequently, they are highly conserved between the various SARS-CoV-2 variants, including omicron,” Lalvani said.

  “New vaccines that include these conserved, internal proteins would therefore induce broadly protective T cell responses that should protect against current and future SARS-CoV-2 variants.”

  They also urged people to get a COVID-19 vaccine instead of relying on the protection from cross-reactive T cells.

  The currently available vaccines have proven less effective against the Omicron variant of the CCP virus, including against severe disease. While booster shots restore some of the lost protection, early data signals the boost quickly drops in effectiveness against infection after administration. Whether boosters last for longer periods of time remains unknown.

  The study was published in Nature and was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit and the Medical Research Council.

  Limitations include the small number of participants and the fact that 88 percent were white.

  Dr. Simon Clarke, an associate professor in Cellular Microbiology at the University of Reading, who was not involved with the study, said that people who have had colds should not assume they are protected against SARS-CoV-2 because many colds are not caused by coronaviruses and further research is needed on the matter.

  “Although this is a relatively small study, it adds to our understanding of how our immune system fights the virus and shows that future vaccines might benefit from targeting components in addition to the spike protein,” he added.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 20:30

• US Treasury Warns Of Frustrating Tax Season Due To IRS Backlogs And 'Longstanding Operational Problems'
  US Treasury Warns Of Frustrating Tax Season Due To IRS Backlogs And ‘Longstanding Operational Problems’

  Existing backlongs and ‘longstanding operational problems’ at the IRS will likely make for a frustrating tax season this year, a Treasury Department official told Politico on Monday.

  

  The agency is still dealing with two years-worth of backlogs in processing returns – and is trying to process approximately 6 million individual returns as of Dec. 23. Typically, the tax collector juggles around 1 million pieces of unopened mail according to the report.

  More than 150 million individual income tax returns typically roll in over the course of a few months.

  Tax returns for 2021 are due April 18 for most individual filers, a few days after the normal April 15 deadline due to a holiday in Washington, D.C., though extensions can be requested. This year’s start and end dates, announced by the IRS on Monday, are more in line with historical norms, which have been upended since 2020 because of the pandemic.

  Last year, the IRS held off the start date to Feb. 12, to give the agency extra time to reprogram operations based on tax law changes passed in late 2020. -Politico

  According to the official, there’s been no internal debate over delaying the filing deadline beyond this April. In 2020 it was extended to July 15, while 2021’s due date was pushed back to May 17. 

  President Biden and Congressional Democrats want to supercharge the IRS to the tune of $80 billion (which is ‘dramatically in excess‘ of what it needs), which would be invested in more agents and technology upgrades, and would beef up enforcement and other agency functions such as customer service. The official blamed Republicans for blocking fresh funding, according to Politico. 

  For one’s best chance at speedy processing, taxpayers should take advantage of filing electronically – which 90% already do. Some 10% of returns are filed on paper, however, and have been caught up in a massive mail backlog that began early on in the pandemic.

  The delays have meant slow refunds and/or incorrect penalities and assessments by the IRS for millions of taxpayers because employees have to physically process each piece of mail that comes in.

  Complicating matters is the fact that the IRS could receive more individual tax returns this year, as child tax payments may push some low-income households past the threshold which would trigger a tax return.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 20:10

• Will Beaten Down Chinese Stocks Be 2022's Best Performers
  Will Beaten Down Chinese Stocks Be 2022’s Best Performers

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and reporter

  Chinese stocks became the pariah of the investment world last year, with the MSCI China Index losing 23%. But as the new year sees global risky assets falter, the Chinese benchmark has been surprisingly resilient. Recent history shows that winners and losers tend to flip in the new year. While that may be too simplistic of a framework, it still should not be too surprising that MSCI China is performing well in 2022 on expectations of policy easing.

  The global risk markets’ poor start to the year extended on Monday. Whenever real yields shoot up as quickly as they have, it tends to ripple through markets. Yet, the Move index of bond volatility failed to increase, suggesting that investors see limited upside for yields from here. Meanwhile, if we look at the cyclical/defensives ratio, it’s been moving higher with yields, signaling the markets have upgraded their growth outlook. That view may be reinforced by encouraging signs that the omicron infection has possibly peaked in places such as New York. All together, the probability of a deeper global market correction seems low.

  

  While U.S. investors are grappling with tighter monetary policy, the drumbeat of easing in China is getting louder. Last week, a senior government official reminded us that ensuring growth stability is not only an economic issue, but also a political one ahead of the power reshuffling later this year. On Monday, a cabinet meeting chaired by Premier Li Keqiang vowed to accelerate investment in key projects and boost domestic consumption. Meanwhile, media reports that officials in Guangdong province are encouraging state-owned enterprises to acquire struggling developers led to a rally in property stocks.

  It remains to be seen what appetite Beijing has for stimulus, especially regarding its policies on the housing market. But the prospect of easing is one of the necessary conditions for the Chinese equity market to perform well.

  In recent years, MSCI China has been either one of the best or worst performers in global assets, as shown in this table below compiled by Morgan Stanley. When it sat at the bottom, it tended to come back with a roar the following year, and vice versa. For instance, the MSCI China Index’s 19% loss in 2018 was followed by 24% gain in 2019. And going long 2020’s loser (REITs) and short its winner (MSCI China) would have been a terrific trade last year.

  
  Source: Morgan Stanley

  Morgan Stanley’s analysts think it’s too early to call the bottom on Chinese stocks because the downward revision to earnings estimates is not finished yet. And the ranking is not adjusted for the assets’ volatility. So it’s not surprising that high-beta assets such as Chinese stocks tend to be either the best or worst.

  Still, the MSCI China managed to limit its decline this year to 0.7%, outperforming the 2% decline in the S&P 500. It’s a promising start.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 19:50

• New York Port Hit With Rare Vessel Congestion Amid COVID-Induced Labor Shortage
  New York Port Hit With Rare Vessel Congestion Amid COVID-Induced Labor Shortage

  President Biden’s cunning plan to clear congestion from the nation’s top ports failed at the end of 2021 and continues to underwhelm in the new year. 

  New data from Bloomberg shows a rare bottleneck has materialized at the New York area’s port terminals, the busiest on the East Coast, due to labor shortage fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

  “We have seen a spike in the number of labor going out into quarantine,” Port Authority Director Sam Ruda said. The average wait time for a container ship is about 4.75 days in the final week of 2021, compared with an average of 1.6 days for the entire year. 

  

  The developing backlog is a labor issue as port workers stay home due to the rapid spread of the Omicron virus. 

  Running at full capacity since the virus pandemic began in early 2020, the port handled 27% more cargo in November 2021 than it did in November 2019. So any disruption to labor has made it susceptible to a backlog. 

  “We’ve essentially had five years of cargo growth in the space of 18, 20 months or so,” he said.

  Ruda said the number of vessels sitting off port was approximately 12 to 13 to start the new year and down to 9 this past Wednesday. By Friday, ships at anchor increased to 11. 

  “On an order of magnitude, it does seem quite small, but it does have our attention,” he said.

  

  Meanwhile, at the twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, on the West Coast, responsible for 40% of all shipping containers entering the U.S., congestion is at a record high of three weeks. 

  President Biden’s plan to alleviate port congestion is not working. Vessels are avoiding the mess on the West Coast and are opting for other less crowded ports. The shipping crisis continues to spread. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 19:30

• Rep. Jordan Indicates He Won't Cooperate With Jan. 6 Committee As It Is Not "Fair-Minded And Objective"
  Rep. Jordan Indicates He Won’t Cooperate With Jan. 6 Committee As It Is Not “Fair-Minded And Objective”

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) appeared to suggest on Sunday that he will not voluntarily cooperate with the Jan. 6 select committee investigating the U.S. Capitol breach, calling the request “unprecedented and inappropriate.”

  

  The nine-member committee investigating the origins of the breach, which is almost entirely comprised of Democrats, has subpoenaed a number of people as part of its investigation, including former President Donald Trump national security adviser Mike Flynn, his former adviser Stephen Bannon, and his former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows.

  In a letter to committee Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) dated Jan. 9, Jordan cited several reasons as to why he feels that he does not need to cooperate with the panel’s request, including that he has “no relevant information” that would assist them in their investigation or in “advancing any legitimate legislative purpose.”

  However, Jordan stopped short of stating that he would not cooperate with the committee.

  “The American people are tired of Democrats’ nonstop investigations and partisan witch hunts,” Jordan began his letter. “Your letter of December 22, 2021, unfortunately, continues this Democrat obsession. It amounts to an unprecedented and inappropriate demand to examine the basis for a colleague’s decision on a particular matter pending before the House of Representatives.”

  “This request is far outside the bounds of any legitimate inquiry, violates core Constitutional principles, and would serve to further erode legislative norms,” Jordan continued.

  The Ohio Republican then went on to cite a number of reasons as to why he feels he does not need to cooperate with the investigation, which has so far appeared to focus on individuals who previously served in the Trump administration, including those who were no longer in the White House during the Jan. 6 breach.

  Jordan wrote that he “cannot speak to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s failure” to ensure the Capitol building had adequate security in advance of the breach and that he has nothing to add to the “bipartisan, comprehensive findings of the Senate investigative committees or to those issued by federal inspectors general.”

  The congressman said he was performing “official duties” as a lawmaker at the time the Capitol building was breached.

  

  

  Jordan also noted that even if he had information to share with the House committee, “the actions and statements of Democrats in the House of Representatives show that you are not conducting a fair-minded and objective inquiry.”

  Thompson sent a letter to Jordan in December making a formal request on behalf of the committee for Jordan to testify (pdf).

  “We write to seek your voluntary cooperation in advancing our investigation,” the letter began. “We understand that you had at least one and possibly multiple communications with President Trump on January 6th. We would like to discuss each such communication with you in detail.”

  The letter also goes on to assert that “despite the urgent requests that the President speak and instruct the rioters to leave, President Trump did not make such a statement for multiple hours as rioters attacked police and invaded and occupied the Capitol.”

  Lawmakers have accused the former president of encouraging violence at the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, a claim Trump vehemently denies.

  His last Facebook post called for “everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful” and non-violent and to respect law and order. The former president has also repeatedly insisted that he offered to bring in the National Guard ahead of the Jan. 6 demonstration, but that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) denied the request.

  The Epoch Times has contacted Thompson for comment.

  Jordan is the second congressman to be asked to cooperate with the partisan House committee’s investigation into the events, after Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), who said in December said that he does not intend to accept the committee’s requests, calling the committee “illegitimate.”

  Earlier this month, MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell sued the House select committee in an effort to stop telecommunications company Verizon from sharing his information with the panel.

  It came after the committee issued Verizon a subpoena for all of his records of communication on a cellphone he regularly used for the period between Nov. 1, 2020 and Jan. 31, 2021.

  The committee is yet to find substantial evidence that high-ranking GOP officials participated in or had any prior knowledge of the events of Jan. 6.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 19:10

• Australian Police Tear-Gas Angry Crowd Of Djokovic Supporters
  Australian Police Tear-Gas Angry Crowd Of Djokovic Supporters

  Police in Australia pepper-sprayed a mob of supporters of tennis champion Novak Djokovic on Monday evening in Melbourne after the crowd began blocking car traffic and standing on a vehicle they thought carried Djokovic. The uproar took place outside Djokovic’s lawyer’s office.

  As we reported earlier, Djokovic was freed from Australian detention on Monday by a judge who ruled the government had made a mistake canceling his visa. He is planning on staying in Australia to try and compete in the Australian Open in Melbourne next week, where he will be angling to clinch his 21st Grand Slam title, which would put him ahead of Roger Federer for most wins.

  

  Djokovic tried to enter the country last week to start practicing early for the tournament, but border force agents detained him and forced him into a migrant detention facility, something that was not taken well by his fans. 

  While the Australian government tried to slander Djokovic as a public health threat (as if his presence would make any difference in a country where COVID cases are surging despite all measures to try and slow the spread), some have speculated that Djokovic’s detention was due to the fact that his exemption was given because he had been infected in December 2021. The Australian government doesn’t want to appear to give legitimacy to the notion that natural infection breeds immunity (even though natural infection is likely better).

  The scene was captured on social media.

  Absolute mayhem by Novak Djokovic’s lawyer’s office on Collins Street. A car leaving the office is completely surrounded by people cheering “free Nole” pic.twitter.com/H3mAsEHSdX

  — Tumaini Carayol (@tumcarayol) January 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The Australian government is still reportedly weighing whether to “deport” Djokovic ahead of the tournament (which begins Jan. 17). While it’s been said the decision won’t arrive today, it may arrive in the coming days.

  Novak Djokovic will be a free man tonight

  Govt wont make decision to deport him tonight per @Gallo_Ways

  Immigration Minister had 4h to cancel before he was freed from detention

  Decision to cancel can still be made but will be tomorrow or in days afterhttps://t.co/cSKqKELJ4O

  — Paul Sakkal (@paulsakkal) January 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Given the intensity of the crowd response at Djokovic’s lawyer’s office, one twitter user joked that the Australian government would be foolish to try re-arresting him for a deportation.

  Outside Novak Djokovic lawyers office earlier this evening.

  I don’t recommend rearresting him.

  I have a Serbian uncle, and from experience, they’re a lovely, loving lot until they’re not.

  pic.twitter.com/w5aYixtUkW

  — Avi Yemini (@OzraeliAvi) January 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  This was earlier as it left Novak’s lawyers’ office. @9NewsMelb @9NewsAUS pic.twitter.com/tKKpEuYyCi

  — Adam Hegarty (@ajhegarty9) January 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  But if the recent past is any guide, well, they have made stupider decisions.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 18:50

• It's Time To Drop The Hysteria And Learn To Live With COVID
  It’s Time To Drop The Hysteria And Learn To Live With COVID

  Authored by Bruce Pardy via The Epoch Times,

  For most people, Omicron is a highly contagious cold. Lots will catch it, and most will get sniffles and a sore throat. Yes, even with Omicron, as with the flu, some people will get seriously ill, and a few will die. Masking, social distancing, capacity limits, lockdowns, curfews, and “vaccines” are not stopping the spread. People who dodge Omicron this time will face the next variant, or the one after that. Like other respiratory viruses in circulation, COVID-19 is here to stay.

  Therefore, COVID is done. Either mild Omicron is the end of COVID madness, or there is no off-ramp.

  The panic-demic must finish or we will be doing this forever.

  

  For the past 23 months, the real pandemic has not been COVID but anxiety. According to Mattias Desmet, professor of clinical psychology at Ghent University in Belgium, the COVID crisis is a product of “mass formation,” a collective psychosis that can occur when a significant portion of the population develops an irrational fixation on an external cause. Mass formation is most likely to occur, Desmet says, when a critical mass of people suffers from a lack of social bonds, a lack of meaning in their lives, free-floating anxiety that has no specific source or cause, and free-floating frustration and aggression not directed at a particular target.

  The virus may have made people anxious, but it was more the other way around. Those already afraid, disconnected, and adrift in their lives were more susceptible to media messaging that portrayed COVID as a bigger threat than it really was. The virus offered an external phenomenon on which to focus their distress. It gave purpose to fear. Masks, lockdowns, social distancing, and vaccine mandates provided the illusion of control and a justification for imposing the burden of their anxiety on others. For some, hiding behind masks, staying home, working online, and being isolated gave respite from social interactions that they found uncomfortable anyway.

  COVID is a righteous platform from which to rage against non-conformists. COVID cranks cheer when small businesses are shut, workers dismissed, university students ousted, and schools closed, all to assuage their anxiety. The country was never “in this together.” As Aldous Huxley wrote, “The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behavior ‘righteous indignation’ — this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats.”

  COVIDians who feel threatened by the end of the cause for which they have lived these past two years will clamour for more and harsher restrictions. In Canada, the game is still on. Quebec imposed new curfews. Ontario throttled down on widespread testing but then lurched back into partial lockdown and closed its schools again. Booster campaigns are in full swing and “the pandemic of the unvaccinated” rhetoric continues. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau even suggested during last fall’s election campaign that the unvaxxed are racists and misogynists who should not be tolerated.

  And yet, signs of the Great Backtrack are slowly emerging.

  In the United States, the CDC has put the kybosh on PCR tests, while the Biden administration has admitted that there is no federal solution to COVID. In some states, stadiums are still full, and there are no masking requirements or vaccine mandates. Perceptive pundits, formerly in solidarity with the COVID regime, are delicately heading for the exit, trying not to be the last one in the room when the music stops.

  In some jurisdictions such as Ontario, the vaccinated have been catching Omicron at a higher rate per capita than the unvaxxed. For those who judge themselves to be at low risk from the virus, why expose yourself to disputed side effects from a therapy not yet fully tested? People should have the right to make their own medical choices. After being suspended, dismissed, ousted, banished, and demonized, the unvaccinated have defended that right the hard way. They are not likely to give it up now.

  COVID rules, say some apostles, protect the right to be kept safe from respiratory viruses. But no such right exists. If it did, lockdowns would be the established practice against colds, flu, and the many other respiratory viruses in circulation.

  Society would have come to a screeching halt long before now. Viruses are part of human existence. If you’re sick, stay home. Remember when we used to just say that? People who are susceptible to COVID, even to Omicron, should keep themselves safe as best they can. The rest of humanity must get on with their lives.

  As a health crisis, COVID is over. The hysteria, however, will be more stubborn.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 18:30

• Icy Start To Russia-NATO Talks As US Calls Moscow's Central Demand "A Non-Starter"
  Icy Start To Russia-NATO Talks As US Calls Moscow’s Central Demand “A Non-Starter”

  As expected, after eight ours of talks between the US-NATO side and Russia in Geneva on Monday, there were no breakthroughs; instead, the opposite with the American delegation reportedly deeming Moscow’s request of no further eastward NATO expansion as a “nonstarter”.

  The Associated Press cited the US side as “firmly rejecting the demands as a nonstarter” which led to each side digging into their positions. Later, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov confirmed “no progress” was made but still asserted that “We have no intention to invade Ukraine.”

  Leading the US representatives was Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who on a positive note said that it involved a “frank and forthright discussion” which led to “a better understanding of each other and each other’s priorities and concerns.”

  

  Yet she further described it didn’t progress much past hearing the other side’s position laid out. “It was not what you would call a negotiation,” she told reporters. “We’re not to a point where we’re ready to set down texts and begin to go back and forth.”

  But her words signaled to Moscow that the door is essentially shut on gaining legal guarantees that NATO will not pursue any further eastward expansion, with Ukraine and Georgia being central to the Russian demands (as the Russians also want prior verbal pledges regarding the two countries’ path to NATO membership rescinded). 

  Apparently Washington is in a position where it’s willing to come to the table with Russia, but doesn’t want to be seen as having NATO policy direction dictated by Moscow. Here’s what Sherman said on this: 

  “We were firm, however, on pushing back on security proposals that are simply nonstarters for the United States,” Sherman said, adding “we will not allow anyone” to shut NATO’s “open-door policy” that extends to countries seeking entry in the alliance.

  She said Washington “will not forgo bilateral cooperation with sovereign states that wish to work with the United States. And, we will not make decisions about Ukraine without Ukraine, about Europe without Europe or about NATO without NATO.”

  Additionally Sherman said, “If Russia stays at the table and takes concrete steps to deescalate tensions, we believe we can achieve progress.” She also reaffirmed the “costs” of any potential Russian offensive into Ukraine: “Those costs will include financial sanctions, and it’s been reported those sanctions will include key financial institutions, export controls that target industries; enhancements of NATO force posture on ally territory; and increased security assistance to Ukraine.”

  Russia has warned that some form of military response to the US stationing advanced weapons in Europe could be possible in the future.

  Happy new year everyone, etc. https://t.co/MYimA5SdSm

  — Bryan MacDonald (@27khv) January 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Despite the Russians still vowing there won’t be the “expected” Ukraine invasion that Western press and officials have been greatly hyping over the last two months, the scenario is sill very dangerous, given the potential for an arms race and proliferation of missiles in Eastern Europe.

  On this point, the Russian side stated the following:

  “If now NATO proceeds towards deployment of capabilities that are being developed very rapidly in the US, and will possibly be introduced somewhere in Europe, it would require a military response on the Russian part, that is a decision to counter this threat through means at our discretion,” Ryabkov, speaking in English. “That will inevitably, unavoidably damage security of the U.S. and its European allies.”

  Ryabkov was further quoted after Monday’s meeting in Russian media as saying the Americans are “playing with fire” – and that “We are calling on the US to demonstrate a maximum of responsibility at this moment. Risks related to a possible increase of confrontation shouldn’t be underestimated.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 18:10

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Kazakhstan Denies US-Funded 'Military Biological Lab' Seized By Rioters After Russia Claims Potential Pathogen Leak
  Kazakhstan Denies US-Funded ‘Military Biological Lab’ Seized By Rioters After Russia Claims Potential Pathogen Leak

  Kazakh officials have denied that a US-funded ‘military biological laboratory’ was seized by rioters in the recent unrest, which has seen at least 160 dead since the violence broke out just one week ago.

  

  It is unclear whether the deaths, reported by the health ministry to state news channel Khabar-24, are primarily civilians or law enforcement according to the Daily Mail – however officials said on Sunday that at least 16 police or national guard members had been killed. Pictures of Kazakh secret service operatives killed during the unrest have also been released.

  According to Russian media, the biolab near Almaty – built in 2017 and used to study outbreaks of particularly dangerous infections – was ‘compromised,’ resulting in a potential leak of dangerous pathogens. Kazakh officials have denied the claim.

  The secret bio-laboratory funded by the US defence department – which has links to Russian and Chinese scientists – was also compromised in the disturbances, according to social media claims that it was seized.

  ‘This is not true. The facility is being guarded,‘ said the health ministry which is responsible for the Central Reference Laboratory, in Almaty.

  Official Russian news agency TASS had highlighted alleged social media reports that it was taken over by ‘unidentified people’ and ‘specialists in chemical protection suits were working near the lab so a leak of dangerous pathogens could have occurred‘.

  The laboratory’s existence has been controversial and in 2020 the country formally denied that it was being used to make biological weapons.

  At the time, the Kazakh government stated: ‘No biological weapons development is underway in Kazakhstan – and no research is conducted against any other states.’ -Daily Mail

  Of course, since the source of the claim is Russian state media, one should take it with the same grain of salt as any state-sponsored outlet (or their legacy media mouthpieces).

  As the Mail notes, “The airport, mayor’s office and secret services buildings fell briefly into the hands of rioters during a wave of protests backed by shadowy armed cells.”

  In 2018 there were reports that a new strain of meningitis which had leaked from the lab – which was similarly denied. According to officials, no US personnel remain involved in the lab’s work, which included studying Covid.

  The most recent controversy over the lab comes amid ‘growing intrigue’ over how the recent protests came to be organized, and which have been tamped down since a large Russian force was sent to the country. According to reports, ‘well-coordinated’ armed groups were operating alongside protesters over a hike in gas prices.

  Nearly 6,000 people have been detained following the riots, with a “sizeable number of foreign nationals among them,” the Mail reports. It’s unclear where these alleged foreign provocateurs originated from.

  Russia and allies Belarus have continued to pour troops and equipment into Kazakhstan.     

  Kazakh authorities said earlier on Sunday that 16 police or national guard members had been killed in the protests that started on January 2.

  A total of 103 deaths were in Almaty, the country’s largest city, where demonstrators seized government buildings and set some on fire, according to the ministry. The country’s ombudswoman for children’s rights said that three of those killed were minors, including a four-year-old girl.

  The ministry earlier reported more than 2,200 people sought treatment for injuries from the protests, and the Interior Ministry said about 1,300 security officers were injured. -Daily Mail

  As we noted on Sunday, Among the boldest and eye-brow raising political moves by embattled Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev within the past days that grabbed international headlines was his ordering the arrest of Kazakhstan’s powerful former intelligence chief, Karim Massimov, on the charge of high treason.

  Massimov had served as the prior longtime strongman ruler Nursultan Nazarbayev’s prime minister and has long been considered his “right hand man”. Shortly after, a photo has resurfaced, currently subject of widespread speculation which shows Joe Biden and Hunter Biden posing with the now detained Kazakh security chief Karim Massimov, along with well-connected oligarch Kenes Rakishev.

  

  UPDATE: It wasn’t just one meeting

  Hunter Biden said Massimov was his “close friend.”

  That close friend has now been arrested for attempting to overthrow the government of Kazakhstan. pic.twitter.com/Wrodpmpzzo

  — Clint Ehrlich (@ClintEhrlich) January 9, 2022

  Where does this rabbit hole lead?

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/10/2022 – 00:00

• "Influencer" Who Made $200K Selling Farts Retires After Heart Attack "Scare" Caused By Eating Too Many Eggs
  “Influencer” Who Made $200K Selling Farts Retires After Heart Attack “Scare” Caused By Eating Too Many Eggs

  While rugged Chinese and Russian citizens prepare for the vigors of geopolitical turmoil on a global stage as each country looks to potentially expand their geographical presences, U.S. citizens are giving themselves heart attack scares from farting into jars and selling them. 

  Just ask 31 year old Stephanie Matto, who has been making more than $50,000 per week selling her farts. 

  After a series of news reports on her “business”, an already-burgeoning venture that Matto was running gained in popularity, to the point where the former “90 Day Fiancé” star (we’ve never heard of it, either) was forcing herself to eat eggs and beans in order to keep up with demand for her flatulence.

  

  Matto cashed in $200,000 in sales, according to the NY Post, before being forced to retire after being rushed to a hospital with chest pains that she thought were symptoms of a heart attack.  

  Instead, “Matto was told that her pain was the result of her steady diet of gas-inducing beans and eggs,” the Post reported. Matto was pushing out up to 50 jars worth of farts per week, the report says. 

  Matto commented: “I thought I was having a stroke and that these were my final moments. I was overdoing it.”  

  “I remember within one day I had about three protein shakes and a huge bowl of black-bean soup,” she disclosed, talking about her ‘secret recipe’ for keeping business “booming”. 

  “I could tell that something was not right that evening when I was lying in bed and I could feel a pressure in my stomach moving upward. It was quite hard to breathe, and every time I tried to breathe in, I’d feel a pinching sensation around my heart,” she continued. “And that, of course, made my anxiety escalate. I actually called my friend and asked if they could come over to drive me to the hospital because I thought I was experiencing a heart attack.”

  

  “It was made clear that what I was experiencing wasn’t a stroke or heart attack but very intense gas pains.”

  With the scare behind her, we’re predicting Matto’s retirement will only be short-lived. Who can turn down those types of margins? $200,000 in sales and your cost of goods sold is a couple cans of Goya Garbanzo Beans and a couple dozen eggs.

  She’ll be back. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 23:30

• These Are The Three Things Investors Will Focus On During Q4 Earnings Season And Into 2022
  These Are The Three Things Investors Will Focus On During Q4 Earnings Season And Into 2022

  There are no two ways about it: the first full year of the year was a lousy one for stocks, with the S&P falling by 1.9% and the Nasdaq tumbling 3.5%, its biggest drop since the year 2000 – the year the dot com bubble popped.

  

  The culprit for the plunge, of course, was the Fed, with the mid-week pivot coinciding with the release of the hawkish December FOMC minutes that hinted at not just a faster liftoff, but an even faster balance sheet drawdown. As a result, banks expect the Fed to hike either three or four times, with some expecting the Fed to announce QT in early H2, and Friday’s dismal jobs report which showed just 199K gains (vs. consensus of 450K) did not deter hawkish expectations as the unemployment rate – just a few years ago viewed as a completely meaningless statistic – fell to 3.9%, down 0.3% from 4.2% in November.

  Looking at the price action, Goldman’s David Kostin – who is of course, head of research and not an actual trader – points to the rapid move higher in yields catalyzed by the Fed statement, and which surged as high as 1.80% last week before settling around 1.76% after ending 2021 at 1.52%, a 24 bps rise over just 5 days. This is material because as Kostin notes in his latest Weekly Kickstart note, the speed of rate moves matters (perhaps more than the actual move) for equity returns. To wit, “equities typically struggle when the 5-day or 1-month change in nominal or real rates is greater than 2 standard deviations. The magnitude of the recent yield backup qualifies as a 2+ standard deviation event in both cases.”

  

  Kostin then notes that the sharp spike in rates was an obvious risk to the premium valuation accorded to the longest duration equities (high growth but low margins), something discussed here extensively. And sure enough, these stocks have been violently re-priced during the past few days, but also past few months

  

  It may not feel like it, but the EV/sales multiple for these stocks has compressed from a peak of 15x in February, to 12x at the start of November, to 7x today. But if the Russell 3000 constituents traded in a well-ordered progression, the relative valuation of these stocks would be wider than the current spread.

  

  With all that in mind, and with one eye trained on macro developments, investors now await the start of 4Q 2021 earnings season that begins next week, when BLK, C, FRC, JPM, and WFC all release their 4Q 2021 results on Friday, January 14.

  As Kostin calculates, between January 10 and February 11, companies representing 79% of S&P 500 market cap will report year-end results, and a list of next week’s reporters is shown below.

  

  Looking ahead, consensus expects 4Q 2021 S&P 500 EPS will grow by 20% year/year. The growth rate will represent a sharp deceleration from previous quarters that benefited from comparison with the worst quarters of Covid-plagued 2020. In 2021, the sequence of year/year EPS growth was 48% (1Q), 88% (2Q), and 39% (3Q). If the consensus expectation for 4Q is realized, it would represent a step in the direction of normalization towards trend growth. Among the sectors, energy is expected to swing from negative to positive EPS. Materials (+57%), Industrials (+47%), and Health Care (+16%) are forecast to report the highest EPS growth while Financials (0%) and Consumer Staples (+3%) are expected to barely grow earnings vs. 4Q 2020

  

  On the revenue side, consensus expects sales will grow by 15% year/year vs. 17% for the prior quarter. Energy (+64%), Materials (+24%), and Communication Services (+16%) will generate the largest revenue gains. Consumer Staples will lag (+9%).

  Net margins are forecast to expand year/year by nearly 100 bps to 11.5% despite soaring inflation, suggesting that all of the input price increases and then some, have been passed on to consumers. On a rolling four-quarter basis margins will equal 12.1%. Note that in 3Q, actual results were 70 bps above analyst forecasts at the start of earnings season. Energy and Materials are anticipated to have the largest margin expansions.

  In any case, as companies close their books on 2021, investors and managements are already focused on 2022. Goldman forecasts the S&P 500 will generate 8% EPS growth to $226, slightly below the median top-down forecast but above the consensus bottom-up forecast of $223. At the index level, Kostin and Co. expect sales growth of 9%, and also project a net profit margin of 12.6% which implies 41 bps of expansion and explains the bank’s above-consensus EPS forecasts. As Kostin explains, his above-consensus forecast “is driven by a combination of operating leverage, pricing power, and cost management.” He also notes that Goldman’s expectations differ most from consensus for the Industrials and Utilities sectors, where it projects slower year/year EPS growth, and for the Communication Services, Materials, and Info Tech sectors, where the bank expects more EPS growth than bottom-up estimates.

  Putting it all together, investors will focus on three items during 4Q reporting season and into 2022.

  1.Threats to growth, especially those posed by Covid variants. The Omicronvariant has introduced new risks to economic activity given its heightenedtransmissibility and drag on reopening. Our economists recently slashed their USgrowth forecasts to 3.5% (from 4.2%), in part due to the effects of Omicron. Each 1pp change in GDP growth translates into roughly $7 of S&P 500 EPS.

  2. Expanding margins will be an uphill battle for companies in 2022, due in part to persistent labor market tightness. In earnings calls as recent as 3Q, managements bemoaned historic worker shortages, particularly for low-wage jobs in the services sector. Goldman economists expect the rapid pace of wage inflation to subside to around 4%, but this could take several quarters to achieve. Today’s jobs report showed average hourly earnings rose 4.7% year/year. Firms with high labor costs or exposure to wage inflation will face the most difficulty in preserving margins. Since the beginning of 4Q, companies with high and stable gross marginshad outperformed those with weak and variable margins by 12 pp(+4% vs. -9%), but the trade has slightly reversed in recent weeks. The next chart shows a list of stocks with high and stable gross margins.

  

  One headwind to margin expansion that may soon improve is the resolution of supply chain bottlenecks that plagued firms in 2021 (assuming it doesn’t get even worse should China’s suffer an Omicron-linked lockdown of its key ports). Managements employed a mixture of price increases and cost controls to offset surging raw materials and shipping prices. Looking ahead, Goldman notes that market measures of supply chain tightness appear to be slowly easing, and shipping costs have begun to decline in recent weeks. We disagree.

  3. Finally, the revival and ultimate passage of President Biden’s Build Back Better bill would have mixed implications for US equities. Senator Joe Manchin’s late-December rejection of the draft legislation ruled out its passage last year. In the event that the legislation is adopted this year, Goldman estimates this tax reform would reduce S&P 500 EPS by 2-3% relative to current tax policy but only go into effect in 2023 at the earliest. By then, however, Dems will no longer have a supermajority in Congress so everything will be in flux.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 23:00

• Tent City Pops Up In Front Of DC's Union Station Amid "Severe Homeless Crisis"
  Tent City Pops Up In Front Of DC’s Union Station Amid “Severe Homeless Crisis”

  Down the street from the US Capitol Building, right in front of Union Station, more than a dozen tents have been erected, highlighting the homeless problem in the nation’s capital. 

  The area outside the train station is a 16-minute walk from the Capitol Building. Lawmakers who take the train to work have to pass by this area and gaze upon the homeless who have been knocked out of the workforce and unable to afford shelter, food, and energy because of inflationary conditions produced by unorthodox monetary and fiscal policies. 

  

  RT News’s Rachel Blevins first reported on the homeless encampment outside the train station on Christmas Eve. She tweeted, “while the Mayor of DC puts an additional burden on businesses by requiring vaccine checks that divide the public into two classes of people… This is the scene outside Union Station. Dozens of tents are serving as a reminder of how bad the homeless crisis has gotten in this city.”

  While the Mayor of DC puts an additional burden on businesses by requiring vaccine checks that divide the public into two classes of people…

  This is the scene outside Union Station. Dozens of tents serving as a reminder of how bad the homeless crisis has gotten in this city. pic.twitter.com/21u6SBKWLU

  — Rachel Blevins (@RachBlevins) December 24, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  After two brutal snowstorms and wicked cold weather, another social media user captured the tent city in front of the train station. 

  The first piece I cropped put. It was a kid in SF making light of a tent city. *hence the music* The main video is of those at Union Station in DC. pic.twitter.com/DkkFjkciK1

  — Holly (@_HollyC__) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  What’s odd about this tent city, or rather a “Bidenville,” is that it’s not tucked away in an alley and empty parking lot but right in front of Union Station for the world to see. 

  So far, DC officials have yet to shut down the homeless encampment. There’s no word if the city has provided food and essential items for the homeless to survive the brutally cold winter. 

  The tent city reminds us of the sprawling homeless encampments throughout Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and other West Coast cities. These metropolises have one thing in common: they’re run by liberal and progressive lawmakers. So far, handing out welfare and other services is failing as more and more people cannot rebound from rock bottom of living in tents back to everyday life. Maybe a different approach is needed.

  Suppose CNN wanted to do real reporting. They should send one of their journalists to Union Station; it’s only a 5-minute walk from their DC studio.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 22:30

• California Folds; Says Asymptomatic COVID-Positive Health Workers Can Get Back To Work Amid Shortages
  California Folds; Says Asymptomatic COVID-Positive Health Workers Can Get Back To Work Amid Shortages

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

  The California Department of Public Health issued guidance that allows health care networks to enable COVID-19-positive employees to keep working if they don’t show any symptoms.

  “The department is providing temporary flexibility to help hospitals and emergency services providers respond to an unprecedented surge and staffing shortages. Hospitals have to exhaust all other options before resorting to this temporary tool. Facilities and providers using this tool, should have asymptomatic COVID-19 positive workers interact only with COVID-19 positive patients to the extent possible,” the Department of Public Health said in a statement to news outlets over the weekend.

  The Epoch Times has contacted the agency for comment.

  

  Health care workers in the state now don’t have to isolate or show a negative COVID-19 test, the guidance said, before coming back to work if they are asymptomatic. The guidance, which remains in effect until Feb. 1, stipulates that staff wear N95 respirator masks while on the job.

  After the guidance was handed down, several unions that represent nurses and other hospital staff expressed alarm.

  “Healthcare workers and patients need the protection of clear rules guided by strong science. Allowing employers to bring back workers who may still be infectious is one of the worst ideas I have heard during this pandemic, and that’s really saying something,” Bob Schoonover, the head of union SEIU California, told CBS Sacramento.

  Schoonover added that while his union supports “supplemental paid sick leave,” the latest guidance imperils a “critical piece of the protection that workers and the public need.”

  The president of the California Nurses Association, Sandy Reding, told local media that the California health department’s guidance will put patients at risk.

  “We are very concerned,” she told KNTV news.

  “If you have health care workers who are COVID positive care for vulnerable populations, we can spread the COVID virus inside the hospital as well.”

  Union officials did not mention the rampant staffing issues that have plagued hospitals across the United States and California in recent days.

  Mandates that were put into effect last year by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, required health care workers to get COVID-19 vaccines or face termination—despite studies showing that natural immunity conferred by a previous COVID-19 infection shows lasting immunity to the virus. Critics of vaccine mandates have questioned why governments and businesses would impose vaccinate or fire policies for “essential workers”—such as nurses and doctors—in the midst of staff shortages during a viral pandemic.

  Health giant Kaiser Permanente suspended more than 2,000 employees who were not vaccinated in October. Other California systems such as Santa Clara Valley Medical Center and Sutter Health also terminated or suspended their employees who weren’t vaccinated in the fall of 2021.

  Meanwhile, Dr. George Rutherford, professor of Epidemiology at the University of California San Francisco, told KNTV that the guidance revision isn’t anything new.

  “This is about having infected people taking care of infected people. We did this with Ebola in South Africa. We’ve done it before. It’s not the first play option in our playbook. I think staffing issues are such that it led the state to put this guidance out,” he told the outlet.

  It comes days after the Newsom administration mandated that booster shots be given to certain health care staffers by Feb. 1. On Friday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, issued said she would issue a directive for all health care workers in the state if signed off by a public health advocacy board.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 22:00

• Pelosi Dangles New Round Of Virus Aid; Wants Tied To February Debt Ceiling Vote
  Pelosi Dangles New Round Of Virus Aid; Wants Tied To February Debt Ceiling Vote

  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has floated the possibility to tack a new round of federal COVID-19 relief to a package of legislation which would fund the government past a February stopgap deadline, according to Bloomberg.

  

  “It is clear from the opportunity that is there and the challenge that is there,” Pelosi told CBS‘s “Face the Nation,” adding that President Biden’s administration “has not made a formal request for more funding.”

  “I believe that left to their own devices, the appropriators can get the job done,” said Pelosi. “Something like additional funding can be in there, can be fenced off for emergency, as would be Covid.”

  “The administration has not made a formal request for more funding,” @SpeakerPelosi tells @margbrennan about whether there will be another #COVID relief bill. So far, the government has spent $6 trillion on COVID aid. pic.twitter.com/ETDQcYRH1Q

  — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) January 9, 2022

  More via Bloomberg:

  Last week, two senators suggested that additional relief for U.S. restaurants and other service industries hurt by the surge of infections could be added to the spending bills. Senators Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat and head of the Small Business Committee, and Roger Wicker, a Mississippi Republican, said they are working to build support for the plan among their colleagues. Pelosi didn’t specify what any extra funding might be used for.

  Pelosi told CBS that the virus’s “resilience” means it’s spreading faster than in previous phases of the pandemic, underscoring the need for everyone “to get vaccinated, to be masked, to have spatial distancing and the rest. And to be tested, tested, tested.”

  Senator Roy Blunt, a Missouri Republican, blasted the administration on the Senate floor last week, saying the problem wasn’t funding but the administration’s lack of a strategy for getting a handle on the virus. Biden officials focused on vaccinations at the expense of additional testing capacity, he said.

  “For a full year, the administration has focused almost exclusively on one thing, and testing and treatments have not had the attention they should have had or now that they must have,” said Blunt, adding: “That failure’s come at a steep cost. Today, Americans can’t find over-the-counter tests, and the nation lacks a comprehensive, reliable testing infrastructure.”

  Pelosi also poured cold water on the notion that the spending bill will include an extension of the child tax credit, which expired in December.

  “The Child Tax Credit, we have to have that fight, that discussion, in the Build Back Better legislation,” she said. “In order to pass the Build Back Better, it’s under reconciliation, we only need 51 votes. The bill that is the appropriations bill requires 60 votes in the Senate. So we have to do what’s possible there.”

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 21:30

• You Know Global Elites Are Triggered When The Propaganda Institutions Collaborate To Refute "Mass Formation Psychosis"
  You Know Global Elites Are Triggered When The Propaganda Institutions Collaborate To Refute “Mass Formation Psychosis”

  Authored by ‘sundance’ via TheConservativeTreehouse.com,

  Well, butter my buns and call me a biscuit… if this ain’t the biggest revealing tell in years.

  Apparently Big Tech and big propaganda media, Reuters and the Associated Press, have joined together to refute the concept of “Mass Formation Psychosis”, and pushed their collective narrative into the narrative engineering system:

  

  The Associated Press – SEE HERE and Reuters – SEE HERE, quickly rush to the “fact check” typeset to stop people from recognizing what is most likely the cause of their own psychosis.   In a world where things are no longer shocking, this is, well, a little shocking, in a weird and seemingly Orwellian kind of way.

  Yes Alice, the same “experts” and media who are credibly accused of creating/enabling the mass formation psychosis would like to assure us that no such reality exists.  This is almost too funny.

  (AP) – […] “The concept has no academic credibility,” Stephen Reicher, a social psychology professor at the University of St Andrews in the U.K., wrote in an email to The Associated Press.  The term also does not appear in the American Psychological Association’s Dictionary of Psychology.

  “Psychosis” is a term that refers to conditions that involve some disconnect from reality. According to a National Institutes of Health estimate, about 3% of people experience some form of psychosis at some time in their lives.

  […]  The description of “mass formation psychosis” offered by Malone resembles discredited concepts, such as “mob mentality” and “group mind,” according to John Drury, a social psychologist at the University of Sussex in the U.K. who studies collective behavior. The ideas suggest that “when people form part of a psychological crowd they lose their identities and their self-control; they become suggestible, and primitive instinctive impulses predominate,” he said in an email.

  That notion has been discredited by decades of research on crowd behavior, Drury said. “No respectable psychologist agrees with these ideas now,” he said.

  Multiple experts told the AP that while there is evidence that groups can shape or influence one’s behaviors — and that people can and do believe falsehoods that are put forward by the leader of a group — those concepts do not involve the masses experiencing “psychosis” or “hypnosis.” (read more)

  Reuters offers this simultaneous rebuttal:

  (Reuters) – “Mass formation psychosis” is not an academic term recognized in the field of psychology, nor is there evidence of any such phenomenon occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple experts in crowd psychology have told Reuters.

  […] There is no evidence to suggest a “mass formation psychosis” has occurred during the pandemic, experts told Reuters. The term itself is not recognised among academics, and modern research into crowd psychology has shown that crowds do not behave in mindless or non-individualistic ways. (more)

  Once a collective group creates an alternate reality of itself, in this case a totalitarian reality based on government needing to create an irrational illusion of fear that becomes part of the accepted national identity, how can anyone call attention to the outcomes without finding themselves in front of the board of inquisition who organizes the collective?

  Put another way… if the pod under your bed malfunctioned, but the pods under all the other beds in the city worked, what happens when you awaken and realize you are not one of them, but you must engage in the world of them while looking for others -like yourself- whose pods hopefully malfunctioned?   That is the current challenge for anyone trying to communicate on contrary evidence and yet avoid the ire from the collective board of COVID compliance who have successfully brainwashed the audience.

  [ZH: Oh wait, there’s this too…]

  Weird bc this article published in Nature Human Behavior in Apr 2020 spells out exactly how to exploit crowd psychology & herding behavior to accomplish Covid agenda.

  Have you tried these, experts who created blueprint for Covid #MassFormationPsychosis?https://t.co/xM5VUbR8S1 https://t.co/fbOe6rULWE pic.twitter.com/iXH8fLLurz

  — Wuhan Gene Therapy Swan 🍊 (@TheWuhanClan) January 9, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  As a rather prescient Lewis Carroll shared so brilliantly in his novel of Alice, Through The Looking Glass:

  “If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would. You see?”

  So here we are.

  

  Cheers !

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 21:00

• Mexico Auto Production Plunges To Lowest Annual Level Since 2014 Amid Chip Shortage
  Mexico Auto Production Plunges To Lowest Annual Level Since 2014 Amid Chip Shortage

  Mexican automotive production plunged to the lowest levels annually since 2014 as ongoing semiconductor shortages put the brakes on the industry, according to Bloomberg. 

  

  National statistics agency (INEGI) data shows auto production in December slumped 16.51% to 212,272 vehicles from a year earlier, while exports dropped by 17.31% to 227,465. 

  Volkswagen Group’s Audi was the worst-hit automaker which saw a staggering 74% drop in production. General Motors Co. and Daimler AG’s Mercedes Benz both saw output halved. 

  An unrelenting global semiconductor shortage continues to terrorize automakers in Mexico and all over North America, forcing many to implement rolling shutdowns, curtailing production.

  Detroit-based General Motors Co’s spokesperson said last month, “the stoppages are due to the shortage of semiconductors, and yes, production decreased due to the shortage.” 

  Entering the new year, there’s more bad news: delivery times for chips jumped in December, signaling the semiconductor shortage is worsening.

  

  If we go by the numbers, President Biden’s progress on alleviating supply chains continues to falter even though the president hails a supply chain win. Guess it’s all about the optics ahead of midterms later this year. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 20:30

• US Threatens Curbs On Tech & Electronics Access For Russia, Day Before Talks
  US Threatens Curbs On Tech & Electronics Access For Russia, Day Before Talks

  Just a day ahead of the much anticipated Russia-US-NATO Monday talks to be held in Geneva, Washington is already signaling it doesn’t expect any breakthroughs. This as the Biden administration continues piling on threats and leverage for its corner, over the weekend ramping up rhetoric on the ‘option’ of imposing strict export controls on Russia. 

  Such controls would involve curbs on sensitive technology and electronics, according to Reuters, in the scenario of Putin ordering an offensive into Ukraine. This would include, according to an official who spoke to Reuters, “measures to deprive Russia of microelectronics made with or based on U.S. software or technology.”

  

  Prior anti-Russia sanctions have up to this point only focused on individuals and government-linked entities, for example officials believed responsible for the persecution of Alexei Navalny, or firms working on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. 

  The talks will kick off in Geneva, but are expected to then move on to venues in Brussels and Vienna; however, there’s current speculation on whether they’ll even be extended beyond a day or two, as Reuters notes, “state-owned RIA news agency quoted Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov as saying it was entirely possible that diplomacy could end abruptly after a single meeting.”

  “I can’t rule out anything, this is an entirely possible scenario and the Americans… should have no illusions about this,” Ryabkov told the outlet. The Kremlin’s firm and consistent position has been that it must gain legal guarantees from the West of “no further NATO expansion eastward”. But a fresh report on Sunday strongly suggest both sides are willing to walk away:

  “Naturally, we will not make any concessions under pressure” or amid constant threats from participants in the talks, said Ryabkov, who will lead the Russian delegation in Geneva. Moscow was not optimistic going into the talks, Interfax news agency quoted Ryabkov as saying.

  The U.S. prognosis was similarly gloomy. “I don’t think we’re going to see any breakthroughs in the coming week,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a CNN interview.

  So it’s looking like both sides are ready for talks to fail, at a moment the situation on the ground has grown more complicated, especially with the fresh “distraction” of a severe security crisis on Russia’s long border: Kazakhstan. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 20:00

• Almost Half Of New York COVID-19 Hospitalizations Not Due To COVID-19
  Almost Half Of New York COVID-19 Hospitalizations Not Due To COVID-19

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  Nearly half of the patients currently in New York hospitals with COVID-19 are not in the hospital because of COVID-19, the state said Friday.

  

  Forty-three percent of the 11,548 hospitalized patients did not have COVID-19 listed as one of the reasons for admission, Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office said.

  Hochul, a Democrat who is seeking a full term in office, told a press conference that she wanted to drill down on the hospitalization numbers to see how many patients are actually being treated for COVID-19 versus merely having the disease, which often causes no or mild symptoms.

  Some of the patients test positive for COVID-19 “but they’re in there for other reasons,” Hochul said.

  “Think of all the other reasons people end up at a hospital; it’s an overdose, it’s a car accident, a heart attack.”

  Hochul had announced on Monday that the state would be separating out hospitalizations for COVID-19 versus those with the disease, which is caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

  She said it was important to know the percentage of patients in each category as the number of hospitalizations rise.

  “I just want to always be honest with New Yorkers about how bad this is. Yes, the sheer numbers of people infected are high, but I want to see whether or not the hospitalizations correlate with that. And I’m anticipating to see that at least a certain percentage overall are not related to being treated for COVID. But we’re still going to watch hospital capacity,” she said.

  Most people admitted for non-COVID reasons who have COVID-19 are in New York City, with approximately half the hospitalizations there meeting that criteria, the data show. In some other areas, the percentage is much lower.

  

  New York Gov. Kathy Hochul speaks during a news conference in the Manhattan borough of New York City on Dec. 14, 2021. (Carlo Allegri/Reuters)

  “About 50 percent are admitted with COVID and 50 percent admitted for COVID,” Dr. Steve Corwin, CEO of New York Presbyterian Hospital, which is in the city, told reporters. “Of the patients in the hospital, 50 percent are unvaccinated or partially vaccinated and 50 percent have two doses of the vaccine,” he added.

  Partially vaccinated means a person has received one dose of the Moderna or Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines or has received two doses but two weeks have not elapsed since their second dose.

  Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a former Food and Drug Administration commissioner who sits on Pfizer’s board, said the percentage was higher than he would have expected.

  “Unclear why we’d see so much incidental infection. I’m hearing similar stats in [New Jersey] and [Connecticut] hospitals. Creates some concern [that COVID-19] could be spreading by contact with healthcare system itself,” he wrote on social media.

  While many jurisdictions and hospitals do not make clear how many COVID-19 patients are being treated for other reasons, researchers found last year that approximately half of the hospitalizations showed just mild or no COVID-19 symptoms. Another study found four-in-10 children hospitalized with COVID-19 were asymptomatic, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s director, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, told reporters Friday that the recent increase in pediatric COVID-19 hospitalizations was due in part to non-COVID reasons.

  “This is really a consistent problem we keep ignoring it as if it’s not an issue. It is an issue,” Dr. Scott Atlas, part of the White House COVID-19 response team during the Trump administration, told The Epoch Times previously.

  Hochul told people who are only experiencing mild symptoms to stay home amid concerns of overburdening New York’s healthcare systems. She said that nearly 5,000 New Yorkers in the past 24 hours alone went to emergency rooms for COVID-19 testing.

  “We have capacity. We have 2,000 locations where people can get tested. So, please do not go to an emergency room and tie up the resources, those individuals, so you can get a test. And don’t come in if you have very mild symptoms, either,” she said. “I know you’re anxious, I really understand this, but if you’re an adult that has very minor symptoms, you can handle a runny nose. You can handle your throat being a little bit sore, a little bit of cough. Just treat it as if you would have the flu. Follow the protocols, but please don’t overburden our emergency rooms.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 19:30

• 'Bring A Trailer' Nears A Billion In Sales As Online Car Trader Dominates Top Auction Houses
  ‘Bring A Trailer’ Nears A Billion In Sales As Online Car Trader Dominates Top Auction Houses

  The days of live classic car auctions at Barrett-Jackson, Mecum Auctions, and RM Sotheby’s aren’t over but are losing popularity in a post-COVID world where online auctions have become all the rage. 

  Bloomberg reports digital auction platform “Bring a Trailer,” also known as BaT, has become a hit with the classic car enthusiast community. Collectors are selling their cars on BaT instead of traditional live auctions. 

  

  In 2021, BaT sold $828.7 million worth of cars, more than a 100% jump over the $398 million sold in 2020 and a quarter billion more than any live-auction-house competitor (Mecum Auctions reported $578 million in total sales, RM Sotheby’s reported around $407 million, and Barrett-Jackson a little more than $191 million last year). 

  For the first time last year, online auctions surpassed live auctions, selling 20,000 cars compared with 16,000, according to data from classic car insurer Hagerty. 

  Hagerty’s Kevin Fisher said online car sales were up 107% YoY, jumping from $492.5 million sold in 2020 to $1.02 billion in 2021. 

  “Online and live auctions were on fire last year,” Fisher said. 

  BaT reports that highly collectible cars, usually reserved for live auctions, are being sold on its website. “Moving online removes the middle men in an inherently opaque industry cloaked by backdoor deals, insider favors and clubby agreements between power brokers,” Bloomberg said. 

  Since the pandemic began, attendance plummeted at live auctions as sales of blue-chip cars shifted to online auctions. Top auction houses have reduced the number of live auctions.

  The days of live classic car auctions in big fancy white tents with Champagne and beautiful women aren’t over, but for the time being, online auctions appear to be red hot. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 19:05

• 19 Killed Including 9 Children In Deadliest NYC Fire In Decades; Blaze Started By Space Heater
  19 Killed Including 9 Children In Deadliest NYC Fire In Decades; Blaze Started By Space Heater

  Update (1840ET): Authorities have confirmed that the deadly Bronx apartment complex fire that killed at least 19 people (including 9 children) was started by a malfunctioning space heater, NYC Mayor Eric Adams disclosed during a press conference Sunday evening.

  32 people have been hospitalized, and 60 were injured in total. One reason this fire’s death toll was high was because of the smoke, not the flames, which were mostly confined to one apartment.

  Here are more details, courtesy of Reuters:

  The fire itself started in an apartment that spanned the second and third floors of the building, and only made it to the hall, officials said.

  But smoke still spread to every floor of the building, likely because the door to the apartment was left open, and victims suffered from significant smoke inhalation, the city’s fire department commissioner Daniel Nigro told reporters at a news briefing.

  “Members found victims on every floor in stairwells and were taking them out in cardiac and respiratory arrest,” he said.

  Fire marshals had determined through physical evidence and accounts from residents the fire started in a portable electric heater in the apartment’s bedroom, Nigro said. He added that the heat had been on in the apartment building and that the portable heater had been supplementing that heating.

  Mayor Eric Adams is just one week into his new job of running the city, and is already confronting a major tragedy. The fire is the deadliest in NYC in decades…

  * * *

  On an otherwise quiet Sunday afternoon, a fire at a massive apartment complex in the Bronx has suddenly become the most deadly fire in the city in decades, casting a pall over the first weeks of Mayor Eric Adams’ tenure.

  So far, 19 people have been killed in the fire, including 9 children. Another 13 are hospitalized in critical condition.

  Approximately 200 firefighters responded to the building on East 181st Street where the fire broke out around 1100ET Sunday. Initial reports said the fire was on the third floor of the 19-story building, with flames blowing out the windows, according to the AP.

  Firefighters “found victims on every floor and were taking them out in cardiac and respiratory arrest,” the fire commissioner said.  “That is unprecedented in our city.”

  Sunday’s fire originated in a duplex apartment spanning the second and third floors,

  Mayor Adams called the fire “horrific.”

  The fire comes after a similarly devastating rowhouse fire in Philadelphia that left 12 dead, including eight children.

  

  Footage of the fire is already making the rounds on social media.

  19 people killed, including 9 children in tragic Bronx apartment building fire. It’s one of the worst fire disasters in New York City history. pic.twitter.com/TWzjaJSRhW

  — Mike Sington (@MikeSington) January 9, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Building resident Cristal Diaz, 27, told the New York Post she started putting wet towels at the bottom of her door after smelling smoke. “Everything was crazy,” she said. “We didn’t know what to do. We looked out the windows and saw all the dead bodies they were taking with the blankets.”

  The 120-unit where the fire broke out is one of multiple buildings in the Twin Parks Northwest complex. It was built in 1973 as part of a project to build subsidized affordable housing across the Bronx. Right now, there’s no reason to believe the fire was “suspicious” in origin. But the cause is being investigated.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 18:52

• Beijing Steps Up Efforts To Contain Housing Risks
  Beijing Steps Up Efforts To Contain Housing Risks

  By Ye Xie, Bloomberg Live commentator and an analyst

  1. China lent more support to the housing market. Policy makers called on banks to boost real-estate lending in the first quarter and eased a key debt restriction for developers. It’s part of the broader policy shift to prioritize economic stability this year. While the credit market remains fragile, property stocks rallied to the highest since July (for more on how one can trade the growing policy divergence between the US and China see here).

