• Biden's New Carbon Capture Mandates Will Cause Blackouts, Increases Prices
  Biden’s New Carbon Capture Mandates Will Cause Blackouts, Increases Prices

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

  The lie of the day is from the EPA: Carbon capture will pay for itself (thanks to IRA subsidies). No, it won’t even with subsidies. Expect blackouts and a higher price for electricity.

  

  Suite of Standards to Raise Costs, Reduce Output

  Let’s take a dive into the EPA news release Biden-Harris Administration Finalizes Suite of Standards to Reduce Pollution from Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants

  “Today, EPA is proud to make good on the Biden-Harris Administration’s vision to tackle climate change and to protect all communities from pollution in our air, water, and in our neighborhoods,” said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. “By developing these standards in a clear, transparent, inclusive manner, EPA is cutting pollution while ensuring that power companies can make smart investments and continue to deliver reliable electricity for all Americans.”

  A final rule for existing coal-fired and new natural gas-fired power plants that would ensure that all coal-fired plants that plan to run in the long-term and all new baseload gas-fired plants control 90 percent of their carbon pollution.

  The final emission standards and guidelines will achieve substantial reductions in carbon pollution at reasonable cost. The best system of emission reduction for the longest-running existing coal units and most heavily utilized new gas turbines is based on carbon capture and sequestration/storage (CCS) – an available and cost-reasonable emission control technology that can be applied directly to power plants and can reduce 90 percent of carbon dioxide emissions from the plants.

  Lower costs and continued improvements in CCS technology, alongside tax incentives from President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act that allow companies to largely offset the cost of CCS, represent recent developments in emissions controls that informed EPA’s determination of what is technically feasible and cost-reasonable. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law also includes billions of dollars to advance and deploy CCS technology and infrastructure. EPA projects that the sector can comply with the standards with negligible impact on electricity prices, thanks to cost declines in CCS and other emissions-reducing technologies. EPA analysis also finds that power companies can comply with the standards while meeting grid reliability, even when considering increased load growth.

  Final EPA Rule

  The EPA’s Final Rule is only 1,020 pages long. There were 953 references to carbon capture and sequestration/storage (CCS).

  I went through some of those 953 references and found these tidbits.

  CCS is an adequately demonstrated technology that achieves significant emissions reduction and is cost-reasonable, taking into account the declining costs of the technology and a substantial tax credit available to sources.

  The first component of the BSER [Best System of Emission Reduction] for base load combustion turbines is highly efficient generation (based on the emission rates that the best performing units are achieving) and the second component for base load combustion turbines is utilization of CCS with 90 percent capture.

  One of the key GHG [Greenhouse Gasses] reduction technologies upon which the BSER determinations are founded in these final rules is CCS—a technology that can capture and permanently store CO2 from fossil fuel-fired EGUs.

  I confess. I did not read all 1020 pages and don’t intend to. I have seen enough by reading through a dozen or so of the 953 references to CCS.

  Returning to the Biden-Harris document I note references to “reasonable cost” and “largely offset the cost of CCS.” Thus CCS is admittedly not cost effective even with subsidies.

  IISD Sustainable Development

  For a rebuttal to the above Biden claims, please consider the International Institution for Sustainable Development article Why Carbon Capture and Storage Is Not a Net-Zero Solution for Canada’s Oil and Gas Sector

  The poor track record of CCS in Canada is part of a broader trend. According to the Global CCS Institute (2022), the global growth of carbon captured by commercially operating CCS facilities has been much slower than anticipated. As of September 2022, only 30 commercial CCS projects are operating across all sectors around the world, capturing 42.5 Mtpa. This falls far short of the IEA’s (2009) previous target of 300 Mtpa by 2020. Most proposed projects have been withdrawn: of the 149 CCS projects anticipated to be storing carbon by 2020, over 100 were cancelled or placed on indefinite hold (Abdulla et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2021). In the United States, despite significant industry and government investment in the technology, more than 80% of proposed CCS projects have failed to become operational due to high costs, low technological readiness, the lack of a credible financial return, and dependence on government incentives that are withdrawn. Of those projects that are operating globally, 73% of the carbon captured is used for EOR.

  Put simply, proponents of CCS have repeatedly over-promised on the technology’s ability to reduce emissions, and CCS projects have under-delivered.

  CCS is both energy and capital intensive. The greatest amount of energy is required for the capture and compression of carbon, with additional amounts needed for transportation and storage. Capture and compression alone require 330–420 kWh per tonne of CO2 captured. CCS projects increase the energy demand of the facility they capture carbon from by 15%–25% on average, which stands to increase emissions given that the energy used to capture CO2 is often natural gas-powered electricity. In general, the technology is highly energy inefficient and generates its own emissions.

  The above doc largely pertains to carbon capture in Canada’s Oil and Gas Sector, not electricity production, bit it is instructive on the difficulty of and inefficacy of carbon capture.

  The lead CCS image is from that post.

  Biden EPA’s Plan to Ration Electricity

  The Wall Street Journal calls the CCS mandate Biden EPA’s Plan to Ration Electricity

  Section 111 of the Clean Air Act says the EPA can regulate pollutants from stationary sources through the “best system of emission reduction” that is “adequately demonstrated.” Carbon capture is neither the best nor adequately demonstrated. As of last year, only one commercial-scale coal plant in the world used carbon capture, and no gas-fired plants did.

  EPA says Inflation Reduction Act tax credits and funding in the 2021 infrastructure bill will “incentivize and facilitate the deployment” of carbon capture. But subsidies would have to be two to three times larger to make the technology cost-effective at a coal plant. Carbon capture reduces a plant’s efficiency, which also raises costs.

  Because carbon capture uses 20% to 25% of the electricity generated by a power plant, less will be available to the grid. That means more generators will be needed to provide the same amount of power. But new gas-fired plants won’t be built because the technology will make them uneconomic. Talk about a catch-22.

  Another problem: CO2 must be stored underground in certain geologic formations, largely in the upper Midwest and Gulf Coast. Permitting new wells for CO2 injections can take six years. Pipelines to transport CO2 can take even longer. Green groups oppose pipelines for CO2 as they do for oil and natural gas.

  All of this will hit while demand for power is surging amid new manufacturing needs and an artificial intelligence boom. Texas’s grid operator this week raised its forecast for demand growth for 2030 by 40,000 megawatts compared to last year’s forecast. That’s about seven times the power that New York City uses at any given time.

  Texas power demand will nearly double over the next six years owing to data centers, manufacturing plants, crypto mining and the electrification of oil and gas equipment. When temperatures in Texas recently climbed into the 80s, the grid operator told power plants not to shut down for maintenance. Americans around the country are increasingly being told to raise their thermostats during the summer and avoid running appliances to prevent blackouts.

  Even some Democrats are noticing the pinch on their voters’ pocketbooks. Reps. Marcy Kaptur, Henry Cuellar, Mary Sattler Peltola, Vicente Gonzalez and Jared Golden last weekend urged President Biden to defer finalizing EPA’s power-plant rules because they could “inadvertently exacerbate existing problems related to the unaffordability of electricity” and cause “increased risks to electric reliability.”

  Mr. Biden’s new rules will surely draw a legal challenge. But as litigation plays out, the tremendous uncertainty will delay investment in much-needed new gas plants. Americans didn’t face energy rationing in Mr. Biden’s first term, but they might in a second.

  The Inflation Reduction Act Keeps Biting in Predictable Ways

  Biden plans to reduce inflation by raising costs, producing less electricity when more is needed, force people into EVs without a capable grid, pipeline captured carbon when the pipelines don’t exist and allegedly increase reliability.

  It’s so stupid even some Democrats are concerned. Well not to worry, this can all be done at a “reasonable cost” with costs “largely offset” thanks to the IRA.

  Expect blackouts and a much higher price for electricity as a key component of “reasonable cost”.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/06/2024 – 02:00

• Yen's First Intervention Rally Owed Very Little to Short Squeeze
  Yen’s First Intervention Rally Owed Very Little to Short Squeeze

  By Garfield Reynolds, Bloomberg Markets Live reporter and strategist

  The first of Japan’s apparent twin interventions last week may have capped USD/JPY for some time to keep the pair under 160. But that had very little to do with flushing out yen short positioning at least with the initial move. Large speculators as covered by CFTC data through last Tuesday were still very strongly positioned for yen declines, highlighting both why Japan was so willing to apparently step in again on Thursday morning Tokyo time, and why it may need to do so several more times in the coming weeks.

  The latest CFTC reading shows yen bears trimmed positions for the first time in seven weeks, but they only cut back by 11,531 contracts — less than the shorts added in the prior week to April 23!

  So the newest, weakest hands look to be the only ones who got forced out when Japan sold an estimated $35b to buy yen. That did at least stop the CFTC shorts exceeding the record 188,000 contracts touched in 2007, though it left them at extreme levels.

  

  Perhaps the second time Japan stepped in — after the Federal Reserve’s Wednesday decision — caused more of a positioning shift, coming as it did in the US session rather than during Tokyo hours. But we won’t find out how much of an impact until this coming Friday’s release from the CFTC.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 05/06/2024 – 00:36

• Marine Vet With PTSD Given More Than 5 Years In Prison, Fined $200,000 Over Jan. 6
  Marine Vet With PTSD Given More Than 5 Years In Prison, Fined $200,000 Over Jan. 6

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Ryan Taylor Nichols, a Marine Corps veteran and disaster-rescue specialist who argued that post-traumatic stress drove his behavior at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, was sentenced on May 2 to more than five years in prison and fined $200,000 for assaulting police and obstruction of an official proceeding.

  

  Mr. Nichols, 33, of Longview, Texas, was ordered by U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth to serve 63 months behind bars and fined $200,000—the lion’s share of the $237,708 raised on a GiveSendGo page set up for his legal and household expenses.

  It was the largest fine issued in a Jan. 6 criminal case.

  Judge Lamberth also ordered Mr. Nichols to serve 36 months of supervised release and pay $2,000 in restitution.

  Prosecutors sought an upward departure from federal sentencing guidelines in asking for an 83-month prison sentence. The Department of Justice stressed Mr. Nichols’s use of pepper spray on police and his incendiary rhetoric before, during, and after Jan. 6.

  Mr. Nichols argued for time served after 28 months in custody, citing his severe PTSD and “horrific prison conditions” at the District of Columbia jail as major mitigating factors.

  “Ryan Nichols is a good guy who made a bad decision on January 6. He’s paid his debt in the most cruel and unusual way possible,” defense attorney Joseph D. McBride told The Epoch Times. “The fact that he’s got to go back to jail for any period of time sickens me to my stomach.”

  Mr. McBride said despite not objecting to the sentencing calculation made by the U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services System, the DOJ complained to Judge Lamberth on May 2 that an error needed correcting that would bump up Mr. Nichols’s sentencing range.

  The judge allowed the last-minute change, Mr. McBride said.

  “I’m disappointed. I respect his [Judge Lamberth’s] service, but I don’t respect his decision today.”

  ‘Expletive-Laden Tirade’

  Federal prosecutors stressed Mr. Nichols’s use of potent pepper spray on the police line near the Lower West Terrace tunnel and his participation in a heave-ho maneuver against police as evidence of his propensity for violence.

  Mr. Nichols’s speech and his belief that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from President Donald J. Trump drew extensive commentary and attention from prosecutors in their 36-page sentencing memorandum.

  On his walk from the Ellipse to the Capitol after President Trump’s speech on Jan. 6, Mr. Nichols let loose with an “eighteen-minute, expletive-laden, threatening tirade,” prosecutors wrote.

  

  “I’m hearing reports that [Vice President Mike] Pence caved. I’m telling you if Pence caved, we’re gonna drag [expletive] through the streets,“ Mr. Nichols said on a social media broadcast. ”You [expletive] politicians are going to get [expletive] drug through the streets. Because we’re not going to have our [expletive] stolen. We’re not going to have our election or our country stolen.”

  After hearing that protesters had breached the Capitol, Mr. Nichols urged them to “get up in there.”

  “Cut their heads off,“ he said. ”Hey, Republican protestors are trying to enter the House right now at the Capitol is the word that I’m getting. So, if that’s true, then get up in there. If you voted for treason, we’re going to drag your [expletive] through the streets.”

  Mr. Nichols also chanted, “Lock and load, lock and load, lock and load,” the DOJ memo said.

  Late on Jan. 6, Mr. Nichols took to social media again to proclaim himself leader of a revolution, the DOJ said.

  “So, yes, I’m calling for violence! And I will be violent!“ Mr. Nichols said. ”Because I’ve been peaceful and my voice hasn’t been heard! I’ve been peaceful and my vote doesn’t count! I’ve been peaceful and the courts won’t hear me. So you’re [expletive] right, I’m going to be violent now!”

  PTSD Drove Behavior

  Mr. McBride cited Mr. Nichols’s PTSD that grew out of his Marine Corps service and his work rescuing stranded residents and pets after countless hurricanes to cast his Jan. 6 behavior in context.

  Because Mr. Nichols had stopped taking his psychiatric medications during the summer of 2020, he believed the country was at war when he traveled to Washington D.C. on Jan. 6, Mr. McBride wrote in his 28-page sentencing memo.

  Jan. 6 was a “PTSD-related aberration in Ryan’s law-abiding life,” Mr. McBride wrote.

  “Ryan’s earnest desire to legally participate in political protest was hijacked by his PTSD, which told him that America was under attack,” Mr. McBride said. “By the time Ryan walked over to the Capitol from the Ellipse on January 6, his PTSD had reached category-5 five hurricane status. His pupils were dilated. His heart was pounding.”

  The man who recorded the video late on Jan. 6 “was so detached from reality that neither Ryan nor anyone from his family recognized him,” Mr. McBride wrote. “That is a man who lost impulse control because PTSD hit the override button in his brain.”

  Mr. Nichols founded a nonprofit organization called Rescue the Universe that has saved the lives of more than 150 people in the aftermath of hurricanes, tropical storms, and tornadoes.

  During Hurricane Michael in 2018, Mr. Nichols drove from Texas to Florida to assist the Coast Guard with rescues. He saved a woman who was eight months pregnant after she was trapped under the rubble of her home, Mr. McBride wrote.

  

  “On another occasion, he was called upon to evacuate several nursing homes. The staff evacuated and left the elderly residents to die,” Mr. McBride wrote. “Ryan tried to save as many lives as possible but could not save everyone.”

  Although Mr. Nichols informed the U.S. Marshals and jail staff that he suffered from PTSD when he was arrested in January 2021, solitary confinement was used against him, and he suffered from other “horrible” conditions during pretrial detainment, Mr. McBride said.

  ‘Driven to Suicide Watch’

  In one instance, “he was thrown into solitary confinement for three weeks,” Mr. McBride wrote. “His drinking water was regularly cut off for 20-hour periods. He was harassed and prodded to the point where he was driven to suicide watch.

  “Suicide watch involved Ryan being stripped naked and forced to wear a plastic Tyvek suit in a brightly lit room where the guards continued to harm and encourage him to kill himself,” Mr. McBride said.

  The mistreatment of Mr. Nichols was the subject of an Aug. 22, 2022, habeas corpus petition and numerous follow-up petitions seeking his release from custody. On Nov. 22, 2022, U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan ordered Mr. Nichols released to the custody of his wife, Bonnie Nichols.

  

  Mr. Nichols spent 350 days on home detention before being ordered back behind bars in November 2023 when he pleaded guilty to two criminal counts under a deal with the DOJ.

  In his sentencing memo, Mr. McBride argued that pretrial services erred in its calculation of possible prison time under federal guidelines. The correct range should have been 24–30 months, he said. Given Mr. Nichols’s 28 months in pretrial detention, he would be eligible for a sentence of time served.

  Mr. McBride filed 57 character letters with Mr. Nichols’s sentencing memo and video statements from his client’s wife, father, and sons.

  “I don’t think my Dad is a criminal and he’s been locked away for a long time,“ Blake Nichols, 8, said in one video. ”I’ve known him for seven years and I think he’s a hero and he did a lot of good things in life and all of that added up to one bad thing.

  “I was just wondering if you could make him come home,” the boy said. “It’s been very bad for him not to be here and I’ve been thinking about him all night.”

  Mr. Nichols has great remorse over Jan. 6, Mr. McBride wrote, and he has suffered greatly in prison for it.

  “Ryan is mortified by the videos and images depicting his outlandish January 6 behavior,” Mr. McBride wrote. “He apologizes sincerely for his words and actions on January 6, 2021, which harmed his family, country, and himself.

  “January 6 is a severe and unfortunate aberration in his law-abiding life.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 23:20

• Texas AG Threatens "Every Possible Response" After Defiant Austin Allows "Gender Affirming" Care For Minors
  Texas AG Threatens “Every Possible Response” After Defiant Austin Allows “Gender Affirming” Care For Minors

  Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has responded to a defiant decision by the Austin City Council (ACC), which voted on Thursday to ignore a state law which prohibits “gender transitioning or gender reassignment procedure or treatment” for minors under the age of 18.

  

  In a 10-1 vote, the ACC passed the resolution which directs city resources away from SB 14.

  Paxton Responds

  “On May 2, 2024, the Austin City Council passed a resolution that purportedly directs the city manager and city employees not to comply with Texas’s prohibition of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and invasive surgeries for children who believe their gender is different than their biological sex,” Paxton said in response.

  “Riddled with problems, the resolution starts with the falsehood that such prohibited treatments have ‘proven to be evidence-based, medically necessary, and lifesaving.’ In addition to a growing body of medical research rejecting such claims, Texas concluded that the proposed treatments for minors are dangerous, and banned the practices by passing SB 14,” he said.

  Paxton says his office stands ready to ensure Austin follows state law.

  “If the City of Austin refuses to follow the law and protect children, my office will consider every possible response to ensure compliance,” he said. “Texas municipalities do not have the authority to pick and choose which state laws they will or will not abide by. The people of Texas have spoken, and the Austin City Council must listen.”

  As the Epoch Times notes further, the resolution was introduced by Council Member Chito Vela, who represents District 4. It was co-sponsored by four other council members—Ryan Alter, Zo Qadri, José Velásquez, and Vanessa Fuentes.

  The one no vote was Council Member Mackenzie Kelly of District 6.

  “Except to the extent required by law, it is the policy of the City that no City personnel, funds, or resources shall be used to investigate, criminally prosecute, or impose administrative penalties upon: (1) a transgender or nonbinary individual for seeking healthcare, or (2) an individual or organization for providing or assisting with the provision of healthcare to a transgender or nonbinary individual,” the resolution states.

  It also directs Austin police to make enforcement of SB 14 their lowest priority.

  According to Mr. Paxton, the resolution is nothing more than an “empty political statement” citing that each clause in the resolution directs the city manager to defy SB 14 with the qualifying statement “except to the extent required by law.” He said the ACC would order the city manager and employees to follow the law while pretending to say the opposite.

  “The vote by the Austin City Council today to support sex change operations for kids is infuriating but comes at no surprise. Repeatedly, Austin City Council has cared more about virtue signaling than the health and safety of its citizens,” Mary Elizabeth Castle, director of Government Relations for Texas Values, told The Epoch Times via email.

  

  Ms. Castle said: “the resolution by its nature does not address the specific enforcement of law and instead directs entities like the local police department and the district attorney, who were not given enforcement power by SB 14, to ignore the law. The resolution is mostly a shell game to make it seem like Austin City Council will not comply with the law.”

  In previous years, Ms. Castle said the ACC’s measures with pro-life laws and defunding the police have directed law enforcement to “either ignore complaints regarding laws on social issues they do not agree with or push them to the bottom of the stack.

  “Today’s action signals to the larger Austin community that sex change operations for kids are no big deal, when in fact transitioning a child can be deadly and dangerous,” said Ms. Castle.

  A new long-term study out of the Netherlands found many adolescents who have doubts about their identity and gender identity grow out of it. The study also found it is normal to have doubts about one’s identity and it is actually relatively common.

  In 2023, Mr. Abbott signed SB 14 into law. The law prohibits any physician or health care provider from “transitioning a child’s biological sex as determined by the sex organs, chromosomes, and endogenous profiles of the child or affirming the child ’s perception of the child ’s sex if that perception is inconsistent with the child ’s biological sex.”

  The law prohibits doctors from performing numerous procedures on minors as part of gender transitioning including castration, hysterectomy, metoidioplasty, orchiectomy, among others.

  Prescription drugs associated with transitioning such as puberty blockers and supraphysiologic doses of testosterone to females or estrogen to males were also prohibited in Texas.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 22:45

• Appeals Court Hammers Prosecution About FBI Conduct In Whitmer Kidnap Plot
  Appeals Court Hammers Prosecution About FBI Conduct In Whitmer Kidnap Plot

  Authored by Ken Silva via Headline USA,

  The much-anticipated appeal hearing was held Thursday for Barry Croft and Adam Fox, the alleged “ringleaders” of the 2020 militia conspiracy to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

  

  Croft and Fox were convicted of plotting to kidnap Whitmer after their second trial in late 2022. At their first trial earlier that year, a jury acquitted two other men while failing to reach a verdict for Croft and Fox.

  The two men appealed their convictions on multiple grounds. Thursday’s hearing focused largely on the conduct of FBI informants and their handling agents.

  Oral arguments in appeal of conviction of Adam Fox and Barry Croft–two men entrapped by FBI in Whitmer fednapping hoax–about to begin.

  Basis of appeal in Fox case. Will cover live: pic.twitter.com/8DbxqFQ0fw

  — Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 2, 2024

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

  Croft’s attorney, Timothy Sweeney, argued that his client should get a retrial because he wasn’t allowed to introduce numerous text messages that showed improper conduct by the FBI.

  Those text messages showed how FBI informants were pressuring Fox and Croft to formulate a plan against Whitmer. A list of the texts can be found in this document.

  Representing the government, Assistant U.S. Attorney Nils Kessler argued that the FBI text messages were irrelevant because Fox and Croft were already predisposed to committing an act of terrorism.

  “All the [FBI] statements identified by defense go to inducement. If jury found they were predisposed [to kidnapping Whitmer], none of that matters,” Kessler said. “This court has held that entrapment can only happen if the government plants an idea in an innocent persons’ head.”

  The appeals justices expressed skepticism about Kessler’s argument. One justice disagreed with the prosecutor’s reading of the law.

  “They’re saying the jury didn’t see all the pressure, all the government informants pounding on them. Surely that’s relevant?” the justice asked Kessler, to which he responded: “Theoretically, yes, but they don’t identify any statements where an informant actually put that kind of pressure to go kidnap the governor.”

  The justices then identified several statements where informants pressured the defendants to move forward with a plot against Whitmer. For example, FBI informant Steve Robeson said in August 2020: “If we don’t talk about actually doing what the fuck we need to be doing, I’m done with meetings.”

  Kessler argued that Robeson was only pressuring the defendants to disclose their plan, but the appeals justice seemed to disagree. “I’m reading this as, ‘We need to make a plan,’” she said.

  The appeals justices presiding over the case were Judge Joan Larsen, Judge Chad Readler, and Judge Stephanie Davis. Audio, but not video, of the hearing was streamed, making it difficult to identify which justices were speaking.

  A recap of the hearing can be found here:

  Oral Arguments on Appeal: Adam Fox & Barry Croft, Whitmer “Kidnap Plot” Case https://t.co/CcBkLJFMOb

  — Radix Verum (@NotRadix) May 2, 2024

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

  The court reserved its decision for a later date.

  Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 22:10

• There Is Nothing Exceptional About US "Exceptionalism"
  There Is Nothing Exceptional About US “Exceptionalism”

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  On Friday, after the jobs report, we heard a lot of chatter about “Goldilocks.” While we wrote NFP – Great for Markets, we caveated that with – for now. Normally we would agree that there is a “transition” period from “everything is great,” to “everything is bad.” While I’m not saying that everything is bad, I do wonder if we can have more of a “gap” than a transition, largely due to the influence that “American Exceptionalism” has had on people’s perceptions. According to Google Trends, the term peaked on searches this year the week of February 4th and is declining again

  Yes, there are some things that have been exceptional. AI has certainly been exceptional on many fronts. The U.S. efforts to help stop Iran’s missile barrage was also exceptional. Away from that, I’m seeing less and less “exceptionalism.” Normally that wouldn’t matter, but I can’t help but wonder if the use of that term has made us interpret data too positively? That we ignore negatives and dwell on positives that support that theory? I’m concerned that we are, which means that we might have less of a transition than a gap, as investors start looking beyond earnings (indicatively, as BofA’s Michael Hartnett just wrote, “US exceptionalism is driven by ‘exceptionally’ easy fiscal policy.”).

  Market Exceptionalism

  It would be easy to understand if the proverbial “person in the street” thought that big tech was by far the best investment possible. On any given day, American Exceptionalism battles with “You Need to Own Big Tech” for airtime. Heck, the term “Magnificent 7” is still bandied about, though it hasn’t been a particularly useful way of expressing market moves for many months. Yet, since January 31st, other major markets have outperformed the Nasdaq 100, a good benchmark for “big tech.” Some (like China) by significant amounts. I did use the Hang Seng Index rather than Shanghai in the below because Shanghai was closed for a few days so won’t show the full performance until next week, though that performance was picked up by FXI and KWEB – the two ETFs I look at for China.

  

  When, as a strategist, I tell people that I’ve been recommending trading the Nasdaq 100 from the short side (selling rips, as opposed to buying dips, though the behavior is similar), people look at me almost with sympathy. When I add in that I have liked China “for a trade” (I still don’t think it is investible for the longer-term), the sympathy turns to outright pity. Yet the data doesn’t warrant that perception.

  What happens if more and more people start focusing on the divergence between the messaging and the actual performance?

  While earnings have helped, I’ve seen a couple of things that caught my eye. I did not verify them, but they sounded reasonable:

  • Sales, in particular, have been mediocre relative to inflation, and the average has been propped up by a minority of large companies that are crushing it.
  • Earnings, while doing well, are heavily skewed by about 20% of the S&P 500 that is doing extremely well!

  Both of these items, which seem reasonable (though I haven’t verified the data myself), would indicate that many companies are living in a world that is far from exceptional. That reality hasn’t hit more broadly, but will it, as we’ve now made it through most of the highest profile earnings reports.

  “Exceptional” Economic Data

  I could fill this section with so many charts, that it would test my patience with Bloomberg’s charting function. We will only go with two charts (and a separate section on jobs).

  

  The Citi Economic Surprise Index went negative. This index is always interesting because it combines shifting expectations with changes in data. It tends to oscillate because as data comes in strong, many economists increase their expectations for future data, making it more and more difficult for the data to exceed expectations. The opposite also tends to happen. As data underperforms expectations, economists can retain their apparently lofty expectations, hoping that the data will change direction, or (and I believe far more likely) they can reduce their expectations.

  Just like for earnings estimates, this process of downgrading the economic outlook could help bonds and make many question growth.

  There are all sorts of reasons why we can say that the importance of the Chicago PMI as an indicator has declined (shifts in manufacturing, relative importance of the region versus other regions, etc.). Having said that, this chart caught my eye.

  

  We’ve reached levels only seen during what could be described as “crises.” The good news is that often the bottom of PMI marked a great investment opportunity. That could be the case here, except that we are still near all-time highs, rather than having endured dramatic selloffs (like in previous bottoms). Again, I understand that this particular measure might not be as emblematic of the nation’s prospects as it once was, but this was pretty darn stark!

  ISM manufacturing PMI came in below 50 (yeah, I know that we are not a manufacturing-based economy), while it had prices paid spiking and employment shrinking. ISM Services, on Friday morning amidst all the Goldilocks chatter, came in at 49.4 (yes, a service index came in below 50). That index also showed higher prices paid (59.2) with weaker employment (45.9). I’m not sure why that got so little attention, because it doesn’t seem very Goldilocks to me! Okay, the S&P Global U.S. Services Index came in at 51.3, so maybe that offset ISM services, but that isn’t a particularly strong number either.

  We could explore revolving credit debt (increasing rather substantially), delinquencies (rising, but still manageable), etc., but we are running out of time and space today.

  “Exceptional” Jobs Data

  Non-Farm Payroll finally went from exceptional to good. But as I scour the data for confirmation of how strong jobs (as reported by the Establishment Survey) have been, I struggle to find it.

  Employment seems weak in many of the surveys, as cited above.

  The JOLTS data has shown a steady decline in jobs available. First, I question whether the methodology has truly captured the use of online job searches correctly. How many “stale” or even “fishing expedition” postings are out there (postings where there is no real job opportunity, but if an “exceptional” and I do mean exceptional candidate applies they would make an effort to find a job for that person).

  

  It makes sense (regardless of how accurate the data is) that in an economy that is growing, there is a general pattern of increases in jobs available. That trendline has potentially been broken. We have about 900k more jobs available than we did in November 2018. Yes, actual jobs are more important than jobs available, but I think that we’ve moved back to a “normal” number of jobs available.

  But I digress since I care more about the QUIT and HIRE rates from JOLTS. I think they tell us as much or more about the true state of the jobs market than almost any other data we get.

  

  The QUIT rate, an indicator of how comfortable employees are with quitting (presumably because they believe they can find another similar or better job quite easily), has dopped to a level that is lower than in 2018 and 2019 and back to a 2015 to 2016 average.

  The HIRE rate is even worse. This indicates hiring on a relative basis, and we are now back to levels seen in 2014.

  We are hiring less, there are fewer jobs available, and people are seemingly afraid to quit, so let’s focus on one part. The Establishment Survey, that has a notorious track record of being revised downward by large amounts, has lower and lower initial response rates, and does “its best” to estimate business creation. The Birth/Death model (what a horrible name) provided 363,000 of the (wait, checks notes) 193,000 jobs created in the private sector.

  I like my “exceptionalism” to be exceptional, and I also like my data not to be dwarfed by “plugged” numbers. My understanding of the Birth/Death model is that it relies heavily on EIN applications to determine new businesses, which I think has been overstated as anyone from rideshare drivers to people trying to make a buck on social media have applied for EINs to treat themselves as businesses.

  I cannot help but wonder if even on the jobs front, which has been close to exceptional, we are exposed to some sort of gap in perception, and we might wind up finding out that Goldilocks met the wrong group of bears and the story doesn’t end so well.

  Bottom Line

  Lower yields. On Friday, I reiterated our range of 4.4% to 4.6% on 10s. I suggested fading the move at 4.45%. While I still think “deficits” and “supply” will push us higher, I think we have some protection here as the economic data surprises to the downside and as economists ratchet down their forecasts. And simply assuming noise around the true rate of inflation, we could see a pleasant inflation print or two. I think we can own yields here, and will bring back the range to 4.3% to 4.5% on 10s. I’m still in the 2-cut camp, which seems more likely, though I’m leaning towards June/July which seems a bit aggressive.

  What do lower yields mean for stocks? That is just such a tricky question as the relationship between yields and stocks has been all over the place. I think that we will see outperformance of small caps, banks, and value here. We’ve seen the S&P 500 moderately outperform the Nasdaq 100 in the past three months and I think that we will see more sectors and industries shift into outperformance mode. We may (probably will) see stocks respond positively to lower yields. But, I am concerned that we won’t see a smooth and gradual transition from “no landing” to “soft landing” to “bumpy landing” and we will jump from “all good” to “all is not-so good” rapidly because we have been ignoring data pointing us to this transition for the past few weeks (or months). So, I remain a better seller of risk here, though won’t fight a rally at the start of the week too much (if one materializes).

  Credit. Reduce exposure to the weakest credits and those most tied to the economy. We could see a period where economic conditions warrant a rate cut, but inflation fears keep the Fed on the “higher for longer” mantra. That should hurt some of the weaker credits, but I don’t see a material threat to overall risk, unless we see stocks respond more negatively than they have.

  Good luck and May 5th is my favorite day of the year!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 21:00

• "People Will Be Teleporting Between Planets" Before California Finishes High-Speed Rail Project
  “People Will Be Teleporting Between Planets” Before California Finishes High-Speed Rail Project

  X users mocked the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s post on the social media platform, which celebrated building a bridge that goes nowhere. 

  “The Fresno River Viaduct in Madera County is one of the first completed high-speed rail structures. At nearly 1,600 feet long, high-speed trains will travel over the riverbed and will run parallel with the BNSF Railroad,” CAHSR wrote on X. 

  The Fresno River Viaduct in Madera County is one of the first completed high-speed rail structures. At nearly 1,600 feet long, high-speed trains will travel over the riverbed and will run parallel with the BNSF Railroad. #BuildHSR pic.twitter.com/zWqusPbOB9

  — CA High-Speed Rail 🚄💨 (@CaHSRA) May 1, 2024

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

  Billy Markus, the co-founder of Dogecoin, joked, “This is the most remarkable human achievement ever, 1600 feet of high-speed rail after 9 years and 11 billion dollars.” 

  this is the most remarkable human achievement ever, 1600 feet of high speed rail after 9 years and 11 billion dollars

  it takes about 5 minutes to walk 1600 feet so a high speed rail for that is a really big deal

  california is so competent https://t.co/Uff4LT57tZ

  — Shibetoshi Nakamoto (@BillyM2k) May 3, 2024

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

  Venture capitalist David Sacks said, “Building products on time and on budget requires a monomaniacal leader who kicks asses to make things run right. Government, which is based on lobbying, backscratching and committee-based decision-making, is uniquely unsuited for this.” 

  Building products on time and on budget requires a monomaniacal leader who kicks asses to make things run right. Government, which is based on lobbying, backscratching and committee-based decision-making, is uniquely unsuited for this. https://t.co/y6ymY96nFF

  — David Sacks (@DavidSacks) May 4, 2024

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

  “People will be teleporting between planets by the time California achieves high speed rail service from Merced to Bakersfield,” one X user quipped. 

  People will be teleporting between planets by the time California achieves high speed rail service from Merced to Bakersfield.

  — Jonofarcadia 🦬 (@jonofarcadia) May 2, 2024

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

  Another user said the partially built Los Angeles-to-San Francisco high-speed rail project could accommodate the homeless and migrants. 

  It will be home to thousands of homeless

  Long before a single train travels it pic.twitter.com/t2m3D9zaxq

  — Marc Escens (@Marc_Escens) May 4, 2024

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

  Perhaps California officials should stop gaslighting taxpayers about a decade of work and billions spent – only to come up with a bridge to quite literally nowhere. Big government is inefficient and wasteful. The state controlled by radical progressives is a trainwreck. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 20:25

• "Economics Works In Mysterious Ways": Is China's Wealth Effect Being Substituted?
  “Economics Works In Mysterious Ways”: Is China’s Wealth Effect Being Substituted?