  

  2. China’s easing stands in contrast with the U.S., where the Fed embarked on one of the most-hawkish turns in recent memory. U.S. Treasuries had the worst start to a year in decades as Fed minutes suggested the central bank may unwind its balance sheet soon after raising rates.

  

  Friday’s payroll report showed the unemployment rate dipped below 4%, cementing expectations for the first rate hike in March. This week’s inflation report may add to the vulnerability of the bond market. The policy divergence between the U.S. and China drove their yield differential to the narrowest since 2019.

  

  3. Beijing’s strict Covid strategy adds downside risk to the economy. As one of the world’s last “Covid Zero” holdouts, China has enacted strict measures to curb the spread of the virus, including locking down some 13 million residents in Xi’an. Travel has already taken a knock, with air passenger trips during the Jan. 1-3 long weekend down 27% from a year ago, state broadcaster CCTV reported.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 18:40

• AOC Tests Positive For COVID
  AOC Tests Positive For COVID

  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has tested positive for Covid-19, less than one week after she was spotted partying maskless at a crowded bar in Miami.

  

  “Representative Ocasio-Cortez has received a positive test result for COVID-19. She is experiencing symptoms and recovering at home. The Congresswoman received her booster shot this Fall, and encourages everyone to get their booster and follow all CDC guidance,” reads a statement from her office.

  pic.twitter.com/woutfVCppZ

  — Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@RepAOC) January 9, 2022

  The far-left member of ‘the squad’ was seen last week at several Miami hotspots, as New York was hit with a record-high number of Covid-19 cases due to the far less mild Omicron variant. New York has also instituted a strict mask and vaccine policy.

  

  AOC was spotted partying in a bar maskless in the great free state of Florida. Absolute hypocrite pic.twitter.com/5lPEtPTnib

  — Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) January 2, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  How will AOC spin this? Blame Florida?

  

  Nailed it:

  Haven’t heard much from AOC in awhile. I assume she got covid in Miami.

  — Boomieleaks (@Boomieleaks) January 8, 2022

  COVID just wants to date @AOC pic.twitter.com/DoNavAJwHp

  — Dems Are Mad They Can’t Date Me (@k_ovfefe2) January 10, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 18:20

• "In 10 Years Half Of All Financial Transactions Will Touch Ethereum" – Iconic Crypto Fund Responds To JPMorgan's Ethereum Hit Piece
  “In 10 Years Half Of All Financial Transactions Will Touch Ethereum” – Iconic Crypto Fund Responds To JPMorgan’s Ethereum Hit Piece

  Perhaps having grown tired of bashing bitcoin which had become one of his main pastimes for the past two years, JPMorgan quant (and rising in-house expert cryptoskeptic) Nick Panigirtzoglou shifted his attention to ethereum last week, and at the risk of infuriating his (very wealthy) web 3.0 clients, used his latest Flows and Liquidity report to slam the second biggest cryptocurrency by warning that it has “been losing market share in the DeFi space at a rapid pace over the past year.”

  And while he admits that the pace has (clearly) slowed in the second half of the year (as the chart below so vividly demonstrates), he then boldly predicts that “the share of ethereum in DeFi will likely drop further before Sharding is implemented in 2023” although it is very much unclear how he reaches this conclusion, and then proceeds to note that “the relative valuation of ethereum vs. its competitors has been echoing its declining DeFi share”, because correlation in this case is clearly causation.

  There is more in the full note (available to pro subs in the usual place) but you get the gist; and here is the one chart that he used to guide his whole narrative and goalseeked conclusion which may have been among the factors that hammered the price of ETH in the past week, sending it 40% below its all time high.

  

  Not everyone was impressed by this painfully superficial “analysis” however, and on Sunday, Joey Krug, co-CIO at digital-asset investment firm Pantera Capital, tore apart JPM’s hitpiece, telling Bloomberg that an explosion in the growth of crypto networks vying to take market share from Ethereum is unlikely to threaten the dominance of the world’s most used blockchain, and what will happen instead is that ETH dominance will only grow in the coming years.

  “If you roll the clock forward 10 to 20 years, a very sizable percent, maybe even north of 50%, of the world’s financial transactions in some way, shape or form will touch Ethereum,” Krug said in an interview, an outcome which all web 3.0 fanatics would find delightful.

  To be sure, Krug is also talking his book, which is of course to be expected – he admitted that Ether is among Pantera Capital’s top three positions across funds. That said, unlike so many fly-by-night “asset managers” who have taken to crypto in recent months and years hoping to piggyback on the success of the cryptocurrency, Pantera is one of the earliest digital-asset investment firms and ranks in the top five of crypto-focused funds with $5.8 billion in assets.

  Krug was responding not just to JPM but to all critics of Ethereum (who tend to also be big bitcoin fans… big frustrated bitcoin cans since that particular crypto is flat over the past year) say it has expensive fees and slow transaction speeds as traffic crowds the network. Add-ons, known as layer-2 networks, have emerged as fixes but can be complex to use, or have other disadvantages. Of course, all of that will change with Ethereum 2.0 and Sharding, both of which are coming soon.

  There is another reason why bitcoin supporters do not like ETH much: it had a breakthrough year, hitting a record high while soaring almost 400%, smashing the performance of bitcoin. That came on top of a gain of almost 500% the prior year, and has rekindled speculation that it could one day surpass Bitcoin, which currently has about double the market value of Ether, an advantage that is rapidly shrinking.

  While various ETH-killers had an even better year in 2021 with Solana and PolkaDot surging 7,000% and 150% respectively, that has to do with their far lower price a year ago. Meanwhile, Krug, an early DeFi developer, believes competitors will eventually rely on Ethereum as a base, assuming that the blockchain successfully switches to proof-of-stake, a transition which is expected to take place in Q2 of this year, and which should catalyze a major spike in the price.

  “There’s too many trade-offs other chains are making that Ethereum is not making on the decentralization side that are pretty important,” Krug said, noting security concerns. “I don’t know if they’re best suited to be the new global financial settlement layer.”

  Pantera is headed by Dan Morehead, a veteran Bitcoin investor, who was an executive at Julian Robertson’s Tiger Management earlier in his career.

  Some have a more laid back view of the increasingly cutthroat competition in the crypto space: Grayscale Investments’ David Grider, head of research, says “all boats can be lifted” in the sector. Several competitors performed strongly in the second half of 2021, Grider said. Grayscale Investments LLC offers clients a Solana investment fund. It is also exploring products related to other rivals.

  “I don’t think it’s this winner-take-all type of market,” Grider says. “Ethereum has this lead-of-a-network effect. It has this large community, but other ones have emerged that fill different market voids.”

  Of course, a far bigger concerns for both Ethereum and Bitcoin fans is when will the selling associated with the Fed’s infamous hawkish turn relent. As we noted yesterday, a furious bout of selling on Saturday which sent bitcoin just above $40,000 and Ethereum to precisely $3,000.01, both down more than 40% from their November all time highs, made Bitcoin be the most oversold since the March 2020 crash, surpassing even the furious liquidations observed during the May 2021 crash.

  

  It remains to be seen what will catalyze the relentless BTFD bid that lifted the crypto space from every single previous crash in its brief history, although our money is on the realization that the more the Fed tightens and hikes rates in the coming months, the more it will have to ease, cut rates, do more QE, NIRP, etc in the months that follow once it send stocks into a catastrophic tailspin.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 18:00

• "I Do Not Want To Have A Vaccination": NHS Doctor Tells UK Health Secretary On Camera
  “I Do Not Want To Have A Vaccination”: NHS Doctor Tells UK Health Secretary On Camera

  Authored by Lily Zhou via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  An NHS doctor told Health Secretary Sajid Javid on Friday that he’s not happy with the government’s Covid-19 vaccination mandate for health workers that is due to take effect in April.

  

  The vaccination mandate has already come into effect for care home staff, volunteers, and visitors from Nov. 11. Parliament approved the mandate for frontline NHS workers on Dec. 14.

  Steve James, a consultant anesthetist at the King’s College Hospital, told Javid that he doesn’t believe the science for mandating the vaccines is “strong enough” and the government should at least consider the nuance that some doctors have had antibodies through previous exposure to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus—the virus that causes COVID-19.

  “I’m not happy about that,” James told the health secretary after he asked an intensive care unit (ICU) their thoughts about the new rule to require CCP virus vaccination for NHS staff.

  The unvaccinated doctor said he had had COVID-19 and had been working in COVID-19 ICU since the beginning of the pandemic.

  “I’ve not had a vaccination. I do not want to have a vaccination,” James said, adding that one of his colleagues was in the same situation.

  “The vaccines are reducing transmission only for eight weeks for [the] Delta [variant of the CCP virus]. With Omicron, it’s probably less. For that, I will be dismissed if I don’t have a vaccine? The science isn’t strong enough,” he told Javid.

  The health secretary said he respects James’s view, adding, “but there’re also many different views.”

  “Obviously, we have to weigh all that up—for both health and social care—and there will always be a debate about it,” Javid said.

  James suggested Javid should reconsider the mandate, considering “Omicron and the changing picture,” or at least the “nuance” that doctors who had previous infections can be exempt because the “protection I’ve got from transmission is probably equivalent to someone who’s vaccinated.”

  When Javid said his immunity “at some point … will wane as well,” James suggested that to maintain a high level of protection against transmission, every staff member would have to get a booster dose “every single month.”

  Javid said the ministers “take the very best advice that we can from people that are vaccine experts.”

  A new study published on Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that CCP virus vaccination was associated with a smaller reduction in transmission of the delta variant than of the alpha variant, and the effects of vaccination decreased over time.

  Analysing real-world data from England between Jan. 2 and Aug. 2, 2021, the government-funded study suggested that Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine reduced the transmission of Delta by 50 percent two weeks after the second dose, but the reduction shrunk to 24 percent 10 weeks later. The Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine only offered a 24 percent reduction in transmission after two weeks and 2 percent after 12 weeks.

  The government previously stated that the reasons for making CCP virus vaccination a condition of deployment in the health and wider social care sector are to “protect them and to reduce transmission within health and social care premises, contribute to the protection of individuals who may have a suboptimal response to their own immunisations, [and to] avoid disruption to services that provide their care.”

  However, with Omicron’s increased ability to evade immunity, the UK is experiencing a record-high number of cases despite the country’s high vaccination rate, with troops deployed to assist hospitals amid staff shortages.

  On Friday, Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation said the main aim of the UK’s vaccination programme remains the prevention of severe disease and that “protection against mild or asymptomatic infection with existing vaccine products would require regular (perhaps as frequent as 3 monthly) booster vaccinations which is not considered a sustainable long-term strategy.”

  The Epoch Times reached out to the Department of Health and Social Care for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 17:45

• The Ultimate Supply And Demand Equation
  The Ultimate Supply And Demand Equation

  By Macro Ops Musings

  Let’s talk about asset shortages.

  If you’re active on fintwit then you’ve probably heard people mention the possibility of a coming asset shortage squeeze — I myself, have been mulling the idea over.

  But the concept is a fuzzy one. There’s little research on the topic. Very few people are aware of the idea and its impact. And even those that do talk about it, have serious misconceptions of how it actually works.

  Even more importantly, it’s a useful model to apply in our framework for analyzing market cycles — it’s at the heart of what drives bull markets (hint… it’s not earnings). It also ties into our debt cycle model and is likely to become an important driver of market returns over the coming year. So knowing what it is and how it works will put us ahead of the market… which is where we want to be.

  Everything in markets comes down to supply and demand. Our job as speculators is to figure out the two and see if there’s a mismatch that will lead to a price change (a trend). So let’s start by defining market demand.

  Investors can allocate their savings to three main assets: stocks, bonds, and cash. They make these allocation decisions based on desired returns and tolerance for risk to come up with a portfolio mix — the classic being m60% in stocks and 40% in bonds/cash. Recent price appreciation (not valuation or yield) is the overwhelming driver behind this allocation decision. Momentum is the bottom line, which means investors are always chasing the trend — nobody likes sitting out of a rising market.

  Savings — the amount of money available to invest — fluctuates according to the levels of cash + credit (money) in the system. Since credit is easier to create than cash (any two willing parties can create credit out of thin air with an IOU), credit largely drives the amount of investable money in the system. Rising lending equals more savings to invest. The amount cycles up and down in accordance with our debt cycle framework.

  The supply side of financial assets is comprised not just of the total amount of shares or bonds in existence, which is what many people mistakenly think. Rather, it’s the market value — the total dollar amount in existence at current market prices — that makes up supply.

  This means that the equity market has a flexible supply. If the demand for stocks increases then those flows will drive up prices along with the overall market value thus creating more supply to meet that demand. It’s a system that automatically self-corrects over time.

  The bond market, on the other hand, has a theoretical supply limit.

  There’s a ceiling on the market value of bonds because credit shouldn’t trade much above the price which corresponds to a 0% yield to maturity. It used to be thought that this was an iron-clad rule. But after years of NIRP, we now know that bonds can and do trade above this limit, in which their yield is negative. But even here, they can only trade so far above this level that there’s a range that serves as a limit on bond market value and hence supply.

  So to summarize, the basics of our supply and demand model is: On the demand side we have:

  • a. The amount of savings available to invest is largely driven by the credit cycle
  • b. The allocation mix of investor portfolios is largely driven by performance chasing

  On the supply side we have:

  • a. Supply is made up of the total market value of the asset and this market value is equal to the number of shares + the price at which they trade
  • b. Stocks have a flexible supply in that greater demand leads to higher market value and more supply
  • c. Bonds have a theoretical limit in that they can’t trade much below 0% interest rates
  • This is a very different kind of thinking about what moves the market. It’s the model that Stanley Druckenmiller was referring to when he said:

  Earnings don’t move the overall market; it’s the Federal Reserve Board… focus on the central banks and focus on the movement of liquidity… most people in the market are looking for earnings and conventional measures. It’s liquidity that moves markets.

  Liquidity is credit-driven investment demand. This isn’t to say that earnings don’t matter. They do, especially on an individual company level. But on the aggregate, earnings are largely a result, not the cause of, the liquidity-driven short-term debt cycle.

  We can look back through time and see how this model correlates to market returns.

  Historically, US corporate share issuance has rarely exceeded 2% and over the last three and a half decades corporates have been actively reducing their share count through buybacks and M&A at an average annual rate of 2%. The chart below shows net corporate share issuance.

  

  While the number of shares has been falling, the amount of money (cash+credit), has been steadily increasing. Over the last 50 years, the US’s money stock has been rising at an average annual rate of 8% a year. The chart below shows total new credit (blue line) and M2 cash stock (red line).

  

  So over the last five decades, we’ve had the supply of equity shares shrinking by an average of 1-2% a year, through buybacks and M&A. And we’ve had the total money stock increasing at an average rate of 8% a year. Disregarding total market value and investor allocation preferences for a second, this gives us a supply/demand mismatch of roughly 9.5% a year. Well, guess what the average annual return has been on the stock market over the same period? That’s right…9.5%.

  The stock market’s average annual returns equal the supply/demand mismatch of share reduction and money creation over the same period. This isn’t a coincidence. It’s just math. You see, if investors keep their portfolio mix (their allocation preference between stocks, bonds, and cash) relatively constant, then the market value of stocks has to rise at the same level of the supply and demand imbalance between share reduction and money creation.

  If not, investors’ allocation to equities will dwindle relative to bonds and cash and the market value of stocks will fall on a relative basis to the amount of investable savings. We can see what this would look like on the chart below via Philosophical Economics.  The chart shows how much the investor allocation to stocks would decrease if the market went through a “lost decade” period; where the share count/money demand imbalance grew at its historical rate, but stock prices stayed constant. The purple line shows the allocation to equities over each hypothetical “lost decade” period and the orange line shows what the actual allocation to stocks was.

  

  So we can see, the market has to rise over time because we operate in an inflationary market system, where the quantity of money is nearly always growing and the corporate sector’s aversion to dilution keeps share growth at a minimum to net negative. The only way for the market to clear — for supply and demand to balance — is for the market’s total value to rise, increasing the supply to meet the demand. If you were trading back in the early 80s and you understood this market supply and demand model, you would have foreseen the massive secular bull market that was mathematically inevitable.

  

  In the early 80’s we saw a perfect storm that led to a huge imbalance between the supply of equities (shares issued plus total relative market value) and demand (total money creation plus investor allocation).

  

  We can see that following the 1981 recession both money creation ballooned to all-time highs and corporates saw record net negative share issuance.

  At the same time, investors’ allocation to stocks hit an all-time low of 12%! The chart below shows a household’s allocation to equities as a percentage of total financial assets.

  

  

  At that rate of money creation and net share decline, investors’ allocation to stocks would have had to fall to near zero just to keep the market from rising.

  The secular bull market HAD to happen so that the market’s total value could rise, bringing supply up to meet demand and allowing the market to clear.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 17:30

• Morgan Stanley: Central Banks Are Increasingly Comfortable Pushing A More Hawkish Line… Until Something Pushes Back
  Morgan Stanley: Central Banks Are Increasingly Comfortable Pushing A More Hawkish Line… Until Something Pushes Back

  By Andrew Sheets, Chief Cross-Asset Strategist for Morgan Stanley

  

  We hope everyone had a Happy New Year and a restful holiday. It feels like we’ll need it. Right out of the gate, 2022 is greeting us with a surge in Covid cases, 199K on payrolls, geopolitical risk, and hawkish Fed communication. Buckle up!

  Amid these issues, the question for our readers is whether the carefully crafted Outlooks and Investment Committee conclusions from late last year still hold. We think the main themes of our 2022 Outlook still apply – solid growth and tighter policy within an accelerated cycle. But clearly, there are now more moving parts.

  One of them is the growth outlook. Our 2022 expectation was that global growth remains above-trend, led by DM and aided by a healthy consumer, robust business investment, and healing supply chains. Can that still hold with the new Omicron variant?

  For the moment, we think it can. Our economists note that global GDP has become less sensitive to each new Covid wave as vaccination rates have risen, treatment has improved, and the appetite for restrictions has declined. Modelling by our US biotechnology team suggests that cases in Europe and the US could crest within 3-6 weeks, meaning that the better part of 2022 lies beyond this peak. With some form of ‘winter wave’ already baked into our original forecasts, we don’t think, for now, that the story has changed.

  However, there are some wrinkles. Because China is pursuing a different (zero Covid) policy from the US, Europe and Japan, its near-term growth may be more impacted than that of other regions. And the emergence of this variant likely reinforces another prior expectation: that US and eurozone growth exceed EM growth in 2022.

  A second wrinkle is the Federal Reserve’s hawkish shift. Last January, the market assumed the first Fed rate hike was still 40 months away (~April 2024). Last August, the market assumed liftoff would come around April 2023. Today, pricing implies that the first hike is ~2.3 months away (March 2022). Importantly, the Fed is doing little to suggest that these assumptions are wrong.

  And this week it continued to push the story. A hawkish set of minutes noted active discussion around whether to raise rates sooner, raise them faster, and start shrinking the balance sheet (QT) much closer to the first rate hike than the market had anticipated. This last point is especially critical, given the importance investors have assigned to Fed purchases for overall market strength and resilience.

  Our economists expect more details at the next Fed meeting later this month. But the direction of travel appears clear: 2022 will be a year of policy tightening.

  And of course, it’s not just the Fed. At the time of writing, markets imply about 100bp of rate hikes over the next 12 months in the UK, 139bp in Canada, 245bp in Mexico, 150bp in Poland and 145bp in New Zealand. Japan stands out as the only major economy without a rate hike priced in for the next year.

  Indeed, it would seem for the moment that central banks are increasingly comfortable pushing a more hawkish line until something pushes back. And so far, nothing has. Equity markets haven’t fallen, credit spreads are steady, and yield curves have steepened over the last month (the opposite of what you’d expect in a policy mistake). Why stop now?

  For markets, therefore, our strategy still leans into the idea of a more hawkish tone to start the year. Our FX team remains bullish on the US dollar, while our US interest rate strategists remain negative on duration, especially in real rates. We think that this combination should be negative for gold but supportive for financial stocks, both in the US and around the world.

  Elsewhere in equities, the expected rate hikes from the Fed and EM central banks, relative to the ECB and the BoJ, lead to different assumptions about how valuations in these markets evolve. We think that valuations for European and Japanese stocks, which are now similar to January 2017, are reasonable, and don’t need to de-rate further. US and EM equities, in contrast, face more valuation uncertainty ahead of the full force of the tightening cycle. In credit, tight spreads and shifting policy drive forecasts for modest spread widening, although low default rates should still support exposure at the bottom of securitized capital structures.

  2022 is set to be an action-packed year, and one that looks likely to test many assumptions about how far, and how fast, monetary policy could shift in this cycle. We wish investors the best, even as they continue to see hawks.

  Enjoy your Sunday.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 16:30

• DOJ Refuses To Withdraw Memo Activating FBI Counterterrorism Division Against School Parents
  DOJ Refuses To Withdraw Memo Activating FBI Counterterrorism Division Against School Parents

  In a quiet response to the Senate Judiciary Committee three days before Christmas, the Biden DOJ says it won’t withdraw a controversial memo used to activate the FBI Counterterrorism Division to investigate parents voicing their opposition to a variety of topics – primarily mask and vaccine mandates, and teaching critical race theory.

  

  This week, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) revealed the pre-Christmas response – stating:

  “[I]n December we asked why the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division was getting involved in parents expressing their concerns at school board meetings. Now, just to be crystal clear, there’s no excuse for real threats or acts of violence at school board meetings, but if there are such threats, these should be handled at the local level and the Attorney General should withdraw his memo that started this whole thing.

  “Well, a couple days before Christmas, the Justice Department responded to us with just a one-page letter.

  “In that letter, DOJ had nothing to say about why the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division was involved in local school-board matters. DOJ just said, ‘We’re not going to withdraw the memo.’ So, the Feds may be keeping track of school board meetings—even if it creates a horrible chilling effect. And, of course the FBI looking over your shoulder would have a chilling effect. Next week the Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on domestic terrorism. I hope we’re going to be focusing on the serious threats facing our country—and I hope no one thinks the focus is on our nation’s parents.”

  The Garland memo

  On October 4, AG Merrick Garland issued a memorandum announcing a concentrated effort to target any threats of violence, intimidation, and harassment by parents toward school personnel.

  The announcement came came days after the national association of school boards asked the Biden administration to take “extraordinary measures” to prevent alleged threats against school staff that the association said was coming from parents who oppose mask mandates and the teaching of critical race theory.

  In late October, however, it was revealed that Garland based the memo on unsupported claims made by the National School Boards Association, which apologized for inflammatory language. Garland maintains that the letter had no bearing on the DOJ’s stance.

  A ‘protected disclosure’:

  In mid-November, House Judiciary Committee Republicans sent a letter to Garland after an FBI whistleblower came forward with “a protected disclosure” – claiming that “the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division had been compiling and categorizing threat assessments related to parents, including a document directing FBI personnel to use a specific “threat tag” to track potential investigations.”

  “This disclosure provides specific evidence that federal law enforcement operationalized counterterrorism tools at the behest of a left-wing special interest group against concerned parents,” the letter continues.

  This is the smoking gun. Attorney General Garland provided zero evidence that parents are engaging in credible threats or acts of violence. And yet, he mobilized the FBI Counterterrorism Division to use counterterrorism tools for investigating, tracking, and tagging parents. pic.twitter.com/PHpVIqvlBw

  — Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) November 16, 2021

  According to a public statement by Grassley regarding the one-page letter: 

  “The Department of Justice owes the American people a better answer than just a one-page letter that says nothing about why the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division is involved in local school-board matters. Now more than ever, parents should be their kids’ strongest and best advocates. They have the God-given right to do so. And the Justice Department ought to be doing everything it can to protect that right, not scare them out of exercising that right. Attorney General Garland should withdraw his memo. And he should take Congress’s oversight, and concern for the rights of parents, more seriously.”

  (h/t Sharyl Attkisson)

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/09/2022 – 16:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Despotism Is The New Normal: Looming Threats To Freedom In 2022
  Despotism Is The New Normal: Looming Threats To Freedom In 2022

  Authored by John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “Looking at the present, I see a more probable future: a new despotism creeping slowly across America. Faceless oligarchs sit at command posts of a corporate-government complex that has been slowly evolving over many decades. In efforts to enlarge their own powers and privileges, they are willing to have others suffer the intended or unintended consequences of their institutional or personal greed. For Americans, these consequences include chronic inflation, recurring recession, open and hidden unemployment, the poisoning of air, water, soil and bodies, and, more important, the subversion of our constitution.”

  – Bertram Gross, Friendly Fascism: The New Face of Power in America

  Despotism has become our new normal.

  

  Digital tyranny, surveillance. Intolerance, cancel culture, censorship. Lockdowns, mandates, government overreach. Supply chain shortages, inflation. Police brutality, home invasions, martial law. The loss of bodily integrity, privacy, autonomy.

  These acts of tyranny by an authoritarian government have long since ceased to alarm or unnerve us. We have become desensitized to government brutality, accustomed to government corruption, and unfazed by the government’s assaults on our freedoms.

  This present trajectory is unsustainable. The center cannot hold.

  The following danger points pose some of the greatest threats to our collective and individual freedoms now and in the year to come.

  Censorship. The most controversial issues of our day—gay rights, abortion, race, religion, sexuality, political correctness, police brutality, et al.—have become battlegrounds for those who claim to believe in freedom of speech but only when it favors the views and positions they support. Thus, while on paper, we are technically free to speak, in reality, we are only as free to speak as the government and tech giants such as Facebook, Google or YouTube may allow. Yet it’s a slippery slope from censoring so-called illegitimate ideas to silencing truth. What we are witnessing is the modern-day equivalent of book burning which involves doing away with dangerous ideas—legitimate or not—and the people who espouse them. Unfortunately, censorship is just the beginning. Once you allow the government and its corporate partners to determine who is worthy enough to participate in society, anything goes.

  The Emergency State. Now that the government has gotten a taste for flexing its police state powers by way of a bevy of lockdowns, mandates, restrictions, contact tracing programs, heightened surveillance, censorship, overcriminalization, etc., “we the people” may well find ourselves burdened with a Nanny State inclined to use its draconian pandemic powers to protect us from ourselves. Therein lies the danger of the government’s Machiavellian version of crisis management that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security. This is the power grab hiding in plain sight.

  Pre-crime. The government is about to rapidly expand its policing efforts to focus on pre-crime and thought crimes. Precrime, straight out of the realm of dystopian science fiction movies such as Minority Report, aims to prevent crimes before they happen by combining widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, precognitive technology, and neighborhood and family snitch programs to enable police to capture would-be criminals before they can do any damage. The intent, of course, is for the government to be all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful in its preemptive efforts to combat domestic extremism, a broad label that can be applied to anything or anyone the government perceives to be a threat to its power.

  The Surveillance State. This all-seeing fourth branch of government, comprised of a domestic army of government snitches, spies and techno-warriors, watches everything we do, reads everything we write, listens to everything we say, and monitors everywhere we go. Beware of what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, and with whom you communicate, because it is all being recorded, stored, and catalogued, and will be used against you eventually, at a time and place of the government’s choosing. Even agencies not traditionally associated with the intelligence community are part of the government’s growing network of snitches and spies.

  Genetic privacy. “Guilt by association” has taken on new connotations in the technological age. Yet the debate over genetic privacy—and when one’s DNA becomes a public commodity outside the protection of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on warrantless searches and seizures—is really only beginning. Get ready, folks, because the government—helped along by Congress (which adopted legislation allowing police to collect and test DNA immediately following arrests), the courts (which have ruled that police can routinely take DNA samples from people who are arrested but not yet convicted of a crime), and local police agencies (which are chomping at the bit to acquire this new crime-fighting gadget)—has embarked on a diabolical campaign to create a nation of suspects predicated on a massive national DNA database.

  Bodily integrity. It doesn’t matter what your trigger issue is—whether it’s vaccines, abortion, crime, religion, immigration, terrorism or some other overtly politicized touchstone used by politicians as a rallying cry for votes—we should all be concerned when governments and businesses (i.e., the Corporate State) join forces to compel individuals to sacrifice their right to bodily integrity on the altar of so-called safety and national security. This debate over bodily integrity covers broad territory, ranging from abortion and forced vaccines to biometric surveillance and basic healthcare. Forced vaccinations, forced cavity searches, forced colonoscopies, forced blood draws, forced breath-alcohol tests, forced DNA extractions, forced eye scans, and forced inclusion in biometric databases are just a few ways in which Americans continue to be reminded that we have no control over what happens to our bodies during an encounter with government officials.

  Gun control. After declaring more than a decade ago that citizens have a Second Amendment right to own a gun in one’s home for self-defense, the Supreme Court has now been tasked with deciding whether the Constitution also protects the right to carry a gun outside the home. Unfortunately, when it comes to gun rights in particular, and the rights of the citizenry overall, the U.S. government has adopted a “do what I say, not what I do” mindset. Nowhere is this double standard more evident than in the government’s attempts to arm itself to the teeth, all the while viewing as suspect anyone who dares to legally own a gun, let alone use one in self-defense. Indeed, while it still technically remains legal to own a firearm in America, possessing one can now get you pulled over, searched, arrested, subjected to all manner of surveillance, treated as a suspect without ever having committed a crime, shot at, and killed.

  Show Your Papers Society. With every passing day, more and more private businesses and government agencies on both the state and federal level are requiring proof of a COVID-19 vaccination in order for individuals to work, travel, shop, attend school, and generally participate in the life of the country. By allowing government agents to establish a litmus test for individuals to be able to engage in commerce, movement and any other right that corresponds to life in a supposedly free society, it lays the groundwork for a “show me your papers” society in which you are required to identify yourself at any time to any government worker who demands it for any reason. Such tactics can quickly escalate into a power-grab that empowers government agents to force anyone and everyone to prove they are in compliance with every statute and regulation on the books.

  Singularity. Welcome to the Matrix (i.e. the metaverse), where reality is virtual, freedom is only as free as one’s technological overlords allow, and artificial intelligence is slowly rendering humanity unnecessary, inferior and obsolete. Indeed, it’s no coincidence that Elon Musk has announced his intentions of implanting brain chips in humans sometime in 2022. The digital universe—the metaverse—is expected to be the next step in our evolutionary transformation from a human-driven society to a technological one. Remaining singularly human and retaining your individuality and dominion over yourself—mind, body and soul—in the face of corporate and government technologies that aim to invade, intrude, monitor, manipulate and control us may be one of the greatest challenges before us.

  Despotism. Even in the face of militarism, fascism, technotyranny, surveillance, etc., the gravest threat facing us as a nation may well be despotism, exercised by a ruling class whose only allegiance is to power and money. The American kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians and corporate thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of the people) continues to suck the American people into a parallel universe in which the Constitution is meaningless, the government is all-powerful, and the citizenry are powerless to defend themselves against government agents who steal, spy, lie, plunder, kill, abuse and generally inflict mayhem and sow madness on everyone and everything in their sphere.

  It is a grim outlook for a new year, but it is not completely hopeless.

  If hope is to be found, it will be found with those of us who do their part, at their local levels, to right the wrongs and fix what is broken. I am referring to the builders, the thinkers, the helpers, the healers, the educators, the creators, the artists, the activists, the technicians, the food gatherers and distributors, and every other person who does their part to build up rather than destroy.

  “We the people” are the hope for a better year.

  Until we can own that truth, until we can forge our own path back to a world in which freedom means something again, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we’re going to be stuck in this wormhole of populist anger, petty politics and destruction that is pitting us one against the other.

  In such a scenario, no one wins.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 23:30

• YouTuber Accused Of Staging Plane Crash For Likes And Views
  YouTuber Accused Of Staging Plane Crash For Likes And Views

  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is investigating YouTuber and former Olympic snowboarder Trevor Jacob after he posted a video online showing him bailing out of a plane after alleged engine issues. 

  “The FAA is investigating this event,” the agency said. “The agency does not discuss open investigations.” 

  The incident occurred in Los Padres National Forest near Cuyama, California, in November. It wasn’t until Dec. 24 when he uploaded the video onto YouTube, showing the alleged engine failure above rocky terrain. The YouTuber then opens the plane’s door and bails out with a parachute—cameras located on the plane capture the entire incident. 

  

  Jacob lands to safety while the plane smashes into the side of a mountain. He locates the crash and shows the wreckage.

  

  The video has gone viral, with nearly 600k views, 5.9k likes, and 36k dislikes. The reason for a large number of dislikes is that followers believe the video was possibly staged.

  Robert Perry, a flight instructor based out of Santa Ynez Airport, California, said he is suspect of Jacob’s crash. He pointed the biggest red: the pilot was wearing a parachute during takeoff. 

  Others on social media said Jacob “faked a plane crash for clout.” 

  Youtuber Trevor Jacob completely faked a plane crash for clout. He went up wearing a sport parachute which ZERO private pilots do, pitched the airplane down and jumped while making sure to film via a selfie stick

  Disgusting & Fake

  Source: My wife and best friend who are pilots

  — TheQuartering (@TheQuartering) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  What stands out to us is why did Jacob strap on a parachute before taking off? That’s unusual among private pilots. 

  Watch the full video here. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 23:00

• How The Geopolitics Of 2021 Will Shape The Year Ahead For Bitcoin
  How The Geopolitics Of 2021 Will Shape The Year Ahead For Bitcoin

  Authored by Nick Fonseca via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Developments around the global regulation, hash rate and adoption of Bitcoin made for a unique year in 2021. So how will 2022 play out?

  

  This past year was certainly a unique one for bitcoin. We saw the first bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) get approved in the United States, the largest-ever Bitcoin conference in Miami, the much anticipated Taproot upgrade, all-time highs nearing $70,000, oh, and a nation state made bitcoin legal tender. Despite all this exciting news, some things never change — the FUD was as prevalent as ever. Bitcoin saw a variety of bans throughout 2021 and, to no one’s surprise, China stole the show in this regard.

  Below is a list of bitcoin bans in 2021 alone:

  • Turkey banned all bitcoin payments

  • Nigeria banned all regulated institutions (financial and non-financial) from “dealing in crypto currencies or facilitating payments for cryptocurrency exchanges”

  • Iran banned the trading of bitcoin mined abroad and banned domestic bitcoin mining as well (though the latter measure was lifted before being reimposed)

  • Last, but not least, China banned financial institutions and payments companies from offering bitcoin services; then it brought the hammer down on bitcoin mining

  With 2021 nearly in the rearview mirror, I’ve been thinking a lot lately about what geopolitical bitcoin moves will occur throughout 2022. Below, I offer up a few questions to think about as we approach the new year:

  • On a global scale, will we see bitcoin regulation turn friendly or grow increasingly hostile?

  • Will hash rate continue to accumulate in the U.S. (possibly eclipsing a 50% share) or will we see a greater distribution moving forward?

  • Will another country adopt bitcoin as legal tender? And if so, which one? There couldn’t be multiple throughout 2022, could there?

  These questions fall into three categories: hash rate, regulation and adoption. I’ve addressed each below in more detail.

  REGULATION

  If we step back and look at 2021 regulation on a global scale, would you think the overall trend was friendly or hostile? Even with the passing of El Salvador’s Bitcoin law, I’d say the global regulatory environment is still quite hostile toward Bitcoin. Iran, Turkey and Nigeria all made hostile moves in 2021. India and the State of New York considered hostile regulatory action as well. We all know what happened in China.

  While the news of bans and corresponding FUD was prevalent, there is still a sense of optimism in the air. After the dust settled post-El Salvador’s bitcoin law, the obvious next question was: Who’s next? Many assumptions have been made about it being another Latin American country. This certainly makes sense.

  In retrospect, El Salvador was almost the perfect country to make this huge leap. It is a small nation that has struggled economically and doesn’t have autonomy over its currency. As a dollarized country, Salvadorans are subject to the whim of the U.S. dollar and the Federal Reserve. I’m not going to debate whether severing ties with the colón in 2001 was the right move (Alex Gladstein covered that topic well here), but I certainly think taking a step toward a Bitcoin standard was.

  El Salvador, like many countries in Latin America, is often harmed by U.S. foreign policy and International Monetary Fund (IMF) intervention. The Cantillon effect created by the U.S. hurt the people of El Salvador by inflating their local currency (and any benefits accompanied by this hidden tax are not seen by Salvadorans), enacting sanctions and controlling trade policy. The IMF harms the people of El Salvador by keeping the country indebted and degrading its credit quality to ensure unfavorable terms for future loans (or even holding hostage future lending prospects).

  “El Salvador bond spreads to U.S. Treasuries hit a record high on Thursday on growing investor fears the Central American nation will not reach a potential $1 billion loan agreement with the International Monetary Fund and faces negative credit implications linked to its use of bitcoin.”

  –Reuters

  So, what did El Salvador do about this? It opted out (though not completely). It took a step in the direction of financial sovereignty and a corresponding step away from nefarious U.S. statecraft and IMF financial tyranny. But El Salvador is not the only struggling, dolarized country in Latin America. So, again I’ll ask, who’s next?

  Politicians across Latin America have been equipping their laser eyes, starting to engage with the bitcoin community and proposing pro-bitcoin legislation. Little has materialized as of this writing (on the surface, at least), but we all know bitcoin acts “gradually, then suddenly.”

  The Latin American leaders backing cryptocurrency.

  🇸🇻El Salvador – @nayibbukele, @monicataher
  🇵🇾Paraguay – @carlitosrejala
  🇵🇦Panama – @gabrielsilva8_7
  🇦🇷Argentina – @fsancheznqn
  🇧🇷Brazil – @FabioOstermann
  🇨🇴Colombia – @JCastroS
  🇲🇽Mexico – @IndiraKempis, @eduardomurat https://t.co/EB7sI3K78B

  — Balaji Srinivasan (@balajis) June 8, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Congressman Carlitos Rejala of Paraguay, Mexican lawmaker Eduardo Murat Hinojosa, Panamanian congressman Gabriel Silva and Brazil’s Federal Deputy Aureo Ribeiro have all signaled support for bitcoin in one way or another.

  It very well could be one of these countries that becomes the next Bitcoin hub, whether it be via a legal tender law or otherwise friendly regulation. And just maybe, we won’t be talking about another single country making bitcoin legal tender, but a handful when we look back at 2022.

  Even if Alexander Höptner’s prediction of five more developing countries adopting bitcoin as legal tender by the end of 2022 turns out to be accurate, there will still be FUD (there will always be FUD). We likely haven’t seen the last of Bitcoin bans and they may become more sophisticated and more strictly enforced as financial elites across the globe feel the increased pressure put upon them by this new freedom money.

  “In reality, U.S. economic statecraft is alive and well in the region, and helped foment the dire conditions that sparked the recent wave of uprisings.”

  –Alexander Main, director of international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, on recent protests across Latin America

  HASH RATE

  In the fall of 2019, Mainland China controlled approximately 75% of the global Bitcoin hash rate. That number fell, but was still over 50% as we kicked off 2021. Now, in the early days of 2022, it sits at 0%.

  This was one of the best stories in bitcoin in 2021. Sure, the FUDsters were sounding the alarm when China banned bitcoin mining this past summer, but that was to be expected and they failed to zoom out. China enacting a legitimate and all-out ban on bitcoin mining certainly hurt the overall hash rate at the time, so the price dropped accordingly. Alarms were sounded. Articles were written. The death of bitcoin was yet again declared.

  Not so fast. Many bitcoiners knew this would actually be a good thing. It may not have been obvious from the outside looking in, but it was clear as day to those who get it. A mass exodus of bitcoin mining from China would result in a greater distribution of global hash rate. This is a huge deal. Not to mention that this does away with one of the most prominent anti-bitcoin arguments — that China has too much control of Bitcoin infrastructure or might co-opt the network by a hostile miner takeover.

  As is evident in the below visual, many countries benefited from the China mining ban: Russia, Kazakhstan and the United States chief among them. The U.S. started the year with roughly an 11% share of the global hash rate. This number (as of August, per the most recently available data) sits at 35%. What are the odds this number continues to grow? When does it go from something to celebrate to a point of concern?

  

   Image source

  As an American, I was happy to see miners coming to the U.S. However, stepping back and recognizing just how fast the U.S. tripled its hash rate, I believe there’s some cause for concern. I wouldn’t want any one country to lay claim over China’s vacated throne of the dominant player in global hash rate. Is it possible that 75% of the hash rate being in the U.S. would actually be worse than when that same concentration was in China?

  The U.S. might be behind the EU in terms of sustainability regulation, but it seems intent on closing that gap fast. With so many corporations leaning into ESG, the topic of ESG and Bitcoin is certainly not going anywhere. This would call into question bitcoin’s fungibility if “green bitcoin” were to be priced at a premium. It would also be in direct conflict with the free market ethos that Bitcoin naturally promotes.

  While the Chinese regulatory environment was uncertain and oftentimes really harsh toward bitcoin, it ultimately decided to push miners out as opposed to co-opting them. Since miners benefit from economies of scale, they’ll likely trend toward centralization over time. This makes regulatory capture more of a concern, whether it be in China, the U.S. or another other country. The next time a major geopolitical move is taken by a global mining power, it might take the form of state control rather than a ban. Even though El Salvador mining bitcoin with geothermal energy is undoubtedly really cool, state-owned bitcoin mining facilities is not a trend I want to see emerge.

  This might be a bit farther out than 2022. It might be unrealistic altogether. Maybe it’s even one of those chances bitcoiners would be willing to take, as it might not arise until we’re at or near hyperbitcoinization. Still, it’s worth some consideration as we look ahead to the short- and long-term futures of bitcoin.

  ADOPTION

  Bitcoin adoption has exploded over the years and is now estimated to be north of 100 million users. Bitcoin users include institutional and retail investors, humanitarians, bankers, government officials, large and small businesses, refugees and everyone in between. Even if we were to say “that 100 million seems really low” and infer it might be closer to double that, we’d only be at roughly 4% to 5% of adults owning bitcoin globally. That’s comparable to the internet in 1999.

  If we continue the trends seen in Bitcoin adoption over the past couple years, the number of global users will reach one billion sooner than we know it. Trying to predict what will happen to bitcoin’s price, hash rate or adoption in the short term is a fool’s errand, but we can say with near certainty that Bitcoin’s user base will expand over longer periods of time.

  It’s impossible to know exactly how many users there are, but below are some trends that clearly illustrate how adoption is rapidly increasing:

  • Six percent of U.S. investors (defined as those with $10,000 invested in stocks, bonds or mutual funds) say they own bitcoin, up from 2% in 2018.
  • Institutional investors are beginning to favor bitcoin over gold.
  • Bitcoin’s use for everyday savings, peer-to-peer transactions and remittance payments is becoming more prevalent in the places that need it most (for example, adoption shot up 1,200% year-over-year in Africa).

  The final bullet point above goes hand in hand with the growth of the Lightning Network. This has been my personal favorite trend in Bitcoin adoption this year. Nation state and institutional adoption will certainly have a greater upward pull on bitcoin’s price, but the Lightning Network is how we onboard millions and eventually billions around the globe, enabling near-instant and zero-cost micropayments. The Lightning Network has more than tripled in capacity this year and the below image shows just how robust development is within the Lightning ecosystem.

  

  Image source

  The velocity with which Bitcoin is adopted by the average person may have less impact on the price compared to when whales make big splashes, but it is a signal that needs to be closely monitored. The President of El Salvador cited bitcoin’s adoption in Bitcoin Beach as a use case for the country’s legal tender law. Regulation and adoption go hand-in-hand, and often it is assumed that regulation will impact adoption, and not the other way around. That statement might sound logical, but bitcoin has been known to challenge our assumptions.

  Places like Nigeria, Pakistan, India and China have all been quite hostile toward Bitcoin and yet, their citizens are among the most prevalent users. Why is that? That’s because bitcoin is freedom money. The need for bitcoin in each of those countries is higher than that in the West. 

  Bitcoin is not just number go up (in monetary terms) technology, it is adoption go up technology. I’ve heard the phrase “bitcoin is inevitable” frequently used within the community. I’m not one to take things for granted, but that is a statement I agree with given a long enough time horizon. If I game out polar scenarios, one with favorable and one with unfavorable regulation, I end up at the same result of increased adoption.

  Many individuals and even more institutions need friendly regulation for them to get on board, whereas financial tyranny, extreme inflation and societal repression will force the disenfranchised to opt-out of their current monetary system.

  Closing out this point with one of my big questions for 2022: Will bitcoin adoption explode this upcoming year? Or will it go up at a more controlled pace?

  I highly doubt I’ll be looking back at 2022 a year from now and be writing an article about how the number of global bitcoin users actually went down since I wrote this piece. What I’ll be looking out for instead is certain dominos falling that push the rate of adoption to something we’ve never seen before.

  WRAPPING UP

  While I addressed hash rate, adoption and regulation separately in this article, they certainly can’t be separated in real life. Each of these three ideas are inherently linked.

  I’m incredibly bullish on bitcoin looking ahead to 2022 and even more so as we look farther out. That doesn’t mean we don’t have anything to be weary of and that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a lot of work left to do, people to onboard, and FUD to fight, but I remain as optimistic as ever. My hope is that 2022 is another great year for Bitcoin and that one year from today I can pen a similar piece as we head into 2023.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 22:30

• China's Lunar Lander Makes First On-Site Detection Of Moon Water
  China’s Lunar Lander Makes First On-Site Detection Of Moon Water

  China’s fifth lunar exploration mission of the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program has found the first on-site evidence of water on the moon’s surface, according to a new study published in the peer-reviewed Science Advances journal on Friday. 

  The study, titled  “In situ detection of water on the Moon by the Chang’E-5 lander,” led by a joint research team of scientists from the Institute of Geology and Geophysics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (IGGCAS) detected water on the moon via reflectance spectral data from the lunar lander. Here’s a more in-depth explanation of the discovery from the study: 

  We estimate up to 120 parts per million (ppm) of water (OH + H2O) in the lunar regolith, which is mostly attributed to solar wind implantation. A light-colored and surface-pitted rock (named as CE5-Rock) is evident near the lander.

  

  The reflectance spectra suggest that CE5-Rock could be transported from an older basalt unit. CE5-Rock exhibits a stronger absorption, near 2.85 μm, than the surrounding regolith, with estimation of ~180 ppm of water if the model for estimating water content of regolith is applicable to rock samples, which may suggest an additional source from the lunar interior. 

  The low water content of the regolith may suggest the degassing of mantle reservoir beneath the Chang’E-5 landing site. 

  There have been many orbital observations that have detected evidence of water on the moon. NASA recently confirmed the presence of water ice. China’s discovery is the first evidence of on-site water detection. 

  China is expected to plan additional missions to examine the content and distribution of lunar surface water. 

  Meanwhile, China’s been conducting missions across the solar system. Last week, its Tianwen-1 Mars orbiter took stunning high-definition images of the red planet.   

  China wants to become dominant in space as it recently launched a new high-tech space station. Just wait until Beijing decides to militarize the heavens above us. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 22:00

• The Eight Degrees Of Ignorance And Stupidity
  The Eight Degrees Of Ignorance And Stupidity

  Authored by Darren Smith via JonathanTurley.org,

  Our host on numerous occasions makes a strong case in labeling today’s zeitgeist as “The Age of Rage”. It would certainly seem to be so if one focuses on what stereotypically comes out of the news media and political figures we lend our ears to. Yet I would go a step further and suggest the root cause of some of this rage is composed of two elements: power-lust and simple human stupidity.

  I believe many people fail to recognize how intertwined is the lust for power and the enabling forces of stupidity. Stupidity can be manipulated to achieve that power. It is said that money is the blood of the powerful. Yet, why spend money when too many can be so easily controlled or recruited for free simply by instead appealing to ignorant or stupid individuals.

  Both sadly and obviously however, ignorance and stupidity is not limited to the news or politics, it is manifest in human society generally. The trick is to recognize and extricate it from our lives whenever possible. So in a mostly cynical and possibly comical study of the problem, I propose there are levels and flavors of both ignorance and stupidity and to apply such a study is a first step toward minimizing its damaging potential.

  

  If you could excuse the pretense, I might suggest this study to also be corollary to Carlo Cipolla’s “The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity“. I will then attempt to quantify Ignorance and Stupidity into both cardinal and ordinal enumerations. For those unfamiliar with Mr. Cipolla’s laws, here follows a basic primer:

  1. Always and inevitably, everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.

  2. The probability that a certain person (will) be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.

  3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.

  4. Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular, non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places, and under any circumstances, to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.

  5. A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

  While I believe Mr. Cipolla’s laws provide some interesting insight, it treats stupidity as an absolute; that is, without a gradient as to how badly it manifests. So I offer to you, the reader, a possible method to quantify ignorance and stupidity so that you may successfully counter it in a reasonably measured fashion.

  The Eight Degrees of Ignorance and Stupidity

  0: Used for reference only, zero degree represents an organism that lacks any mechanism for thought or cognition, relying only on reflex or stimulus-response to changes in its environment. Plants and simple animals comprise this level. There have been debates in some circles as to whether or not plants exhibit a behavior or communicate based upon stress or environmental challenges, though it is an interesting proposal I will leave that debate to others.

  First Degree Ignorance: In this example a person or animal having 1st degree ignorance is where the person due to infancy or perhaps early childhood is not physically capable of understanding the facts or information presented to them due to either the transient condition of their age or stage of development or that they lack a sufficiently matured biological structure within their brain necessary to process the information. The state for which a person or animal resides in is not one to be judged as a failure or shortcoming. It is simply the nature of the person or animal at this stage in their lifetime.

  Second Degree Ignorance: The simplest definition of this degree is that the person or animal is capable of understanding the facts but is not aware of their existence. Every person or animal living has this at some time or concerning some form of information. Not all facts can ever be known. Yet it is incumbent upon intelligent organisms to manage the known/unknown deficit to be successful.

  Third Degree Ignorance: At this stage the person can be taught how to recite an outcome or answer but does not fully understand the underlying reason, process, or cause for the fact or event. The knowledge the person possesses is casual and limited, and hence they can be vulnerable to situations where the outcome is defective or malformed. Yet, the person lacks the ability to correct it by repairing the mechanism.

  Fourth Degree Ignorance: At this stage, the beginnings of negligence come into play, where the person or animal causes unnecessary harm to themselves or others by willfully failing attend to learning or intellectual growth required by their environment or social station.

  Fifth Degree (Stupidity): Fifth degree separates human beings from most animals. While this degree’s definition relies mostly upon nomenclature, such as instinct versus cognitively derived strategy, it does require a certain intellectual threshold be met to transition from ordinary ignorance (inability to conceive a proper result), to stupidity (ability to conceive a proper result but willingly refusing to do so by disregarding the truth or the process of deriving truth). This is the most prevalent level of stupid among the general population.

  The inchoate notion of recklessness incorporates into this degree.

  Another form of expression within this degree is that while the person displaying stupidity might not immediately be contributing to the stupid act, it is also that the act resulted from the culmination of a series of events whereby the stupid person continually failed to exercise attention to truth and was somewhat predestined to commit to stupidity by default.

  Sixth Degree (Unyielding Stupidity): At this stage the Unyielding Stupid express total unwillingness to accept any fact presented to them that is contrary to their own presumptions, regardless of even monumental levels of proof from all other sources. No amount of convincing will succeed in dislodging their false belief or facilitate their acceptance of truth. In fact, the strength in which they will hold their falsehood is nearly proportionate to the amount of effort wasted by others trying to convince them otherwise.

  They also tend to accept new information as “factual” based on a very low initial bar of proof, especially if presented to them by a source they blindly assign credibility. Once falsehood becomes resident in their mind it is nearly impossible to rehabilitate by contrary, yet factual evidence. From this they incorporate falsehoods into their thinking and behavior; which of course leads to feedback loops of bad decision making and the consternation of all around them.

  Normally minded individuals will certainly experience frustration and annoyance in having to be forced into proximity with the Unyielding Stupid. It is one of the rare quantifiable aspects of human emotion: the aggravation is measured as the inverse of the square of the distance the victim finds themselves from the stupid person’s mouth or keyboard. For one’s own mental wellbeing this flavor of stupid is better observed from a safe distance and at best if not at all.

  As detrimental as these persons are, they fortunately lack high levels of motivation and tend to be rather benign in their ability to infect others’ tranquility of reason. This is not to say that they keep to themselves but their continual blundering tends to cap the damaging potential to those around them. Great care must be taken of course to guard at all costs against the entrance of the Unyielding Stupid into one’s life or worse, government and politics. That systemic degree of dysfunction which envelopes their lives usually serves as a moderator to their damaging ability. Theirs is a counterintuitive example of laziness being a benefit to others and society, or at least a buffer against damaging potential.

  Also counterintuitively, these individuals are also easily manipulated by others who they’ve assigned expertise or kinship. They tend to place greater importance on the person or ideal they devote themselves to rather than the information or events presented by that person. So by extension they blindly follow a few because they both lack the ability to effectively think for themselves and that everyone else who might disagree is wrong.

  Individuals routinely manifesting Unyielding Stupidity relegate themselves to having their sole prominent achievement as proving the Dunning-Kruger effect.

  Seventh Degree (Militant Stupidity): This by far is not only the worst level of a stupid person it is also the most dangerous.

  A person espousing Militant Stupidity possesses all the traits of the Unyielding Stupid, but rather than otherwise being somewhat benign, actively prosecutes against capability and intellect while forcing stupidity upon the general population. They view the notion of free thinking, scientific methodology, reason, or working debate as existential threats that must be exterminated at any cost. They have no tolerance of any idea that is not closely held by them or their cohorts and seek the maximum punishment against those they perceive as threats or unwilling to submit to idiocy. They become unhinged easily and quickly resort to anger and shouting. In fact, they seem to be almost permanently offended or outraged when dealing with those outside their inner circle. Yet just like their lesser brethren, the Unyielding Stupid, they surrender themselves into being manipulated. And to their greater detriment, their militancy facilitates their vulnerability to be prompted into action.

  An auxiliary to Militant Stupidity is what is known as a “Useful Idiot”, that is a disrespected individual who can be easily summoned to blindly perform dirty-work on behalf of unscrupulous yet powerful individuals or organizations. Organizations that can thereby maintain plausible deniability of responsibility for the damage the Useful Idiot germinates. These are the most recruitable of Useful Idiot.

  The Militant Stupid proffer themselves as highly intelligent and also command a delusional birthright mandate to lead others. They are completely incapable of benevolent, effective leadership yet are actually otherwise sheep who believe they are wolves or the shepherd. This narcissism is the yoke from which they can be controlled.

  A good laugh can be generated by easily beckoning Useful Idiots and the Militant Stupid into identifying themselves among a crowd or audience simply by voicing a generic reference to stupid people in general. Both types of creature will be the first to jump up in outrage and either demand the speaker be punished or they will also proclaim that they are the smartest people in the room. It works nearly every time and seems to stem from a hair-trigger like proclivity on their part to be irrational and easily offended—“offended” being their preferred state of being. Deep down, there might be a faint yet secret notion within some of them that they possibly are not the smartest or brightest, but they perceive this as a vulnerability that must not be revealed or exposed by others. Consequentially, they overreact to this perceived threat by attacking others with shotgun-like precision. When having provoked the Militant Stupid into identifying themselves within the crowd, some of them become so ferociously animated in their rage and screaming that you begin to wonder when the demon possessing their body will tear its way out and unleash pandemonium upon the fleeing crowd. Pitiful and annoying perhaps, but at least the drama can certainly break the monotony of an otherwise boring town council meeting or lecture. So the useful idiot does have some utility, I suppose.

  Eighth Degree (Self-Actualized Stupidity): This seemingly contradictory and oxymoronic term nomenclates a rare and paradoxical creature of bad habit, the Self-Actualized Stupid. This strangely benevolent person lends their self to a unique form of justice and that propensity, I suspect, is hardcoded into the DNA of humanity as a form of error correction; halting further replication into the biosphere. The recessive allele of this gene expresses itself as the Self-Actualized Stupid, and the dominant expresses as the Schadenfreude Trait within the realm of human thought.

  The Self-actualized Stupid generally possess a higher than average level of general intelligence, a requisite attribute to construct and conduct their own demise. With them the endgame’s culmination of their stupidity ranges from an absolute reputation worthy of universal ridicule, to the other pole being a successful laureate for the Darwin Awards.

  In the former, they quickly achieve fame through misfortune by committing acts or making statements that are so preposterous and exaltedly stupid they evoke thunderous levels of laughter and elation in society, vanquishing any possible taint or perceivable threat this type of stupidity might engender. Not only is their own credibility eviscerated, but the whole of society buoys itself in joy from the occasional reminder of the humor brought forth again by the replaying of such a stupid act or statement. It is akin to the stupid creating a Big Bang of a blunder on video, with YouTube as the Cosmic Microwave Background reverberating its echoes.

  One shining example of a ridiculed, self-actualizedly stupid person was a man who several years ago posted a YouTube video of his challenging a large cactus to a test of wills, or quills so to speak. I do not know which species of cactus this was, but it appeared very menacing—being more bush-like than tall, while wielding a ferocious arsenal of thick, inch-and-a-half long needles more accurately described as nails. He announced his grievance to the audience. As it was the cactus, being level 0, was unable to accept such a challenge, it was nevertheless clear from the beginning who was not going to get satisfaction in this duel.

  I suspect this need to battle the cactus was inspired from an earlier meme where lesser stupids posted videos of their forceful grappling of cactus houseplants with their bare hands and proclaiming supremacy in overcoming the ensuing pain. Not to be outdone, our Self-actualized Stupid candidate drove into the hinterlands in search of a more formidable opponent. Upon locating such, he positioned his car next to the cactus, climbed atop the car and belly flopped himself into a new definition of agony and suffering. In a way it appeared the cactus swallowed him whole in a manner similar to how a Venus Fly Trap ensnares its prey. Though his seconds managed to extricate him…there he lay, frozen in pain, shrieking in despair, reduced to being a human bed of nails begging to be plucked. Prior to this spectacle of foolhardiness he somehow managed to summon the inspiration to at least put on a facemask, boxing gloves, and goggles. Notwithstanding, he could not escape his nature; the recessive alleles prevailed and his stupendous stupidly neglected to realize that going into this challenge shirtless and in shorts would not end well for him. Dozens and dozens of quills remained impaled in his body, to be yanked out to the gruesome tune of his wailing. I admittedly was a bit disappointed the producers of the video did not provide a musical score to this act, perhaps some baroque chamber music with a harpsichord plucking a note for each quill extracted. A missed opportunity for sure, yet macabre and perhaps fitting I would say: for I came to realize after witnessing such a grand spectacle that this man was decidedly beyond all others.

  I observed then that this person was clearly stupider than every other individual within the Animal Kingdom. No animal, not salamander, not ape, nor thing that slithers would ever commit itself to such a depravedly foolhardy game—cactus diving—at least not intentionally. An animal would at best be sufficiently cunning to avoid such cactuses or at least if it had never previously encountered such it would approach cautiously. At a minimum, after perhaps a slight stinging to the snout the experience would impart forever in the animal’s mind a thing to be avoided. Yet it takes a human being, having a brain capable of both driving a car to approach this cactus and a mind stupid enough to deliberately leap into it with the hopes of generating more likes on a YouTube.

  I suppose he succeeded in affording several schadenfreude-driven people free entertainment for a couple minutes. But more importantly the damage he did was his own to suffer and he set a precedent for lesser stupid people not to follow in his manner. For even they would break from their tradition of self-described omnipotence and recognize this level of stupidity was beyond theirs to attempt. The wider audience…they were at least offered a fleeting distraction from the constant strain of having to deal with the malignant banality of the Unyielding and Militant Stupid otherwise infesting life.

  On balance I would be remiss to not offer a degree of respect of the Self-Actualized Stupid. It is difficult, if not impossible for ordinary people, and even greatly creative thinkers, to convincingly mimic the skill level and artistic expression commanded by the Self-Actualized Stupid. We are constrained by our own sense of self-preservation and reason, and thus our capacity to conjure the ideas and thoughts of these savants will never compare. They on the other hand are unbound by caution and reasonability, modern-day Icaruses to the Suns of Social Media. Best of all, they are benign.

  So I submit for your review the Eight Degrees of Ignorance and Stupidity. May God have mercy on our souls.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 21:30

• Why The Kazakhstan Crisis Is A Much Bigger Deal Than Western Media Is Letting On
  Why The Kazakhstan Crisis Is A Much Bigger Deal Than Western Media Is Letting On

  Geopolitical commentator Clint Ehrlich has reported while on the ground in Moscow that “the situation in Kazakhstan is a much bigger deal than Western media is letting on.” He further argues that the mayhem unleashed this past week and ongoing violent destabilization significantly increases the risk of NATO-Russia conflict. 

  He asks the key question: what really is happening in Kazakhstan? After all, he writes  “In America, the situation in Kazakhstan is a small news item” but it remains that “in Moscow, it is currently receiving 24/7 news coverage, like it’s an apocalyptic threat to Russia’s security. I’ve had the TV on here while writing this thread, and Kazakhstan has been on the entire time.” Below is Ehrlich’s mega-thread from Twitter exploring the crisis and connecting the dots in terms of why this is a bigger deal than many believe…

  

  Mass protests and anti-government violence have left dozens dead. Russia is deploying 3,000 paratroopers after Kazakh security forces were overrun. The largest city, Almaty, looks like a warzone. To appreciate why Russia is willing to deploy troops to Kazakhstan, it’s critical to understand the depth of Russia’s vital national interests inside the country. This isn’t just any former Soviet republic. It’s almost as important to Russia as Belarus or Ukraine. 

  First, Russia and Kazakhstan have the largest continuous land border on planet earth. If Kazakhstan destabilizes, a significant fraction of the country’s 19 million residents could become refugees streaming across the border. Russia is not willing to let that happen.

  Second, roughly one-quarter of the population of Kazakhstan is ethnic Russians. Kazakh nationalists are overwhelmingly Muslims, who resent the Orthodox-Christian Russian minority. Russia believes that civil war would entail a non-trivial risk of anti-Russian ethnic cleansing.

  Third, the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan was the heart of the Soviet space program. Russia still uses it as its primary space-launch facility. The Vostochny Cosmodrome in Russia’s Far East will lessen that dependence, but it still isn’t complete.

  

  Fourth, Russia conducts its Anti-Ballistic Missile testing at the Sary-Shagan test site within Kazakhstan. This is where ongoing development of the S-550 ABM system is occurring, one of the foundations of Russia’s national security.

  Fifth, Russia’s nuclear fuel cycle is intimately linked to Kazakhstan. Russian-backed Uranium mining operations are active in the country. Uranium from Kazakhstan is enriched in Novouralsk, Russia and then returned to Kazakhstan for use in Chinese nuclear-fuel assemblies. 

  Collectively, these security interests make Kazakhstan a region that Russia is willing to stabilize with force. The 3,000 troops it has already committed are not the maximum it is willing to deploy. If necessary, these will only be the first wave of RU forces in the country. The biggest question is how the situation in Kazakhstan will affect the existing standoff between Russia and NATO over Ukraine. Will Russia be deterred from intervention in Ukraine by the need to maintain reserves to deploy to Kazakhstan? Or will it simply be provoked? 

  Recall that, before things escalated in Kazakhstan, Russia had massed troops along its border with Ukraine. Moscow issued an ultimatum: Provide security guarantees that Ukraine would not join NATO “or else.” This was already a very dangerous situation. NATO-Russia talks to resolve the crisis in Ukraine were set to begin next week. Yet, on their eve, the revolution against the government of Kazakhstan began. Russia perceives this to be an act of “hybrid war.” Right or wrong, that perception is fueling a desire for revenge. 

  What is “hybrid war”? From the Russian perspective, it is a two-pronged approach to regime change. First, Western-backed NGOs encourage large protests against an incumbent government. Second, armed provocateurs use the protests as cover to stage kinetic attacks.

  Moscow believes that this playbook was employed successfully in Ukraine to oust the Russian-aligned government in 2014. And it believes that the West unsuccessfully attempted to employ the same strategy to topple Russia’s allies in Syria and Belarus. It’s debatable whether the West has anywhere near the power to spark revolutions that Russia contends. Yet America plays into Russian paranoia by funding “civil society” NGOs overseas.

  
  See the NED’s Kazakhstan page here.

  When revolutions occur in countries where they’re active, Russia connects the dots. Kazakhstan is the latest example. In the year before the attempted revolution, the US National Endowment for democracy spent more than $1M in the country. The money went to PR campaigns against the government and training anti-government protesters. The Russians are convinced that NED is a front for the CIA. I don’t think that’s true. But it’s a distinction without a difference, since NED has taken over part of the CIA’s mission. In 1986, the founder of NED, Carl Gershman, said the group was created because “[i]t would be terrible for democratic groups around the world to be seen as subsidized by the CIA.” Today, instead of receiving CIA money, they receive NED money. 

  In 1991, NED President Allen Weinstein said, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” He claimed that operating overtly via NED, rather than covertly through the CIA, made the risk of blowback “close to zero.”  The Russians do not see things that way. When they witness overt US support for ousting pro-Russian governments, they assume there is also covert support being provided. To them, NED is only 1/2 of a “hybrid war” strategy in Kazakhstan that includes kinetic operations. Russia’s Foreign Ministry made that clear yesterday.

  It describes the situation in Kazakhstan as “an attempt to undermine the security and integrity of the state by force, using trained and organized armed formations, that is inspired from the outside.” This claim forms the predicate for intervention by the “Collective Security Treaty Organization,” the Russian-led equivalent of NATO. It’s the first ever CSTO intervention, and it’s based on the accusation of a foreign attack on the sovereignty of Kazakhstan. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki has questioned the legal legitimacy of the CSTO operation, but there’s not much to complain about.

  

  The undisputed President of Kazakhstan, Tokayev, requested CSTO support, claiming his nation was under attack. To bolster the appearance of multilateralism, RU forces are deploying alongside smaller number of troops from two other CSTO states, Belarus and Armenia. These CSTO forces will secure critical government installations, freeing up the Kazakh military to perform “anti-terrorism.” The most critical function of the CSTO deployment is internal signaling within Kazakhstan.

  Now that Kazakh forces know Russia is backing their government, fewer of them will be willing to join the side of the opposition. We saw that happen before. I doubt we’ll see it again. In the short term, while Kazakhstan remains volatile, Russia’s freedom to maneuver in Ukraine may be constrained. But this will not motivate Moscow to deescalate the crisis in the long term.

  Instead, it will only strengthen perceptions of the West as an existential threat. Activists from prior color revolutions are already publicly taking credit for what is happening in Kazakhstan. Here is a post from Belorussian activist, Dzmitry Halko, who says that he helped organize the uprising in Kazakhstan along with veterans of the Ukraine revolution…

  Activists from prior color revolutions are already publicly taking credit for what is happening in Kazakhstan.

  Here is a post from Belorussian activist, Dzmitry Halko, who says that he helped organize the uprising in Kazakhstan along with veterans of the Ukraine revolution. pic.twitter.com/pGputJwi2C

  — Clint Ehrlich (@ClintEhrlich) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The Kremlin’s biggest fear is a “Maidan on Red Square” – i.e., a repeat of the Ukrainian revolution inside Moscow. The more that it appears the West is pursuing similar revolutions in former Soviet republics, the more aggressively Russia will push back. 

  In America, the situation in Kazakhstan is a small news item. In Moscow, it is currently receiving 24/7 news coverage, like it’s an apocalyptic threat to Russia’s security. I’ve had the TV on here while writing this thread, and Kazakhstan has been on the entire time.

  It’s important to note that today (Jan.7) is Christmas in Russia. (They celebrate it on January 7th rather than December 25th, due to the Russian Orthodox church still adhering to the Julian Calendar.) When Christmas is overshadowed by a security crisis, it’s a big deal. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 21:00

• Newsom, Democrats Go For Californians' Guns
  Newsom, Democrats Go For Californians’ Guns

  Authored by John Seiler via The Epoch Times,

  Even as crime is surging in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom and his allies in the legislature are seeking to make it more difficult for citizens to defend themselves.

  

  This week, Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) introduced Assembly Bill 1594, which reads, “This bill would specify that a gun industry member has created or maintained a public nuisance, as defined, if their failure to follow federal, state, or local law caused injury or death or if the gun industry member engaged in unfair business practices.”

  It’s a blatant attempt to bankrupt the gun companies, a clear violation of the Second Amendment “right of the people to keep and bear arms.” The 2008 Heller decision by the U.S. Supreme Court clearly affirmed that meant an individual right, not just that of a state militia. And a right obviously can only be exercised if one has the physical means to do so.

  For example, the First Amendment right to freedom “of the press” can only be exercised if paper companies are not impeded in their business of selling paper to publishers and the public. If the “paper industry” could be sued because, say, terrorists used paper to publish plans for attacks, then paper would go up in cost so high the exercise of freedom “of the press” would be impinged.

  AB 1594 was introduced after Newsom reacted against a U.S. Supreme Court action that let stand, for now, a Texas law allowing private citizens to sue abortion providers. It’s by no means clear the court will let that law stand permanently. But Newsom said in a Dec. 11 statement, “If states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way.”

  Newsom’s spokesperson, Daniel Lopez, reiterated that sentiment in a statement Tuesday, “So long as the United States Supreme Court has set a precedent which allows private citizens to sue to stop abortions in Texas, California will use that same ability to save lives.”

  Actually, pro-lifers say abortion takes a life, and with modern medicine childbirth rarely leads to the death of the mother. All medical procedures involve some risk, including abortions, not only to the baby, but for the mother.

  Guns also are specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights, while abortion only has become a right since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision—still controversial—which the court might reverse or modify.

  

  Deputies handle some of approximately 3,500 confiscated guns to be melted down at Gerdau Steel Mill in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., on July 19, 2018. (David McNew/Getty Images)

  Product Liability

  Explaining his bill, Ting said, “We must make our communities safer. Almost every industry in the United States can be held liable for what their products do, but the gun industry is not held to the same standard. Financial repercussions may finally push them to be more responsible by improving their practices and adhering to California’s strict gun laws.”

  That’s misleading. Industries can be held accountable for the malfunction of their products, not their misuse. Car companies often have been sued when a system fails and a car crashes and kills people, but not for when a car is used as a weapon to kill, as in the recent slaughter in Kenosha, Wis.

  For guns, the proper use if for self-defense, sporting, and hobbies; improper use is to kill someone during a crime. Justifiable killings are allowed with guns, as with knives and other instruments, to fend off an attack by a killer or rapist. Ting’s law would make it harder for Californians to get such instruments of self-defense.

  Another big difference Newsom and Ting don’t recognize is Texas’s abortion law only applies to abortion clinics in that state. There’s no affect at all on clinics in other states. But AB 1594 would apply to all gun manufacturers, including those in other states.

  If the Texas abortion law were followed for AB 1594, then only gun manufacturers in California would be affected. But there apparently are no more manufacturers left of any size in the state, Sam Paredes told me; he’s the executive director of Gun Owners of California. “When Weatherby left Paso Robles for Wyoming in 2018, I do believe that they were the last major firearms company left in California,” he said.

  So overregulation killed even more businesses and jobs in California.

  Given that the Interstate Commerce Clause exists precisely to prevent the states attacking one another’s businesses through tariffs and lawsuits, it’s easy to see how AB 1594 would be rejected by the Supreme Court on that grounds as well.

  

  California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks at a VA Facility in Los Angeles, Calif., on Nov. 10, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  Newsom’s Presidential Ambitions

  What’s odd about this is how it plays into Newsom’s obvious presidential ambitions, either in 2024 or, more likely, in 2028. Supporting this bizarre legislation might help Newsom gain support among the more radical elements in the Democratic Party. So it could push him forward in future party presidential primaries.

  But it would hurt him in any national presidential bid, especially in such pro-gun swing states as Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin that President Biden won in 2020. Michael Anton of the Claremont Institute explained this in a Jan. 4 article, “Blue America’s Messaging Problem.”

  He wrote, “Blue America offers to Red nothing but scorn, contempt, hatred, insult, humiliation, calumny, outsourcing, open borders, layoffs, lower wages, opioids, losing wars, censorship, trumped-up treason accusations, surveillance, anarcho-tyranny, pre-trial detention, mask mandates, lockdowns, Critical Race Theory, and cancellation. And then not only gets enraged when Red America objects, but demands Red reverence and gratitude in return.”

  That scorn might do well in Ting’s San Francisco, Newsom’s California or New York City, but it’s a loser in every swing state.

  Newsom, as I have said in past articles, is a shrewd politician who actually has maneuvered himself into potentially becoming the next Democratic president. Why he is putting himself into a corner of defeat this early is a mystery. Maybe he doesn’t see it because he’s spent his whole life in the cocoon of Democratic Party politics in California.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 20:30

• Iowa Nursing Home Operator Forced Into Bankruptcy By "Crippling" Staff Shortages
  Iowa Nursing Home Operator Forced Into Bankruptcy By “Crippling” Staff Shortages

  Here’s just the latest example of why forcing health-care workers to get vaccines and boosters – like the State of New York is still doing – is an untenable policy at best, and a stepping stone to disaster at worse.

  

  Bloomberg reports that a chain of nursing homes in Iowa has just been forced into bankruptcy, placing even more strain on the creaking local health-care system, due to “crippling” staff shortages.

  Court documents reflect how the company, QHC Facilities LLC, which hosts a total of 750 beds across its 8 nursing homes and two assisted living facilities, has been devastated by the twin pressures of COVID deaths among its patients (many of whom fall into the most susceptible category of patient), and resignations en masse among its workers. One of its homes even made it on to a list of “America’s worst nursing homes”.

  QHC Facilities LLC filed for bankruptcy last week, citing “crippling staffing and employee retention issues” in a court filing. The Clive, Iowa-based company operates eight skilled nursing facilities and two assisted living homes with a total of about 750 beds in the state and 300 workers.

  Occupancy rates plunged as Covid-19 spread through nursing homes, which accounted for a large proportion of deaths early in the pandemic. At the same time, the health-care sector has suffered from mass resignations as workers face burnout and seek more lucrative employment, contributing to swelling gaps in coverage.

  Fortunately for the state’s health-care system, a judge back in November blocked a federal vaccine mandate for health-care workers in Iowa and eight other states. Clearly, that was a prescient decision.

  To be sure, the company was struggling even before the pandemic. Local media reports out of Iowa showed QHC Facilities had been fined many times in recent years for substandard patient care.

  But some of the obstacles facing the firm were completely out of its control.

  One of its facilities was damaged in a strong storm in 2020 and still hasn’t been rebuilt. The death of the company’s co-founder in June “had a devastating impact” on the business, his spouse and Chief Executive Officer Nancy Voyna said in the filing, leaving unmet obligations including a $4 million state fee.

  The company is seeking a buyer for its assets. But with all the additional government scrutiny brought on by COVID, who really wants to get into the nursing home game right now?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 20:07

• Yale Continues To Believe It Can Ban Legal, Off-Campus Behavior
  Yale Continues To Believe It Can Ban Legal, Off-Campus Behavior

  Authored by Matt Lamb via TheCollegeFix.com,

  Previously said it could tell students in other states to wear masks

  

  Yale University officials continue to insist that its student handbook trumps state and local laws.

  The Ivy League university has banned students from eating at legally operating restaurants off-campus.

  “Students may not visit New Haven businesses or eat at local restaurants (even outdoors) except for curbside pickup,” the Yale Daily News wrote in a Facebook post Monday.

  The campus newspaper summarized an email from the administration that laid out the spring semester plans.

  The campus paper posted a longer excerpt of the email after it attracted media attention. The email also says that students should feel free to go for runs or walks around the area.

  Commenters on the post mocked the university.

  “Welcome to college, now go to your room your grounded!” one person wrote.

  “Imagine thinking you have the power to tell people that pay your salary that they can’t go out to eat,” another said.

  The rules are telling about the consequences of attending Yale. Residents of New Haven, Connecticut are allowed to go into a local restaurant to have a meal.

  But residents of New Haven who also go to Yale are not allowed to do that. So going to Yale gives you fewer freedoms, simple as that.

  This is not the first time that Yale’s administrators have said they have the ability to ban legal, off-campus behavior in the name of COVID prevention.

  The Ivy League university has previously told students that they must remain masked while conducting school business, even if they are in a locality that does not require masking, such as a completely different state.

  The requirement hindered film students who wanted to make movies without masked actors, but were told that even if a locality did not require masking, Yale still would enforce its mandate.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 19:30

• Taliban Threatened US With 2,000 Suicide Bombers In Washington D.C.
  Taliban Threatened US With 2,000 Suicide Bombers In Washington D.C.

  A recent report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) – which monitors and tracks global jihadist communications via open source intelligence collection methods – has detailed that last year the Taliban threatened the Biden administration with “a battalion of suicide bombers” sent to Washington D.C.

  This was a threat and warning reportedly relayed simultaneous with prior Doha talks when it emerged the Pentagon was contemplating a massive security force of some 2,000 US troops to guard the at that time still operating American embassy in Kabul. 

  According to the MEMRI report, “In December 2021, it also emerged that the Islamic Emirate told the United States during talks in Doha that if the U.S. insisted on deploying 2,000 American troops at its embassy in Kabul, the Taliban would also deploy as part of any bilateral arrangement 2,000 fidayeen mujahideen [i.e., suicide bombers] at the Afghan Embassy in Washington D.C.”

  

  During the chaotic and bloody events of August as the US evacuated forces from Kabul airport, the State Department was forced to abandon its sprawling Afghan embassy altogether amid the lightning Taliban advance on the capital city.

  Once Taliban rule over the country was firmly established by September, some of the hardline Islamist group’s officials began to tout it had become “moderate” and “reformed”. This as the Taliban also sought international funds and lobbied the US and global powers unfreeze billions in sanctioned assets.

  However, it has since emerged that Taliban leaders intend to establish a “martyrdom” battalion, or essentially a group of would-be suicide bombers: 

  “Our mujahideen in the Ishtishhadi Kandaks [martyrdom-seeking battalions] will be part of the army and [they] will be Special Forces and organized under the defense ministry,” Zabihullah Mujahid, a veteran terrorist and leader in the Taliban government, said in a recent interview, according to MEMRI. “The Special Forces will be established in a specific number and used for special operations.”

  Bloomberg this week confirmed ongoing Taliban efforts to specifically recruit suicide bombers to be incorporated into its national army. “The Taliban will officially recruit suicide bombers to become part of the army as the militant group tries to contain its biggest security threat from rival Islamic State since forming government in Afghanistan four months ago,” the report detailed as the Taliban continues to battle Islamist rivals in some locales. 

  Office for suicide bombings in the #Taliban Ministry of Defense.

  Yesterday #Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told RFE/RL that the #Taliban new army will also have a unit for suicide bombings to take part in special operations.#Afghanistan pic.twitter.com/ZifAJwjsJn

  — Natiq Malikzada | ناطق ملکزاده (@natiqmalikzada) January 4, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And more via Bloomberg: 

  “The special forces that include martyrdom seekers will be used for more sophisticated and special operations,” Karimi said by phone, without providing details.

  The militant group is building a “strong and organized army to bolster defense” nationwide and at the borders with the suicide bombers becoming a integral part of the strategy, Karimi added. Some 150,000 fighters will be invited to join the military, Al Jazeera reported in November, citing the Taliban’s chief of staff Qari Fasihuddin.

  Among the first major Taliban actions to re-organize government ministries in Kabul was to re-establish the Islamic “religious police”. These have returned to the streets, and ghastly practices such as hanging executed bodies in public have returned, including cutting off hands for criminal offenses – recent claims of a “moderate” Taliban notwithstanding.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 19:00

• COVID Vaccines Do Disrupt Menstrual Cycles, New Study Reveals
  COVID Vaccines Do Disrupt Menstrual Cycles, New Study Reveals

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Getting a COVID-19 vaccine has been linked to a change in the menstrual cycle among women, per a new study.

  Dr. Alison Edelman of the Oregon Health & Science University and other researchers studied cycles among 2,403 vaccinated and 1,556 unvaccinated women and concluded vaccination was associated with a change in cycle length.

  The change was pegged at under one day; no change in menses length was detected.

  Researchers said that vaccines that use messenger RNA technology—both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s do—trigger an immune response, which could temporarily affect the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis function, and the study results support the hypothesis.

  “Our findings are reassuring; we find no population-level clinically meaningful change in menstrual cycle length associated with COVID19 vaccination. Our findings support and help explain the self-reports of changes in cycle length. Individuals receiving two COVID-19 vaccine doses in a single cycle do appear to experience a longer but temporary cycle length change,” the researchers wrote.

  [ZH: Andy Swan hits the nail on the head…]

  An MRNA injection that causes disruption to function of the ovaries is CLEARLY a threat to reproductive health.

  This may only become known over many years of observation!

  Additionally, impact on function of ovaries should be a RED FLAG that other organs may be impacted!

  — Andy Swan (@AndySwan) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  While the study did not find vaccination associated with changes in menses length, “questions remain about other possible changes in menstrual cycles, such as menstrual symptoms, unscheduled bleeding, and changes in the quality and quantity of menstrual bleeding,” they added.

  Limitations include possibly not being generalizable to the U.S. population given that the women who use Natural Cycles, from which the data came, are more likely to be white, college educated, and have lower body mass indexes than the average woman.

  The study was published by Obstetrics & Gynecology and was funded by the National Institutes of Health, which last year awarded $1.6 million in grants to probe potential links between vaccination and menstrual changes.

  “It is reassuring that the study found only a small, temporary menstrual change in women,” Dr. Diana Bianchi, director of agency’s Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

  “These results provide, for the first time, an opportunity to counsel women about what to expect from COVID-19 vaccination so they can plan accordingly,” she added.

  Little research has been conducted in the past on how vaccines, whether for COVID-19 or note, could influence the menstrual cycle, according to officials.

  Research conducted in Norway by the country’s Institute of Public Health and published last month showed many women reported heavier periods than normal after getting a COVID-19 vaccine, but also found most changes went away after a period of time.

  “Most menstrual changes after the first dose were transient. On average, they returned to their normal levels by the time of vaccination with the second dose, approximately two to three months after the first dose,” Dr. Lill Trogstad, project leader at the institute, said in a statement.

  Authorities in Norway recommended women who experience heavy and persistent bleeding after vaccination put off any further doses until the cause is investigated or symptoms pass.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 18:30

• Mainstream Media Is "Being Swallowed" By Joe Rogan
  Mainstream Media Is “Being Swallowed” By Joe Rogan

  Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

  Over the past week, after a blog post I made about how Joe Rogan was disrupting the mainstream media, I had the pleasure of being interviewed by former Fox Houston newswoman Ivory Hecker about what the future of the mainstream media looks like.

  You may remember Ivory as the woman who was fired after interrupting a live, on-air weather report this past summer to claim that Fox was “muzzling” her, before turning over her evidence to Project Veritas.

  

  A follow up interview by Project Veritas revealed that Hecker was reportedly reprimanded by the network for bringing up hydroxychloroquine during an interview and that Fox 26’s Sales Coordinator “admitted on tape that the CDC is heavily influencing stations such as theirs due to the amount of money they are pouring into ad campaigns – and how that, in turn, affects the network’s coverage of major health issues.”

  Suffice to say, I had no trouble seeing why Hecker took interest in my recent campaign against the mainstream media.

  

  My interview with Ivory was prompted by an article I wrote called “The Mainstream Media Is Losing The Fight Of Its Life…All Thanks To Joe Rogan”.

  In that article, I described why I was expecting one of the largest mainstream media pivots in history in 2022, catalyzed by capitalism and common sense. I wrote about why Joe Rogan leading the pack would force changes throughout the industry and why I thought the media’s narrative on Covid would have to change in 2022.

  In short, I believe the legacy media must change:

  1. Due to capitalism. They are going to have to adapt their business models or they will become money-losing, financially failing enterprises.

  2. To respond to continued outrage from both sides of the aisle being stripped of hearing both sides of the story. All Joe Rogan does is allow the other side of the story to present their case – he rarely argues how people should think. Instead, he just gives them a chance to consider all the potential facts available.

  3. If they (the mainstream media) want their candidates (Democrats) to have any chance in hell of even showing up at mid-terms this year. As I wrote in November, the recent blowout in Virginia, which quickly turned red and elected Glenn Youngkin after being in favor of Biden during the Presidential election, could wind up becoming the trend nationwide during mid-terms.

  

  I had previously been critical of the mainstream media’s:

  1. Handling of news about the new omicron variant of Covid – read here

  2. Coverage of the Joe Rogan / ivermectin news – read here

  3. Inability to even touch on the story of Hunter Biden’s laptop – read here

  4. Inability to realize that Covid, and the lab leak theory, wasn’t a “conspiracy” in late 2019/early 2020 – read here

  

  “The mainstream media has to come to terms with the fact that their industry is being swallowed,” I started off the interview by arguing, citing a phrase from Rogan’s years old boxing vs. UFC debate with Lou DiBella.

  In that interview, Rogan told DiBella “your sport is being swallowed”. Now, I’m saying the same thing to the mainstream media.

  “Rogan brings viewers wherever he goes, so he’s going to be tough to cancel,” I continued, making the argument for the free market dictating how the industry would evolve.

  “Capitalism and the free market are going to force changes as a negative consequence of the actions the media has taken over the last year,” I told Hecker during our interview.

  “Because he comes by it honestly, because he inquires about the truth with good intention – he’s not serving anybody, he’s trying to find answers about fringe questions – those are the things the mainstream media doesn’t do. The mainstream is already losing the fight of its life and in coming years they’re going to have to make some marked pivots, or else capitalism is going to have its way with them.”

  

  When asked about the media’s coverage of the Joe Rogan/ivermectin story, I said: “The coverage is so blatantly untruthful, it leads you to this place where you have to wonder, ‘Is this nefarious or it is ignorance’?”

  “I’m not the smartest person in the world, but I’ve done enough reading and enough critical thinking on my own to come to conclusions that I think are far closer to the objective truth than the media has been able to arrive at,” I continued.

  “When you come out and make such a brazen misstatement – that Rogan is taking ‘horse medicine’ – people are left to wonder what’s really going on here. It transcends both sides of the political aisle and it just ‘gets in’ for people carrying with them a modicum of common sense,” I continued.

  “Media is an industry, just like pharma is an industry, just like automotive is an industry. Industries are generally beholden to what makes them money. Capitalism is going to force changes,” I argue.

  I continued: “There’s a reason Spotify hasn’t cancelled Rogan, right? Because they’ve invested in him. Why do they invest in him? Because he brings people to the table! And that equates to ad revenue and viewership. The same engine that’s keeping him there is going to force the changes elsewhere.”

  When asked about how the free market can interfere with media when the government can print infinite money and use that to sponsor (and, by proxy fund, mainstream news), I answer:

  “At some point, no matter how much the government intervenes, its a mathematical certainty that capitalism will have its way with the media. Otherwise, we become China: we become a state run media and a state run economy. It’s a slippery slope to get there from where we are right now. But I do think the propaganda and campaign to get vaccinated was highly disturbing.”

  

  When asked about Rogan’s recent interviews with Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Robert Malone, I offered my take on why Rogan’s method of discourse has caught on:

  “You have an instance here where you have experts trying to opine on what they think is best and what the public needs to know, but you have this intervention from the tech companies, from the government, saying ‘Hey, you guys are too stupid to listen both sides of the story and make your decision accordingly. We have to protect you from this one set of opinions, despite the fact that they’re from published authors with incredible credentials.’”

  

  I continued, “And what Rogan does, the reason he’s caught on – he’s seeing who gets banned and he’s saying ‘come on’ and tell me what you were saying, I’ll let my listeners decide whether you’re as full of shit as the mainstream media thinks you are or if your points hold water.”

  Ivory Hecker adds: “I think for a long time the corporate monopoly has gotten away with using suppression tactics to snuff out content and act like this person/this concept doesn’t exist. With the rise of alternative media, they don’t have as much of an option to do that.”

  “I think a lot of corporate news journalists are so brainwashed, they don’t realize what other opportunities for journalism are out there,” the former Fox 26 reporter adds.

  

  Speaking about the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, the Covid lab leak hypothesis, adverse events to the vaccine and the new Omicron variant, Hecker says: “The way the media reacted lost them a lot of viewers. They’re turning off their own audience.”

  If you asked critical questions about the origins of Covid, “you were written off as a conspiracy theorist, you were written off as a maniac, you were written off as someone on the fringe,” I added. Now, the media has all but admitted that the lab leak hypothesis likely holds water.

  

  I made the point: “People say ‘If that was the conspiracy theory then and I was being told what a maniac I was then for asking the most common sense questions available, and then it turns out that’s the truth, what’s going on now that I think are common sense questions that I’m being told I’m being ridiculous for – but we’re going to find out in 12 months are the questions we should have been asking and getting honest answers to all along?’”

  “I think this is what has created so many conspiracy theories in America,” Hecker says.

  “It’s not conspiracy theories, though,” I conclude. “It’s just a search for the truth.”

  If you have the means and would like to support my work and subscribe, I’d be extremely grateful. I’d even offer you 22.2% off for 2022 – a discount that lasts forever: Get 22% off forever

  You can watch my full interview with Ivory here:

  You can read my reporting on related topics here:

  • The Cure For Covid Is Turning Off The TV

  • The Mainstream Media Is Losing The Fight Of Its Life…All Thanks To Joe Rogan

  • Omicron Is Creating An Unnecessary Media Hysteria Over Positive Case Numbers…Again

  • Where Is There Any Integrity Left In The Mainstream Media?

  • Government Handling Of Covid “A Crime”: Trader

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 17:30

• Bitcoin More Oversold Than During May 2021 Crash After Furious Weekend Dump
  Bitcoin More Oversold Than During May 2021 Crash After Furious Weekend Dump

  Late on Friday we joked that, in keeping with the recent trend of aggressive crypto selling taking place largely during the Asian session…

  

  … which as a reminder was the culprit behind the December 3 flash crash which took place literally at midnight ET on Friday heading into Saturday, just when liquidity is lowest – as shorting algos know all too well – we joked that we were patiently waiting for the latest overnight puke in cryptos to kick in (which offers delightful bargains for those not with cubic zirconium hands), adding to the pain of crypto longs who have seen their holdings lose more than 40% in just the past two months.

  Ok, what time is the Asian cryptodump today. Everyone is waiting

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Naturally, with everyone expecting a rerun of the Dec 3 fireworks overnight to cap off a miserable week for cryptos, the selling did not come during the Asian session…. instead it waited patiently until the US was covered in sunlight on an extremely illiquid Saturday, before emerging with a bang and hammering the two largest cryptocurrencies, sending bitcoin to just above the $40,000 level that Mike Novogratz said was a key support. 

  Those same selling programs, knowing very well that in the world of crypto it is all about momentum and key trendlines, also pounded ethereum and launched not one, not two, not three but five attempts to push ETH below the critical $3000 support level, and despite sending it as low as 3,000.055, failed to drag it below this key level (as a reminder, ETH traded at 4,800 just a few weeks ago).

  

  The furious selling in bitcoin, which sent it as low at $40,500, some 42% lower from its all time high hit on Nov 17, also sent its RSI below that hit during the May 2021 crash when it lost half its value, plunging from $60K to $30K in days, making it the most oversold it has been since the covid crash in March 2020, when it briefly traded below $4,000.

  

  Today’s panic pushed the bitcoin fear and greed index to one of its lowest levels on record.

  Bitcoin Fear and Greed Index is 10 — Extreme Fear
  Current price: $41,837 pic.twitter.com/bXDAnSFX0H

  — Bitcoin Fear and Greed Index (@BitcoinFear) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  In addition to a so-far failed attempt to push ETH below $3000, popular defi tokens such as Uniswap and Aave were also hammered into the weekend.

  The aggressive shorting (and selling), which comes amid signs that the Federal Reserve is getting ready to withdrawal stimulus would remove liquidity from the system and depress speculative assets, takes place just as liquidity is lowest and is certainly intentional, meant to push bitcoin and ether below the key levels of $40K and $3K, respectively, at a time when buyers are few and far between.

  Echoing Novogratz, Bloomberg Intelligence’s Mike McGlone – who believes that BTC and ETH will hit $100,000 and $5,000 respectively in 2022 – said $40,000 is an important technical support level for the digital token. Cryptocurrencies are a good barometer for the current reduction in risk appetite. But he projects that Bitcoin will eventually come out ahead as the world increasingly goes digital and the coin becomes the benchmark collateral.

  Others were less bullish. According to Eric Ervin, chief executive officer at Blockforce Capital, the declines across the asset class might be the beginnings of a “mini bear market,” and recent investors may pull out, leaving the long-term holders as the primary owners.

  “It is heart-pounding, nerve-racking for any investor that’s looking at it, especially if they come from a traditional equity market,” he said. But, he added, “this is completely normal for this asset class.”

  Needless to say, if stocks had dropped more than 40% in under two months, the Fed would be disclosing several market bailout scenarios each and every day.

  Offering a more measured view, Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan told Bloomberg that it makes sense to see prices slump as the Fed starts to get more aggressive with its stimulus withdrawal. The downturn could linger a bit because there are no obvious near-term catalysts to help turn things around.

  But, “fundamentals of crypto are stronger than ever, even as prices are wobbly,” he said. “Long-term, the fundamentals will win out.”

  The good news for any new longs who are watching their investment bleed on a daily basis, is that every time bitcoin have been this oversold, it has risen by at least 10% over the next month. And while we wait to find out if this time will be different, let’s end on some levity.

  Jan, 8th 2021: $40,800

  Jan, 8th 2022: $40,800

  Seems like a pretty stable currency.

  — Documenting Bitcoin 📄 (@DocumentingBTC) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 17:01

• US Rejects Russia's Call To Halt NATO Expansion, Days Before Talks
  US Rejects Russia’s Call To Halt NATO Expansion, Days Before Talks

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com, 

  On Friday, the US and NATO rejected a Russian call for the military alliance to halt its eastward expansion. Amid tensions around Ukraine, Russia submitted a series of security proposals to the US, and chief among the Russian requests is a guarantee that Ukraine won’t join NATO.

  “NATO never promised not to admit new members; it could not and would not,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said after a virtual meeting of NATO’s foreign ministers.

  

  NATO Secretary-General made similar comments earlier in the day. “We will not compromise on core principles, including the right for every nation to decide its own path, including what kind of security arrangements it wants to be a part of,” he said.

  US and Russian officials are due to meet in Geneva on January 10th to discuss Ukraine and other issues, and NATO will hold talks with Moscow on January 12th. Blinken accused Russia of making unreasonable demands in an attempt to sabotage diplomacy.

  “Certainly part of [Putin’s] playbook is to put out a list of absolutely non-starter demands and then to claim that the other side is not engaging and then use that as somehow justification for aggressive action,” Blinken said.

  Ukraine has been a prospective NATO member since 2008 and cooperates with the alliance on military exercises. Ukraine’s ascent into NATO was never a concern when Viktor Yanukovych was president from 2010 to 2014. But after he was ousted in a US-backed coup, US and NATO cooperation with Ukraine has increased significantly.

  2/2

  That is PRECISESLY the promise Blinken’s own predecessor, James Baker, repeatedly made to the Russians on NATO. Other US officials said the same. Not “one inch” of eastward expansion.

  More than a dozen new member states have been admitted since.https://t.co/tM5NCN7FMC pic.twitter.com/6zdPwNojQA

  — Will Porter (@TheWillPorter) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Since the 2014 coup, the US has provided Ukraine with over $2 billion in military aid. US and NATO now regularly patrol the Black Sea, and Western warplanes are constantly flying in the area.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 16:30

• Mom Sentenced To 3 Months In Federal Prison For Bringing 14-Year-Old Son To J6
  Mom Sentenced To 3 Months In Federal Prison For Bringing 14-Year-Old Son To J6

  Left-leaning liberal media outlets like the Daily Beast have loudly complained about the sentences that have been handed down to some of the more than 700 people who have been arrested and charged for their role in the Capitol “insurrection”.

  

  But on Friday, a judge sentenced a woman to three months in federal prison after she was plead guilty to the non-violent misdemeanor of illegally parading in the building. The sentence is one of the longer prison terms that has been handed out since the prosecution began.

  

  Presumably the reason for the lengthy sentence is that the woman brought her 14-year-old son to the Capitol that day; the woman, Virginia Spencer, was “rebuked” by the judge who sentenced her over the decision to bring her child. The woman was also accompanied by her husband, Christopher Spencer, who has pleaded not guilty.

  After her prison term ends, Spencer will be facing three years of federal probation.

  Here’s more from CNN:

  Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rebuked Virginia Spencer for bringing her child and questioned whether she had accepted responsibility for her role in the insurrection.

  “This isn’t like a school or a tourist trip,” Kollar-Kotelly said.

  The sentence includes a term of three years’ probation, which other federal judges have shied away from combining with jail time for misdemeanor defendants.

  […]

  Before handing down her sentence, Kollar-Kotelly said she found “it very hard to comprehend…why you would bring a 14-year-old minor son to the Capitol,” adding that it showed a “lack of judgment.”

  “Law enforcement had weapons, some of the [rioters] had weapons,” the judge said. “This isn’t like a school or a tourist trip. … I don’t understand but I sincerely hope he is alright,” Kollar-Kotelly continued, suggesting that it could have been “traumatic” for the boy.

  So far, roughly 70 of the more than 700 people who were arrested for attending the impromptu rally have been sentenced; only 30 of them have received jail time. The harshest sentence appears to be the five-year prison term that one participant received for attacking the Capitol Police with a poll and throwing a fire extinguisher at one.

  Five years in federal prison? Does that sound lenient to you?

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 16:00

• Chicago Parents Sue Teachers Union Over Refusal To Educate In-Person
  Chicago Parents Sue Teachers Union Over Refusal To Educate In-Person

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

  A group of Chicago parents this week sued the city’s teachers union over its refusal to teach classes in person.

  

  The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) voted on Tuesday night to only teach classes remotely, arguing the rise in COVID-19 cases and an alleged lack of protective measures made it too dangerous to instruct students inside classrooms.

  Chicago Public Schools (CPS) deemed the action an illegal work stoppage and canceled classes for three consecutive days as officials negotiated with union leaders. CTU and city officials also filed competing labor complaints.

  The lawsuit, filed in Cook County circuit court, offers a similar view of the union’s refusal.

  The union “never sent a notice of intent to strike to CPS, the regional superintendent, or the Educational Labor Relations Board,” the suit states.

  “And less than 24 hours elapsed from the time CTU members voted on its measure to authorize a strike on January 4, 2022, and when they did not show up for work in-person the next day, in contrast to the requirement under Illinois law that 10 days elapse from the vote to authorize a strike to the time a strike begins.”

  The law in question, the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act, outlines requirements for when teachers go on strike.

  The union, which did not immediately return an inquiry, has said the attempt to shift to remote learning is not a strike. Tennille Evans, a teacher and union organizer, told reporters in a briefing that it’s “a work action, not a strike,” but the parents say that no part of state law, no contract, and no local ordinance authorizes the union to decide to teach virtually without approval from the Chicago Board of Education.

  The parents say they’ve been harmed by the situation “because their children are being denied schooling and they have had to secure child care for their children.”

  

  Members of the Chicago Teachers Union and supporters stage a car caravan protest outside City Hall in the Loop in Chicago, Ill., on Jan. 5, 2022. (Ashlee Rezin /Chicago Sun-Times via AP)

  They’re asking the court to make clear that CTU’s actions amount to a strike and that the vote violated the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the city. The court should prevent CTU from continuing to authorize its members to not teach in person unless all conditions set forth in state law are met, and the agreement isn’t violated.

  The parents also want the court to award them damages in the form of lost income and cost of securing child care while classes were canceled.

  “Throughout this entire pandemic, our kids have paid a tremendous price for adults’ mistakes and miscalculations, and now the teachers’ union has hastily and recklessly put them on their political roller coaster again,” Laurel Golden, lead plaintiff in the lawsuit and a Chicago parent, said in a statement.

  “The science is clear, and so is the desire of parents: Our kids need and deserve to be in school. This illegal strike must be ended immediately, and we must get kids back into the classroom.”

  The union, meanwhile, in press releases and the briefing on Friday indicated there’s no plans at this time to end the refusal to teach in person.

  “The COVID cases are spiraling out of control in every neighborhood, and that is why we ask for [remote classes],” Evans said.

  Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Chicago Public Schools CEO Pedro Martinez said in a joint statement around the same time that negotiations “continued today and went into the evening,” adding, “The sessions remain productive but must be concluded this weekend.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 15:30

• Elon Musk Says Price Of Full Self Driving Will Rise To $12,000 This Month
  Elon Musk Says Price Of Full Self Driving Will Rise To $12,000 This Month

  In a move that we can only describe as equal parts laughable and confusing, Elon Musk announced last night via Twitter that Tesla would be raising the price of its almost non-existent Full-Self Driving feature from $10,000 to $12,000.

  Despite moving one iteration further in the “beta testing” process for Full Self Driving, the product has not been available for wide commercial release, despite Tesla charging unsuspecting consumers $10,000 a clip for the software for nearly a half-decade now.

  In other words, people buying Teslas have been paying for features that, but for dangerous looking beta tests, haven’t arrived yet. This makes it obviously quizzical as to why Musk would go and raise the price for the feature. 

  Tesla FSD price rising to $12k on Jan 17

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  In August of last year, Musk came out and admitted that FSD Beta 9.2 was “actually not great”. 

  Tesla skeptic and short seller Jim Chanos immediately rang in on Twitter, dryly noting about Musk’s admission that he must have missed the admission on Tesla’s AI day. Chanos also asked the obvious question: if the software is “not great”, why is it being tested on public roads?

  Last year, we reported that two senators had asked the Federal Trade Commission to examine whether or not Tesla misled consumers and endangered the public by marketing its driving systems as “Full Self Driving”.

  Senate Democrats Richard Blumenthal and Edward Markey wrote in a letter last year: “Tesla and (CEO) Mr. (Elon) Musk’s repeated overstatements of their vehicle’s capabilities…put Tesla drivers — and all of the traveling public — at risk of serious injury or death.”

  Recall, Elon Musk said in January 2021 that he was “highly confident [a Tesla] will be able to drive itself with reliability in excess of human this year.”

  Raise the price on a product that doesn’t exist, the entire increase drops to the bottom line pic.twitter.com/rWNopxGkGo

  — Quoth the Raven (@QTRResearch) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Then, an admission from Tesla this past summer seemed to confess what anyone paying attention already knew: there would be no Full Self Driving by the end of 2021. And if we were betting people, we’d bet we’re not going to see it anytime in 2022, either. 

  A memo to regulators last year noted: “Tesla indicated that they are still firmly in L2. As Tesla is aware, the public’s misunderstanding about the limits of the technology and its misuse can have tragic consequences.”

  Despite this, it hasn’t stopped Tesla from rolling out (and then hurriedly recalling) “beta” versions of its FSD, which it has been doing since October 2020.

  Last year, regulators in the United States also opened a long-overdue investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot. The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said the investigation includes Tesla’s Model X, S and 3 for model years 2014-2021.

  We’re sure that investigation will turn out fine though…right?

  (1/3) Well guys this is it, #Tesla will have to remove the sun for the next update to fix “#FSDBeta” from disengaging due to glare. Notice that this is a single point of failure that Tesla will never (never ever!) be able to fix or mitigate.$TSLA $TSLAQhttps://t.co/hNiaxJoag1 pic.twitter.com/Y5vwaydkUE

  — Bullshit Exposed (saving frunk puppies from Earl) (@BS__Exposed) January 8, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 15:00

• UK Gov't Admits Evidence For Face Masks Stopping COVID Spread In Schools "Not Conclusive"
  UK Gov’t Admits Evidence For Face Masks Stopping COVID Spread In Schools “Not Conclusive”

  The latest example of why people shouldn’t blindly follow ‘the science…as decreed by bureaucrats’, arrived Friday, when Bloomberg reported that a study undertaken by the British government to justify forcing children to wear masks in schools has forced them to admit that the evidence for the efficacy of face masks stopping the spread of COVID-19 in schools is “not conclusive.”

  

  Data from the Department of Education stated that whilst not conclusive, there are now a number of scientific studies which consider the association between COVID-19 and the use of face coverings specifically in education.

  The study cited by the department didn’t provide proof of a statistically significant decline in absences.

  The research compared 123 U.K. schools that used masks with about 1,200 others that didn’t during the Covid wave fueled by the delta variant.

  Schools with face-covering rules in October 2021 saw their absence rate drop by 2.3 percentage points, to 3%, two to three weeks later.

  In schools that didn’t use masks, absences fell by 1.7 percentage points, to 3.6%.

  As BBC reports, the study concluded that this difference was not statistically significant and the greater reduction in schools where masks were worn could be down to chance.

  One epidemiologist quoted by Bloomberg said the government’s data didn’t provide strong enough evidence to justify requiring face coverings in schools.

  “The study and research outlined in this report does not provide strong justification for introducing this policy in schools,” said Sarah Lewis, professor of molecular epidemiology at the University of Bristol.

  And they should, because forcing children to wear masks all day inhibits their ability to learn, particularly if they struggle with hearing difficulties.

  Mask mandates can detract from the quality of education and exclude pupils with hearing difficulties from discussions, Lewis said.

  “Where there is insufficient evidence of a benefit of a policy and evidence of harms the default should be not to intervene,” she said.

  The decision to impose the mask rules was a “really tough choice,” but one that was necessary for a few weeks, Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi said in a Times Radio interview. But not everybody feels the same way.

  The backlash to the mask mandate has intensified, even making its way to the House of Commons, where one critic pointed out that teachers aren’t required to wear masks.

  My Question to @nadhimzahawi yesterday on masks in schools. They aren’t harm free and cause great harm to some. Important the guidance for children to wear them in class is dropped as soon as possible. pic.twitter.com/eIaPfN8rJm

  — Greg Smith MP (@gregsmith_uk) January 6, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The situation in Britain’s schools has only worsened. More than one-third of schools have at least 10% of teachers absent due to COVID reasons. And some students rebelled against the mask mandate by refusing to wear their masks.

  “Sadly, we have had reports in the last 24 hours of at least six secondary schools in the north-west of England where children, in huge numbers, are refusing to take lateral flow tests or to wear masks,” said Damien McNulty, a national executive member of the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers.

  “We’ve got one school in Lancashire where only 67 children out of 1,300 are prepared to have a lateral flow test and wear masks. This is a public health emergency,” he added.

  Additionally, according to University of Oxford Professor Jim Naismith, when England dropped face mask mandates back in July and Scotland maintained them, it made “no meaningful difference” to infection rates.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 14:44

• FAA Will Impose Flight Restrictions On Some Flight Operations Over 5G
  FAA Will Impose Flight Restrictions On Some Flight Operations Over 5G

  Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

  The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) updated information Thursday, maintaining that U.S. 5G deployment will require the FAA to impose flight restrictions on flight operations using certain types of safety equipment that will perform in proximity to the 5G networks.

  

  AT&T and Verizon agreed to delay the use of C-Band spectrum until Jan. 19, a move that was endorsed by the White House. This extension would give the FAA more time to study and evaluate how to minimize the disruption to radar altimeters, while preparing airline companies for any changes.

  The telecom companies, which won access to almost all the C-Band spectrum in an $80-billion auction, had earlier agreed to adopt 5G deployment with similar precautions as that of France.

  The crux of the issue lies in the fact that radar altimeters, an important piece of safety equipment used in aircraft, use frequencies close to C-band. 5G services use C-band radio spectrum frequencies between 3.7 and 4.2 GHz that may prove hazardous to flight safety. Altimeters assess the airplane’s height above the ground and inform other safety sensors within the craft like collision-avoidance systems and navigation instruments.

  As the situation currently stands, the proposed 5G deployment would result in modifying flight schedules and altering other aspects of the aviation network. The FAA is working towards mitigating these disruptions as they investigate the precautionary measures needed to move forward.

  Telecom companies have also agreed on positioning the related antennas away from the airports where the interference would be greatest, while the FAA tests out how the radar altimeters work in a 5G C-band environment.

  When altimeters are discovered to work without interference, the corresponding restrictions on aircraft operations will be removed. This process will go on until more altimeters are certified safe, retrofitted or replaced.

  On Friday, the FAA released a list (pdf) of 50 airports that will have 5G buffer zones like Austin-Bergstrom Intl, Los Angeles Intl, Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood Intl, San Francisco Intl, and Chicago O’Hare Intl. These zones are expected to reduce risks when the wireless companies turn on their 5G services.

  Many other airports are not affected by the rollout as they are not located in the same region where 5G is being implemented and some do not have the ability to allow low-visibility landings, according to the FAA.

  AT&T and Verizon will adjust their operations like turning off transmitters near sensitive airports for a period of six months to minimize risk and avoid interfering with safety systems. However, it remains to be seen how the 5G networks will coexist safely with flight traffic systems in the coming days.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 14:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Is There A Way To Prevent Psychopaths From Getting Into Positions Of Power?
  Is There A Way To Prevent Psychopaths From Getting Into Positions Of Power?

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

  Despite a growing resurgence of interest in the science and psychology of narcissistic sociopaths and psychopaths it seems as though society today has lost track of how these people can sabotage the core fabric of a civilization or nation. It is very easy to hyper-focus on collectivist ideologies as the source of our problems and forget that these ideologies do not function in a vacuum; they cannot wreak havoc by themselves, they need psychopathic people directing them to do real damage.

  

  There is something about collectivism that lends itself to projection and hypocrisy (collectivism is organization by FORCE instead of being voluntary). I suppose when your political ideology becomes your religion it’s easy to turn into a zealot. And while zealots find power in their single-mindedness and their cultism they also tend to lack any self-awareness. They literally go insane with devotion to their cause to the point that they lose track of whether or not their cause is fair and just. Their behavior becomes increasingly erratic and disjointed and every person they run into that does not share their views is immediately seen as a heretical enemy that needs to be exposed or destroyed.

  To outsiders looking in, zealots are an endless source of comedy. You can’t help but laugh because their ticks and cricks and outbursts are nonsensical and absurd (just check out “Libs Of Tik Tok” for a mountain of examples). As long as they don’t have any real power these people act as a reminder of what happens when human beings abandon reason for madness. They can be frightening but they serve the purposes of entertainment as well as keeping the rest of us grounded. When they do gain power, however, that’s when things stop being funny.

  Civilizations throughout history have consistently dealt with the problem of zealots, but the greater threat is the existence of narcissists and psychopaths sneaking into positions of authority and encouraging zealotry among the masses. Generally, psychopaths are seen as an anomaly which is quickly identified and shunned in order to prevent them from climbing too high up the ladder of social influence. The problem is they are not as rare as one might hope and many of them have the ability to hide among the herd.

  Around 1% of any given population is made up of psychopaths while another 1% are sociopaths. Around 5% of people are identified as having narcissistic traits. Narcissists are self absorbed and view themselves as superior to everyone else – They believe they are entitled to adoration and authority. Sociopaths have an inability to feel empathy for others and this makes them impractical as leaders. Psychopaths also exhibit a lack of empathy but also have a propensity for emotional or physical violence. They take joy in the suffering of others and perpetrate a large number of violent crimes.

  Even though psychopaths are 1% of the population, they make up 15% to 25% of those incarcerated in prisons. The drag they exert on society cannot be overstated.

  There is definitely some overlap among the various types, but in general close to 10% of human beings exhibit dangerous and mostly inherent psychological malfunctions that are often not treatable. Think about that for a moment – 10 out of every 100 people are ticking time bombs waiting to make life miserable for the rest of us.

  To be sure, some of them are still able to function in society. Sociopaths in particular can become valuable in fields where less empathy is required in order to accomplish certain tasks. They are particularly well suited as surgeons, EMTs, soldiers, firefighters, and any other job where seeing people in pain is not going to stop them from saving lives. They don’t necessarily take joy in seeing others harmed, but they aren’t emotionally phased by it either. As long as they are never allowed into positions of influence over large groups of people they can serve some good for the public.

  History shows us that vetting and preventing psychologically broken individuals from slipping into institutions that offer power is not so easy. In fact, many monarchies and empires were built on systems that allowed psychopaths and narcissists to flourish because they relied on genetic succession. If a monarch had a son that was predisposed to psychopathy it did not matter, that crazed prince would one day become a king and there was little that could be done about it. There was no vetting process. Also, many such traits are passed on genetically, which means a power structure built on heredity could become progressively more destructive as psychopaths in royalty intermarry. This would help explain why psychopathic behavior is over-represented among monarchs of the past.

  The creation of democracy and democratic republics was in part designed to help weed out aberrant individuals by using open elections and the voting process. In other words, let the people scrutinize candidates and remove the crazies from circles of power. Unfortunately, this doesn’t work too well if ALL the candidates are psychopaths and the public has no real choice. By extension, psychopaths have also found ways to circumvent the political process and control it without directly participating in it.

  The corporate world and financial institutions allow psychopaths to influence politics from behind the curtain, buying off candidates and their loyalty or vetting candidates and ONLY allowing those with similar sociopathic, narcissistic and psychopathic habits through the selection process and into the political arena.

  In tribal societies and in smaller low-tech societies the ability to identify and root out psychologically broken individuals and prevent them from becoming leaders was easier. In the midst of vast empires and technocracy it is much simpler for psychopaths to hide among normal people and blend in. I usually compare invasive psychopaths to mythological stories of vampires for this reason. I really can’t think of a better analogy. They insinuate themselves into a population, take up positions of influence which protect them from suspicion and then systematically bleed the town dry. This is what they do. It is in their nature and they cannot be fixed, they can only be removed as a parasite is removed from a host.