  By Teeuwe Mevissen, Senior Macro Strategist at Rabobank

  Is the wealth effect being substituted?

  Summary

  • China’s real estate market suffered heavy losses early this year while stock market investors continue to face huge uncertainty.
  • This will add to the deterioration of household balances and as such could influence private domestic (consumer) demand.
  • While the wealth effect predicts a deterioration of consumption, the substitution effect would predict the exact opposite.
  • This paper concludes that the substitution effect is more likely in the case of real estate.
  • This could be explained by the fact that housing is still expensive despite declining housing prices while at the same time wages are suppressed and youth unemployment is high.
  • But more explanations (like prepayment risks) could be given for the positive correlation between housing prices and the savings ratio.

  Introduction

  The new year in China kicked off with turmoil on China’s stock markets. Amongst others, the decision of the court in Hong Kong to liquidate real estate giant Evergrande further undermined investors’ confidence in China’s stock market. A market that already had been battered during the last three years due to ongoing worries about China’s economic prospects, regulatory crackdowns, a changing geopolitical landscape and a real estate sector in crisis. While China’s stock markets have pared some of the most recent losses due to (expectations of) increased government support, investor sentiment will likely remain fragile for some time to come. Moreover, many of the recently imposed government regulations, such as short selling curbs, are likely to be temporary assuming China is really serious about attracting more foreign investments. This follows from the fact that a full functioning market environment includes the possibility to sell stocks short and let market forces determine market outcomes.

  Given that stock markets tend to be a leading indicator for the economy’s travails, this special zooms in on the question what the recent market turmoil could mean for China’s economic prospects in the coming year(s). The relation between the stock market’s performance and economic prospects is, amongst others, reflected by the expected future cash flows that companies are expected to make. But there may also be a wealth effect which predicts a positive relationship between stock market performance and consumption. Since the value of real estate also affects the willingness to consume, we also take a closer look at this particular topic in this research note. But before we do so, we will start with a general overview of China’s stock markets, its performance over the last 5 years and the measures that China’s government has implemented so far in order to prevent a further slump, which already evaporated a stunning amount of $7 tn during the recent lows in February. For more information regarding the real estate sector we refer to an earlier publication that covered this topic.

  China’s stock markets experiencing a rout.

  After a sharp recovery of China’s stock markets in 2021 – which was part of a global relief rally that followed the panic sell-off in March 2020 – 2022 saw investor sentiment souring and China was no exception. However, whilst Western indices recovered sharply thereafter, China’s stock markets struggled to keep up during the first half of 2023 and showed a very poor performance in the second half of 2023. The start to this year can only be characterized as a true stock rout. As a result, the benchmark MSCI China stock index is down 60% from its peak in 2021. All in all the total decline in value of China’s stock markets is approximately 7 tn renminbi (close to $1 tn) since the peak in 2021. The majority of these losses are borne by domestic holders of Chinese equities and retail investors in particular.

  

  Some background on China’s stock markets

  China’s restrictions related to foreign investments, geopolitical tensions and regulatory crack downs have soured foreign investors’ appetite for Chinese stocks and in October 2023 it was estimated that foreigners only hold $600 billion in Chinese stocks listed on mainland China or Hong Kong. This is indeed a small share of a total market capitalization that is estimated to be a little less than $9.7 tn in January 2024. While institutional investors’ share in Chinese stock holdings has significantly increased over the past two decades, China’s stock markets are still more influenced by retail investors than is the case in, for example, the United States. The box below explains some of the most common features of its stock market.

  

  The structure of China’s stock market is important because it gives an idea of who has ownership and to what share classes. But for this it is clearly also relevant to have an idea about the total market capitalization of China’s main stock markets. This is why we show a table below that provides an overview of China’s stock exchanges ranked by market capitalization and which also includes the stock market returns YTD and for longer periods; It also provides an estimated breakdown between the share of private owned enterprises and state owned enterprises where available.

  

  Connecting the stock market with consumption

  While stock markets are less connected to the economic process and performance in China than is the case in most advanced economies (for instance, equity financing plays a relatively small role for China’s corporates who generally rely more on retained earnings and bank loans), the recent stock market rout adds to the wealth loss Chinese households already had suffered from China’s real estate crisis.

  As can be seen from figure 4 below, surveyed consumers continue to signal weak confidence regarding developments related to employment and, related to it, income. Furthermore, consumer confidence is near record low levels. Moreover, close to 60% of respondents expect to increase savings in the next quarter while less than 25% of respondents indicate that they are expecting to consume more in the next quarter. We do note, though, that the most recent data is from Q2 2023.

  

  Measures to support China’s stock markets

  While most recently Beijing fired the head of the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) Yi Huiman and replaced him with Wu Qing, it is questionable whether this will result in the much needed restoration of investors’ confidence. However, as a previous head of the Shanghai Stock Exchange and in various roles within the CSRC, where he earned the nickname ‘the broker butcher’, it seems that a further crackdown on illicit trading practices is on the cards.

  Several other measures have been announced, although the majority lacks details as is often the case when new policies and/or guidelines are announced. Below is a broad selection of measures that have been decided upon in recent months:

  • More liquidity support for developers
  • The CSRC announced it would look to support listed companies to find possibilities to merge and or restructure businesses in order to create value
  • Sales of stocks were also restricted for some domestic institutional investors as well as some offshore units of those investors
  • A lowering of 0.5% of the reserve ratio requirement for banks
  • Monetary authorities provided 1 tn yuan extra liquidity into the markets in order to provide ample liquidity
  • Promises to deal with margin call risks
  • More active involvement of the CSRC in addressing concerns from listed companies
  • Placing restrictions on security lending

  More recently announced measures are:

  • Cease displaying real-time data for flows into the world’s second-largest stock market through Hong Kong
  • China’s ‘national team’ buying for $50 billion of stocks
  • Clarification of new delisting rules which are aimed at zombie firms
  • Tighten stock listing criteria
  • Crack down on illegal share sales
  • Strengthening the supervision of dividend payouts

  While the PBOC has added additional stimulus since the end of last year, this stimulus still seems not to have fully fed into China’s economy and the real estate sector. Earlier this year, the PBOC offered 1 tn renminbi in loans to the banking sector and lowered the reserve requirement ratio by 0.5% bringing the average RRR for financial institutions to ‘about 7.0% after the cut’. A move that is expected to free up about 1 tn yuan according to the central bank chief who held a press conference in Beijing on Wednesday the 24th of January.

  The last and perhaps most draconic measure announced this year is a ban on net stock selling during the first and last 30 minutes of a trading session. This measure came into effect on the 21st of February. This makes it harder for entities affected by this measure (mainly hedge funds and institutional investors) to apply certain trading strategies. At the same time it makes it easier for government-backed funds to influence the stock market during those crucial trading windows.

  These measures clearly influence the extent to which stock valuations are determined by market mechanisms but they won’t increase the profitability of any company traded at any of China’s stock exchanges. It also remains to be seen how offshore investors will react on measures that increase the risk of not being able to sell your stocks anymore because of decreasing liquidity on the sellers’ market. Moreover, the restrictions on security lending are likely to have more effect on stocks listed on the Hong Kong exchanges than those listed in Shanghai. Mostly because stocks listed on the Shanghai stock exchange are held for more than 80% by individual investors vs 15% of stocks traded at the Hong Kong stock exchanges.

  While Chinese stock markets initially showed a sharp recovery since their February lows, the stock rally seems to have stalled again since the midst of March. Taking all of the above into account, it remains to be seen whether the recent recovery of stock prices can be continued, especially when the current stock market trading curbs would be lifted again.

  How the loss of wealth could lower consumption

  Wealth effect

  We will now look at a few behavioral phenomena when it comes to the relationship between wealth and consumption. This so-called wealth effect is a behavioral economic theory which postulates that peoples’ willingness to spend increases when the wealth of their homes or asset portfolio increases because they feel more financially secure. Since (for now) we want to exclude the extreme swings of consumption and stock market prices arising from the Covid-19 pandemic (which is even more relevant given China’s strict lock down measures and its obvious effect on consumption), we first use the results of an academic paper from 2010 which studies the importance of the wealth effect on China’s consumer spending.

  This paper estimates a long run consumption elasticity of total assets to be around 0.51 or roughly one half. This would imply that a 20% drop in share prices would result in a drop of about 10% in consumption. Compared to Western elasticities, which are often found to be closer to 0.05, this is extremely high. Based on such a positive relationship between wealth and consumption, one would expect a significant negative impact on consumption from the recent decline in house and equity prices. The elasticity on income is estimated at 0.76, which seems plausible in our view.

  Based on the elasticity from the paper above and given the price developments of the separate asset classes we can make a rough estimate of the impact of declining asset prices on consumption. We take 2021 as the starting point because the real estate crisis started in the summer of 2021 and we want to omit the results during the pandemic because of reasons discussed above. These estimates are shown in table 2 below. We abstain from the impact of increased saving via (bank) deposits.

  

  This is based on a total value of real estate in China of $55tn in 2021. So, if we assume the elasticities from this paper to be realistic, this suggests that the decline in asset values has depressed consumption by some 3.4% since August 2021. This would amount to a drop of consumption of more than $2 tn! Given a level of nationwide per capita consumption expenditure of 26.796, a total population of 1.425.000.000 people and the current USD/CNH exchange rate of around 7.25, this would boil down to a total amount of consumption of $5.3 tn. Our estimates above are generally inline with other research indicating that ‘a 5% decline in home prices will wipe out 19 trillion yuan ($2.7 trillion) in housing wealth’.

  We should also add, though, that rising incomes have overshadowed its impact so that a positive gain in consumption (in nominal terms) results after all.

  The (opposite) substitution effect

  Having said this, there could also be reasons to assume an increase in consumption. So how would that work? Young people in China have been faced with a prolonged episode of rising housing prices while at the same time facing high levels of youth unemployment and an economy slowing down. As such, young people have increasingly felt discouraged. This has even led to the so-called lying flat movement, where young people deliberately choose to not join the tough rat race that recent graduates face when entering the labour market. Additionally, despite the gradual decline of house prices (both newly built and existing homes), suppressed wages have not made housing that more affordable especially in China’s tier-1 cities. This may have led many young people in China to delay or even give up on buying a house entirely.

  Another reason why some young people are delaying or have given up on purchasing a house is the huge impact it has on the ‘quality of life’. Young people that have been able to purchase a house face relatively high monthly mortgage payments despite significant down payments. This has led a large amount of young Chinese citizens increasingly willing to spend their money on
  consumption like traveling. This effect is called the substitution effect. Many economists have indeed claimed that the effect on consumption of declining stock and housing prices in China is different. Let’s say a wealth effect with Chinese characteristics, i.e. an inverse wealth effect.

  For about two decades, consumption in China has been partially suppressed since households had to channel an unusual large share of their income to savings in order to make the necessary down-payment for purchasing a house. Back then, this often boiled down to about 30% of the value of the house. In other words, consumption was substituted for expenditures on housing. Indeed last year we saw signs of the substitution effect when the savings rate for households dropped while real estate prices dropped as well. This effect is in sharp contrast with the findings of the wealth effect discussed in the academic paper mentioned earlier.

  Our data shows yet another picture

  Since we lack data about the net savings rate for households in China we have derived the savings ratio by subtracting household expenditures from disposable income. We plot this estimated saving ratio against both real estate prices as well as the Shanghai Stock Exchange Composite Index. This results in the two graphs below:

  

  While positive correlation between (inflation-adjusted) real estate prices and savings (i.e. a negative correlation with consumption) is evident from the first graph, stock prices don’t seem to have an impact on private domestic savings or consumption at all. Both results are at odds with the results from the academic paper discussed above whilst the first chart suggests that there is – if anything – a substitution rather than wealth effect.

  However, we should be aware of the fact that in China, the major component of household wealth is invested in real estate and not the stock market. As such, declining stock prices could reduce consumption of the holders of these stocks; but if only a relatively small percentage of China’s citizens hold stocks or if many Chinese citizens only hold very small portions of their wealth in stocks, the impact on an aggregate level would still be negligible.

  It is therefore important to take into account that approximately 70% of household wealth is in real estate while it was estimated in an article published by Atlantic press that household financial assets only accounted for about 13%. The rest is allocated towards other financial assets like saving accounts, deposits, gold etc. etc. The important conclusion we can draw from these figures is that much of the wealth of China’s households is either being held in illiquid assets, such as real estate or in low return deposits. From this angle it becomes easier to understand why in China the wealth effect arising from declining stock market prices is less likely to have a significant influence on consumption patterns.

  Moreover, as we argue, the wealth effect arising from the developments in the real estate sector, may not apply in the case of China. We therefore conclude this special by discussing a number of explanations for the observed effect from real estate prices on consumption.

  What about other factors? (prepayment risk)

  Above we have shown conflicting findings on the existence of a wealth effect in China arising from price developments in both the real estate- and stock market. While older research seems to conclude that the wealth effect is indeed present, most recent data seems to indicate the absence of it. Indeed, in the case of real estate we actually observe an opposite effect, i.e. lower housing prices lead to lower saving rates. Does this mean that we observe a substitution effect in China? We would, albeit hesitantly, answer this question with a yes. But there could be more at play.

  Aside from the substitution effect which has been outlined above, lower interest rates could also play a role. This is via the so called prepayment risk. It is well known that when interest rates and/or housing prices decline, house owners tend to increase their mortgage payments in order to reduce their outstanding amount of mortgage debt. Most mortgage prepayment models indeed predict increasing prepayments when the contract rate and the current market rate diverge, i.e. a situation where the contract rate is significantly higher than the current market rate.

  One way to look at this phenomenon is the following: house owners have an incentive to refund themselves against lower rates and pay off the outstanding amount of mortgage debt if the terms and conditions of the mortgage allow for this. However, prepayment risks can also work in the opposite direction. When home owners expect rising interest rates the home owner also has an incentive to repay the mortgage more quickly to avoid higher interest rate payments in the future. Since interest rates have gradually and steadily declined in China, the former prepayment risk is more likely.

  Additionally, the relationship between real estate prices and consumption is not necessarily static. Its effect could very well change over time. A prime analogy is the famous Phillips curve that tries to explain the inverse relationship between (wage) inflation on levels of unemployment. If other factors occasionally flip the relationship between wealth and consumption this would make it very hard to predict the impact of real estate prices on consumption at any point in time. Finally, developments in the labor market, such as adverse job conditions, could also impact the savings rate where higher unemployment levels lead to decreasing levels of savings and consumption, if households are forced to dip into their savings to maintain consumption levels.

  Finally – as our analysis shows – the consumption effect arising from the rise in disposable income (which according to the paper has an elasticity of 0.76) has offset the wealth effect arising from the decline in assets. This could be another reason why the predicted decline in consumption cannot be observed.

  Conclusion

  Altogether it is extremely hard – and with a lack of relevant data – impossible to draw strong conclusions about a permanent presence or absence of a wealth effect arising from price developments in the real estate sector in China. Unfortunately we cannot present a solid relationship between real estate price developments and consumption. At his point in time we can only conclude that we observe a negative relationship between consumption and house prices and offer some reasons that are likely to have influenced this relationship, with prepayment flows and possibly a weak labor market situation as relevant factors. The only firm conclusion we can draw is that economics continue to work in mysterious ways.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 19:50

• The Ideological Roots Of The Open Borders Push
  The Ideological Roots Of The Open Borders Push

  Authored by Simon Hankinson via The Epoch Times,

  Why does the Biden administration want open borders? As a researcher and writer on immigration, that’s the question I often get asked.

  

  Here are the three reasons I think are behind President Joe Biden’s deliberate border chaos:

  1. electoral politics,

  2. extortion, and,

  3. most insidiously, ideology.

  I’ll start with ideology and come back to the other two reasons in my next columns.

  The most dangerous driver behind Biden’s open borders is ideological. Policy differences can be negotiated, but as we’re seeing on college campuses, people fanatically committed to an idea can prove intransigent, regardless of the facts.

  When you see the word “abolition” used in connection with criminal justice and immigration, you might be confused. Americans rightly associate the term with ending slavery and abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison who were active before the Civil War.

  Why are academics, politicians, and race professionals using it in 2024?

  Those saying “abolitionist” today have appropriated it for the positive historical connotation it possesses, but they mean something else entirely. To see the roots of their ideology, you have to go back to the dawn of the New Left, as described by Chris Rufo in his book “America’s Cultural Revolution.”

  Under their intellectual godfather, German academic Herbert Marcuse, Marxist-Leninists, Black Panthers, the Weather Underground terrorist group, and Students for a Democratic Society gathered.

  This leftist alliance believed—as the Students for a Democratic Society magazine Prairie Fire explained—that the United States was founded on genocide, slavery, and racism. Its goal was to abolish the existing capitalist America and build a new society. One element of this was destroying the justice system. The Black Panthers’ manifesto thus called for the release of all black men who were incarcerated, no matter for what crime.

  As Rufo writes, “[Communist Angela] Davis and her comrades began to call not for the release of individual criminals, but for the abolition of the entire system.” Davis said that “a society without racism … has to be a society without prisons.”

  The Black Lives Matter organization adopted the same agenda of “abolition.” The mobs that destroyed a police station and looted Minneapolis in 2020 shouted, “Abolish the police, then the prisons.” The “abolitionist” activists in the Seattle CHAZ commune wanted to abolish the police, prisons, and courts.

  BLM founder Patrisse Cullors was crystal clear in this Harvard Law Review essay from 2019: “Abolition means no borders. Abolition means no Border Patrol. Abolition means no Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” America is the source of world evil, in her view, and thus has no right to exist as a nation state nor keep anyone in the world from entering its borders.

  Some Biden administration officials seem to share this core belief. Avideh Moussavian, a senior appointee at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, tweeted “#abolishICE” in 2018 and “cut ICE and [Customs and Border Protection] funding” in 2019.

  Another Biden appointee, Claire Trickler-McNulty, undermined ICE from within before leaving for a nongovernmental organization partly funded by the Vera Institute for Justice. The Vera Institute says, “The U.S. immigration system is an arrest-to-deportation pipeline rooted in racism,” wants no detention of people in the United States illegally, and grants millions to nongovernmental organizations defending illegal immigrants.

  “Abolition” ideology also has clear links with today’s campus support of Hamas. Take a look at this course taught at Columbia University this Spring by professor Mohamed Abdou, titled “Decolonial-Queerness and Abolition in SWAN.” SWANA likely stands for South West Asian and North African people. A sentence from the course description sums it up:

  “Using intersectional/assemblage-based theories, what decolonial, gender-based readings and formulations of feminisms/queerness exist that evade the apparent tidiness of European feminist and narrow LGBTQIA categories that characterizes most (non)Euro-American political queer-feminist scholarship beyond the depiction of queer BIPOC as co-opted and duped, colonized pawns of ‘Gay Empire’ towards elucidating critical discussions on identity, agency, subjectivity, and dissidence?”

  Parents are paying $90,000 a year for their kids to learn that kind of balderdash. But even if you can’t make any sense of that sentence, you can be sure of what Abdou means by “abolition.”

  Columbia University now resembles Gaza as designed by outdoor equipment retailer Eastern Mountain Sports. Meanwhile at Princeton University, students briefly set up a camp last week “in solidarity with Gaza to protest Princeton’s role in funding the ongoing genocide,” according to organizers Princeton Israeli Apartheid Divest.

  Dan-el Padilla Peralta was among faculty who signed a letter supporting the Princeton students and boycotting Columbia University. He is a “classics” professor who calls his field “equal parts vampire and cannibal” and the foundation of white supremacy, and argues that it should be abolished.

  Peralta came from the Dominican Republic as a child, and his family overstayed their visas and became illegal immigrants. Leftist academics such as Peralta do not like nations or borders any more than they do classical antiquity. In his book “Undocumented,” Peralta wrote, “Demography is a [expletive]. Holla at me if you want me to break it down for you.” By this, Peralta implies that without immigration enforcement, the “global majority”—defined here as everyone but white Europeans—will be able to dominate every country.

  What we’re seeing at the southern border and on college campuses comes from the same ideological roots and ends the same way: anarchy.

  *  *  *

  Reprinted by permission from The Daily Signal, a publication of The Heritage Foundation.

  Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 18:40

• The World's Fastest Growing Emerging Markets (2024-2029 Forecast)
  The World’s Fastest Growing Emerging Markets (2024-2029 Forecast)

  Large emerging markets are forecast to play a greater role in powering global economic growth in the future, driven by demographic shifts and a growing consumer class.

  At the same time, many smaller nations are projected to see their economies grow at double the global average over the next five years due to rich natural resource deposits among other factors. That said, elevated debt levels do present risks to future economic activity.

  This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows the emerging markets with the fastest projected growth through to 2029, based on data from the International Monetary Fund’s 2024 World Economic Outlook.

  

  Top 10 Emerging Markets

  Here are the fastest-growing emerging economies, based on real GDP compound annual growth rate (CAGR) forecasts over the period of 2024-2029:

  

  As South America’s third-smallest nation by land area, Guyana is projected to be the world’s fastest growing economy from now to 2029.

  This is thanks to a significant discovery of oil deposits in 2015 by ExxonMobil, which has propelled the country’s economy to grow by fourfold over the last five years alone. By 2028, the nation of just 800,000 people is projected to have the highest crude oil production per capita, outpacing Kuwait for the first time.

  Bangladesh, where 85% of exports are driven by the textiles industry, is forecast to see the strongest growth in Asia. In fact, over the last 30 years, the country of 170 million people has not had a single year of negative growth.

  In eighth place overall is India, projected to achieve a 6.5% CAGR in real GDP through to 2029. This growth is forecast to be fueled by population trends, public investment, and strong consumer demand.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 18:05

• Pritzker Doubles-Down With $827 Million Taxpayer Handout To Troubled EV-Maker Rivian
  Pritzker Doubles-Down With $827 Million Taxpayer Handout To Troubled EV-Maker Rivian

  Authored by Mark Glennon via Wirepoints.org,

  At $1.5 million per job, this new incentive package from the state is at least 15 times the norm. For this much money, the state could have just handed out a million bucks to 827 people, instead of creating 550 jobs.

  

  Gov. JB Pritzker announced Thursday that the State of Illinois will provide an $827 million incentive package for Rivian to invest $1.5 billion to expand its electric vehicle factory in Normal, Illinois. The expansion is expected to create at least 550 full-time jobs within the next five years, and will build Rivian’s next model EV, the R2. Rivian initially got $49.5 million under Gov. Bruce Rauner in 2017 to create 1,000 jobs at the same location.

  The new deal gives $1.5 million per job created, which is astronomical in the world of location incentives. Estimated average location incentives paid by state and local governments around the nation range from $13,000 to $84,000 per job, though sometimes go as high as $100,000 per job for capital intensive projects. Even using that high end, Rivian’s package will be 15 times what’s typical.

  Moreover, Rivian is on shaky wheels, along with the rest of the U.S. EV industry. Rivian loses over $43,000 for every vehicle it sells and has had two rounds of layoffs this year. The decision to move its R2 production to Illinois is a further reflection of the company’s need to preserve cash. R2 production was initially planned for a new $5 billion plant in Georgia, heavily subsidized by the state. But Rivian concluded that moving production to the existing Illinois facility would save cash.

  Its stock price has consequently been hammered. It reached a high of $172 per share in 2021 but now trades at less than $10 per share.

  

  Rivian is not alone. As a CNBC headline recently declared, “EV euphoria is dead. Automakers are scaling back or delaying their electric vehicle plans.” Since then, the news is no better. Ford announced last week that it is losing a stunning $132,000 per vehicle. Hertz announced last week a second round of sales of its EV fleet due to heavy maintenance and depreciation costs. For the first quarter of this year, EV sales continued to slow and the share of EV sales for all autos actually decreased. While total EV sales are still up a bit from last year, the growth rate is not nearly enough to put EV makers on a path to profitability.

  EV makers pin their hopes on less expensive models that they promise soon, and on more public charging stations, into which Illinois last month announced it would invest an additional $50 million. Rivian hopes its new R2 will be among the new, lower priced models. However, its starting price is expected to be about $45,000 and it won’t come out until the first half of 2026.

  Regarding the astronomical incentive package to be paid by Illinois, in fairness, it should be noted that most of it is in the form of tax credits to be granted over the next 30 years. They are available on condition that the company retain 6,000 already existing jobs. However, the fact remains that just 550 new jobs are to be created, and incentive packages like this are not supposed to be payoffs for merely standing still. And a less charitable way to look at it would be that future taxpayers will be on the hook for the high cost of the incentive package — if it works.

  Aside from thinking that the incentive package is too low, my first instinct was to ask, “Where’s the warrant coverage.” That is, I know from working as a lawyer and then as an investor, often with troubled companies, that it’s not unusual to make risky bets. However, it’s routine for the investor to get part of the upside if the venture succeeds, usually in the form of stock or warrants (basically, options) on stock that pay off nicely if things turn around. The federal government, for example, got stock and warrants as part of the deal for its 2010 bailout of the auto industry.

  This new Rivian deal has nothing like that. Since the job creation per dollar is minimal, it’s just not worth the price.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 17:30

• Man vs Bear Debate: The Dumbest Feminist Argument Yet?
  Man vs Bear Debate: The Dumbest Feminist Argument Yet?

  When it comes to identifiable differences in female vs male psychology as well as differences in brain biology, as a general rule and as most studies show women focus far more on feelings than men do.  Specifically, women tend to be more sensitive to negative emotions and negative imagery.  Obviously, men and women are not the same, never have been the same and never will be the same, and this includes how they process information and come to conclusions.

  This is the reason why many of women’s perceptions on life tend to bewilder men; most women operate from a place of emotion and assumption (which they call “intuition”) and come to conclusions based on feelings rather than facts.  Intuition can be a powerful tool for identifying threats before they occur, and when women get it right they might appear to be clairvoyant. However, when they get it wrong they get it really wrong and the result is foolishness and disaster.

  How one feels is not necessarily what is true. 

  Enter feminism, a movement which claims to be fighting for women’s “equality” but is actually fighting for women’s privilege.  Legal equality for the sexes was achieved long ago and one would think that feminism would have faded away with its mission accomplished.  This has not been the case.  Instead, feminists move the goalposts and the notion of equality has given way to desires for power.  But unlike most political movements feminism does not chase power by applying direct force (in most cases).  Rather, feminists chase power by magnifying and exaggerating their own weaknesses and victimhood. 

  In other words, they gain power by demanding reparations for perceived injustices.  The more they feel oppressed or afraid or abused the more power society supposedly owes them.  Feminism exploits the natural tendency of women to hyperfocus on negative emotions and promotes feelings over logic.  If women feel like victims, that means they are victims.

  This is where the “Man vs. Bear” narrative comes from.  A bizarre thought experiment in which random women are asked if they were lost in the woods, would they rather run into a man or a bear?  The question has created considerable controversy across social media, with a majority of women apparently choosing a bear over a man.

  On the surface we can dismiss the thought experiment with the simple reality that women encounter men daily while most have never dealt with or seen a real bear in the wild in their entire lives.  If they did run into a bear all of them would be screaming for help from the nearest man available to protect them.

  It’s perhaps the dumbest feminist mind-game so far in this respect.  Life is not a Disney movie with friendly talking animals and there’s a reason why men make up the vast majority of solo hunters – Female hunters don’t want to go into the woods by themselves because they know predators like bears represent great potential injury or death.  

  To be fair, plenty of women have laughed off the question as ridiculous and pointed out the reality that with a man there’s a good chance they will be helped out of the woods.  With a bear there’s no chance.  But this hasn’t stopped feminists from pretending as if the pro-bear response represents some kind of revelation about men and masculinity. 

  

  The issue has also revealed once again that math is the kryptonite of woke activists and critical thinking is their enemy.  

  Citing the predominance of men in crime stats, feminists argue that it’s far more likely for a man to harm a woman than a bear to harm a woman.  In fact, bear encounters are far more rare than encounters with men, and the percentage of men that commit violent crimes is tiny compared to the total male population in western countries.

  By feminist logic, men are also actually safer with bears than with women.  In 2021, 1,078 men were killed by women in the U.S. There have only been 180 fatal human/bear conflicts in North America since 1784.  Again, this is about proximity.

  In 2019, there were 283,467 violent crimes committed by men in the US, out of 161 million men.  That’s around 0.1% of the male population.  The chances of a woman running into a violent man in the woods in this fantasy scenario is negligible.  Feelings are being elevated over facts. 

  Most feminist narratives lean heavily on the fear dynamic.  If women feel afraid of men then men and society must take them seriously and assuage those fears; the fears fabricated in women’s minds are suddenly everyone’s problem.  In the past society used to laugh off female melodrama as an unfortunate bi-product of their nature; how can society fix a problem that doesn’t exist in the tangible world?  But as the male commentator in the first video argues, it doesn’t matter if women are actually in danger from men, it only matters that they believe they are in danger.

  But who created that fear in women?  Was it men?  Or, was it feminist propaganda?  The numbers suggest feminism has rotted women’s minds with fear.   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 16:55

• Open The Overton Window
  Open The Overton Window

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via DailyReckoning.com,

  You may have heard of the “Overton window.”

  

  The concept of the Overton window caught on in professional culture, particularly those seeking to nudge public opinion, because it taps into a certain sense that we all know is there.

  There are things you can say and things you cannot say, not because there are speech controls (though there are) but because holding certain views makes you anathema and dismissable. This leads to less influence and effectiveness.

  The Overton window is a way of mapping sayable opinions.

  The goal of advocacy is to stay within the window while moving it just ever so much. For example, if you’re writing about monetary policy, you should say that the Fed should not immediately reduce rates for fear of igniting inflation.

  You can really think that the Fed should be abolished but saying that is inconsistent with the demands of polite society. That’s only one example of a million.

  To notice and comply with the Overton window is not the same as merely favoring incremental change over dramatic reform. There is not and should never be an issue with marginal change.

  That’s not what’s at stake.

  To be aware of the Overton window, and fit within it, means to curate your own advocacy. You should do so in a way that’s designed to comply with a structure of opinion that’s pre-existing as a kind of template we’re all given.

  It means to craft a strategy specifically designed to game the system, which is said to operate according to acceptable and unacceptable opinionizing.

  In every area of social, economic and political life, we find a form of compliance with strategic considerations seemingly dictated by this window. There’s no sense in spouting off opinions that offend or trigger people because they’ll just dismiss you as not credible.

  But if you keep your eye on the window — as if you can know it, see it, manage it — you might succeed in expanding it a bit here and there and thereby achieve your goals eventually.

  The mission here is always to let considerations of strategy run alongside — perhaps even ultimately prevail in the short run — over issues of principle and truth, all in the interest of being not merely right but also effective.

  Everyone in the business of affecting public opinion does this, all in compliance with the perception of the existence of this window.

  It’s how ideas move from unthinkable to radical to acceptable to sensible to popular to become policy.

  The concept was named for Joseph Overton, who worked at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Michigan. He found that it was useless in his work to advocate for positions that he could not recruit politicians to say from the legislative floor or on the campaign trail.

  By crafting policy ideas that fit within the prevailing media and political culture, however, he saw some successes about which he and his team could brag to the donor base. A wise intellectual shepherd will manage this transition carefully from one stage to the next until victory and then take on a new issue.

  The core intuition here is rather obvious. It probably achieves little in life to go around screaming some radical slogan about what all politicians should do if there is no practical means to achieve it and zero chance of it happening.

  But writing well-thought-out position papers with citations backed by large books by Ivy League authors and pushing for changes on the margin that keep politicians out of trouble with the media might move the window slightly and eventually enough to make a difference.

  Beyond that example, which surely does tap into some evidence in this or that case, how true is this analysis?

  Read on for the answer.

  Is the Overton Window Real?

  First, the theory of the Overton window presumes a smooth connection between public opinion and political outcomes. During most of my life, that seemed to be the case or, at least, we imagined it to be the case. Today this is gravely in question.

  Politicians do things daily and hourly that are opposed by their constituents — fund foreign aid and wars for example — but they do it anyway due to well-organized pressure groups that operate outside public awareness. That’s true many times over with the administrative and deep layers of the state.

  In most countries, states and elites that run them operate without the consent of the governed. No one likes the surveillance and censorial state but they are growing regardless, and nothing about shifts in public opinion seem to make any difference.

  It’s surely true that there comes a point when state managers pull back on their schemes for fear of public backlash but when that happens or where, or when and how, wholly depends on the circumstances of time and place.

  Second, the Overton window presumes there’s something organic about the way the window is shaped and moves. That is probably not entirely true either. Revelations of our own time show just how involved are major state actors in media and tech, even to the point of dictating the structure and parameters of opinions held in the public, all in the interest of controlling the culture of belief in the population.

  I had read Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman when it came out in 1988 and found it compelling. It was entirely believable that deep ruling-class interests were more involved than we know about what we are supposed to think about foreign-policy matters and national emergencies, and, further, entirely plausible that major media outlets would reflect these views as a matter of seeking to fit in and ride the wave of change.

  What I had not understood was just how far-reaching this effort to manufacture consent is in real life.

  What illustrates this perfectly has been media and censorship over the pandemic years in which nearly all official channels of opinion have very strictly reflected and enforced the cranky views of a tiny elite. Honestly, how many actual people in the U.S. were behind the lockdowns policy in terms of theory and action? Probably fewer than 1,000. Probably closer to 100.

  But thanks to the work of the Censorship Industrial Complex, an industry built of dozens of agencies and thousands of third-party cutouts including universities, we were led to believe that lockdowns and closures were just the way things are done. Vast amounts of the propaganda we endured was top down and wholly manufactured.

  Third, the lockdown experience demonstrates that there is nothing necessarily slow and evolutionary about the movement of the window. In February 2020, mainstream public health was warning against travel restrictions, quarantines, business closures and the stigmatization of the sick. A mere 30 days later, all these policies became acceptable and even mandatory belief.

  Not even Orwell imagined such a dramatic and sudden shift was possible!

  The window didn’t just move. It dramatically shifted from one side of the room to the other, with all the top players against saying the right thing at the right time, and then finding themselves in the awkward position of having to publicly contradict what they had said only weeks earlier.

  The excuse was that “the science changed” but that is completely untrue and an obvious cover for what was really just a craven attempt to chase what the powerful were saying and doing.

  It was the same with the vaccine, which major media voices opposed so long as Trump was president and then favored once the election was declared for Biden. Are we really supposed to believe that this massive switch came about because of some mystical window shift or does the change have a more direct explanation?

  Fourth, the entire model is wildly presumptuous. It is built by intuition, not data, of course. And it presumes that we can know the parameters of its existence and manage how it is gradually manipulated over time.

  None of this is true. In the end, an agenda based on acting on this supposed window involves deferring to the intuitions of some manager who decides that this or that statement or agenda is “good optics” or “bad optics,” to deploy the fashionable language of our time.

  The right response to all such claims is: You don’t know that. You are only pretending to know but you don’t actually know. What your seemingly perfect discernment of strategy is really about concerns your own personal taste for the fight, for controversy, for argument, and your willingness to stand up publicly for a principle you believe will very likely run counter to elite priorities. That’s perfectly fine, but don’t mask your taste for public engagement in the garb of fake management theory.

  It’s precisely for this reason that so many intellectuals and institutions stayed completely silent during lockdowns when everyone was being treated so brutally by public health. Many people knew the truth — that everyone would get this bug, most would shake it off just fine and then it would become endemic — but were simply afraid to say it. Cite the Overton window all you want but what is really at issue is one’s willingness to exercise moral courage.

  The relationship between public opinion, cultural feeling and state policy has always been complex, opaque and beyond the capacity of empirical methods to model. It’s for this reason that there is such a vast literature on social change.

  We live in times in which most of what we thought we knew about the strategies for social and political change have been blown up. That’s simply because the normal world we knew only five years ago — or thought we knew — no longer exists. Everything is broken, including whatever imaginings we had about the existence of this Overton window.

  What to do about it? I would suggest a simple answer.

  Forget the model, which might be completely misconstrued in any case. Just say what is true, with sincerity, without malice, without convoluted hopes of manipulating others. It’s a time for truth, which earns trust.

  Only that will blow the window wide open and finally demolish it forever.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 16:20

• Cognitive Decline: Biden Campaign Says They Will Shorten His Speeches
  Cognitive Decline: Biden Campaign Says They Will Shorten His Speeches

  Who is actually running the country?

  The Biden campaign team has admitted that they are seeking to shorten his speeches, claiming that they are seeking “quality over quantity,” but leading many to presume it is because he can barely talk.

  

  Modernity.news’ Steve Watson reports that Biden Deputy Campaign manager Quentin Fulks told MSBNC:

  “Our campaign believes in quality over quantity. We believe that these touches, these smaller things that are getting to the point about what is going on in the stakes of this election are gonna be easier for the voters to tap into.”

  NBC reports Biden’s handlers are “looking to shorten his speeches” to limit his public displays of cognitive decline.

  A Biden campaign spokesman insists it’s about “quality over quantity.” pic.twitter.com/GreyaVbgN6

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) May 4, 2024

  The announcement led many to ask, how much shorter can his speeches get?

  Is that..possible?

  I suppose they can just have him show up, smile, crap his pants and leave.

  — JD Sharp (@imjdsharp) May 4, 2024

  Prediction: biden’s speeches will be two words within the next month….. Hi. Bye.

  — I put my faith in God, not the government (@DontBidenMe) May 4, 2024

  At the moment he can barely manage three minutes without slurring and losing a battle with the teleprompter.

  I guess they can’t shorten his responses in press conferences since he hardly gives any.

  — Kelkat (@Tweetytweeter63) May 4, 2024

  Who’s actually running the country?

  👀 👀 👀

  — iNeo_G 🚀 💫 ✨ (@iNeo_G) May 4, 2024

  The campaign like to air pre recorded speeches, that have scores of edits and cuts in them, blatantly because he struggles to speak more than one sentence at a time.

  And when Biden goes off script, he does something idiotic like calling Japan a Xenophobic country:

  They are already hiding him from the press after failing to disguise that he can barely walk.

  Probably because when he does encounter the press, he freezes and looks like he’s crapping himself:

  Joe Biden is falling apart in front of our very eyes! They can hide him all they want but the people know he’s more than unfit to serve! https://t.co/RVjzPJoTma

  — Tex-Mex Trumpian (@TexicanTrumpian) May 4, 2024

  Is it any wonder he is less popular than any other president in modern history:

  *  * *

  Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 15:45

• US Covert Missile Launcher Touted As Game Changer In Future Taiwan War
  US Covert Missile Launcher Touted As Game Changer In Future Taiwan War

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com,

  After the US withdrew from a major nuclear arms treaty with Russia in 2019, the Pentagon began to develop weapons that would have violated that agreement. Such a covert missile has now been deployed to the Philippines as part of the US military buildup surrounding China. The New York Times reports this system to be a covert missile launcher that Washington believes could jeopardize Xi Jinping’s position as president of China.

  Capable of firing Tomahawks and other munitions, the Typhon launcher is concealed in a 40-foot shipping container and can hold up to four missiles. The Defense Department first deployed the launchers to the Philippines during war games late last month, after which China accused the US of “stoking military confrontation.”

  

  According to the Times, Washington hopes to use the Typhon launchers to protect Taiwan from a Chinese attack. Sources who spoke with the outlet believe that Typhon’s strike power is enough to thwart an invasion of Taiwan and even force Xi from power in Beijing if an invasion fails.

  Below is a section of the NYT report which sets a dramatic scene:

  Setting squadrons of Chinese amphibious ships packed with troops ablaze in the Taiwan Strait, Pentagon officials believed, would not only protect the de facto independent island but may also make Mr. Xi’s own grip on power within the Communist Party untenable.

  Without the legal restrictions of the I.N.F. Treaty, the Pentagon began experimenting with existing assets.

  The Typhon launcher would have been banned under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Signed near the end of the Cold War, the treaty outlawed land-based missiles and launchers with a range between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.

  Tomahawks have carried nuclear payloads in the past, although the US retired that variant of the missile in compliance with the INF Treaty.

  The Times’ Pentagon reporter also notes that the Typhon system could be deployed to the southwestern Philippines for a potential conflict in the South China Sea. Tensions between Beijing and Manila have been rising for several months over dueling claims about sovereignty over reefs in the sea.

  The White House has reaffirmed its mutual defense pact with the Philippines, suggesting the Biden administration is ready to go to war with China over territorial claims in the South China Sea.

  Washington and Manila are additionally working on an intelligence-sharing agreement that is expected to be finalized this year. This pact, and a raft of other partnerships Washington has formed in the Indo-Pacific, are aimed at fighting a future war with Beijing.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 15:10

• Biden Boosts Student Dem Leader Warning Of "Dictator Trump" On PBS
  Biden Boosts Student Dem Leader Warning Of “Dictator Trump” On PBS

  Days after OnlyFans & TikTok star Farha Khalidi revealed the Biden administration paid her to push “full-on political propaganda” while asking her not to disclose that she was part of a covert propaganda strategy, the Biden-Harris campaign reposted on X a video of Gen-Zers regurgitating Democrat talking points, such as ‘Trump is a threat to Democracy.’ 

  The PBS News Hour roundtable discussion with Michigan students appeared loaded and staged. The left-wing media outlet tried to create the vibe that Gen-Zers are voting for President Biden in November because they’re afraid of losing Democracy if former President Trump is reelected.

  This is yet another example of Democrats brainwashing the youth into believing the biggest threat to America right now is the reelection of Trump. Under Biden, in just a few short years, the administration facilitated the greatest illegal alien invasion this nation has ever seen, now risking a major national security threat as unvetted migrants roam the nation, causing crime and chaos. Then there’s horrendous foreign policy in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, which risks pushing the world closer to World War III. Yet these kids, infected with the woke mind virus, are having trouble seeing reality. 

  Biden-Harris campaign reposted the video on X, saying, “Gen Z voter: The biggest issue for me is Democracy. We saw January 6. Now Trump is admitting he’ll be a dictator on day one. That’s not just rhetoric, that’s an admission.” 

  Gen Z voter: The biggest issue for me is democracy. We saw January 6. Now Trump is admitting he’ll be a dictator on day one. That’s not just rhetoric, that’s an admission pic.twitter.com/JxkQbLgcNa

  — Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) May 3, 2024

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

  However, as X users pointed out, how can there be a fair and balanced discussion when the Gen-Zer speaking in the video is the co-chair of College Democrats at the University of Michigan? 

  

  Here’s what others said: 

  Lol staged with paid actors

  — Shawn spelled the right way (@ShawnsBrain) May 3, 2024

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

  Right, because a bunch of teenagers who struggle with gender identity are exactly the type of people we should be listening to lmfao

  — Heywood Jablome (@SeanSeneca30103) May 3, 2024

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

  Not sure how 4 students represent all Gen Z voters but go on.

  — This too shall pass (@coolname77) May 4, 2024

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

  I hope the boys are ready to be drafted for world war 3

  — Tammy (@Tammy8156) May 5, 2024

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

  So why would the Biden-Harris campaign be focused on attempting to deceive youngsters into believing the cool thing in November is to vote for someone who could honestly be their elderly grandpa in a retirement home? 

  

  The reason is straightforward. A recent Bloomberg News/Morning Consult poll found that Trump leads Biden 47% to 40% among voters 18-34 in swing states. This is a significant shift from the last presidential cycle when Biden won 61% of voters under 30. 

  The Biden administration understands they desperately need Gen-Z and millennial support to win in November, hence why they were paying at least one OnlyFans creator to spew propaganda. And why they pushed for an illegal alien invasion. 

  Meanwhile, youngsters are coming to age in one of the worst economic periods this nation has seen in a generation. Elevated inflation is crushing household finances. Thanks to Fed chair Powell & out-of-control fiscal spending by Democrats. 

  Youngsters are pissed about disastrous Bidenomics. 

  The struggle is real for the new generation, which is just now learning that working a 9-5 isn’t as easy as college. pic.twitter.com/FvAeYkTddt

  — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) October 25, 2023

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

  A lot of people seem to think this mindset is unique to Gen Z. It’s not.

  Every generation goes through this. Watch Reality Bites, where a group of 20-somethings in the early 90s deal with the exact same struggles and emotions as described in this video.

  pic.twitter.com/7h1gAN3c7R

  — Matthew Kobach 🍕 (@mkobach) October 20, 2023

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

  The Gen-Z girl who complained about the 9-5 work schedule has a comment for Business Insider (which tried to find out where she works) about the stress of finding a job as a post-grad. She’s got a point. pic.twitter.com/4ExfWrELLF

  — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) October 27, 2023

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

  Plus, on campus – there’s been a surge in Gen-Zers stepping up to protect the flag and the nation against Marxist radicals. 

  The average 20-year-old boy on a big state college campus is a lot closer to the picture on the right than the picture on the left. https://t.co/6wI7LSl31Y pic.twitter.com/yx52F01kNY

  — Nate Hochman (@njhochman) May 4, 2024

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

  We’ll leave you with this. 

  Here are some more Gen Z voters.

  How about you post these ones 🤨 pic.twitter.com/HgBN490Evm

  — Rob Coates 🇺🇸 (@LuckyHippie926) May 3, 2024

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

  Biden camp is in trouble. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 14:35

• Change Of S&P Leadership Suggests Bottom Is Near
  Change Of S&P Leadership Suggests Bottom Is Near

  Authored by Simon White, Bloomberg macro strategist,

  A change in sector leadership in US stocks suggests the correction might soon be over and a bottom is not too far away.

  The tech sector has led the recent advance in the US stock-market (i.e. the sector with the highest three-month return on a three-month smoothed basis), but in the last two weeks it lost that mantle to the communication services sector.

  (Tech stocks are leading today after the payrolls miss, but on a three-month return on a three-month smoothed basis communication services are still ahead.)

  

  As the chart shows, the two previous market corrections were accompanied by a change of leadership. But that change came near the bottom and ahead of the next advance.

  The tech sector is lagging as its main constituents, Microsoft, Apple and Nvidia, have been lagging, while the communication services sector, predominately Meta and Google, went into the lead, driven the latter’s positive earnings surprise last week.

  Further confidence that the current fall in prices is just a correction is given by buoyant excess liquidity that continues to be supportive for stocks and relatively low near-term recession risk (although that is always subject to changes based on the data).

  

  Also the primary bull trend in the stock market remains intact. The 13 versus 26-week moving average crossover signal for the S&P was one of the earliest signs that the market’s nascent advance in early 2023 was durable. The positive stock-market regime that began late last year remains in place.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 14:00

• "Nothing Wrong With Being Hamas": Radical Leftist Groups Trained Students Before Nationwide Campus Chaos 
  “Nothing Wrong With Being Hamas”: Radical Leftist Groups Trained Students Before Nationwide Campus Chaos 

  It’s very puzzling that the purple-haired communist revolutionaries sitting in tents across woke colleges and universities nationwide would advocate for Palestinians to break free from the support of freedom-loving Israel only to adopt the authoritarian control of Sharia law by Hamas. But perhaps, as we’ve explained before, the uprisings at colleges have very little to do with helping poor Palestinians and everything to do with abolishing capitalism and the socialist reconstruction of America. 

  In the last several weeks, social unrest has been spreading like stage 4 cancer across college campuses nationwide. These uprisings have likely been influenced by Marxist groups grooming kids, infecting them with the woke mind virus (in this case, oppressor vs. oppressed). Really, how can these kids be oppressed if they’re attending elite schools, living the dream on taxpayer-funded student loans while getting worthless gender studies degrees? Meanwhile, the vast majority of Americans are struggling to pay bills and put food on the table in the era of failed Bidenomics as inflation runs rampant.  

  Like many law-abiding Americans watching the protests, we spotted similarities with demonstrators at multiple colleges and universities, including the same-style tent and white construction worker helmets being utilized by demonstrators.

  

  Also, professional protesters showed up… 

  

  This began the questioning of just how organized and funded these protests were. 

  Professional agitators arrested at Columbia College campus.

  Unveiling a Pattern of Disruption

  Recent arrests at Columbia College campus in NYC have brought to light the activities of anarchists, revealing a concerning pattern of unlawful protest actions. These arrests,… pic.twitter.com/xqjoHp96Jx

  — Viral News NYC (@ViralNewsNYC) May 5, 2024

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

  To answer that question, the Wall Street Journal, published a new report that reveals the social unrest at colleges and universities was the result of a multi-month “training and planning” campaign by “activists and left-wing groups.”

  At Columbia University, student organizers consulted heavily with radical leftwing groups, such as National Students for Justice in Palestine, veterans of campus protests, and former Black Panthers, many months before the protests. 

  These campus riots have been spontaneous eruptions of support for Hamas terrorists. Luckily 500 professionally printed protest signs showed up unannounced out of nowhere! 😂 pic.twitter.com/caHr9dar1b

  — James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) May 1, 2024

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

  “We took notes from our elders, engaged in dialogue with them and analyzed how the university responded to previous protests,” Sueda Polat, a graduate student and organizer in the pro-Palestinian encampment, told WSJ. She said they met with former Black Panthers about how to organizer the movement. 

  Meanwhile, the National Students for Justice in Palestine, or NSJP, with over 300 chapters across the US, was heavily involved in organizing college encampments and building takeovers. 

  These building takeovers left the nation stunned… 

  She participated in a hostile takeover of campus and subjected her classmates to “Zionist” purity checkpoints that determined whether or not they got to access their classes.

  Her group vandalized and barricaded historic buildings and treated anyone not w/them as enemies.

  They… pic.twitter.com/R71cXZvfFZ

  — Mark Schipper (@TheMarkSchipper) May 3, 2024

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

  🇺🇸🇵🇸 MORE FOOTAGE OF THE PRO-PALESTINIAN TAKEOVER OF CAL-POLY

  Riot police are attempting to regain control of the campus after protesters barricaded themselves within the campus of California’s Polytechnic University.

  Decisive action is called for as more universities around… https://t.co/d8VIvhuY2C pic.twitter.com/dLxXLIY2ci

  — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) April 23, 2024

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

  Royce Hall is the most iconic building on the UCLA campus. I spent a lot of time there in college.

  Look at what these supporters of Hamas terrorists did to my school, and tell me again how peaceful this protest is. pic.twitter.com/Ci7YEDvAwF

  — Joel M. Petlin (@Joelmpetlin) May 2, 2024

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

  Protesters that were Arrested last week at Columbia University in New York City had, for several Weeks and Months prior to the Establishment of the Campus Encampment as well as the Storming and Barricading of the Hamilton Hall Building, held discussions with Outside Extremists… pic.twitter.com/oBTvUOI55B

  — OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 5, 2024

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

  As early as November, we pointed out how NSJP was beginning to cause chaos across school campuses:

  • Brandeis University Bans Students For Justice In Palestine, Alleges Hamas Support

  And…

  • Virulent Antisemitism And The Rot At Our Universities
  • Berkeley Instructor Offers Extra Credit For Attending Pro-Palestine Protest

  WSJ pointed out, “NSJP have been received and administered by the Wespac Foundation.” 

  According to Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, in a recent Washington Examiner op-ed, Wespac’s website has a photo of activists holding up a sign that reads “Another World is Possible.” He said this slogan is well-known and used by organizations that “despise capitalism but feel they must cloak their communism.” 

  “WESPAC funds various revolutionary far-left/anti-Western groups,” Ryan Mauro of Capital Research Center, who tracks these activists groups, told Gonzalez. 

  Mauro told Gonzalez that WESPAC donations include monies from Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors and George Soros’s Open Society. 

  

  Back to WSJ’s report, weeks before the college protests erupted, students at Colombia University were given “Resistance 101” training with activists from Samidoun. 

  “There is nothing wrong with being a member of Hamas, being a leader of Hamas, being a fighter in Hamas,” Samidoun coordinator Charlotte Kates told university students. 

  Meanwhile, the Israeli government declared Samidoun a terrorist organization in 2021.

  “They support terrorism, and they want to gain public opinion — support — for terrorism,” Yossi Kuperwasser, the former chief of the research division in the Israel Defense Forces’ military intelligence unit, recently said. 

  ActiveFence Research sheds more color on Samidoun: 

  

  

  

  

  

  

  What’s taking shape here is yet another Marxist movement, or perhaps ‘BLM-style 2.0’ emerging ahead of the summer months. These Marxists, like parasites, are hijacking the pro-Palestinian movement with their intent to destroy capitalism and America. 

  Robert Pape, a political scientist at the University of Chicago who studies political violence, warned that protests are expected to continue through summer and fall.  

  Just remember, Marxists at these colleges said the quiet part out loud last week. 

  An extremist on the mic says: “There’s only one solution, intifada revolution. We must have a revolution so we can have a socialist reconstruction of the USA.”

  This isn’t just about Israel/Palestine. It’s an attempt of the Marxist takeover of America. Our colleges have become… pic.twitter.com/2IEqRyuorB

  — A Man Of Memes (@RickyDoggin) April 30, 2024

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

  In April, Samidoun and other groups unleashed protests that attempted to shutter airport terminals, bridges, and highways nationwide. These protests masqueraded as pro-Palestinian demonstrations, but their dark intentions by Marxists were to disrupt the economy.  

  We asked in April: “Who Is Funding This Chaos? Pro-Palestinian Protesters Attempt To Paralyze Chicago O’Hare, Golden Gate Bridge.”

  So where are the FBI, Congress, and the Biden administration? Why aren’t they investigating these left-wing artificial protests before they spark out of control and cause more chaos across the nation?

  Caption this 👇 pic.twitter.com/HxDdS0Zpny

  — wilder😎🇺🇸 (@wilderpatriot) May 4, 2024

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

  However, this time around, unlike the BLM riots several years ago, there are more than ten million unvetted illegal aliens from around the world, some of whom do not like the US. The nation is on the brink of chaos if this continues. Yet, Democrats are mostly silent. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 13:25

• Watch: Senator Eviscerates Biden Official Over "Dark Money Meetings"
  Watch: Senator Eviscerates Biden Official Over “Dark Money Meetings”

  Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

  During a Senate Energy and National Resources Committee hearing this week, Republican Senator Josh Hawley exposed a Biden official as having no clue what is going on in her own department.

  

  Hawley grilled Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland regarding alleged shady meetings with foreign “dark-money groups” that actively fund radical left-wing environmental initiatives. 

  “Is it common practice at your department to meet with dark money groups off the books and conceal it from the public?” Hawley probed.

  Talk about corruption: Biden’s Interior department has *off the books* meeting with liberal dark money group funded by foreign billionaire, conceals it from the public, then does everything they want. In this case, canceling critical mining in the US. To benefit China. pic.twitter.com/tfQeEXq1f3

  — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) May 2, 2024

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

  Haaland Replied “Senator, thank you for the question, and of course, I can’t answer to, uh, if you’re referring to our former deputy secretary. He’s no longer at the department.”

  “Who worked for you,” Hawley fired back.

  “He worked for the president. He was appointed by the president,” Haaland said, attempting to to deflect responsibility.

  “He’s your deputy secretary,” Hawley said, adding “Are you the secretary of the Department of the Interior? I thought that’s why you were here.”

  Hawley then asked “Are you the secretary?” Scolding Haarland for attempting to look to colleagues for assistance. 

  “Don’t look at her, look at me. Are you the secretary?” he repeated.

  “I am,” Haaland responded.

  Hawley further asked “Do these people who are sitting here today answering most of your questions, do they work for you? Do they report for you? You’re not in charge?”

  “They work with me,” Haaland answered.

  “They work with you. So you’re not in charge of the department?” An exasperated Hawley asserted, adding “Oh my gosh, I thought you were in charge! I thought that was why you were here!”

  “We work as a team,” Haaland responded, 

  “Oh, okay. So who’s in charge then?” Hawley demanded.

  Secretary Haaland apparently doesn’t know who’s in charge of the Interior Department. Hint: it’s supposed to be her 👇 pic.twitter.com/c1BSXtiViW

  — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) May 2, 2024

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

  “Uh, I, I provide the vision, I provide the overall direction and —” Haaland stuttered. 

  “But you’re not in charge,” Hawley proclaimed, asking “Do you take responsibility for what happens at the Department of the Interior?”

  “I take responsibility,” Haaland said.

  “Good, then why are your leadership meeting with dark money groups and concealing it from the public? Why are they doing it off the books? How many times did this happen?” Hawley asked, returning to the original question. 

  “Senator, this is the first I’m hearing of this,” Haaland claimed, adding “I don’t, I didn’t … my deputy secretary is no longer there, and, um, I can’t answer to what he did when he was there.”

  Hawley again accused Haaland of refusing to take responsibility again, and charging that Haaland’s Department has “a corruption problem.”

  “We have foreign billionaires, who are funding dark-money groups, coming to meet with your leadership, concealing it from the public, while they are filing lawsuits adverse to the department,” Hawley urged, concluding “The American people should be charge—not the foreign billionaires.”

  The full exchange is below:

  *  *  *

  Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 05/05/2024 – 12:50

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Interlocking Of Strategic Paradigms
  The Interlocking Of Strategic Paradigms

  Authored by Alastair Crooke via the Ron Paul Institute,

  Theodore Postol, Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy at MIT, has provided a forensic analysis of the videos and evidence emerging from Iran’s 13th April swarm drone and missile ‘demonstration’ attack into Israel: A ‘message’, rather than an ‘assault’.

  The leading Israeli daily, Yediot Ahoronot, has estimated the cost of attempting to down this Iranian flotilla at between $2-3 billion dollars. The implications of this single number are substantial.

  Professor Postol writes:

  “This indicates that the cost of defending against waves of attacks of this type is very likely to be unsustainable against an adequately armed and determined adversary”.

  “The videos show an extremely important fact: All of the targets, whether drones or not, are shot down by air-to-air missiles”, [fired from mostly U.S. aircraft. Some 154 aircraft reportedly were aloft at the time] likely firing AIM-9x Sidewinder air to air missiles. The cost of a single Sidewinder air-to-air missile is about $500,000”.

  Furthermore:

  “The fact that a very large number of unengaged ballistic missiles could be seen glowing as they reenter the atmosphere to lower altitudes [an indication of hyper-speed], indicates that whatever the effects of [Israel’s] David’s Sling and the Arrow missile defenses, they were not especially effective. Thus, the evidence at this point shows that essentially all or most of the arriving long-range ballistic missiles were not intercepted by any of the Israeli air and missile-defense systems”.

  

  Postel adds, “I have analyzed the situation, and have concluded that commercially available optical and computational technology is more than capable of being adapted to a cruise missile guidance system to give it very high precision homing capability … it is my conclusion that the Iranians have already developed precision guided cruise missiles and drones”.

  “The implications of this are clear. The cost of shooting down cruise missiles and drones will be very high and might well be unsustainable unless extremely inexpensive and effective anti-air systems can be implemented. At this time, no one has demonstrated a cost-effective defense system that can intercept ballistic missiles with any reliability”.

  Just to be clear, Postol is saying that neither the U.S. nor Israel has more than a partial defense to a potential attack of this nature – especially as Iran has dispersed and buried its ballistic missile silos across the entire terrain of Iran under the control of autonomous units which are capable of continuing a war, even were central command and communications to be completely lost.

  This amounts to paradigm change – clearly for Israel, for one. The huge physical expenditure on air defense ordinance – 2-3 billion dollars worth – will not be repeated willy-nilly by the U.S. Netanyahu will not easily persuade the U.S. to engage with Israel in any joint venture against Iran, given these unsustainable air-defence costs.

  But also, as a second important implication, these Air Defense assets are not just expensive in dollar terms, they simply are not there: i.e. the store cupboard is near empty! And the U.S. lacks the manufacturing capacity to replace these not particularly effective, high cost platforms speedily.

  ‘Yes, Ukraine’ … the Middle East paradigm interlinks directly with the Ukraine paradigm where Russia has succeeded in destroying so much of the western supplied, air-defence capabilities in Ukraine, giving Russia near complete air dominance over the skies.

  Positioning scarce air defense ‘to save Israel’ therefore, exposes Ukraine (and slows the U.S. pivot to China, too). And given the recent passage of the funding Bill for Ukraine in Congress, clearly air defence assets are a priority for sending to Kiev – where the West looks increasingly trapped and rummaging for a way out that does not lead to humiliation.

  But before leaving the Middle East paradigm shift, the implications for Netanyahu are already evident: He must therefore focus back to the ‘near enemy’ – the Palestinian sphere or to Lebanon – to provide Israel with the ‘Great Victory’ that his government craves.

  In short, the ‘cost’ for Biden of saving Israel from the Iranian flotilla which had been pre-announced by Iran to be demonstrative and not destructive nor lethal is that the White House must put-up with the corollary – an attack on Rafah. But this implies a different form of cost – an electoral erosion through exacerbating domestic tensions arising from the on-going blatant slaughter of Palestinians.

  It is not just Israel that bears the weight of the Iranian paradigm shift. Consider the Sunni Arab States that have been working in various forms of collaboration (normalissation) with Israel.

  In the event of wider conflict embracing Iran, clearly Israel cannot protect them – as Professor Postol so clearly shows. And can they count on the U.S.? The U.S. faces competing demands for its scarce Air Defenses and (for now) Ukraine, and the pivot to China, are higher on the White House priority ladder.

  In September 2019, the Saudi Abqaiq oil facility was hit by cruise missiles, which Postol notes, “had an effective accuracy of perhaps a few feet, much more precise than could be achieved with GPS guidance (suggesting an optical and computational guidance system, giving a very precise homing capability)”.

  So, after the Iranian active deterrence paradigm shift, and the subsequent Air Defence depletion paradigm shock, the putative coming western paradigm shift (the Third Paradigm) is similarly interlinked with Ukraine.

  For the western proxy war with Russia centered on Ukraine has made one thing abundantly clear: this is that the West’s off-shoring of its manufacturing base has left it uncompetitive, both in simple trade terms, and secondly, in limiting western defense manufacturing capacity. It finds (post-13 April) that it does not have the Air Defence assets to go round: ‘saving Israel’; ‘saving Ukraine’ and preparing for war with China.

  The western maximalization of shareholder returns model has not adapted readily to the logistical needs of the present ‘limited’ Ukraine/Russia war, let alone provided positioning for future wars – with Iran and China.

  Put plainly, this ‘late stage’ global imperialism has been living a ‘false dawn’: With the economy shifting from manufacturing ‘things’, to the more lucrative sphere of imagining new financial products (such as derivatives) that make a lot of money quickly, but which destabilize society (through increasing disparities of wealth); and which ultimately, de-stabilise the global system itself (as the World Majority states recoil from the loss of sovereignty and autonomy that financialism entails).

  More broadly, the global system is close to massive structural change. As the Financial Times warns,

  “the U.S. and EU cannot embrace national-security “infant industry” arguments, seize key value chains to narrow inequality, and break the fiscal and monetary ‘rules’, while also using the IMF and World Bank – and the economics profession– to preach free-market best practice to EM ex-China. And China can’t expect others not to copy what it does”. As the FT concludes, “the shift to a new economic paradigm has begun. Where it will end is very much up for grabs.”

  ‘Up for grabs’: Well, for the FT the answer may be opaque, but for the Global Majority is plain enough – “We’re going back to basics”: A simpler, largely national economy, protected from foreign competition by customs barriers. Call it ‘old- fashioned’ (the concepts have been written about for the last 200 years); yet it is nothing extreme. The notions simply reflect the flip side of the coin to Adam Smith’s doctrines, and that which Friedrich List advanced in his critique of the laissez-faire individualist approach of the Anglo-Americans.

  ‘European leaders’, however, see the economic paradigm solution differently:

  “The ECB’s Panetta gave a speech echoing Mario Draghi’s call for “radical change”: He stated for the EU to thrive it needs a de facto national-security focused POLITICAL economy centered around: reducing dependence on foreign demand; enhancing energy security (green protectionism); advancing production of technology (industrial policy); rethinking participation in global value chains (tariffs/subsidies); governing migration flows (so higher labour costs); enhancing external security (huge funds for defence); and joint investments in European public goods (via Eurobonds … to be bought by ECB QE)”.

  The ‘false dawn’ boom in U.S. financial services began as its industrial base was rotting away, and as new wars began to be promoted. It is easy to see that the U.S. economy now needs structural change. Its real economy has become globally uncompetitive – hence Yellen’s call on China to curb its over-capacity which is hurting western economies.

  But is it realistic to think that Europe can manage a relaunch as a ‘defense and national security-led political economy’, as Draghi and Panetta advocate as a continuation of war with Russia? Launched from near ground zero?

  Is it realistic to think that the American Security State will allow Europe to do this, having deliberately reduced Europe to economic vassalage through causing it to abandon its prior business model based on cheap energy and selling high-end engineering products to China?

  This Draghi-ECB plan represents a huge structural change; one that would take a decade or two to implement and would cost trillions. It would occur too, at a time of inevitable European fiscal austerity. Is there evidence that ordinary Europeans support such radical structural change?

  Why then is Europe pursuing a path that embraces huge risks – one that potentially could drag Europe into a whirlpool of tensions ending in war with Russia?

  For one main reason: The EU leadership held hubristic ambitions to turn the EU into a ‘geo-political’ empire – a global actor with the heft to join the U.S. at Top Table. To this end, the EU unreservedly offered itself as the auxiliary of the White House Team for their Ukraine project, and acquiesced to the entry price of emptying their armories and sanctioning the cheap energy on which the economy depended.

  It was this decision that has been de-industrializing Europe; that has made what remains of a real economy uncompetitive and triggered the inflation that is undermining living standards. Falling into line with Washington’s failing Ukraine project has released a cascade of disastrous decisions by the EU.

  Were this policy line to change, Europe could revert to what it was: a trading association formed of diverse sovereign states. Many Europeans would settle for that: Placing the focus on making Europe competitive again; making Europe a diplomatic actor, rather than as a military actor.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 23:20

• CIA Engaged In "Infinite Race" With China For AI, Other Tech
  CIA Engaged In “Infinite Race” With China For AI, Other Tech

  The CIA is engaged in an “infinite race” with China when it comes to AI and other top technologies, according to the agency’s Chief Technology Officer, Nand Mulchandani, who outlined a strategy that prioritizes technological prowess as crucial to national security.

  

  Speaking at the Hill & Valley Forum’s gathering of top technology and government officials in Washington this week, Mulchandani’s made it clear that the agency is aggressively pursuing advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) to bolster both offensive and defensive capabilities, the Washington Times reports.

  “We’re looking at transforming every single part of what the agency does,” he stated, underscoring the depth of the CIA’s commitment to integrating AI into its core operations. The agency’s push includes the development of large language models, sophisticated algorithms that are the backbone of generative AI tools, aiming to enhance everything from field operations to analytical and support functions.

  This strategic pivot comes as geopolitical rivalry with China is intensifying. The CCP has repeatedly expressed its ambition to dominate the AI sphere, which would present profound challenges and implications for global power dynamics. Mulchandani emphasized the need to rethink the concept of this competition as a “race,” suggesting that viewing it as having a definitive end is a misstep. “This is an infinite race. This is not going to stop. It’s going to keep on going,” he explained, framing the scenario as a continuous struggle for technological superiority.

  The implications of this shift are profound. If the deployment of these new tools escalates to warfare, it will test America’s position in the technology stakes, a scenario Mulchandani hopes will never materialize. He predicts the next major conflict will be “primarily a software war,” driven by AI, changing the nature of warfare from hardware-dependent to software-driven.

  The concerns are not just theoretical. At Stanford’s Hoover Institution, Herbert Lin of the Stanford Emerging Technology Review highlighted the shift in global tech leadership, with the U.S. losing its primacy in certain key areas like AI. Lin pointed out the critical need for a robust talent pipeline and a strategic vision, especially in fields like biotechnology, to maintain competitiveness.

  Moreover, the CIA is particularly wary of AI-driven Ubiquitous Technical Surveillance (UTS), which threatens the secrecy of U.S. intelligence operations. In response, the agency is engaged in foundational infrastructure work, which Mulchandani described as the “sewer and plumbing work” necessary to navigate the AI revolution. This involves constant adaptation to rapid technological changes, ensuring that the CIA remains agile in its tech tactics.

  “We talk about UTS, which is basically something that’s really, really killing us out in the field in terms of competitively, you know, biometrics, video cameras,” he said. “Well, how do we turn it around [and continue] those operations in the face of this much AI being thrown at us is another big area that they’re looking at. So directorate by directorate, we’re rethinking, reshaping every part of what CIA needs to do in the face of using it and deploying it.“

  The urgency of these initiatives is echoed in the broader governmental plea for collaboration from Silicon Valley. House Speaker Mike Johnson’s call to technologists and venture capitalists at the forum to guide and assist the government underscores the critical role of public-private partnerships in navigating the technological labyrinth.