  These people are the top threats to any given civilization. They are moderators of chaos and they actively conspire to supplant free society. They are what I would call primary organized psychopaths and they do indeed work together for mutual gain, much like a pack of wolves. They represent the 1% of the 1% (i.e. the globalists).

  Psychopaths at the top of the pyramid have been organized for a long time, but what about the millions of other people out there with such traits? What happens when they are given a way to congregate?

  Modern society and Big Tech social media have created even worse circumstances because now the greater psychopathic community is no longer isolated. That 1% that used to be mostly relegated to quiet corners and the fringes of humanity are now able to organize into aggressive mobs of hundreds of thousands, leading millions of lesser sociopaths and narcissists. This is creating a subculture of what I would call communal insanity – As the old saying goes, the patients are taking over the asylum.

  We see this specifically with the political left and the open promotion of narcissism as an acceptable way of life.  This is not to say that psychopaths don’t try to infiltrate conservative circles as well, only that leftists are much more welcoming to their kind. These are people that once felt powerless because they were shunned and now they want revenge.

  The thing is, they were originally shunned from influence for a very good reason; they are not psychologically equipped to handle any measure of power. Now they are being handed institutional control and they are being whipped into a frothing frenzy. They see themselves as the underdogs and the “revolutionaries”, but really they are just emotionally stunted and handicapped and they were put in permanent time-out to protect the rest of humanity.

  But how is this danger dealt with, not just in the short term but the longer term?

  Our culture has to be fundamentally changed with psychopathy and other aberrant traits in mind. We can no longer ignore the effect these people have on humanity as a whole. The first step would require separation from movements and institutions that promote psychopathic and narcissistic behaviors. In other words, we need to return to a model of isolation for the psychopathically inclined instead of treating them as if they are some kind of victim status group that needs special attention and “nurturing.”

  As noted, in many cases these characteristics are inherent (inborn) and cannot be treated. There is no fixing the problem because it is not so much an illness as it is a completely different psychological structure. They might as well be a different species, and a predatory one at that. There is no mutual coexistence with them. They see us as food.

  Candidates for positions of authority would have to be screened for psychopathy, narcissism and sociopathy. If they have too many of the warning signs then they should not be allowed to pursue those jobs. This is the only answer beyond fundamentally changing the way our election system functions, which I’m not necessarily opposed to either. A random lottery system for government jobs along with strict term limits (not just for normal political positions but also in bureaucratic positions) would at least be better than what we have now. I would rather risk the possibility of less qualified people being randomly chosen for government than have a system that attracts a concentrated culture of malicious parasites.

  What better way to discourage psychopaths than to take away any long term benefits of working in government? What better way to disrupt the influence of corporate elitists than to take away their ability to finance or choose the candidates that end up in office? And even if they were able to buy off some officials, with term limits they would have to start over and over again with the latest crop of new officials.

  Some will of course point out that changing the system tomorrow will require getting rid of the psychopaths that run it today. I agree, it’s a dilemma. Sadly, once psychopaths become organized and entrenched history tells us they will not be moved without the force of violence. They don’t care about protests, they are not moved by reason or logic, they don’t care about the suffering of the masses and they will always see themselves as the rightful rulers of us “lesser” peasants.

  They derive supremacy from the mobs of the stunted that they lead and exploit; the nearly 10% of the population that when organized becomes an army of raging mad hatters hungry for scraps from the table of power. We can and should continue to separate from the collectivist mob and the zealots, but all psychopaths view separation as defiance and will try to interfere. Eventually there’s going to be a fight, and maybe that’s for the best.

  *  *  *

  If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/08/2022 – 00:00

• Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Model Says Stalker Used Apple AirTag To Track Her
  Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Model Says Stalker Used Apple AirTag To Track Her

  A Sports Illustrated model shared her most “terrifying” experience of her life when she discovered that a stalker placed an Apple AirTag in her coat pocket. The person allegedly tacked the swimsuit model’s location for hours, and she only discovered the device when her iPhone alerted her about an “unknown accessory.” 

  

  “I went to a restaurant, a popular spot in TriBeCa, a very upscale, safe neighborhood,” Brooks Nader, 26, told Fox News. “I go there all the time… I was at the bar waiting for some friends. It was early, like 45 minutes to an hour early. So I thought, I’ll have a little bite to eat while I wait for them. It’s winter so it’s freezing. I had my big winter coat with me and laid it on the bar stool. I did go to the bathroom once and I always take my purse with me. I didn’t take my coat because I assumed no one was going to steal it and I didn’t have anything inside of it.”

  Five hours later, Nader was walking home when she received a notification from her Find My iPhone app that read an “Unknown Accessory Detected — This item has been moving for you for a while. The owner can see your location.”

  

   “I’m just honestly grateful that I got that notification from Apple. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have known,” she said, adding that someone at the restaurant likely slipped the AirTag in her coat jacket while she was in the restroom. 

  The incident occurred on Wednesday. Nader told her 800k followers on Instagram about the incident. “A ton of women told me, ‘Watch out, this happened to me, it’s an AirTag,'” said Nader

  The use of AirTags for nefarious activities has been documented. We noted Canadian thieves used the tracking device to track and steal luxury vehicles. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 23:40

• What The Great Ammunition Shortage Says About Inflation
  What The Great Ammunition Shortage Says About Inflation

  Authored by Matt Stoller via BIG Substack,

  Concentration is increasing prices and keeping them high. The ammunition duopoly and the “Great Ammunition Shortage” is just one example.

  

  Covid has done a lot of things to our society. But talk to anyone who enjoys hunting, and they’ll tell you one of result is the ‘Great Ammunition Shortage of 2021.’ “5.56 ammunition for an AR-15 used to be about 33 cents a round,” said Mark Oliva, director of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. “Now you’re looking at closer to almost a dollar a round. So it is much more expensive and it is much more difficult to find ammunition.”

  One of the more interesting questions in the discussion over inflation is the relationship between concentration and pricing changes. Most economists believe that supply shocks are increasing profits, but that this increase will serve as an inducement to more productive capacity. “Capitalism is on our side,” said economist Alan Blinder in the Wall Street Journal. “Shortages raise prices, but high prices create opportunities for profit, which attract capitalists to alleviate the shortages.” If Blinder were correct, then one would expect lots of new productive capacity and new entrants into this market.

  Ammunition is a highly concentrated industry. There are many ammo brands, like CCI, Federal, Remington, Winchester, and Speer, but they are all controlled by two firms – Vista Outdoor and the Olin Corporation. As Elle Ekman wrote in the American Prospect, Vista and Olin rolled up the industry through mergers, as well as taking advantage of the privatization of government facilities making ammunition and government contracts.

  During the pandemic, a lot of people decided they wanted to buy and use guns, either for hunting or personal protection. The 12 million new gun owners, plus existing activity, meant that the industry experienced the same demand shock that lots of outdoor activity segments saw. The result has been a shortage of ammunition, and higher prices.

  Like a lot of industries, there are cost pressures in ammunition; the price of raw materials, like brass, have gone up. Additionally, the State Department has blocked imports from Russia, adding to the pricing pressure. But the cost story is really a sideshow; the pricing increase is going almost entirely to profit. For Vista, margins skyrocketed in 2020, and continued to increase in 2021. As the CFO of Vista, Sudhanshu Shekhar Priyadarshi, told investors in November, margins rose to a record 27% in Q2 of 2021, on top of an already extraordinary 2020.

  According to Blinder, and most economists, competitors should enter the market and invest in new factories, or existing firms should expand existing capacity to seize market share, eventually leading to reduced prices. But the industry hasn’t experienced such competitive dynamics. Profits, said Priyadarshi, have gone to share repurchases and paying down debt.

  There are several reasons for this, but the main ones are consolidation and high barriers to entry in the industry. Ammunition is difficult to produce, as it requires careful manufacturing processes to safely handle explosive materials. Vista recently bought its competitor Remington out of bankruptcy, lowering the number of firms in the industry that could even build a factory and distribute ammunition effectively. And the limits on capacity were explicit. The head of ammunition for Vista, Jason R. Vanderbrink, explained that the “most important” reason for the Remington acquisition was “added capacity to Vista without increasing the overall market capacity.”

  This isn’t purely a story of informal cartel engaged in profit-seeking, but also risk-management. Like a lot of commodity businesses, the ammunition industry is cyclical, with shortages and price hikes when demand increases, followed by collapses as capacity increases and demand stays level or declines. Industry executives know this, and are intent on that not happening again. Here’s Christopher T. Metz, the CEO of Vista, talking about their purchase of Remington, a competitor in the industry.

  Because of some of the consolidation we’ve done with Remington, even if you look long term, we don’t see the same type of price compression the industry may have experienced in previous times.

  Vista has set up two pricing programs to ensure high prices and stability. The first is a subscription service for ammunition, which gives them a steady flow of ammunition demand and lets them plan production more easily. The second is, well, an informal form of price-fixing, or output reduction. They aren’t totally explicit about it, but they use code words to make the point. Here’s Metz explaining that they collude with their competition to keep capacity lower than it should be.

  “Now with ammunition being the largest part of our business. I mean, clearly, buying a Remington, we’ve created what we feel like is an even more disciplined industry now as we go forward. We’ve got, I think, like competitors in the sense that they watch growth, they watch their margin profiles. And we feel like we’ve got a disciplined industry.”

  And I’ve mentioned previously that we studied, as best we can…industry capacity and making sure that we’re not only managing our capacity, but very mindful of what’s being brought into the industry, so we don’t get over our skis, if you will.

  In other words, Vista executives are planning to ensure that prices won’t come down. They have expanded some capacity on the margins, but because there are only two real firms now, they can easily pull that extra production offline if necessary. We’ve seen the management of pricing across economic cycles in other concentrated industries. Chris Leonard wrote about Tyson Food’s control of the poultry business, and how during the financial crisis this meant the entire industry could raise prices by all cutting production at once.

  No one in the room was excited about the idea of a production cut. It was Tyson’s nuclear option. It meant the company would intentionally scale back its business, cutting down its sales. It also meant farmers would get fewer deliveries of chickens, reducing their income even as their debt payments stayed the same. But Smith decided that a cutback was inevitable.

  Ultimately, Tyson cut its production by 5 percent in December. Around that time, the industry as a whole was estimated to have cut back the placement of new eggs between 6 and 7 percent.

  In a matter of weeks, the price of a boneless, skinless chicken breast rose by about 20 cents, according to an industry estimate. Within a short few months, Tyson’s chicken business was profitable again.

  What was remarkable about this plan was the fact that Tyson executives could even consider it. Decades of lax antitrust enforcement allowed Tyson Foods to buy most of it competitors, giving executives at company headquarters the ability to control production on thousands of farms and dozens of major poultry plants across the nation. In 2008, Tyson Foods and its competitor Pilgrim’s controlled more than 40 percent of the national market. The third-biggest company controlled just 8 percent. Modern American farming was run out of the central office.

  If meat-packers were doing this fourteen years ago, then what is happening in the ammunition industry shouldn’t be a shock. Vista and Olin, in other words, are following the legal framework laid out more than a decade ago. In fact, we can see that within the ammunition industry itself, since Olin is more a chemical conglomerate, and its ammunition division is something of a sideshow. But that firm’s leaders are also excited about margins and price increases across their whole suite of products.

  

  Barriers to Entry

  When economists like Alan Blinder, Jason Furman and Larry Summers, discuss inflation and concentration, they are relying on the idea that markets are competitive, and that new entrants will drive down margins of existing players. This is not a crazy theory. Some bottlenecks will go away; Congress is acting to reduce the problem at the ports, otherwise known as the world’s most profitable traffic jam.

  But in terms of concentrated industries, is it really true that there will be mass entry with high profit margins? As we see with ammunition, the answer is, probably not.

  This relates to an interesting question in antitrust law, which is the idea of barriers to entry. Such barriers can be financial or technical, such as the expertise and expense needed to enter many industries. But as antitrust law has weakened, it’s also made it much harder for new firms to come into concentrated markets. Let’s keep going with Tyson Food. As New York Times reporter Pete Goodman tweeted, independent meat-packers actually can’t enter the market to compete with Tyson, even if they can built out facilities.

  Striking, though, that there’s no involvement of retailers, no? Ranchers have told me that capital isn’t the barrier to launching slaughterhouse capacity; it’s the reality that big packers retaliate against any chains that buy beef from independent producers.

  — Peter S. Goodman (@petersgoodman) January 3, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  That doesn’t mean inflation is going to keep rising, only that concentration means that price signals are less responsive to underlying supply and demand. Tommaso Valletti, formerly top economist at the EU Competition Authority, noted that there are likely impacts on inflation of competition – the more competition the more quickly prices adjust.

  Also, more competition implies more frequent price adjustments.
  See e.g. work on exchange rates across sectors by @GitaGopinath & Itskhoki (QJE 2010), or by @CGenakos & Pagliero (AEJ: Applied, forthcoming) on excise taxes and cost of petrol in islands (literally).
  3/ pic.twitter.com/O3nJ0ZbOcK

  — Tommaso Valletti (@TomValletti) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  This makes sense, and it’s consistent with what is happening in the ammunition market. Vista executives are trying to stop price adjustments downward by controlling output.

  Still, the problem of market power hasn’t penetrated the world of macro-economists trying to understand price adjustments. When economists say that inflation is unrelated to market power, what they really mean is that they don’t have models of inflation that incorporate market power. Market power isn’t under the lamp post, so it must not matter.

  But of course, that’s ridiculous. It does matter. The only question is, how much?

  *  *  *

  Welcome to BIG, a newsletter on the politics of monopoly power. If you’d like to sign up to receive issues over email, you can do so here. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 23:20

• National Tire Shortage Emerges As Snowstorms Pound US
  National Tire Shortage Emerges As Snowstorms Pound US

  Tire shops in the US complain about a tire shortage. They say snarled supply chains have put the overseas rubber industry in limbo, and by the time the tires are shipped to the US West Coast, port congestion adds weeks until they arrive at warehouses. 

  The shortage comes as winter storms are battering states in the mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Midwest, and Pacific Northwest. People are rushing to purchase winter tires, but there appears to be a limited stock for certain brands and models. 

  

  South Carolina-based Hay Tires Pros’ president David Hay told NewsNation Now that tires “made in America” have no problem sourcing, but “premium Asian tires are the ones we’re having problems with. They’re stuck on ships on the West Coast.” 

   Hay said the tire shortage adds all kinds of issues for the automobile industry. 

  “It’s causing all kinds of stress. Then you add chassis shortages, driver shortages, truck shortages — it’s a real problem.”

  The problem isn’t just on the East Coast but also in Lansing, Michigan, where tire shops have trouble sourcing winter tires. 

  “We were shopping around for different brands,” Michigan resident Shawn Foxworth said. He said the shortage had been a headache. 

  “It took a while to get here,” Foxworth said, adding that tires prices were much higher than last year. 

  Some people have waited weeks tires, if not at least a month, due to snarled supply chains. Even the online tire website Tire Rack has experienced a backlog for certain tires. 

  The expanding list of car parts in short supply comes as no surprise considering not one ISM respondent said anything about improvement in supply chains…

  

  People who purchase winter tires at the very last minute might run into sourcing problems or at least pay a hefty premium this winter as supply chains remain snarled. A word to the wise: buy in the offseason and prepare because the ability to purchase things on-demand today is becoming harder and harder. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 23:00

• Buchanan: Russia Is Not The Great Rival; China Is
  Buchanan: Russia Is Not The Great Rival; China Is

  Authored by Pat Buchanan,

  While all facts are true, not all facts are relevant.

  And what are the relevant facts in this crisis where 100,000 Russian troops are now stationed along the Ukrainian border?

  Fact one: There is not now and never has been a vital U.S. interest in Ukraine to justify risking a war with Russia.

  History tells us that. Even as Ukraine was suffering in the Stalin-induced Holodomor, the terror-famine of 1932-33, President Franklin Roosevelt granted diplomatic recognition to the Bolshevik regime.

  During four decades of Cold War, the U.S. never regarded Moscow’s control of Ukraine as any threat to the USA.

  President Joe Biden was thus right to rule out military action in response to any Russian incursion or invasion of Ukraine.

  Moreover, as it is declared U.S. policy not to retaliate militarily to an invasion of Ukraine, Biden should make it clear that Ukrainian membership in NATO is a closed question.

  Not going to happen.

  Ukraine is not going to be invited to join NATO and be given Article 5 U.S. war guarantees that are the primary benefit of membership.

  Hence, with U.S. negotiations with Moscow over Ukraine impending, what is the state of play?

  Russia is demanding that the U.S. give formal assurances that Ukraine and Georgia will never be admitted to NATO, and no nation bordering Russia will ever accept offensive NATO weapons that could imperil Russia’s security.

  If Moscow cannot get such assurances that Ukraine will never become a member of NATO, Russian President Vladimir Putin warns, Russia may invade and occupy Ukraine to neutralize that threat.

  The U.S. position?

  While we will not resist Russia militarily, the most severe sanctions in history will be imposed on Russia, possibly including cancellation of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany.

  Putin has lately issued a counterthreat.

  If such severe sanctions are imposed on Russia, this will result in a “complete rupture of relations” and be a blunder “which our descendants will later appreciate as a huge one.”

  Not long ago, a total severing of relations was the prelude to war.

  While Putin and Russia initiated this crisis with the deployment of 100,000 troops to Ukraine’s borders, we should try to see this crisis through Putin’s eyes.

  The heart of Greater Russia as one ethnic, cultural and historic nation consists not only of Russia but also of Belarus and Ukraine.

  Yet, consider the political condition of that core nation today.

  Ukraine has broken from Moscow and seeks its future in the West, the EU and NATO.

  Belarus, a nation of 10 million, just went through an election where only fraud guaranteed victory for its 67-year-old autocrat, Alexander Lukashenko, who has ruled Belarus for a quarter-century.

  Though an ally of Putin, Lukashenko is not the future.

  And Putin himself, while popular, has been in power for two decades and is bedeviled by rising democratic resistance in Russia.

  Now the Americans — who have, in a quarter-century, moved NATO across Germany into Eastern Europe and the Baltic states — are planning to bring into an alliance established to contain Russia the former Soviet republics of Georgia and Ukraine.

  Putin has to see himself as the ruler of a diminishing Russia, not a rising power.

  Time is not on Russia’s side or Putin’s side.

  

  His principal ally, China, has 10 times the population of Russia and an economy 10 times Putin’s. Moreover, China harbors ancestral claims to Russian territory in the Far East, which, in 1969, caused a border clash between the two countries.

  Putin has decided that the long retreat of Russian power must end, that the eastward march of a NATO alliance created to contain and resist Russia must end, and if this means risking war over Ukraine, so be it.

  Putin may see this as a now-or-never moment to halt the decades-long attrition of Russian territorial and national power.

  And the U.S.?

  In the Cold War, President Dwight Eisenhower did not intervene militarily to save the Hungarian rebels who rose against Moscow in 1956. Nor did President John F. Kennedy act to stop the building of the Berlin Wall in 1961. Nor did President Lyndon B. Johnson intervene to prevent Moscow’s crushing of the “Prague Spring” in 1968. Nor did President Ronald Reagan act when Solidarity was crushed in Poland in 1981.

  Historically, those presidents who refused to use force in Central or Eastern Europe, to avoid a war with Russia where U.S. vital interests were not imperiled, were proven right.

  Time was on America’s side in the Cold War. And, with Russia, time is still on America’s side.

  Our great challenge in the 21st century is not Russia.

  Indeed, in the long term, we want Russia on our side in the long struggle between the U.S. and the West, and Communist China.

  What the U.S. should do in this Ukrainian crisis is to avoid a war with Russia, avoid an escalation, and leave our adversary with an honorable avenue of retreat. Again, with Russia, time is on our side.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 22:40

• Prediction Consensus: What The Experts See Coming In 2022
  Prediction Consensus: What The Experts See Coming In 2022

  Even at the best of times, it’s human nature to want to decode the future.

  During times of uncertainty though, we’re even more eager to predict what’s to come. To satisfy this demand, thousands of prognosticators share their views publicly as one year closes and another begins. In hindsight, we see varying levels of success at predicting the future.

  In truth, as Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley details below, experts are merely guessing at what will happen over the coming year. In 2020, almost nobody had a pandemic on their bingo card. In 2021, NFTs completely flew under the radar of experts, and nobody saw a container ship get lodged in the Suez Canal in their crystal ball.

  So, why should we pay any attention to predictions at all? Are they, as Barry Ritholtz says, “wrong, random, or worse”?

  For one, these guesses are backed by expertise and experience, so the accompanying analysis is informative. Perhaps more importantly though, influential people and companies are in a position to shape the future with their predictions. In some cases, sentiment and actions can turn a prediction into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

  Regardless, whether for research or pure entertainment purposes, we’ve sifted through hundreds of reports, interviews, and articles to see which predictions are generally the most agreed upon. Where do experts see the ball moving over the next year? Our bingo card sums up the top 25, and below, we’ll dig into some of the trends that could shape 2022.

  

  Want to dive deeper into this year’s predictions? Join us for our interactive webinar on Jan 13th, 2022 by becoming a VC+ member: Join VC+ Today

  Vibe Check: What’s the General Outlook for 2022?

  Based on the hundreds of predictions we analyzed, the general mood can be described as cautiously optimistic.

  For starters, the global economy will likely keep growing, but not at the rate it did in 2021. We aggregated 40+ predictions from reputable sources such as the IMF and Goldman Sachs to determine median GDP estimates for the world, and select regions:

  

   

  Next, there’s broad agreement that monetary policy will begin to tighten over the next 12 months. Here’s what major central banks are predicted to do:

   

  

  Multiple experts described an era of lower equity returns and increased volatility. Many of the issues that plagued 2021 have carried over into 2022.

  Technological disruption continues to reshape industries, and climate change and cybersecurity issues will be top of mind this year. Geopolitical tensions are heating up as well, now that countries have acclimated to the immediate challenges posed by the pandemic.

  In short, nobody expects 2022 to be uneventful.

  Trends that Will Shape 2022

  Some of the predictions above are straightforward. GDP targets and explicit binary statements don’t require too much explanation.

  Below are some of the predictions experts agreed on that are worth digging into in more detail:

  1. Geopolitical Tensions Will Flare Up

  There are a number of potential hotspots around the world, but here are a few that experts are watching in 2022.

  Iran: Tensions ratcheted up between the U.S. and Iran after an attack on a U.S. military base in southern Syria in the fall of 2021. Further, the tension between Iran and Israel has the potential to escalate further in 2022, drawing in other nations in the region into a conflict.

  

  Ukraine: This is a continuation of tensions that flared up after Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014. Europe’s dependence on Russian gas and Ukraine’s position as a key gas transit hub makes this a situation experts are watching very closely.

  Taiwan: The risk that China will make a move on Taiwan has elevated in the minds of experts, though actions may contain “more bark than bite”.

  2. China’s Rocky Start to 2022

  At the dawn of 2021, many of the predictions around China were largely optimistic as the country had entered a recovery phase sooner than the rest of the world.

  Fast forward to 2022, and the predictions are the polar opposite as China faces challenges on a number of fronts. To begin with, there is pessimism around China’s zero-COVID strategy, which even today sees entire cities fall under strict lockdown orders. This strategy has unavoidable economic impacts.

  

  Secondly, uncertainty around power shortages, a potential housing crisis, and regulatory crackdowns have dampened enthusiasm for the country’s near-term prospects.

  Finally, Xi Jinping eliminated term limits on the presidency in 2018, potentially positioning himself to lead China indefinitely. As the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th National Party Congress approaches later in the year, if the country is still on uncertain footing, it could create a tense political atmosphere in Beijing.

  3. The Year of the Worker

  

  Labor dynamics have stayed in the spotlight since the pandemic upended the world of work. There are a number of trends that emerge from this broader theme:

  • The labor shortages that emerged during the pandemic will remain in place in 2022 and beyond. Certain sectors, such as cybersecurity, are facing acute shortages of skilled workers

  • There is a broad consensus that the future of office work is “hybrid”. Companies that don’t offer flexibility will face a disadvantage in attracting talent

  • The internet and social media have opened up a number of career pathways for individuals to earn an income beyond simply working for a company

  • Work/life balance and burnout will be central points in discussions around workplace culture

  4. The Changing Digital Ecosystem

  If predictions are any indication, we’ll be hearing a lot more about NFTs and Web3. There are plenty of opinions on the former, and they run the spectrum from exuberant to outright bearish. Whether the hype surrounding profile picture NFTs dies down is anyone’s guess, but the technology has opened the door to a lot of experimentation for artists and creators.

  

  On that note, experts are generally excited about the prospects of the burgeoning “Creator Economy”—a catch-all term describing the new technological ecosystem and growing infrastructure that is allowing individual content creators to monetize and flourish.

  Another trend that is picking up steam is ecommerce centered around social media. The ability to purchase products straight from influencers is becoming more common on major social platforms, and ecommerce companies are creating more products to support influencers in their marketing endeavors.

  By 2026, Gartner estimates that 60% of Millennial and Gen Z consumers will prefer making purchases on social platforms over traditional digital commerce platforms.

  5. Inflation Slowly Eases Off

  Worries about inflation have always cropped up here and there, but in countries like the U.S., truly damaging amounts of inflation haven’t been seen since the 1980s.

  Last year, the narrative changed.

  After trillions of dollars of pandemic stimulus and borrowing, inflation suddenly came back on the radar—and it was not “transitory” as early central bank statements hoped. Now, going into 2022, experts expect higher-than-normal inflation levels to continue.

  

  While inflation is expected to have an impact going forward, experts also see it leveling off (relative to 2021) as supply chain disruptions work themselves out.

  6. Another Banner Year of Electric Vehicles

  As climate change dominates more of the spotlight in 2022, regulatory actions will force automakers to consider the future of their fossil-fuel models.

  Even as incentives are slowly rolled back in a number of markets, EV sales are expected to set new records this year. As well, electrification of fleets will be a trend that gathers momentum.

  

  Industrial and battery metals like lithium and cobalt surged by 477% and 208%, respectively, in 2021, a trend that many experts believe will stretch into 2022.

  The Good Stuff

  Of the hundreds of sources we looked at, here were a few that stood out as memorable and comprehensive:

  • Bloomberg’s Outlook 2022: This article compiled over 500 predictions from Wall Street banks and investment firms.

  • The All-In Podcast’s 2022 predictions: This lively podcast, featuring Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, David Sacks, and David Friedberg, is always entertaining and informative. In this predictions episode, biggest business winners and losers is great, as is best performing asset.

  • Eurasia Group’s Top Risks for 2022: This comprehensive group of articles covers a lot of ground, and offers up some very credible predictions as to what might happen on the world stage this year.

  • Wood Mackenzie’s Predictions for 2022: Wood Mackenzie analysts offer 10 predictions for key developments expected in the energy and natural resources industries in 2022.

  Lastly, if you’ve found our Prediction Consensus useful, we’re going to be diving even deeper into this subject matter in the coming weeks.

  Our VC+ members get access to the whole Global Forecast 2022 series, which features a webinar and additional articles that flesh out predictions for the coming year in even more detail. You can learn more about it here.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 22:20

• Maxwell May Get A Second Trial, But What About The Rest Of Epstein's "Significant Others"?
  Maxwell May Get A Second Trial, But What About The Rest Of Epstein’s “Significant Others”?

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in USA Today on the lingering questions in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. These questions are likely to grow if the court overturns the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell due to what appears to be exceptionally serious allegations of juror misconduct.  Maxwell could end up with a second trial while various powerful men appear to have escaped any serious investigation, let alone a trial, on their alleged roles in such abuse.

  

  Here is the column:

  The conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell last week on five of six felony counts represented the first guilty verdict to come out of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal since his death. The question is whether it will be the last.

  Maxwell was rightfully convicted as someone who was an enabler of sexual abuse, a craven figure convicted of enticing minors to travel and the transportation of a minor.

  However, these girls were enticed and transported for a purpose and, quite possibly, for people other than Epstein.

  The prosecution framed its case in terms of the transportation rather than the destination of the girls – and chose to limit the trial to just four of the victims. The trial offered insights into the bizarre relationship of Epstein and Maxwell, one sustained in part by Maxwell’s eagerness to fulfill Epstein’s demands for a steady stream of young girls.

  Taste for human consumption

  On one level, Epstein and Maxwell were embodiments of the conspicuous consumption culture we have seen in an array of criminal defendants, from Donald Trump’s former presidential campaign chair Paul Manafort to the late Bernie Madoff.

  However, Epstein and Maxwell found each other as soul mates in a mutual taste for human consumption. Where Manafort consumed $15,000 ostrich jackets, Epstein and Maxwell actively harvested children.

  For Maxwell, unrestrained, unapologetic consumption was a matter of breeding from a pampered upbringing by her father, publishing tycoon (and fraudulent businessman) Robert Maxwell. For Epstein, it was a taste fueled by sexual and criminal addiction.

  The Epstein-Maxwell alliance was forged by a deep corruption on every level, but that corruption was not limited to this despicable duo. Maxwell facilitated flights and travel to produce girls on trips attended by a list of the super elite. And Epstein allegedly used his stable of young girls as an enticement for powerful men.

  The travel logs and guest records on Epstein’s trips read like a who’s who of the global elite. That by itself is not strange. The most elite in our society tend to flock together. What was notable is that these high-powered trips included teenage girls along with presidents and princes.

  There are only two possibilities that arise from the records. 

  First, that Epstein and Maxwell trafficked victims for only their own enjoyment.

  Under this theory, young girls and women were transported to an island or homes with powerful men, but those men were interested only in the pleasure of Epstein’s company. They simply often traveled without their spouses or children.

  Second, Epstein used what former President Trump called Epstein’s taste for “beautiful women on the younger side” to draw powerful friends into his circle of influence.

  These trips are now largely public record, and the pictures are well known. Bill Clinton getting a massage from a 22-year-old woman in an airport in transit. Prince Andrew with his arm around a teenager in an Epstein home. Names from Donald Trump to Bill Gates have been associated with Epstein or his infamous flights on “The Lolita Express.” Clinton took 26 flights on Epstein’s plane, according to Fox News.

  None of these pictures or records proves criminal acts or establishes which of the two scenarios is true. What they do create is an ample basis for investigation and formal questioning by the FBI.

  Yet, with the exception of Prince Andrew, there is no public account of a formal investigation into those who were the possible beneficiaries of Epstein’s actions.

  The history of the Justice Department’s involvement in the case magnifies these concerns. In 2007, Epstein faced a state investigation that found probable cause for at least four counts of unlawful sex with minors and one count of sexual abuse. He was the subject of a 53-page indictment that could have resulted in life in prison.

  That is when the Justice Department struck a breathtaking plea agreement that effectively negated the claims of more than 40 minor girls (many between the ages of 13 and 17). Epstein pleaded guilty to Florida charges of felony solicitation of underage girls in 2008 and served a 13-month jail sentence.

  The agreement violated federal law and the rights of the victims. Nevertheless, former U.S. attorney Alexander Acosta , who signed off on the agreement, was inexplicably made Labor secretary under Trump. He later resigned.

  The special treatment did not end there. Epstein was not sent to state prison with other sex offenders. Instead, he was housed at the Palm Beach County Stockade and, after only several months, was allowed to leave on “work release” for up to 12 hours a day, six days a week.

  Willingness to investigate

  Epstein reportedly had sex with at least one teenage girl, according to a lawsuit. Epstein was allowed to hire the deputies who guarded him on work release. According to reports, he was not locked in at night and a television was installed for his use.

  His work?  A foundation that he created and then closed after serving his time.

  In July 2019, Epstein was arrested again on sex trafficking charges. A month later, he was found dead in a New York jail cell. His death was ruled a suicide.

  Many are wondering whether Maxwell will now name names or produce rumored tapes. It is not clear that she has such evidence to offer, but with 65years of potential time on sentencing, she has every reason to cooperate.

  Prosecutors already have dozens of names of people who frequented Epstein’s homes and island. Critics of the prosecution say what is lacking isn’t the evidence but the willingness to investigate.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 22:00

• Watch: McDonald's Kiosk Denies Man Service Over Vaccine Status
  Watch: McDonald’s Kiosk Denies Man Service Over Vaccine Status

  Highly vaccinated and “boosted” Israel was among the world’s first countries to impose a vaccine passport requirement on its population, which the government calls a ‘Green Pass’. And yet the pandemic has continued there unabated, and all that average citizens are left with is immensely curtailed freedoms.

  As a glaring case in point, Israelis apparently can’t even order a Big Mac from an automatic kiosk at McDonald’s unless their Green Pass status is up to date. Most recently, this means a citizen has to have not just been double-jabbed, but they have to have received the booster. This also as Israel has approved a second booster for the immunocompromised and elderly. Watch the absurdity unfold:

  Welcome to Israel’s draconian rules pic.twitter.com/9ryjbTKi2V

  — Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) January 3, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “Mcdonald’s appears to be the first food provider in Israel to deny customers who do not have proof of vaccination,” one local news source comments on the disturbing video.

  “Activist Shlomo Walfish went to the McDonald’s in Bet Shemesh to try to order food,” the report descsribed. “The computer that takes orders then denied him service after selecting that he does not have a green passport.”

  With the green pass system, other public venues like bars, gyms, and theaters are denying people access; however, this could be a first example of a machine literally being programed to halt service to unvaccinated people – or at least those without proper vaccine “credentials”. 

  And we are being told this is all in the name of public “health” and “safety”… No Covid passport = no food.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 21:40

• Ross Ulbricht: Bitcoin Equals Freedom
  Ross Ulbricht: Bitcoin Equals Freedom

  Via BitcoinMagazine.com,

  Silk Road darknet marketplace founder Ross Ulbricht explains how bitcoin derives its value from the freedom it enables.

  

  Something special happened in the first year or so after Satoshi gave us Bitcoin, something no one expected and many thought was impossible.

  Try to imagine Bitcoin back then, before you could buy things with it, before there was an exchange rate, before anyone really knew what, if anything, would happen with it. Bitcoin didn’t start out as money. It became money, but it did so unlike any money that came before it. For all the things Bitcoin has made possible, for all the ways it is changing about our world, we don’t fully appreciate or even understand what happened in those early days, when it was just a plaything for geeks.

  Every other money that predates bitcoin — in the long history of human civilization — was valued for reasons other than its use as money. Cattle in Africa, postage stamps in prison, seashells and precious metals all have been used as money and fit this pattern. The only exception is fiat money — something declared to be money by an authority — but even national fiat currencies were once backed by something with prior value, like gold.

  Bitcoin changed all that. Bitcoin had no prior value, and no one was forced to use it, yet somehow it came to be a medium of exchange. People who don’t understand and care little for bitcoin can nevertheless accept it as payment because they know it can be used to pay for something else or be exchanged into conventional money.

  People often mention the pizzas that were bought for 10,000 bitcoin and, in hindsight, poke fun at the guy who ate what would become a multi-million dollar lunch. I’m more interested in the person who gave up two perfectly good pizzas for mere bitcoin. What did they see in those bits and bytes, that digital signature on something people were calling a blockchain? Whatever motivated the pizza seller may have also called to the early miners who could not liquidate but happily hoarded. It may have inspired the ones who simply gave bitcoin away by the thousands. Whatever it was, it was something new.

  Classical economics says exchange won’t happen unless both parties value what they are getting more than what they are giving up. So, where did the value come from? Bitcoin should never have gotten off the ground, but it did. Even a new product has some kind of value to it, and early adopters are taking a risk that they won’t get their money’s worth, but they still expect to gain from the exchange.

  The early adopters of Bitcoin, on the other hand, had no way of knowing what we do now. All they had was a dream, a conviction and enough infectious enthusiasm to bootstrap a digital contrivance into a multi-billion-dollar phenomenon we are only beginning to see the effects of.

  I’ll tell you what I think happened, but the truth is that no one knows. It is like magic that bitcoin could somehow come from nothing, and without prior value or authoritative decree, become money.

  But bitcoin did not appear in a vacuum.

  It was a solution to a problem cryptographers had been struggling with for many years: How to create digital money with no central authority that couldn’t be forged and could be trusted.

  This problem persisted for so long that some left the solution to others and dreamed instead of what our future would be like if decentralized digital money did somehow come to be. They dreamed of a future where the economic power of the world is accessible to everyone, where value can be transferred anywhere with a keystroke. They dreamed of prosperity and freedom, dependent only on the mathematics of strong encryption.

  Bitcoin was therefore birthed onto fertile ground and was recognized by those who had been waiting for it.

  This was an historic moment for them, far more important than pizzas or electric bills run up from mining.

  The promise of freedom and the allure of destiny energized the early community. Bitcoin was consciously, yet spontaneously taken up as money while no one was watching, and our world will never be the same.

  *  *  *

  An earlier version of this article was published on Medium on September 25, 2019.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 21:20

• Japan, US Vow More Defense Cooperation Against China's "Destabilizing" Actions
  Japan, US Vow More Defense Cooperation Against China’s “Destabilizing” Actions

  Coming off a “historic” signing of a formal defense cooperation agreement with Australia on Thursday, Japan is now pursuing a deepened commitment for military assistance from the United States. Both are expressing concern over China’s growing military might and influence in the region. 

  Following a virtual meeting of top defense and foreign policy leaders between Tokyo and Washington, the two sides issued a joint statement on Friday, citing closer cooperation on a military level amid Beijing’s attempts to “destabilize” the region – including with an eye on Taiwan, according to Reuters. The Japanese side, which included the foreign minister, had this to say:

  The ministers expressed concerns that China’s efforts “to undermine the rules-based order” presented “political, economic, military and technological challenges to the region and the world”, according to their statement.

  “They resolved to work together to deter and, if necessary, respond to destabilizing activities in the region,” it said.

  

  The statement additionally highlighted “serious and ongoing concerns” over the plight of the Uighur minority in China’s Xinjiang region, and mentioned the ongoing media and opposition crackdown in Hong Kong. 

  Japan’s historic post-WW2 pacifism appears to increasingly be abandoned as Tokyo has recently vocalized a pro-US line on hot button regional issues like Taiwan.

  China’s foreign ministry has meanwhile slammed these developments involving fresh pacts and the growing defense commitments between Japan, the US, and China:

  “We deplore and firmly oppose the gross interference in China’s internal affairs by the U.S., Japan and Australia and the fabrication of false information to smear China and undermine the solidarity and mutual trust of countries in the region,” foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin told a daily briefing in Beijing.

  Friday’s statement also follows unprecedented statements in recent months from Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who said his country is now pursuing offensive strike capabilities, specifically considering “all options including possession of so-called enemy-strike capabilities”.

  “In order to safeguard the people’s lives and livelihoods, we will examine all the options, including the capability to attack enemy bases… and fundamentally strengthen our defense posture with a sense of speed,” PM Kishida said just last month. Already, international reports commonly estimate that Japan has built an arsenal of almost 1,000 warplanes, and even dozens of submarines and destroyers. Additionally, often its coast guard acts as a forward deployed force in fishing or island disputes with China. 

  Likely China will only increase its own muscle-flexing maneuvers amid the closer US-Japan and Japan-Australia defense ties. It must be recalled that in October a grouping of Chinese and Russian warships provocatively traversed narrow passageways near Japan, and ultimately took an encircling route around the large island-nation, in a clear ‘message’ that it needs to cool its rhetoric vis-a-vis Beijing.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 21:00

• For Farmers Across America, Solar Power May Spell Trouble
  For Farmers Across America, Solar Power May Spell Trouble

  Authored by Nathan Worcester via The Epoch Times,

  This article is the first in a series on the underreported costs of solar power. American farmers express concerns about being crowded off of their property, the potentially permanent loss of good agricultural soil, and the feasibility of combining large solar installations with farmland or pollinator habitats, among other topics.

  “It’s very frustrating to try to protect your farm,” cotton farmer Nancy Caywood told The Epoch Times.

  

  Caywood and her family manage Caywood Farms in rural Casa Grande, Arizona, south of Phoenix in Pinal County. She said they’re under significant pressure to sell their land to large solar companies, which are buying up parcels near their property.

  “It’s eyesores to me,” she said.

  Caywood said that surveyors and other people are coming onto her family’s land without their permission.

  “They’re very bold,” she said, adding that she’s not sure which companies have been intruding on the Caywood property.

  Caywood worries about what could happen to the solar installations near her if their parent companies go under. Abengoa, the Spanish company that built Solana Generating Station near Gila Bend, Arizona, recently filed for bankruptcy.

  She is also concerned that the land used for solar farms may never be able to be restored to farmland.

  Even now, the land her family owns close to the new solar farm is apparently being affected by the massive installation. Caywood’s son Travis measured ambient temperatures on the east end of the family’s farm that were 10 degrees warmer than the rest of the property.

  That portion of the property abuts a solar farm identified as Pinal Central Energy Center, LLC, which was developed by NextEra Energy Resources and was described as one of that company’s “investments in Arizona” according to a 2021 presentation by the firm.

  Representatives of NextEra Energy Resources didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment by press time.

  Another nearby solar project, the 2,100-acre Eleven Mile Solar Center, is just across the Arizona State Route 287 from Caywood Farms.

  

  The project’s website claims it will generate more than 900,000 megawatts of electricity per year from 850,000 solar panels.

  The Epoch Times also has reached out to Orsted, the Danish multinational power company that is a partner in the project, for comment on Caywood’s remarks as well as the installation’s projected power output, given longstanding concerns about the real-world efficiency of solar panels.

  A spokesperson for the Solar Energy Industries Association, an industry trade organization, offered a different perspective.

  “Solar projects and agricultural lands are often highly compatible. Farmers and landowners can gain significant revenue for lands they are not actively farming and projects almost always are conducted to the benefit of both parties,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

  The spokesperson declined to comment on the specific individual stories described in this article, stating that “we don’t know all the facts.”

  Protecting Soil

  Caywood isn’t alone in her concerns about the use of good farmland for solar installations.

  Annette Smith, executive director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, told The Epoch Times via email that the protection of prime agricultural soils has been an issue in her New England state.

  Vermont law now specifies that primary agricultural soils won’t cease to be defined as such when a solar installation is built on them.

  “My goal was to see that using prime ag land for solar should not be an opportunity to have the land ‘switched’ to commercial, industrial, or some other category simply by installing solar panels thereupon,” state Sen. Mark MacDonald, the Democratic lawmaker who drafted the language, told The Epoch Times via email.

  In a telephone call, he added that the language was also motivated by prospective improvements in solar panel efficiency.

  “In future years, it won’t take as many acres to produce the same amount of electricity,” he said.

  

  “The dynamic over the years has changed,” Smith told The Epoch Times. She said Vermont’s Republican Gov. Phil Scott has given the state’s scientists more freedom to consider the downsides of solar projects than his predecessor, Democrat Peter Shumlin.

  “When Gov. Shumlin was in charge, it was ‘build everything everywhere regardless of impacts,’” Smith said.

  In 2014, under Shumlin, one major solar development ended up claiming what Smith called “some of the finest prime agricultural soils in Rutland County, Vermont.”

  Despite these concerns, the Public Service Board (PSB) granted the land to Rutland Renewable Energy, LLC, which was owned by the utility-scale solar company groSolar and has since been sold to the French firm EDF Renewables.

  In its decision, PSB concluded that the company’s Cold River Project “will not significantly reduce the agricultural potential of the soils found at the Project site.”

  

  The case made it to the Vermont Supreme Court, which upheld the PSB’s decision against opposition from the Town of Rutland and several neighbors.

  “The project site contains a variety of primary agricultural soils; the standards prohibit siting a ground-mounted solar facility on primary agricultural soils. The site has not, however, been used for agricultural production for 15 to 20 years,” Justice John Dooley noted in his opinion affirming PSB’s ruling.

  The power produced at the Cold River site, which includes 8,820 solar panels, is currently being sold to Green Mountain Power under a multidecade agreement, according to AEP OnSite Partners, which built the array.

  Green Mountain Power confirmed to The Epoch Times that it’s still under that power purchase agreement. Representatives of EDF Renewables didn’t respond to a request for comment by press time.

  Vermont is one of only 15 states with statewide solar decommissioning requirements, as described in a December 2021 report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Despite the state’s relatively stringent regulation of the energy source, Smith believes the status quo still leaves farmland vulnerable.

  

  “The state of Vermont really hasn’t done much to protect prime ag soils from solar development,” Smith said. “It’s a case-by-case basis and so far it has not been an impediment to approval, as long as it is returned to being prime ag after the project is decommissioned.”

  An SEIA spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email that the group supports decommissioning standards “to promote transparency and clarity while encouraging responsible development of solar projects.”

  “Solar developers are seeking to optimize among numerous factors including both minimizing impacts to local resources (like prime ag lands) and access to the grid. Developers will choose less productive agricultural land to avoid such conflicts,” the spokesperson wrote.

  Downsides

  Janet Christensen-Lewis, who owns Puck’s Glen Organic Farm on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, thinks the wider public is only just beginning to grasp the downsides of solar power.

  “I think the public consciousness may have been what I was about six years ago,” she told The Epoch Times. “I just wanted to flip a light switch, totally oblivious to all of the consequences of energy production. And then when you’re faced with projects that are coming that are actually going to impact your surroundings, you take a closer look at things.”

  “I suspect that if you said to people in New York City that we should take Central Park, which is 800 acres, and cover it with solar panels, they would be aghast,” she said. “What they don’t realize is that 800 acres is pretty much nothing for the solar that’s being put in now. And we’re using that land.”

  In September 2021, the Biden administration’s Department of Energy released its Solar Futures Study, which envisioned a maximum solar deployment scenario of more than 16,000 square miles—an area slightly smaller than the states of Massachusetts and Connecticut combined.

  That report, like some other solar energy research undertaken in recent years, envisions the “co-location of agriculture and solar energy.” But Christensen-Lewis is skeptical that such “agrivoltaic” technology could be realized at a large scale.

  

  “You’re not going to run combines underneath—you’re never going to figure out a way to make that happen underneath solar panels.”

  The Solar Futures Study also emphasizes the potential of “solar-pollinator habitats,” which are intended to combine solar panels with pollinator-friendly native plants, ultimately bolstering crop yields while simultaneously producing cleaner energy.

  Christensen-Lewis, who already plants wildflowers on her organic farm to encourage pollinators, has her doubts about those habitats as well.

  “We always say that when a solar company comes in and puts in their pollinator habitat, it’s three years away from becoming a patch of weeds, and then they’re going to have to use Roundup,” she said. “It’s just a label—it’s just a selling point—and not necessarily a very good one.”

  Maryland has set the target of producing 50 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030, increasing the pressure to build more solar in the state’s rural counties. Yet development along the Eastern Shore hasn’t gone without controversy.

  

  The Maryland Department of the Environment ruled that Great Bay Solar I, LLC’s solar plant construction sites in Princess Anne, Maryland, violated multiple titles of the state’s environmental law. The department found that Great Bay Solar had disturbed nontidal wetlands at multiple sites, reaching a settlement whereby the company paid the department a $400,000 civil penalty.

  Christensen-Lewis was involved in a successful effort to keep a large solar farm out of Kent County, Maryland, where she believes it threatened prime farmland.

  Despite these victories, the outlook for many farmers facing pressure from major solar companies remains uncertain.

  Caywood, of Caywood Farms in Casa Grande, worries her fourth-generation farm could become “an island” surrounded by utility-scale solar.

  “They’re putting it [solar] out here in the rural areas, on our farmland, and in our forests,” Christensen-Lewis said. “That’s land that we see major other purposes for—for feeding people, for making sure that we have environmental protections in place.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 20:40

• Apple's Tim Cook Officially A Billionaire After Massive Windfall In 2021
  Apple’s Tim Cook Officially A Billionaire After Massive Windfall In 2021

  Just days after becoming the first publicly-traded company to see its valuation cross the $3 trillion mark, Apple released its proxy statement ahead of its annual meeting, which is set for early March, which offered some interesting insights about its executive compensation.

  The statement revealed that thanks to his stock-based compensation, Apple CEO Tim Cook earned nearly $100M during 2021, which is more than 1,400x the median pay at Apple (in 2021, median pay rose to $68,254, up from $57,783 during the prior year. Apple said the change was due to changes in hiring and compensation).

  

  The massive payday helped push Cook’s net worth past the $1 billion mark. Here’s the breakdown, courtesy of Reuters.

  Cook’s salary remained at $3M, but he received $82.3M in stock awards, $12M for hitting Apple’s targets and $1.4M for air travel, 401(k) plan, insurance premiums, a vacation cash-out and other compensation. In total, he earned $98.7M, compared with $14.8M in 2020.

  But as Apple Insider pointed out, Cook’s biggest windfall wasn’t even included in his pay package: In August 2021, he vested the maximum amount from a performance-based incentive package. He vested the maximum amount, and in August he received 5M shares, worth $754M at the time.

  These two major windfalls pushed Cook’s personal wealth north of $1 billion, Apple Insider said.

  Not all of this massive award in restricted stock will vest right away: it’s expected to vest in annual installments between 2023 and 2025. Although the non-performance-based portion of this compensation will vest even if Cook leaves the company.

  Judging by movements in the company’s share price since Cook took over in 2011 (just months before Apple founder Steve Jobs died), his massive compensation is worthwhile: shares have risen more than 1,000% since then.

  The big difference-maker for Cook: In September, the Apple chief received 333,987 restricted stock units in his first stock grant since 2011. The award was part of a long-term equity plan which will see him awarded the next chunk of stock in 2023.

  American CEOs were paid 351x more than their typical worker in 2020, according to a report by the Economic Policy Institute. The study also showed that the compensation of top CEOs grew roughly 60% faster than the stock market from 1978 to 2020, eclipsing the slow 18% growth in a typical worker’s annual pay.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 20:20

• Will Artificial Intelligence Create A Socialist Paradise?
  Will Artificial Intelligence Create A Socialist Paradise?

  Authored by Doug French via The Mises Institute,

  Relating a quip by Soviet economist Nikolai Fedorenko, Yuri Maltsev illustrated the problem with socialism in his foreword to Ludwig von Mises’s Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth. Fedorenko said, at the time, in Maltsev’s words, “[A] fully balanced, checked, and detailed economic plan for the next year would be ready, with the help of computers, in 30,000 years.”

  

  Victor Shvets believes computing power has caught up and “technology could soon create an environment where state planning might be able to deliver acceptable economic results while simultaneously suppressing societal and individual freedoms.” Mr. Shvets has worked all over the world as an investment banker and has now put down his dystopian ideas of the future in the book The Great Rupture: Three Empires, Four Turning Points, and the Future of Humanity. 

  Shvets admits history tells us freedom equals productivity, prosperity, and happiness, while Soviet-style planning creates criminality, corruption, and starvation.

  His use of Soviet “good intentions” makes a reader wonder as to his naïveté. 

  The author believes that by 2030 artificial intelligence (AI) “will replace most research functions and go beyond that by anticipating changes and making discoveries.”

  AI will be able to make all those naughty decisions entrepreneurs struggle to make.

  Capital will be deployed with perfection.

  Consumer needs and wants will be anticipated effortlessly.

  Shvets writes, “modern AI is able to manipulate an unheard of amount of information, and hence, arguably it might steer investments in a more productive way than has ever been possible by Adam Smith’s invisible hand.” 

  Shvets believes Nikolai Bukharin’s scientific planning and state control “might not have been wrong at all but were just a century ahead of their time. Today, the computational power might allow for such planning to occur without creating the stagnation and inefficiency of the Soviet system.”

  He goes on to say F.A. Hayek’s ideas may end up on the scrap heap of history and free market capitalism will be viewed the same as the “burning of witches.”

  All of this after most of his book was spent chronicling how freedom is the reason the West has prospered and the Ottoman Empire, China, and Russia have been mired in poverty. However, now, Americans are sitting around watching TV and playing on their computers instead of reading. Shvets says the collision of financialization and technology has led to civil disintegration, “all the ingredients of Roman ‘bread and circuses.’ Escapism, stagnating incomes, and rising inequalities characterize most Western societies, with the public sector stepping in to distribute ‘Free bread.’”

  Younger people are more in favor than their parents of government solving problems. Baby boomer parents have created kids who are dependent, used to winning “prizes for losers.” Shvets believes this era is more toxic than smoking, with loneliness, increased suicides, declining literacy, digital addictions, and impaired analytical capacity.

  The new world, according to Shvets, will be fair, equitable, and beneficial to society, rather than freedom and individualism. 

  His soothsaying is based on a quarter of millennials believing democracy is bad for society and less than a third believing it essential. Fewer than half of European millennials support democracy despite direct experience with fascism and communism. 

  Shvets sees a world where AI takes over and only 5 percent of people will work and the remaining 95 percent won’t have to, presumably supported by taxes paid by the 5 percent.

  “Karl Marx’s idea of ‘communism’ will be our common future,” Shvets writes.

  Society will achieve such a high level of productivity “it will liberate humans from the need to toil in order to survive, and by that stage it is likely that alternative avenues of personal satisfaction will also emerge.” 

  Mises wouldn’t buy any of this.

  “No single man [or machine] can ever master all the possibilities of production, innumerable as they are, as to be in a position to make straightway evident judgments of value without the aid of some system of computation,” Mises wrote.

  He continues:

  The distribution among a number of individuals of administrative control over economic goods in a community of men who take part in the labor of producing them, and who are economically interested in them, entails a kind of intellectual division of labor, which would not be possible without some system of calculating production and without economy. (emphasis added)

  There can be no such thing as a leisurely form of communism.

  “This, then, is freedom in the external life of man—that he is independent of the arbitrary power of his fellows,” explained Mises. “Such freedom is no natural right. It did not exist under primitive conditions. It arose in the process of social development and its final completion is the work of mature Capitalism.”

  Mr. Shvets, there is a mature capitalism. And, it’s not communism, Marxian or otherwise.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 20:00

• Here Are The Best And Worst Performing Hedge Funds Of 2021
  Here Are The Best And Worst Performing Hedge Funds Of 2021

  It was another painful year for most hedge funds, with many suffering the pain of their short books shooting up during periods of heightened retail trading such as the start of 2021, followed by a just as painful rotation in and out of the growth to value (and vice versa) rotation. As a result hedge funds as an industry were one of the worst performing asset classes of 2021, trailed only by emerging markets, Treasurys, gold and the euro.

  

  And incidentally, here are the best and worst performing S&P stocks of 2021.

  

  But while most hedge funds underperformed their benchmark for yet another year, some stood out. Here, courtesy of the HSBC Hedge Weekly is a list of the best and worst performing hedge funds of 2021 (and yes, any year when the Tulip Trend Fund is the top 10 you just know markets were micromanaged by central banks).

  

  Not surprisingly, the best performing hedge fund tracked by HSBC, Senvest, is also the one that quietly orchestrated the Gamestop short squeeze mania (the fund was extremely long the stock around the time it became a Reddit sensation then quietly sold out its entire stake in January just as the stock was surging lifted by retail daytraders).

  That said, and demonstrating just how challenging 2021 was, not even half of the Top 20 funds managed to outperform the S&P500. And while the typical response is that they are not supposed to outperform the S&P500, when they fail to do so every year for a decade, well… no surprise why launching a new fund has become virtually impossible. Then again, 2022 is a year when there will be little if any Fed support for the market (at least until the whole tightening frenzy fades away) so all these underperforming hedge funds will surely be able to prove themselves… right?

  In any case, digging among these names, what stands out is that event-driven and stock-picking hedge funds were the best-performing strategies last year, according to preliminary figures from the Bloomberg hedge fund indexes. Funds such as the iconic Renaissance Technologies and Senvest Management (noted above) posted double-digit gains for their investors.

  Event-driven hedge funds rose 16% last year, while equity-focused managers gained nearly 13%, the indexes show. Hedge funds broadly returned nearly 10%. Still, they all trailed the S&P 500 Index which rallied 27%.

  In addition to Senvest, another prominent hedge funds that made the list was Jim Simons’ Renaissance Technologies, which made a comeback after a lousy 2020. The firm posted double-digit gains across all three of its public hedge funds. The equity-focused quant funds had their worst year in 2020 when the algorithms struggled with the pandemic-driven market tumult.

  In the world of multi-strat, or “pod” funds, Citadel bested its peers, posting a 26% return for 2021. The $43.1 billion firm’s Wellington fund, which runs a market neutral strategy, beat D.E. Shaw & Co. and Millennium Management even as their hedge funds had double-digit gains.

  As a group, multistrats rose 8.3% last year through November, and they saw more inflows than any other strategy, attracting $28 billion from investors for the period, according to eVestment. Investors flocked to these funds to diversify their portfolios and to gain exposure to investments that aren’t correlated to the stock market.

  ExodusPoint Capital Management and Sculptor, formerly Och Ziff, came in at the bottom of the group with gains of about 5% last year.

  

  “There has been a range of performance from stellar to well below average among these capital raising powerhouses,” eVestment researchers wrote in a report. “How does this bode for the group heading into 2022? Frankly I’m on the fence between ‘we’ll have to wait and see,’ and ‘I’m not concerned.’”