  As the U.S. and China continue their relentless pursuit of technological dominance, the narrative is clear: this is not a sprint with a finish line but a marathon without end, defining the future of global power, security, and technological innovation.

  Big Mike Begs

  No, not that Big Mike… House Speaker Mike Johnson (R?-LA), who implored the technologists and venture capitalists at the forum to help the government wherever they can.

  

  “There are not many industries, not many leaders and experts, who we just openly plead for your counsel, but I am doing that here today,” said Johnson. “Because a lot of the people who are of goodwill here, who want to do the right thing, could use some of your guidance along the way to make sure that we don’t step on any land mines that we don’t see. You have a much better vision, I think, on a lot of that than we do.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 22:45

• Russia Stepping Up 'Decapitation Strikes' – Belatedly Adds Zelensky to Criminal 'Wanted' List
  Russia Stepping Up ‘Decapitation Strikes’ – Belatedly Adds Zelensky to Criminal ‘Wanted’ List

  Days ago, for the first time Russian forces mounted a major air attack on the Ukrainian command’s southern headquarters in the port city of Odessa. This suggests Moscow is increasingly targeting Ukraine’s top command and control centers.

  There’s been another key development late in the week suggesting Russia is escalating in response to more and more weapons and billions pouring into Kiev from the West: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has just been added to a Russian government most-wanted list of criminals.

  

  It was revealed Saturday that Zelensky’s name is now on the Russian Interior Ministry’s “wanted” list, which is an important online database. 

  The database lists Zelensky as wanted “under an article of the criminal code” but provides no other specifics or details. This designation comes after well over two years of war, so the question is: why now?

  It seems the Kremlin is signaling a new escalation which could focus on ‘decapitation strikes’ targeting Ukraine’s top leadership. Or else, is Russia establishing a legal ground for arresting him in some future scenario?

  While command and intelligence HQ’s have been hit by Russian airpower in the past, strikes have yet to directly target top-ranking civilian and military leadership. But it seems this is about to change.

  President Putin has for years demonstrated that he is very law-oriented and ‘by the book’ – that is, he must have a legal basis or rationale for acting. So Zelensky now personally being designated as ‘wanted’ perhaps provides the ‘rationale’ in a sense, from the Kremlin’s perspective.

  The anti-Kremlin independent news outlet Moscow Times suggests this sets the stage for new plots to try and assassinate Zelensky: 

  The Ukrainian President said last year he was aware that at least “five or six” assassination attempts against him had been foiled.

  The day after sending troops into Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin gave an address to the nation in which he called on the Ukrainian army to overthrow Zelensky.

  Russia has placed several foreign politicians and public figures on its wanted list, which has tens of thousands of entries.

  As for Russia’s unrelenting and recently stepped-up aerial campaign, it has continued to pummel and degrade Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. This appears a tit-for-tat retaliation for Ukraine’s own devastating cross-border attacks on Russian oil depots and refineries. 

  A fresh Russian Defense Ministry (MoD) statement has outlined that “In the past 7 days, the Russian Armed Forces carried out 25 group strikes via precision weapons and drones, hitting Ukrainian energy and transportation infrastructure facilities and Ukrainian military-industrial complex enterprises.”

  Zelensky is now officially WANTED by Russia!

  At least that’s what the database for Russia’s MVD (Ministry of Internal Affairs–basically, police) states: Zelensky is wanted under an undisclosed article of the Russian criminal code.

  An interesting development to say the least.… pic.twitter.com/FS8tdWAJxt

  — Nina 🐙 Byzantina (@NinaByzantina) May 4, 2024

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

  “Between April 28 and May 4, in response to the Kiev regime’s attempts to inflict damage to Russian energy and industrial facilities, the Russian Armed Forces carried out 25 group strikes via precision weapons and drones, hitting Ukrainian energy and transportation infrastructure facilities, military-industrial complex enterprises, missile and ammunition storage areas, as well as unmanned speedboats and drone manufacturing workshops,” the ministry said.

  The MoD has also warned that any “mercenary” positions and also foreign military equipment will be specifically targeted. There are reports that Ukraine has had to pull back it US-supplied M1 Abrams tanks precisely because they make for such an attractive target.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 21:35

• Almost Half Of Health Care Workers Hesitant To Take COVID-19 Boosters: Study
  Almost Half Of Health Care Workers Hesitant To Take COVID-19 Boosters: Study

  Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Approximately half of the health care workers in a Polish study were found to be averse to taking COVID-19 booster shots, with one of the reasons for this hesitancy being their negative experiences with previous vaccinations.

  

  The peer-reviewed study, published in the Vaccines journal on April 29, examined factors underlying “hesitancy to receive COVID-19 booster vaccine doses” among health care workers (HCW) in Poland. Almost 50 percent of the participants were identified as being wary of the boosters. “Our study found that 42 percent of the HCWs were hesitant about the second booster dose, while 7 percent reported no intent to get vaccinated with any additional doses.”

  “As reasons for not vaccinating, participants most frequently highlighted lack of time, negative experiences with previous vaccinations, and immunity conferred by past infections.”

  The study involved 69 healthcare workers composed of nurses, midwives, physicians, other health associate professionals, and administrative staff.

  At the time of enrollment, 47 had a history of lab-confirmed COVID-19 infection and 31 had at least one comorbidity, a situation where a person suffers from more than one disease or medical condition at the same time.

  Over 92 percent of study participants received at least one vaccine booster, with 50.73 percent getting two doses. Five out of the 69 HCWs did not take any boosters.

  “Booster hesitancy among health professionals (physicians, nurses, and midwives) was lower than among administrative staff and others. Almost 79 percent of the physicians had received two COVID-19 vaccine booster doses. However, apart from physicians, about half of the HCWs from each occupation group were hesitant about the second booster dose.”

  “The highest number of HCWs without any vaccine boosters was observed among administration personnel.”

  HCWs in the age groups of 31-40 and 41-50 were found to be the most skeptical about taking the second booster shot. Thirty-four out of the 69 HCWs provided reasons for their COVID-19 booster vaccine hesitancy.

  Two of the health care workers who did not take booster shots said their decision was based on their personal experience with the vaccines.

  “They reported negative experiences with past COVID-19 vaccination and stated that the natural immunity developed after SARS-CoV-2 infection could protect them against COVID-19, which, overall, does not pose serious health risks,” the study said.

  “Responses from HCWs who received only one COVID-19 booster dose can be categorized into two themes: (i) influences arising from personal perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and disease prevention and (ii) issues directly related to vaccination and its safety.”

  Six health care workers reported suffering negative adverse effects after previously taking COVID shots. Four had safety concerns about the vaccines.

  In an earlier study conducted by the researchers, COVID-19 antibody levels among HCWs after receiving the mandatory primary vaccine series were found to have decreased by around 90 to 95 percent within seven months of vaccination. However, “none of the HCWs contracted COVID-19,” it said.

  The current study was funded by the Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry Polish Academy of Sciences. The authors of the study reported no conflicts of interest.

  Vaccine Concerns, Harms

  Other studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy among health care workers. A March 2023 study that looked at HCWs from Cameroon and Nigeria found that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was “high and broadly determined by the perceived risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines on personal health, mistrust in COVID-19 vaccines, and uncertainty about colleagues’ vaccine acceptability.”

  An April 2022 study found that “a concern for vaccine side effects” and “the belief that the vaccines are inadequately studied” were some of the key reasons for vaccine hesitancy among health care workers.

  A May 2022 analysis at BMJ Global Health warned that indulging in policies like mandatory vaccination “may cause more harm than good.”

  “Current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good,” it said.

  “Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunizations.”

  The analysis recommended that vaccines should only be mandated “sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions.”

  During Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-Wis.) roundtable discussion on COVID-19 vaccines on Feb. 26, researcher Raphael Lataster, associate lecturer at the University of Sydney, claimed that data from Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials exaggerated the efficacy of the shots.

  The data exaggeration could make an ineffective vaccine have a perceived effectiveness of up to 48 percent, he stated.

  Meanwhile, a Jan. 27 narrative review found that repeated COVID-19 vaccination may end up boosting the likelihood of experiencing COVID-19 infections and other pathologies. Taking multiple vaccine doses could trigger higher levels of IgG4 antibodies and impair activating white blood cells that protect a person from infections and cancers.

  “While booster doses have been recommended to enhance and extend immunity, especially in the face of emerging variants, this recommendation is not based on proven efficacy, and the side effects have been neglected,” the paper said.

  In an interview with EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program last year, clinical pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole said that DNA contamination in some of the COVID-19 vaccines could be behind an increase in cancers. He pointed to “turbo cancers,” referring to the phenomenon of cancer symptoms arising faster.

  “Now I’m seeing the solid tissue cancers at rates I’ve never seen … Patients that were stable, or cancer-free for one, two, five, ten years and their cancer’s back, it’s back with a vengeance and it’s not responding to the traditional therapies,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 21:00

• Bitcoin Vs. Gold: Who Won The ZeroHedge Debate?
  Bitcoin Vs. Gold: Who Won The ZeroHedge Debate?

  Friday night’s ZeroHedge Debate explored which is the superior asset: Gold or Bitcoin.

  

  Arguing in favor of Gold were investor Peter Schiff and NYU economist Nouriel Roubini, who went toe-to-toe with crypto proponents Erik Voorhees, a cryptocurrency entrepreneur and wealth manager Anthony Scaramucci.

  Schiff made the case that Bitcoin cannot be a viable currency because “money needs to be a commodity” and that Bitcoin has no inherent value.

  “It’s not just a unit of account and a medium of exchange. It needs to be a store of value,” he added.

  “[Bitcoin] is no more ‘digital gold’ than if I create an image of a hamburger on a computer screen. That’s not digital food.”

  Does Bitcoin’s transferability give it value?

  Voorhees argued that Bitcoin’s ability to seamlessly cross borders is an example of inherent value.

  “I can send $1 million to Europe in five minutes from my phone.”

  As things heated up, Roubini echoed Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), suggesting that crypto could be exchanged between a “criminal and a terrorist” and that Bitcoin’s transferability allows for the subversion of Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know-Your-Customer (KYC) laws.

  He blasted Voorhees for being too idealistic.

  “Live in your Libertarian cave! That’s not the world we live in.”

  Voorhees then gave his best impression of Socrates, attempting to dissect Roubini’s argument that Bitcoin is not “decentralized.”

  Roubini, meanwhile, made the case that Bitcoin mining is controlled by an oligopoly, and that “The Gini coefficient of Bitcoin is worse than North Korea,” – a point he’s made in the past, suggesting that Bitcoin contributes to income inequality, rather than reducing it.

  One topic the panelists agreed on: inflation is crushing the work class.

  According to Schiff, “there’s only one source of inflation and that’s government.”

  So, who do you think won?

  If you would like to protect yourself from rising inflation, consider checking out this debate’s sponsors: Preserve Gold and Bitlayer Labs. ZeroHedge would like to offer a special thank you to each of them for helping to facilitate free speech and open debate.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 20:33

• Northern Gaza In Grip Of Full-Blown Famine, UN Food Agency Chief Says
  Northern Gaza In Grip Of Full-Blown Famine, UN Food Agency Chief Says

  Starting early last month the director of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) Samantha Power informed US lawmakers in Congress for the first time that the population in parts of northern Gaza have begun facing famine. This testimony served to hasten international efforts to more efficiently get aid into the Strip, such as the Pentagon’s Gaza pier project, though it didn’t put a halt of the Western weapons flowing to Tel Aviv.

  Now, a top UN official has warned the crisis is worse than previously assessed. The head of the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) Cindy McCain is now warning that northern Gaza is in the midst of a “full-blown famine”.

  

  She further said that famine is “moving its way south” in a new NBC News interview set to air Sunday. She described that this is base on the humanitarian office’s assessment on the ground.

  “It’s horror. It’s so hard to look at and it’s so hard to hear,” McCain told Meet the Press. “What we are asking for and what we continually ask for is a ceasefire and the ability to have unfettered access, to get in safe through the various ports and gate crossings.”

  But a ceasefire is unlikely to come for at least a week, given that is how long Israel has just given Hamas to respond in a a fresh ultimatum. “Israel has informed Egyptian mediators that Hamas has one week to agree to a hostage deal or Tel Aviv will begin the invasion of Rafah,” AntiWar.com writes. “The Israeli proposal does not offer a permanent ceasefire, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared the attack on the city will occur with or without the release of hostages.”

  Conditions for the civilian population are expected to compound in the south if Israel’s military goes through with its planned ground offensive against Rafah.

  “The idea that we will halt the war before achieving all of its goals is out of the question,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhu told representatives of hostage families this past Tuesday. “We will enter Rafah and we will eliminate the Hamas battalions there – with or without a deal, in order to achieve the total victory.”

  The southern city is packed with some 1.5 million people at this point – with most of these being internally displaced refugees. But Israel says that some final key Hamas battalions and commanders are hiding out in the city, embedded within the civilian population, and that there will be no way to root them out except to send in the IDF infantry.

  In her early April testimony, USAID’s Power warned that “Food has not flowed in sufficient quantities to avoid this imminent famine in the south, and these conditions that are giving rise already to child deaths in the north.”

  “There’s been significant damage during the war; bullet holes, walls missing, roofs not intact” @UNWateridge

  Critical @UNRWA & @WFP mission to expand food distribution in north #Gaza. Agencies working closely to avert famine through meaningful supply despite massive destruction. pic.twitter.com/khMHxOU7qH

  — UNRWA (@UNRWA) May 2, 2024

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

  Aid officials have warned that in addition to the likelihood of mass deaths, famine would grow in the south of the Strip as well in the wake of a major Rafah assault. The population is so concentrated there that people would have few or no safe places to which to flee for safety. The US has been leaning on Israel to establish a credible civilian evacuation plan, but it’s unclear the degree to which this is being realized.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 20:25

• California Bill Would Give Black Applicants An Edge In Getting Occupational Licenses
  California Bill Would Give Black Applicants An Edge In Getting Occupational Licenses

  Authored by Sophie Li via The Epoch Times,

  California lawmakers are considering a bill that would give preference to African American applicants seeking occupational licenses, for such professions as teaching, nursing, counseling, electrical work and others, especially those who are descendants of slaves.

  

  Assemblyman Mike Gipson, author of AB 2862, said the state’s licensing process poses barriers for African Americans seeking employment, particularly in terms of wage disparities and access to leadership or managerial positions.

  “There has been historical longstanding deficiencies and internal barriers … [for] African Americans seeking professional work, and by prioritizing their applications, we are bridging the gap of professional inequities of under representation and under compensation,” Mr. Gipson said in a bill analysis.

  Under current law, only veterans are eligible for such prioritization.

  Mr. Gipson argued in the analysis that if such priority can be granted to veterans, similar standards should be applicable to African-American applicants.

  “If expediting licensure for veterans does not discriminate, then perhaps prioritizing African American applicants also is not discriminatory,” his statement reads.

  “Nor would a preference for African American applicants violate the equal protection clause of the California Constitution any more than the existing preference for veterans.”

  Supporters of the bill, including the Greater Sacramento Urban League and the California African American Chamber of Commerce, said the legislation addresses historical injustices and “promotes equity and provides opportunities for economic advancement within our community.”

  However, opponents say it is “unconstitutional” and lacks legal backing.

  The Pacific Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm, argues in a statement that both the U.S. and California Constitutions guarantee citizens equal protection under the law, prohibiting the government from treating citizens differently based on race, ancestry, or other protected categories.

  The law firm suggested if the bill were to become law, it would probably not hold up against legal challenges, referencing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard last summer. The court deemed the consideration of an applicant’s race as a factor in admissions decisions unconstitutional.

  They argued that while the constitution allows the government to use race to remedy instances of past discrimination, the bill doesn’t cite any specific California laws that exclude African Americans or that were drafted with the intention of excluding workers needing redress.

  Additionally, they said that introducing race as a factor in the licensing process would exacerbate barriers for many Californians seeking to enter the workforce, particularly low-income workers, who already face numerous challenges.

  The law firm also pointed out that the representation of minority groups within industries often varies, suggesting that prioritizing one group over others would fail to address the root of the problem.

  They argued that if the state were to do so, it should reduce barriers to licensure for all Californians.

  The bill, which will now be heard in the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee, passed the Assembly’s Business and Professions Committee on a 13–2 vote last week.

  If ultimately passed, it would go into effect on Jan. 1, 2029.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 19:50

• Cargill Recalls 8 Tons Of Ground Beef At Walmart Stores Nationwide Over Possible E. Coli
  Cargill Recalls 8 Tons Of Ground Beef At Walmart Stores Nationwide Over Possible E. Coli

  Eight tons of ground beef, processed at a Cargill Meat Solutions plant in Pennsylvania and distributed to Walmart stores nationwide, have been recalled due to potential E. coli contamination. 

  On Wednesday, the US Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service announced that 16,243 pounds of raw ground beef products may be contaminated with E. 

  In recent days, Cargill shipped the raw ground beef to Walmart stores in a wide range of states, including Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, DC, and West Virginia. 

  

  The recalled beef from Cargill includes:

  • All Natural Lean Ground Beef with lot code 117 (2.25 pounds)

  • Prime Rib Beef Steak Burgers Patties with lot code 118 (1.33 pounds)

  • Fat All Natural Angus Premium Ground Beef with lot code 117 (2.25 pounds)

  • Fat All Natural Ground Beef Chuck with lot code 118 (2.25 pounds)

  • Fat All Natural Ground Beef Chuck Patties with lot code 118 (1.33 pounds)

  • Fat All Natural Good Beef Sirloin Patties with lot code 118 (1.33 pounds)

  This comes about one month after walnuts sold at Whole Foods were recalled for potential  E. coli contamination. 

  Last month, Trader Joe’s recalled fresh basil sold in 29 states and Washington, DC, due to dozens of cases of salmonella. 

  The recent spate of food recalls, including the current ground beef recall, highlights the need for Americans to understand better the sourcing of their food. 

  Here’s what X users said about the recall: 

  It was eggs last week, peanut butter the week before that, granola bars before that, who tf is letting this all threw.

  — Godhasreturned (@Godhasreturned_) May 2, 2024

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

  I wouldn’t eat any meat sold at Walmart regardless

  — Mang (@Manglonian) May 2, 2024

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

  I can’t believe that many people buy meat there.

  — Mrs.America (@NeoAndTrinity_) May 2, 2024

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

  That’s what you get for buying meat at Walmart

  — Bobby (@0gbobbyEth) May 2, 2024

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

  This calls for reevaluating food sources, moving away from big companies, and shifting towards more localized and transparent farming practices. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 19:15

• David Stockman On The $1.3 Trillion Elephant In The Room
  David Stockman On The $1.3 Trillion Elephant In The Room

  Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.com,

  These people have to be stopped!

  

  We are talking about the nation’s unhinged monetary politburo domiciled in the Eccles Building, of course. It is bad enough that their relentless inflation of financial assets has showered the 1% with untold trillions of windfall gains, but their ultimate crime is that they lured the nation’s elected politician into a veritable fiscal trance. Consequently, future generations will be lugging the service costs on insuperable public debts for years to come.

  For more than two decades these foolish PhDs and monetary apparatchiks drove the entire Treasury yield curve to rock bottom, even as public debt erupted skyward. In this context, the single biggest chunk of the Treasury debt lies in the 90-day T-bill sector, but between December 2007 and June 2023 the inflation-adjusted yield on this workhorse debt security was negative 95% of the time.

  That’s right. During that 187-month span, the interest rate exceeded the running (LTM) inflation rate during only nine months, as depicted by the purple area picking above the zero bound in the chart, and even then by just a tad. All the rest of the time, Uncle Sam was happily taxing the inflationary rise in nominal incomes, even as his debt service payments were dramatically lagging the 78% rise of CPI during that period.

  Inflation-Adjusted Yield On 90-Day T-bills, 2007 to 2022

  

  The above was the fiscal equivalent of Novocain. It enabled the elected politicians to merrily jig up and down Pennsylvania Avenue and stroll the K-Street corridors dispensing bountiful goodies left and right, while experiencing nary a moment of pain from the massive debt burden they were piling on the main street economy.

  Accordingly, during the quarter-century between Q4 1997 and Q1 2022 the public debt soared from $5.5 trillion to $30.4 trillion or by 453%. In any rational world a commensurate rise in Federal interest expense would have surely awakened at least some of the revilers.

  But not in Fed World. As it happened, Uncle Sam’s interest expense only increased by 73%, rising from $368 billion to $635 billion per year during the same period.  By contrast, had interest rates remained at the not unreasonable levels posted in late 1997, the interest expense level by Q1 2022, when the Fed finally awakened to the inflationary monster it had fostered, would have been $2.03 trillion per annum.

  In short, the Fed reckless and relentless repression of interest rates during that quarter century fostered an elephant in the room that was one for the ages. Annualized Federal interest expense was fully $1.3 trillion lower than would have been the case at the yield curve in place in Q4 1997.

  Alas, the missing interest expense amounted to the equivalent of the entire social security budget!

  So, we’d guess the politicians might have been aroused from their slumber had interest expense reflected market rates. Instead, they were actually getting dreadfully wrong price signals and the present fiscal catastrophe is the consequence.

  Index Of Public Debt Versus Federal Interest Expense, Q4 1997-Q1 2022

  

  Needless to say, the US economy was not wallowing in failure or under-performance at the rates which prevailed in 1997. In fact, during that year real GDP growth was +4.5%, inflation posted at just 1.7%, real median family income rose by 3.2%, job growth was 2.8% and the real interest rates on the 10-year UST was +4.0%.

  In short, 1997 generated one of the strongest macroeconomic performances in recent decades—even with inflation-adjusted yields on the 10-year UST of +4.0%. So there was no compelling reason for a massive compression of interest rates, but that is exactly what the Fed engineered over the next two decades. As shown in the graph below, rates were systematically pushed lower by 300 to 500 basis points across the curve by the bottom in 2020-2021.

  Current yields are higher by 300 to 400 basis points from this recent bottom, but here’s the thing: They are only back to nominal levels prevalent at the beginning of the period in 1997, even as inflation is running at 3-4% Y/Y increases, or double the levels of 1997.

  US Treasury Yields, 1997 to 2024

  

  Unfortunately, even as the Fed has tepidly moved toward normalization of yields as shown in the graph above, Wall Street is bringing unrelenting pressure for a new round of rates cuts, which would result in yet another spree of the deep interest rate repression and distortion that has fueled Washington’s fiscal binge since the turn of the century.

  As it is, the public debt is already growing at an accelerating clip, even before the US economy succumbs to the recession that is now gathering force. And we do mean accelerating. The public debt has recently been increasing by $1 trillion every 100 days. That’s $10 billion per day, $416 million per hour.

  In fact, Uncle Sam’s debt has risen by $470 billion in the first two months of this year to $34.5 trillion and is on pace to surpass $35 trillion in a little over a month, $37 trillion well before year’s end, and $40 trillion some time in 2025. That’s about two years ahead of the current CBO (Congressional Budget Office) forecast.

  

  On the current path, moreover, the public debt will reach $60 trillion by the end of the 10-year budget window. But even that depends upon the CBO’s latest iteration of Rosy Scenario, which envisions no recession ever again, just 2% inflation as far as the eye can see and real interest rates of barely 1%. And that’s to say nothing of the trillions in phony spending cuts and out-year tax increases that are built into the CBO baseline but which Congress will never actually allow to materialize.

  What is worse, even with partial normalization of rates, a veritable tsunami of Federal interest expense is now gathering steam. That is because the ultra-low yields of 2007 to 2022 are now rolling over into the current market rates shown above—at the same time that the amount of public debt outstanding is heading skyward. As a result, the annualized run rate of Federal interest expense hit $1.1 trillion in February and is heading for $1.6 trillion by the end of the current fiscal year in September.

  

  Finally, even as the run-rate of interest expense has been soaring, the bureaucrats at the US Treasury have been drastically shortening the maturity of the outstanding debt, as it rolls over. Accordingly, more than $21 trillion of Treasury paper has been refinanced in the under one-year T-bill market, thereby lowering the weighted-average maturity of the public debt to less than five- years.

  The apparent bet is that the Fed will be cutting rates soon. As is becoming more apparent by the day, however, that’s just not in the cards: No matter how you slice it, the running level of inflation has remained exceedingly sticky and shows no signs of dropping below its current 3-4% range any time soon.

  

  What is also becoming more apparent by the day is that the money-printers at the Fed have led Washington into a massive fiscal calamity. It is only a matter of time, therefore, until the brown stuff hits the fan like never before.

  *  *  *

  The truth is, we’re on the cusp of an economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. And most people won’t be prepared for what’s coming. That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 18:40

• Data Centers Hiding In 'Spy Country' Northern Virginia Will Need Reactor's Worth Of Power
  Data Centers Hiding In ‘Spy Country’ Northern Virginia Will Need Reactor’s Worth Of Power

  Since the beginning of the digital age, most of the world’s internet data has flowed through massive data centers in Northern Virginia. The area is known as “Data Center Alley” because it’s home to the world’s largest concentration of data centers. Some call the area ‘spy country’ because of the number of data centers used by the Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies. 

  Given the exponential proliferation of smartphones, streaming services, smart devices, and now generative artificial intelligence, the power demanded by data centers in Northern Virginia will need nuclear reactors worth of power, if not much more, according to utility Dominion Energy.

  On Thursday, Chief Executive Officer Bob Blue told investors on a company earnings call that “economic growth, electrification, and accelerating data center expansion” is boosting power demand across the area. 

  

  Blue said, “The data center industry has grown substantially in northern Virginia in recent years,” noting, “We’ve connected 94 data centers with over 4 gigawatts of capacity over the last approximately five years.” 

  Blue expects his utility company to connect another 15 data centers to the local power grid this year. 

  He said, “This growth has accelerated in orders of magnitude, driven by one, the number of data centers requesting to be connected to our system, two, the size of each facility, and three, the acceleration of each facility’s ramp scheduled to reach full capacity.” 

  He provided some context about rising power demand, pointing out:

  “A single data center typically had a demand of 30 megawatts or greater. However, we’re now receiving individual requests for demand of 60 to 90 megawatts or greater, and it hasn’t stopped there. We get regular requests to support larger data center campuses that include multiple buildings and require total capacity ranging from 300 megawatts to as many as several gigawatts.” 

  Blue told analysts that Loudoun County is home to the “largest data center market in the world, and we have had an opportunity to work with our data center customers for 15 or more years.”

  He said the electrification of the economy, in combination with data centers, will only mean “substantial load growth driven by electrification in data centers for the foreseeable future.” 

  With substantial load growth coming down the pipe, the local media outlet The Frederick News-Post reported earlier this year that billions of dollars in “regional power grid upgrades” are being proposed to “increase data center power demands in Northern Virginia.” 

  

  Recently, media outlet LoudounNow reported that “hunger for energy continues to grow, especially in the data center industry with new large-scale projects adding hundreds of megawatts of demand.” The paper said that this has led government officials to propose “small modular reactors.”

  

  Putting this all together plays into our latest investing theme, ‘powering up America’ and the upgrade of the nation’s grid for AI data centers, electrification of the economy, and reshoring of manufacturing. We titled the notes “The Next AI Trade” and “Everyone Is Piling Into The Next AI Trade.” Nuclear will be a big part of power generation as it’s the only clean and reliable source for data centers, as Blackrock’s Larry Fink pointed out last week. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 18:05

• US Demands Qatar Expel Hamas If Group Rejects Israeli Truce Deal
  US Demands Qatar Expel Hamas If Group Rejects Israeli Truce Deal

  Via The Cradle

  US officials have told Qatar to expel Hamas’ political leadership if the Palestinian militant group rejects the latest proposal for a ceasefire with Israel, The Washington Post reports Saturday. A US official speaking on the condition of anonymity with The Post said that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken delivered the message to Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani in April.

  Three diplomats familiar with the matter said Qatari officials have expected the request for months, as ceasefire talks mediated by Qatari and Egyptian officials have repeatedly failed. Qatari officials have advised Hamas officials to prepare to depart for another country should they be forced to leave, one of the diplomats told The Post. Some have speculated that Turkiye may be a possible future host of the group.

  

  Doha has hosted Hamas’ political leadership, including Ismail Haniyeh, at the US’ request since 2012 and provided billions in cash to the Hamas authorities governing Gaza in recent years with the approval of the US and Israel. 

  However, Qatar has come under criticism from US and Israeli officials since Hamas launched Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October. During the operation, Hamas attacked Israeli military bases and settlements to break the 17-year siege on Gaza. Some 1,200 Israeli civilians and soldiers were killed, including some by Hamas and others by Israeli forces, which used attack helicopters, tanks, and drones in their own settlements (kibbutzim) to respond to the operation.

  Hamas also took some 240 Israelis captive, of which roughly 100 remain alive in Gaza, to exchange for some of the thousands of Palestinians held captive in Israeli jails. 

  The White House has sought to use the threat of expelling Hamas from Qatar as leverage in ceasefire negotiations. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants the return of the Israeli captives without offering a permanent end to the war in return. 

  Netanyahu has long insisted that Israel only agree to a temporary ceasefire in exchange for the return of the Israeli captives, after which the army would be allowed to resume the war on Gaza, which he claims is meant to eliminate Hamas. Hamas has rejected the idea of a temporary ceasefire in hopes of ending the war permanently and winning the return of displaced Palestinians from northern Gaza to their homes, though many have been destroyed by Israeli bombing.

  After seven months of war, the Israeli army has succeeded in killing a reported over 34,000 Palestinians, including over 14,000 children according to Gaza Health Ministry casualties, and has laid waste to large swathes of Gaza’s cities and farmland. However, the army has not defeated Hamas, whose fighters continue to carry out operations against occupying Israeli troops. 

  Netanyahu has also used the threat of an all-out invasion of Rafah, the city on the Egypt border where over 1 million displaced Palestinians are sheltering, as leverage to force Hamas to agree to a ceasefire and prisoner exchange on Israel’s terms. 

  Blinken returned to Israel this week in hopes of pressuring Hamas to agree to the latest Israeli proposal. “We are determined to get a ceasefire that brings the hostages home and to get it now, and the only reason that wouldn’t be achieved is because of Hamas,” Blinken said Wednesday in Tel Aviv. “There is a proposal on the table, and as we’ve said: no delays, no excuses. The time is now.” A Hamas delegation is expected to visit Cairo this weekend, potentially to respond in writing to Israel’s latest proposal, Reuters reported Friday.

  Major Israeli strike have continued to rock Gaza this week:

  BREAKING: MAJOR ISRAELI AIRSTRIKES ON NORTHERN GAZA RIGHT NOW pic.twitter.com/pxoc2eFhqb

  — Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) May 3, 2024

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

  As negotiations have dragged on, US officials and lawmakers have blamed Qatar for its failure to force Hamas to agree to a deal. Some US lawmakers have called on the White House to force Qatar to not only expel the Hamas leadership but to cut ties with the group entirely.

  However, some analysts say expelling Hamas from Qatar will not assist Israel. “Applying pressure to Hamas in Doha is ineffective pressure,” an official briefed on the talks said. “The problem is the guys making the decisions are in Gaza, and they don’t care where the political office is located,” this person said.

  Patrick Theros, a former US ambassador to Qatar, told The Post that kicking Hamas out of Qatar would simply sabotage the current talks further. “We’d be cutting off our nose to spite our face,” he said.

  Qatari officials have expressed frustration for the criticism they are receiving, simply for doing what the US had requested of them. “We did not enter into a relationship with Hamas because we wanted to. We were asked by the U.S.,” Majed al-Ansari, adviser to the Qatari prime minister and spokesperson for Qatar’s Foreign Ministry, stated last week to Israeli media.

  “Qatar is being used as a political punching bag for those who are looking either to safeguard their political futures or to find more votes in the next elections,” he said in response to US and Israeli criticism.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 17:30

• Bitcoin ETFs See Buying Resurgence; 'Mr.100' BTFD As Grayscale Sees First Inflow Since Jan
  Bitcoin ETFs See Buying Resurgence; ‘Mr.100’ BTFD As Grayscale Sees First Inflow Since Jan

  For the first time since spot bitcoin ETFs were launched, Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) saw a daily net inflow on Friday (of $63 million)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  GBTC has dominated the outflows since inception (adding up to around $17.5 billion) since the 11 spot ETFs were launched on Jan 11. The inflow coincided with a sudden surge in aggregate net inflows to ETFs overall of $378 million on Friday (which came two days after a record net outflow of $563 million)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  CoinTelegraph’s Ciaran Lyons reports that pseudonymous crypto investor DivXman told his followers that the GBTC was the “primary source” of sell pressure across all spot Bitcoin ETFs, but “the tides” could be turning.

  “That effectively means a significant decrease in sell pressure and additional increase in demand while ETFs collectively are buying more BTC than miners can create,” he explained to his 20,800 X followers in a May 3 post.

  Crypto trader Jelle predicted to his 80,300 X followers on the same day that Bitcoin’s new all-time high is on the horizon.

  “60 million dollars worth of inflows for Grayscale’s ETF. The halving chop will come to an end, and 6-figure Bitcoin will follow shortly after.”

  Bitcoin’s price responded to this sudden inflow surprise and rallied back above $64,000, erasing the outflow-driven plunge from last week…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  This price rise corresponded to a big short liquidation in the past 24 hours…

  

  Source: CoinGlass

  Additionally, CoinTelegraph reports that bitcoin whale entity nicknamed “Mr. 100” has bought the Bitcoin dip for the first time since the Bitcoin halving.

  Meanwhile, multiple market analysts suggest that the local Bitcoin bottom may be in as the price bounces from $56,000 lows.

  The Mr. 100 whale wallet has added over 4,100 BTC worth over $242 million, around the $58,000 mark, according to on-chain data from Bitinfocharts, as noticed by X user HODL15Capital.

  This represents the wallet’s first Bitcoin purchases since April 19, the day before the 2024 Bitcoin halving.

  The wallet has been adding at least 100 BTC nearly every day since Feb. 14, except for the post-halving period.

  

  Mr. 100 is currently the 12th-largest Bitcoin holder, with over 65,155 BTC, according to Bitinfocharts data.

  Finally, another even-larger ‘whale’ is Michael Saylor at MicroStrategy, delivered a masterclass on corporate finance and the power of bitcoin to supercharge corporate balance sheets. Saylor made a point to emphasize Bitcoin as the single solution for capital appreciation in an inflationary environment.

  The MicroStrategy Executive Chairman noted key differences between Bitcoin and alternative cryptocurrencies like Ethereum, expressing the importance and necessity of proof-of-work-based consensus in creating a digital commodity.

  “You could see the writing on the wall when the spot ETF of Bitcoin was approved in January. By the end of May, you’ll know that Ethereum is not going to be approved. And when Ethereum is not going to be approved, sometime this summer it’ll be very clear to everyone that Ethereum is deemed a crypto asset security, not a commodity. After that, you’re going to see that [for] Ethereum, BNB, Solana, Ripple, Cardano – everything down the stack.”

  Saylor’s conviction and use of physics-based metaphors were present as ever as he spoke on Bitcoin’s price appreciation and continued monetization.

  “It’s never declining. The chart’s not ever decreasing. It only goes one way. Bitcoin is a capital ratchet. It’s a one-way ratchet. Archimedes said, give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I can move the world. Bitcoin is the place to stand.”

  “There’s no more powerful idea than the digital transformation of capital… No force on earth can stop an idea whose time has come. This is an idea. Its time has come. It’s unstoppable. And so I’m going to end with the observation that Bitcoin is the best. The best what? The best.”

  Saylor is an outspoken proponent of BTC and a leading force behind MicroStrategy acquiring the cryptocurrency as a reserve asset. As of April 30, the firm held 214,400 BTC – worth more than $13 billion at the time of publication.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 16:55

• Governments Cause Inflation And Hurt Bond Investors
  Governments Cause Inflation And Hurt Bond Investors

  Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

  The Fed’s preferred inflation measure rose 2.8% in March from a year ago. This is the core personal consumption expenditures price index, excluding food and energy, which should be less volatile than the consumer price index and a better indicator of the real process of disinflation.

  

  This figure is not only concerning, considering the propaganda that repeats that the fight against inflation is nearing its conclusion, but it becomes even more so when we observe the upward trend over the last three and six months. Inflation has accelerated on a quarterly and half-year basis.

  As E.J. Anthony, PhD economist, points out, “there was never any indication we were heading to the 2.0% inflation target, let alone the pre-pandemic 1.8% average; we’ve arrived at 3%+ with no indication we’re going significantly lower anytime soon, not with the current levels of Treasury borrowing and Fed allowing money supply growth.”

  We need to understand why inflation is not falling as promised and announced.

  There is no such thing as cost-push inflation

  Fiscal policy has been reckless, and enormous deficit spending is fueling inflationary pressures through unnecessary government consumption of newly created currency.

  Government spending is printing new units of currency and inflation is caused by issuing more than what the private sector demands, thus making the purchasing power of money decline.

  There is no such thing as cost-push inflation, greedflation, or commodity inflation.

  None of those factors can make aggregate prices rise, consolidate, and continue increasing on an annualized level.

  Furthermore, if cost-push or supply chain disruptions were the cause of inflation, we would have deflation today, not rising aggregate prices every month.

  Governments created the inflation burst of 2021 and have not only ignored fiscal responsibility but, in the case of the United States, maintained a completely unhealthy and unrequired budget deficit

  Governments are destroying the purchasing power of money and perpetuating inflation. They created the inflation burst of 2021 and have not only ignored fiscal responsibility but, in the case of the United States, maintained a completely unhealthy and unrequired budget deficit.

  “An upsurge in money growth preceded the inflation flare-up, and countries with stronger money growth saw markedly higher inflation,” concluded Claudio Borio in a scholar paper in 2023 (“Does money growth help explain the recent inflation surge?”, BIS Bulletin No. 67, January 26, 2023).

  Doctors Juan Castañeda and Tim Congdon already warned as early as June 2020 that “the policy reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic will increase budget deficits massively in the world’s leading countries. The deficits will largely be monetized, with heavy state borrowing from both national central banks and commercial banks. The monetization of budget deficits, combined with official support for emergency bank lending to cash-strained corporates, is leading to extremely high growth rates of the quantity of money,” and these “will instigate an inflationary boom” (Inflation: The Next Threat? Institute of Economic Affairs, Briefing 7, June 2020).

  Inflation is a policy

  Inflation is not a coincidence or a fatality; it is a policy. Governments tend to announce large-scale spending programs to combat inflation.

  These policies accelerate money velocity in a recovery, particularly after a shutdown like the one of 2020, as well as the quantity of money in the system.

  Thus, inflation rises rapidly. The only way to contain the inflation burst is to cut spending and reduce the quantity and growth of money. However, although central banks have announced so-called restrictive policies, reality has shown the opposite.

  The quantity of money in the system has not been reduced. Money supply measured as M2 has declined, and the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve has diminished, but these forces have been entirely offset by net liquidity and money market funds.

  As government spending and deficit have not fallen at all, but rather the opposite, the economy has been flooded with the post-waves of the first money growth impact (2020), its market and net liquidity effect, and rising public expenditure with annual deficits close to $2 trillion.

  The quantity of money has not been reduced

  The Federal Reserve has increased rates, but that only helps moderate the growth of money, not eliminate inflationary pressures.

  Furthermore, as markets immediately discounted large rate cuts in 2024, the real effect on money growth has been just to postpone the inevitable future monetization of such enormous deficits. It has become a Call option on a forthcoming new quantitative easing program.

  We cannot forget that the quantity of money has not been reduced due to another relevant factor.

  The Federal Reserve has multiplied its support for the troubled banking sector via the discount window, which offsets the modest reduction in the Fed balance sheet.

  Instead of attacking inflation, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” has perpetuated the destruction of the value of the currency issued

  By purchasing the sovereign bonds in the banks’ balance sheets at par despite the collapse in price, the Fed was inadvertently printing new money and sabotaging its own restrictive measures.

  The misguided Keynesian policies implemented by the US government have cancelled out the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet reduction and rate hike efforts.

  The Treasury injected more than $2 trillion per annum in liquidity, creating new money, counteracting the net $1.6 trillion that the Fed retired in three years from its balance sheet.

  Therefore, the impact on the purchasing power of the currency through inflation has been negative. Instead of attacking inflation, the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” has perpetuated the destruction of the value of the currency issued.

  The impact on markets

  The impact on markets has been phenomenal. The yen, once a stable currency perceived as a haven for investors, has fallen to a 35-year low versus the US dollar.

  The Bloomberg index of globally expanded major currencies and the emerging markets indicator have both fallen.

  The result of the 2020–2024 “free money” wave was a very expensive destruction of real wages and deposit savings.

  Furthermore, bonds have been obliterated and the latest data shows that the aggregate US and euro area bond indices have not recovered from the past years’ slump, and even going back to 2020, the indices are showing negative returns.

  Only the high yield index has shown a positive performance in the past four years, albeit a meager 4.5%.

  Governments are destroying the currency that they issue in all possible ways. Through persistent inflation, making wage earners and middle-class deposit savers poorer, with rising taxes to try to reduce a budget deficit that was bloated by unnecessary spending in a recovery, and through the destruction of the safest asset, bonds, that have become a bad investment for the most conservative investors, pension funds.

  The only way in which inflation will be reduced will be if the Federal Reserve abandons its decision to cut rates and starts to take measures that drain net liquidity.

  Without the support of the Treasury, this is impossible because it floods the market with new money even if monetary policy is restrictive and investors simply discounts that all those newly issued currency units will be monetized somehow in the future.

  It does not matter if Powell promises restraint when Yellen pushes excess. The most conservative bondholders will only start to see positive returns when the Treasury stops destroying the currency’s value. It does not seem likely anytime soon.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 16:20

• Gaza Pier Delayed Over Rough Seas, Pentagon Calls Project "Extremely Challenging"
  Gaza Pier Delayed Over Rough Seas, Pentagon Calls Project “Extremely Challenging”

  This week has seen statements and reports indicating the US military constructed humanitarian pier on Gaza’s coast is expected to be complete by some point this weekend. 

  But the $320 million project has hit another snag, as the Pentagon has said its soldiers and engineers were forced to “temporarily pause” the offshore assembly of the floating pier due to bad sea conditions in the eastern Mediterranean. So a finish date by this weekend appears unrealistic at this point, based on the Friday announcement.

  

  “The partially built pier and military vessels involved in its construction have moved to the Port of Ashdod, where assembly will continue, and will be completed prior to the emplacement of the pier in its intended location when sea states subside,” CENTCOM said in a statement. 

  So now the US personnel constructing it have moved to Israel. Presumably once the floating pier is completed it will be moved by sea back to the northern Gaza coast in preparation for maritime aid deliveries. 

  The pier is expected to allow “the delivery of large quantities of humanitarian aid from ship to shore by truck, with vehicles driving directly off ships and across the temporary pier to a marshaling yard ashore,” per the US military statement.

  According to more details of what could prove to be cause of more continued pauses and delays:

  Defense officials previously hoped that the JLOTS system would be fully built by Friday. But officials told CNN that sea state conditions have been extremely challenging off the coast of Gaza over the last week, impeding the work of the personnel involved in building the pier. One of the key tasks, for example, involves military divers working underneath the pier to ensure all the parts are secured and stable — a difficult and dangerous task when the seas are rough.

  The operation of the pier and causeway, which will also require US military personnel to be stationed at sea, will also depend on weather conditions, officials say. 

  Meanwhile famine has hit parts of the Gaza Strip, USAID said starting last month. There are also still lingering fears that once complete the pier and personnel working it could come under attack by Palestinian militants.

  On Tuesday Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin made a surprise admission for the first time. It came during a hearing of the House Armed Services committee, and specifically when Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida grilled him on whether US servicemen will be placed in harm’s way during the construction of the project in Gaza.

  Update on the Construction of the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore capability in Mediterranean Sea

  Yesterday, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) temporarily paused offshore assembly of the floating pier in the vicinity of Gaza due to sea state considerations. Forecasted high winds and… pic.twitter.com/cIY2TUn7NX

  — U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) May 3, 2024

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

  Austin answered in the affirmative, and further said that troops erecting the pier will be armed and that they will be authorized to fire back if fired upon. It must be recalled that just last week a visiting delegation of UN officials came under mortar fire from Palestinian militants. Hamas has further warned that any foreign military presence on Gaza soil will come under attack. 

  * * *

  Below is more from the tense Congressional exchange: 

  Gaetz: This is a very telling moment, Mr. Secretary, because you’ve said something that’s quite possible, that could happen, right? Shots from Gaza on our service members, and then the response our armed service members shooting live fire into Gaza. That is a possible outcome here so that we can become the Port Authority and run this pier. Right?

  Austin: That’s correct. And I expect that we will always have the ability to protect themselves.

  Gaetz: Don’t you think that counts as boots on the ground? President Biden told the country that we weren’t going to have boots on the ground in Gaza.

  Austin: And we won’t

  Gaetz: Okay, but you guys parse the distinction between… Like when Americans think boots on the ground, they think Americans in harm’s way or engaged actively in a conflict. You guys seem to be sort of saying that boots on a pier, connected to the ground, connected to service members shooting into Gaza doesn’t count as boots on the ground?

  Austin: It does not.

  Gaetz: I think you’re gonna find the the American people have a different perspective on that. And if we’re gonna have people shooting into Gaza, we probably should have a vote on that, pursuant to our war powers.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 15:45

• Biden Spends All Afternoon Awarding Medals To Other Democrats
  Biden Spends All Afternoon Awarding Medals To Other Democrats

  Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

  Despite the fact that the world is teetering on the edge of global conflict, US college campuses being trashed by radical occupiers, and criminal illegals are still overwhelming the border, Joe Biden spent Friday afternoon awarding other Democrats medals.

  

  Biden, who was incapable of saying ‘Presidential Medal of Freedom,’ awarded one each to Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, Al Gore, Michael Bloomberg, and Rep. Jim Clyburn.

  Crooked Joe’s brain is friedhttps://t.co/8TGrYdQFd0

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) May 3, 2024

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

  It was just a big back-patting session for Democrats.

  Old Joe Biden is so confused he thought he was supposed to nominate the most financially successful politicians. Or something. Hard to believe some of these folks deserve a medal of any kind. Al Gore, Climate Grifter, John Kerry, Climate Grifter, Nancy Pelosi, Stock Market… https://t.co/mhz8CAIA81

  — Brother Eric (@01IOTA) May 3, 2024

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

  Al Gore and John Kerry were seemingly given medals for losing elections, with Biden stating that Gore “accepted the outcome of a disputed presidential election for the sake of our unity.”

  These Democrats like standing behind each other.

  — Jungle Ball (@JungleBall_) May 3, 2024

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

  While Pelosi was given a medal for her actions on January 6th, which amounted to locking herself in a room, threatening to punch Donald Trump, and calling it an insurrection.

  Freedom to make over $150,000,000.00 in insider trading while in congress.

  — Nick Koutrakos (@NickKoutrakos) May 3, 2024

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

  Is that Medal for facilitating the setup for January 6th or assisting the in Committee in disposing of evidence? pic.twitter.com/5EsUUci2Pb

  — Bennetta Elliott (@belliott123) May 4, 2024

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

  Bloomberg and Clyburn got medals for…something or other, but being pivotal in Biden’s election campaign was just pure coincidence.

  BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. pic.twitter.com/uA1LUPuy0d

  — The Pink Elephant in the Room (@PEITRblog) May 4, 2024

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

  I want to congratulate one of our own, Mike Bloomberg, on receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom!

  Although he wasn’t as great a mayor as DeBlasio and Adams, he was fiercely opposed to guns and sugary drinks.

  Thank you President Biden. We in New York are celebrating today. pic.twitter.com/BXstjq4NkK

  — Kathy Hochul Press Release (Parody) (@NY_Gov_PR) May 3, 2024

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

  Hahaha of course you woke joke snowflakes think only democrats should get participation trophies 🏆 😆

  — Doug Osborne (@DougOsb70438101) May 4, 2024

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

  *  *  *

  Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 15:10

• Long Beach Hotel Housing 'Homeless' Sparks Tuberculosis Outbreak As Health Emergency Declared
  Long Beach Hotel Housing ‘Homeless’ Sparks Tuberculosis Outbreak As Health Emergency Declared

  A health crisis has emerged for Democrat officials in Long Beach, California, following a tuberculosis outbreak linked to a hotel housing ‘homeless’ people, according to Fox News. 

  On Thursday, health officials declared a public health emergency after an alarming tuberculosis outbreak was reported at an unnamed hotel housing. 

  The city has so far confirmed 14 cases of tuberculosis in people “associated with a single room occupancy hotel.” Nine of them were hospitalized with one fatal case. Another 170 people were “likely exposed” to the deadly bacteria. 

  

  “The outbreak is currently isolated to a distinct population and the risk to the general public is low,” the city said, adding, “The population at risk in this outbreak has significant barriers to care, including homelessness and housing insecurity, mental illness, substance use and serious medical comorbidities.”

  The reason health officials declined to name the hotel or its location is to comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations. 

  One X user said, “I believe the name of the hotel SHOULD BE DISCLOSED in the interest of traveler safety. OR does this mean the hotel is used to house illegal aliens invading our border? Long Beach declares public health emergency after deadly tuberculosis outbreak.” 

  I believe the name of the hotel SHOULD BE DISCLOSED in the interest of traveler safety. OR does this mean the hotel is used to house illegal aliens invading our border? Long Beach declares public health emergency after deadly tuberculosis outbreak https://t.co/jTe7fpuR2R

  — Judy Holiday (@msjudyholiday) May 3, 2024

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

  The question now becomes if Long Beach officials were housing illegal migrants in the hotel… 

  If so, this isn’t the first time unvaccinated and undocumented illegal aliens have sparked infectious disease outbreaks in hotels and shelters nationwide. 

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 14:35

• Hamas-Israel Truce To Free Hostages Said To Be Closer Than Ever
  Hamas-Israel Truce To Free Hostages Said To Be Closer Than Ever

  Rumors are flying Saturday that Hamas and Israel are closer than ever to finally reaching a truce deal that would center of the release of more Israeli hostages, and the freeing of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

  “Negotiations for a potential hostage deal and truce in Gaza appeared to reach a critical moment Saturday, with Hamas set to offer its response to the latest proposal, and Israel indicating an offensive in the city of Rafah could be imminent if no agreement is reached,” Times of Israel reports.

  Separately Haaretz is reporting based on regional Arab sources that Hamas has in essence already accepted a deal. The last hours of Egyptian and Qatari mediated talks have reportedly seen significant progress.

  However, this key caveat could make all of the current Saturday headlines premature: 

  An Israeli official told Haaretz that ‘Israel will, under no circumstances, agree to end the war as part of a deal’ and is determined to enter Rafah.

  But Haaretz is also saying that “Hamas was guaranteed by the U.S. for a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and that Israeli forces will not continue fighting once the hostages are released.”

  

  The problem with this is that given PM Netanyahu’s latest and consistent rhetoric vowing to not halt the operation until Palestinian terrorists in the Strip are eradicated, a full IDF withdrawal still seems unrealistic.

  Starting Friday Israeli leaders said they were giving Hamas one week to agree to the deal on the table or else a full-scale assault of Rafah will begin. 

  Less than 40 hostages are expected to be freed as part of the deal – it would focus on the remaining children, elderly, and the sick.

  One Israeli official told Haaretz that the government is “waiting anxiously to see Hamas’ final position.”

  But the source cautioned, “The information has not yet arrived, but in light of past experience, even if Hamas says it’s following the suggested framework, the small details and reservations it’ll eventually present may dissolve the whole deal.”

  This is precisely what has happened to prior rounds of negotiations which were believed to be at the finish line. They blew up at the last moment over specific details, typically involving wrangling over the names on the hostage release list.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 14:00

• Ukraine Struggles To Build New Defensive Lines As Its Forces Retreat
  Ukraine Struggles To Build New Defensive Lines As Its Forces Retreat

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

  Russian forces are advancing in several places across the 600-mile frontline in Ukraine, straining Kiev’s ability to build rear fortifications. Some in the Ukrainian military fault the country’s leadership for not building stronger second and third-line defenses last year while Russian troops were stalled. 

  According to a dozen Ukrainian soldiers, government officials, and construction company directors who spoke with the Associated Press, Kiev is struggling to set up new defensive lines as its forces retreat. The officials cited several issues including decision-making last year, bureaucracy in doling out military contracts, and ammunition shortages. 

  

  A deputy infantry commander fighting near Avdiivka explained that the defensive line needed to be built last year during Ukraine’s offensive. “There was an absence of responsibility. … People didn’t understand that fortifications can save your life if you do it in advance,” he stated. “Many people thought we … wouldn’t need to prepare such lines. They didn’t expect a new Russian offensive.”

  Last summer, at Washington’s insistence, Kiev launched a counteroffensive that failed to retake much territory due to deeply entrenched Russian defensive lines. Ukraine lost a significant number of troops and military equipment during the failed assault. 

  The AP notes that “Ukraine’s lack of adequate defensive lines has helped Russia make significant military gains, and constant enemy fire hinders building.”

  In a Telegram post on Sunday, Kiev’s Commander in Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi said the situation at the front had “escalated,” adding, “Trying to seize the strategic initiative and break through the front line, the enemy has concentrated its main efforts in several directions, creating a significant advantage in forces and in means.”

  In the battle for Chasiv Yar, a city in Donetsk, a Ukrainian soldier said the lack of fortified positions allowed Russian forces to prevail, with over 100 men killed or missing after a major withdrawal from the area.

  “We lost department commanders, platoon commanders, company commanders, and sergeants. That is, we lost the entire skeleton of the brigade,” the soldier explained to the AP. 

  2/ Ukrainian intelligence officials also identified three Russian efforts to destabilize Ukraine and achieve victory.

  Details in the Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment for May 2, 2024: https://t.co/p2XVK93bUy pic.twitter.com/OEvKmsYaoH

  — Institute for the Study of War (@TheStudyofWar) May 3, 2024

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

  Rather than use military engineers to complete the projects, Kiev elected to pay construction companies to build third-line defenses. Ukraine awarded the contracts without following the typical bidding process, raising fears of corruption. Additionally, one contractor said the reported progress on the fortifications has been exaggerated to satisfy the government’s demands.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 12:50

• "Stunning On Multiple Levels": DOJ Admits To Evidence Tampering In Trump Classified Docs Case
  “Stunning On Multiple Levels”: DOJ Admits To Evidence Tampering In Trump Classified Docs Case

  Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team admitted on Friday that key evidence in Trump’s classified documents case was altered or manipulated – leaving two different chronologies; one that was digitally scanned vs. what’s in the actual boxes.

  

  Smith also misled the court, after originally telling U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that the boxes remained “in their original, intact form as seized,” when in a footnote they conceded that they removed classified documents and left placeholder sheets, which prosecutors acknowledged has created an “inconsistent” record – in which some of the documents are no longer in the same order as they appear in digital scans made in the fall of 2022.

  “The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court,” the footnote reads, according to Just the News.

  The finding comes after Cannon ordered a review into whether the FBI may have seized legally privileged records in response to a request from Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta.

  

  “Since the boxes were seized and stored, appropriate personnel have had access to the boxes for several reasons, including to comply with orders issued by this Court in the civil proceedings noted above, for investigative purposes, and to facilitate the defendants’ review of the boxes,” wrote Smith’s team in the Friday filing.

  “There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans,” the filing continues.

  The organization of the documents in storage boxes at Mar-a-Lago is likely to be an important part of Trump‘s defense. His team is expected to argue the documents were stored in the White House in chronological order on the days that Trump received them, and that staff simply boxed them up and sent them to his home without him accessing them or knowing they contained classified information.

  Smith’s team tried to downplay the problem and argued it’s not a reason for a delay in Trump’s case.

  But several legal experts told Just the News the court filing essentially is an admission of evidence tampering, and could be problematic. -Just the News

  “Prosecutors and investigators should never tamper with or alter evidence in their possession, including the order of documents in a box because one never knows what may become relevant or crucial to a court or jury later in a case,” Alan Dershowitz told Just the News.

  Jack Smith confessed as much in yesterday’s filing. He would not have but for Nauta’s attorney busting DOJ for tampering with evidence.

  Defense building evidence to support motion to dismiss on prosecutorial misconduct–which is pending before Cannon. pic.twitter.com/Igjh0VBmBj

  — Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 4, 2024

  “This admission is stunning on multiple levels,” said defense attorney Tim Parlatore, who worked on Trump’s team earlier in the classified documents case but no longer is involved, adding that the revelation “reinforces the incompetence” of prosecutors “in conducting basic criminal investigations and prosecutions that I observed when I was on the team.

  “But at a deeper level, the loss of specific document locations is a destruction of exculpatory evidence,” Parlatore added. “I went through all of the boxes at NARA and the document order was important because it was clear to us that the boxes had been untouched since leaving the White House.

  

  “For prosecutors who are trying to prove that the defendants knowingly possessed these documents to then destroy the evidence that would undermine that claim is a very serious violation,” he said.

  In response to the filing, Trump said on Truth Social that “Deranged Jack has admitted in a filing in front of Judge Cannon to what I have been saying happened since the Illegal RAID on my home … that he and his team committed blatant Evidence Tampering by mishandling the very Boxes they used as a pretext to bring this Fake Case.“

  

  Smith’s Excuses

  The prosecution offered several explanations for the manipulated evidence.

  “There are several possible explanations, including the above-described instances in which the boxes were accessed, as well as the size and shape of certain items in the boxes possibly leading to movement of items,” reads the filing. “For example, the boxes contain items smaller than standard paper such as index cards, books, and stationary, which shift easily when the boxes are carried, especially because many of the boxes are not full.”

  This is an answer to defense accusations that incriminating files do not correspond with FBI index of evidence.

  And look at that FBI slip sheet–what a shoddy operation conducted by sloppy investigators bc they have zero accountability. pic.twitter.com/IjDwmfMXO1

  — Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) May 4, 2024

  That said, Just the News also notes that altered evidence has featured prominently in previous political scandals.

  Erasure of an 18 1/2 minute segment of Richard Nixon’s White House tapes became a very important aspect of the Watergate scandal.

  The Iran-Contra scandal exploded during the Reagan years with the revelation that documents were shredded before they could be obtained by investigators.

  The Hillary Clinton classified email scandal became more complicated in 2015 with the revelation that her team used a “Bleach Bit” program to erase emails on her secret computer server, and had email devices destroyed. 

  As Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton suggests, this is “Yet more reason to throw out this sham prosecution.”

  EVIDENCE TAMPERING? Biden DOJ/Jack Smith just admitted they messed with boxes supposedly containing “classified” documents they seized from Trump and can’t be sure the order or placement of the documents as originally found has been maintained — which is contrary to what they…

  — Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) May 3, 2024

  And as the Epoch Times notes, the case was brought against President Trump and others over their alleged violation of federal law in handling documents marked classified. Defendants have pleaded not guilty.

  Neither Mr. Nauta nor other defendants in the case have responded yet to the new filing.

  Mr. Nauta’s request for an extension is one of many documents that are under seal, or unavailable for perusal.

  In another recent filing, President Trump’s team said that the case should be dismissed because prosecutors are motivated by “improper political animus,” pointing in part to how White House lawyers worked with the National Archives and Records Administration on its referral to the Department of Justice and how President Joe Biden has said that he was “making sure” President Trump “does not become the next president again.”

  Prosecutors opposed the dismissal request but their opposition was filed under seal.

  Read the filing below (via Just the News): 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 05/04/2024 – 12:15

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Scientists Backtrack, Admit Proposed Virus Experiments Could Have Been Done In China
  Scientists Backtrack, Admit Proposed Virus Experiments Could Have Been Done In China

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Scientists with close ties to China and the U.S. government is now saying that risky experiments he proposed—which some experts believe could have led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2—may have been done, deviating from earlier statements.

  

  Another scientist involved in the proposal also says he doesn’t know if the work was done.

  “To the very best of my knowledge … the work hasn’t been done,” Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance, told a congressional panel this week.

  Mr. Daszak, however, admitted that he doesn’t know whether scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China have done the proposed experiments.

  “Do you know if the WIV started this work?” he was asked during a U.S. House of Representatives Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic hearing in Washington.

  “No,” Mr. Daszak replied.

  “Then you can’t say that the work was not done,” Mitch Benzine, the staff director for the panel, said.

  “There is no evidence of the work being done. There is no evidence that WIV started it,” Mr. Daszak said.

  Has he ever asked Shi Zhengli, a top scientist at the WIV, whether she carried out the proposal?

  “No,” Mr. Daszak acknowledged.

  The proposal in question, dubbed Project DEFUSE, was submitted in 2018 to the U.S. government as EcoHealth and its partners, including WIV, sought to take viruses from bats, reverse engineer them, and add features. Some outside scientists say the proposed work could have led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

  The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) declined to fund the proposal, expressing concerns that adding features to coronaviruses could create a dangerous virus.

  After the proposal was leaked to the public in 2021, Mr. Daszak and EcoHealth have said definitively that the proposed experiments never took place.

  “The DARPA proposal was not funded. Therefore, the work was not done. Simple,” Mr. Daszak told The Intercept in 2022.

  “The proposed research was never done,” EcoHealth added in a recent statement.

  Ralph Baric, a University of North Carolina virologist who was also listed in the DEFUSE proposal, also said in newly disclosed testimony that he did not know whether the proposed experiments were conducted.

  “Certainly not by my group,” Mr. Baric told the subcommittee. “I don’t know what China did.”

  Mr. Baric and Ms. Shi have created chimeras, or combination viruses, among other work together.

  “There was no evidence that they were doing this kind of work,” Mr. Baric said. “Well, there was evidence that they were building chimeras using WIV1 as a backbone, so they were doing some discovery work about the functions of spike genes of zoonotic strains that they discovered later on, but I don’t know if they did any of the engineering or anything.”

  WIV1 is a bat coronavirus that was found in China.

  Mr. Baric also claimed he had forgotten about DEFUSE so he didn’t discuss it while meeting with Dr. Anthony Fauci, a top U.S. government official, on Feb. 12, 2020.

  Mr. Daszak said Wednesday that DARPA later returned to EcoHealth “to try and fund portions” of DEFUSE, but no lawmakers pressed him on that disclosure.

  ‘They’ve Always Been Truthful’

  EcoHealth separately for years funneled grant money from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) to Wuhan researchers, including money that funded experiments that increased the virulence of a bat coronavirus.

  Asked how his group verified information about those experiments, Mr. Daszak acknowledged it relied on statements from the WIV. “I have no other way to verify,” he said.

  The scientists in Wuhan “have always been honest with us,” he added later. “They’ve always been truthful. There’s never any untoward, underhand things going on. I have no reason to think that they were under pressure to lie. There’s no indication of that.”

  After the pandemic started, WIV researchers refused to hand over laboratory notebooks and other files to EcoHealth after the U.S. government asked for the records, resulting in the government debarring WIV from receiving U.S. grant money.

  “Nearly two years have passed since the NIH first requested that WIV provide the requested information and materials, and yet WIV has still failed to do so,” a debarment official wrote to Ms. Shi.

  In comments on a draft of the DEFUSE proposal, Mr. Daszak said that some of the work would be done at the Wuhan lab.

  “If we win this contract, I do not propose that all of this work will necessarily be conducted by Ralph, but I do want to stress the US side of this proposal so that DARPA are comfortable with our team,” Mr. Daszak wrote in one comment. “Once we get the funds, we can then allocate who does what exact work, and I believe that a lot of these assays can be done in Wuhan as well.”

  Mr. Daszak told Mr. Baric in a May 27, 2021, email released by the subcommittee that Ms. Zhengli said culturing of animal viruses was being done under biosafety level two conditions, or one level below that applied in many other countries.

  “We checked with Zhengli, who let us know that she used ‘BSL-2 with negative pressure and appropriate PPE.’ I also know that they are stricter now on SADS-CoV… ever since you showed it was able to infect human airway epithelial cells,” he wrote.

  Mr. Baric responded by saying Mr. Daszak was “being told a bunch of [expletive].”

  “BSL-2 w[ith] negative pressure, give me a break,” he wrote, adding later, “You believe this was appropriate containment, if you want but don’t expect me to believe it. Moreover, don’t insult my intelligence by trying to feed me this load of [expletive].”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 23:40

• The State Of World Press Freedom
  The State Of World Press Freedom

  The 2024 World Press Freedom Index, compiled by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), was released today. This year, the agency highlights a “worrying decline in support and respect for media autonomy and an increase in pressure from the state or other political actors.” This is based on the fact that, of the five indicators used to compile the ranking, it is the political indicator that has fallen most, with a global average decline of 7.6 points.

  Out of the 180 countries and territories analyzed, some 138 places had a majority of their respondents say that political actors in their countries were involved in disinformation or propaganda campaigns. This involvement was described as “systematic” in 31 countries.

  The report writers also highlight the lack of political will on an international level to enforce protection of journalists, with particular reference to the war in Gaza, which has been marked by a record number of violations against journalists and the media since October 2023. According to the report, more than 100 Palestinian reporters have now been killed by the Israel Defence Forces, including at least 22 in the course of carrying out their journalistic activities.

  Taking a look at wider trends, this chart, via Statista’s Anna Fleck, shows that 36 countries were listed in the worst category in the index – where there exists a “very serious” situation of the press.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  49 countries fall under the “difficult” category and 50 in the “problematic” group, while 45 have either a “satisfactory” or “good” situation. Norway is once more at the top of the list, ranking in first place for the eighth year running, followed by Denmark and Sweden.

  The final trio, considered the most repressive countries for the press, are Afghanistan (position 178), Syria (179) and Eritrea (180). The report states: “The last two countries have become lawless zones for the media, with a record number of journalists detained, missing or held hostage.”

  The United States ranked 55th in 2024, having dropped ten positions. RSF notes that the country is experiencing growing distrust in the media, partly driven by antagonism from political officials, while there have also been cases of local law enforcement having raided newsrooms.

  Reporters Without Borders have compiled the index annually since 2002. The agency devised a new methodology in 2021 with the help of a panel of experts from the media and academic world. This year, 180 countries and territories were analyzed based on five indicators covering political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context and safety.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 23:20

• Coffee Compound May Help Counteract Age-Related Muscle Loss
  Coffee Compound May Help Counteract Age-Related Muscle Loss

  Authored by George Citroner via The Epoch Times,

  One of the world’s favorite brews may hold the key to keeping muscles strong and healthy as we age.

  According to recent research, a natural compound found in coffee could be the secret weapon against age-related muscle loss.

  

  The Muscle-Preserving Molecule

  Mitochondria, the powerhouses of our cells, play a crucial role in muscle health. An issue linked to sarcopenia, the age-related loss of muscle mass and strength, is that these cellular components generate less energy as we get older. Compounding this problem, levels of the crucial substance NAD+ (which stands for nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide), a coenzyme that helps cells regenerate and protects them from damage, also decline with age.

  Researchers already know that NAD+ levels can be boosted using various dietary precursors, including the essential amino acid L-tryptophan and different forms of vitamin B3, such as nicotinic acid, nicotinamide, nicotinamide riboside, and nicotinamide mononucleotide.

  In a recent study published in Nature Metabolism, scientists investigated whether an alkaline compound called trigonelline could help reverse these age-related changes in muscle health.

  The researchers analyzed trigonelline levels in the blood of mice and worms and found that high levels of the substance were positively associated with muscle strength and function.

  Conversely, low trigonelline levels were linked to sarcopenia, the typical loss of muscle size and strength that occurs with aging.

  Trigonelline Promoted Healthy Longevity

  Trigonelline is structurally related to vitamin B3 and is produced naturally in the body, in addition to being found in certain foods.

  “We discovered that older people with low endogenous levels of trigonelline in their blood lose more muscle mass and strength during aging,” Katharina Fischer, research and development and scientific communications manager at Nestle Research in Switzerland, where the study was conducted, told The Epoch Times. “We also discovered that trigonelline is a precursor to NAD.”

  Providing trigonelline promoted longevity in test animals by activating cellular energy production in mitochondria and increasing muscle strength and function during aging, according to Ms. Fischer.

  These findings open new opportunities to test the clinical efficacy of increasing trigonelline consumption through food products or supplements to improve muscle health, she noted.

  Foods That Contain Trigonelline

  Trigonelline is an alkaloid compound found in various plant sources. While it may not be as well-known as some other beneficial plant compounds, trigonelline is present in a variety of dietary sources. About 5 percent of the niacin we consume is converted into trigonelline.