  And while 2021 had its share of emotional rollercoasters in the world of 2 and 20, with Russell Clark Investment Management – the fund we had once dubbed the world’s most bearish – shutting down in November after losing the fight with central banks, one fund that stood out was Crispin Odey’s funds which made a roaring comeback after years of underperformance.

  According to Bloomberg, in 2021 the London-based money manager enjoyed both his best-ever monthly return and suffered his worst monthly loss, before ending the year with a gain of almost 54%. Odey’s fund was up as much as 108% through September before giving up half those gains in the last quarter of 2021. February marked the fund’s best month, largely on the back of a massive government bond short, while October was its worst.

  

  Alas, gone are the days when Odey managed billions: his strategy has shrunk over the years and ran about $383 million at the end of November. That’s because a dollar invested in the fund at the start of 2015 is still worth only about 51 cents now.

  The annual return, Odey’s best since 2007, comes as a welcome respite for the hedge fund manager, who stepped down from running his eponymous firm to focus on trading in 2020 and has faced public scrutiny for years for his stunning losses and support for Brexit.

  As Bloomberg notes, at least two bets helped power the fund’s surge. The first targeted long-dated government bonds amid expectations that a post-pandemic economic recovery will fan inflation. The fund’s short exposure to bonds totaled 902% of its net asset value at the end of November. The second was a stake in Oxford Nanopore, which surged in value after the DNA-sequencing company listed in London in September.  

  As noted here in the past, Odey has for years predicted a market collapse and been one of the most vocal critics of QE.

  The full weekly HSBC hedge fund performance presentation is available to professional subscribers.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 19:40

• Money Supply, Rising Rates, & The Discrediting Of Keynesian Hopium
  Money Supply, Rising Rates, & The Discrediting Of Keynesian Hopium

  Authored by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com,

  The establishment, including the state, central banks and most investors are thoroughly Keynesian, the latter category having profited greatly in recent decades from their slavish following of the common meme.

  That is about to change. The world of continual Keynesian stimulus is coming to its inevitable end with prices rising beyond the authorities’ control. Being blinded by neo-Keynesian beliefs, no one is prepared for it.

  This article explains why interest rates are set to rise substantially in this new year. It draws on evidence from the inflation crisis of the 1970s, points out the similarities and the fact that currency debasement today is far greater and more global than fifty years ago. In the UK, half the current rate of monetary inflation for half the time — just for one year — led to gilt coupons of over 15%. And today we have Fed watchers who can only envisage a Fed funds rate climbing to 2% at most…

  A key factor will be the discrediting of this Keynesian hopium, likely to be replaced by a belated conversion to the monetarism that propelled Milton Friedman into the public eye when the same thing happened in the mid-seventies. The realisation that inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon will come too late for policy makers to stop it.

  The situation is closely examined for America, its debt, and its dollar. But the problems do not stop there: the risks to the global system of fiat currencies and credit from rising interest rates and the debt traps that will be sprung are acute everywhere.

  

  Introduction

  Clearly, the outlook is for higher dollar interest rates. The Fed is trying to persuade markets that it is a temporary phenomenon requiring only modest action and that while inflation, by which the authorities mean rising prices, is unexpectedly high, when things return to normal it will be back down to a little over two per cent. There’s no need to panic, and this view is widely supported by the entire investment industry.

  Unfortunately, this narrative is based on wishful thinking rather than reality. The reality is that over the last two years the dollar has been dramatically debased as part of an ongoing process, as the chart in Figure 1 unmistakably shows.

  

  Since February 2020, M2 has increased from $15,470 to $21,437 last November, that’s 38.6% in just twenty months, an average annualised inflation rate of 23.2% for nearly two years on the trot. And that follows unremitting expansion at an accelerated pace since the 2008 Lehman crisis, an inflationary increase of 175% since August 2008 to November 2021. If the CPI is the relevant measure, then its current indicated rate of price inflation at 6.8% is only the beginning of upward pressure on prices.

  For now, markets are ignoring this reality, hoping the Fed is still in control and can be believed. But we can be sure that it will soon become apparent that the monetary authorities have a major problem on their hands which will no longer be satisfied by jaw-jaw alone. Interest rates will then be destined for significantly higher levels, not because there is demand for capital against a background of limited savings supply, but because anyone holding dollars will require compensation for retaining them. A similar error is to think that with economic growth slowing from its initial recovery and with concerns that the world may be entering a recession, demand and supply will return to a balance and prices will stop rising.

  These errors aside, the 10-year US Treasury, which is currently yielding 1.7% cannot continue for long at these levels with CPI prices rising at 6.8% and more. And in the next few months, with higher producer prices, energy, and raw material costs in the pipeline the pressure for a substantial upwards rerating of bond yields (which is a catastrophic fall in prices) is only going to increase.

  International investment flows

  This article is less concerned with the implications for financial asset values than with how such a shock will affect the currency and confidence in monetary policy. The dollar is over-owned by foreign interests, which with cash deposits and investments now exceed $33 trillion, 145% of estimated current US GDP and not too far from the Bank of International Settlements’ estimate of US non-financial core debt. Of this foreign ownership, nearly $27 trillion is in long-term securities, with private sector ownership of equities by foreign investors standing at $12.5 trillion within that figure.

  It should be appreciated that nearly all foreign ownership of US equities is with profits in mind only: foreigners may be required by their regulators to hold domestic equities, but there is no such requirement covering foreign equities. Consequently, an increase in interest rates of a magnitude suggested by the dollar’s debasement can be expected to trigger an avalanche of foreign selling of all classes of financial assets. Whether they sell the dollar as well will depend partly on how high interest rates are permitted to rise, and partly on alternative currency, precious metal, and commodity options.

  Countering foreign investment in USD financial assets, US residents’ investment in foreign currency assets is far less, with only $651.4bn of foreign currency deposits and short-term investments, one tenth of foreign entitlements to dollar bank deposits and ownership of Treasury and commercial bills. But ownership by US investors in long-term foreign securities stands at $15.7 trillion, less than half the foreign position in US securities, of which $12 trillion is in equities. A bear market in US stocks will therefore lead liquidation of foreign stocks as well, ensuring an equity bear market in the US will become truly global. But the net effect on the dollar is likely to be negative.

  Another aspect for foreign holders of dollar assets to consider is the ongoing supply of dollars and dollar credit. So far, the prospect of further dollar debasement relative to other currencies has not been reflected on the foreign exchanges because the other major currencies face similar outcomes. This may be changing. The euro and Japanese yen have weakened significantly recently with the ECB’s and Bank of Japan’s deposit rates trapped below the zero bound.

  The inability of governments and monetary authorities to escape from currency debasement is what will ultimately matter, setting the scene for purchasing power, interest rates and systemic instability. For now, prospects for the money supply of the world’s reserve currency are central to these issues.

  Does M2 truly represent the dollar’s money supply?

  In February 2021 the Fed changed the components in M1 and M2 and began to report them monthly instead of weekly. Put simply, savings deposits at the banks were added to M1, which accounted for a large jump in the M1 total. Adjustments to prior figures were only backdated to May 2020 onwards, rendering it useless for comparisons with data prior to that date.

  The composition of M2 was left unchanged.

  There are two additional factors, which arguably should be included in M2. The first is IRA and Keogh accounts at the banks. Presumably, they are excluded on the basis that they are not readily available for consumer spending, and if they are withdrawn from one bank, they must be deposited in another. But this ignores the fact that they are part of the deposit money which banks deploy for their dealings in credit, and that the total of these deposits varies. They should therefore be included in any bank deposit-based definition of the money supply. The effect of including these balances is to increase M2 today by $974bn (November 2021).

  The second factor is the treatment of repurchase agreements (repos and reverse repos or RRPs), which are tools for liquidity management both between commercial banks and between the banks and the Fed. We are not concerned with inter-bank repos, because they do not affect the overall amount of currency and credit in circulation. But when the Fed is one counterparty, the situation is different.

  Readers may recall the liquidity crisis in September 2019, when the Fed stepped in and provided finance by providing repos to commercial banks. When the Fed acts in a repo transaction, it buys high quality assets (usually US Treasury bills, Treasury bonds or agency debt) with an agreement to sell them back on pre-agreed terms, which will give the Fed a profit, currently set at an annualised rate of 0.05%. The selling bank then has use of the cash proceeds over the duration of the repo, until the transaction is completed by the bank repurchasing the collateral from the Fed on the pre-agreed terms, thereby returning the cash. Because these transactions are short-term, usually providing overnight liquidity, there is little point in including them in money supply statistics.

  A reverse repo is the other side of a repo transaction. If a commercial bank has too much liquidity on its balance sheet it can use a reverse repo to provide it to another bank in need of liquidity on profitable terms. But if the Fed is the counterparty to a bank or eligible institution in a reverse repo then liquidity is being taken out of general circulation reducing money supply on a short-term basis. Therefore, an increase in the Fed’s reverse repo book reduces the M2 money supply figure below what would otherwise be reported.

  For the Fed, repos and reverse repos are overnight liquidity management tools to allow the Fed to keep its funds rate within the limits set by the Open Markets Committee. Repos are deployed to put a cap on interest rates and reverse repos a floor.

  But commercial banks are unlikely to make use of the reverse repo facility. The only way a bank will be encouraged to enter a reverse repo transaction with the Fed is as a dealer in credit. The return on an RRP must exceed alternative uses of the liquidity available to a bank on the liability side of its balance sheet. Banks will not undertake a reverse repo with the Fed because the rate is fixed at 0.05%, which is less than the interest paid on bank reserves at 0.15%.

  But on 31 December last week, the Fed’s total reverse repo operations stood at $1.905 trillion (it has since declined by $400bn because in the last few trading sessions the yield on 13-week T-bills has risen to 0.085%, giving a higher yield than that offered by the Fed’s reverse repo facility). Nonetheless, outstanding overnight reverse repos are still a very large item. If commercial banks are disinterested because they earn more on their reserves, then who are the Fed’s counterparties? The answer is money funds.

  Money funds faced two problems. With interest rates fixed by the Fed at the zero bound, there is a heightened risk that they will “break the buck”, in other words they would no longer be able to guarantee to return their investors’ capital. The second problem is that commercial banks are no longer interested in acting as counterparties in wholesale money markets absorbing money funds’ liquidity. The issue is Basel 3’s net stable funding ratio rules introduced on 1 July. The NSFR is intended to ensure that banks have stable funding for their activities, and a bank exposed to large depositors, who might withdraw their deposits at little or no notice, for the purpose of the NSFR rules do not constitute a stable source of funding. Consequently, banks are no longer interested in taking in deposits from the money funds permitted to deposit money with them through wholesale money markets.

  Therefore, all money funds are driven towards the New York Fed’s Open Market Trading Desk to earn a paltry 0.05% on their funds when the yield on 13-week T-bills declines towards the zero bound. This facility was specifically opened to them in March 2020 when the Fed reduced its funds rate to 0—0.25%. Ahead of the NSFR’s introduction to US bank regulations last June, the Desk’s reverse repo facility stood at just a few billion from which it exploded to nearly $2 trillion last week, coincided with the NSFR’s introduction. And for money funds restricted to dealing in T-bills and the Fed’s reverse repos, the T-bill rates also dropped. The consequences for the Fed’s reverse repo facilities is illustrated in Figure 2.

  

  Now that the Fed’s reverse repo counterparties have been identified, we return to the question posed above: how does this unprecedented increase in outstanding overnight reverse repos affect our understanding of the quantity of currency and credit in the system?

  There is little doubt that in the absence of the Fed’s intervention that money funds’ cash placed with commercial banks would be recorded as part of the deposit-based money supply, and that on a change in the interest rate situation, it is likely to flood back into circulation. Money funds invested in short-term Treasury instruments, which is most of them, are reflected in bank deposits when it is spent out of the government’s general account.

  Therefore, like the IRA and Keogh balances, the Fed’s reverse repos distort M2 and should be added to broad money M2 to give a truer picture of the quantity of currency and credit in circulation, despite the timing differences involved. M2 and M2 adjusted for these items are shown in Figure 3 below.

  

  M2 so adjusted has increased from $8.3 trillion the month Lehman failed, to almost $25 trillion today, an increase of 200%. The gap between official M2 and our adjusted figures has also increased significantly. In the introduction to this article, it was pointed out that since February 2020 the average annualised rate of official M2 inflation was 23.2% for twenty months. The adjusted annualised rate for M2 modified increases to 27.7% for the same period. Crucially, the recent slowdown in M2 growth properly adjusted has not happened.

  The funding precedent from the 1970s

  With currency and credit increasing at this rate, it is only a matter of time before the US Government will find its funding costs rising materially. Not only will that change the outlook for its spending plans, but there is a risk of periods of funding disruption. Relying on its proven auction process may no longer be wise.

  It is well worth revisiting the 1970s precedent to today’s financial conditions. It was the last time there was an inflation-linked funding crisis. But it wasn’t the US Government that suffered, because it ran relatively small budget deficits relative to the economy at that time — the largest being an unprecedented $74 million in 1976 (compared with $3,131,917 million in 2020, over 42,000 times the 1976 deficit!).

  It was the UK that had problems, but on a far smaller relative scale. Periodically, the Bank of England, acting for the UK Treasury, was unable to fund its budget deficit, which peaked at 6.9% of GDP in 1975/76, forcing the then Chancellor (Denis Healey) to borrow $3, 900 million from the IMF to cover the entire deficit. Following this episode, IMF restrictions on government spending capped the UK budget deficit at approximately 5% in the years following, and the rate of price inflation, which had peaked at 25% in 1975, declined to 8.4% in 1978. Furthermore, in late-1973 there had been a combined commercial property and banking crisis on a scale never seen in the UK before. And in the bear market in equities between May 1972 and the end of 1974 the FT 30 Share Index lost over 70%.

  More than anything else at the time, this episode discredited Keynesianism. For comparison, the US deficit to GDP ratio in 2020 was 11.6% in 2020 and 10.3% in 2021, nearly double that of the UK at the height of its crisis, but so far for two consecutive years. With similarly socialist policies which led to a sterling crisis forty-five years ago, the dangers facing the dollar, which are potentially far greater, are yet to materialise. And the IMF cannot come to the rescue of the US, as it did for the UK in 1976, and Greece in 2010-12.

  Crucially, the Bank of England lacked the tools to hide the true extent of monetary inflation. Repos and reverse repos didn’t exist in the UK until the early 1990s. Intentionally or not, to a degree central banks can massage the numbers today with the financial press being none the wiser. But that changes nothing, other than fooling markets for just a little longer.

  Back in seventies’ Britain, the initial cause of a series of funding crises was that the Bank of England, under pressure from politicians, did not accept the market’s demands for higher interest rates. This sent a negative message to foreign holders of sterling, weakening the exchange rate, triggering foreign selling of gilts, and raising fears of further imported price inflation.

  Meanwhile, government spending continued apace (as described above), pushing extra currency into circulation without it being absorbed by debt issuance funded by genuine savings. And as sterling weakened and money supply figures deteriorated at an increased pace, yet higher interest rates would be required to persuade investing institutions to subscribe for new gilt issues.

  The longer the delay in accepting reality, the greater the chasm became between market expectations and the authorities’ position. Only then would the politicians and the Keynesians at the UK’s Treasury throw in the towel. The Bank of England then had the authority to fund at its discretion. It deployed what became known in the gilt market as the Grand Old Duke of York strategy, after the nursery rhyme: “He had ten thousand men. He marched them up to the top of the hill, then marched them down again.” The Bank of England would raise interest rates high enough to take all expectations of higher rates out of the market, then issue gilt stocks to absorb pent-up investment liquidity before allowing and encouraging rates to fall again. That was how 15% Treasury 1985, 15 ¼% Treasury 1996 the 15 ½% Treasury 1998 gilts came to be issued on separate occasions.

  At the top of the interest rate hill and following the announcement of the terms of the new gilt, sterling would rise, the crisis passed, and the money supply figures corrected themselves. Paul Volcker at the Fed did something similar at the Fed in June 1981 when he raised the Fed funds rate to 19.1% — except the objective was less about funding and more about killing expectations of price inflation.

  Though they are being ignored, there are worrying similarities with the Fed’s position today. The budget deficit has been and remains far higher than the one that forced the UK to call in the IMF, as much as 11.6% of GDP and over 42,000 times the US deficit in 1976. With a US economy bound to be impacted by rising interest rates, the outlook is not recovery as forecast by the Congressional Budget Office, but for further deterioration, requiring continual inflationary funding.

  The Fed is reluctant to acknowledge the argument for significantly higher interest rates, and risks losing control over them. It is in this context that reverse repos have come to the Fed’s partial rescue by suppressing statistically the true rate of growth in currency and credit. That will unwind in the coming months.

  A further lesson from the 1970s was that they commenced with Keynesianism in vogue, which became gradually discredited, notably in the wake of the UK’s 1976 crisis. Monetarists, such as Milton Friedman, gained credibility, and with it a growing recognition that “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”. Today, neo-Keynesianism appears as entrenched in monetary policy committees than they were in the early seventies. We can be reasonably sure that as prices, interest rates, and currency and credit quantities continue to rise, that Keynesianism will be discredited again, and a new realisation based on monetarist principals will gain ground.

  When investors in US Treasuries begin to drift away from failed Keynesian arguments and understand the Fed’s dilemma is in a monetary context there can be little doubt that US Treasury auctions will begin to experience failures. How the Fed responds will be crucial: will it be reluctant to raise interest rates sufficiently? Almost certainly the answer is in the affirmative, because of the economic damage to highly indebted businesses and government finances.

  And no one yet is contemplating Treasury coupons at anything like the 15% seen in UK gilts in the far milder inflationary conditions of the 1970s. The rate of US M2 growth recently is the highest by far since records began, even greater than at any time in the two World Wars and compares with a maximum of rate of 13.8% in February 1976, half of that today.

  The dangers from rising interest rates

  We now turn to the consequences of rising interest rates on the money supply, and the impact on government funding. There seems little doubt that as rates move above the zero bound, so long as T-bill rates remain above the Fed funds rate minimum target that money funds will no longer use the Fed’s reverse repo facility. Indeed, earlier this week a jump in the yield of the thirteen-week T-bill to 0.085% has already coincided with a reduction of $400bn in overnight reverse repos.

  From the money funds’ viewpoint, the risk of “breaking the buck” disappears as the Fed funds rate moves above the zero bound, and a purchase of short-term T-bills becomes an increasingly profitable alternative. These money funds are likely to increase their buying of T-bills, which will be credited to the government’s general account at the Fed. The funds gained in the general account will be subsequently drawn down and spent by the Federal Government, when they will then be reflected as bank deposits adding to M2 money supply.

  With this ready source of short-term funding, there is a danger that the government will rely increasingly upon it, making government finances more immediately exposed to rising interest rates. And with the growth of reverse repos having initially slowed down the growth of M2, its subsequent release into deposits as the government spends it out of the general account risks accelerating its growth subsequently at a time when Keynesian policies are being discredited in favour of monetarism.

  The Fed only agreed to deal with money fund counterparties as a temporary measure in March 2020 to ensure that large deposits from them did not face negative deposit rates from banks while the Fed funds rate was at the zero bound. But when rates move up, the money fund problem disappears, and the facility may be withdrawn.

  But with interest rates rising, the Fed will have a far greater problem dealing with the economic fallout. We can all agree that rising interest rates increases the burden on all borrowers exposed to market rates, while those who have locked in low fixed rates merely have the problem only deferred over the length of their loans.

  Rising interest rates and national debts

  According to the Bank for International Settlements total non-financial core debt for the US stood at $35.2 trillion at the end of 2021 Q2 (other estimates appear to be higher). The trend since 2000 is illustrated in Figure 4.

  

  Non-financial debt expanded to record levels between 2000 and the financial crisis of 2008-09, much of it in lieu of stagnating wage increases outpaced by rising prices. The repayment of total non-financial debt, the expansion of which had led up to the Lehman failure, was then deferred by expansive monetary policies, and subsequently rose sharply in 2020-21 driven by soaring government deficits. The economic cost of rising interest rates to non-financial actors is indicated by its sheer scale.

  Mounting non-financial debt is a global problem, with the US at 286% compared with its GDP, the Eurozone at 284%, the UK at 290%, Japan at 416.5%, Switzerland at 308%, and China at 285% (BIS figures for 2021 Q2). The springing of debt traps by rising interest rates of more than a few per cent is bound to destabilise the entire global economy. As well as the Fed, the other central banks will be acutely aware of their own situation and we can be sure that G7 finance ministers and central bankers will try to coordinate interest rate policies, by which we mean doubling down on their suppression. The recent situation for highly indebted national governments is shown in Table 1.

  

  Advanced economies have had debt to GDP ratios of over 100% for at least ten years, a hangover from the financial crisis in 2008-09. The debt position of some of them has since deteriorated alarmingly.

  In a joint paper, economists Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff concluded in 2010 that “…public debt levels of debt/GDP that push the 90 per cent threshold are associated with lower median and average growth”. In other words, all the countries in Table 1 will find it difficult, if not impossible to grow their way out of these peacetime debt levels.

  Highly indebted national governments, such as Belgium, Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Japan will struggle to survive a rise in global interest rates without being in the front line of a funding and systemic crisis. And the Eurozone nations in Table 1 will almost certainly destabilise member states with less direct exposure to debt traps.

  Only recently, President Macron of France and Prime Minister of Mario Draghi of Italy wrote a joint article calling for “The EU’s fiscal rules to be reformed”. For “reform”, read increase borrowing levels. In other words, having achieved government debt to GDP ratios of 128% and 174% respectively, they now want to increase these debt levels even further.

  The race into a European debt crisis is bad enough. But Japan is particularly alarming, with government debt obligations further extended in a policy of suppressing risk premiums on corporate loans and subsidising a wide range of consumer goods with the result that over 50% of the consumer price index is government controlled. With interest rates trapped beneath the zero bound, a rise in global rates is set to deliver a currency crisis for the yen.

  Japan’s banking system is also highly leveraged, with debt to GDP levels for all their large systemically important banks of over twenty times. China has a far lower level of government debt to GDP. But its heavily indebted non-financial private sector has an estimated $27 trillion equivalent and cracks in the system are already becoming evident with the Evergrande crisis.

  Summary and conclusion

  It seems extraordinary that the link between changes in the quantities of currency and credit, epitomised by deposit-based monetary statistics, is being totally disregarded by governments, monetary authorities, and the entire investment establishment. But that is certainly the case today. And no one seems to expect much more than an increase of a few percentage points in global interest rates.

  We should not be surprised, therefore, that rising prices measured by the CPI have caught the whole establishment unawares. Nor should we be surprised that the current situation continues to be analysed through a neo-Keynesian lens, when we know it has led us to the current crisis. The crisis is now of debt traps not just for the US Government, but in all the other major jurisdictions.

  The Keynesian belief that government economic and monetary management is superior to free markets is set to be discredited by market reality, which can only be suppressed so far. It has led to savers being forced to accept deeply and further deepening negative yields on their bond investments. So far, they have been prepared to have their pockets picked by this means, but that cannot last. When it becomes clear that inflation of prices is only a marker for currency debasement, and that this debasement can only continue, these deeply negative rates will no longer be available to subsidise profligate government spending.

  The scale of an interest rate and bond market crisis for everyone’s reserve currency appears to be severely underestimated. The sudden emergence of runaway price inflation has led to tentative comparisons being made between the current situation and the 1970s. But so far, there is little evidence that these comparisons are being taken seriously enough.

  If they were, analysts would have to conclude that events in common with the 1970s which led to high nominal bond yields and coupons in UK gilts exceeding 15%, are potentially far more destabilising today than they were then. That being so, the world is on the edge of a substantial bear market in financial assets driven by global bond prices normalising from the current deeply negative real rates to levels that truly reflect deteriorating government finances. All financial asset values will be undermined by this adjustment.

  It is increasingly difficult to see a way out of these difficulties, and the Keynesian hope that economic growth will deal with the debt problem is simply naïve. In 2010, respected economists (Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff) concluded that at a government debt to GDP rate of over 90% it becomes exceedingly difficult for a nation to grow its way out of its debt burden. With advanced economies averaging a ratio of 125%, Japan and Greece at over 200%, and some Eurozone nations at over 150%, there are debt traps almost everywhere ready to be sprung.

  In highly indebted fiat currency economies, there can only be one outcome: once one falls into a crisis, the others will follow with accelerating currency debasements leading to the destruction of faith in their currencies as well. And with a government core debt ratio to GDP of 125%, the US with its dollars is up there with the others to be destabilised, being over-owned by foreigners, and transmitting risk to all currencies that regard the dollar as its principal reserve currency.

  It can only be concluded that as we enter a new year the adjustment to market reality is likely to be more violent than anything seen in the 1970s.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 19:20

• Surging Opioid Overdose Deaths Are Forcing Democrats To Rethink The "War On Drugs"
  Surging Opioid Overdose Deaths Are Forcing Democrats To Rethink The “War On Drugs”

  The first batch of data from the CDC won’t be available for months, but many expect that the US likely saw a new record in overdose deaths during 2021, after setting a record in 2020 and 2019, with most of the deaths attributed to synthetic opioids like fentanyl that have infected the drug supply throughout the US.

  Even drugs like cocaine have been laced with deadly fentanyl, a practice that leads to far more accidental deaths. Almost 2/3rds of the 100K overdose deaths from 2020 involved synthetic opioids, which can be 50x more potent than morphine, if not more.

  

  The surging deaths have alarmed policy makers, who had hoped that cracking down on Big Pharma would help reverse the worst affects of the pandemic. But it seems like it’s already too late; a large market of users who started with Vicoden and oxycodone are still alive, fueling the demand for fentanyl-laced street dope. Meanwhile, the surge in demand for fentanyl has caused street heroin to largely disappear from the US east of the Mississippi.

  The fear is that the pandemic caused many addicts in recovery to relapse, raising the risk of overdosing on far more powerful street drugs. Health experts believe many of those who died probably didn’t even know they were consuming fentanyl.

  Finally, some state officials in Pennsylvania and other hard-hit starts are finally giving up on treating this like a criminal justice issue, and are starting to treat it like a public health issue. Instead of criminalizing it, they’re accepting that it happens, and hoping to minimize it.

  With Democrats in power, the five-decade-old “war on drugs” might be totally transformed. And one of the most contentious issues is the adoption of supervised injection sites like they have in Kensington.

  Conservatives and community activists have long opposed these facilities because of the type of people they attract.

  

  Source: FT

  But NYC opened its first supervised injection sites in April. And Philadelphia’s Kensington neighborhood, long a haven for drug dealers and drug users, jokingly called the “Wal-Mart of Heroin” because of the open air drug markets that dominate the neighborhood and have for decades.

  The Biden administration faces a critical crossroads: the Dems can either embrace the progressive policies and risk taking their political lumps, or they can resist their spread and do nothing.

  Dr Rahul Gupta, director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, says he wants to evaluate the science and data behind supervised injection sites, suggesting a change in policy is being considered. “We want to learn and we want to make sure that every possible door we can open up to help people and connect them to treatment is available to us,” he told CNN in December. “If you’re looking to save lives and you’ve reached a historic unprecedented level of deaths, then you cannot avoid looking at any and every option in order to save those lives,” he added.

  

  Source: FT

  Overdose deaths hit a record 1,214 in Philadelphia in 2020, a 6% increase on 2019. Fentanyl was involved in 81% of them. The problem with fentanyl is that it’s so physically addicting, it’s a moneymaker for the cartels, who have begun lacing other drugs with it, including cocaine, “Molly” and fake pills pressed to look like Xanax.

  Speaking to staff at Prevention Point, the only safe injection site in Kensington, the executive director told the FT that nobody has ever died at a safe injection site. But the site’s staff have played a role in saving the lives of many addicts who overdose nearby.

  Jeanmarie Perrone, professor of emergency medicine at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital, said “it’s like drowning”…”Fentanyl depresses the respiratory effort and people stop breathing. They go a few minutes without oxygen, the heart rate slows and they have a cardiac arrest.”

  One parent in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, described to the reporter how two of his children have spent their adult lives chasing drugs until one overdosed. The other is still alive, but continues to struggle.

  “If I mapped out his life, from the time he was 15 till the day he died, all he was doing was going in and out of rehab…and Molly was just kind of following his same path,” says Randy, a 70-year-old Baton Rouge construction worker, who asked not to use his real name. “I think a lot of places are money hungry, they get them in and out. You felt like they were supposed to be helping them but kicking them out ain’t helping them.”

  One policy change that could make users more safe would be to allow drug testing strips and narcan. Believe it or not, these items are still banned by dozens of  states because they are considered drug paraphernalia.

  President Biden has so far remained silent on whether he supports more harm control measures. Many are curious, since he authored some tough-on-crime legislation during his stretch in the Senate.

  Perhaps the fact that two of his children turned out to have drug issues has changed his mind?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 19:00

• Supplies Still Limited More Than A Year After Monoclonal Antibodies Authorized For Treating COVID-19
  Supplies Still Limited More Than A Year After Monoclonal Antibodies Authorized For Treating COVID-19

  Authored by Meiling Lee via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Despite being the only authorized outpatient medical therapy for preventing the worsening of COVID-19 symptoms in high-risk patients, there remains no steady supply of monoclonal antibodies from the federal government a year after its approval for use by medical regulators.

  

  Rolled out in the same month as the COVID-19 vaccines, monoclonal antibody therapies have not gotten the attention that vaccine treatments have after they were billed as the thing to get America out of the pandemic.

  Even today, President Joe Biden continues to mostly focus on vaccinating children, providing boosters to every adult, and increase testing as part of his “new actions” to combat the COVID-19 pandemic during the winter.

  Dr. Marc Siegel, a practicing internist and a professor of medicine at NYU’s Langone Medical Center, says vaccines alone cannot bring America out of the pandemic. More breakthrough cases are occurring with the Delta and Omicron variants, and hospitalizations are rising this winter.

  More than 206 million Americans are fully vaccinated and 72 million people have received a booster dose as of Jan. 5. Individuals are considered fully vaccinated if they received two doses of the messenger RNA vaccines or a single shot of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

  Siegel said that the Biden administration has not been able to deliver any therapeutics for early treatment of people with mild or moderate COVID-19 because of the administration’s “obsessive focus on the vaccines to the exclusion of all else.”

  “When it comes to therapeutics, the Biden team’s results are even more anemic,” Siegel wrote in an op-ed in USA Today. “Paxlovid, Pfizer’s new protease inhibitor wonder drug, has been approved but is scarce.”

  “Ditto monoclonal antibodies, the synthetic neutralizing antibodies that have been so helpful in patients at high risk of complications or hospitalizations. Omicron is most susceptible to sotrovimab, made by GlaxoSmithKline, but in most states, it is almost impossible to find,” he added.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to the Biden administration for comment.

  The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has delivered over 197,000 courses of the monoclonal antibody treatments to state and territorial health departments, and to federal entities for the week of Jan. 3. This comes after the agency briefly paused distribution of the treatments on Dec. 23.

  Lack of Public Messaging

  

  The monoclonal antibody therapies have been shown to be effective in preventing severe disease or hospitalization in high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. They are different from the convalescent plasma from a recovered COVID-19 patient, in that monoclonal antibodies are “created [in a lab] to specifically target an essential part of the infectious process,” according to physicians from the University of Michigan Health System.

  As of Dec. 16, 2021, the National Institutes of Health does not recommend convalescent plasma for treating hospitalized patients without impaired humoral immunity.

  The first monoclonal antibody treatments were issued emergency use authorization (EUA) in November 2020, but there seemed to be little interest in utilizing the therapy when the focus was on the campaign to vaccinate every person aged 16 and older by federal and state governments.

  The lack of messaging around monoclonal antibody treatments from federal authorities resulted in people being unaware of the short timeframe to receive these effective therapies (within 10 days of experiencing the first symptoms) and some hospitals refusing to use them. This led to low demand for the monoclonal antibodies at a time when it should have been utilized to help alleviate strain on hospitals, as the United States was reporting over 100,000 people hospitalized for or with COVID-19 by the end of December 2020.

  

  Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist, cardiologist, and epidemiologist, said in an interview with EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program that he was “shocked with the lack of fanfare on the monoclonal antibodies, there was almost no uptake.”

  He added, “We heard reports that over 80 percent of the supply was sitting on the shelves. Nursing homes weren’t informed, urgent cares weren’t supplied, hospitals weren’t in supply. There wasn’t any messaging.”

  The Epoch Times reached out to the CDC for comment about the lack of messaging around the COVID-19 therapeutics and was told to contact the FDA, who did not reply by press time.

  Due to the low uptake, the HHS allowed authorized health care providers to order the therapies directly from the supplier from February 2021 to Sept. 13, 2021. But the emergence of the Delta variant and waning vaccine effectiveness saw increased demand for the therapies, leading the HHS to announce it would revert back to taking control of distribution.

  The number of monoclonal antibodies allocated to each state and territory would be based on the case numbers, hospitalizations, and utilizations, a distribution system that is still being used today.

  In the Sept. 13 announcement, the HHS claimed that the Delta variant caused a surge in monoclonal antibody therapy uses, “particularly in areas of the country with low vaccination rates,” without further clarification.

  Looking at the statistics from the HHS itself and comparing the vaccination rate and monoclonal antibodies distributed to the 12 most populated states did not always show a correlation between a low vaccination rate with more uptake of the therapies.

  

  The emergence of the Omicron variant further added to the confusion on whether certain antibody therapies should continue to be used and if they would still be effective clinically, particularly when the HHS halted the allocation of the therapies two days before Christmas.

  HHS issued a notice on Dec. 23 that it would halt distribution of the REGEN-COV and Eli Lilly antibody therapies, based on in-vitro or “test-tube” studies—which have yet to be independently peer-reviewed—which found the antibody treatments may not be as effective against the Omicron variant, leaving GlakoSmithKline’s sotrovimab as the only available treatment.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to both the drug manufacturers for comment. Eli Lily didn’t respond and Regeneron directed us to their Dec. 16 press release (pdf), which states, “While Regeneron’s currently authorized REGEN-COV antibodies have diminished potency against Omicron, they are active against Delta, which currently is the most prevalent variant in the U.S.”

  The company said it is awaiting approval for a clinical trial of its “next generation” monoclonal antibodies that would be active against the Omicron variant and all variants of concerns.

  Efficacy With Omicron?

  Florida’s State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Lapado says that the findings of one study conducted in a lab don’t necessarily conclude the same outcome in humans.

  “So the laboratory evidence was indicating the affinity of the antibodies, such as the Regeneron antibodies for the Omicron variant were diminished … but that’s not the same thing as concluding that the Regeneron monoclonal antibodies will not work in a patient with Omicron,” Lapado said at a press conference on Jan. 3.

  He added, “So, there’s a difference between laboratory data and clinical data. And they made the decision to withhold medication based on laboratory data, but we care about clinical outcomes. The decisions should be based, obviously, on clinical data, which is why they’ve reversed [the pause].”

  HHS then lifted the pause eight days later on Dec. 31, allowing all states and territories to continue ordering the treatments, citing that “the prevalence of COVID-19 variants remain dynamic.” The decision was also “in light of recent National Institutes of Health (NIH) clinical guidelines published on Dec. 30, 2021, and the significant variability in the prevalence of the Omicron Variant of Concern (VOC),” it added.

  The NIH is recommending a three-day course of intravenous remdesivir as a treatment option for nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who are at high risk of severe illness when Omicron is more than 80 percent prevalent in a region.

  The recommendation was based on the PINETREE trial, which found an 87 percent relative reduction in the risk of hospitalizations and deaths compared to the placebo group. However, there was not a significant difference in the safety profile of both groups as “adverse events occurred in 42.3 [percent] of the patients in the remdesivir group and in 46.3 [percent] of those in the placebo group.”

  Remdesivir is approved by the FDA for patients requiring hospitalization. Experts recommend physicians perform “close kidney monitoring when prescribing remdesivir” and be aware that the drug may cause kidney disorders. In addition, the NIH says that every patient should be given a liver function test and a prothrombin time test (to measure the length of time it takes blood to clot) prior to receiving remdesivir.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 18:40

• Top Iran Commander Vows To Strike "From Within US" To Avenge Soleimani Death
  Top Iran Commander Vows To Strike “From Within US” To Avenge Soleimani Death

  During a speech on the occasion of Friday prayers in the Iranian city of Mashhad which commemorated this week’s second anniversary of the US killing of IRGC General Qassem Soleimani, the top commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force (who was Soleimani’s replacement) vowed to take vengeance “from within the US”.

  Iranian state and other foreign regional media featured Brigadier General Esmaeil Qaani’s ultra-provocative words, translating them as follows: “We will prepare ground for the hard revenge against the US from within their homes, as we do not need to be present as supervisors everywhere.”

  

  He added that “wherever is necessary we take revenge against Americans by the help of people on their side and within their own homes without our presence,” Commander Qaani said.

  The fiery speech is being widely interpreted as a threat to strike directly at the American homeland via proxies or terror cells. It’s perhaps the most high-level direct threat of attack on US soil since the height of the Osama bin Laden days during the early years of the so-called ‘war on terror’. 

  Further, at a moment that US bases in both Iraq and northeast Syria are coming under increased drone and rocket attack, something particularly intense this week from what the Pentagon has dubbed “Iran-backed militias”, the Quds force chief told the Iranian crowds gathered for the speech that operations to “uproot” the Americans had already begun…

  “This revenge has begun. Americans will be uprooted from the region,” the IRGC Quds Force Commander said.

  🇮🇷🇺🇲 BREAKING| #Iran‘s Quds Force commander #Qaani says revenge for the assassination of #Soleimani will be done by someone in #Trump‘s own house:

  “Soon we will get payback from within their own homes, with people around them. America’s roots will be uprooted with Divine Power!” pic.twitter.com/fMfcBESTax

  — Terror Alarm (@terror_alarm) January 7, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  However, amid the series of direct threats aimed at Washington, he held out that the only possibility for the US to avoid suffering vengeance is to “deal with the criminals” on its own. He stressed that otherwise the “children of the Resistance Front” will strike.

  Early this week, on Jan.3rd – which marked two years since Soleimani’s death on Baghdad airport road – Tehran urged Washington to arrest Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo for the assassination. “If Trump and (former secretary of state Mike) Pompeo are not tried in a fair court for the criminal act of assassinating General Soleimani, Muslims will take our martyr’s revenge,” Iran’s President Ibrahim Raisi said in a televised speech Monday, according to Reuters. 

  

  Of course, no US leader in history has ever been put on trial for any alleged “war crimes” abroad, and Raisi without doubt knows this. But the demand came just after the Islamic Republic submitted a formal letter to the United Nations requesting that it hold both the US and Israel accountable for the 2020 killing.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 18:20

• The Lesson Of COVID: When People Are Anxious, Isolated, & Hopeless; They're Less Ready To Think Critically
  The Lesson Of COVID: When People Are Anxious, Isolated, & Hopeless; They’re Less Ready To Think Critically

  Authored by Jonathan Cook via MintPressNews.com,

  When I criticize meddling in Syria by Britain and America, or their backing of groups there that elsewhere are considered terrorists, it does not follow that I am, therefore, a cheerleader for the dictatorship of Bashar Assad or that I think that Syrians should be denied a better political system. Similarly, when I criticize Joe Biden or the Democratic party, it does not necessarily follow that I think Donald Trump would have made a better president.

  A major goal of critical thinking is to stand outside tribal debates, where people are heavily invested in particular outcomes, and examine the ways debates have been framed. This is important because one of the main ways power expresses itself in our societies is through the construction of official narratives – usually through the billionaire-owned media – and the control and shaping of public debate.

  You are being manipulated – propagandized – even before you engage with a topic if you look only at the substance of a debate and not at other issues: such as its timing, why the debate is taking place or why it has been allowed, what is not being mentioned or has been obscured, what is being emphasized, and what is being treated as dangerous or abhorrent.

  If you want to be treated like a grown-up, an active and informed participant in your society rather than a blank sheet on which powerful interests are writing their own self-serving narratives, you need to be doing as much critical thinking as possible – and especially on the most important topics of the day.

  Learning curve

  The opportunity to become more informed and insightful about how debates are being framed, rather than what they are ostensibly about, has never been greater. Over the past decade, social media, even if the window it offered is rapidly shrinking, has allowed large numbers of us to discover for the first time those writers who, through their deeper familiarity with a specific topic and their consequent greater resistance to propaganda, can help us think more critically about all kinds of issues – Russia, Venezuela, Iran, Israel-Palestine, the list is endless.

  This has been a steep learning curve for most of us. It has been especially useful in helping us to challenge narratives that vilify “official enemies” of the west or that veil corporate power – which has effectively usurped what was once the more visible and, therefore, accountable political power of western states. In the new, more critical climate, the role of the war industries – bequeathed to us by western colonialism – has become especially visible.

  But what has been most disheartening about the past two years of Covid is the rapid reversal of the gains made in critical thinking. Perhaps this should not entirely surprise us. When people are anxious for themselves or their loved ones, when they feel isolated and hopeless, when “normal” has broken down, they are likely to be less ready to think critically.

  The battering we have all felt during Covid mirrors the emotional, and psychological assault critical thinking can engender. Thinking critically increases anxiety by uncomfortably exposing us to the often artificial character of official reality. It can leave us feeling isolated and less hopeful, especially when friends and family expect us to be as deeply invested in the substance – the shadow play – of official, tribal debates as they are. And it undermines our sense of what “normal” is by revealing that it is often what is useful to power elites rather than what is beneficial to the public good.

  

  Emotional resilience

  There are reasons why people are drawn to critical thinking. Often because they have been exposed in detail to one particular issue that has opened their eyes to wider narrative manipulations on other issues. Because they have the tools and incentives – the education and access to information – to explore some issues more fully. And, perhaps most importantly, because they have the emotional and psychological resilience to cope with stripping away the veneer of official narratives to see the bleaker reality beneath and to grasp the fearsome obstacles to liberating ourselves from the corrupt elites that rule over us and are pushing us towards ecocidal oblivion.

  The anxieties produced by critical thinking, the sense of isolation, and the collapse of “normal” is in one sense chosen. They are self-inflicted. We choose to do critical thinking because we feel capable of coping with what it brings to light. But Covid is different. Our exposure to Covid, unlike critical thinking, has been entirely outside our control. And worse, it has deepened our emotional and psychological insecurities. To do critical thinking in a time of Covid – and most especially about Covid – is to add a big extra layer of anxiety, isolation, and hopelessness.

  Covid has highlighted the difficulties of being insecure and vulnerable, thereby underscoring why critical thinking, even in good times, is so difficult. When we are anxious and isolated, we want quick, reassuring solutions, and we want someone to blame. We want authority figures to trust and act in our name.

  Complex thinking

  It is not hard to understand why the magic bullet of vaccines – to the exclusion of all else – has been so fervently grasped during the pandemic. Exclusive reliance on vaccines has been a great way for our corrupt, incompetent governments to show they know what they are doing. The vaccines have been an ideal way for corrupt medical-industrial corporations – including the biggest offender, Pfizer – to launder their images and make us all feel indebted to them after so many earlier scandals like Oxycontin. And, of course, the vaccines have been a comfort blanket to us, the public, promising to bring ZeroCovid (false), to provide long-term immunity (false), and to end transmission (false).

  And as an added bonus, vaccines have allowed both our corrupt leaders to shift the blame away from themselves for their other failed public health policies and our corrupt “health” corporations to shift attention away from their profiteering by encouraging the vaccinated majority to scapegoat an unvaccinated minority. Divide and rule par excellence.

  To state all this is not to be against the vaccines or believe the virus should rip through the population, killing the vulnerable, any more than criticizing the US war crime of bombing Syria signifies enthusiastic support for Assad. It is only to recognize that political realities are complex, and our thinking needs to be complex too.

  To be clear, I haven’t ‘changed my view’. I’ve kept an open mind throughout. I scorn the media’s silencing of dissenting scientists, the general celebration of vaccine profiteering, the unscientific discounting of natural immunity, and the divisive use of mandates to scapegoat https://t.co/83L1UXR4ga

  — Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) January 3, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  ‘Herd immunity’

  These ruminations were prompted by a post on social media I made the other day referring to the decision of the Guardian – nearly two years into the pandemic – to publish criticisms by an “eminent” epidemiologist, Prof Mark Woolhouse, of the British government’s early lockdown policies. Until now, any questioning of the lockdowns has been one of the great unmentionables of the pandemic outside of right-wing circles.

  Let us note another prominent example: the use of the term “herd immunity,” which was until very recently exactly what public health officials aimed for as a means to end contagion. It signified the moment when enough people had acquired immunity, either through being infected or vaccinated, for community transmission to stop occurring. But because the goal during Covid is not communal immunity but universal vaccination, the term “herd immunity” has now been attributed to a sinister political agenda. It is presented as some kind of right-wing plot to let vulnerable people die.

  I’ve had run-ins with Off-Guardian of late, but they’re right to highlight the WHO mucking about with the established definition of ‘herd immunity’. This kind of thing does nothing but undermine trust in science and scientists https://t.co/SgEMqnptZu

  — Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) January 2, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  This is not accidental. It is an entirely manufactured, if widely accepted, narrative. Recovery from infection – something now true for many people – is no longer treated by political or medical authorities as conferring immunity. For example, in the UK, those who have recovered from Covid, even recently, are not exempted, as the vaccinated are, from self-isolation if they have been in close contact with someone infected with Covid. Also, of course, those recovered from Covid do not qualify for a vaccine passport. After all, it is not named an immunity passport. It is a vaccine passport.

  Emmanuel Macron, the French president, has at least been open about the “reasoning” behind this kind of discrimination. “In a democracy,” he says, apparently unironically, “the worst enemies are lies and stupidity. We are putting pressure on the unvaccinated by limiting, as much as possible, their access to activities in social life. … For the non-vaccinated, I really want to piss them off. And we will continue to do this, to the end. This is the strategy.”

  Notice that the lies and stupidity here emanate from Macron: he is not only irresponsibly stoking dangerous divisions within French society, he has also failed to understand that the key distinctions from a public health perspective are between those with immunity to Covid and those without it and those who are vulnerable to hospitalization and those who are not. These are the most meaningful markers of how to treat the pandemic. The obsession with vaccination only serves a divide and rule agenda and bolsters pandemic profiteering.

  Crushing hesitancy

  The paradox is that these narratives dominate even as the evidence mounts that the vaccines offer very short-term immunity and that, ultimately, as Omicron appears to be underscoring, many people are likely to gain longer-term immunity through Covid infection, even those who have been vaccinated. But the goal of public “debate” on this topic has not been transparency, logic, or informed consent. Instead, it has been the crushing of any possible “vaccine hesitancy.”

  Dr John Campbell is always worth listening to. The bottom lines of the latest omicron research are positive:
  a) It’s likely to be more like a cold
  b) It’ll spread so quickly there’s a good chance we’ll have herd immunity within months, at minimal suffering https://t.co/GIpGYbXZOX

  — Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) December 8, 2021

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  I have repeatedly tried to highlight the lack of critical thinking around the exclusive focus on vaccines rather than immune health, the decision to vaccinate children in the face of strong, if largely downplayed, opposition from experts, and the divisive issue of vaccine mandates. But I have had little to say directly about lockdowns, which have tended to look to me chiefly like desperate stop-gap measures to cover up the failings of our underfunded, cannibalized, and increasingly privatized health services (a more pressing concern). I am also inclined to believe that the balance of benefits from lockdowns, or whether they work, is difficult to weigh without some level of expertise. That is one reason why I have been arguing throughout the pandemic that experts need to be allowed more open, robust, and honest public debate.

  It is also why I offered a short comment on Prof Woolhouse’s criticisms, published in the Guardian this week, of national lockdown policies. This evoked a predictably harsh backlash from many followers. They saw it as further proof that the “Covid denialists have captured me,” and I am now little better than a pandemic conspiracy theorist.

  Framing the debate

  That is strange in itself. Prof Woolhouse is a mainstream, reportedly “eminent” epidemiologist. His eminence is such that it also apparently qualifies him to be quoted extensively and uncritically in the Guardian. The followers I antagonize every time I write about the pandemic appear to treat the Guardian as their Covid Bible, as do most liberals. And they regularly castigate me for referring to the kind of experts the Guardian refuses to cite. So how does my retweeting of a Guardian story that uncritically reports on anti-lockdown comments from a respectable, mainstream epidemiologist incur so much wrath – and seemingly directed only against me?

  The answer presumably lies in the short appended comment in my retweet, which requires that one disengage from the seemingly substantive debate – lockdowns, good or bad? That conversation is certainly interesting to me, especially if it is an honest one. But the contextual issues around that debate, the ones that require critical thinking, are even more important because they are the best way to evaluate whether an honest debate is actually being fostered.

  Prof Woolhouse on the lockdowns: ‘We did serious harm to our children and young adults who were robbed of their education, jobs and normal existence, as well as suffering damage to their future prospects, while they were left to inherit a record-breaking mountain of public debt’

  — Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) January 3, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  My comment, intentionally ambiguous, implicitly requires readers to examine wider issues about the Guardian article: the timing of its publication, why a debate about lockdowns has not previously been encouraged in the Guardian but apparently is now possible, how the debate is being framed by Woolhouse and the Guardian, and how we, the readers, may be being manipulated by that framing.

  Real, live conspiracy

  Interestingly, I was not alone in being struck by how strange the preferred framing was. A second epidemiologist, Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician at Harvard who serves on a scientific committee to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), saw problems with the article too. Unfortunately, however, Prof Kulldorff appears not to qualify as “eminent” enough for the Guardian to quote him uncritically. That is because he was one of three highly respected academics who brought ignominy down on their heads in October 2020 by authoring the Great Barrington Declaration.

  Like Woolhouse, the Declaration offered an alternative to blanket national lockdowns – the official response to rising hospitalizations – but did so when those lockdowns were being aggressively pursued, and no other options were being considered. The Guardian was among those that pilloried the Declaration and its authors, presenting it as an irresponsible right-wing policy and a recipe for Covid to tear through the population, laying waste to significant sections of the population.

  My purpose here is not to defend the Great Barrington Declaration. I don’t feel qualified enough to express a concrete, public view one way or another on its merits. And part of the reason for that hesitancy is that any meaningful conversation at the time among experts was ruthlessly suppressed. The costs of lockdowns were largely unmentionable in official circles and the “liberal” media. It was instantly stigmatized as the policy preference of the “deplorable” right.

  This was not accidental. We now know it was a real, live conspiracy. Leaked emails show that Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the president, and his minions used their reliable contacts in prominent liberal media to smear the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. “There needs to be a quick and devastating published takedown of its premises. I don’t see anything like that online yet – is it underway?” a senior official wrote to Fauci. The plan was character assassination, pure and simple—nothing to do with science. And “liberal” media happily and quickly took up that task.

  The Guardian, of course, went right along with those smears. This is why Prof Kulldorff has every right to treat with disdain both the Guardian’s decision to now publish Prof Woolhouse’s criticisms – so very belatedly – of lockdown policy and Prof Woolhouse’s public distancing of himself from the now-radioactive Great Barrington Declaration even though his published comments closely echo the policies proposed in the Declaration. As Prof Kulldorff observes:

  Hilarious logical somersault. In the Guardian, Mark Woolhouse argues that [the] UK should have used focused protection as defined in the Great Barrington Declaration, while criticizing the Great Barrington Declaration due to its mischaraterization by the Guardian.”

  Hilarious logical somersault. In @guardian, Mark Woolhouse argues that UK should have used focused protection as defined in the Great Barrington Declaration, while criticizing the Great Barrington Declaration due to its mischaraterization by @guardian. https://t.co/lJfKVbzgaC

  — Martin Kulldorff (@MartinKulldorff) January 3, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Reputational damage 

  If we put on our critical thinking hats for a moment, we can deduce a plausible reason for that mischaracterization.

  Like the rest of the “liberal” media, the Guardian has been fervently pro-lockdown and an avowed opponent of any meaningful discussion of the Great Barrington Declaration since its publication more than a year ago. Moreover, it has characterized any criticism of lockdowns as an extreme right-wing position. But the paper now wishes to open up a space for a more critical discussion of the merits of lockdown at a time when rampant but milder Omicron threatens to shut down not only the economy but distribution chains and health services.

  Demands for lockdowns are returning – premised on the earlier arguments for them – but the formerly obscured costs are much more difficult to ignore now. Even lockdown cheerleaders like the Guardian finally understand some of what was clear 15 months ago to experts like Prof Kulldorff and his fellow authors.

  What the Guardian appears to be doing is smuggling the Great Barrington Declaration’s arguments back into the mainstream but trying to do it in a way that won’t damage its credibility and look like an about-face. It is being entirely deceitful. And the vehicle for achieving this end is a fellow critic of lockdowns, Prof Woolhouse, who is not tainted goods like Prof Kulldorff, even though their views appear to overlap considerably. Criticism of lockdowns is being rehabilitated via Prof Woolhouse, even as Prof Kulldorff remains an outcast, a deplorable.

  In other words, this is not about any evolution in scientific thinking. It is about the Guardian avoiding reputational damage – and doing so at the cost of continuing to damage Prof Kulldorff’s reputation. Prof Kulldorff and his fellow authors were scapegoated when their expert advice was considered politically inconvenient, while Prof Woolhouse is being celebrated because similar expert advice is now convenient.

  This is how much of our public discourse operates. The good guys control the narrative so that they can ensure they continue to look good, while the bad guys are tarred and feathered, even if they are proven right. The only way to really make sense of what is going on is to disengage from this kind of political tribalism, examine contexts, avoid being so invested in outcomes, and work hard to gain more perspective on the anxiety and fear each of us feels.

  The corporate media is not our friend. Its coverage of the pandemic is not there to promote the public good. It is there to feed our anxieties, keep us coming back for more, and monetize that distress. The only cure for this sickness? A lot more critical thinking.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: Maidan In Almaty? Oh Yeah, But It's Complicated
  Escobar: Maidan In Almaty? Oh Yeah, But It’s Complicated

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Saker blog,

  Steppe on Fire: Kazakhstan’s Color Revolution

  So is that much fear and loathing all about gas? Not really.

  

  Kazakhstan was rocked into chaos virtually overnight, in principle, because of the doubling of prices for liquefied gas, which reached the (Russian) equivalent of 20 rubles per liter (compare it to an average of 30 rubles in Russia itself).

  That was the spark for nationwide protests spanning every latitude from top business hub Almaty to the Caspian Sea ports of Aktau and Atyrau and even the capital Nur-Sultan, formerly Astana.

  The central government was forced to roll back the gas price to the equivalent of 8 rubles a liter. Yet that only prompted the next stage of the protests, demanding lower food prices, an end of the vaccination campaign, a lower retirement age for mothers with many children and – last but not least – regime change, complete with its own slogan: Shal, ket! (“Down with the old man.”)

  The “old man” is none other than national leader Nursultan Nazarbayev, 81, who even as he stepped down from the presidency after 29 years in power, in 2019, for all practical purposes remains the Kazakh gray eminence as head of the Security Council and the arbiter of domestic and foreign policy.

  The prospect of yet another color revolution inevitably comes to mind: perhaps Turquoise-Yellow – reflecting the colors of the Kazakh national flag. Especially because right on cue, sharp observers found out that the usual suspects – the American embassy – was already “warning” about mass protests as early as in December 16, 2021.

  Maidan in Almaty? Oh yeah. But it’s complicated.

  Almaty in chaos

  For the outside world, it’s hard to understand why a major energy exporting power such as Kazakhstan needs to increase gas prices for its own population.

  The reason is – what else – unbridled neoliberalism and the proverbial free market shenanigans. Since 2019 liquefied gas is electronically traded in Kazakhstan. So keeping price caps – a decades-long custom – soon became impossible, as producers were constantly faced with selling their product below cost as consumption skyrocketed.

  Everybody in Kazakhstan was expecting a price hike, as much as everybody in Kazakhstan uses liquefied gas, especially in their converted cars. And everybody in Kazakhstan has a car, as I was told, ruefully, during my last visit to Almaty, in late 2019, when I was trying in vain to find a taxi to head downtown.

  It’s quite telling that the protests started in the city of Zhanaozen, smack into the oil/gas hub of Mangystau. And it’s also telling that Unrest Central immediately turned to car-addicted Almaty, the nation’s real business hub, and not the isolated, government infrastructure-heavy capital in the middle of the steppes.

  At first President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev seemed to have been caught in a deer facing the headlights situation. He promised the return of price caps, installed a state of emergency/curfew both in Almaty and Mangystau (then nationwide) while accepting the current government’s resignation en masse and appointing a faceless Deputy Prime Minister, Alikhan Smailov, as interim PM until the formation of a new cabinet.