  Coffee Beans

  Trigonelline is more abundant in coffee beans than in any other food source, and it contributes to coffee’s characteristic bitterness. However, during the roasting process, trigonelline partly breaks down to form nicotinic acid (niacin or vitamin B3), another nutrient with significant health benefits.

  Fenugreek Seeds

  Fenugreek, a plant commonly used in Indian and Middle Eastern cuisines, contains about 35 percent alkaloids, with trigonelline being the primary one in the seeds.

  Other Foods

  Trigonelline can be found in a variety of other foods, including barley, cantaloupe, corn, onions, peas, soybeans, and tomatoes.

  You can also obtain trigonelline by eating fish, mussels, and crustaceans.

  Never Too Late to Address Age-Related Muscle Loss: Expert

  It’s natural to lose muscle mass as we age.

  “Sarcopenia can occur due to a myriad of factors, such as immobility, lack of proper nutrition, obesity, and lack of physical activity,” Macie Smith, a licensed gerontology social worker, told The Epoch Times. “Since the senior population tends to be more sedentary, you’ll see it show up more prevalently in persons over the age of 65, but the process can begin as early as 30–40 years of age.”

  However, while we cannot prevent aging, we can reduce muscle mass loss caused by it.

  This can be done through proper exercise; a balanced, nutritional diet; and managing any underlying health conditions.

  “It’s never too late to build and strengthen muscle to counter the effects of sarcopenia,” Ms. Smith said. “You can always develop a new exercise regimen that will allow you to become active and to maintain the active lifestyle.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 23:00

• The US Is The Only G-7 Nation To See Trust In Government Plummet
  The US Is The Only G-7 Nation To See Trust In Government Plummet

  How much do you trust the government, and its various institutions?

  It’s likely that your level of confidence probably depends on a wide range of factors, such as perceived competency, historical context, economic performance, accountability, social cohesion, and transparency.

  And for these same reasons, trust levels in government institutions also change all the time, even in the world’s most developed countries: the G7.

  Confidence in Government by G7 Countries (2006-2023)

  This chart, via Visual Capitaist’s Nick Routley, looks at the changes in trust in government institutions between the years 2006 and 2023, based on data from a multi-country Gallup poll.

  

  Specifically, this dataset aggregates confidence in multiple national institutions, including the military, the judicial system, the national government, and the integrity of the electoral system.

  What’s interesting here is that in the G7, a group of the world’s most developed economies, there is only one country bucking the general trend: the United States.

  Across most G7 countries, confidence in institutions has either improved or stayed the same between 2006 and 2023. The largest percentage point (p.p.) increases occur in Italy and Japan, which saw +13 p.p. and +11 p.p. increases in trust over the time period.

  In the U.S., however, confidence in government institutions has fallen by 13 p.p. over the years. What happened?

  Key Figures on U.S. Trust in Institutions

  In 2006, the U.S. was tied with the UK as having the highest confidence in government institutions, at 63%.

  But here’s where the scores stand in 2023, across various institutions:

  

  Based on this data, it’s clear that the U.S. lags behind in three key indicators: confidence in the national government, confidence in the justice system, and confidence in fair elections. It ranked in last place for each indicator in the G7.

  One other data point that stands out: despite leading the world in military spending, the U.S. is only the third most confident in its military in the G7. It lags behind France (86%) and the United Kingdom (83%).

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 22:40

• People With More COVID-19 Vaccine Doses More Likely To Contract COVID-19: Study
  People With More COVID-19 Vaccine Doses More Likely To Contract COVID-19: Study

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  People who received more than one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to contract COVID-19, according to a new study.

  

  An analysis of data from Cleveland Clinic employees found that people who received two or more doses were at higher risk of COVID-19, Dr. Nabin Shrestha and his co-authors reported.

  The risk of contracting COVID-19 was 1.5 times higher for those who received two doses, 1.95 times higher for those who received three doses, and 2.5 times higher for those who received three or more doses, the researchers found. The higher risk was compared to people who received zero or one dose of a vaccine.

  Even after adjusting for variables, the elevated risk remained.

  “The exact reason for this finding is not clear. It is possible that this may be related to the fact that vaccine-induced immunity is weaker and less durable than natural immunity. So, although somewhat protective in the short term, vaccination may increase risk of future infection,” the researchers said in the paper, which was released as a preprint.

  Dr. Robert Malone, a vaccine researcher who was not involved in the paper, told The Epoch Times that the paper served as “another acknowledgment that the products are not effective or are at very low effectiveness and are contributing to negative effectiveness [down the line].”

  He noted that the researchers did not study vaccine safety among the employee population. The COVID-19 vaccines can cause a number of side effects, including fatal heart inflammation, according to the literature and death records.

  Earlier studies and data have also suggested that people with more vaccine doses are more susceptible to COVID-19 infection, including previous papers from the Cleveland Clinic scientists and a study from Iceland.

  The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which has repeatedly declined requests to comment on outside research, recommends virtually all people aged 6 months and older receive one of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines, regardless of how many shots they’ve received, although a meeting later in May is set to discuss whether to update the vaccine formulations to improve protection.

  CDC scientists said in a paper published in February in the agency’s weekly report that the latest version of the vaccines, a monovalent targeting the XBB.1.5 subvariant, provided 49 percent effectiveness between 60 and 119 days later when the JN.1 virus strain was dominant. Supplementary data, however, showed that people aged 50 and older who received the previous bivalent version were more susceptible to symptomatic infection.

  Authors disclosed no conflicts of interest and acknowledged at least five limitations, including how they used a proxy for infection with JN.1.

  Another study, released ahead of peer review in April, estimated the effectiveness of Pfizer’s updated vaccine as 32 percent against hospitalization from late 2023 through early 2024. The research was conducted by scientists from multiple institutions, including the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Pfizer, many authors reported conflicts of interest, and some of the funding came from Pfizer.

  People’s immune systems being trained to react to older virus strains at the expense of protection against newer variants is one theory for why the vaccinated might be more prone to infection.

  “Multiple vaccine doses may have the effect of antibody-dependent enhancement or ‘original antigenic sin,’ which increase the infection response disproportionally to antibodies generated from the first vaccine dose, rather than from the current vaccine or the current infection, making the antibody response less effective,” Dr. Harvey Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Epoch Times in an email after reviewing the paper.

  Dr. Shrestha, who did not respond to a request for comment, and the Cleveland Clinic researchers aimed to analyze the effectiveness of the XBB.1.5 shots against JN.1, which displaced XBB.1.5 before the end of 2023.

  To do so, they analyzed the incidence of COVID-19 among Cleveland Clinic employees from Dec. 31, 2023, to April 22, 2024.

  Among approximately 47,500 employees included in the study, 838 tested positive for COVID-19 during that period.

  Unadjusted data showed no difference between people who received one of the updated shots and people who didn’t, but after adjusting for age and other factors, the researchers estimated the shots provided 23 percent effectiveness against infection.

  Federal and global guidelines consider vaccines ineffective if they provide under 50 percent shielding.

  The number of severe illnesses among the study population was too small to estimate effectiveness against severe illness, the researchers said.

  Listed limitations included the inability to separate symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. No conflicts of interest were reported and authors said they received no funding.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 22:20

• "I've Been Totally Ghosted": After Install, Solar Panels Become Maintenance Nightmare
  “I’ve Been Totally Ghosted”: After Install, Solar Panels Become Maintenance Nightmare

  The green new deal and switch to “alternative’ energy looks like it’s going exactly as planned: costing the taxpayer trillions of dollars and generally pissing everybody off.

  That was the case with a number of solar panel owners who are now finding it difficult to get their panels serviced, according to WBAL TV.

  Solar panel installation is touted as offering benefits like reduced energy costs, environmental friendliness, and significant rebates. However, many homeowners have discovered a concerning issue within the industry: addressing technical problems can be exceedingly challenging — if not outright impossible. 

  Those interviewed shared experiences with various solar providers, each facing prolonged unresolved issues. 

  Tom Lucas, who installed solar panels in 2018, initially saw higher electricity production. Yet, by 2022, 20% of his system failed, leading to considerable losses. Despite having a 25-year warranty from Invaleon Solar Technologies, the issue remains unaddressed.

  Lucas commented: “I’ve been totally ghosted. All I want is a working system. To me, even though I’m generating some electricity, it’s not right.”

  

  Lucas added: “They’re a sales-oriented company. All solar companies are. They want to sell the next job. They want to get that installed and move on to the next sale. They’re not service-oriented.”

  Steve Pilotte, an early solar adopter, has experienced ongoing problems since 2009. His current provider, Sunrun, has been unresponsive in fixing an inverter issue that started in 2020, despite multiple technician visits.

  “Once again, in 2022, I followed up with them. And then 2023. And January 2024. I’m totally lost. I’ve never experienced a situation like this in my life.”

  Mike Rice, who leases from Spruce Power, saw his electricity costs drop significantly until 2023 when his meter malfunctioned. Despite the fault, Spruce has not compensated him for the energy lost during peak production times.

  “No one called me to tell me my system is out. Not even credits. I’d just take credits so I can offset my future bills, but they won’t do that,” Rice said.

  “I think they’re more interested in putting solar up than repairing it,” he concluded. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 22:00

• 26 States File Lawsuits In Federal Courts Over ATF Redefinition Of Gun Dealers
  26 States File Lawsuits In Federal Courts Over ATF Redefinition Of Gun Dealers

  Authored by Michael Clements via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Attorneys general representing half of the country on May 1 sued President Joe Biden’s administration over a new rule requiring criminal background checks for all gun sales, including private sales.

  

  Lawsuits in Florida, Texas, and Arkansas are asking the courts to block a rule from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that redefines “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms.

  Under the new rule, almost every transfer of firearm ownership would require at least one party to have a Federal Firearms License and perform a criminal background check, including private sales.

  U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland signed the new rule on April 10, and it goes into effect on May 10.

  According to the 466-page rule, the only requirement for determining whether a person is engaged in the business of selling guns is whether the person is trading to “predominately earn a profit.” Previously, the defining characteristic was whether the dealer worked to earn a “livelihood.”

  The new definition is in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), signed into law on June 25, 2022.

  In the Florida case, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

  According to the lawsuit Ms. Moody filed on May 1, the act was passed to balance gun owners’ rights against public safety concerns.

  In the filing, Ms. Moody wrote that the BSCA’s sponsors assured voters that the law clarified that dealers were only those who earned their livelihood from selling guns. Ms. Moody claims that President Biden is stretching the language of the act to fit his political agenda.

  “Sensing an opportunity, the Biden Administration now seeks to exploit the minor changes to federal law enacted in the BSCA to implement President Biden’s preferred policies by executive fiat,” Ms. Moody wrote.

  The other two lawsuits—filed in the Northern District of Texas and Eastern District of Arkansas—also decry the change as an unconstitutional infringement on Americans’ Second Amendment rights and an illegal attempt to circumvent the U.S. Congress and enact “universal background checks.”

  President Biden has called for expanding the criminal background check requirement since his election in 2020.

  Each suit asks its respective court to block the rule’s enforcement and find that it violates the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedures Act.

  ATF spokesperson Kristina Mastropasqua said the agency had no comment on the lawsuits.

  The White House did not respond to requests from The Epoch Times for comment on this story.

  

  The attorneys general say they are defending their constituents’ rights.

  “This lawsuit is just the latest instance of me and my colleagues in other states having to remind the President that he must follow the law,” Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin wrote in a press release on May 1.

  Mr. Griffin joined Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach in the largest suit, representing 21 states. They say the new rule completely reverses decades of legal precedence that protected the right of private parties to buy, sell, or trade firearms without government intrusion.

  “Defendants’ claim of authority to implement this scheme dramatically upends both our constitutional traditions and the federal firearms licensing regime Congress designed,” the lawsuit states.

  In addition to Kansas and Arkansas, the plaintiffs in the Arkansas lawsuit include Iowa, Montana, Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Indiana, Idaho, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

  Private citizens Phillip Journey, Allen Black, Donald Maxey, and the Chisholm Trail Antique Gun Association joined the lawsuit as plaintiffs.

  They are suing Mr. Garland, ATF Director Steven Dettelbach, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the ATF.

  

  “This rule is blatantly unconstitutional. We are suing to defend the Second Amendment rights of all Americans,” Mr. Kobach wrote in a press release on his state website.

  In Texas, four states, four Second Amendment Advocacy groups, and one individual are challenging the rule in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Amarillo.

  That lawsuit was filed on May 1 by the states of Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Utah, along with Gun Owners of America Inc., the Gun Owners’ Foundation, the Tennessee Firearms Association, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and Jefferey W. Tormey.

  Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a press release calling the new rule an affront to the Constitution.

  “Yet again, Joe Biden is weaponizing the federal bureaucracy to rip up the Constitution and destroy our citizens’ Second Amendment rights,” Mr. Paxton’s statement reads.

  Gun Owners of America Eric Pratt said allowing the rule to stand would send a dangerous message to other government agencies. In the press release, Mr. Pratt wrote that the rule must be struck down entirely.

  “Anything less would further encourage this tyrannical administration to continue weaponizing vague statutes into policies that are meant to further harass and intimidate gun owners and dealers at every turn.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 21:40

• "An Unlawful Sleight Of Hand": Biden Parole Program Has Flown Illegals To More Than 45 US Cities
  “An Unlawful Sleight Of Hand”: Biden Parole Program Has Flown Illegals To More Than 45 US Cities

  In a recent development, a House Committee subpoena has forced the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to reveal details of its parole program designed to allow entry for thousands of individuals from several nations.

  

  The program, established in October 2022, was initially tailored to facilitate entry for Venezuelans who had American sponsors and passed a vetting process. However, the scope of the program rapidly expanded, encompassing individuals from Cuba, Haiti, and Nicaragua as well – eventually flying illegal aliens to more than 45 cities across the United States.

  According to the DHS documents, between January and August 2023, the parole program allowed over 200,000 individuals to enter the United States. While the program did not cover the cost of flights for these individuals, it permitted them to enter the country and make travel arrangements independently. Among the program’s participants, Florida emerged as a leading destination, with around 80% of the 200,000 choosing to settle in cities such as Miami, Tampa, and Fort Lauderdale. Other prominent destinations included New York, California, Texas, Nevada, and Georgia.

  

  DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas defended the program, stating that it provided “a safe and orderly way to reach the United States” and asserting, though without presenting specific evidence, that the program “resulted in a reduction in numbers of those nationalities.” Mayorkas also highlighted its global relevance, noting its role in addressing “the unprecedented level of migration throughout our hemisphere” and suggesting that other countries might see it as a model to manage irregular migration.

  That said, the documents revealed that at least 1.6 million applications were still pending as of October 2023. The program currently admits approximately 30,000 individuals per month, granting them work permits and authorizing them to live in the country for two years.

  Congressman Mark Green (R-Tenn.), Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, expressed strong criticism of the program, stating, “These documents expose the egregious lengths Secretary Mayorkas will go to ensure inadmissible aliens reach every corner of the country, from Orlando and Atlanta to Las Vegas and San Francisco.” Green labeled the parole program “an unlawful sleight of hand” aimed at concealing the worsening border crisis from the American public.

  In response to perceived poor handling of the border crisis, Mayorkas faced impeachment by the House of Representatives in February. This marked the second impeachment of a Cabinet secretary in U.S. history, and the first in nearly 150 years. However, the Senate’s Democratic majority ultimately voted to end the trial without proceeding to a vote on conviction or acquittal, following repeated delays.

  The disclosure of the DHS parole program documents has reignited debate over U.S. immigration policy and the handling of migration at the southern border, reflecting persistent tensions on these issues at both the national and international levels.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 21:20

• Trump Urges Dismissal Of Mar-a-Lago Case, Claims 'Selective And Vindictive Prosecution'
  Trump Urges Dismissal Of Mar-a-Lago Case, Claims ‘Selective And Vindictive Prosecution’

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Former President Donald Trump docketed a brief to support his motion to dismiss the classified documents indictment against him in Florida, citing “selective and vindictive prosecution” on Thursday.

  

  The 43-page filing contends that special counsel Jack Smith’s case against the former president “has been motivated by improper political animus.”

  It cites “targeted leaks and public statements” by President Joe Biden, “urging others to prosecute President Trump.” This refers to a New York Times report from April 2, 2022, reporting that President Biden told his “inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted.”

  President Trump’s lawyers contend that the article amounted to presidential pressure on Attorney General Merrick Garland to “act … more like a prosecutor who is willing to take decisive action.”

  The motion details a series of events to support the former president’s arguments of a concerted effort by the Biden administration and federal agencies to target him.

  It points to statements from officials at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), which is responsible for the preservation of presidential records, that the Biden administration’s “current business” was investigating the 45th president. Among other events, it cites a text message from a NARA official dated Feb. 9, 2022, stating that the classified documents have “consumed all of our discussions” with the Biden White House.

  “There is evidence of vindictive political animosity focused on election interference in these proceedings, which is part of the reason why the Special Counsel’s Office is wrong in the claim that President Trump ‘does not contend that the Special Counsel himself was motivated by improper considerations,’” President Trump’s lawyers argue.

  Smith Refutes Trump’s Claims

  In a March 7 filing, Mr. Smith argues against President Trump’s claims that the prosecution team, influenced by political bias, is selectively targeting him for prosecution.

  Prosecutors from the special counsel’s office argue that the former president hadn’t identified anyone in his motion who was engaging in similar conduct without being prosecuted and failed to provide evidence that his indictment was solely retaliatory.

  “Trump contends … that he has been subject to selective and vindictive prosecution,” the prosecution wrote. “But he has not identified anyone who has engaged in a remotely similar battery of criminal conduct and not been prosecuted as a result.

  “He has likewise failed to provide any evidence that his indictment was brought solely to retaliate against him for exercising his legal rights, rather than because he flagrantly and repeatedly broke the law,” the prosecution continued.

  Meanwhile, President Trump’s legal team has given Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, a list of other former government officials who they say engaged in similar alleged misconduct, including the mishandling of classified information.

  Among them are President Biden, former Vice President Mike Pence, former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, and the FBI’s former director James Comey.

  However, with respect to the alleged misconduct of these officials, President Trump’s team asserted in a February motion that “no one in the government lifted a finger” to prosecute them.

  “Collectively, this history of non-prosecution and leniency for similarly situated individuals and others strongly supports President Trump’s motion based on intolerable and unconstitutional selective and vindictive prosecution,” the motion reads.

  President Trump’s lawyers argued again on Thursday that, on its face, these specific comparators are enough to establish a case of selective and vindictive prosecution.

  The former president’s legal team asked the judge for further investigation through discovery and a hearing to examine the allegations of selective prosecution.

  Trump ‘The Exception’

  Special counsel Robert Hurr declined to press charges against President Biden in February, despite finding evidence that he retained and disclosed highly classified materials when he was a private citizen.

  According to Mr. Hur’s report from February, there is no precedent for prosecuting former presidents or vice presidents for mishandling classified documents from their own administrations, with one exception.

  “The exception is President Trump,” the February motion reads.

  “The basis is his politics and status as President Biden’s chief political rival,” the motion continues. “Thus, this case reflects the type of selective and vindictive prosecution that cannot be tolerated. Accordingly, further discovery and a hearing are necessary, and the Superseding Indictment must be dismissed.”

  President Trump’s legal team cited Mr. Hur’s report in a bid to exonerate him from charges. On the other hand, the prosecution claims that the former president was the only one who participated in a “multifaceted scheme of deception and obstruction” to prevent the safe return of those documents.

  The former president argues that the special counsel’s office is trying to influence the general election by pursuing “two lawless prosecutions,” which have been initiated at the urging of the Biden administration.

  “[T]he Special Counsel’s Office seeks to ‘become a de facto campaign voice for the Democrats in the general election,’ and Jack Smith is ‘probably less concerned now with whether a Trump conviction will survive appeal than with whether Trump can be convicted ahead of the November 2024 election,’” the February motions reads.

  “No sitting President has ever successfully pressed for the prosecution of a former President, and his chief political rival, the way that President Biden did—proudly and publicly—in 2022,” President Trump’s lawyers contend. “NARA has never targeted a former President in the way that the agency targeted President Trump. No law enforcement body has ever raided a former President’s home. DOJ has never even used civil remedies against a former President.”

  President Trump’s defense had previously sought to have the case thrown out based on the Presidential Records Act (PRA), but Judge Cannon rejected this argument on April 4.

  Mr. Smith had indicted President Trump and aide Walt Nauta in June 2023, alleging mishandling of over 300 classified documents. The charges against the former president include 31 counts of violating the Espionage Act, along with various other counts related to obstruction of justice, withholding documents, and making false statements.

  The Epoch Times contacted Mr. Smith’s office for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 21:00

• Stormy Daniels Lawyer Says Payment Wasn't 'Hush Money' – Avenatti Calls "A Shakedown"
  Stormy Daniels Lawyer Says Payment Wasn’t ‘Hush Money’ – Avenatti Calls “A Shakedown”

  A lawyer who was involved in negotiations between former President Donald Trump and two women denied that payments made to them constituted “hush-money,” and instead used the word “consideration.”

  

  Keith Davidson, who negotiated deals with both Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) and model Karen McDougal, disputed Manhattan prosecutor Joshua Steinglass’s language during a May 2 court appearance.

  “It wasn’t a ‘payout’ and it wasn’t ‘hush money.’ It was consideration in a civil settlement,” said Davidson.

  “Would you use the phrase hush money to describe the money that was paid to your client by Donald Trump?” Steinglass shot back.

  “I would never use that word,” Davidson replied.

  When asked what he would call it, he said it was a “Consideration,” comparing it to a contract in which one pays to have one’s lawn mowed.

  Trump attorney Emil Bove pressed Mr. Davidson on his understanding of extortion law, grilling him about previous instances in which he solicited money to suppress embarrassing stories, including one involving wrestler Hulk Hogan.

  Mr. Bove suggested to the witness that by the time he negotiated the payments for Ms. McDougal and Ms. Clifford, he would have been “pretty well versed in coming right up to the line without committing extortion.”

  “I had familiarized myself with the law,” Mr. Davison replied. –Epoch Times

  Davidson also told Steinglass that he worked out the “consideration” deal with former Trump attorney Michael Cohen just days before the 2016 election, but that Trump never signed it.

  Avenatti pipes up from prison

  

  Trying to reclaim his 15 minutes of fame from prison, former Trump foe and Stormy Daniels’ ex-attorney Michael Avenatti posted on X that Davidson is a liar – and had in fact tried to extort Trump.

  “Keith Davidson is lying,” claimed Avenatti. “After I confronted her w/ her own text msgs, Daniels admitted to me in early 2019 that she & Davidson had extorted Trump in Oct. 2016 – it was a shakedown.”

  Keith Davidson is lying. After I confronted her w/ her own text msgs, Daniels admitted to me in early 2019 that she & Davidson had extorted Trump in Oct. 2016 – it was a shakedown. This was one of the many reasons I fired her as a client in Feb. 2019

  — Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) May 2, 2024

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

  Last month, Trump publicly thanked Avenatti “for revealing the truth about two sleaze bags who have, with their lies and misrepresentations, cost our Country dearly!,” referring to the gag orders placed on Trump in his Manhattan trial.
   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 20:40

• Money Is A Monopoly Government Will Never Surrender
  Money Is A Monopoly Government Will Never Surrender

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  A major intellectual revelation from my youth came from reading Murray Rothbard’s “What Has Government Done to Our Money?” (1963). He includes a passing opinion that private markets are perfectly capable of producing money with no help from government. Under a sweeping monetary reform, private mints could compete in offering this good with full associated services. There is no need for any government intervention here.

  

  It was the kind of claim that, at some point in one’s life, causes the jaw to hit the floor. Investigating this assertion more, I came to see that there was a large literature on the topic. Historically, money originated in the market economy itself, a naturally evolving institution that met the needs of trade. Whatever good was generally valued by everyone, and was as capable of being divided into consistent units with a stable value, could be deployed as money, with no need for government to do anything but watch.

  But of course history has not panned out that way. Every government has a strong incentive to monopolize the good called money because this is how they can tax their citizens, reward the most compliant industries, cultivate close relationships with bankers, and inflate the currency at will through a variety of methods depending on the technology of the time.

  We can of course imagine primitive tribes or pre-colonial native populations using rocks and shells, but is there a modern case where private coinage became normalized? In a major but often overlooked work of historical scholarship, economist George Selgin has written the most extensive treatment of the private coinage industry in the UK at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

  His book “Good Money” is beautifully produced with color photographs of some of the most alluring coins you will ever see. The historical narrative is endlessly fascinating. At the dawn of the factory system, the Royal Mint didn’t care in the slightest bit about small denomination coins of silver and copper to enable small businessmen to pay their workers. The Royal Mint only produced large denominations in gold for big business doing big trade deals.

  Frustrated with the inability to pay workers, the entire period from 1700 through 1813 saw the evolution of a sophisticated industry focused on coinage. Old button factories were converted to producing coins of various weights and sizes based on copper and silver. They were used to pay workers and accepted widely by merchants.

  The system worked just fine and it could have continued forever. The new industry alleviated the coin shortage and yielded healthy competition among many producers of new money. It was all made to be inflation resistant and verifiable according to standard weights and measures. This was a full industry of private coinage, in operation in one of the most advanced and industrious societies in the world at the time.

  Sadly, the Royal Mint eventually became upset about this. Driven by the eternal need of government to control the money in its realm, Parliament passed a series of acts in 1812–1813 to cartelize the function of the mint and make the Royal Mint the only legal producer. The entire industry was destroyed very quickly. So from this one case, we can see that the monopolization of money is not an outgrowth of market forces but imposed by government. It has always been this way.

  The digital age birthed new attempts to privatize money, stemming from a very real problem of financial verification (revealed in the 2008 financial crisis) and using money without the need for intermediaries. The result was Bitcoin, which was born in January 2010. It grew in sophistication and value over the course of the year. In the following seven years, adoption exploded and incentivized the creation of new private methods of settling transactions and accepting credit cards. It was a solid competitor to nationalized money.

  As in 1813, governments did not much like it. The code of Bitcoin itself was deliberately throttled to prevent the new private money from scaling, prompting a fork in the transaction chain and the birth of general chaos in the industry, even as Bitcoin itself kept growing in value. Government responded by taking control of the on-ramps, the off-ramps, all exchanges, and then put heavy taxation and reporting requirements on all dealings. Right now, the crackdown is full-on, with websites and wallets being shut down and top investors investigated and even subject to criminal trials.

  As in 19th century Britain, we see here another tragic case of government intervention strangling a wonderful new industry in the interest of maintaining a monopoly on power, the first condition of which is always to control the money of the realm.

  I think back to my own shock at the discovery that free enterprise was fully capable of managing money as a good. It had never occurred to me because it had always been otherwise. And yet, if you think about it, there are all sorts of conditions in which market forces invent money as a method of moving beyond primitive barter arrangements.

  Every prison has its own form of money. It used to be cigarettes but now is more commonly canned fish or some other valued good. The only reason this is not common in society at large is that governments do not want it this way.

  A feature of government management in modern times has been periodic reforms that always end in making the system worse. We had a government-backed gold standard in the late 19th century that was compromised by a fixed price relationship between gold and silver that was unsustainable. Then we got the Federal Reserve in 1913, with the promise that it would control inflation even as it took off soon after the Fed accommodated the need for war funding.

  In 1933, we got another reform that devalued the currency from the center, changing the definition of a dollar from 1/20 an ounce of gold to 1/35 an ounce. That massive devaluation was accompanied by a nationwide gold confiscation that included criminal penalties and jail time for noncompliance. At the close of World War II, a new system called Bretton Woods forbid domestic conversion and only allowed gold for international exchange. This was completely unsustainable because every nation has different fiscal and monetary policies so of course the value of money could not be frozen in place. This led to the end of the gold standard completely in 1971–73, resulting in a disastrous inflation bout.

  No question that the next great monetary reform will be to globalize a central bank digital currency with track-and-trace capability and the power to turn money on and off on political whim. In order to make this possible, government now needs to eliminate all the competition, just as they did in 1813.

  None of this mucking around with the money is in the public interest. It is in the government’s interest and also its industrial partners in banking and finance. A full denationalization of money is the fix for the whole problem but getting there from here will require dislodging the government of its penchant for controlling the economic forces of the whole realm. It’s an age-old problem and perhaps the greatest challenge of all ages.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 20:20

• California's Single-Family Zoning Exemplifies The Market-Intervention Problem
  California’s Single-Family Zoning Exemplifies The Market-Intervention Problem

  Via SchiffGold.com,

  California’s government bet that they knew better than the free market. And now millions are paying the price…

  

  The story begins in 1919, when the city of Berkley, California instituted legislation setting aside districts that would only allow the construction of single-family housing. The idea spread, and soon much of California’s urban areas had adopted the zoning policy. Today, approximately 40% of the total land in Los Angeles is set aside for single-family homes, while only 11% is reserved for multi-family residences. 

  In 2021, a bill was signed which was intended to end single-family zoning in California. But politics is rarely that simple. The decision was met with widespread protests and an LA County Court recently declared the law unconstitutional, preventing its passing in 5 Southern California cities. While many celebrated the ruling, the decision has perpetuated California’s housing crisis.

  The logic behind the original legislation was to preserve the “charm” of California’s neighborhoods. In the eyes of policymakers, multi-family residences such as apartment complexes or duplexes would sully the white-picket fence aesthetic which they saw as a staple of Californian life. While this may appear like a harmless notion, this idealism came with devastating consequences.

  The problem with this policy is apparent to those with an understanding of supply and demand. By preventing high-capacity residences from being built, the supply of housing has been artificially constrained by the legislation. Even as demand rises for increased housing, companies cannot produce the necessary residences to meet the desire. When demand rises while supply remains fixed, prices will surge. And that’s exactly what happened.

  California has the second highest home prices of any state, behind only Hawaii. Housing costs have increased by 10.1% in the past year, while the number of homes sold has decreased by 6.9%. As of March 2024, the average price of a house in LA is a staggering $974,000. In San Francisco, that figure is 1.29 million.

  These soaring rates have heavily affected the citizenry. California has the 4th highest homelessness per capita rate among U.S. states. Over 180,000 Californians are homeless, which is almost a third of the nation’s entire homeless population.

  While the cause of some homelessness is self-inflicted, studies have found a direct correlation between the cost of housing and rates of homelessness. With the second-highest housing costs of any state, it’s safe to say daunting housing prices are at least partially to blame for a vast number of California’s displaced citizens.

  Another consequence of the legislation is an increase in class inequality. California has the fourth-most unequal income distribution of any state. The zoning law contributes to this problem by acting as a gatekeeper that excludes low-income families from better neighborhoods, sacrificing equality for community “quality.” Accompanied by the state’s stringent school choice laws, many citizens are left attending lower-caliber schools in worse neighborhoods. This harms future career opportunities and feeds the vicious generational cycle of poverty.

  These issues are all either caused or exacerbated by the single-family zoning legislation which has constrained the state’s housing market for decades. The directive prevents the construction of apartment complexes, or other housing structures which would cater to a larger constituency, keeping prices too high for many to afford. From 1919 to the present, politicians have continued to turn a blind eye to single-family zoning’s detrimental effects in the pursuit of the perceived good of protecting neighborhoods.

  The Fundamental Problem with Government Intervention

  Government intervention always leads to unintended consequences. It’s a tale as old as government. But why does it so often result in disaster?

  There’s a fatal flaw at the root of all bureaucratic intervention: a lack of information. In any centralized decision, there is an incalculable amount of pertinent decentralized information that is not available to governmental bodies.

  In the absence of intervention, this information is communicated through prices. Even though all of the information will never be understood by the same person at once, we’re still able to coordinate our plans to reach a productive end. That’s the beauty of the price system. You may have no idea that a cocoa farm in Ghana had a poor yield, but you will buy less cocoa when it costs more than usual. A series of complex events can all be boiled down to a simple price hike.

  Government intervention is the wrench in the works. No centralized body can know all of the variables in a given situation. While protecting Californian neighborhoods sounds good, it is a gross simplification of the actual issues at play. Restricting the supply of housing leads to a bevy of consequences, including skyrocketing prices, rampant homelessness, and pervasive inequality. The pursuit of a solution in the absence of information usually ends up hurting more people than it helps.

  Economics is often regarded as a dismal science reserved for bookworms and professors. But for the homeless who are struggling to survive because of market-hampering governmental policies, economics is about life and death. When the government intervenes in the market system because it “knows best,” it far too often doesn’t, and innocent people pay the price. It’s up to us to hold our leaders accountable for the consequences of their actions and to help those harmed by their political arrogance.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 20:00

• Major Australian Pension Fund To Restrict Coal Investments
  Major Australian Pension Fund To Restrict Coal Investments

  By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

  Australian Retirement Trust, which manages $183 billion (AUS$280 billion) of retirement savings, is placing thermal coal on its exclusion list as of July 1, as it looks to have a net-zero emissions portfolio by 2050.

  

  Thermal coal includes the mining of lignite, bituminous, anthracite, and steam coal and its sale to external parties, the second-largest Australian pension fund said in updates to its product offering.

  The fund will be screening its investments and exclude direct investments in coal companies that have 10% of revenue from coal (estimated or reported) in the most recent year of financial reporting.

  “As a global investor, Australian Retirement Trust is committed to achieving a net zero greenhouse gas emissions investment portfolio by 2050,” the fund said in a statement carried by Reuters.

  However, it applies exclusions in limited circumstances “in accordance with members’ best financial interest.”

  For coal investments, exclusions will apply for pooled derivative products, which may have indirect exposure to companies involved in the mining of thermal coal. Exclusions will also be made for companies deriving revenue from metallurgical coal used in the production of steel, coal mined for internal power generation, intra-company sales of mined thermal coal, revenue from coal trading, and royalty income for companies not involved in thermal coal extraction operations.

  Climate change is the single largest motivation of investment institutions to decide to exclude companies from their portfolios, a so-called ‘exclusion tracker’ showed last year.

  Investors have become increasingly wary of investing in ‘sin industries’, which for many now include fossil fuel companies alongside the weapons and tobacco sectors.

  Pension funds and other institutional investors in Europe have already excluded some major oil and gas companies from their portfolios, while some European banks have scaled back financing for fossil fuel projects.

  Not all investors are dumping fossil fuels—some believe that owning stocks could help them influence decisions at oil and gas firms regarding emissions reductions.   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 19:40

• The Great Gold Vs Bitcoin Debate
  The Great Gold Vs Bitcoin Debate

   

  https://t.co/z5tfJThm9J

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 3, 2024

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

  Watch Live on X, YouTube and Rumble. 