  Yet that could not possibly contain the unrest. In lightning fast succession, we had the storming of the Almaty Akimat (mayor’s office); protesters shooting at the Army; a Nazarbayev monument demolished in Taldykorgan; his former residence in Almaty taken over; Kazakhtelecom disconnecting the whole country from the internet; several members of the National Guard – armored vehicles included – joining the protesters in Aktau; ATMs gone dead.

  And then Almaty, plunged into complete chaos, was virtually seized by the protesters, including its international airport, which on Wednesday morning was under extra security, and in the evening had become occupied territory.

  Kazakh airspace, meanwhile, had to contend with an extended traffic jam of private jets leaving to Moscow and Western Europe. Even though the Kremlin noted that Nur-Sultan had not asked for any Russian help, a “special delegation” was soon flying out of Moscow. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov cautiously stressed, “we are convinced that our Kazakh friends can independently solve their internal problems”, adding, “it is important that no one interferes from the outside.”

  Geostrategy talks

  How could it all derail so fast?

  Up to now, the succession game in Kazakhstan had been seen mostly as a hit across Northern Eurasia. Local honchos, oligarchs and the comprador elites all kept their fiefdoms and sources of income. And yet, off the record, I was told in Nur-Sultan in late 2019 there would be serious problems ahead when some regional clans would come to collect – as in confronting “the old man” Nazarbayev and the system he put in place.

  Tokayev did issue the proverbial call “not to succumb to internal and external provocations” – which makes sense – yet also assured that the government “will not fall”. Well, it was already falling, even after an emergency meeting trying to address the tangled web of socioeconomic problems with a promise that all “legitimate demands” by the protesters will be met.

  This did not play out as a classic regime change scenario – at least initially. The configuration was of a fluid, amorphous state of chaos, as the – fragile – Kazakh institutions of power were simply incapable of comprehending the wider social malaise. A competent political opposition is non-existent: there’s no political exchange. Civil society has no channels to express itself.

  So yes: there’s a riot goin’ on – to quote American rhythm’n blues. And everyone is a loser. What is still not exactly clear is which conflicting clans are flaming the protests – and what is their agenda in case they’d have a shot at power. After all, no “spontaneous” protests can pop up simultaneously all over this vast nation virtually overnight.

  Kazakhstan was the last republic to leave the collapsing USSR over three decades ago, in December 1991. Under Nazarbayev, it immediately engaged in a self-described “multi-vector” foreign policy. Up to now, Nur-Sultan was skillfully positioning itself as a prime diplomatic mediator – from discussions on the Iranian nuclear program as early as 2013 to the war in/on Syria from 2016. The target: to solidify itself as the quintessential bridge between Europe and Asia.

  The Chinese-driven New Silk Roads, or BRI, were officially launched by Xi Jinping at Nazarbayev University in September 2013. That happened to swiftly dovetail with the Kazakh concept of Eurasian economic integration, crafted after Nazarbayev’s own government spending project, Nurly Zhol (“Bright Path”), designed to turbo-charge the economy after the 2008-9 financial crisis.

  In September 2015, in Beijing, Nazarbayev aligned Nurly Zhol with BRI, de facto propelling Kazakhstan to the heart of the new Eurasian integration order. Geostrategically, the largest landlocked nation on the planet became the prime interplay territory of the Chinese and Russian visions, BRI and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

  A diversionary tactic

  For Russia, Kazakhstan is even more strategic than for China. Nur-Sultan signed the CSTO treaty in 2003. It’s a key member of the EAEU. Both nations have massive military-technical ties and conduct strategic space cooperation in Baikonur. Russian has the status of an official language, spoken by 51% of the republic’s citizens.

  At least 3.5 million Russians live in Kazakhstan. It’s still early to speculate about a possible “revolution” tinged with national liberation colors were the old system to eventually collapse. And even if that happened, Moscow will never lose all of its considerable political influence.

  So the immediate problem is to assure Kazakhstan’s stability. The protests must be dispersed. There will be plenty of economic concessions. Permanent destabilizing chaos simply cannot be tolerated – and Moscow knows it by heart. Another – rolling – Maidan is out of the question.

  The Belarus equation has shown how a strong hand can operate miracles. Still, the CSTO agreements do not cover assistance in case of internal political crises – and Tokayev did not seem to be inclined to make such a request.

  Until he did. He called for the CSTO to intervene to restore order. There will be a military enforced curfew. And Nur-Sultan may even confiscate the assets of US and UK companies which are allegedly sponsoring the protests.

  This is how Nikol Pashinyan, chairman of the CSTO Collective Security Council and Prime Minister of Armenia, framed it: Tokayev invoked a “threat to national security” and the “sovereignty” of Kazakhstan, “caused, inter alia, by outside interference.” So the CSTO “decided to send peacekeeping forces” to normalize the situation, “for a limited period of time”.

  The usual destabilizing suspects are well known. They may not have the reach, the political influence, and the necessary amount of Trojan horses to keep Kazakhstan on fire indefinitely.

  At least the Trojan horses themselves are being very explicit. They want an immediate release of all political prisoners; regime change; a provisional government of “reputable” citizens; and – what else – “withdrawal of all alliances with Russia.”

  And then it all gets down to the level of ridiculous farce, as the EU starts calling on Kazakh authorities to “respect the right to peaceful protests.” As in allowing total anarchy, robbery, looting, hundreds of vehicles destroyed, attacks with assault rifles, ATMs and even the Duty Free at Almaty airport completely plundered.

  This analysis (in Russian) covers some key points, mentioning, “the internet is full of pre-arranged propaganda posters and memos to the rebels” and the fact that “the authorities are not cleaning up the mess, as Lukashenko did in Belarus.”

  Slogans so far seem to originate from plenty of sources – extolling everything from a “western path” to Kazakhstan to polygamy and Sharia law: “There is no single goal yet, it has not been identified. The result will come later. It is usually the same. The elimination of sovereignty, external management and, finally, as a rule, the formation of an anti-Russian political party.”

  Putin, Lukashenko and Tokayev spent a long time over the phone, at the initiative of Lukashenko. The leaders of all CSTO members are in close contact. A master game plan – as in a massive “anti-terrorist operation” – has already been hatched. Gen. Gerasimov will personally supervise it.

  Now compare it to what I learned from two different, high-ranking intel sources.

  The first source was explicit: the whole Kazakh adventure is being sponsored by MI6 to create a new Maidan right before the Russia/US-NATO talks in Geneva and Brussels next week, to prevent any kind of agreement.

  Significantly, the “rebels” maintained their national coordination even after the internet was disconnected.

  The second source is more nuanced: the usual suspects are trying to force Russia to back down against the collective West by creating a major distraction in their Eastern front, as part of a rolling strategy of chaos all along Russia’s borders.

  That may be a clever diversionary tactic, but Russian military intel is watching. Closely. And for the sake of the usual suspects, this better may not be interpreted – ominously – as a war provocation.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/07/2022 – 02:00

• Expect A "Blue Wave Of Gun Control" In 2022
  Expect A “Blue Wave Of Gun Control” In 2022

  Submitted by The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN).,

  Governing By Executive Fiat. 

  It’s something that the Biden Administration knows quite well. Not even a week into the new year, Merrick Garland, Attorney General at the Department of Justice, announced a new “rule” for Federal Firearms Licensees, also known as FFLs. 

  

  The “Rule” is as follows: FFLs must have “safe storage” options for sale. The government is mandating that FFLs sell locks and safes. It also changes the definition of an antique firearm; you can read the change here. 

  While this might sound wholly bland and harmless, keep in mind that the DOJ can use the 1968 Gun Control Act to add new rules and regulations to gun ownership without passing any laws. This change means that unelected bureaucrats in executive branch positions can usurp federal power to make “law” as they see fit. 

  It is precisely this attitude that we’ve seen throughout 2021 from the Biden Administration, the Department of Justice, and the ATF. There’s no reason to expect that they would shift their plans for 2022. 

  Just because gun owners were able to make their voices heard and stop the disastrous nomination of David Chipman to head the ATF doesn’t mean that it’s all over. 2021 has been full of significant accomplishments; we’ve added more constitutional carry states and 2nd amendment sanctuaries. Support for gun control has hit its lowest point, and almost 8 million new gun owners have decided to exercise their constitutional rights. That being said, we’re headed into year number two of one of the most hostile administrations to gun rights in recent history. 

  We can make a few predictions about what the Biden admin may do (and to a lesser extent blue state governors as well) but let’s take a look at some recent actions first. 

  In 2020, the ATF raided a company called Diversified Machine. Diversified Machine sells Solvent Traps. The ATF now considers these devices to be Suppressors. Since they raided Diversified Machine, the ATF has a list of all of Diversified Machine’s customers. 

  A few days ago, the ATF sent customers of Diversified Machine letters saying that they were actually in possession of a suppressor and that those needed to be turned in immediately or those customers would face felony charges. 

  What separated Diversified Machine’s solvent traps from any other solvent trap on the market? Well, their solvent traps were dimpled on the end caps. 

  Prior to these letters, the ATF offered no guidance on what they did/did not consider to be a suppressor, or solvent trap, dimpled end caps or not. Solvent traps are popular with Form 1 Suppressor groups online, as they can be purchased, an ATF Form 1 can be filed, and then said solvent trap can be converted into a suppressor. 

  This behavior is par for the course with the ATF and should come as no surprise for long-time gun owners. In 2021 we saw them change rules on 80% kits, pistol braces, and the Rare Breed Forced-Reset-Trigger. 

  What’s interesting about this letter to Diversified Machine customers, though, is that the ATF states explicitly that the customer is in possession of a suppressor. Even though the words “readily convertible” are used in conjunction, we can only infer that the ATF is considering these solvent traps as sold to be actual suppressors, making the purchase of a solvent trap a violation of the 1968 GCA and the National Firearms Act, or NFA. 

  We should expect a forthcoming “rule” on solvent traps that will turn millions of Americans into felons overnight. What’s worse is the ATF hasn’t stopped at solvent traps; they’ve started investigating people who have bought fuel filters online. According to Ammoland, Federal Agents visited an unnamed Florida resident who had purchased fuel filters online. The Agents demanded that he hand over the filters, even though he did not own firearms. Another example of wackiness, a YouTuber named “Truck Master” was told to turn over the diesel truck filters he was using for his truck builds under suspicion that they were illegal suppressors.

  The question we have to ask is, how far is too far? The ATF has decided on a whim that fuel filters and solvent traps fit their definition of a suppressor, even though both items have legitimate uses beyond being firearm suppressors. 

  In 2022, we should expect the ATF and DOJ to march forward with the idea that anything that is “readily convertible” to be a firearm, is in fact, a firearm in the eyes of the Feds. It’s looking grim for 80% kits like Polymer80. How long until it’s an NFA/GCA violation if you have a block of metal and CNC knowledge. There’s not much separating those two things. 

  We should also expect a “Blue Wave” of gun control legislation and proposals on the state and federal level, with politicians and governors doubling down on unpopular gun policy. Considering how low Biden is currently polling and the 2022 midterms fastly approaching, gun control is an easy issue for the President to pull out and energize his base. Doubling down on gun control will also keep his major donors like Bloomberg and Soros from the anti-gun lobby happy. Blue state governors will, of course, follow suit. We saw Gavin Newsom of CA recently propose gun control as a way to spit in the face of gun owners and one-up the Texas abortion law at the same time. 

  Expect the Biden Admin to try and move forward with already proposed rules regarding pistol braces as well. Currently, the DOJ has asked for delays on the final rule’s implementation as they try to figure out a way to get around all the impending lawsuits from the pro-gun lobby. 

  I also expect Biden to nominate a Gun Czar, as an appeasement to the Gun Control lobby, after being such a disappointment that the mainstream media have run headlines like this.

  So, what can we do to stop this? Right now, because of the way that the ATF is using current law to add additional regulations, our best bet of stopping the ATF from continuing to be able to act in this manner is the bump stock case currently making its way to the supreme court. The case is Aposhian v. Garland, and it tackles why the ATF has been able to, on a whim, decide that items are illegal. That being a legal doctrine called the “Chevron Deference.” This is a legal test in which a court may not substitute its own interpretation for a reasonable interpretation made by an administrative agency. 

  The question isn’t if Aposhian v. Garland makes it to the supreme court; it’s when. A panel of 16 judges on the 6th circuit just had a tie vote (8-8) on the case, making it even more necessary for the Supreme Court to weigh in on this hotly debated issue. 

  We’ve seen a clear pathway that the anti-gun lobby is taking in our coverage of gun control issues. Using the NFA, 1968 GCA, FOPA, and other gun control laws on the books, they’ve managed to ban bump stocks and inch closer and closer to regulating semi-automatic firearms under the NFA or outright ban them. This Case, Aposhian v. Garland, would put a significant roadblock in front of the ATF by taking away their ability to regulate items without congressional approval.

  With hotly contested midterms and Presidential approval ratings plummeting, The Biden Administration will be looking for any scapegoat to rally their base back to vote. Gun control will likely be that issue, and gun owners should be ready to get out and once again make their voices heard.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 23:40

• Elon Musk's "Death Trap" Underground Vegas Tunnel Hit With Traffic Jam
  Elon Musk’s “Death Trap” Underground Vegas Tunnel Hit With Traffic Jam

  A video has gone viral on Reddit of the Las Vegas Loop, an underground express transportation tunnel designed and built by Elon Musk’s The Boring Company to help alleviate traffic congestion on convention streets, showing everything the tunnel promised not to do: cause traffic jams. 

  

  The Boring Company’s Las Vegas Convention Center (LVCC) Loop system is a 1.7-mile tunnel under the Las Vegas Strip that stretches from the convention center with three stations, the South, the West, and the Central. It allegedly slashes the above-ground 45-minute walk to a two-minute drive. 

  

  Musk founded The Boring Co. in 2017 with the hopes of solving traffic problems in major cities by creating underground tunnels for Tesla vehicles. However, this is the first instance where Musk’s grand tunnel idea has hit a snag, or rather a traffic jam. 

  The viral video titled “Lol. Elon Musk’s Boring company has traffic jams. I was told it was impossible” was posted on Reddit on Thursday morning. It already has 21k upvotes and 3k comments. 

  Redditors were not that enthusiastic about the tunnel. Many voiced concerns about the safety of the tunnel, with one person calling it a “death trap.” 

  Another said, “I’m surprised it’s even legal. No lighting, no ventilation, no fire detection or suppression, not enough space between the cars and the wall to walk out… They are asking for trouble. If somehow a car catches fire, people will die.” 

   “Not any fire. A fucking battery fire burning brightly, extremely hot and producing poisonous gas,” someone else said. 

  One Redditor said, “Imagine having to go in reverse because the person in front of you had their car catch on fire. But then you just run into more people going in reverse… If you exit your car you’re going to inhale poisonous toxins… But it’s getting hotter in your car by the second.” 

  So Musk, maybe back to the drawing boards. The big idea to solve traffic congestion with underground tunnels appears not to be working. Also, people think it’s a death trap. 

  If you frequent Vegas, there are efficient monorails on the surface that do just fine. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 23:20

• Victor Davis Hanson: Who Are The Real Insurrectionists?
  Victor Davis Hanson: Who Are The Real Insurrectionists?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  Recently, Democrats have been despondent over President Joe Biden’s sinking poll numbers. His policies on the economy, energy, foreign policy, the border, and COVID-19 all have lost majority support.

  As a result, the left now variously alleges that either in 2022, when they expect to lose the Congress, or in 2024, when they fear losing the presidency, Republicans will “destroy democracy” or stage a coup.

  

  A cynic might suggest that they praise democracy when they get elected, only to claim it is broken when they lose.

  Or they hope to avoid their defeat by trying to terrify the electorate. Or they mask their own revolutionary propensities by projecting them onto their opponents.

  After all, who is trying to federalize election laws in national elections contrary to the spirit of the Constitution? Who wishes to repeal or circumvent the Electoral College? Who wishes to destroy the more than 180-year-old Senate filibuster, the over 150-year-old nine-justice Supreme Court, and the more than 60-year-old, 50-state union?

  Who is attacking the founding constitutional idea of two senators per state?

  The Constitution also clearly states that “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Who slammed through the impeachment of former president Donald Trump without a presiding chief justice?

  Never had a president been either impeached twice or tried in the Senate as a private citizen. Who did both?

  The left further broke prior precedent by impeaching Trump without a special counsel’s report, formal hearings, witnesses, and cross-examinations.

  Who exactly is violating federal civil rights legislation?

  New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in December decided to ration potentially lifesaving new COVID-19 medicines, partially on the basis of race, in the name of “equity.”

  The agency also allegedly used racial preferences to determine who would be first tested for COVID-19. Yet such racial discrimination seems in direct violation of various title clauses of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

  That law makes it clear that no public agency can use race to deny “equal utilization of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of any State or subdivision thereof.” Who is behind the new racial discrimination?

  In summer 2020, many local- and state-mandated quarantines and bans on public assemblies were simply ignored with impunity — if demonstrators were associated with Black Lives Matter or protesting the police.

  Currently, the Biden administration is also flagrantly embracing the neo-Confederate idea of nullifying federal law.

  The administration has allowed nearly 2 million foreign nationals to enter the United States illegally across the southern border — in hopes they will soon be loyal constituents.

  The administration has not asked illegal entrants either to be tested for or vaccinated against COVID-19. Yet all U.S. citizens in the military and employed by the federal government are threatened with dismissal if they fail to become vaccinated.

  Such selective exemption of lawbreaking non-U.S. citizens, but not millions of U.S. citizens, seems in conflict with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

  After entering the United States illegally, millions of immigrants are protected by some 550 “sanctuary city” jurisdictions. These revolutionary areas all brazenly nullify immigration law by refusing to allow federal immigration authorities to deport illegal immigrant lawbreakers.

  At various times in our nation’s history — 1832, 1861-65, and 1961-63 — America was either racked by internal violence or fought a civil war over similar state nullification of federal laws.

  In the last five years, we have indeed seen many internal threats to democracy.

  • Hillary Clinton hired a foreign national to concoct a dossier of dirt against her presidential opponent. She disguised her own role by projecting her efforts to use Russian sources onto Trump. She used her contacts in government and media to seed the dossier to create a national hysteria about “Russian collusion.”

  • Clinton urged Biden not to accept the 2020 result if he lost, and herself claimed Trump was not a legitimately elected president.

  • The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has violated laws governing the chain of command.

  • Some retired officers violated Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by slandering their commander-in-chief.

  • Others publicly were on record calling for the military to intervene to remove an elected president.

  • Some of the nation’s top officials in the FBI and intelligence committee have misled or lied under oath either to federal investigators or the U.S. Congress, again, mostly with impunity.

  All these sustained revolutionary activities were justified as necessary to achieve the supposedly noble ends of removing Trump.

  The result is Third World-like jurisprudence in America aimed at rewarding friends and punishing enemies, masked by service to social justice.

  We are in a dangerous revolutionary cycle. But the threat is not so much from loud, buffoonish one-day rioters on Jan. 6. Such clownish characters did not for 120 days loot, burn, attack courthouses and police precincts, cause over 30 deaths, injure 2,000 policemen, and destroy at least $2 billion in property — all under the banner of revolutionary justice.

  Even more ominously, stone-cold sober elites are systematically waging an insidious revolution in the shadows that seeks to dismantle America’s institutions and the rule of law as we have known them.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 23:00

• Risk Parity ETF Suffers Biggest Drop Since Covid Crash
  Risk Parity ETF Suffers Biggest Drop Since Covid Crash

  Earlier today we joked that while many on Wall Street were lamenting their fate, it could be even worse: they could be running a risk-parity fund.

  It could be worse, you could be running a risk-parity fund

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 6, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  But for investors in one particular fund, however, this wasn’t a joke.

  While secretive risk-parity hedge funds such as Bridgewater will reveal their losses from the recent market turmoil in due time, there is one investment vehicle which invests in portfolios of stocks and bonds and which reveals in real time just how much pain its has suffered as a result of the concurrent plunge in equities and Treasuries in recent days.

  The $1.6 billion RPAR Risk Parity exchange-traded fund (ticker RPAR) – the biggest of its kind – has dropped 3.4% in the five trading days through Thursday, on course for the worst five-day streak since March 2020. Its systematic strategy, popularized by Bridgewater’s Ray Dalio, allocates across asset classes based on risk and tends to suffer outsize losses when markets fall together.

  

  According to Bloomberg, the cross-asset volatility is also bad timing for RPAR’s new sister fund launched this week, which seeks to amp up returns with extra leverage (yes, that’s leverage upon leverage). The RPAR Ultra Risk Parity ETF (UPAR) has fallen in each of its first three trading days, including a 1.5% slump on Wednesday — a drop that equals some of RPAR’s worst moves in the past year.

  Both funds traded lower on Thursday in New York as the S&P 500 fluctuated and Treasuries extended their retreat.

  While risk-parity indexes hit records in 2021 as reopening optimism fueled stocks and commodities while dovish central banks kept bond yields in check, runaway inflation and the Fed’s hiking intentions are disrupting the “everything rally” and making life for balanced portfolio investors mierable.

  Worse, since risk parity funds target a level of risk by allocating across assets based on their volatility and then levering up, that means that during times of market turbulence they can be forced to unwind positions exacerbating price moves. That’s what happened during March 2020 when Treasury yields first exploded then crashed.

  RPAR and its levered cousing, UPAR, are actively managed but seek to match the returns of an index across four major asset classes: global equities, commodities, Treasuries and Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities, or TIPS.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 22:40

• Shift To Quality Intensifies Thanks To Hawkish Fed
  Shift To Quality Intensifies Thanks To Hawkish Fed

  By Ishika Mookerjee, Bloomberg Markets Live commentator and analyst

  Demand for quality stocks is strengthening in Asia as the Federal Reserve dials up its hawkish commentary, making riskier firms look more vulnerable with borrowing costs expected to rise.

  The MSCI AC Asia ex-Japan Quality Index has climbed about 1% since the end of October as the Fed announced its plan to taper asset purchases, while the MSCI AC Asia ex Japan Index has slumped 4%. The gauge of stocks with a high return on equity, stable earnings growth and low leverage trounced the broader benchmark by about nine percentage points last year, a better relative performance than that seen in its global peer.

  

  “Asian quality stocks tend to outperform during global slowdown, inflationary regime in Asia and in the following 12 months post China slowdown,” Sanford C. Bernstein analysts Rupal Agarwal and Anusha Madireddy wrote in a note on Wednesday. There’s also support from positive earnings revisions and a historical discount to low-quality stocks, they added.

  Investors are dumping riskier companies, yet the outperformance of the quality gauge suggests they are still comfortable betting on the more mature tech companies in the region. The sector had the biggest weighting in the gauge as of November with software firms Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services as well as chip giant Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing among the largest constituents. Their shares are up 9%, 12% and 9% respectively since the end of October, despite pressure on the global tech sector

  While the jury’s still out on China’s internet behemoths, semiconductor stocks are expected to fare better in Asia amid an ongoing chip shortage. The 12-month forward earnings estimates for Samsung Electronics and TSMC have risen more than 20% in the past year and over 50% for SK Hynix. That’s while the MSCI Asia Pacific Communication Services Index — which includes Tencent — saw a drop of 13% in its earnings estimates.

  Given inflationary pressures, high-yielding quality stocks in Taiwan and China are preferred by Bernstein. “We are most bullish on staples, tech and energy while being most negative towards discretionary and industrials,” the analysts wrote.

  The median forecast in Bloomberg’s survey of analysts anticipates the FOMC will raise its policy rate twice this year and three times next.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 22:21

• Unvaxxed Aussies Told They Won't Be Allowed To Exercise Or Go To Work
  Unvaxxed Aussies Told They Won’t Be Allowed To Exercise Or Go To Work

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

  Unvaccinated Australians in the Northern Territory have been put under a new lockdown during which they won’t be allowed to go outside to exercise or travel to work.

  

  Yes, really.

  The onerous new measures were announced by NT Chief Minister Michael Gunner in response to the detection of 256 new cases of COVID-19, including 27 cases of community transmission.

  “The fully vaccinated can continue as they were. For people who are not vaccinated, lockdown rules will apply to everyone aged 16 and above,” Mr Gunner said.

  The unvaccinated will be banned from traveling further than 30km from their home unless they’re traveling to hospital.

  Gunner said that unjabbed Aussies in the region will be forbidden from taking an hour of outdoor exercise and won’t be allowed to travel to their job.

  “Unlike previous lockdown rules, unvaccinated people will not be able to leave home to go to work or for exercise,” he asserted.

  NT 🇦🇺 The Insanity Continues 💥 So it begins…Aus gets the UNWAXXED lockdown. UNWAXXED have ONLY 3 reasons to leave home, Essential Shopping, Medical Treatment or Care Giving…No WORK, no EXERCISE nothing…Welcome to Full Bore Covid1984 people, it’s time to Rise🔥👇👊 pic.twitter.com/ACTEcrwz4z

  — 𝙍𝙄𝙎𝙀𝙈𝙀𝙇𝘽𝙊𝙐𝙍𝙉𝙀 (@risemelbourne) January 6, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The rules are being introduced despite the fact that across the entire territory, only 23 people are in hospital with COVID-19 and just two are in the ICU.

  Fully vaccinated people will not be subject to any further restrictions, despite the fact that they can still spread the virus.

  Indeed, a new study out of Denmark found that the Omicron variant spreads faster within vaccinated people.

  According to a summary of the study, “Omicron spreads faster than Delta among those who are fully vaccinated, and even higher between those who have received booster shots.”

  Australia continues to pursue its disastrous ‘zero COVID’ policy at the expense of fundamental human rights.

  The Northern Territory region has set up a network of COVID internment camps, including one at Howard Springs centre near Darwin, where people aren’t allowed to leave.

  Last month, Australian police arrested three camp inmates who tried to escape in the middle of the night.

  *  *  *

  Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

  In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 22:20

• Russia May Sentence Pedophile Rapists To Life In Arctic Prison
  Russia May Sentence Pedophile Rapists To Life In Arctic Prison

  Repeat child sex offenders in Russia could be sent to hard labor penal colonies in the Arctic, where they would be forced to work in Siberian mines, according a plan floated by Parliamentary Speaker, Vyacheslav Volodin.

  

  The new legislation was presented after the horrific murder of a five-year-old girl, who was abducted by a serial pedophile and his lover, before being raped and stabbed to death.

  Veronika Nikolayeva had been playing near her mother’s workplace in Kostroma, and a video showed how she was snatched before being abused.

  The helpless girl ‘struggled and fought back’ but passersby did not pay attention to her distress – and the men took her to their hostel.

  Her corpse was later found in a duffle bag as the suspects, named Denis Gerasimov, 44, and Vadim Belyakov, 24, planned to dispose of her body.

  …

  As the girl’s body was removed from the suspects’ hostel, a mob of locals demanded to be allowed to lynch the suspects. The suspects are understood to have been in a long term relationship since the younger man was underage. The men told interrogators that the crime was ‘spontaneous’, it was reported. The younger one ‘suggested that his partner catch the girl and make fun of her’.

  The video shows one suspect carrying the kidnapped girl down snowy streets, while the other walks alongside. When police raided the room shared by the suspects in a hostel, they found the girl’s body hidden in a duffle bag, say law enforcement sources. –Daily Mail

  Volodin, a close ally of President Vladimir Putin, called the child’s abuse and death a “terrible tragedy,” which illustrated the need for tougher laws against pedophiles.

  “One of the detained men turned out to be a formerly convicted paedophile,” he said, adding “Let’s do everything for the law on life sentences for paedophiles to be adopted in January.”

  

  “Those convicted for such crimes should serve life sentences in the harshest conditions – in the extreme north (of Russia) or in mines,” he continued, adding: “These bastards should undergo the hardest labour, so they remember the crimes they committed every day – and regret them.”

  “They cannot be called human,” he said.

  The idea was supported by influential MP, Alexander Khinstein, who said “‘It is necessary to adopt our bill on life punishment for paedophile-rapists as soon as possible,” adding that all sex attackers released from prison should be forced to wear electronic tags.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 22:00

• Seattle Police Officers Falsified Reports About Proud Boys Moving Toward 'CHOP': Watchdog
  Seattle Police Officers Falsified Reports About Proud Boys Moving Toward ‘CHOP’: Watchdog

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours):

  Seattle police officers falsified a report of armed Proud Boys members heading toward the autonomous zone in the city in 2020, a watchdog found.

  

  The Seattle Police Department abandoned a precinct on June 8, 2020, and activists soon after established an armed protest zone in the area known by some as CHOP.

  That same day, officers over the radio said armed members of the Proud Boys, a right-wing group that has clashed with members of the far-left Antifa network, were heading towards the area where the autonomous zone cropped up.

  “We’re going to be the one taking my group down around city hall to monitor the group of the Proud Boys gathering right now,” one officer told a dispatcher.

  “Small group, possible Proud Boys. It looks like a few of them might be open carry,” another said.

  A third officer later said one of the group was carrying a gun and that the group “is very boisterous tonight.”

  “Hearing from the Proud Boys group. They are not very happy with the response in the audience. They may be looking for somewhere else for confrontation,” the first officer said.

  According to a journalist who was in the autonomous zone, the string of communications prompted many people to go grab firearms and the event transitioned from being peaceful to something entirely different. However, video footage from the scene showed at least some individuals already armed.

  Interviewed by the Seattle Office Police Accountability, the officer credited with coming up with the effort said officers put forth “misinformation” because they knew they would be overheard.

  “[There was] no intent to put any kind of false narrative out there, as far as like Proud Boys, or anything, that was not the guidance that I gave to those. I just wanted to see if that was something that would, that could actually work, but it was all more routine kind of movement, you know, we’re going to go here to there, let’s deliver food, let’s do that kind of stuff like that, just to kind of see what the reaction would be,” the officer, who was a captain at the time, told investigators (pdf).

  The officer, who has since retired, said he did not believe the transmissions prompted people in the autonomous zone to grab weapons, adding that officers had already been injured by armed people there.

  A second officer, who was already retired when interviewed, said the captain had asked him to “organize some folks that could broadcast anything that was mundane and kind of focus some attention on a location different than where the main police and protest interactions were happening.”

  He said including the Proud Boys was part of making the ruse “seem realistic.” But the first officer claimed using the group went against the guidance he gave to his colleague.

  Former Police Chief Carmen Best appeared to be unaware of the plot, investigators said. The assistant chief of patrol operations said he knew of the misinformation effort but did not know the Proud Boys were mentioned.

  “Given the volatility situation, I think everyone is trying to do the best they could try to resolve a very complex situation, very dynamic circumstances, again, there’s no attempt to instill fear or create alarm, I think, really, the goal was to try and without using force, move the crowd or get the crowd somehow distracted away from the precinct so potentially we could take the action to reoccupy the space,” the assistant chief said.

  The Seattle Office Police Accountability attributed responsibility for the ruse to the captain, who it said abused law enforcement discretion by not providing sufficient guidelines, not adequately supervising it, and did not document any part of the effort.

  The second officer also bore responsibility, the watchdog said. The officers who carried out the fake broadcast did, too, but the watchdog removed the allegations against them, blaming their supervisors for what happened.

  A Seattle police spokesman told The Epoch Times that the findings have not been reviewed by the chain of command or Police Chief Adrian Diaz. He declined further comment.

  The autonomous zone was eventually ordered disbanded after multiple shootings took place. The city was sued by several people over allowing the zone to remain in place.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 21:40

• Chicago Thieves 'Boast' Of Ease Of Store Break-Ins By Dumping Loot On Democrat Governor's Lawn
  Chicago Thieves ‘Boast’ Of Ease Of Store Break-Ins By Dumping Loot On Democrat Governor’s Lawn

  Chicago police have confirmed that a high-end Burberry store on the city’s central Michigan Ave. was robbed no less than two times this week, with the second break-in coming early Thursday morning. The first instance was Tuesday morning, with the burglaries being especially brazen given they took place in daylight hours, or just before dawn. The Tuesday incident involved five men in a White SUV, but apparently with no other leads or identifiers. So naturally they hit the same site again, plus others.

  But as CWB Chicago details of the second break-in, it appears the criminals are positively boasting about the ease of mass theft in a seemingly “lawless” windy city: “A group of armed burglars broke into two Lakeview convenience stores, dumped their stolen cash registers in front of Gov. JB Pritzker’s home, and then burglarized the Burberry store on Michigan Avenue early Thursday.”

  

  It appears to be the same criminal gang, and what’s more is that police indicated it all happened in under 45 minutes. They’re believed to have escaped with an estimated $100,000 in merchandise from the Burberry store, with other loot from the separate stores as yet unknown.

  According to further details for the spree, “Burglars broke into Apple Bite, a liquor store at 2919 North Broadway, around 4:10 a.m. and then burglarized Belmont Harbor Market, 401 West Belmont, around 4:35 a.m., according to separate police reports. They took cash, registers, liquor, and tobacco products.”

  It’s hard to imagine the purpose of taking the chance of casually going by the governor’s Chicago residence to dump presumably empty cash registers in front of the home, other than to “boast” and in effect rub the Democrat governor’s face in it.

  The bizarre antics come amid a spate of break-ins where thieves are breaching small Chicago stores with ease. Perhaps in a strange and hugely ironic way, the thieves themselves are seeking to demonstrate the fact directly to the governor.

  Is this the equivalent of putting a Horse Head in Pritzker’s bed?https://t.co/7bU8IKIxR6

  — Jim Bianco biancoresearch.eth (@biancoresearch) January 6, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “Late-night burglary sprees targeting small stores for liquor, cigarettes, and cash registers have been an ongoing problem across the North Side for several weeks, the Thursday CWB Chicago report highlights. 

  “Some stores, including Belmont Harbor Market, which was targeted this morning, have been hit twice” it underscored. And here’s the topper from ABC7 news: “No one is in custody for either incident.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 21:20

• The Vaccine Is A Dud, But That Won't Stop Push For Digital IDs
  The Vaccine Is A Dud, But That Won’t Stop Push For Digital IDs

  Authored by Jeffrey Barrett via American Thinker (emphasis ours),

  As time goes on, we are learning more and more about Covid 19 and the Covid 19 vaccines. To date, the most important and surprising information about the vaccines is that they do not prevent the vaccinated from contracting or transmitting the virus.  The irony is that the CDC, a government agency, readily admits this[i] but other sectors of the government are carrying on as if this vitally important new information did not exist at all. 

  

  Take for example Biden’s OSHA which, before it was temporarily halted by a Circuit Court ruling, ordered the unvaccinated but not the vaccinated employees of private companies to undergo inconvenient weekly Covid tests even though other parts of the government were admitting that the vaccinated transmit the virus as readily as the unvaccinated. The whole moral justification of forcing people to take the vaccine is to protect others even if the “hesitant” don’t want to risk taking the jab due to the escalating problem of vaccine-related deaths and serious injuries.[ii] But we now know that the vaccine is a dud.  While it can reduce symptoms of Covid, it cannot prevent the vaccinated from catching and transmitting Covid.  And yet the government is acting as if none of this matters and is continuing to push harsh mandates upon those who do not want to play vaccine roulette and take the risk of a vaccine injury.

  Again as time goes on, it is becoming increasingly evident that the reason why the  Biden administration is demonstrably not “following the science“[iii] is that the irrational and probably unconstitutional vaccine mandates are not about public health at all but more likely about the implementation of a universal digital identification program that governments are labeling “vaccine passports.”

  To understand why the government seems determined to tag every citizen of every age with a digital ID, it is first necessary to understand the attitudinal evolution of political elites in Western countries.  These elites appear to be losing their faith in the classical liberal emphasis on individual human freedom that was intellectually nurtured in the West by such thinkers as Kant, Voltaire, Locke, Bastiat, Mill, and Spencer and attained its clearest concrete political expression in the American Constitutional Republic.  The essence of this revolution in political thought and practice is that it gave common people protection against the potential abuse of power of their ruling elites.  Such protections included political theory that rooted individual rights in natural law and Divine Will as well as practical institutions such as the division of power between the states and central government, the further division of those powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary, the rule of law, courts of law, the Bill of Rights, privacy rights, property rights, elections and so forth. 

  Despite considerable differences, Western elites used to broadly agree on the moral necessity of protecting the people against the potential abuse of power of those who controlled a society’s instruments of coercion such as the police and military.  This appears to be no longer case.  Western elites from the political, commercial, and media worlds regularly meet in events and “training schools”[iv] sponsored by the World Economic Forum  (WEF) to discuss the need for a whole new kind of society where people own no personal property, have little or no personal privacy, are heavily dependent upon their governments for the goods and services they consume, the location of their homes and where and how often they can travel.  All this illiberalism is couched in terms of a new kind of “sustainable,” “inclusive,” “equitable” quasi-utopian society[v] not unlike the vaporous visions that Marx used to conjure up in his early writings.

  The reason for this abandonment of traditional Western ideals appears to be their belief that these ideals no longer work in the post-World War II era.  At the beginning of that era, Western elites were still largely committed to civil liberties but their commitment to economic liberty and constrained government was considerably less than that of earlier generations of leaders. Then increasingly post-World War II elites began to strive to seek and sustain their power by claiming they could proactively provide their voters with a level of economic wealth, economic security, and an overall social “safety” environment never before seen in human history.  The economic justification for these escalating promises was a form of neo- Keynesianism.  The economist John Maynard Keynes did not trust the markets to correct themselves during recurring business cycles and so advocated that government go into debt to “stimulate” stagnant economies out of recessions and then pay off that debt during the subsequent booms and budgetary surpluses brought about by the proactive economic managers.  Western politicians quickly forgot about the “paying off” part and gradually over the postwar decades increased the public debt to the stupendous levels we see today.  Western central banks also suppressed interest rates thereby incentivizing private companies and consumers to heap unprecedented private debt onto the unprecedented public debt. 

  Today the European and Japanese bond markets are in such shambles that only their central banks will purchase their government debt.  And as economists have been pointing out for years, governments cannot possibly pay for all the promises they have made to their voters for future benefits such as pensions, medical care, and other cradle-to-grave comforts.  The American federal government alone has, by some measures, a 200 Trillion gap between future expected revenues and future promised benefits.[vi]   Little wonder that today’s Western elites are giving up on traditional Western liberties because they know that once the hard times hit, the masses will use those liberties such as freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to protest, the courts, and elections as weapons to lash back at the “establishments” in power. 

  The establishments, of course, do not want to give up their wealth, status, and power, and so must find some way of depriving the masses of these dangerous liberties, exert more authority over them and turn them from free citizens into subjects.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 21:00

• Here's What The Fed's Quantitative Tightening Will Look Like
  Here’s What The Fed’s Quantitative Tightening Will Look Like

  As we noted last night, the December FOMC meeting minutes included a lengthy discussion of the timing and speed of Fed balance sheet shrinkage (quantitative tightening or “QT”), an unexpected twist which sent risk assets and Treasurys tumbling. The broad message appears to be that QT will start sooner than it did in the previous tightening cycle, and proceed at a faster pace although as the Fed’s Bullard (who is a voting member this year) observed, the runoff could be passive, i.e., not involve actual selling but merely be the result of maturing securities held by the Fed.

  In any case, in a note from BofA economist Aditya Bhave, he argues that the Fed’s balance sheet policy will remain accommodative for the next several quarters for several reasons:

  • The Fed has more than doubled its balance sheet during the pandemic.
  • Therefore it will have to reinvest a larger quantity of maturing Treasuries even while it is shrinking its balance sheet.
  • BofA expects QT to start in 4Q 2022, but the stance of Fed balance sheet policy will remain more accommodative than it was before the pandemic through end-2023.

  With regard to point two, a frustrated Steve Liesman pointed out yesterday that what the Fed is doing is a “historic absurdity” and noted that “the fed is talking about aggressively reducing its balance sheet while at the same time adding assets to that balance sheet. I think that’s the monetary policy equivalent of a dog chasing its tail.”

  I can’t let the historic absurdity of current monetary policy pass w/out remark: the fed is talking about aggressively reducing its balance sheet while at the same time adding assets to that balance sheet. I think that’s the monetary policy equivalent of a dog chasing its tail.

  — Steve Liesman (@steveliesman) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Fed’s (now constant) absurdity aside, what markets want to know is what the Fed’s QT will look like, and for the answer we again turn to BofA, whose strategists think the Fed will allow $10BN of maturing coupon-paying Treasuries to run off its balance sheet in the first month of QT (which they expect will start in October 2022). This “redemption cap” – shown in yellow on the chart below – should rise to $40bn by January 2023 and then remain at that level. They also assume a $30bn redemption cap for Agency MBS.

  In total, this would allow the Fed’s balance sheet to shrink by $1.2tn through end-2024. They think the balance sheet could be cut further in future years, all the way down to $4.7tn, i.e. about 15% larger than its pre-pandemic level (spoiler alert: there is no way the market will allow this type of balance sheet shrinkage without a historic tantrum first).

  Here BofA takes a quick detour to note that there is considerable debate about the exact mechanism through which balance sheet policy affects markets, with three pathways generally viewed as important. Some investors think it is the size of the Fed’s balance sheet that matters. In that case Fed balance sheet policy is clearly easier than it was pre-Covid. Others – such as this website – think that flow matters, i.e., the change in the balance sheet, or said otherwise, the size of asset purchases net of maturities, is the key variable. Then balance sheet shrinkage – QT – would certainly imply a tighter policy stance than the flat balance sheet policy of early 2020.

  A third view is that gross asset purchases are what matter. This is the view that BofA sympathizes with. In the “gross” world, the Fed replaces maturing assets via “add-ons” in Treasury auctions, or as Liesman put it, the Fed is adding to its balance sheet at the same time as it is shrinking it all the while it’s chasing its tail. For example, if the Fed plans to re-invest $10bn in an auction, the Treasury would reduce the size of its auction by this amount and then allocate $10bn worth of securities to the Fed at the market-clearing price. Markets price in this mechanism: the larger the add-on, the less is the supply that markets have to absorb, and the higher would be the market-clearing price.

  Theory aside, let’s look at some numbers: since the Fed’s balance sheet has more than doubled during the pandemic, keeping it steady would require significantly more reinvestment than would have been the case before the pandemic. Specifically, to keep its balance sheet steady as a result if upcoming maturities, the Fed would have to purchase (i.e., reinvest) nearly $400bn worth of coupon-paying Treasuries in 2Q and 3Q 2022, of which 59% were bought during the pandemic. This, according to BofA and it is correct here, would buffer the impact of rate hikes. Recall that most banks are now forecasting three to four hikes this year, as the Fed responds to sticky high inflation.

  What about QT?

  The chart below compares BofA’s QT forecast to the maturity schedule of coupon-paying Treasuries on the Fed’s balance sheet. The light blue bars represent Treasuries that were purchased in pandemic-era QE and the dark blue bars show those that were on the balance sheet pre-Covid. Quantities below the QT redemption cap (the yellow line) would run off the balance sheet while those above the cap would be reinvested (i.e., re-purchased)

  

  Notice that in all but three months through end-2023, the redemption cap is less than the amount of maturing coupon-paying Treasuries that were purchased during the pandemic. Therefore in 2022 and 2023, reinvestments will generally exceed the amount of maturing assets that the Fed owned before Covid.

  In other words, the likely path of reinvestment under QT would have amounted to QE relative to the pre-pandemic Fed balance sheet.

  The bottom line is despite impending QT, the stance of the Fed’s balance sheet policy for the next couple of years should be more accommodative that it was pre-pandemic (as it continues to buy tens of billions in Treasuries just to keep its balance sheet from shrinking too fast), and as a final note, the above analysis excludes the additional liquidity support of roughly $1.5 trillion currently parked in the Reverse Repo facility which will slowly be drained in the coming quarters to make the impact of QT easier.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 20:40

• Greenwald: The Histrionics & Melodrama Around 1/6 Are Laughable, But They Serve Several Key Purposes
  Greenwald: The Histrionics & Melodrama Around 1/6 Are Laughable, But They Serve Several Key Purposes

  Authored by Glenn Greenwald,

  As Kamala Harris compares 1/6 to 9/11 and Nancy Pelosi introduces the cast of Hamilton to sing about democracy, today’s inanity should not obscure its dangers…

  

  The number of people killed by pro-Trump supporters at the January 6 Capitol riot is equal to the number of pro-Trump supporters who brandished guns or knives inside the Capitol. That is the same number as the total of Americans who — after a full year of a Democrat-led DOJ conducting what is heralded as “the most expansive federal law enforcement investigation in US history” — have been charged with inciting insurrection, sedition, treason or conspiracy to overthrow the government as a result of that riot one year ago. Coincidentally, it is the same number as Americans who ended up being criminally charged by the Mueller probe of conspiring with Russia over the 2016 election, and the number of wounds — grave or light — which AOC, who finally emerged at night to assure an on-edge nation that she was “okay” while waiting in an office building away from the riot at the rotunda, sustained on that solemn day.

  That number is zero. But just as these rather crucial facts do not prevent the dominant wing of the U.S. corporate media and Democratic Party leaders from continuing to insist that Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory was illegitimate due to his collusion with the Kremlin, it also does not prevent January 6 from being widely described in those same circles as an Insurrection, an attempted coup, an event as traumatizing as Pearl Harbor (2,403 dead) or the 9/11 attack (2,977 dead), and as the gravest attack on American democracy since the mid-19th Century Civil War (750,000 dead). The Huffington Post’s White House reporter S.V. Date said that it was wrong to compare 1/6 to 9/11, because the former — the three-hour riot at the Capitol — was “1,000 percent worse.”

  Indeed, when it comes to melodrama, histrionics, and exploitation of fear levels from the 1/6 riot, there has never been any apparent limit. And today — the one-year anniversary of that three-hour riot — there is no apparent end in sight. Too many political and media elites are far too vested in this maximalist narrative for them to relinquish it voluntarily.

  The orgy of psychodrama today was so much worse and more pathetic than I expected — and I expected it to be extremely bad and pathetic. “House Democrats [waited] their turn on the House floor to talk to Dick Cheney as a beacon for American democracy,” reported CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere. Nancy Pelosi gravely introduced Lin-Manuel Miranda and the cast of Hamilton to sermonize and sing about the importance of American democracy. The Huffington Post‘s senior politics reporter Igor Bobic unironically expressed gratitude for “the four legged emotional support professionals roaming the Capitol this week, helping officers, staffers, and reporters alike.” Yesterday, CNN’s Kaise Hunt announced: “Tomorrow is going to be a tough one for those of us who were there or had loved ones in the building. Thinking of all of you and finding strength knowing I’m not alone in this.” Unsurprisingly but still repellently: Kamala Harris today compared 1/6 to 9/11.

  That the January 6 riot was some sort of serious attempted insurrection or “coup” was laughable from the start, and has become even more preposterous with the passage of time and the emergence of more facts. The United States is the most armed, militarized and powerful regime in the history of humanity. The idea that a thousand or so Trump supporters, largely composed of Gen X and Boomers, who had been locked in their homes during a pandemic — three of whom were so physically infirm that they dropped dead from the stress — posed anything approaching a serious threat to “overthrow” the federal government of the United States of America is such a self-evidently ludicrous assertion that any healthy political culture would instantly expel someone suggesting it with a straight face.

  Putting the events of January 6 into their proper perspective is not to dismiss the fact that it was a lamentable event — any more than opposing the exploitation of 9/11 and exaggeration of the domestic threat of Muslim extremism, which I spent a full decade doing, meant that one was denying the heinousness of that attack. The day after the 1/6 riot, I wrote in this space that “the introduction of physical force into political protest is always lamentable, usually dangerous, and, except in the rarest of circumstances that are plainly inapplicable here, unjustifiable.” I still believe that to be the case. There was nothing virtuous about the 1/6 riot.

  But it is typically the case that fear-mongering and deliberate exaggeration of threats has an element of truth to them. Al Qaeda and ISIS really did want to carry out mass-casualty events on U.S. soil. COVID is a fatal virus that can kill people and has done so around the world. There are right-wing extremists in the U.S. bent on using violence to advance their political agenda, just as there are left-wing extremists and anarchist insurrectionary movements and many other types eager to do the same (more destruction was caused by the latter than the former over the last two years, to say nothing of the dozens of journalists physically assaulted by individuals participating in Antifa protests).

  Far too many centers of political and economic power benefit from an exaggerated and even false narrative about January 6 to expect it ever to end.

  The Democratic Party, eager to cling to their majoritarian control of the White House and both houses of Congress, knows it has no political program that is appealing and thus hopes that this concocted drama will help them win — just as they foolishly believed about Russiagate. With the threat of Al Qaeda and ISIS faded if not gone, and the attempt to scare Americans over Putin a failure, the U.S. security state, always in need of a scary enemy, has settled on the claim that right-wing “domestic extremists” are the greatest threat to U.S national security; though they claimed this before 1/6, casting 1/6 as an insurrection allows them to classify an entire domestic political movement as an insurrectionary criminal group and thus justify greater spying powers and budgetary authorities.

  CNN proudly announced that the most-watched day in the history of their network was 1/6. The dirty little secret of the liberal wing of the corporate media is that nobody benefited more from the Trump campaign, his presidency and its aftermath than they, and they are desperate to rejuvenate it and re-discover that glory. Meanwhile, coddled journalists who have never broken meaningful stories have finally found a way to claim that they stared down dangerous and risky situations — as if they spent years in the middle of an active war zone or were persecuted and prosecuted by a corrupt and authoritarian state for their intrepid reporting — and have converted Brian Stelter’s CNN show into a virtual therapists’s couch where they all get to go and talk about how they are still coping with the deep trauma of spending a few hours in the Capitol last year.

  

  The pettiness and absurdity of this Democrat/media narrative, laughable as it often is, does not mean it is free of danger. Asserting that the U.S. suffered an attempted coup by a still-vibrant armed faction of insurrectionists is a self-evidently inflammatory claim. It has been used to allocate billions more to the Capitol Police and to radically expand their powers; justify the increased domestic use of FBI tactics including monitoring and infiltration; and agitate for the mass imprisonment of political adversaries, including elected members of Congress. Hapless defendants who are not even accused of using violence have been held in harsh solitary confinement for close to a year, then sentenced to years in prison — while self-styled criminal justice reform advocates say nothing or, even worse, cheer. If one genuinely believes that the U.S. came close to a violent overthrow of American democracy and still faces the risk of an insurrection, then it is rational to sanction radical acts by the U.S. security state that, in more peaceful and normal times, would be unthinkable.

  Where is this “insurrection”? What happened to it? Where did it go? The January 6 protest barely lasted four hours until it was easily subdued. Copying the Bush/Cheney model of keeping fear levels high by constantly issuing vague warnings of looming violence and doom, the Department of Homeland Security issued at least six separate “heightened threat” warnings last year, not a single one of which materialized. There were no violent protests in Washington, D.C. or in state capitols on Inauguration Day; no violent protests materialized the week after Biden’s inauguration; no violent protest erupted once COVID lockdowns were eased due to social media provocations; none happened on the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attack; there was no right-wing violence perpetrated in connection with the commemoration of the 100th year anniversary of the Tulsa massacre. Each time such a warning was issued, cable outlets and liberal newspapers breathlessly reported them, ensuring fear levels remained high.

  What is really going on here is as tawdry as it is obvious. Democrats have no governing program on which they can run and win. The complete collapse of the party was temporarily obscured by the once-in-a-generation talent in Barack Obama and the very narrow win in 2020 of a banal, empty septuagenarian, thanks to the incumbent-killing double crisis of a devastating pandemic and economic shutdown. But the edifice of this party collapsed under Obama — “the Whole Democratic Party is Now a Smoking Pile of Rubble,” warned supreme Democratic partisan Matt Yglesias at Vox in 2016 — and it is collapsing once again under Biden. Its only ideologies — neoliberalism, corporatism, militarism — are widely despised failures, but they are imprisoned by their donor base from offering anything else.

  A party that does not believe it can win politically often tries to criminalize its adversaries. That is what Democrats did during the Trump years: focused not on defeating his legislative agenda but obsessing on the fantasy that FBI Superman Robert Mueller was going to come and round up Trump and his family members and associates and haul them off to prison. The Democrats’ beloved former CIA Director, NBC News star John Brennan, all but promised that was going to happen two weeks before Robert Mueller closed his investigation by announcing he found no evidence to establish the core crime of conspiring with Russia.

  When that four-year-long prison fantasy collapsed, they quickly switched to a new one: Merrick Garland was going to come and round up Trump and his allies in Congress like Josh Hawley and Matt Gaetz and haul them off to prison as traitors and seditionists. After a full year of producing nothing but banal trespassing and assault charges — no sexy allegations of insurrection or sedition let alone the arrest of Trump and his relatives — Democrats, who spent four years pretending to revere an apolitical DOJ, are now intensifying their political pressure on Garland to deliver. In a press conference on Wednesday, the beleaguered Attorney General addressed those political attacks directly and urged Democrats to have patience, implying that people not present at the Capitol on 1/6 could and would be criminally charged. Fantasies of Trump in handcuffs once again danced in the heads of Adam Schiff, Laurence Tribe, and Eric Swalwell.

  As demonstrated by the glee universally expressed by Democrats over Twitter’s banning this week of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (D-GA), it is not an exaggeration to say the top priority for Democrats is to turn their opponents into criminals who are silenced, censored, rounded up by prosecutors and then imprisoned. That is why they are so content to see Julian Assange (an actually persecuted and traumatized journalist) rotting in prison: to them, his real crime is that he helped elect Donald Trump and, for that, he deserves prison. That is why this Insurrection narrative surrounding 1/6 is so vital to Democrats: it ensures that they are not facing a different ideological camp but rather a band of criminals and domestic terrorists who deserve not a defeat at the ballot box but censorship by a union of state and corporate power, followed by a prison cell.

  Democrats’ media allies — the axis of the The New York Times, NBC News, CNN, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, and the undifferentiated and rapidly disappearing mass of Brooklyn-based digital outlets (HuffPostGizmodoBuzzFeedDailyBeastIntercept MotherJonesViceVultureVox, who churn out the same content with just a few more curse words and radical poses) — now speak only to and for one another when they are not failing completely. Keeping Americans hooked on fear — of Putin’s takeover of the U.S., of COVID, of an imminent fascist coup — is their only hope for relevance, profit, and purpose. They can shower themselves with as many Pulitzers as they want for fake Russiagate stories and spend all day applauding one another on social media, but they know they are widely despised and distrusted. Posturing as the bulwark against Fascism and Defenders of Democracy — which in turn depends on the existence of an insurrectionary movement — is their only hope for finding meaning. But cowards and propagandists who weep and engage in public therapy when confronting the slightest discomfort do not make for convincing super heroes. Nobody is inspired, but merely irritated, by the Princess whining about the pea buried under her seventeenth mattress.

  As usual, the prime beneficiaries of all of this, and the most dangerous one, is the U.S. security state. They need, above all else, an existential threat to justify their endless growth and unchecked power. All of the old villains are largely vanquished and stale (Communism, Al Qaeda, ISIS), while the proposed stand-ins never really panned out (Americans never woke up thinking about Putin). That is when they began claiming that the most serious threat was a domestic one: fellow American citizens who harbor “extremist” ideologies. Though they claim that it is right-wing extremists who pose the greatest threat — white supremacist extremists to be exact — the lists they disseminate of who falls under this rubric encompasses essentially anyone — left, right or in between — who sees the world differently than Wolf Blitzer, Joe Scarborough and Chris Hayes see it: meaning dissidents, those who distrust the decrees of authority and wish to subvert rather than submit to establishment power. Claiming that the U.S. is facing an Insurrection and barely survived a “coup” is a script that could not be better suited to their interests.

  There are genuine unresolved questions surrounding the 1/6 riot that are genuinely important and merit scrutiny. It is proven that the FBI had at least two informants on the ground with whom it was communicating as the protest unfolded, but the full extent of the FBI’s role — whether it replicated what it repeatedly did during the first War on Terror and then again in engineering the attempted kidnapping of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer — remains unknown. That is because the only bodies capable of discovering the answers — the DOJ and the Congressional 1/6 Committee — have no interest in finding out. The contrary is true: they have a strong interest in suppressing those facts because it undermines rather than advances their fear narrative.

  Fear is a powerful human drive — arguably the most powerful one. Humans need it to survive; without it, they would have died off thousands of years ago. It is embedded in our psyches. And any demagogue worth their salt knows how to stimulate it and manipulate it. Fear — as we have seen throughout the last two years of the COVID pandemic — breeds acquiescence, subservience and conformity. It fosters not just a willingness, but an eagerness to submit to any authority promising to keep you safe from the threat and to banish and silence anyone dissenting from their decrees, on the ground that dissent is not just wrong but dangerous.

  What happened on January 6 was ugly and disturbing. But it was nowhere near an insurrection, a coup, or anything threatening in a fundamental or sustained way. That core truth — that it was a protest that turned into a three-hour riot killing nobody except four of the protesters — destroys its value. Only the false narrative that has been constructed over the last year and consecrated by today’s inane festivities can convert this banal episode into some world-historic event that at once makes heroes out of those who were there to oppose it and justifies everything and anything done in the name of preventing its repetition.