  ZeroHedge is partnering with Crypto Banter to bring together four top minds to debate one of the most combustible topics of the day: gold or bitcoin?

  In the anti-crypto corner is the man whose name is synonymous with “gold”, infamous crypto bear Peter Schiff. Alongside Schiff will be “Dr. Doom”, renowned economist Nouriel Roubini.

  Arguing in favor of crypto will be Anthony Scaramucci – wealth manager with over $10 billion in AUM – as well as day-one crypto veteran Erik Voorhees, founder of ShapeShift and torch-bearer for the asset class’s libertarian roots.

  The debate will be moderated by Ran Neuner, founder and host of Crypto Banter, one of the largest digital asset news channels on YouTube.

  ZeroHedge would also like to thank our sponsors for this debate: Preserve Gold and BITLAYER — “Layer 2. The future of Bitcoin.” Whether you’re a fan of gold or Bitcoin, you probably see the wisdom in diversifying away from U.S. dollars. Do so by visiting their websites and checking out their products. ZeroHedge Goldbugs can access a special offer from Preserve Gold by texting “ZERO” to 50505.

  And so, without further ado, let’s get ready to rumble. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 19:25

• Biden Admin Covertly Pursued Gender Affirming Care For Kids In States Where The Practice Is Banned
  Biden Admin Covertly Pursued Gender Affirming Care For Kids In States Where The Practice Is Banned

  America First Legal revealed documents on Thursday from its lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), showcasing emails from Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine and indicating that the Biden Administration has engaged privately with “gender affirming care providers” from states that have outlawed these practices, pledging federal support to counteract such state laws.

  In particular, Levine expressed significant concern for the LGBTI+ community in Idaho, emphasizing ongoing efforts to challenge these state measures nationally, the site pointed out. The documents were acquired through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request concerning Levine’s correspondence about pediatric transgender clinics.

  Previously, in March 2023, Levine stated that the federal backing for transitioning children was comprehensive, even at presidential levels, and framed any opposition as politically motivated. The newly revealed records elaborate on the administration’s covert operations with advocates to push this agenda.

  THERE IT IS.

  America First Legal (@America1stLegal) has uncovered documents proving the Biden administration coordinated with radical activists to find ways around state laws to g*oom children to become “transgend*r.”

  “New internal docs obtained through our lawsuit against HHS… pic.twitter.com/UOfhiskOsE

  — Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) May 2, 2024

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

  One notable communication from June 2022 involves HHS Regional Director Ingrid Ulrey discussing an Idaho meeting about impending legislation aimed at prohibiting certain medical treatments for minors. Ulrey’s message to Levine highlighted her empathy for Idaho’s LGBTQ community, particularly in light of legislative efforts she described as harmful.

  Among other things, the report noted that in her memo, Ulrey highlighted concerns about the impact of Idaho’s proposed law on “Gender Affirming Care” (GAC), including a doctor shortage and the high costs of such treatments without insurance subsidies.

  

  She noted that only one provider was offering GAC to a significant state prison population, with a few others too intimidated to attend a meeting or preferring to stay under the radar. Ulrey also relayed that the care providers had specific definitions of GAC, controversially suggesting the removal of parental consent requirements, which could include requiring consent from just one parent or both if divorced. This approach appears to be advocated by a high-ranking HHS official following discussions with these providers.

  

  Ulrey’s discussions with “gender-affirming care providers” led to a disturbing proposal to simplify legal barriers, including reducing parental consent requirements for such treatments, according to America First Legal. 

  Following these meetings, a high-ranking HHS official advocated for the removal of parental consent as part of the definition of “gender-affirming care.”

  

  The meeting’s summary called for federal intervention to override state laws restricting such care, with suggestions for using Medicaid to mandate coverage across all states and queries about providing such care in prisons, indicating a push to extend “gender-affirming care” despite local restrictions.

  The summary also reflected provider concerns about parental rights obstructing children’s access to these treatments. On June 5, 2022, Assistant Secretary Levine expressed ongoing support for the LGBTI+ community in Idaho, promising to continue advocacy efforts nationally.

  

  Further details emerged from a June 2022 roundtable in Anchorage, Alaska, where discussions focused on integrating mental health counselors in schools amidst concerns about parental opposition. A local clinic, Identity, Inc., was noted for providing non-surgical gender-affirming care, with surgical treatments sought outside Alaska. The report also mentioned potential local legislation in Anchorage impacting transgender individuals’ participation in school sports, signaling continued legislative challenges for the transgender community.

  America First Legal Senior Advisor Ian Prior commented: “The Biden Administration is leveraging the full power of the federal government to engage in an anti-science war on reality, with America’s children as the collateral damage. While European nations are drastically pulling back on these dangerous experiments and a number of states are legislating against them, the Biden Administration is plowing full steam ahead in its goal of redefining the foundations of biology, from the doctors’ offices to the athletic fields. This comes even as the United States Supreme Court has held that states have a right to enact such legislation. The Biden Administration is supporting crimes against humanity, and America First Legal will continue to fight back until these dangerous practices end.”

  You can read the full trove of emails here.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 19:20

• Almost Half Of Health Care Workers Hesitant To Take COVID-19 Boosters: Study
  Almost Half Of Health Care Workers Hesitant To Take COVID-19 Boosters: Study

  Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Approximately half of the health care workers in a Polish study were found to be averse to taking COVID-19 booster shots, with one of the reasons for this hesitancy being their negative experiences with previous vaccinations.

  

  The peer-reviewed study, published in the Vaccines journal on April 29, examined factors underlying “hesitancy to receive COVID-19 booster vaccine doses” among health care workers (HCW) in Poland. Almost 50 percent of the participants were identified as being wary of the boosters. “Our study found that 42 percent of the HCWs were hesitant about the second booster dose, while 7 percent reported no intent to get vaccinated with any additional doses.”

  “As reasons for not vaccinating, participants most frequently highlighted lack of time, negative experiences with previous vaccinations, and immunity conferred by past infections.”

  The study involved 69 healthcare workers composed of nurses, midwives, physicians, other health associate professionals, and administrative staff.

  At the time of enrollment, 47 had a history of lab-confirmed COVID-19 infection and 31 had at least one comorbidity, a situation where a person suffers from more than one disease or medical condition at the same time.

  Over 92 percent of study participants received at least one vaccine booster, with 50.73 percent getting two doses. Five out of the 69 HCWs did not take any boosters.

  “Booster hesitancy among health professionals (physicians, nurses, and midwives) was lower than among administrative staff and others. Almost 79 percent of the physicians had received two COVID-19 vaccine booster doses. However, apart from physicians, about half of the HCWs from each occupation group were hesitant about the second booster dose.”

  “The highest number of HCWs without any vaccine boosters was observed among administration personnel.”

  HCWs in the age groups of 31-40 and 41-50 were found to be the most skeptical about taking the second booster shot. Thirty-four out of the 69 HCWs provided reasons for their COVID-19 booster vaccine hesitancy.

  Two of the health care workers who did not take booster shots said their decision was based on their personal experience with the vaccines.

  “They reported negative experiences with past COVID-19 vaccination and stated that the natural immunity developed after SARS-CoV-2 infection could protect them against COVID-19, which, overall, does not pose serious health risks,” the study said.

  “Responses from HCWs who received only one COVID-19 booster dose can be categorized into two themes: (i) influences arising from personal perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and disease prevention and (ii) issues directly related to vaccination and its safety.”

  Six health care workers reported suffering negative adverse effects after previously taking COVID shots. Four had safety concerns about the vaccines.

  In an earlier study conducted by the researchers, COVID-19 antibody levels among HCWs after receiving the mandatory primary vaccine series were found to have decreased by around 90 to 95 percent within seven months of vaccination. However, “none of the HCWs contracted COVID-19,” it said.

  The current study was funded by the Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry Polish Academy of Sciences. The authors of the study reported no conflicts of interest.

  Vaccine Concerns, Harms

  Other studies have also explored vaccine hesitancy among health care workers. A March 2023 study that looked at HCWs from Cameroon and Nigeria found that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was “high and broadly determined by the perceived risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines on personal health, mistrust in COVID-19 vaccines, and uncertainty about colleagues’ vaccine acceptability.”

  An April 2022 study found that “a concern for vaccine side effects” and “the belief that the vaccines are inadequately studied” were some of the key reasons for vaccine hesitancy among health care workers.

  A May 2022 analysis at BMJ Global Health warned that indulging in policies like mandatory vaccination “may cause more harm than good.”

  “Current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good,” it said.

  “Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunizations.”

  The analysis recommended that vaccines should only be mandated “sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions.”

  During Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-Wis.) roundtable discussion on COVID-19 vaccines on Feb. 26, researcher Raphael Lataster, associate lecturer at the University of Sydney, claimed that data from Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials exaggerated the efficacy of the shots.

  The data exaggeration could make an ineffective vaccine have a perceived effectiveness of up to 48 percent, he stated.

  Meanwhile, a Jan. 27 narrative review found that repeated COVID-19 vaccination may end up boosting the likelihood of experiencing COVID-19 infections and other pathologies. Taking multiple vaccine doses could trigger higher levels of IgG4 antibodies and impair activating white blood cells that protect a person from infections and cancers.

  “While booster doses have been recommended to enhance and extend immunity, especially in the face of emerging variants, this recommendation is not based on proven efficacy, and the side effects have been neglected,” the paper said.

  In an interview with EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders” program last year, clinical pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole said that DNA contamination in some of the COVID-19 vaccines could be behind an increase in cancers. He pointed to “turbo cancers,” referring to the phenomenon of cancer symptoms arising faster.

  “Now I’m seeing the solid tissue cancers at rates I’ve never seen … Patients that were stable, or cancer-free for one, two, five, ten years and their cancer’s back, it’s back with a vengeance and it’s not responding to the traditional therapies,” he said.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 19:00

• Ford's $120,000 Loss Per Vehicle Shows California EV Goals Are Impossible
  Ford’s $120,000 Loss Per Vehicle Shows California EV Goals Are Impossible

  Authored by John Seiler via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  So much for California’s mandate that “all new passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs sold in California will be zero-emission vehicles by 2035,” according to the California Air Resources Board. It imposed the mandate at the request of Gov. Gavin Newsom.

  

  On April 24, Ford reported it lost $132,000 for each of its 10,000 electric vehicles sold in the first quarter of 2024, according to CNN. The sales were down 20 percent from the first quarter of 2023 and would “drag down earnings for the company overall.”

  The losses include “hundreds of millions being spent on research and development of the next generation of EVs for Ford. Those investments are years away from paying off.” Ford is the only major carmaker breaking out EV numbers by themselves. But other marques likely suffer similar losses.

  Californians bought 1.78 million new vehicles in 2023, reported the California New Car Dealers Association. Multiply that number by $132,000 and you get $235 billion. That would bankrupt every car manufacturer, meaning they just would pull out of selling anything in the state.

  The California government would have to set up socialist, government-owned companies to make the cars, like the infamous Yugo. Dubbed “the worst car in history,” it was sold in America in the 1980s and was made by the communist Yugoslav government just before the country itself broke up in 1991.

  

  Battery Problems

  The Epoch Times also reported that same day, April 24, “Ford Recalling More Than 55,000 SUVs and Trucks in Canada Over Battery Issues.” The Transport Canada notice read, “A sudden loss of power to the wheels or a vehicle that doesn’t restart after a start-stop event could increase the risk of a crash. Additionally, hazard lamps that don’t work could make the vehicle less visible and increase the risk of a crash.”

  Also, most of Canada gets really cold in the winter. “The effects of cold weather on car batteries start to become pronounced when the temperature drops below freezing for an extended period,” explained United Tire & Service. “At a temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit, your battery will lose about 30 percent of its power. Your battery will continue to get weaker as the temperatures get colder. In fact, your battery will lose about 60 percent of its power at 0 degrees Fahrenheit.”

  In Montreal, the average low temperature in January is 10 degrees Fahrenheit. In Edmonton it’s 8 degrees.

  Most of California enjoys the balmiest weather on earth. But in January 2023, the temperature around Bridgeport, near Yosemite National Park, dropped to minus 27 degrees. In such areas, EVs are almost completely useless except for rich people in the summer.

  Cheap Electric Cars?

  But isn’t Tesla working on cheaper models, not just the expensive ones? Aren’t they figuring out what Ford couldn’t? “Exclusive: Tesla scraps low-cost car plans amid fierce Chinese EV competition,” headlined Reuters on April 5.

  However, on April 24 Yahoo Finance headlined, “Tesla stock surges as EV maker will ‘accelerate’ the launch of cheaper cars. Tesla had previously said it would focus on its robotaxi product after paring back plans for a lower-cost car.”

  Who knows what’s going on with mercurial Tesla CEO Elon Musk? But I would never count him out.

  So what about those cheap cars financed by communist China? In February, the Biden administration announced it would investigate Chinese “smart” cars, which like your cell phone—probably also made in China—scoop up increasing amounts of data about your life.

  “China is determined to dominate the future of the auto market, including by using unfair practices,’’ President Joe Biden said. “China’s policies could flood our market with its vehicles, posing risks to our national security. I’m not going to let that happen on my watch.’’

  On April 11, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) called for banning Chinese EVs as “an existential threat to the American auto industry. Ohio knows all too well how China illegally subsidizes its companies, putting our workers out of jobs and undermining entire industries, from steel to solar manufacturing. We cannot allow China to bring its government-backed cheating to the American auto industry.”

  So far no action has been taken. But presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump in March promised he would impose a 100 percent tariff on Chinese cars, EV or otherwise, built in Mexico.

  No CO2 Threat

  Meanwhile, the carbon monoxide emitted by gas and diesel engines is being shown not to cause global warming. Reported No Tricks Zone, “Three Polish physicists have focused their attention on this saturation principle as it applies to CO2 in three recently published papers (Kubicki et al., 2024, 2022, and 2020). Their latest (Kubicki et al., 2024), published in Applications in Engineering Science, summarizes the experimental evidence from their 2020 and 2022 publications substantiating the conclusion that ‘as a result of saturation processes, emitted CO2 does not directly cause an increase in global temperature.’

  “The authors are concerned about the recent push to rely on modeling and assumptions about CO2’s capacity to drive changes in global temperature rather than observational evidence. They point out the current CO2-is-the-climate-control-knob zeitgeist is no more than a hypothesis.”

  The scientists themselves wrote: “This unequivocally suggests that the officially presented impact of anthropogenic CO2 increase on Earth’s climate is merely a hypothesis rather than a substantiated fact.”

  As I have written several times in The Epoch Times, the CO2 from California vehicles is minuscule compared to the massive spewing from coal plants still being built in massive numbers in communist China. See from March 25, “‘Green Innovation’ Study Shows California CO2 Policies Mainly Help China.”

  Conclusion: EV Mandates Are a Delusion

  California’s 100 percent zero-emission vehicle mandate by 2035 is a tailpipe dream. It’s pushed by ambitious politicians like Mr. Newsom and financed by billionaire environmentalists like Bill Gates. It has no basis in reality.

  At some point in a couple of years, a coalition will form to get rid of these mandates, as well as President Biden’s national goal of more than half of all vehicles sold being EVs by 2030. Auto dealers, especially in California, will work with automakers and the Democratic-aligned United Auto Workers union to push the mandates further into the future, say 2045. Later, the date will be pushed to 2055, and so on.

  Mr. Newsom’s term as governor ends in January 2027. President Biden, if reelected, must leave in January 2029. California’s term limits also mandate a maximum of 12 years in the Legislature.

  Today’s politicians will be gone soon enough, their green battery dreams wafted away like the thick exhaust from a classic 1957 Chevy.

  Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 18:20

• College Fraternities Rise Up Against Marxist Protesters Chanting For 'Socialist Takeover Of America' 
  College Fraternities Rise Up Against Marxist Protesters Chanting For ‘Socialist Takeover Of America’ 

  Colleges and universities are witnessing a coordinated push to spark a new movement resembling Black Lives Matter ahead of the summer months. This time, it’s under the guise of defending Palestine while embedding Marxist ideologies, such as quite literally calling for a ‘revolution’ to usher in ‘a socialist reconstruction of the USA.’ 

  An extremist on the mic says: “There’s only one solution, intifada revolution. We must have a revolution so we can have a socialist reconstruction of the USA.”

  This isn’t just about Israel/Palestine. It’s an attempt of the Marxist takeover of America. Our colleges have become… pic.twitter.com/2IEqRyuorB

  — A Man Of Memes (@RickyDoggin) April 30, 2024

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

  Once again, George Soros and his Open Society Foundation are funding Marxist chaos across campuses, with Soros-funded Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) having organized them. These professional agitators are trained to rise up for revolution. 

  Biden has sparked a wildfire. pic.twitter.com/YXbHCKONcm

  — Edward Snowden (@Snowden) April 25, 2024

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

  So, not enough college students? These radical groups had to import ‘outsiders’. 

  

  Recall that the son of pro-chaos billionaire Soros, Alex, visited the White House over a dozen times for meetings since 2021. 

  

  Meanwhile, Axios reports Democrats are in full-blown ‘panic mode’ behind the scenes as campus takeovers by extremists of their own party produce terrible optics ahead of the presidential election in November. 

  “The longer they continue, and the worse that they get, the worse it’s going to be for the election overall,” one House Democrat said.

  The House Democrat warned that school chaos will only “bring out [the public’s] most conservative side.” 

  What’s clear is that campus protesters are becoming a political liability for Biden and Democrats. That’s because Americans aren’t falling this time for the fake BLM-style protests. Many folks are realizing just how artificial these protests have become. 

  One X user asked: “Is it  about Free Palestine? or Attack on Capitalism?” 

  They outlined the four main goals of Marxists stoking campus chaos: 

  1.  Gain Power
  2. Destabilize the System
  3. ATTACK CAPITALISM!
  4. Usher in their Marxist Utopia

  Is it really about Free Palestine? or Attack on Capitalism?
  The FOUR goals of the Socialist are…
  1. Gain Power
  2. Destabilize the System
  3. ATTACK CAPITALISM!
  4. Usher in their Marxist Utopia pic.twitter.com/VhD8xhlg9w

  — gala gauthier (@Eclipsiay) April 27, 2024

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

  X user Western Lensman might want to update his list… 

  A Warning to America: 25 Ways the US is Being Destroyed | Explained in Under 2 Minutes pic.twitter.com/qwmBO8DmMt

  — Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) April 22, 2024

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

  Let’s remind readers that right before the campus uprisings, there was a surge in Maxists, masquerading as pro-Palestinian protesters, attempting to shut down the nation’s critical infrastructure, including bridges, highways, and airport terminals. We asked at the time, “Who are these pro-Palestinian protesters? And who are they being funded by?” 

  Shutting down critical infrastructure and causing chaos on campuses has nothing to do with helping poor Palestinians, just like burning down businesses and police stations during the Black Lives Matter riots had nothing to do with helping working poor blacks. These movements are hijacked by Marxists, with one intention only: crash the US economy and abolish capitalism.

  Besides Soros, could it also be the Saudis, Qataris, and dark Middle Eastern monies that plowed money into Ivy League schools to prop up radical leftists with one common goal? That goal could be to destroy America from within. 

  After all, America’s enemies don’t even need to fire a shot when woke Harvard University staff can allow the film screening of “How to Blow Up A Pipeline” to students. 

  Harvard is promoting domestic ecoterrorism.

  This is disgraceful. https://t.co/1bB8fpbuzn

  — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 25, 2024

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

   The Marxist takeover of America is happening through colleges that have become indoctrination camps for the youth. 

  Yet the FBI, CIA, and other intelligence agencies are turning a blind eye to this chaos. They’re more focused on going after President Biden’s political opponents. 

  However, out of all this chaos this week, there was a glimmer of hope as fraternities at universities stood up to protect Old Glory. 

  

  The most notable were the boys at Pi Kappa Phi at UNC – who protected Old Glory from protesters. The boys turned around and raised $500,000 on GoFundMe to throw an epic rager for their heroic patriotic duties. 

  

  Frats across the nation got the memo…

  

  They, too, must defend against Marxism.

  A small group of Palestine protestors just showed up at University of Mississippi.

  Frat boys came out and drowned out the protesting with Star Spangled Banner. pic.twitter.com/ADYMAxQb8t

  — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) May 2, 2024

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

  University of Mississippi frat boys faced off with Free Palestine protestors today.

  The images speak for themselves. pic.twitter.com/4mPsR9MUiu

  — End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) May 2, 2024

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

  ASU FRAT BOYS

  ROLLED UP LAST NIGHT

  SPOONKED SOME FREE PALESTINE CAMPS

  LIBERATED THE CAMPUS IN 10 MINUTES

  SALUTE

  WE WANT TO BUY ALL FRAT MALES WHO LIBERATE CAMPUSES BEER

  TO BATTLE!!!

  TAKE YOUR SCHOOLS BACK! pic.twitter.com/EjafWn7YMs

  — 👑 🇺🇸 0HOUR 🇺🇸👑 (@0HOUR) April 27, 2024

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

  🔴 Frat Brother Shares Patriotic Message After Protecting American Flag From Pro-Palestine Protestorshttps://t.co/krgR1RMihR

  — Resist the Mainstream (@ResisttheMS) May 2, 2024

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

  Frat boys are more patriotic than the president of the United States

  I stand with anyone who hoists the American flag over the flag of “Palestine” or the pride flag https://t.co/Lqil68kTvJ

  — YachtMoney (@yat023) May 3, 2024

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

  NOW- ‘Taking Back America’- Patriotic frat boys with Trump flags turn up to rally at Ole Miss, overshadowing the far-left Palestine protest on the university’s campus pic.twitter.com/LHpHO2y0Os

  — Overton (@OvertonLive) May 2, 2024

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

  Let’s see what the frat boys can do at the southern border.

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 18:00

• The Golden Age Of Disinformation Has Only Just Begun
  The Golden Age Of Disinformation Has Only Just Begun

  Authored by Boyan Radoykov via The Epoch Times,

  Disinformation is all about power, and because of the harmful and far-reaching influence that disinformation exerts, it cannot achieve much without power.

  As a tool for shaping public perceptions, disinformation can be used by authoritarian regimes and democracies alike. The dissemination of false information is not a new practice in human history. However, over the last few decades, it has become professionalized and has taken on exorbitant proportions at both national and international levels.

  

  The Origins of Disinformation

  Disinformation can be understood as misleading information, intentionally produced and deliberately disseminated, to mislead public opinion, harm a target group, or advance political or ideological objectives.

  The term disinformation is a translation of the Russian дезинформация (dezinformatsiya). On Jan. 11, 1923, the Politburo of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union decided to create a Department of Disinformation. Its mission was “to mislead real or potential adversaries about the true intentions” of the USSR. From then on, disinformation became a tactic of Soviet political warfare known as “active measures,” a crucial element of Soviet intelligence strategy involving falsification, subversion, and media manipulation.

  During the Cold War, from 1945 to 1989, this tactic was used by numerous intelligence agencies. The expression “disinformation of the masses” came into increasing use in the 1960s and became widespread in the 1980s. Former Soviet bloc intelligence officer Ladislav Bittman, the first disinformation professional to defect to the West, observed in this regard that ”The interpretation [of the term] is slightly distorted because public opinion is only one of the potential targets. Many disinformation games are designed only to manipulate the decision-making elite, and receive no publicity.”

  With its creation in July 1947, the CIA was given two main missions: to prevent surprise foreign attacks against the United States and to hinder the advance of Soviet communism in Europe and Third World countries. During the four decades of the Cold War, the CIA was also at the forefront of U.S. counter-propaganda and disinformation.

  The Soviet Union’s successful test of a nuclear weapon in 1949 caught the United States off guard and led to the advent of the two nuclear powers clashing on the world stage in an international atmosphere of extreme tension, fear, and uncertainty. In 1954, President Dwight Eisenhower received a top-secret report from a commission chaired by retired Gen. James H. Doolittle, which concluded: “If the United States is to survive, long-standing American concepts of ‘fair play’ must be reconsidered. We must develop effective espionage and counterespionage services and must learn to subvert, sabotage and destroy our enemies by more clever, more sophisticated and more effective methods than those used against us. It may become necessary that the American people be acquainted with, understand and support this fundamentally repugnant philosophy.” Of course, “repugnant” philosophy includes subversion through disinformation.

  Although the United States had high expertise in this field, it did not react much to the disinformation that was sent its way until 1980, when a false document claimed that Washington supported apartheid in South Africa. Later on, they also took offense at Operation Denver, a Soviet disinformation campaign aimed at having the world believe that the United States had intentionally created HIV/AIDS.

  In the United States, the intellectual influence of Edward Bernays is at the root of institutional political propaganda and opinion manipulation. A double nephew of Sigmund Freud, he worked as a press agent for Italian tenor Enrico Caruso and for the Ballets Russes. He took part, alongside President Woodrow Wilson, in the Creel Commission (1917), which helped turn American public opinion in favor of going to war. His wife and business partner, Doris Fleischman, advised him to avoid using the overused term “propaganda.” Instead, she coined the term “public relations” to replace it, a term still in use today.

  China and Its Digital Authoritarianism

  In China, deception, lies, and the rewriting of history are disinformation techniques used by the Chinese Communist Party, according to tactics learned in the Soviet Union in the 1950s. Today, the CCP has a sophisticated arsenal of disinformation on all fronts. Its main objectives are to turn public opinion upside down, interfere in foreign political circles, influence elections, discredit its opponents, and hide its own intentions and priorities.

  In September 2021, the French Institute for Strategic Research at the École Militaire published a report on China’s influence operations, which warned: “For a long time, it could be said that China, unlike Russia, sought to be loved rather than feared; that it wanted to seduce, to project a positive image of itself in the world, to arouse admiration. Beijing has not given up on seduction … but, at the same time, Beijing is increasingly taking on the role of infiltrator and coercer: its influence operations have become considerably tougher in recent years, and its methods increasingly resemble those employed by Moscow.”

  On Sept. 28, 2023, the U.S. government published a report in which it accused China of seeking to “reshape the global information landscape” through a vast network specialized in disinformation. “[China’s] global information manipulation is not simply a matter of public diplomacy—but a challenge to the integrity of the global information space.” This “manipulation” encompasses “propaganda, disinformation, and censorship.”

  “Unchecked, [China’s] efforts will reshape the global information landscape, creating biases and gaps that could even lead nations to make decisions that subordinate their economic and security interests to Beijing’s,” according to the report.

  According to the U.S. State Department, China spends billions of dollars every year on these “foreign information manipulation” operations. At the same time, Beijing suppresses critical information that runs counter to its rhetoric on politically sensitive subjects. The report goes on to state that China manipulates information by resorting to “digital authoritarianism,” exploiting international and UN organizations and controlling Chinese-language media abroad.

  When Disinformation Becomes Military Doctrine

  In some countries, policymakers may turn to their national history to justify the implementation of certain regulations on information. German politicians, for example, frequently refer to the Nazi past or that of the communist Stasi to justify the regulations they want to put in place. Yet these historical comparisons don’t always hold water. The Nazis, for example, did not come to power because they controlled the then-new technology of radio. Rather, once in power, they used the state control on radio stations that the previous Weimar governments had put in place—in the hope of saving democracy—to their own benefit. This decision by the Weimar governments had the perverse effect of enabling the Nazis to control radio much more quickly than with newspapers.

  Disinformation is mainly orchestrated by government agencies. In the post-Soviet era, and with the advent of the information society, when the media and social networks became a central relay for the dissemination of fake news, disinformation evolved to become a fundamental tactic in the military doctrine of powerful countries. In the early 2000s, the European Union and NATO realized that the problem of Russian disinformation was such that they had to set up special units to process and debunk mass-produced false information.

  The Methods and Processes of Disinformation

  There are four main methods of spreading disinformation: selective censorship, manipulation of search indexes, hacking and dissemination of fraudulently obtained data, and amplification of disinformation through excessive sharing.

  By way of example, disinformation activities involve the following processes:

  • The creation of fabricated characters or websites with networks of fake experts who disseminate supposedly reliable references.

  • The creation of “deep-fakes” and synthetic media through photos, videos, and audio clips that have been digitally manipulated or entirely fabricated to deceive the public. Today’s artificial intelligence (AI) tools can make synthetic content almost impossible to detect or distinguish from reality.

  • The development or amplification of conspiracy theories, which attempt to explain important events through the secret actions of powerful actors acting in the shadows. Conspiracy theories aim not only to influence people’s understanding of events, but also their behavior and worldview.

  • Astroturfing and inundation of information environments. At the root of disinformation campaigns are huge quantities of similar content, published from fabricated sources or accounts. This practice, called astroturfing, creates the impression of widespread support or opposition to a message while concealing its true origin. A similar tactic, inundation, involves spamming social media posts and comment sections with the aim of shaping a narrative or stifling opposing viewpoints. In recent years, the use of troll factories to spread misleading information on social networks has gained momentum.

  • Exploiting alternative social media platforms to reinforce beliefs in a disinformation narrative. Disinformation actors take advantage of platforms offering fewer protections for users and fewer options for detecting and removing inauthentic content and accounts.

  • Amplification of information gaps, when there isn’t enough credible information to answer a specific search. Misinformation leaders can exploit these gaps by generating their own content and feeding the search.

  • Manipulating unsuspecting protagonists. Disinformation facilitators target high-profile individuals and organizations to corroborate their stories. Targets are often not even aware that they are repeating a disinformation actor’s narrative, or that this narrative is intended to influence or manipulate public opinion.

  • Dissemination of targeted content: The instigators of disinformation produce customized influential content likely to resonate with a specific audience, based on its worldview, beliefs, and interests. It’s a long-term tactic that involves disseminating targeted content over time to build trust and credibility with the target audience, making it easier to manipulate them.

  A Race Against Time to Protect the Younger Generation

  In the early 2000s, most publications about the internet hailed its unprecedented potential for development. Only a few years later, commentators, analysts, and policymakers began to worry that the internet, and social media platforms in particular, posed new threats to democracy, global governance, and the integrity of information.

  Since then, the world has become increasingly interconnected and interdependent, and the opportunities for misinformation have become almost limitless. With more than 5.5 billion internet users and more than 8.58 billion mobile subscriptions worldwide by 2022, compared to a global population of 7.95 billion at mid-year, the great paradox is that the rise of information technology has created a much more conducive, even thriving, environment for misinformation, and that the development of AI is leading to even worse and more rampant misinformation.

  Some experts agree that while online misinformation and propaganda are widespread, it is difficult to determine the extent to which this misinformation has an impact on the public’s political attitudes and, consequently, on political outcomes. Other data have shown that disinformation campaigns rarely succeed in changing the policies of targeted states, but it would be irresponsible to believe that misinformation has little impact. If that were the case, major countries would have abandoned the practice long ago. The opposite is true. With the gradual increase in the foolishness of ruling elites and the rise of new technologies, the policy of destabilization through disinformation has a bright future ahead of it. The risks and stakes remain enormous, and the erosion of public trust in institutions and the media is deeply significant in this regard.

  The fight against disinformation must go beyond simplistic solutions such as shutting down Facebook or X (formerly Twitter) accounts, publicly denouncing the actions of one’s adversary, or containing false information through technical means. And it is certainly not enough to focus on measures such as fact-checking or media education to help individuals master and consume information; the average person carries little weight in the face of government disinformation machines.

  It would therefore be preferable to address the political and economic operating conditions of the structures that facilitate the spread of disinformation, such as large technology companies, the state actors involved, the media, and other information systems.

  Of course, the human factor must remain at the center of leaders’ concerns in the face of growing state and media disinformation. The price of educating young people will always be less than the price of their ignorance.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 05/03/2024 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Fighting Monsters
  Fighting Monsters

  Authored by CJ Hopkins via off-guardian.org,

  

  So, I gave a little speech about art, and war. The Internationale Agentur für Freiheit, a Berlin art and cultural association, asked me to do that to open their exhibition, Make Art Not War. I couldn’t turn them down.

  As my readers may have noticed, I haven’t had very much to say about “The War on Hamas,” or “The War on Gaza,” or “The Liquidation of Gaza,” or whatever you want to call it. (It doesn’t look like much of a “war” to me, but then, nothing really has for quite a while.)

  I wrote about it in October and November of last year. And I said a few things about it in my speech. But, mostly, I’ve been trying to keep my mouth shut. I don’t have much to contribute to the … well, I can’t really call it a discussion, or debate, or an argument. It feels like people screaming slogans into each other’s faces, accusing each other of this and that, and calling each other names, and so on. Which … I get why people are inclined to do that. I’m not. But I get why other folks are. So, I think it’s best if I just shut my pie hole (as much as possible) and let folks do that.

  It isn’t going to change what’s happening. GloboCap (or whatever you call the system we’re all living under) has been occupying, destabilizing, and restructuring the Middle East for decades. It’s not going to stop. It is going to continue. As the restructuring of the West is going to continue.

  GloboCap doesn’t have anything else to do.

  Anyway, before I ramble on any further, here’s the English version of the speech I gave at the exhibition. Many thanks to those of you who attended … and apologies again for my German. I’ll get the hang of it one of these days.

  Fighting Monsters

  The name of this exhibition is “Make Art not War.” So I’m going to say a few things about art, and war. You’re not going to like all of them. Or at least I hope not. If you did, I wouldn’t be a very good artist, but I might be a pretty good propagandist.

  I grew up in the 1960s and 70s. In the USA. The war was on television. In Vietnam. Cambodia. Cuba. The Middle East. Then in El Salvador. Nicaragua. Iran. Libya. Yugoslavia. Afghanistan. Iraq. The list goes on and on. I am almost 63 years old. All my life we’ve been at war. Not just Americans. All of us. People. Someone always at war with someone. And all my life there have been other people calling for peace. Protesting the war. Whatever war it was at the time.

  If you read a little history, as I like to do sometimes, you will learn that someone has been at war with someone over something since the dawn of civilization. Certainly Western civilization. The history of Western art and literature begins with war. Genocidal war. The Illiad is a poem about a genocidal war. Rape. Mass murder. The slaughter of children. Most of Shakespeare’s plays are about war, or are set during a war, or have something to do with someone killing someone over something.

  Some of that history happened right here. There are bunkers below us where people sheltered during the bombing raids in the Second World War. Legend has it the Stasi operated listening stations right here in these rooms. When I first arrived in Berlin, twenty years ago, I lived in a sublet on this street. This was my neighborhood, the Bötzowviertel. There were still bullet holes in the facades of buildings. People died here. Civilians. Children. Women were raped here. Families were dragged out of their homes and sent to the death camps here. This is Berlin. You know the history. I don’t need to recite all the details.