  ---

  To support the independent journalism we are doing here, please subscribe, obtain a gift subscription for others and/or share the article

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 20:20

• December Payrolls Preview: Strong Enough For A March Rate Hike?
  December Payrolls Preview: Strong Enough For A March Rate Hike?

  We are officially in the “good news is bad news” quarter of the artificial business cycle, and as such a strong payrolls number on Friday (especially after last month’s major headline payrolls disappointment when only 210K jobs were added) will only raise expectations of an even stronger hawkish response by the Fed, and an appropriate market reaction. And, naturally, vice versa especially since it appears that the Fed is hiking into a major economic slowdown.

  With that in mind, here is what Wall Street expects tomorrow, courtesy of Newsquawk:

  • Analysts look for a 447k rise in December payrolls, up from 210K with a range in analyst forecasts between 150k and 1.1 million.
  • Manufacturing payrolls are expected at 35k vs the prior 31k, while private payrolls are expected to rise 365k vs the prior 235k.
  • The unemployment rate is expected to drop from 4.2% to 4.1%, with analyst forecasts ranging between 4.0% and 4.4%.
  • Wages are seen rising 0.4% M/M, up from 0.3% in November, while the Y/Y metric is seen slowing to 4.2% from 4.8% growth.
  • The average work week hours are expected to remain unchanged at 34.8hrs.

  Significant upward revisions to prior-month payrolls are fairly likely, following large upward revisions over the previous seven reports and a view that the depressed November response rate may have weighed on reported job growth in the advance release.

  In a late Thursday report, Goldman raised its nonfarm payrolls estimate from 450K to 500k, above the consensus of +447k, after the strong ADP print, with the bank noting that the pre-Omicron payroll trend was much firmer than the 210k pace reported for November – perhaps as high as +600k –  and most of the virus-related slowdown in dining activity occurred after the December survey week. Big Data labor market indicators were generally solid in the month, and the number of year-end layoffs was well below normal. By industry, Goldman looks for a weather-related boost in the construction industry and a ~50k rebound in education employment (public and private) — the latter reflecting fewer janitors and support staff departing for the holidays. However, the bank also expects another modest decline in retail jobs due to labor supply constraints, and we are assuming only a modest pickup in leisure-sector job growth.

  Slack measures will also be eyed, with the November report showing an improvement in the participation rate, employment-population ratio and U6 underemployment, although none have managed to return to pre-pandemic levels. While Powell has acknowledged the “rapid” progress the labor market is making, he has highlighted the pick-up in participation was subdued and disappointing, with Powell suggesting that it was now likely that higher participation will take longer than previously anticipated. Powell explained the subdued participation may be a result of people not wanting to go back into the labor force while COVID is still prevalent, a lack of availability of childcare, and higher savings. Other measures of slack also saw improvement in November, the employment to population ratio rose to 59.2%, compared to the 61.1% pre-pandemic print, while U6 underemployment fell to 7.8%, edging closer to the pre-pandemic level of 7.0%.

  The December NFP report will be framed in context of Fed lift-off, especially after the latest minutes leaned hawkish with some policymakers suggesting a hike could come before maximum employment is met, but several said that this had already been achieved and most judged it could be achieved relatively soon if job growth continues at the current pace. Fed pricing moved hawkish following the minutes, to see an 80% chance of a March hike, therefore a strong report will be viewed as a tiebreaker whether March will see the first lift-off.

  That said, employment gauges for December are mixed, the jobless claims week that coincided with the usual NFP survey period was in-line with expectations and unchanged from the prior week at 205k, while continued claims fell by more than expected. However, some analysts question the accuracy of the jobless claims data over the holiday period. The ADP report, although having a weak correlation with the official release, saw a very strong print which doubled analyst expectations, and led some banks to slightly revise higher their forecasts for the NFP print. The business surveys point to further growth in the manufacturing sector, while the services sector shows a slowdown, but still in expansionary territory. Job cuts however were disappointing, rising to 19k from 14.9k.

  FED POLICY OUTLOOK: The Friday NFP report will help shape expectations for lift off from the Fed. The December meeting minutes on Wednesday revealed that participants generally noted it may become warranted to increase the FFR sooner or at a faster pace than was earlier anticipated, while some members of the FOMC said there could be circumstances whereby the Fed raises rates before maximum employment had been fully achieved. Meanwhile, several participants viewed labor market conditions as already largely consistent with maximum employment, while most judged it could be met relatively soon if the recent pace of the labor market continues. The prior jobs report (which the Fed saw going into the December meeting) disappointed on the headline, seeing 210k jobs created in November, although measures of slack (participation rate, employment to population ratio, and U6 underemployment) all improved from the prior, but remained beneath pre-pandemic levels. After the release of the hawkish December minutes, interest rate futures started to price in a c.80% chance of a Fed hike at the March meeting, something Governor Waller has previously alluded too. As the Fed is now in data-dependent mode, and given the remarks around the labor market from the Fed minutes, providing job growth continues at the current pace, the case for a March lift-off will strengthen, although doves on the FOMC, including Kashkari, suggested to wait before the April data has been seen – note, Kashkari is a non-voter this year. Given the Fed are looking for the current pace to continue, a beat or miss on the headline may not be too important, just providing the jobs market is still increasing at a decent pace, while the Fed will also be cognizant of the slack metrics.

  JOBLESS CLAIMS: For the week coinciding with December’s NFP, initial jobless claims printed in-line with expectations at 205k, and unchanged from the prior week. Pantheon Macroeconomics note, “the apparent stalling in the downshift jobless claims in the past couple weeks is no big deal; the seasonals now are less friendly over the next few weeks than in October and November, and the data are always noisy over the holidays”. Moreover, PM added “the core story is unchanged; the trend in claims is very low and still falling, because rising demand is easing the pressure on businesses. Moreover, firms are reluctant to let staff go in such a tight labor market, unless they have no other choice”. The continued claims that coincide with the NFP survey week fell to 1.716mln from 1.856mln, better than the expected rise to 1.868mln.

  ADP: The ADP report was strong, although the consistency with the official NFP report has not been strong. The ADP report added 807k jobs in December, seeing the largest increase since May 2021, rising from the prior 505k (revised lower from 534k) despite expectations for job growth to slow to 400k in December. Analysts at Pantheon Macroeconomics highlight the ADP data is slightly lower than the over 1mln rise in private payrolls signalled by the Homebase small business employment data, but although neither are consistently accurate in terms of the official NFP report, it is still consistent with their view that the NFP expectation of c. 400k is too low and thus are maintaining their 1mln forecast. Note, following the ADP report, analysts at Goldman Sachs boosted their NFP forecast for Friday to +500k from +450k. Pantheon points out that the rise in payrolls could be due to the fading of some of the forces holding back labor supply, such as enhanced unemployment benefits and school closures, combined with strong labor demand. However, the consultancy does note this could be interrupted by the rise in Omicron cases, although this may not be seen until the January data is released. Pantheon writes “it looks as though December survey week fell in something of a sweet spot, after the Delta wave faded, but before the Omicron surge began.”

  BUSINESS SURVEYS: The December ISM Manufacturing PMI report saw an uptick in employment, suggesting faster growth than the prior month. The employment index rose 0.9pts to 54.2 from 53.3 to show the fourth consecutive month of expansion. The report also notes that “an Employment Index above 50.6 percent, over time, is generally consistent with an increase in the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data on manufacturing employment”. ISM note that the survey panelists’ companies are still struggling to meet labor-management plans, but there were modest signs of progress where 7% of comments noted greater hiring ease, the same as November. Meanwhile an overwhelming majority (85%) indicated their companies are hiring or attempting to hire, but 37% of those expressed difficulty in filling positions, but that is lower than the November report. The December services report was more downbeat, employment fell to 54.9 from 56.5 in December, albeit remained in expansionary territory. Commentary noted respondents are struggling to backfill positions in a timely manner noting “The Great Resignation” is hitting them. Respondents are having to relook at their policies and incentive programs as fast-food restaurants are offering higher pay for lower level jobs as well as sign-on bonuses.

  ARGUING FOR A BETTER-THAN-EXPECTED REPORT:

  • Education seasonality. Education weighed on job growth during the fall, likely because some janitors and support staff declined to return for the new school year. Many of these individuals typically stop working for the December survey period, implying a seasonally adjusted gain in education payrolls in tomorrow’s report.
  • Big Data. High-frequency data on the labor market generally point to in-line or above-consensus job gains, as shown in Exhibit 1. That being said, the Google series continues to be biased upward by return-to-office (RTO) initiatives (office workers commuting instead of working from home)

  

  • ADP. Private sector employment in the ADP report increased by 807k in December, nearly double consensus expectations and consistent with strong growth in the ADP panel.
  • Jobless claims. Initial jobless claims fell during the December payroll month, averaging 204k per week vs. 277k in November. Continuing claims in regular state programs decreased 337k from survey week to survey week.
  • End of federal enhanced unemployment benefits. The expiration of federal benefits in some states boosted job-finding rates over the summer, and all remaining such programs expired in early September. With 4.6mn fewer individuals receiving benefits versus in early September, the gradual return of these workers is expected to boost job growth in tomorrow’s report and beyond.
  • Weather. Unseasonably warm weather during and leading up to the survey week argues for a solid rise in industries like construction. National temperatures averaged 40 degrees during the December survey week, compared to 35 degrees on average in those of the previous three years.
  • Job availability. The Conference Board labor differential—the difference between the percent of respondents saying jobs are plentiful and those saying jobs are hard to get—decreased by 2.1pt to 42.6, but remained near record highs. JOLTS job openings decreased by 529k in November to 10.6mn but remained significantly higher than the pre-pandemic peak.

  ARGUING FOR A WEAKER-THEN-EXPECTED REPORT:

  • Public health. Covid infections rose sharply in late December, but the survey period ended on December 18th, and as shown below the decline in dining activity versus the November survey week—eventually to 20pp below pre-crisis levels—mostly occurred after the December survey period. Coupled with the 246krise in ADP’s estimate of leisure and hospitality jobs, we expect continued job gains in the leisure sector in tomorrow’s report (our estimates embed a rise of nearly+100k, compared to +23k in November).

  

  • Supply constraints in retail. Labor supply constraints likely weighed on pre-holiday hiring in the retail industry in November (-20k mom sa). The BLS seasonal factors anticipate 100k net hires in December, and we do not expect all of these positions to be filled. If so, retail payroll could again fall on a seasonally adjusted basis.
  • Vaccine mandates. The vaccine mandates announced by the Biden administration in September apply to roughly 25mn unvaccinated workers, and may have weighed on December job growth in healthcare and government. While the federal deadline for compliance is generally not until early January and faces an uncertain future in the court system, early adoption in some states may have reduced job growth at the margin in tomorrow’s report.
  • Employer surveys. The employment components of business surveys generally decreased in December. Goldman’s services survey employment tracker decreased 2.3pts to 54.1 and the manufacturing survey employment tracker decreased 1.7pt to 57.9.The Goldman Sachs Analyst Index (GSAI) edged down by 0.3pt to 76.9 in December, but the employment component rose 6.8pt to a record-high of 82.4.

  NEUTRAL FACTORS:

  • Job cuts. Announced layoffs reported by Challenger, Gray & Christmas increased by 24% month-over-month in December after decreasing by 11% in November, but remain near their three-decade low.

  As noted above, upward revisions to prior-month non farm payrolls are likely in tomorrow’s report, which reflects the trend of large upward revisions over the course of the year.

  

  There are two potential explanations, both of which could produce upward revisions in tomorrow’s report as well. First, some reopening establishments may respond to the BLS survey with a lag (e.g. 1-2 months after reopening). This would result in positive revisions to the not-seasonally-adjusted data (dark blue bars above). Relatedly, the depressed response rate in last month’s report (lowest for November in 13 years) may have in part reflected this issue, with the busiest human resource managers least likely to respond to the survey during the Thanksgiving holiday.

  A second possible explanation is that the seasonal factors may be overfitting to the advance releases, mistaking some of the strong job creation in 2021 as an evolution of seasonality (light blue bars). Given this and given consensus expectation of strong gains in the December panel, upward revisions are fairly likely.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 20:07

• Judge Rejects FDA's 75 Year Delay On Vax Data, Cuts To Just 8 Months
  Judge Rejects FDA’s 75 Year Delay On Vax Data, Cuts To Just 8 Months

  A federal judge has rejected a request by the FDA to produce just 500 pages per month of the data submitted by Pfizer to license its Covid-19 vaccine – and has ordered them to produce 55,000 pages per month. Assuming there are roughly 450,000 pages, that means it will take just over eight months for the world to see what’s under the hood.

  

  Attorney Aaron Siri, who represents the plaintiff in the case, has provided this stunning update via his blog, Injecting Freedom:

  On behalf of a client, my firm requested that the FDA produce all the data submitted by Pfizer to license its Covid-19 vaccine.  The FDA asked the Court for permission to only be required to produce at a rate of 500 pages per month, which would have taken over 75 years to produce all the documents. 

  I am pleased to report that a federal judge soundly rejected the FDA’s request and ordered the FDA to produce all the data at a clip of 55,000 pages per month!

  This is a great win for transparency and removes one of the strangleholds federal “health” authorities have had on the data needed for independent scientists to offer solutions and address serious issues with the current vaccine program – issues which include waning immunity, variants evading vaccine immunity, and, as the CDC has confirmed, that the vaccines do not prevent transmission.

  No person should ever be coerced to engage in an unwanted medical procedure.  And while it is bad enough the government violated this basic liberty right by mandating the Covid-19 vaccine, the government also wanted to hide the data by waiting to fully produce what it relied upon to license this product until almost every American alive today is dead.  That form of governance is destructive to liberty and antithetical to the openness required in a democratic society. 

  In ordering the release of the documents in a timely manner, the Judge recognized that the release of this data is of paramount public importance and should be one of the FDA’s highest priorities.  He then aptly quoted James Madison as saying a “popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy” and John F. Kennedy as explaining that a “nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.” 

  The following is the full text of the Judge’s order, a copy of which is also available here.

  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

  PHMPT, Plaintiff v. FDA, Defendant, No. 4:21-cv-1058-P

  ORDER

  This case involves the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). Specifically, at issue is Plaintiff’s FOIA request seeking “[a]ll data and information for the Pfizer Vaccine enumerated in 21 C.F.R. § 601.51(e) with the exception of publicly available reports on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System” from the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). See ECF No. 1. As has become standard, the Parties failed to agree to a mutually acceptable production schedule; instead, they submitted dueling production schedules for this Court’s consideration. Accordingly, the Court held a conference with the Parties to determine an appropriate production schedule.[1] See ECF Nos. 21, 34.

  “Open government is fundamentally an American issue” – it is neither a Republican nor a Democrat issue.[2] As James Madison wrote, “[a] popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps, both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”[3] John F. Kennedy likewise recognized that “a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”[4] And, particularly appropriate in this case, John McCain (correctly) noted that “[e]xcessive administrative secrecy . . . feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public’s confidence in the government.”[5]

  Echoing these sentiments, “[t]he basic purpose of FOIA is to ensure an informed citizenry, [which is] vital to the functioning of a democratic society.” NLRB v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., 437 U.S. 214, 242 (1977). “FOIA was [therefore] enacted to ‘pierce the veil of administrative secrecy and to open agency action to the light of public scrutiny.’” Batton v. Evers, 598 F.3d 169, 175 (5th Cir. 2010) (quoting Dep’t of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 361 (1976)). And “Congress has long recognized that ‘information is often useful only if it is timely’ and that, therefore ‘excessive delay by the agency in its response is often tantamount to denial.’” Open Soc’y Just. Initiative v. CIA, 399 F. Supp. 3d 161, 165 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (quoting H.R. REP. NO. 93-876, at 6271 (1974)). When needed, a court “may use its equitable powers to require an agency to process documents according to a court-imposed timeline.” Clemente v. FBI, 71 F. Supp. 3d 262, 269 (D.D.C. 2014).

  Here, the Court recognizes the “unduly burdensome” challenges that this FOIA request may present to the FDA. See generally ECF Nos. 23, 30, 34. But, as expressed at the scheduling conference, there may not be a “more important issue at the Food and Drug Administration . . . than the pandemic, the Pfizer vaccine, getting every American vaccinated, [and] making sure that the American public is assured that this was not [] rush[ed] on behalf of the United States . . . .” ECF No. 34 at 46. Accordingly, the Court concludes that this FOIA request is of paramount public importance.

  “[S]tale information is of little value.” Payne Enters., Inc. v. United States, 837 F.2d 486, 494 (D.C. Cir. 1988). The Court, agreeing with this truism, therefore concludes that the expeditious completion of Plaintiff’s request is not only practicable, but necessary. See Bloomberg, L.P. v. FDA, 500 F. Supp. 2d 371, 378 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2007) (“[I]t is the compelling need for such public understanding that drives the urgency of the request.”). To that end, the Court further concludes that the production rate, as detailed below, appropriately balances the need for unprecedented urgency in processing this request with the FDA’s concerns regarding the burdens of production. See Halpern v. FBI, 181 F.3d 279, 284–85 (2nd Cir. 1991) (“[FOIA] emphasizes a preference for the fullest possible agency disclosure of such information consistent with a responsible balancing of competing concerns . . . .”).

  Accordingly, having considered the Parties’ arguments, filings in support, and the applicable law, the Court ORDERS that:

  1. The FDA shall produce the “more than 12,000 pages” articulated in its own proposal, see ECF No. 29 at 24, on or before January 31, 2022.

  2. The FDA shall produce the remaining documents at a rate of 55,000 pages every 30 days, with the first production being due on or before March 1, 2022, until production is complete.

  3. To the extent the FDA asserts any privilege, exemption, or exclusion as to any responsive record or portion thereof, FDA shall, concurrent with each production required by this Order, produce a redacted version of the record, redacting only those portions as to which privilege, exemption, or exclusion is asserted.

  4. The Parties shall submit a Joint Status Report detailing the progress of the rolling production by April 1, 2022, and every 90 days thereafter.[6]

  SO ORDERED on this 6th day of January, 2022.

  ---

  [1] Surprisingly, the FDA did not send an agency representative to the scheduling conference.

  [2] 151 CONG. REC. S1521 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2005) (statement of Sen. John Cornyn).

  [3] Letter from James Madison to W.T. Barry (August 4, 1822), in 9 WRITINGS OF JAMES MADISON 103 (S. Hunt ed., 1910).

  [4] John F. Kennedy, Remarks on the 20th Anniversary of the Voice of America (Feb. 26, 1962).

  [5] America After 9/11: Freedom Preserved or Freedom Lost?: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on the Judiciary, 108th Cong. 302 (2003).

  [6] Although the Court does not decide whether the FDA correctly denied Plaintiff’s request for expedited processing, the issue is not moot. Should the Parties seek to file motions for summary judgment, the Court will take up the issue then.

  Subscribe to Injecting Freedom

  *  *  *

  Boom! Very bad for a certain company. $PFE https://t.co/TmOJF6qeZI

  — Ed ☯️Free Thinker & Oracle (@DowdEdward) January 6, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 19:40

• Outgoing Fed Vice Chair Quietly Covered Up Suspicious Trades Made During March 2020 Market Rout
  Outgoing Fed Vice Chair Quietly Covered Up Suspicious Trades Made During March 2020 Market Rout

  Several months have passed since FOMC members Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren and Dallas Fed President Robert Kaplan abandoned their posts following a trading scandal that raised questions about senior Fed officials.

  Now, Richard Clarida, who is already on his way out the door at the Fed to make room for Biden appointee Lael Brainard, has become the latest senior Fed official to find his way into the ethics officials’ rifle sights.

  

  Because according to the NYT, Bloomberg and a handful of other reports, Clarida sold at least $1M of shares in a US-traded stock fund in February 2020 before buying a similar amount of the same fund a few days later, on the eve of a major Fed policy announcement that would trigger an 18-month-plus torrid rally in stocks, bonds and other securities.

  Notably, while Clarida’s purchase was previously disclosed and reported by Bloomberg News back in October, the initial sale of the fund shares wasn’t disclosed until last month, when an amended financial-disclosure form was finally filed with the government. Notably, this amended form was filed several weeks after the backlash to Clarida’s colleagues’ trades had died down.

  And apparently, no journalists had even bothered to notice the amended form for weeks, until the NYT reported on it Thursday.

  For the record, the new form showed Clarida sold $1M to $5M of the iShares MSCI USA Min Vol Factor exchange-traded fund on Feb. 24, then invested a similar range in the fund on Feb. 27.

  

  As Bloomberg explains, the disclosure may raise further questions about what the soon-to-depart vice chair knew about the impending Feb. 28 announcement from Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who declared the Fed would unveil massive new monetary stimulus measures in the days afterward, stimulus that is only now finally being unwound.

  “In reviewing his materials, Vice Chair Clarida identified inadvertent errors requiring amendment,” a Federal Reserve spokesperson said.

  “He reviewed those transactions with our ethics office and submitted amendments” to his disclosure forms for 2019 and 2020.

  The amended form, dated Dec. 16, came out just one day after the close of the Fed’s Dec. 14-15 FOMC meeting. The minutes from that meeting were only just reported yesterday, and Clarida has already said he has no intentions of attending the next FOMC meeting later this month. Clarida is expected to step down at the end of the month to make room for Lael Brainard, who has served on the Fed board of governors since 2014, and who was nominated by President Biden to serve as the Fed’s new vice chair, assuming her nomination makes it through the Senate.

  In the wake of the trading scandal that engulfed the Fed last fall, Chairman Jerome Powell has announced new investment guidelines in October, including banning purchases or sales during periods of market stress for all senior Fed bureaucrats. All of this begs the question, why is Clarida exposing all of this now? A probe of Fed trading is presently under way by the central bank’s inspector general, which declined to comment on whether Clarida is part of the investigation.

  Read the updated filing below:

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 19:20

• China's Xi Orders Military To Create "Elite Force" To Win Wars
  China’s Xi Orders Military To Create “Elite Force” To Win Wars

  By Andrew Thornebrooke of Epoch Times,

  Chinese leader Xi Jinping delivered this year’s mobilization orders to the regime’s military on Jan. 5, saying it must evolve into an elite force capable of winning any war.

  “The armed forces must closely follow the evolution of technology, warfare, and rivals, redouble their efforts to better combine training with combat operations, and strengthen systematic training and the use of technologies to develop an elite force that is capable of fighting and winning wars,” the order said, according to state-run news agency Xinhua.

  Xi, who is both the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the head of the Party’s military as chairman of the Central Military Commission, has issued mobilization orders annually since 2018. The orders signal the priorities of the armed forces and initiate military-wide training for the coming year.

  

  The orders come as the CCP takes an increasingly bellicose approach to international relations, coinciding with worsening relations between the regime and the greater international order.

  Since coming to power in 2012, Xi has implemented sweeping reforms across the whole of Chinese society, including a massive restructuring of the military, which began in 2015.

  That restructuring process continues to this day, and Xi has worked to significantly tighten his personal control over military leadership during the intervening period, promoting at least 58 generals loyal to him and sympathetic to his reforms.

  The technology-focused mobilization order also follows the CCP’s signing of a joint statement earlier this week with the other members of the U.N. Security Council. In it, the regime leadership said it believed the further spread of nuclear weapons must be prevented.

  Immediately after the statement was issued, however, a Chinese official said that the regime would continue to modernize its nuclear arsenal and wouldn’t make any reductions until the United States and Russia had fewer nuclear warheads than it did.

  The United States has grown increasingly wary of China’s expanding military capabilities.

  These include new bids on assault helicopters from Russia, an expanding navy, a record number of incursions into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone by Chinese military aircraft, Taiwan invasion simulations, and the test of a hypersonic weapon in July.

  In response, the Pentagon said its upcoming national security strategy would focus on developing global alliances and partnerships while contending with the Chinese regime as a “pacing challenge.”

  As such, the United States is expanding its military footprint in the Indo-Pacific, increasing troop rotations to allied nations, and pursuing increased multilateral operations and diplomatic forums with allies and partners through channels such as AUKUS and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD), which are considered vital to continued U.S. strength in the region.

  In December, the U.S. military introduced new software to help predict how its actions might provoke anger from China’s communist leadership. Ultimately intended to help American leadership avoid the ire of the CCP, the software was pejoratively dubbed an “appeasement app” by some critics.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 19:00

• "It's Been Bad Since Christmas" – Subway Service Slows Dramatically As Worker Shortages Cause Mass Delays
  “It’s Been Bad Since Christmas” – Subway Service Slows Dramatically As Worker Shortages Cause Mass Delays

  One day after New York’s Gov. Kathy Hochul delivered her state of the state address – her first major address since taking over from her former boss Gov. Andrew Cuomo this past summer – the NYT and the rest of the media gallery praised her performance. But despite her alluring promises about ending “unproductive” rivalries between the elected leaders of NYC and the Empire State.

  Unfortunately, she still has one major, economy-wrecking problem to solve, and it’s this: on any day this week, some 1,300 people out of a work force of 6.3K (roughly 1/5th) have been absent from work from the MTA due the ongoing crush of omicron case.

  

  The soaring jump in absenteeism, which the transportation authority attributes to the virus, has meant a lack of workers to keep up with the regular train schedules, leading officials to suspend service this week on three of the system’s 22 subway lines and reduce schedules on many others, leading to longer wait times.

  NYC’s shortage of workers has made it the most critically underserved public transit system in the country, the NYT reports.

  “I feel like it’s been bad since Christmas,” Jennifer Hall, 41, said Wednesday morning as she waited with her son for a D train in the Bronx.

  The news comes as New York State confirmed 85K new cases on Thursday, a new daily record for the Empire State.

  

  Source: NYT

  The surge in worker absences comes as the transportation authority has already been contending with a smaller work force after a rush of retirements and a pandemic-related hiring freeze was lifted last February.

  Unlike other public workers, MTA employees are not restricted by the vaccine mandate (although if they aren’t vaccinated they must submit to a test every week).

  The MTA’s troubles are hardly unique; they’re part of a wider issue of staffing shortages that has lead to thousands of flights being cancelled, along with train delays across the country.

  In particular, sick calls have soared in recent weeks: “We have seen increased sick calls, more than we have seen in the past,” said Craig Cipriano, the interim president of the division of the transportation authority. The number swelled through the end of the year, with unplanned absences currently more than three times higher than their typical levels before the pandemic.

  The number of subway riders in NYC has fluctuated dramatically, often following the COVID case numbers in an inverse pattern. Unsurprisingly, this has forced the MTA to make some exceptions to its virus-related worker absences.

  Subway ridership this week stood at about 40 percent of prepandemic numbers, transit officials said. That is a drop from levels that climbed above 50 percent in November, but still represents millions of passengers.

  For now, at least, the MTA’s leaders expect the worker shortages to get better, not worse.

  Still, Mr. Cipriano said there was reason to believe that the suspensions and delays caused by virus-related worker absences would soon ease, though he would not specify when. Already this week, he said, the absentee numbers showed signs they may be reversing. Transit employees who test positive for the virus get up to two weeks of sick leave beyond their standard sick time, which is 12 days per year. In the transit authority’s guidance to employees, which mirrors recent guidance from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it suggests that vaccinated workers who test positive for Covid-19 must isolate for at least five days and can return to work only if they have been without a fever for three days, have no runny nose and a “minimal cough.”

  Unvaccinated workers who have tested positive or been exposed to the virus must isolate for 10 days before returning to work. Transit officials have said that about 80 percent of its roughly 67,000 employees were vaccinated, and that they were unlikely to impose a stricter vaccine requirement out of concern that it might further disrupt service at a time when the system can scarcely afford it.

  Fortunately, Cipriano and the rest of the MTA leadership don’t expect to halt round-the-clock service any time soon. At the very least, they feel they would be able to run fewer trains per hour before they’re stuck with having to dial back service, forcing passengers who keep odd hours to pay for cab fare after leaving work late at night or early in the morning.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 18:40

• Destroying A Democracy To Save it: Democrats Call For The Disqualification Of Dozens Of Republican Members
  Destroying A Democracy To Save it: Democrats Call For The Disqualification Of Dozens Of Republican Members

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  Below is my column in the Hill on the continued calls to disqualify Republican members of Congress to prevent them from running for reelection. What is maddening is that Democratic groups and commentators are seeking to remove as many as 120 Republicans from the ballots in the name of democracy.

  It is like burning books in the name of literacy.

  Yet, on this anniversary of the January 6th riot, members of Congress and Democratic groups want to block voters from reelecting their preferred representatives. Like villages in Vietnam, it appears that some members and activists believe that you have to destroy democracy to save it from itself.

  

  Here is the column:

  This year, the Biden administration joined many in the United States in criticizing the mass disqualification of 583 candidates in Iran by the Guardian Council. The Iranian elections (like elections in other countries like China and Venezuela) are democratic only in the most artificial sense: You can freely vote from a pre-selected list of candidates.

  Electoral disqualification systems are generally anathema to democratic values, but some in the United States are now toying with the idea for the 2022 or 2024 elections. While more modest than the Iranian model, the Democratic calls for disqualification are just as dangerous. What is most maddening is that this anti-democratic effort is cloaked in democratic doublespeak.

  This week, Democratic lawyer Marc Elias predicted that 2022 would bring a renewed interest in disqualifying Republican members from office based on an obscure Civil War-era provision. Elias — the former Hilary Clinton campaign general counsel — is a well-known figure in Washington who has been prominently featured in the ongoing investigation of Special Counsel John Durham. Elias has founded a self-described “pro-democracy” group that challenges Republican voting laws and pledges to “shape our elections and democratic institutions for years to come.”

  In the age of rage, nothing says democracy like preventing people from running for office.

  Elias and others are suggesting that — rather than defeat Republicans at the polls — Democrats in Congress could disqualify the Republicans for supporting or encouraging the Jan. 6 “insurrection.” Last year, Democratic members called for the disqualification of dozens of Republicans. One, Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) demanded the disqualification of the 120 House Republicans — including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy(R-Calif.) — for simply signing a “Friend of the Court brief” (or amicus brief) in support of an election challenge from Texas.

  These members and activists have latched upon the long-dormant provision in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — the “disqualification clause” — which was written after the 39th Congress convened in December 1865 and many members were shocked to see Alexander Stephens, the Confederate vice president, waiting to take a seat with an array of other former Confederate senators and military officers.

  Justin Reade of the North Carolina Supreme Court later explained, “[t]he idea [was] that one who had taken an oath to support the Constitution and violated it, ought to be excluded from taking it again.” So, members drafted a provision that declared that “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

  By declaring the Jan. 6th riot an “insurrection,” some Democratic members of Congress and liberal activists hope to bar incumbent Republicans from running. Even support for court filings is now being declared an act of rebellion. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) helped fuel this movement — before Jan. 6 even occurred — by declaring that the Republicans supporting election challenges were “subverting the Constitution by their reckless and fruitless assault on our democracy which threatens to seriously erode public trust in our most sacred democratic institutions, and to set back our progress on the urgent challenges ahead.”

  Jan. 6 was a national tragedy. I publicly condemned President Trump’s speech that day while it was being given — and I denounced the riot as a “constitutional desecration.” However, it has not been treated legally as an insurrection. Those charged for their role in the attack that day are largely facing trespass and other less serious charges — rather than insurrection or sedition. That’s because this was a riot that was allowed to get out of control by grossly negligent preparations by Capitol Police and congressional officials. While the FBI launched a massive national investigation, it did not find evidence of an insurrection.

  With an ominous mid-term election approaching, much of the effort among Democrats on the Hill and in the media has been to keep the enmity alive from Jan. 6. In what seemed almost a hopeful plea, the New York Times recently declared “Every Day is Now Jan. 6.” It made this tragedy sound like the political equivalent of a year-round Christmas store: Every day should involve a renewed gift of reminiscence and rage.

  The saddest aspect of this politicization of the Jan. 6 riot is that many of us wanted a full, transparent, and apolitical investigation. House Republicans rejected that idea, but there remain many questions to be answered — which has not happened. Instead, we have an effort to encode the notion of an actual insurrection through mantra-like repetition.

  The Constitution fortunately demands more than proof by repetition. In this case, it requires an actual rebellion. The clause Democrats are citing was created in reference to a real Civil War in which over 750,000 people died in combat. The confederacy formed a government, an army, a currency, and carried out diplomatic missions.

  Conversely, Jan. 6 was a protest that became a riot.

  That is not meant to diminish the legitimate outrage over the day. It was reprehensible — but only a “rebellion” in the most rhetorical sense.

  More importantly, even if you adopt a dangerously broad definition of “insurrection” or “rebellion,” members of Congress who supported challenging the electoral votes (as Democrats have done in prior years) were exercising constitutionally protected speech.

  Moreover, the Democrats cannot simply use their razor-thin majority to disqualify opponents willy-nilly. Punishments like expulsions take two-thirds votes, and any disqualifications can be challenged in the court.

  Indeed, not long after ratification in 1869, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase ruled in a circuit opinion that the clause was not self-executing. He suggested that allowing Congress to simply bar political opponents from office would be a form of punishment without due process and would likely violate the prohibition on bills of attainder.

  As Democrats push to federalize elections and negate the laws in a couple dozen states, figures like Elias are now suggesting that Republicans could also be listed as “rebels” and barred from the ballot. Congress would then control not just how states conduct their elections but even who can appear on such ballots.

  The renewed calls for disqualifications may be simply reckless rhetoric timed for the anniversary of the riot. After all, every day would not be Jan. 6 without the requisite rage. However, it is reason — not rage — that we need right now.

  A recent poll showed that one in three Americans believes that violence against the government can be justified. It often seems like some want to trigger an actual rebellion by disenfranchising parts of our population. The fact is that there are people who traffic and profit in rage, and we are all the poorer for it.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 18:20

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Democrats' Problem With Democracy
  The Democrats’ Problem With Democracy

  Authored by J.Peder Zane via RealClearPolitics.com,

  Democrats have challenged the legitimacy of every presidential election they’ve lost this millennium: They blamed a corrupt Supreme Court for their defeat in 2000, crooked voting machines in 2004 and Russian interference in 2016 – sparking a years-long collusion hoax to knee-cap Trump’s presidency.

  

  But now, as President Biden’s poll numbers tank, his legislative agenda falters and his party’s 2022 prospects look increasingly grim, they and their media allies are adding a new twist to the tactic: They’re challenging elections before they happen.

  Prestigious news outlets including the New York Times, Washington Post, the Atlantic, NPR and the New York Review of Books warn that American democracy is under siege. With headlines ripped straight from Democratic Party talking points they argue that Republicans are planning a two-pronged coup to seize power in 2022 and beyond.

  Step one, they say, is a series of election laws being passed by GOP state legislatures designed to thwart the will of the people.

  Anyone who has bothered to read these pieces of legislation – which modify but still maintain early voting, mail-in voting, and other open-ballot measures – knows that their impact will be negligible. That hasn’t stopped Biden and others from describing them as “Jim Crow in the 21st Century.” Note this is the same argument they made for years about voter ID laws, which, studies show, do not suppress minority turnout. Further claims that the laws will allow state legislatures to pick the winners despite the tallies is also a fabrication.

  The intent of this argument is clear – to cast doubt on the legitimacy on all Republican victories. That it is being made by the same people who relentlessly (and correctly) assail Trump’s false claims that he won the 2020 election demonstrates their bad faith.

  The second prong of their coup narrative is even more invidious. In their telling, the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol was just a test run for Republicans to violently seize power if their plans to rig the elections fail.

  Jan. 6 was, indeed, a dark day in American history; it was a criminal riot stoked by a troubled president. Its perpetrators, at every level, deserve the full measure of fair justice.

  But it was not insurrection. The perpetrators were unarmed, for one thing. Reuters reports that the FBI found scant evidence that the riot was an organized plot to topple the government. And we can trust the authority of our own eyes to see the absurdity of claims that Jan. 6 was worse than 9/11.

  I am tempted to say that no reasonable person could embrace the coup fantasies advanced by the left. And while there is almost certainly a cynical, partisan aspect to these arguments – proponents believe they will help their cause – the truly frightening thing is that many are sincere.

  Many honestly believe that the American right is a hotbed of violent hatred bent on gaining control of the nation as the brownshirts did in Germany during the early 1930s. To their mind, Trump is only the outward symbol of a cultural cancer (although NPR compared him to Hitler in a recent report).

  Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland recently summarized this view in the New Yorker.

  “January 6th was not the final act, but perhaps the prologue to a titanic struggle between democracy and violent authoritarianism in America. Long after Donald Trump is gone, we’ll be dealing with a movement of violent, neo-Fascist elements who came very close to knocking over the U.S. government.” 

  Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Barton Gellman tried to define the threat more precisely in his long Atlantic article, “Trump’s Next Coup Has Already Begun,” citing a June poll which reported that just over 8% of Americans agreed that Biden’s election “was illegitimate and that violence is justified to restore Trump to the White House.” Never mind that poll results are notoriously unreliable, especially when trying to reduce complex questions to yes, no and maybe answers; this was enough for Gellman and his sources to declare that at least 21 million Americans are “committed insurrections.”

  This squishy finding – supported by no evidence of armed groups planning political mayhem – then becomes fact, as Gellman quotes an “expert” who states, “‘The last time America saw middle-class whites involved in violence was the expansion of the KKK in the 1920s.’”

  Commentator John Heilemann echoed and expanded this “fact” without challenge on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” telling viewers, “We’ve had political violence before, lynching, many things over the course of time that African Americans have suffered, but this is 30 million people right now who are ready to take up arms.”

  Probably because we have never seen signs of such violent intent – even the Jan. 6 assault was arms-free – journalist Ron Brownstein assured CNN voters that the “Let’s Go, Brandon” chant widely adopted by conservatives as code for “F— Joe Biden proves their thirst for “insurrection.”

  How can Democrats and their allies embrace such a dark view of the American people? History provides part of the answer.

  From their 19th century roots as the party run by Southern planters and Northern political machines, to their embrace of technocratic progressivism during the 20th century, to their current status as the party of global elites, the Democratic Party has long been a hierarchical outfit where those at the top promised to act in the best interests of those below them. Especially in the South, this paternalism was fused with demagoguery, as leaders kept voters in line by playing on fears of the “Negro menace.”

  In the years following World War II, Democrats gradually changed the groups they pretended to speak for – working-class whites were out, once marginalized groups were in – but their DNA remained the same. They continued their uneasy relationship with the give-and-take of American democracy; convinced that their policies were unassailable, they argued that moral failings – stupidity, racism and greed – explained why we have two parties (see Thomas Frank’s much-discussed but superficially reasoned 2004 book, “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”). And they began using the exact same language that had once been deployed against blacks to demonize Republicans – today’s warnings of rampant white supremacy and conservative insurrection are updated versions of their ugly rhetoric regarding slave revolts.

  In fairness, Republicans have engaged in many of the tactics ascribed to them. But their historic embrace of limited governmental power has usually restrained their impulse to direct people’s lives.

  They have tended to demonize small groups (e.g. left-wing communists) rather than entire populations. The argument that Republicans hate African Americans is simply a Democrat falsehood belied by the GOP’s long support for racial justice and the fact that America is by every measure less racist than it has ever been.

  America is a fractured nation and we must be clear-eyed about the sources of this division. But instead of providing insight, the ugly smears passing as wisdom among Democrats are only adding fuel to the fire. In their quest for power, they seem willing to burn down the entire house.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/06/2022 – 00:00

• China Imposes New Rules Regulating Algorithms Used By Big Tech
  China Imposes New Rules Regulating Algorithms Used By Big Tech

  Beijing has once again devised a way to protect Chinese children from the deleterious effects of technology like TikTok: China’s Cyberspace Administration will start closely regulating algorithms like the TikTok content recommendation algorithm start.

  A draft of the rules was released back in August. But according to the final version released Tuesday, the rules forbid practices that encourage addiction or high consumption as well as any activities that endanger national security.

  

  According to the Internet Information Service Algorithm Recommendation Management Regulations: “In recent years, algorithm applications have injected new momentum into political, economic, and social development. At the same time, problems caused by algorithm discrimination, ‘big data killing,’ and inducing indulgence in the unreasonable application of algorithms have also profoundly affected the normal communication order and market order.”

  Algorithms like the TikTok algorithm creates problems like social order poses challenges to safeguarding ideological security, social fairness and justice, and the legitimate rights and interests of netizens. The introduction of targeted algorithm recommendation rules and regulations in the field of Internet information services is a need to prevent and resolve security risks, and it is also a need to promote the healthy development of algorithm recommendation services and improve the level of supervision capabilities.

  The decision to crack down on social media companies that harvest user data in this way comes as Beijing struggles to protect user data. Chinese tech companies use algorithm technology for a wide range of applications, from recommending content to users on e-commerce and short video platforms to offering efficient food delivery services. However, companies seeking better profits have been accused of using highly manipulative algorithms to grab user attention, influence prices, and even exploit the rights of gig workers.

  The new policy requires companies that use these types of algorithms to publicly disclose how their recommendation algorithms work, and allow users to easily turn off the service.

  The new rules also help protect the Chinese public from “fake news” that might be disseminated via platforms like TikTok.

  Read the full statement from the Cyberspace Administration of China below (translation courtesy of Google):

  Recently, the State Internet Information Office, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Public Security, and the State Administration for Market Regulation jointly issued the “Internet Information Service Algorithm Recommendation Management Regulations” (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulations”), which will come into force on March 1, 2022. The relevant person in charge of the National Internet Information Office stated that the “Regulations” were issued to standardize Internet information service algorithm recommendation activities, safeguard national security and social public interests, protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations, and promote the healthy development of Internet information services.

  In recent years, algorithm applications have injected new momentum into political, economic, and social development. At the same time, problems caused by algorithm discrimination, “big data killing”, and inducing indulge in the unreasonable application of algorithms have also profoundly affected the normal communication order and market order. And social order poses challenges to safeguarding ideological security, social fairness and justice, and the legitimate rights and interests of netizens. The introduction of targeted algorithm recommendation rules and regulations in the field of Internet information services is a need to prevent and resolve security risks, and it is also a need to promote the healthy development of algorithm recommendation services and improve the level of supervision capabilities.

  The “Regulations” clarify that the application of algorithmic recommendation technology refers to the use of algorithmic technologies such as generating synthesis, personalized push, sorting and selection, retrieval and filtering, and scheduling and decision-making to provide users with information. The national cybersecurity and informatization department is responsible for overall planning and coordination of the national algorithm recommendation service governance and related supervision and management. The State Council’s telecommunications, public security, market supervision and other relevant departments are responsible for the supervision and management of algorithm recommendation services in accordance with their respective responsibilities. The local cybersecurity and informatization department is responsible for overall planning and coordination of algorithm recommendation service governance and related supervision and management within the administrative area. Relevant local departments are responsible for the supervision and management of algorithm recommendation services in their respective administrative regions according to their respective responsibilities.

  The “Regulations” clarify the information service specifications of algorithm recommendation service providers, requiring algorithm recommendation service providers to adhere to the mainstream value orientation, actively spread positive energy, and must not use algorithm recommendation services to engage in illegal activities or disseminate illegal information. Measures should be taken to prevent and Resist the dissemination of bad information; establish and improve management systems and technical measures such as user registration, information release review, data security and personal information protection, and emergency response to security incidents, and regularly review, evaluate, and verify algorithm mechanisms, models, data, and application results; Establish and improve the feature database for identifying illegal and bad information. If illegal or bad information is found, corresponding measures should be taken; strengthen the management of user models and user tags, and improve the rules for points of interest and user tags recorded in the user model; Strengthen the ecological management of the algorithm recommendation service page, establish and improve the mechanism of manual intervention and user independent selection, and actively present information that meets the mainstream value orientation in key links; standardize the development of Internet news information services, and shall not generate synthetic false news information or disseminate non-state regulations News information released by the units within; algorithms shall not be used to influence online public opinion, circumvent supervision and management, monopoly and unfair competition.

  The “Regulations” clarify the user rights protection requirements of algorithm recommendation service providers, including guaranteeing the right to know the algorithm, requiring users to be informed of the provision of algorithm recommendation services, and publicizing the basic principles, purpose and intentions and main operating mechanisms of the service; guaranteeing the algorithm The right to choose should provide users with options that are not specific to their personal characteristics, or the option to conveniently turn off algorithm recommendation services. In addition, the “Regulations” clarify specific requirements for the provision of algorithmic recommendation services to minors, the elderly, workers, consumers and other subjects. If algorithmic recommendation services are not used to induce minors to indulge in the Internet, it should be convenient for the safety of the elderly. The use of algorithmic recommendation services shall establish and improve the relevant algorithms of platform order distribution, remuneration composition and payment, working hours, rewards and punishments, and shall not use algorithms to implement unreasonable trading conditions such as transaction prices based on consumer preferences and transaction habits. Differential treatment, etc.

  The “Regulations” require that algorithm recommendation service providers with public opinion attributes or social mobilization capabilities should fill in the filing information through the Internet information service algorithm filing system within ten working days from the date of providing the service, and perform the filing procedures; if the filing information has changed , The change procedures should be completed within the specified time. Algorithm recommendation service providers shall keep network logs in accordance with the law, cooperate with relevant departments to carry out safety assessment and supervision and inspection work, and provide necessary technical and data support and assistance.

  The relevant person in charge of the National Internet Information Office pointed out that the governance of algorithm recommendation services requires the participation of the government, enterprises, society, and netizens to promote fairness, fairness, standardization and transparency of algorithm recommendation services, promote the improvement of algorithm recommendation services, and create a clearer network space.

   

     

   

   

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 23:40

• Betty White's Cause Of Death Revealed, Agent Shuts Down Booster Shot Rumors
  Betty White’s Cause Of Death Revealed, Agent Shuts Down Booster Shot Rumors

  Authored by Isabel van Brugen via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Comedic actress Betty White died just weeks shy of her 100th birthday as a result of “natural causes,” her agent confirmed on Monday.

  “Betty died peacefully in her sleep at her home,” her agent and close friend Jeff Witjas said in a statement to People on Monday, shutting down rumors that White had received a COVID-19 booster shot on Dec. 28.

  “People are saying her death was related to getting a booster shot three days earlier, but that is not true,” Witjas said.

  “She died of natural causes. Her death should not be politicized—that is not the life she lived.”

  

  White, an award-winning actress whose career spanned more than eight decades, starred in hit television sitcoms including “The Golden Girls” and “The Mary Tyler Moore Show,” She died on Dec. 31 at the age of 99 at her home in California. Her 100th birthday would have been on Jan. 17.

  Witjas’ statement follows the circulation of a fabricated quote on social media suggesting that the late actress had received a booster shot on Dec. 28.

  “Eat healthy and get all your vaccines. I just got boosted today,” White was falsely quoted as saying next to a link to a report titled, “Betty White: I’m lucky to still be in good health” from a Minnesota news outlet Crow River Media, according to The Associated Press.

  The article does not include the bogus quote, and archived versions of the story on the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine also do not mention White having taken a COVID-19 vaccine booster.

  She said in her interview with Crow River Media published on Dec. 28 that she was “so lucky to be in such good health and feel so good” at her age, and that she felt really healthy.

  “Even though Betty was about to be 100, I thought she would live forever,” Witjas said on Friday. “I will miss her terribly and so will the animal world that she loved so much. I don’t think Betty ever feared passing because she always wanted to be with her most beloved husband Allen Ludden. She believed she would be with him again.”

  White and her late husband Ludden were married from 1963 until he passed away in 1981 from stomach cancer. The 99-year-old’s “very last word” was reportedly “Allen,” according to Page Six.

  White never had any of her own biological children, but the actress was stepmother to Ludden’s three children. The pair reportedly met after she appeared as a guest on the televised game show “Password,” where Ludden was the host, according to Romper.

  White previously told People that she felt “blessed” to take on the role as stepmother to Ludden’s children.

  On Jan. 17, White’s milestone birthday, the documentary “Betty White: A Celebration” will be screened nationwide. The film’s title was changed from “Betty White: 100 Years Young—A Birthday Celebration” after her death.

  “Our hearts mourn today with the passing of Betty White,” producers Steve Boettcher and Mike Trinklein said in a statement.

  “During the many years we worked with her, we developed a great love and admiration for Betty as a person, and as an accomplished entertainer. … We will go forward with our plans to show the film … in hopes our film will provide a way for all who loved her to celebrate her life—and experience what made her such a national treasure,” they said.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 23:20

• Quebec Under Curfew, Unvaxx'd Banned From Buying Booze, Marijuana
  Quebec Under Curfew, Unvaxx’d Banned From Buying Booze, Marijuana

  Quebec reimposed a nighttime curfew beginning New Year’s Eve as COVID-19 infections surged. Restaurants in the Canadian province only offer takeout service, while Gyms, bars, and movie theaters have been closed for days.

  As the media and government drum up another COVID scare, Quebec Prime Minister Francois Legault wants to punish unvaccinated people for the soaring infections despite 85% of the residents in the province being vaccinated. 

  This week, Quebec Prime Minister Francois Legault is expected to announce more restrictive measures towards unvaccinated people, such as banning them from purchasing hard liquor and marijuana. 

  

  On Tuesday, the Journal de Montreal reported that “there was still some discussion to fine-tune the passport enforcement” at entrances or cash registers to block the unvaccinated from entering liquor and cannabis stores.

  Vaccine passports have been required to access non-essential businesses such as theaters, bars and restaurants, casinos, conventions and conferences, places of worship, and sports facilities. If Legault goes ahead with the move, unvaccinated will only be able to purchase beer and wine. 

  “Time and time again, the government has said it does not intend to force officials to be vaccinated,” the local paper said. However, through indirect ways, it’s making life for the unvaccinated into a living hell, with an end goal to make them eventually concede and get jabbed. 

  What’s ironic is that the new vaccine requirement at liquor and cannabis stores will only apply to unvaccinated shoppers but not employees. 

  The fact that authorities in Quebec are using “totalitarian” methods to make the lives of unvaccinated people miserable and instill fear in the overall population as the less severe Omicron variant sweeps across the world is nothing short of disgusting. 

  The Canadian government has even admitted to launching a psychological operations campaign against their own people to manipulate them into vaccine compliance. 

  The use of fear by the government and corporate media has definitely been ethically questionable. On Sunday, a convoy of police rolled around Montreal with flashing lights and sirens telling people to go home or get fined for breaking curfew. 

  Montréal, Québec Canada.. welcome to the NWO.. citizens told to go home before curfew, those who resist will be fined $5000 to $6000. pic.twitter.com/4G3FoAJcnM

  — Pelham (@Resist_05) January 2, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  What’s happening is a pandemic power grab by elites who use mass formation psychosis to hypnotize the population through fear into being their subservient slaves. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 23:00

• Disgraced FBI Agents Under Scrutiny In Whitmer Kidnapping Case
  Disgraced FBI Agents Under Scrutiny In Whitmer Kidnapping Case

  Authored by Ken Silva via The Epoch Times,

  The five defendants accused of plotting to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer are pushing for more information about the wrongdoing allegedly committed by FBI agents who handled their case.

  

  A federal grand jury has charged six men with conspiring to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer: from top left, Kaleb Franks, Brandon Caserta, Adam Dean Fox, and bottom left, Daniel Harris, Barry Croft, and Ty Garbin, in an indictment released Dec. 17, 2020. (Kent County Sheriff via AP File)

  In a flurry of filings on Dec. 31, the defendants in the Whitmer case opposed a motion from federal prosecutors to exclude evidence about FBI agents involved in the investigation. The defendants—Adam Fox, Barry Croft, Kaleb Franks, Daniel Harris, and Brandon Caserta—also sought to admit as evidence 258 statements they believe will prove the FBI entrapped them.

  The motions follow the dismissal of one FBI agent in the Whitmer case for beating his wife. Another agent has been accused of perjury in a separate case, and a third was pulled from testifying in the trial after it was revealed that he was operating a private intelligence business while working investigating the defendants.

  Federal prosecutors have painted the slew of recent motions by the defendants as a stall tactic that threatens to delay the March 8 trial date. Defense attorneys, however, say the motions are crucial to prove entrapment and protect the rights of their clients.

  When it comes to the alleged wrongdoing by investigating FBI agents, the defendants said the Department of Justice has been stonewalling them for more information.

  For example, federal prosecutors have called the perjury claims against FBI agent Henrick Impola “unfounded,” but the defense said government hasn’t provided records proving that.

  “It is of record that a local attorney has filed a complaint with the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility alleging that Mr. Impola committed perjury in another case,” the defendants said.

  “It is not clear why the government won’t disclose the outcome of the investigation into allegations it characterizes as ‘unfounded’ when a simple disclosure could very well clear Mr. Impola’s name and moot this issue in its entirety.”

  Likewise, the government has allegedly refused to provide records about the private business of FBI agent Jayson Chambers. BuzzFeed News revealed that Chambers had registered a business called Exeintel, which was linked to Twitter account that posted about the case before it became public.

  In its motion to exclude evidence about Exeintel, prosecutors said Chambers’ business had nothing to do with the Whitmer case.

  “The BuzzFeed story (and the defendants) implied that SA Chambers leaked confidential law enforcement information in this and/or other cases to an Exeintel-related Twitter user, to drum up business by making the company look prescient,” prosecutors said.

  “The defendants have produced no evidence, however, showing SA Chambers had a financial stake in the outcome of this case.”

  But the defendants argued otherwise in their Dec. 31 response, saying that Chambers’ business scheme calls into question whether he was investigating the Whitmer case in good faith.

  “When an agent, like Chambers, is focused on using his active investigations on behalf of the government as a selling point to make money in his private business, it raises a serious question about whether the agent is conducting the investigations in good faith or is instead motivated to make arrests for personal financial gain,” the defendants said.

  As for former agent Richard Trask the defendants agreed with the prosecution that the conviction for beating his wife is irrelevant to anything at issue in their case.

  Along with its Dec. 31 filing in response to the government, the defense also made a motion to admit as evidence 258 statements, largely comprising texts and audio recordings. Such statements would generally be considered hearsay and inadmissible as evidence in court, but the defendants argued that the statements should be allowed because they provide a fuller context of the events leading up to their arrest.

  For instance, one of the alleged co-conspirators, Ty Garbin, said in a recorded call that “Captain Autism can’t make up his mind”—referring to Fox, the alleged plot leader. The defense said this statement from Garbin—who pleaded guilty and was sentenced to six years imprisonment in August for his role in the plot—is important for multiple reasons

  First, Garbin’s statement shows that Fox wasn’t fully committed to the plot, the defense argued.

  Moreover, the statement also disproves the notion that Fox was the plot mastermind, as, “The meaning of it lies in the defendants’ recognition that Adam Fox had no actual disposition toward truly committing wrongdoing . . . with a true plan and viability. No one would have conspired with Adam Fox because no one believed he had any ability to form, much less carry out, a plan,” the defense said.

  “This statement also demonstrates a lack of predisposition in the entrapment context—no one, even Adam Fox himself—was actually predisposed to make any decisions with regard to possible wrongdoing.”

  Prosecutors haven’t responded to the defense’s motion to admit the statements as evidence, but they did oppose numerous motions in a Jan. 4 filing—including an earlier Dec. 25 motion to dismiss, as well as a separate motion to extend filing deadlines.

  “The defendants have filed a motion for more time to file more motions. They have already begun recycling the same motions previously denied, and identify no particular legal issues they expect to address given more time,” prosecutors said. “Accommodating their request would either unduly compress the pretrial briefing schedule, or necessitate a third continuance of the trial.”

  A motion hearing is scheduled for Jan. 18, followed by a final pretrial conference on Feb. 18 before the March 8 trial.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 22:40

• Thousands Of Cops Deployed To Quell Public Anger In China's Locked Down Xi'an Amid Widespread Food Shortages
  Thousands Of Cops Deployed To Quell Public Anger In China’s Locked Down Xi’an Amid Widespread Food Shortages

  Tens of thousands of police officers were deployed to China’s Xi’an where public anger has exploded among the city’s 13 million residents who were left bargaining and bartering for essential foodstuffs amid ongoing food shortages, as the city entered its 13th day of lockdown amid a wave of COVID-19 cases.

  As some people took to social media to appeal for assistance as their food supplies ran low, or they were unable to access medical care, others started local trading networks in residential compounds to try to meet each other’s needs through bartering.

  “Everything is getting bartered in Xi’an,” a resident of the city told RFA. “People are swapping stuff with others in the same building, because they no longer have enough food to eat.” Another resident said in a video clip that some people were trading cigarettes and iPhones for bags of rice.

  “We now have a barter system in our residential compound,” the man says in the clip. “We had a bag of rice, and the neighbor wanted to trade … a smartphone and a tablet.”

  “We have six bags of rice in our home but no vegetables.”

  According to Radio Free Asia, authorities in the northern Chinese city of Xi’an have called for calm, as many in Xi’an are taking to social media complaining that they were unable to get sufficient food supplies after being ordered to stay in their homes.

  To contain any civil unrest, city authorities have deployed around 29,000 police officers to enforce the lockdown, while countless local security guards are preventing people from entering or leaving areas designated high or medium risk. One video clip that made the rounds on social media showed security guards beating a teenager in the lobby of a building because he went out to buy steamed buns.

  “I was hungry, so I came out to get some mantou,” the youngster is heard telling the guards, who beat and kick him, knocking his food to the ground. City authorities later said the guards had been punished.

  Residents were initially told they would be allowed to send a designated person to buy groceries every other day, but many have since told RFA that the security guards in many areas aren’t allowing anyone to leave.

  Those who can make it out to buy supplies are finding that prices have skyrocketed, especially of fresh fruit and vegetables, despite a well publicized effort by the government and volunteers to bring fresh produce into the city in large quantities to hand out to beleaguered residents.

  One video clip posted to social media showed a man who said he had paid around 40 yuan for 10 capsicum peppers, the same amount for six tomatoes and 40 yuan for two cabbages.

  “The vegetable vendor must be making a fortune,” the man complains, while showing his haul to friends.

  State media, which is tightly controlled by the ruling Communist Party, reported on a line of trucks hauling a selection of vegetables, fresh fruit and pork belly into residential households in one part of the city on Dec. 29, delivering fresh food to around 180 households.

  But the address given in the news report was tracked down by social media users, who discovered it was a residential compound for employees of the Shaanxi Provincial People’s Congress and the Xi’an municipal government, prompting a public outcry on social media.

  A Xi’an resident surnamed Song said the food given to the families of officials looked luxurious compared with what regular people are getting: “They were spoiled for choice when it comes vegetables,” Song said. “Where can regular people find stuff like that?”

  “I managed to get one head of Chinese leaves, a zucchini, four bell peppers, three heads of garlic, a piece of ginger, two scallions and three potatoes,” she said.

  According to the Shaanxi provincial government, a total of 41,000 police officers have been dispatched to Xi’an to maintain public order, with 29,000 of those deployed to Xi’an, 20,352 of whom are working in residential compounds. Some 4,000 are operating traffic roadblocks, while others are guarding hotels or COVID-19 testing sites.

  A Shaanxi scholar who gave the surname Tian said the government’s top priority in times of crisis is always maintaining public order and social stability, rather than looking after the needs of ordinary people.

  “They have been building up the stability maintenance system ever since 2004,” Tian said. “They say there are only 40,000 police officers in Xi’an, but actually there are many more [security personnel] who aren’t police, including neighborhood committees and security in charge of buildings.”

  “There are also village officials and their teams and so on,” he said.

  Commentator Han Dapeng said the lockdown doesn’t appear to be preventing the spread of the Omicron variant of COVID-19, however.

  “They used this total lockdown method on Wuhan last year, but Omicron is still going strong,” Han said. “Yet the rates of fatality and severe disease are both very low.”

  “I don’t think this Xi’an lockdown is about disease prevention,” he said. “It’s more about controlling the population.”

  State news agency Xinhua reported that China had 161 confirmed cases of COVID-19 nationwide on Monday, 101 of which were locally transmitted.

  New cases in Xi’an fell to their lowest in a week, health officials said Sunday, as the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) pursues a “zero COVID” approach involving tight border restrictions and swift, targeted lockdowns.

  Zhang Canyou of the China Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that several rounds of testing in Xi’an had showed there are “some positive changes” in case numbers, which have dipped since the lockdown began.

  Meanwhile, to contain speculation that Beijing is only enforcing lockdowns “to control the population”, amid the widespread outcry about the draconian lockdown measures, the official local news platform of Xi’an said a hospital’s wrongdoings amid the lockdown led to miscarriage of a pregnant woman and requires the hospital “to compensate and apologize.” And just to make everything better, the hospital’s general manager was suspended and two department heads fired.

  Liu Shunzhi, head of the city’s health commission, received a warning from the Communist Party for malpractice in emergency treatment during the Covid outbreak. It wasn’t clear just what the “malpractice” was.

  And just like that everything in Xi’an is back to abnormal.

  Oh, and then just a few moments ago, this hit: China’s Xian Xianyang International Airport Suspends All International Passenger Flights From Jan 5. Because things are clearly under control.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 22:20

• Big Left-Wing 'Dark Money' Groups Fund Schumer's Secretive Anti-Filibuster Ally
  Big Left-Wing ‘Dark Money’ Groups Fund Schumer’s Secretive Anti-Filibuster Ally

  Authored by Mark Tapscott via The Epoch Times,

  Fix Our Senate, the obscure outfit leading a coalition of 70 liberal advocacy groups backing Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) anti-filibuster drive, is a left-wing “dark-money pop-up,” according to a political nonprofit finance expert.

  “Fix Our Senate may present itself as a standalone, grassroots activist group, but it’s actually a front for the Sixteen Thirty Fund, itself part of a $1.7 billion left-wing ‘dark- money pop-up’ empire run by the shadowy consulting firm Arabella Advisors,” said Capital Research Center (CRC) senior investigative researcher Hayden Ludwig.

  “We call these fronts ‘pop-ups’ because they’re websites which pop into existence, run attack campaigns, and disappear in an instant and almost never reveal their connection to Arabella or its nonprofits,” Ludwig told The Epoch Times on Jan. 4.

  The CRC is a conservative nonpartisan foundation that specializes in tracking trends among the most influential charities, nonprofits, and special-interest groups affecting the public policy process in the nation’s capital.

  “We study unions, environmentalist groups, and a wide variety of nonprofit and activist organizations. We also keep an eye on crony capitalists who seek to profit by taking advantage of government regulations and by getting their hands on taxpayers’ money,” CRC says of its purpose on its website.

  Schumer promised earlier this week to seek a vote by Jan. 17 on abolishing or reforming the filibuster—the Senate’s “cloture” rule that requires 60 votes to end debate and vote on a proposal—if Senate Republicans block consideration of two election reform packages that are top priorities of the Democrats’ progressive, or far-left, faction.

  

  Republicans argue the reforms—the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act—severely limit or eliminate entirely the use of photo IDs and related ballot security measures, and require that all proposed changes to state election laws have prior Department of Justice (DOJ) approval.

  Measures such as strengthening voter identification requirements are highly popular with the public, with recent surveys by Rasmussen, Monmouth, Pew, and AP-NORC finding 72 to 80 percent support for requiring photo IDs to vote.

  Fix Our Senate describes itself as a “coalition of more than 70 organizations (and counting) representing millions of Americans fighting to eliminate the filibuster and fix the Senate so our elected officials can finally start delivering on their promises.”

  While no individuals are identified as officials on Fix Our Senate’s website, Eli Zupnick is identified by The Hill as a “spokesman.”

  He’s cited as praising Schumer for making “the choice clear: Senate Democrats must now choose between protecting our democracy or stubbornly preserving an outdated and abused Senate rule.”

  The Epoch Times received no response to its questions submitted through the “Press Inquiries” contact form on the Fix Our Senate website by press time. Zupnick, who identifies himself with Fix Our Senate on his Twitter profile page, didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.

  He’s the former longtime communications director for Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), working for her in various positions from 2009 until 2019. He also was briefly in 2019 the managing principal for Precision Strategies, a Washington and New York City political consulting and marketing firm co-founded by Stephanie Cutter, who identifies herself as the former deputy campaign manager for President Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign.

  Among the 70 organizations participating in the Fix Our Senate coalition are the American Muslim Civil Rights Center, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Equal Justice Society, Faith in Public Life, Friends of the Earth, League of Conservation Voters, Peoples’ Action, Right to Health Action, and United We Dream. Many of the participating groups are locally focused activists groups such as the Long Beach Alliance for Clean Energy and Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action.

  Many of the coalition members, whether nationally or locally focused, share one thing in common—significant funding from the Sixteen Thirty/Arabella Fund dark money network, according to Ludwig.

  “Because Fix Our Senate and other ‘pop-ups’ aren’t real nonprofits, they don’t file IRS Form 990 disclosures or publicly report their budgets, boards, or lobbying–making it impossible to trace their donors,” Ludwig explained.

   “Instead, all that money moves through the Sixteen Thirty Fund, itself created and managed by the for-profit company Arabella Advisors as a way for liberal mega-donors to quietly fund many of the Left’s most extreme causes.”

  Ludwig said CRC has “traced about $10 million flowing from Arabella’s network funded by anonymous liberal donors to signatories on Fix Our Senate’s anti-filibuster coalition.”

  Prospects for the success of the Schumer/Fix Our Senate campaign to abolish or reform the Senate filibuster suffered a major blow on Jan. 4, when Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) told reporters that he worries that “being open to a rules change that would create a nuclear option, it’s very, very difficult. It’s a heavy lift.”

  With the Senate split 50-50, the loss of even one Democratic vote on a filibuster reform proposal would be fatal unless 11 Republicans would then be willing to join the effort, which is highly unlikely.

  Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) also has spoken publicly against revising the filibuster process, and a senior congressional GOP source who asked not to be named told The Epoch Times on Jan. 3 that “at least a couple of other Democrat senators will oppose it if Schumer forces a vote.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 22:00

• Manhattan Apartment Sales Record Best Fourth Quarter In Three Decades
  Manhattan Apartment Sales Record Best Fourth Quarter In Three Decades

  For the last quarter of 2021, bargain hunters rushed to purchase apartments in Manhattan. Home sales in the borough reached a fourth-quarter record even though the Omicron variant scare has slowed the back-to-office return in the city. 

  Appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. and brokerage Douglas Elliman Real Estate released a new report Tuesday that highlighted 3,559 co-ops and condos were sold in the fourth quarter of 2021, the most sales for the quarter going back three decades. The average price for an apartment sold jumped 11% to $1.17 million compared with the same quarter a year ago.  

  

  The buying frenzy began in early 2021 as bargain hunters purchased apartments at a pandemic discount while thousands of Manhattanites in 2020 fled the metro area to suburbia because of pandemic lockdowns and violent crime. 

  Jonathan Miller, president of Miller Samuel, believes the buying frenzy will continue through the first half of this year. 

  “For the next several quarters, we’re going to see above-average sales activity and that is going to go a long way to bring down inventory levels,” Miller said. 

  “One of the things that has differentiated the Manhattan market with the rest of the country has been that it was late to the party, and the city’s boom in activity really started at the beginning of 2021,” he added.

  Supply is down 25% from a year earlier to 6,207 apartments in the borough. This was the most significant annual reduction in seven years. Supply remains elevated, but bidding wars are starting to pick up — the share of apartments sold above ask was 9.2%, the highest since early 2018. 

  

  A separate report on the borough’s real estate market, released by Bess Freedman, chief executive officer at brokerage Brown Harris Stevens, showed tightening inventory is pushing home values higher and could suggest 2022 will be another banner year. 

  “The good news is that the foreign buyer has returned, Wall Street bonuses are incredible and we have a new mayor, which all bodes well,” Freedman said. “Now, because pricing has ticked up a bit, it could slow things down with mortgage rates going up, but we’ll have to see.”

  However, not all is rosy in the metro area. NYC Mayor Eric Adams has already promised to keep 1M+ students attending classes in person at the Big Apple’s public schools. Wall Street megabanks – including JPM and Goldman Sachs – are delaying their employees’ return to the office because of the Omicron scare.

  Kastle Systems, whose electronic access systems secure thousands of office buildings across NYC, showed only 10.61% of workers were back at their desks in late December, compared with 37% on Dec. 2. 

  

  A lopsided recovery appears to be playing out. Housing could be recovering, but the overall recovery will sputter without workers in office buildings. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 21:40

• Florida Surgeon General: If You Have No Symptoms, Please Don't Get Tested
  Florida Surgeon General: If You Have No Symptoms, Please Don’t Get Tested

  Authored by Jannis Falkenstern via The Epoch Times,

  Florida’s Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo issued new guidance for COVID-19 tests on Jan. 4 in a bid to reduce the strain on the state’s testing centers.

  

  So many people are using the centers the availability of tests is under pressure.

  “We are going to scale back,” Ladapo told reporters at a press conference.

  “We’re coming back to something sensible.”

  People have been flooding Florida testing sites, leading to long lines, he said.

  Instead of restricting testing, however, Ladapo said he would place a new emphasis on “high-value” testing against those of “low-value” in order to give priority to tests that would “likely change outcomes” based on a positive or negative result.

  For example, someone who is elderly with pre-existing medical conditions and is having symptoms he regards as high value.

  Someone who is otherwise healthy with no pre-existing medical issues and with no symptoms is low value, he explained.

  Ladapo said people need to get back to a “sense of normalcy” in society.

  “We need to unwind this sort of planning and living one’s life around testing,” Ladapo said.

  “It’s really time for people to be living; to make the decisions they want regarding vaccination; to enjoy the fact that many people have natural immunity; and to unwind this preoccupation with only COVID as determining the boundaries and constraints and possibilities of life.

  “And we’re going to start that in Florida.”

  Ladapo said Omicron is “on the rise” in Florida and cases are “vertically climbing,” but people are being “whipped into a frenzy” over it and there is no need because the variant is “much less violent” than other variants that have spawned from the COVID-19 virus.

  “What you’re seeing in cases is actually just a fraction of what’s happening in the community,” he said. “For example, the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] estimates that only one in four cases of COVID are diagnosed, that may be an even bigger ratio with Omicron.”

  He said that Florida has seen a rapid increase in cases and hospitalizations, but added it is not comparable to the case rise.

  “A substantial share, based on the data we have from some of our hospitals of the patients in hospitals with COVID, are there in the hospital with COVID rather than for COVID.”

  In other words, people who go to the hospital are there for other reasons and then test positive for COVID-19 because hospitals test everyone who comes for treatment, Ladapo said.

  

  A health care worker use a nasal swab to test Marcelino Soto for COVID-19 at a pop up testing site at the Koinonia Worship Center and Village in Pembroke Park, Fla., on July 22, 2020. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

  The surgeon general said that federal leadership had “created a monster” in public health.

  “What’s happened in the country is that people have forgotten, or abandoned basic public health principles,” he said.

  “Instead, they have opted for things that are anti-public health.”

  He said anti-public health is “taking away people’s options” and “ability to choose.”

  “Anti-health tends to be mandates,” he continued. “Anti-public health is losing touch with sensibility.”

  The Surgeon General’s office wants to educate and provide people with the ability to make “better decisions.”

  “That’s what public health used to be,” Ladapo said.

  “The federal approach has been to mandate and to create division and strife and really politicize this pandemic.”

  Getting back to basic principles of public health is important, he said and part of that is prevention such as weight loss, exercise, and vitamin intake.

  Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was present at the press conference and said COVID-19 tests have turned into “a testing industrial company” and are a “cash cow” for people.

  “There’s people making huge amounts of money,” he said of the COVID-19 testing companies.

  DeSantis urged everyone to live their lives like they did before the pandemic.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 21:20

• $100 Million F-35 Jet Forced To Do Emergency 'Belly Landing' In Alarming First
  $100 Million F-35 Jet Forced To Do Emergency ‘Belly Landing’ In Alarming First

  “I’m very surprised the emergency gear down systems didn’t work, or weren’t used,” a top regional military analyst and former air force officer told CNN after a $100 million US-designed stealth fighter was forced to do a “belly landing” after its landing gear failed to deploy.

  It happened in South Korea on Tuesday, when a F-35A jet fighter suffered “avionic system issues” and the South Korean pilot didn’t eject, but instead came in on the plane’s belly, with emergency crews below having deployed a special foam on the runway to minimize damage to the aircraft.

  

  It’s alarming given the ultra-costly F-35 stealth fighter is supposed to be cutting edge, having been transferred to over a dozen US allied countries.

  According to more details by Air Force Magazine: 

  The emergency landing occurred around 1 p.m. local time at a South Korean base in Seosan, some 70 kilometers from Osan Air Base. According to media reports, it is the first known instance of a belly landing by an F-35 since the U.S. began selling the fifth-generation fighter to partner nations.

  South Korean officials have reportedly said they are suspending flights for all its air force’s 30-plus F-35 fighters while it investigates the emergency landing.

  Amid an ongoing investigation into the incident, South Korean military officials have not confirmed the extent of damage, but described, “The jet did an emergency landing as the landing gear did not extend. This would mean the jet did the ‘belly landing,'”

  A May 2020 crash landing happened with a US Air Force pilot in the advanced fighter at a base in Florida, while partner nations have also endured a growing number of mechanical and other failures in the aircraft: 

  There have been other incidents involving allies and partners in the F-35 program—members of the Japan Air Self-Defense Force have had to make at least seven emergency landings in F-35s, news agency Nikkei reported. There was also a nighttime crash into the ocean in April 2019 that killed a Japanese pilot.

  More recently, a British F-35B crashed just after takeoff from an aircraft carrier in November 2021, falling into the Mediterranean Sea. 

  South Korea grounds F-35 fleet after malfunction forces ‘belly landing’ ✈️🇰🇷🇺🇸 Don’t buy American airplanes. #Lockheed #Boeing https://t.co/9d6zCFuBnP

  — Spencer Wells (@spwells) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  In this latest incident, the South Korean pilot is being hailed for his skills given the extreme difficulty of a belly landing scenario in such a jet.

  “A gear-up landing on the F-35 may be quite difficult and dangerous because of the angle of attack the aircraft has on approach to touchdown,” David Cenciotti, who runs the The Aviationist blog described. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 21:00

• Taibbi: Meet Jed Rakoff, The Judge Who Exposed The "Rigged Game"
  Taibbi: Meet Jed Rakoff, The Judge Who Exposed The “Rigged Game”

  Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

  On November 27, 2011, a federal judge named Jed Rakoff threw out a $285 million regulatory settlement between Citigroup and the Securities and Exchange Commission, blasting it as “neither fair, nor reasonable, nor adequate, nor in the public interest.” The S.E.C. and Citigroup were stunned. Expecting to see their malodorous deal wrapped up, the parties were instead directed “to be ready to try this case” the following summer.

  

  Try a case? Was the judge kidding? A pattern had long ago been established in which mega-companies like Citigroup that were implicated in serious offenses would be let off with slaps on the wrist, by soft-touch regulators who expected judges to play ball. These officials in many cases were private sector hotshots doing temporary tours as regulators, denizens of the revolving door biding time before parachuting back into lucrative corporate defense jobs. A judge who refused to sign the settlements such folks engineered was derailing everyone’s gravy train.

  Citigroup had replicated a scheme employed by numerous big banks of the era, helping construct a “born to lose” portfolio of rotten mortgage securities to be unloaded on customer-dupes, who were unaware the bank intended to bet against them. A similar case involving a Goldman, Sachs deal called “Abacus” had concluded the previous year with a hefty fine, but, infamously, no admission of wrongdoing.

  In the Citigroup version, the bank earned $160 million in profits, customers lost $700 million, and the S.E.C. wanted to impose a $285 million fine. As noted by papers like the Washington Post at the time, the S.E.C.’s logic was to ask the bank to return the money ($160 million plus interest equaled $190 million) and pay a $95 million civil penalty on top.

  Citigroup that quarter alone earned $3.8 billion in profits, which meant the S.E.C. proposed to charge the bank — which had been functionally bankrupt in 2008 and was booming again thanks to a massive public bailout, engineered in part by former Citi officials by the way — a fee of 2.5% of its quarterly profits. In a country where an ordinary schlub could get multiple years in prison for something like third-degree attempted theft of a car, seeking no individual penalties and asking shareholders to forego a tiny fraction of earnings as restitution for stealing $160 million was a joke.

  The fine was “pocket change to any entity as large as Citigroup,” noted Rakoff, in a blistering 15-page opinion. Objecting to the practice of allowing corporate crooks to walk away without admission of wrongdoing, he noted that Citigroup had already begun asserting its right to deny the allegations, both in litigation and to the media. This, he said, left the public despairing “of ever knowing the truth in a matter of obvious public importance.”

  Such a policy, he concluded, would reduce the court to “a mere handmaiden to a settlement privately negotiated on the basis of unknown facts.” And, well, screw that.

  There was cheering in the legal community and even in the press (“Judge Jed Rakoff Courageously Rejects SEC-Citigroup Settlement” was the Post headline) for a few minutes. Then came the inevitable plot twist. Citigroup and the S.E.C., robber and cop, joined together to appeal the decision, forcing Rakoff to retain counsel. Before long, Rakoff was overturned. An appeals court judge ruled he had stepped out of bounds by demanding the “truth” behind allegations, saying “consent decrees are primarily about pragmatism.”

  The original dirty deal was re-routed back to Rakoff, who was then forced by the appeals court to approve it. “That court has now fixed the menu, leaving this court with nothing but sour grapes,” Rakoff wrote in a succinct but seething opinion, adding one parting warning:

  This court fears that, as a result of the Court of Appeal’s decision, the settlements reached by governmental regulatory bodies and enforced by the judiciary’s contempt powers will in practice be subject to no meaningful oversight whatsoever.

  The symbolism of the Rakoff episode was striking. Citigroup had been created by something like the ultimate insider deal. The merger of Citicorp and the insurance conglomerate Travelers had been struck in the late nineties despite apparently conflicting with several laws, including the Glass-Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956.

  The merger to create the first American “supermarket bank” only happened because a temporary waiver was granted by Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve. This held up in time for Bill Clinton to sign a bipartisan piece of legislation called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, sanctifying the deal after the fact. Former Clinton Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin then skedaddled to a job at the new super-bank that Citi itself described as having “no line responsibilities,” but nonetheless would go on to earn Rubin $115 million, a transaction that grossed out even the Wall Street Journal.

  Thus the way the S.E.C. and the Appellate Courts essentially joined hands with this particular firm to strike down Rakoff’s ruling was a graphic demonstration of the self-defense capability of what one former Senate aide I know calls “The Blob,” i.e. the matrix of interconnected (and, not infrequently, intermarried) lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, and executives who run the country from the Washington-New York corridor. I don’t think it’s an accident that politicians in both parties, ranging from Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump, began scoring political points by talking about the “rigged game” just after Rakoff’s Capra-esque gesture was overturned. What did Rakoff himself think?

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 20:40

• Sony Is Joining The EV Race
  Sony Is Joining The EV Race

  Move over, Tesla, Apple, and other “not just a car company” entrants into the EV market: Sony is joining the race. 

  At CES 2022, Sony announced it would set up subsidiary called Sony Mobility Inc. to focus on electric vehicles, Nikkei reported overnight. They also unveiled a new SUV prototype vehicle, about two years after announcing its first plans for EVs and its first sedan prototype.

  The SUV prototype is called the Vision-S 02.

  Sony Chairman Kenichiro Yoshida commented: “The excitement we received after we showed off the Vision-S really encouraged us to further consider how we can bring creativity and technology to change the experience of moving from one place to another.”

  

  “I’m excited to announce we are establishing a new company for mobility, Sony Mobility Inc., to accelerate these efforts, and we are exploring a commercial launch of Sony’s EVs,” he continued. 

  The company’s Vision-S 01 sedan sports two 200 kW electric motors and Level 2 autonomy, according to the report. It began testing on public roads in 2021 and its EV platform was manufactured by Magna Steyr with parts from Bosch. 

  EV is still a vision that the company is considered pursuing, according to follow up reporting from The Verge, who made it sound as though follow-through still isn’t a guarantee. 

  “We are exploring a commercial launch of Sony’s EV,” Yoshida said, to find out how a “creative entertainment company” can “redefine mobility.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 20:20

• What Spooked Markets So Badly In Today's Fed Minutes? JPMorgan, Goldman Explain
  What Spooked Markets So Badly In Today’s Fed Minutes? JPMorgan, Goldman Explain

  Considering that today’s minutes covered a FOMC meeting that took place some three weeks ago, with numerous Fed speakers having ample opportunity to set the stage for what was to come (talk about those famous Fed “communication” skills), it is rather shocking how powerful and violent today’s stock tantrum was.

  But what exactly spooked traders so badly?

  Well, as JPM Michael Feroli writes in his FOMC post-mortem, the minutes portray “a Committee on the march toward removing policy accommodation” which is not a surprise to anyone except perhaps the biggest cubic zirconium hands out in Seoul. Regarding the expected path of policy rates the minutes note that meeting participants generally see rate hikes “sooner or at a faster pace” than previously expected. Of course, this too had already been hinted at by the dots released after the meeting.

  What was new in these minutes, and was also unexpectedly hawkish, were the clues given to how balance sheet normalization would play out. While most favored allowing assets to run off after the first rate hike, it was generally thought that this runoff would occur sooner after liftoff relative to the 2014-17 episode. Moreover, it was generally felt that the pace of runoff would be faster than the last experience: as a reminder, last time it took two years between the first rate hike and the beginning of balance-sheet contraction (see excerpt below) so the Fed is now hinting that it could shorten this to less than nine months so that runoff begins in 2022… or at least that’s how the market reads it.

  And the other big surprise is that some on the Committee felt that tightening financial conditions by relying more on balance sheet runoff and less on rate hikes would help steepen the curve, a desirable outcome in their opinion, though it’s not clear this was a widely-shared view, especially considering the catastrophic conclusion to the Fed’s tapering in Sept 2019 when JPMorgan had to crash to repo market to force the Fed to launch Not QE (narrator: it was QE) when the financial system promptly ran out of reserves. Here is the section in question:

  Some participants commented that removing policy accommodation by relying more on balance sheet reduction and less on increases in the policy rate could help limit yield curve flattening during policy normalization. A few of these participants raised concerns that a relatively flat yield curve could adversely affect interest margins for some financial intermediaries, which may raise financial stability risks. However, a couple of other participants referenced staff analysis and previous experience in noting that many factors can affect longer-dated yields, making it difficult to judge how a different policy mix would affect the shape of the yield curve.

  Many participants judged that the appropriate pace of balance sheet runoff would likely be faster than it was during the previous normalization episode. Many participants also judged that monthly caps on the runoff of securities could help ensure that the pace of runoff would be measured and predictable, particularly given the shorter weighted average maturity of the Federal Reserve’s Treasury security holdings.

  Separately, Feroli also notes that “many” also felt the recently-authorized standing repo facility should support faster and smoother balance sheet normalization, and as has been the case recently, “some” participants favored a quicker runoff pace for agency MBS relative to US Treasuries.

  There were fewer surprises regarding the Fed’s views on the economy where the staff revised up their inflation forecast for coming years, noting the “salience” of ’21 inflation outcomes. On the labor market, some on the Committee noted that the recovery was already “more inclusive.” In the discussion of the labor force participation rate, the Committee sounded more pessimistic that participation would soon recover, if ever. More generally, “several” thought the labor market was already at maximum employment, and many others thought it would “fast approach” that criterion. It was also noted by “some” participants that liftoff could happen before maximum employment had been reached if inflation expectations appeared to become unanchored.

  Commenting on the maximum employment assessment, Bloomberg economist Yelene Shulyatyeba said that “the FOMC participants’ labor-market assessment suggests they see the economy at or very close to full employment. Apart from ‘a number of signs that the U.S. labor market was very tight,’ policy makers also saw little potential for a significant short-term improvement in participation. Therefore, the economy may have achieved full employment earlier and with a smaller labor force than previously foreseen, which implies the need for tighter policy sooner than anticipated.”

  We disagree with this for reasons we explained in “A March Rate Hike? Not So Fast“

  Finally, while virus variant risks were noted several times, the overall tone of the minutes suggests this was not expected to be a major headwind to the growth outlook.

  Shifting from JPM to Goldman’s post-mortem, the bank’s Jan Hatzius cut to the chase and titled his note with the big punchline. namely that “Fed Balance Sheet Runoff Could Start “Relatively Soon” After Liftoff.” Similar to Feroli, this is how he explains it:

  The December FOMC minutes indicated that participants continued to view mid-March as an appropriate end date for net asset purchases. The minutes also noted that “some” participants said that it could be appropriate to start runoff “relatively soon after beginning to raise the federal funds rate” and “many” participants judged that the appropriate pace of balance sheet runoff would likely be faster than last cycle. 

  In our view, today’s minutes increase the chances that the FOMC might be ready to reach a decision on the runoff process and issue new normalization principles in the second quarter, which could mean that runoff begins somewhat earlier than our standing assumption of Q4.  We still expect that the start of runoff will substitute for a quarterly hike, so that the FOMC would still hike 3 times total in 2022 if runoff begins in Q3, but an earlier announcement of the start of runoff would be somewhat less likely to substitute for a hike than one that comes toward the end of the year.

  This is all fine and good, and it is certainly far more hawkish than the market expected, but it does raise several questions, as today’s market action indicated.

  First, and foremost, back in 2018 when r-star was far higher than it is today, the Fed managed to get away with 8 rate hikes before a 20% drop in stocks forced Powell into a premature easing cycle in the summer of 2019, right around the time the repo crisis emerged and the Fed realized it needs to add far more reserves (and lo and behold 7 months later, we got just the perfect Made in China excuse to inject trillions into the financial system). So the first question is how many rate hikes can the Fed get away with now that global debt is orders of magnitude higher than it was just 4 years ago. 3 hikes? 4 hikes and a run off, before the next big crash forces the Fed into early easing.

  

  Keep a close eye on fwd OIS swaps markets for the tell on when the next rate cut cycle/QE will start.

  And tied to that are two more question: while it is clear that Biden is freaking out about inflation far more than he is about the prospect of a market crash, is the president even remotely aware of what a 20%, 30% (or more) crash in the market will do to Democrats in the polls, and midterms, not to mention 2024? Something tells us the answer is no.

  Last but not least is the question everyone would like answered: just how is the Fed tightening financial conditions going to ease a historic supply chain collapse which is driven by countless other factors than just excess demand sparked by Biden’s stimmies.

  We doubt we will find out the answer, but we also doubt that the market’s latest freak out about much tighter financial conditions – including 3 rate hikes and balance sheet run off starting in 2022 – will ever come to pass. Because if it does, the only question then is how long before the Fed starts monetizing ETFs, cryptos and NFTs to preserve the $145 trillion or so in US net worth parked squarely in the hands of the 1%, the only legacy the US central bank will leave on this earth.

  The full JPM and GS reports are available to pro subs in the usual place.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 20:00

• President Biden Called Elizabeth Holmes "Inspiring", Praised Theranos As "Lab Of The Future" In 2015
  President Biden Called Elizabeth Holmes “Inspiring”, Praised Theranos As “Lab Of The Future” In 2015

  While media coverage of the Elizabeth Holmes trial – and its ensuing guilty verdicts – was robust, there was one part of the Theranos narrative that the media seemed happy to tiptoe around.

  That is, of course, Joe Biden’s involvement in the now-defunct and fraudulent blood testing startup.

  Among dozens of investigative reports about Theranos and hundreds of articles, somehow, nobody touched upon the fact that Biden praised Holmes in 2015 for “maintaining the highest standards”, as Breitbart pointed out this week.

  

  In fact, then VP Joe Biden met with Elizabeth Holmes in 2015 and called her company “the laboratory of the future”. Theranos was so jazzed about the compliment, it took to social media to post a photo of Biden with Holmes.

  A second tweet from Theranos proudly touts another quote from Biden, wherein he says “The POTUS and I share your vision of a health care paradigm focused on prevention”. 

  At a summit where the two met, Holmes said of Biden: “It is a tremendous honor to have Vice President Biden visit Theranos and participate in a preventive health care summit.”

  And the praise from Biden didn’t stop there. Breitbart reports that, after touring Holmes’ facility, Biden said: “You can see what innovation is all about just walking through this facility.”

  

  “The fact that you’re voluntarily submitting all of your tests to the FDA demonstrates your confidence in what you’re doing,” Biden continued. “Talk about being inspired. This is inspiration. It is amazing to me, Elizabeth, what you’ve been able to do.”

  In Biden’s defense, he’s hardly the first idealistic liberal to be bamboozled by futuristic sounding nonsense that doesn’t make scientific and/or economic sense. Look at fuel cell companies, wind power projects and promises of solar roof tiles, for starters. 

  But the one question that begs an answer is: how would the media have reacted if it were a GOP President who had taken meetings with Holmes in 2015? And why were Biden’s comments on Holmes never reported on over the last few years of controversy surrounding the company?

  Maybe the answers are on Hunter Biden’s laptop. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 19:40

• The Defenestration Of Dr. Robert Malone
  The Defenestration Of Dr. Robert Malone

  Commentary authored by John Mac Ghlionn via The Epoch Times,

  Dr. Robert Malone is a U.S. virologist and immunologist who has dedicated his professional existence to the development of mRNA vaccines.

  In the 1980s, Malone worked as a researcher at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, where he conducted studies on messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology. In the early 1990s, Malone collaborated with Jon A. Wolff and Dennis A. Carson, two eminent scientists, on a study that involved synthesization.

  In fact, Malone is the father of mRNA vaccines. He has served as an adjunct associate professor of biotechnology at Kennesaw State University, and he co-founded Atheric Pharmaceutical, a company that was contracted by the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in 2016.

  As you can see, Malone is no ordinary man. In fact, he’s a rather extraordinary man. Before embarking on a distinguished career in science, Malone worked as a carpenter and as a farmhand. Becoming a doctor was a lofty aspiration, but through hard work and determination, his dream became a reality. Over the course of three decades, Malone has established himself as one of the most competent people in the fields of virology and immunology.

  

  Why, then, is he considered “a pariah” (in his own words) by so many of his peers? Why did Twitter recently suspend his account?

  Malone is arguably the most qualified person in the world to speak on what we as a society should and shouldn’t be doing during the pandemic. Yet for reasons that will become abundantly clear, he finds himself ostracized, largely silenced, and cut off from the scientific community. Why?

  Two months before his Twitter account was suspended, Malone wrote a rather prophetic Twitter post:

  “I am going to speak bluntly,” he wrote.

  “Physicians who speak out are being actively hunted via medical boards and the press. They are trying to delegitimize us and pick us off one by one.”

  He finished by warning that this is “not a conspiracy theory” but “a fact.” He urged us all to “wake up.”

  Sadly, many of us are still asleep.

  In my research for this piece, it seems clear to me that Malone has been silenced, not because he’s some quack spouting nonsense, but because he challenged—and still challenges—the overarching narrative about vaccines and the lethality of COVID-19.

  Malone was recently interviewed by Joe Rogan. For the uninitiated, Rogan is the host of one of the most influential podcasts in the world. At one point during the three-hour interview, Malone referred to Dr. Anthony Fauci as Tony Fauci, a man he knows personally. Malone, in other words, knows where all the skeletons are hidden. The same is true for Dr. Peter McCullough, another world-renowned expert who has appeared on Rogan’s podcast.

  Prior to writing this piece, I consulted both Malone and McCullough.

  

  Over the course of the past 18 months, Malone has been painted as some kind of anti-vax fringe scientist, a man of questionable merit who’s spouting nonsense.

  Well, he’s not. Malone happens to be vaccinated. All he has ever asked for is the chance to have frank and honest discussions on vaccines.

  In his own words, vaccines have “saved lives. Many lives.”

  “But it is also increasingly clear that there are some risks associated with these vaccines,” Malone said. “Various governments have attempted to deny that this is the case. But they are wrong. Vaccination-associated coagulation is a risk. Cardiotoxicity is a risk. Those are proven and discussed in official USG communications, as well as communications from a variety of other governments.”

  Malone isn’t a crazed conspiracy theorist: He’s a man who’s intimately familiar with the benefits and the risks of vaccines. He’s a proponent of informed consent. Perhaps before letting someone inject a vaccine into your body, you should be fully informed of the risks involved, he says. He isn’t an unreasonable man.

  Nevertheless, in this age of faux outrage and fabricated storylines, society needs a fall guy, a boogie man, a sacrificial lamb. Malone fits the bill. He knows too much. It’s much easier to discredit a decorated physician—who challenges the overarching narrative—than it is to actually debate him.

  Zero Degrees of Separation

  The story goes deeper. In 2019, the BBC established the Trusted News Initiative (TNI), a partnership that now includes organizations such as Facebook, Twitter, Reuters, and The Washington Post. We’re told that it was established to tackle “disinformation in real time.” TNI was ostensibly designed to wage a war on “fake news.”

  Upon closer inspection, however, it appears to have been designed to promote very specific narratives and to silence any dissenting voices, such as Malone’s. Instead of trusting the TNI, we should question the motives of its members.

  After all, The Washington Post recently published a piece asking people to stop criticizing President Joe Biden. The message is clear: Stop being mean to the president, even if the president is being mean to you (on more than one occasion).

  Then, there’s James C. Smith, chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation. He sits on the board of directors for Pfizer, a company that’s responsible for the creation of vaccines with questionable efficacy and that has a history of manipulating data. In short, Pfizer is a company with a questionable reputation. Nevertheless, Pfizer Chief Executive Albert Bourla was recently named CNN’s Business CEO of the Year. Make of that what you will.

  When one thinks of TNI (and the mainstream media in general), various terms instantly spring to mind. “Objectivity” isn’t one of them. “Highly compromised” and “conflict of interest” do come to mind, however.

  Speaking of objectivity, or the lack thereof, in August 2021, The Atlantic ran a much-cited hit piece on Malone, which was high on accusations, but low on actual evidence. It attacked his character and credibility—repeatedly. Rather intriguingly, the article, like all of The Atlantic’s COVID-19 articles, was funded by the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

  The former is an organization established and owned by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation owns stock in Johnson & Johnson, a company whose vaccine has been associated with the development of blood clots—the very thing Malone has been warning us about for the better part of two years.

  People might scoff. But contrary to popular belief, democracy doesn’t die in darkness. It dies in broad daylight. Its death is slow and protracted, one by a thousand cuts rather than by one fatal stab.

  As author Steve Levitsky once wrote, democracies don’t often die at the hands of military generals, “but of elected leaders—presidents or prime ministers who subvert the very process that brought them to power.”

  “One of the great ironies of how democracies die is that the very defense of democracy is often used as a pretext for its subversion,” he wrote. “Would-be autocrats often use economic crises, natural disasters, and especially security threats—wars, armed insurgencies, or terrorist attacks—to justify antidemocratic measures.”

  Apply these lines to the pandemic, and Levitsky’s words carry more weight than ever before.

  In the United States, one must not question the efficacy of masks, vaccines for kids, the logic (or lack thereof) of lockdowns, or the unconstitutional nature of vaccine mandates. What about the little matter of vaccine breakthrough deaths? Don’t ask any questions.

  But wait, if science can’t be questioned, doesn’t this make it propaganda? Hush now. Don’t you love America? Don’t you want people to live, rather than die? Then shut up and get the vaccine, then the booster shot, then the booster-booster shot. We, the arbiters of truth, know what’s best for you. Somewhat ironically, these self-appointed arbiters of truth spout no shortage of lies.

  Is it any surprise, then, that more and more Americans continue to lose faith in the mainstream media and the government? Yet here we are, being condescended to by the likes of CNN’s Don Lemon and MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace. Worse still, we’re supposed to take orders from Fauci, a man who supposedly represents science, yet goes out of his way to smear scientists. Why would a man of science attack the very thing that he’s supposed to represent?

  

  According to numerous reports, Fauci has repeatedly deceived the American people. It’s important to remember that Fauci is, first and foremost, a talking head for the U.S. government. In reality, he’s a politician with a medical degree.

  To quote the author Gillian Flynn, the author of “Gone Girl”: “The truth is malleable; you just need to pick the right expert.”

  Who better than Fauci, a highly qualified individual with his own fan club? But don’t be fooled. Fauci might act like he answers to no one, but he does. He answers to the U.S. government. Who, then, does the government answer to? Big Pharma, it seems.

  In 2019, the Roosevelt Institute published a fascinating report, “The Cost of Capture: How the Pharmaceutical Industry has Corrupted Policy Makers and Harmed Patients.” The report outlines the many ways in which the pharmaceutical industry has shaped policies through corporate capture. This is a phenomenon that sees private industries use their significant financial and political influence to manipulate a state’s decision-making apparatus. The report warned about the dangers of lobbying and of deeply flawed medical research.

  What we’re seeing is the convergence of Big Pharma, Big Tech, and Big Government. Let’s call it the unholy trinity, with Big Tech doing the bidding of Big Government, and Big Government doing the bidding of Big Pharma.

  Interestingly, but not surprisingly, YouTube has removed the Joe Rogan episodes featuring Robert Malone and Peter McCullough. Why? Because when it comes to viruses and vaccines, these are among the most notable and accomplished experts in the world. They appear to know things that the government doesn’t want us to know. Additionally, Google, the owner of YouTube, appears to be closely involved with the U.S. government.

  What we’re left with is the equivalent of a digital dictatorship, with even the most qualified people being silenced, ostracized, and, in some cases, defenestrated. Robert Malone is a wise man, an honest man, and a highly credible man. The grief that has come his way—and continues to come his way to this day—is unwarranted. But as he knows only too well, this is the price one must pay for challenging the unholy trinity.

  Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 19:20

• Ningbo Port Activity Grinds To A Halt As China Outbreak Worsens
  Ningbo Port Activity Grinds To A Halt As China Outbreak Worsens

  After authorities found more COVID cases in Ningbo, a port city and industrial hub home to one of the world’s largest ports, residents are facing a partial lockdown, and reports claim that movement of essential products has been dramatically slowed as the lockdown measures slow activity at the port.

  Beijing has managed to keep reports about the situation mostly under wraps, but reports in Bloomberg and several trade journals have warned that the slowdowns at the port could have wide-ranging ramifications for international commerce.

  

  Right now, lockdowns are affecting Xi’an and Yuzhou along with the Ningbo port, Chinese sources said. In Yuzhou, which has a population of 1.1M, authorities shut down its transport system and all but essential food stores closed overnight.

  The strict lockdown measures come as Beijing braces for both the Winter Olympics and the Lunar New Year. With exactly a month to go until the Games start, foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin assured reporters China had “formulated an efficient and highly effective defense system”.

  Part of this system will involve thousands of staff and volunteers entering a bubble on Tuesday, which will see them have no physical contact with the outside world in order to limit the spread.

  Athletes and members of the press who cover the Games will also enter the bubble on arrival in China, where they will remain for the duration of their stay.

  In Yuzhou, situated some some 434 miles south-west of Beijing, officials said that “to curb and quash the epidemic within the shortest amount of time is a high-priority political task” for the local government.

  Some people pointed out that the CCP’s lockdown measures might actually be making the situation worse: “People are swapping stuff with others in the same building, because they no longer have enough food to eat,” one man who spoke with Radio Free Asia on the condition of anonymity said. 

  The news outlet also reported that another man had wanted to trade a smartphone and tablet for rice, according to the BBC.

  What Beijing calls its “dynamic zero COVID” strategy combines mass vaccinations with a regime of constant testing, nationwide monitoring of people’s movements, temperature-taking and smartphone apps to prove individuals don’t pose a threat. This hyper-vigilance has left doctors exhausted.

  Perhaps this is why the activity at the Ningbo port has slowed: one trade journal covering the business of commerce said that while no COVID cases have been reported at any of the port’s three container terminals, closures at warehouses and the container depot, as well as trucking disruptions, have made it difficult for manufacturers and suppliers to get their goods from the port, or to the port.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 19:00

• Finally, Bloomberg Admits Renewables Mania Caused Energy Shortages
  Finally, Bloomberg Admits Renewables Mania Caused Energy Shortages

  Authored by Michael Shellenberger via Substack,

  Between 2017 and 2021, Environmental Progress and I researched and published dozens of articles, testified before Congress, and authored a book, Apocalypse Never, arguing that weather-dependent renewables were making electricity increasingly unreliable and expensive, and making the United States, Europe, and Asia, dangerously dependent on natural gas.

  In response, there was an organized and somewhat successful effort by progressive climate-renewables activists to cut off our funding, censor us on Facebook, and prevent me from testifying before Congress.

  But now, one of the biggest boosters of natural gas and renewables, media giant Bloomberg, whose owner, Michael Bloomberg, is directly invested in natural gas and renewables, has published an article conceding and substantiating almost every single point we have made over the years. “Europe Sleepwalked Into an Energy Crisis That Could Last Years,” screams the headline. The article concludes that the crisis was “years in the making” because Europe is “shutting down coal-fired electricity plants and increasing its reliance on renewables.”

  

  Bloomberg still pulls its punches and misdescribes the situation in some ways. The article, like many other Bloomberg articles, mislabels the deployment of renewables as an “energy transition” similar to past transitions from wood to coal and coal to natural gas, failing to acknowledge that the poor physics of energy-dilute renewables make that impossible. And it suggests that Europe’s energy crisis is the result of ignorance. “The energy crisis hit the bloc,” notes a renewable energy PR person, “when security of supply was not on the menu of EU policymakers,” ignoring the reality that I and others warned EU policymakers of this very crisis.

  But, to its credit, the article acknowledges that the energy crisis is a direct result of Europe over-investing in unreliable renewables and under-investing in reliable energy sources. “Wind and solar are cleaner but sometimes fickle,” the authors admit, in the understatement of the year, “as illustrated by the sudden drop in turbine-generated power the continent recorded last year.” (I was the first U.S. journalist to report Germany saw its emissions rise 25% in the first half of 2021 due to lack of wind.)

  Now, a new analysis from Environmental Progress finds Germany increased its emissions last year and will likely increase them again this year. This year, German electricity generation coming from fossil fuels will be 44% compared to 39% in 2021 and 37 percent in 2020, assuming weather conditions and electricity demand are similar to 2021. Emissions from Germany’s power sector will rise from 244 million tons in 2021 to 264 million tons in 2022.

  

  And Bloomberg notes that Europe is in a full-blown energy crisis.

  “The retired salt caverns, aquifers, and fuel depots that hold Europe’s stockpiles of natural gas have never been so empty at this point in winter,” it notes, and “the continent is grappling with a supply crunch that’s caused benchmark gas prices to more than quadruple from last year’s levels, squeezing businesses and households. The crisis has left the European Union at the mercy of the weather and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s wiles, both notoriously difficult to predict.”

  It’s true that American natural gas from fracking, a practice I have defended since 2013, is being shipped to Europe, and will ease Europe’s pain. And it hasn’t helped that France’s leaders have grossly mismanaged their nuclear power plants, resulting in an embarrassing 30% decline in their output during the crisis.

  But, notes Bloomberg, the relief provided by American liquified natural gas (LNG) is “temporary at best…. Storage sites [for natural gas] are only 56% full, more than 15 percentage points below the 10-year average… Barring an increase in Russian exports, something that doesn’t appear to be in the cards, levels will be at less than 15% by the end of March, the lowest on record… With the two coldest months of winter still ahead, the fear is that Europe may run out of gas.”

  And the lack of nuclear energy underscores the need for more nuclear plants since they are reliable and operate independently of the weather when they are managed well. No matter how well a solar farm is managed, it can’t change the weather.

  

  And now, Russia is massing troops on its border with Ukraine, and may invade. This is a problem since one-third of Russian gas going into Europe goes through Ukraine. If war breaks out, Europe could suffer serious gas shortages. Overdependence on natural gas and renewables, and underinvestment in nuclear, has thus undermined the energy security, and thus national security, of Europe, since heads of state dependent on Russian gas will be less likely to speak out against an invasion.

  Even longtime natural gas and renewable energy boosters agree there’s a crisis. “The ability of Europe and the U.S. to respond to a Russian invasion is constrained both by a desire not to exacerbate Europe’s energy crisis by sanctioning Russian energy exports and, more broadly, by the threat that Russia could retaliate to any confrontation by restricting gas flows into Europe, as Russia did in 2006 and 2009,” Jason Bordoff, a former Obama administration official, told Bloomberg.

  Covid accelerated many trends and one of them is the recognition that unreliable and weather-dependent renewables cannot power modern economies. Senator Joe Manchin specifically mentioned the role that renewables are playing in making America’s electricity less reliable when he killed Build Back Better legislation in December. The Netherlands mentioned the need for reliable electricity when it announced plans to expand nuclear energy.

  Now, with New England at grave risk of energy shortages for the exact same reasons as Europe, it’s time for the American people and their representatives to fully wake up to the reality that modern societies cannot rely on unreliable renewables. It would also help if the renewable energy industry, and its dogmatic supporters, including Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Rep. Sean Casten, and Rep. Jared Huffman, would stop trying to censor and otherwise shut down the people who raised the alarm about the coming crisis in the first place.

  *  *  *

  Michael Shellenberger is a Time Magazine “Hero of the Environment,”Green Book Award winner, and the founder and president of Environmental Progress. He is author of just launched book San Fransicko (Harper Collins) and the best-selling book, Apocalypse Never (Harper Collins June 30, 2020). Subscribe To Michael’s substack here

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 18:40

• Russian-Led Bloc Agrees To Send Troops To Restore Order In Kazakhstan
  Russian-Led Bloc Agrees To Send Troops To Restore Order In Kazakhstan

  (update6:24eastern): After hours ago Kazakhstan’s embattled President Tokayev formally requested the CSTO security bloc – which involves 6 former Soviet countries including Russia and Belarus – for military assistance to quell largescale uprising which was triggered over a rapid fuel price hike, the Kremlin has said it is sending Russian troops.

  In the early hours of Thursday (local time), the Russian-led bloc approved the “peace-keeping” mission in the former Soviet satellite state along Russia’s border to its south. Chairman of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), Nikol Pashinyan, has announced a “limited” mission due to the “threat to national security” of Kazakhstan. This after President Tokayev had blamed “external aggression” on the unrest which has seen government buildings torched and banks looted. 

  “In response to the appeal by [President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev] and considering a threat to national security and sovereignty of Kazakhstan, caused, among other things, by outside interference, the CSTO Collective Security Council decided to send the Collective Peacekeeping Forces to the Republic of Kazakhstan in accordance with Article 4 of the Collective Security Treaty,” Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan said in a statement on Facebook.

  The CSTO is a central Asia-focused military alliance of Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. But logistically it could prove a significant problem to move any level of a large Russian forces, given other factors…

  Russia last year was busy moving whole army from Kazakhstan border to the border of Ukraine. And that is not “rapid deployment forces” easy to move https://t.co/wZZXFurCh9

  — Liveuamap (@Liveuamap) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Meanwhile, widespread looting was reported in major Kazakh cities in the overnight and early morning hours of Thursday – amid continued national internet outages – with increasingly wild scenes such as the following…

  Looting in Almaty: crashing the bank pic.twitter.com/W1jH7LBNLO

  — Russian Market (@russian_market) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  And more:

  Looting continues in Kazakhstan pic.twitter.com/VTSJFWrY4K

  — Russian Market (@russian_market) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  It appears the new peace-keeping mission will likely have a “counter-terror” focus. So far there’s been little reaction from Washington over the rapidly moving events in Kazakhstan. But likely we are about to hear the mainstream US networks go into overdrive alleging an “expansionist” Russia under Putin, and the usual hysterics. 

  * * *

  (update2:01eastern): Russian state sources are reporting that embattled Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has sent a formal request for foreign troops to help quell the ongoing unrest, particularly Russia, as multiple cities have seen state buildings torched by protesters and rioters.

  KAZAKH PRESIDENT SAYS PROTESTS ARE EXTERNAL AGGRESSION: TASS

  ⚡️Kazakh President sends request for foreign troops to collective security bloc – involving six former Soviet countries including Russia – to help stem the riots – reports pic.twitter.com/h8Nh1oyieR

  — RT (@RT_com) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  This after he extended the state of emergency nationwide, and as external monitors have said the internet has been blocked for much of the last 24 hours.

  Russia’s RT has published the following statement:

  The Kazakh president has asked the Russia-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) for help amid violent unrest gripping the nation, claiming that “terrorists” were overrunning strategic facilities across the country.

  “I believe reaching out to the CSTO partners is appropriate and timely,” President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev was quoted as saying by the media late on Wednesday.

  

  * * *

  It didn’t take long for the Kremlin to chime in on the raging and increasingly violent protests which have rocked its southern neighbor, the former Soviet satellite of Kazakhstan. As we underscored earlier, what began as angry mass protests days ago upon authorities removing a cap on gas prices for the citizenry now appears to be a full-blown push for government overthrow happening in the streets. With state buildings on fire and fierce clashes with police in various cities, Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has on Wednesday extended the ‘state of emergency’ across the whole nation.

  Already there are rumblings in regional press of possible “foreign manipulation” — causing Russia to warn against any external interference in Kazakhstan’s affairs, according to Reuters citing RIA news agency. At the same time some Western pundits are already making this all about Putin.

  

  Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov addressed the rapidly moving events which has seen the Kazakh president vow not to leave the capital “no matter what”. Peskov stressed to reporters that the country can “solve its own problems” and that it’s crucial that “no one interfere from the outside.”

  And more, the report quoted Peskov as saying “Kazakhstan had not requested Russian help to deal with protests, triggered by a fuel price increase, that prompted the resignation of its government on Wednesday.”

  The Russian foreign ministry confirmed separately it’s monitoring the unrest, “We advocate the peaceful resolution of all problems within the constitutional and legal framework and dialogue, rather than through street riots and the violation of laws,” a statement said. 

  Internet has been blocked across the country for at least a full day at this point, and there were earlier unconfirmed reports that the largest international airport, Almaty Airport, had been stormed and seized by rioters, with all flights canceled. 

  Hawkish analysts in the West are already linking Kazakh government oppression with who else… Putin

  Another country with its border to Russia revolts: because the Beloved Leader stays in power for too long. Not a good sign for Putin, who will clearly intervene, if Nursultan (ruling since Summer 1989!) would disappoint Putin. Long live free Kazakhstan! pic.twitter.com/TAjQHDsewf

  — Sergej Sumlenny (@sumlenny) January 4, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  For now at this early point, claims of outside or foreign interference remain highly speculative, also given the lack of much if any international correspondents actually on the ground during the unrest.

  Meanwhile multiple public buildings, including at least one presidential residence, have been torched, according to widely circulating social media videos.

  Protesters now storming the main government building in Kazakhstan’s largest city Almaty. pic.twitter.com/lemKcpILL8

  — Patrick Reevell (@Reevellp) January 5, 2022

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  There is also evidence of ‘live fire’ in various locations, though there’s been little in the way of official casualty figures. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 18:24

• Goldman: Bitcoin's Price May Rise Above $100,000
  Goldman: Bitcoin’s Price May Rise Above $100,000

  As part of a “bonus question” asked in Goldman’s listing of the bank’s five top FX questions for 2022 (available to pro subscribers in the usual place), Goldman FX strategist Zach Pandl speculates on the fate of bitcoin – yes, according to the most important bank in the world, bitcoin is a currency – and predicts that the token frequently cited as digital gold will continue to take market share from gold as part of broader adoption of digital assets, suggesting that the often touted price prediction of $100,000 a distinct possibility.

  In response to a rhetorical question whether “Bitcoin take additional market share from gold” (one which JPM answered affirmatively back in October when it found that “Institutions Are Rotating Out Of Gold Into Bitcoin As A Better Inflation Hedge“), Goldman’s Pandl takes a hint from the iconic analysis penned by Paul Tudor Jones back in May 2020 which quickly became a bible to crypto advocates, and which looked at the absolute value of various hard assets…

  

  … and writes that according to the World Gold Council estimates, the private sector owns 44,000 metric tonnes of gold for investment purposes (i.e. privately-held bars and ETFs, excluding jewelry, official sector holdings, and industrial uses).

  So, at the current market price of $1,800 per troy ounce, this implies that the public owns about $2.6 trillion of gold for investment purposes. By comparison, Bitcoin’s float-adjusted market capitalization is currently just under $700BN. Therefore, Pandl writes, “Bitcoin currently commands a roughly 20% share of the “store of value” (gold plus Bitcoin) market”

  

  Looking ahead, the Goldman strategist thinks that Bitcoin’s market share will most likely rise over time as a byproduct of broader adoption of digital assets, and possibly due to Bitcoin-specific scaling solutions although, as he admits, “the network’s consumption of real resources may remain an important obstacle to institutional adoption.

  In any case, in a hypothetical scenario, the Goldman strategist notes that if Bitcoin’s share of the “store of value” market were to rise to 50% over the next five years – with no growth in overall demand for stores of value – “its price would increase to just over $100,000, for a compound annualized return of 17-18% (accounting for growth in Bitcoin supply over time).”

  Of course, bitcoin may eventually have applications beyond simply a “store of value”—and digital asset markets are much bigger than Bitcoin — but Goldman thinks that comparing its market capitalization to gold can help put parameters on plausible outcomes for Bitcoin returns.

  Finally, this is great news for web3 fans holders of Ethereum: as a reminder, Goldman has traditionally been skeptical about the long-term prospects of bitcoin while praising ethereum if for no other reason than its actual practical uses (see ““The Amazon Of Information”: Goldman Initiates On Crypto, Sees Ethereum Overtaking Bitcoin“). In fact, Goldman not too long ago said that the odds of a flipenning (the market cap of ETH surpassing that of BTC) are rising. Which means that if Bitcoin is set to double from here, then Ethereum may be looking at a $20,000 price in the not too distant future.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 01/05/2022 – 18:20