  What’s my point? Well, my point is … that is war. Indiscriminate killing. Rape. Mass atrocities. That’s what war is. That is what it has always been. And we’ve been doing it to each other since the dawn of civilization. It is not going to stop. We are not going to stop it. Art is certainly not going to stop it. We are, whether we like it or not, a violent species, human beings. It isn’t all we are, but it is part of what we are. We are also lovers, teachers, healers, artists, and other beautiful things. But sometimes we are vicious killers. Monsters. Genocidal monsters.

  A crazy old German philosopher once warned us, “beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster.” He was joking, of course. There are no monsters. Or, rather, there are only monsters, on every side of every war. In a war, there are no good guys and bad guys. There is just our side and the other side. Our atrocities and their atrocities. And whoever wins gets to write the history.

  That’s it. The rest is propaganda. Their propaganda and our propaganda. Of course, our propaganda is not propaganda. Our propaganda is just the truth. Because we’re not monsters. They are the monsters.

  This is Day 202 of Israel’s war on Hamas, or its liquidation of Gaza, depending on your perspective. I haven’t said too much about it publicly. I said a few things about it when it began. That didn’t go well. No one was listening. The propaganda from both sides was already deafening. I described the Hamas attack as mass murder. My pro-Palestinian readers didn’t like that. I described Israel as a typical mass-murdering nation-state, no different than the United States of America, Germany, France, Spain, The Netherlands, the Soviet Union, the British empire, the Ottoman empire, the Holy Roman Empire, or any other mass-murdering nation-state or empire. My pro-Israeli readers didn’t like that. Neither side wanted to hear about history. The history of asymmetric warfare, or terrorism, depending on your perspective. The history of nation-states and empires. They wanted to hear a story about monsters. About the monsters on the other side.

  I told you you weren’t going to like everything I said, right?

  OK, let me say a few things about art now. If you didn’t like what I said about war, maybe you’ll like what I say about art. I can’t speak for other artists, but I’ll tell you why I think I became an artist, and what I have been trying to do as an artist.

  I haven’t been trying to stop any wars. Or to pacify the human species. I don’t know how to do either of those things. And I am not a fan of propaganda. I confess, I have engaged in it from time to time, but mostly what I’ve been trying to do is deprogram minds, starting with my own.

  We are all, by the time we realize we exist, the products of programming, ideological conditioning. I believe it is the job of artists to undo that, or at least to marginally interfere with it. That’s what art, and artists, did for me. They introduced me to my mind. My programmed mind. They forced me to think, and to see, and listen. They taught me to question, to pay attention. They dared me to deprogram my mind, and provided me with the tools to do it. OK, sure, some mind-altering drugs also helped, but it was artists that introduced me to those drugs. Then they introduced me to the monster I’ve been fighting.

  I have been fighting this monster, in my art, in my mind, and out in the world for as long I remember. You have to fight it everywhere at once. To fight it in your mind, you have to fight it out in the world. And to fight it out in the world, you have to fight it in your mind.

  Let me tell you about the monster.

  The monster is legion. It goes by many names. It wears many faces. They change over time. William S. Burroughs called it “The Control Machine.” Some people call it the corporatocracy. I call it global capitalism. The monster doesn’t care what we call it. It doesn’t care who we are, what our politics are, or which side of what war we think we are on. It doesn’t care what we believe, which religion we profess. It couldn’t care less how we “identify.”

  All it cares about is power. All it cares about is control.

  It is everywhere, and nowhere. It has no country. No nationality. It doesn’t exist. It is everything, and nothing. It is the non-existent empire occupying the entire planet. It has no external enemies because there is no outside, not anymore. So there is no real war. There are only insurrections, carried out by rebels, traitors, terrorists.

  The monster, our non-existent empire, is the first global empire in human history. It is not a group of evil people. It is maintained by people, but they are all interchangeable. It has no headquarters. There is no emperor. There isn’t any “Bastille” to storm. It is a logos. A system. An operating system.

  It has no politics, no ideology. Its official ideology is “reality.” Thus it has no political opposition. Who would argue against or oppose “reality”? Lunatics. Extremists. The terminally deranged. And thus there are no dissidents, no opposing political parties. There are only apostates, heretics, blasphemers, sowers of discord, “reality” deniers.

  It manufactures “reality.” Whatever “reality” it needs. The War on Terror. The War on Populism. The War on the Virus. The War on the Weather. The War on Hate. The War on Whatever. It doesn’t matter. It is all the same war. The same “Clear-and-Hold” op. The same counterinsurgency. It has been for about 30 years.

  If things seem crazy, if you’re wondering what’s happening, that is what’s happening. That is all that is happening. That is all that has been happening since the end of the Cold War.

  The empire is eliminating internal resistance, any and all forms of internal resistance. The monster is monsterizing everything and everyone. Transforming societies into markets. It doesn’t have anything else to do. It is erasing values. It is dissolving borders. It is “sensitivity-editing” culture. Synchronizing everything and everyone in conformity to its only value … money. Rendering everything a commodity.

  It is the apotheosis of liberal democracy, the part where the monster does away with democracy, with the simulation of democracy, and proclaims itself “democracy.” It is global-capitalist Gleichschaltung.

  That’s the monster I have been fighting.

  Which makes me a terrorist. A conspiracy theorist. A Russian propagandist. A Covid denier. A right-wing extremist. An anti-vaxxer. An anti-Semite. A transphobic racist. An enemy of “democracy.” A Hamas supporter. A Donald Trump supporter. An AfD supporter. Whatever the official enemy happens to be today.

  It makes me a criminal. A thought criminal. An art criminal.

  Which I literally am. The German authorities are prosecuting me for disseminating art. For tweeting art. Pictures. Words. They banned one of my books. So maybe I’m marginally interfering with their ideological conditioning, with their programming, with their New Normal Gleichschaltung op.

  If so, good, because, if I can quote another German, “art is not a mirror held up to reality, it is a hammer to shape reality with.”

  And I’ll go a little further than Brecht. Every work of art we make shapes reality one way or another, whether we intend it to or not. It either feeds the monster or it fucks with the monster. The monster out there, and the monster in here, inside us, all of us … because it’s all the same monster.

  Thank you, all of you who are fucking with the monster. That is all. Let’s keep it up.

  CJ Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing, Inc. His dystopian novel, Zone 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. Volumes I and II of his Consent Factory Essays are published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 05/02/2024 – 02:00

• China Humiliated Blinken But Blinken Kept Begging
  China Humiliated Blinken But Blinken Kept Begging

  Authored by Gordon Chang via The Gatestone Institute,

  It is not clear whether a Chinese official was at the Beijing airport to bid farewell to Secretary of State Antony Blinken as he ended his three-day visit to China on Friday, but the send-off was in any event low-key and Chinese leader Xi Jinping slighted America’s top diplomat at the end of his troubled stay.

  Also, China, literally and figuratively, did not roll out the red carpet for his arrival in Shanghai on Wednesday. Only a low-level official was on hand to greet Blinken as he stepped off the plane.

  “The Chinese government flouted international protocols at the airport on the secretary of state’s arrival in Shanghai and departure from Beijing,” Charles Burton of the Prague-based Sinopsis think tank told Gatestone.

  “It was petty.”

  “This was more than a slight,” Burton, a former Canadian diplomat who served in Beijing, said.

  “Aside from a calculated insult to the dignity of the United States, the move indicates Xi Jinping is making clear that the accepted norms of diplomacy will not be respected by China anymore.”

  

  Blinken was in China to discuss the growing list of disagreements between Washington and Beijing. Not surprisingly, he did not accomplish anything there other than register America’s complaints on matters such as Beijing’s support for the Russian war effort in Ukraine and unfair treatment of U.S. companies. On every major issue, the U.S. and China take different sides, and the Chinese have clearly dug in. Blinken was reduced to begging.

  As a result, America is resorting to the dialogue-is-progress narrative. “I think it’s important to underscore the value—in fact, the necessity—of direct engagement, of sustained engagement, of speaking to each other, laying out our differences which are real, seeking to work through them, as also looking for ways to build cooperation where we can,” Blinken said to Chen Jining, Communist Party secretary of Shanghai, ahead of his talks in the Chinese capital.

  After the end of fruitless sessions in Beijing—Blinken met with, among others, President Xi Jinping and Foreign Minister Wang Yi—all the secretary of state could do is highlight new dialogue issues.

  “I’m pleased to announce that earlier today, we agreed to hold the first U.S.-PRC talks on artificial intelligence to be held in the coming weeks,” he said at a press availability on April 26, as he wrapped up his trip to China.

  “We’ll share our respective views on the risks and safety concerns around advanced AI and how best to manage them.”

  Blinken’s comments repeated those of President Joe Biden after his November 15 meeting with Xi Jinping in Woodside, California. In substance, therefore, Blinken in Beijing continued talking about talking.

  There is no question that AI is an important topic, especially when it comes to the control of nuclear weapons. Yet this does not mean the U.S. should seek an agreement with China on that topic.

  “The latest shambolic display by the Biden administration comes in the form of Secretary of State Antony Blinken groveling before China’s Ruler-for-Life Xi Jinping for a new set of protocols for governing the development of artificial intelligence between America and China, the two nations contributing the most to both the advancement of AI and its weaponization,” Brandon Weichert, a national security analyst at The National Interest, told Gatestone.

  “Although creating such protocols may sound like a good idea, it seems like a bad idea for Washington to unilaterally agree to limit its own activities.”

  “Unilaterally”? Burton and Weichert point out that China never honors agreements, so any deal with Beijing is akin to a unilateral promise.

  “China is deeply committed to the weaponization of AI and would be counting its lucky communist star if the Americans basically deterred themselves with such a protocol,” Weichert, also author of Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, added.

  He suggests the United States spend its time getting the world to restrict tech trade with China “rather than pleading with Xi Jinping for mercy.”

  On the AI front, the Biden administration to its credit has been restricting sales of chips and chip-making equipment and has been coercing cooperation from others, most notably the Netherlands, the home of equipment-maker ASML.

  Nonetheless, Biden needs to do more: China has been able to buy chips on the black market. For instance, Reuters reported this month that ten Chinese entities were able, despite U.S. rules, to acquire Nvidia’s artificial intelligence chips through resellers.

  The risk now is that the Biden administration will trade away its restrictions for meaningless promises from China’s Communists.

  Biden is willing to sign agreements with China’s regime because he believes it is merely a “competitor,” refusing to label it an adversary and certainly not using the term that the Chinese Communist Party reserves for America: enemy. He and his predecessors have not wanted to acknowledge that the Party, as it openly proclaims, seeks the destruction of the United States.

  Enemy? In May 2019, People’s Daily, the Party’s self-described “mouthpiece” and therefore the most authoritative publication in China, carried a landmark piece declaring a “people’s war” on America.

  This phrase has special meaning. “A people’s war is a total war, and its strategy and tactics require the overall mobilization of political, economic, cultural, diplomatic, military, and other power resources, the integrated use of multiple forms of struggle and combat methods,” declared a column carried in April 2023 by PLA Daily, an official news website of the People’s Liberation Army.

  Therefore, Biden’s measures, like those of presidents before him, have been inadequate.

  America still suffers from an inability to appreciate the hostility and maliciousness of the Communist Party. Blinken left China talking about how it was in America’s interest for China to prosper. China’s regime, however, fueled with American investment and trade, has been waging “unrestricted warfare” against the United States for decades. Beijing’s unrestricted warfare has included the killing tens of thousands of Americans each year with fentanyl, the equivalent of one plane crash every day and more American deaths than in the Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq wars combined.

  Now, Xi thinks he has the upper hand. From the moment Blinken touched down in Shanghai to the moment he left, China’s ruler went out of his way to humiliate the secretary of state. The secretary of state, however, exhibited inexhaustible patience for humiliation.

  Unfortunately, acceptance of rough treatment has consequences, because the meekness leads the Chinese to think they can do what they want, making them even more arrogant and aggressive. Biden has yet to figure that out.

  Xi met Blinken on Friday, but China’s leader let the cameras record his disdain for his visitor. Seconds before the secretary of state walked half-way across the room to shake hands, Xi asked an aide, “When will he leave?”

  “Not soon enough,” Blinken should have replied.

  The secretary of state should never have gone to China in the first place.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 23:45

• Visualizing The Size Of The Global Senior Population
  Visualizing The Size Of The Global Senior Population

  The growth of the senior population is a consequence of the demographic transition towards longer and healthier lives. Population aging, however, can pose economic and social challenges.

  Here, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu maps the size of the world’s population aged 65+ for 1980, 2021, and 2050 (projected). The data is from the World Social Report 2023 by the United Nations.

  

  Global Aging

  Currently, population aging is most advanced in Europe, Northern America, Australia, New Zealand, and parts Eastern and Southeastern Asia.

  According to the UN, in most countries in these regions, the proportion of older persons exceeds 10%, and in some cases, 20% of the total population.

  

  Most parts of sub-Saharan Africa and Oceania (excluding Australia and New Zealand) are still in an early stage of this transition, while most countries in Central and Southern Asia, Western Asia and Northern Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean are at an intermediate stage.

  The size of the world’s senior population isn’t just growing in absolute numbers; it’s also growing as a share of the overall total. For example, in 2021, 1 in 10 people worldwide were over 65. By 2050, this is likely to be around 1 in 6.

  While the shift towards older populations is largely irreversible, some critical measures are necessary to guarantee this transition. These include financial support for the senior population through pension plans, budgeting healthcare and long-term care costs, and implementing measures to adapt and innovate in labor markets to include seniors.

  The Global Senior Population in 2100

  What will the global senior population look like in the future? For more on that, look at this chart which highlights aging projections by country based on data and projections from the United Nations.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 23:25

• Japan's Warning For America
  Japan’s Warning For America

  Authored by Michael Wilkerson via The Epoch Times,

  Last week, Japan saw its currency, the yen, rapidly depreciate against the U.S. dollar and other world currencies to near record low levels. This drew the attention of financial markets and other observers, and—in some quarters—led to panic. There was concern that Japan, a formerly great nation now increasingly viewed as the “sick man of Asia,” was on the brink of a currency and financial markets crisis.

  

  It wasn’t so long ago that Japan was the envy of the world. Japan’s postwar recovery and subsequent economic miracle produced by the 1980s the world’s second-largest economy after the United States. Numerous Japanese multinational corporations were admired by the business world as a result of their growth, efficiency, and managerial discipline. The state and big business were closely aligned in what appeared an unstoppable formula. Flush with cash and confidence, Japanese companies and investors were aggressively expansionist, acquiring market share, trophy properties, resources, and businesses in the United States and elsewhere. Much like concerns about China today, fears then abounded that Japan would overtake the United States as the global economic leader.

  These fears were unfounded. “Japan Inc.” was a house built on a faulty foundation. Overly accommodative easy money, along with high leverage throughout the financial and corporate sectors, facilitated a massive stock market and real estate bubble, which eventually burst in 1990. The crash led to a depression from which Japan has never recovered, even after three decades. The question is, why not? Herein lies a lesson for the United States.

  Repeated government bailouts of failing financial and industrial companies have perpetuated Japan’s crisis. Japan’s leaders and policies have repeatedly blocked the process of creative destruction, which—if allowed to run its course and cleanse the system—would have been a massive stimulus to entrepreneurship and economic vitality. However, rather than allow capitalism to work, the Japanese system doomed the country to a generation of stagnation.

  As a result, Japan has endured three “lost decades” of weak economic growth, diminished purchasing power, lower and lower standards of living, loss of prestige and influence in the global community, and an aging population that the island nation’s resources are straining to support.

  Japan now has the world’s highest government debt-to-GDP ratio, at 264 percent. Japan’s banks are walking zombies, unable to grow or lend because they have never restructured their balance sheets to clean up massive piles of debt left over from excesses of previous decades. The Bank of Japan (BOJ) holds government bonds and other assets equal to 127 percent of Japan’s GDP, the highest ratio of any central bank in the world. This portfolio resulted in over $70 billion in unrealized losses for the BOJ in six months of 2023 alone.

  The Japanese yen has devalued against the U.S. dollar by more than 30 percent in just three years since 2021. Since the global financial crisis 2008–09, the yen has lost 75 percent of its value against gold. Because of Japan’s high reliance on imports, this loss of purchasing power has translated directly into a substantially lower standard of living for the Japanese people. In theory, Japan could support the yen by raising interest rates, but this is a political, monetary, and fiscal impossibility.

  Decades of easy money policies are a central culprit and cause of this slow-moving trainwreck.

  The Bank of Japan only began raising interest rates this March, some three years after the United States and the European Union brought their own easy money policies to an end. This was the first time the BOJ has raised rates since 2007, a move that pulled the official rate out of negative territory. Nonetheless, with inflation now approaching 2 percent, a short-term policy rate of zero to 0.1 percent means that real rates remain around negative 2 percent. This serves as an additional tax on Japanese households and an intended stimulus to spend today rather than save for tomorrow.

  Money essentially is free in Japan, but no one can afford to borrow it, even if the banks can manage to lend it. The BOJ and the entire banking system stand in the penumbra of insolvency. Only Japan’s decade-long zero interest-rate policy has allowed Japan’s decrepit financial system to continue to stand following the 2008 financial crisis and the effects of COVID economic shutdowns. Japan cannot afford to raise interest rates to support its currency more than nominally above the zero bound without substantially raising debt service costs and exploding losses. This would bring the entire rickety system to the ground.

  A growing economy might help ease the burden, but Japan’s economy is moribund. This is not surprising, as meaningful growth is impossible under mountains of debt. GDP shrank by 0.8 percent in the third quarter and eked out 0.1 percent growth in the fourth quarter. While the country thus barely escaped technical recession (two consecutive quarters of GDP decline), Japan hasn’t posted GDP growth above 2 percent in more than 20 years, save for two rebound quarters after the global shocks of the financial crisis and COVID.

  Japan represents a slow-moving demographic disaster. Japan has the oldest median population of any major country in the world and the lowest fertility rate at 1.37. Japan’s fertility rate has been below the minimum population replacement rate (2.1) for 40 years, meaning that the country is both aging and losing economic productivity, and it is probably too late to reverse it.

  This all represents a grave warning to the United States.

  The U.S. government is chasing Japan for the ignoble title of most indebted nation. Overly indebted nations cannot grow. With federal government debt to GDP of 129 percent, a ratio which is increasing rapidly, the United States is now the fourth most indebted country in the world. Debt is growing more quickly now because the federal government refuses to wean itself off of deficit spending, including an additional $1.7 trillion in 2023, which must be funded by new debt, as must over $1 trillion in interest expense. This debt—and the cost to service it—acts as a drag on our economy. Deficit spending and the borrowing required to support it crowds out private market investment and financings.

  Rather than let more insolvent banks and unprofitable firms fail, U.S. monetary policy since at least the 2008 financial crisis has propped up bad business models—and the asset values of otherwise worthless investments—by subsidizing the cost of capital well below the natural rate of interest. In a nation that has been the standard bearer and exporter of capitalism for more than two centuries, socialistic government policies are preventing capitalism from working at home. This will eventually catch up with our financial markets and economy, just as it did for Japan.

  It is not just shortsighted monetary and financial policy that threatens U.S. competitiveness.

  If Americans’ worsening attitudes toward the importance of marriage and children do not reverse course dramatically, the United States will face the same demographic fate as Japan. The fertility rate in the United States has been in decline since at least 2008, and reached a record low of 1.62 in 2023. This is well below the replacement rate, and thus unsustainable.

  Progressives point to declining fertility rates and aging populations to justify mass illegal immigration, but this is a red herring. Bringing tens of millions of unskilled, uneducated, and culturally unassimilated migrants into the nation is not a benefit but rather an untenable burden on social infrastructure, an enervating drain on economic productivity, and an unbearable tax on legal citizens.

  At least Japan got that part right.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 23:05

• South Koreans & Lithuanians Have The Highest Rate Of Suicide In the World
  South Koreans & Lithuanians Have The Highest Rate Of Suicide In the World

  May is Mental Health Awareness Month in the United States.

  According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, participants use the month to focus efforts on “eradicating stigma, extending support, fostering public education and advocating for policies that prioritize the well-being of individuals and families affected by mental illness.”

  The topic of suicide is an important part of this conversation. As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the following chart, it is a truly global issue, even though estimated rates vary around the world. For example, according to OECD data, out of every 100,000 men in the United States an average of 23 committed suicide in 2021, while for women the average was close to six per 100,000. In several countries these figures are even higher, such as in South Korea, Lithuania and Hungary.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  While there are significant differences between countries, one pattern is clear to see: the rates of men taking their own lives are higher than women in each of the 15 countries selected here.

  South Korea and Lithuania had the highest rates of suicide among men in 2022 (out of the countries reporting data), at 34.9 and 33.1 cases per 100,000 population, respectively.

  For women, South Korea and Japan had the highest rates of the selected countries, with 14.9 and 9.8.

  If you or somebody you know are in need of help, you can find a list of suicide crisis lines and website for countries around the world here.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 22:45

• CDC Found Evidence COVID-19 Vaccines Caused Deaths
  CDC Found Evidence COVID-19 Vaccines Caused Deaths

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials found evidence that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines caused multiple deaths before claiming that there was no evidence linking the vaccines to any deaths, The Epoch Times has learned.

  

  CDC employees worked to track down information on reported post-vaccination deaths and learned that myocarditis—or heart inflammation, a confirmed side effect of the vaccines—was listed on death certificates and in autopsies for some of the deaths, according to an internal file obtained by The Epoch Times.

  Myocarditis was also described as being caused by vaccination in a subset of the deaths.

  In other cases, the CDC workers found that deaths met the agency’s definition for myocarditis, that the patients started showing symptoms within 42 days of a vaccine dose, and that the deceased displayed no virus-related symptoms. Officials say that after 42 days, a possible link between the vaccine and symptoms becomes tenuous, and they list post-vaccination deaths as unrelated if they can find any possible alternative causes.

  In cases with those three features, it’s “absolutely” safe to say that the vaccines caused the deaths, Dr. Clare Craig, a British pathologist and co-chair of the Health Advisory and Recovery Team Group, told The Epoch Times in an email.

  Despite the findings, most of which were made by the end of 2021, the CDC claimed that it had seen no signs linking the Moderna and Pfizer messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines to any deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

  CDC officials in a letter to The Epoch Times dated June 13, 2023, said that there were no deaths reported to the VAERS for which the agency determined “the available evidence” indicated Moderna or Pfizer vaccination “caused or contributed to the deaths.”

  The agency also said that evidence from seven deaths from thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome following the Johnson & Johnson vaccination suggested that the vaccine led to people dying.

  “That’s a scandal, where you have information like this and you continue to put out this dishonest line that there’s only seven deaths and they’re all unrelated to the mRNA vaccines,” Dr. Andrew Bostom, a heart expert based in the United States, told The Epoch Times.

  The CDC is “concealing these deaths,” he said.

  A CDC spokeswoman, presented with the file and dozens of questions about it, said that “determining a person’s cause of death is done by the certifying official, physician, medical examiner, or coroner, who completes the death certificate.”

  The spokeswoman declined to explain why the CDC doesn’t consider autopsies or death certificates as evidence of causality, the criteria that would establish vaccine-caused deaths, or whether the numbers have been updated since 2023. She also declined to answer questions about specific deaths outlined in the file, citing “privacy and confidentiality.”

  People who die in the United States with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 are counted as COVID-19 deaths. That count has included a number of deaths from unrelated causes. The CDC also in 2023 advised death certifiers to include COVID-19 on certificates even if the deaths happened years after COVID-19 infection.

  “They are taking the exact opposite approach to COVID deaths! Every death after a test was a COVID death. No death after a vaccine is a vaccine death!” Dr. Craig said. She questioned what it would take for the CDC to admit that the vaccines have caused some myocarditis-related deaths.

  

  More People Died

  The file, acquired by The Epoch Times through a Freedom of Information Act request, has never before been reported. The file was obtained after U.S. authorities rejected another Freedom of Information Act request for the autopsies themselves. The file outlines the agency’s investigation into reports submitted to VAERS of suspected cases of myocarditis or a related condition, pericarditis, following COVID-19 vaccination.

  CDC employees, starting in April 2021, contacted health care providers and other agencies to obtain medical records, death certificates, and autopsies as they sought to confirm whether each report was legitimate.

  The file shows the CDC examined 3,780 reports through April 13, 2023, a small number of which were duplicates. Among the reported cases, 101 resulted in death.

  In one instance, a 37-year-old man started suffering symptoms that can be caused by myocarditis, such as shortness of breath, shortly after receiving a Moderna COVID-19 shot. The man collapsed three days after vaccination and was soon pronounced dead.

  Dr. Darinka Mileusnic, the medical examiner who examined the man, said in an autopsy report that the patient died of “post vaccination systemic inflammation response” which caused, among other problems, acute myocarditis, according to the CDC file.

  The CDC worker who was assigned to look into the death wrote that it was “evident of a sudden death post second dose of Moderna vaccine.”

  “One of the factor[s] to death [sic] is acute myocarditis. There are other findings related to VAE [vaccine adverse event] and non vaccine related. Thus, it can’t be distinguished that only vaccine may have caused the death,” the CDC employee wrote.

  Dr. Mileusnic declined a request for comment through her employer, the Knox County Regional Forensic Center in Tennessee. The center said it would only provide an autopsy report if the decedent’s name and date of death were provided. The CDC file did not include names.

  

  After another man, 24, died on Oct. 27, 2021, about two months after receiving a second Pfizer injection, his health care provider diagnosed him with myocarditis. An autopsy listed “complications of COVID-19 vaccine-related myocarditis” as the cause of death, according to the file.

  A post-mortem test for COVID-19 returned negative, there were no viral organisms found in post-mortem testing of the heart, and there were no other signs of viruses causing the myocarditis, the notes show.

  Another vaccine recipient, a 77-year-old man, was found dead at home on Nov. 14, 2021. The autopsy confirmed the man had pericarditis and listed the cause of death as “complications from the COV-19 booster,” according to the file.

  The CDC worker who looked at that case said it met the CDC’s definition of pericarditis based on the autopsy and death certificate but noted there were comorbidities such as coronary artery disease that were listed as contributing to the death. The patient also received shots against influenza and shingles about two months before death, so “it is difficult to say that COV-19 vaccine alone caused pericarditis,” the worker wrote.

  A voicemail left for the man’s doctor was not returned.

  Among other deaths in the CDC file are:

  • A male, whose age was redacted, suffered sudden cardiac death in April 2021 following a Johnson & Johnson vaccination. He was diagnosed with myocarditis, which was confirmed by the medical examiner. A CDC worker stated that the case did not technically meet the agency’s case definition, but they would “consider probable subclinical myocarditis, given the histopathological findings.”
  • A 21-year-old woman who died in 2021 after seizures and cardiac arrhythmias following Pfizer vaccination was found on autopsy to have lymphocytic myocarditis. The CDC listed her case as confirmed myocarditis with no evidence of viral causes.
  • A 45-year-old man was found dead in his bed in 2021 after Moderna vaccination but testing for myocarditis and pericarditis was not performed.
  • A 55-year-old woman who was “found unresponsive in [a] field” in 2021 after Johnson & Johnson vaccination was confirmed on autopsy to have myocarditis and to have suffered a cardiac arrest. The death met the CDC’s case definition but concurrent upper respiratory infection “makes viral myocarditis a potential alternative cause,” a CDC worker stated. The medical examiner declined to comment.

  

  Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson did not return requests for comment.

  Lot numbers for the vaccines injected into people who died were among the information in the file redacted by the CDC. Some vaccine lots have caused significantly more problems than others, according to CDC data obtained by the nonprofit Informed Consent Action Network.

  Deaths in other countries from vaccine-induced myocarditis have been reported in journals, including deaths among young people. More deaths from vaccines in cases that didn’t include myocarditis have been confirmed by international authorities. Death certificates obtained by The Epoch Times from several U.S. states have also listed the COVID-19 vaccines as causing or contributing to dozens of deaths.

  

  Overruling

  The file and a tranche of emails also obtained by The Epoch Times shows the agency started intervening shortly after the vaccines were introduced in post-vaccination cases that led to death and sometimes overruled the certifier.

  Take the case of a 23-year-old man who left home on April 13, 2021, to go for a jog and was found dead on the side of the road. His death occurred four days after receiving Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 22:25

• Colombian Government Severs Relations With Israel
  Colombian Government Severs Relations With Israel

  It’s been no secret that the fiercest and most sustained criticism of Israel’s military operation in Gaza has come from Global South countries. Many of these have also supported South Africa’s taking Israel before the International Criminal Court (ICC) on allegations of genocide.

  But now the next big step is taking place: governments are formally severing ties with Israel and expelling diplomats. On Wednesday Colombian President Gustavo Petro announced that his country will cut relations with Israel over what he called its “genocidal” war against Palestinians. He said this will be formally initiated starting Thursday.

  

  “Tomorrow (Thursday) diplomatic relations with the state of Israel will be severed… for having a genocidal president,”  Petro told a May Day rally in Bogota.

  “If Palestine dies, humanity dies, and we will not let it die,” he said at one point in the speech. Petro is Colombia’s first ever leftist president, and he proclaimed that “democratic peoples cannot allow Nazism to reestablish itself in international politics.”

  However, Bloomberg has noted that his motives could partly be to distract from the ongoing economic crisis in the country:

  Petro is looking to counter large anti-government rallies that took place on April 21 and said his administration will send a package of bills to congress meant to boost economic growth.

  The package will include measures that force the financial sector to provide cheap financing to productive sectors, Petro said.

  “It will consist of bills that generate forced investment in the Colombian private financial system aimed at credits for small, medium, and large industries, agriculture, and tourism in Colombia, to reactivate the country,” he said.

  President Petro has for months been a fiery vocal critic of Israel, having first threatened to sever relations with Israel back in March. Already Bolivia had cut ties with Israel by the end of October as the Gaza offensive entered full swing.

  NOW – Socialist president of Colombia: “Tomorrow diplomatic relations will be broken with Israel due to having a genocidal president.”pic.twitter.com/FbkVBnaHIn

  — Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) May 1, 2024

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

  At that time Foreign Minister Israel Katz had condemned the Colombian leader’s call to cut ties, writing on X that his support for “the Hamas murderers who carried out terrible acts of slaughter and sexual crimes against babies, women and adults is a disgrace to the Colombian people.”

  “Israel will continue to defend its citizens and will not give in to any pressure or threats,” Katz had declared at the time. Israel has already halted security exports to Colombia as of last year following the worsening rift with Bogota in the wake of Oct.7.

  Tel Aviv fears that such dramatic actions by Global South and non-aligned governments could spread, damaging trade in some corners of the globe and its standing on the world stage. A similar domino-effect momentum also happened in the late 20th century with apartheid-era South Africa.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 22:05

• 'Unacceptable': Trump Campaign Slams Commission's Refusal To Hold Earlier Debates
  ‘Unacceptable’: Trump Campaign Slams Commission’s Refusal To Hold Earlier Debates

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Trump campaign on Tuesday issued a rebuke of the Commission on Presidential Debates’ refusal to move up its debate schedule until after millions of Americans have already cast their ballots, calling it “unacceptable” and a “grave disservice” to the electorate.

  

  In a statement, former President Donald Trump’s campaign representatives Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles intensified criticism of the body that sponsors all general election presidential debates. Previously, they had requested debates to be held “much earlier” than the commission’s planned first debate in mid-September.

  The Trump campaign repeated its argument that voters deserve to hear from both candidates before they begin casting their votes.

  “The Presidential Debate Commission’s schedule does not begin until after millions of Americans will have already cast their ballots. This is unacceptable, and by refusing to move up the debates, they are doing a grave disservice to the American public who deserve to hear from both candidates before voting begins,” the statement read.

  The statement comes after the nonprofit commission told Fox News that it would stick with its debate schedule, which was released last November. Four debates are planned: three presidential and one vice presidential.

  The first presidential debate takes place on Sept. 16 at Texas State University in San Marcos; the second takes place on Oct. 1 at Virginia State University in Petersburg; and the third takes place on Oct. 9 at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.

  The commission said that it “is proceeding with production and broadcast plans at its four debate sites as also announced on November 20, 2023.”

  The Trump campaign had pressed the commission to provide debates sooner and with greater frequency, particularly now that both 2024 contenders have secured the necessary delegates to become their respective parties’ presumptive nominees.

  In a letter penned to the commission earlier this year, the Trump campaign wrote: “The Commission must move up the timetable of its proposed 2024 debates to ensure more Americans have a full chance to see the candidates before they start voting, and we would argue for adding more debates in addition to those on the currently proposed schedule.”

  The Trump campaign’s push for earlier debates comes as President Trump applies pressure on President Joe Biden to engage in head-to-head debates.

  The Biden campaign has largely avoided addressing debates directly with President Trump, but last week, President Biden said that he’s “happy” to debate President Trump.

  “I am, somewhere, I don’t know when,” President Biden said when asked about debating his Republican opponent during an interview with radio personality Howard Stern. “I’m happy to debate him.”

  Following these remarks, President Trump took to Truth Social to press the president for a debate.

  

  “Crooked Joe Biden just announced that he’s willing to debate! Everyone knows he doesn’t really mean it, but in case he does, I say, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME, ANYPLACE, an old expression used by Fighters,” President Trump wrote on Truth Social.

  In March, following his State of the Union address, President Biden said that a debate with President Trump “would depend upon his behavior.” The Biden administration has also cited concerns over finding a fair moderator.

  Last week, following President Biden’s remarks agreeing to debate, President Trump suggested any location, including the White House, as a venue.

  President Trump, according to the campaign’s Tuesday statement, remains committed to debating President Joe Biden “anytime, anywhere, anyplace.”

  His campaign suggested on Tuesday that he could circumvent the body that’s sponsored all general election presidential debates for decades.

  “We are committed to making this happen with or without the Presidential Debate Commission. We extend an invitation to every television network in America that wishes to host a debate, and we once again call on Joe Biden’s team to work with us to set one up as soon as possible. The American people deserve it,” Mr. LaCivita and Ms. Wiles added.

  The commission’s schedule includes a vice presidential debate on Sept. 25 at Lafayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania.

  The Epoch Times contacted the Commission on Presidential Debates for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 21:45

• "It Was Brutal": 2nd Boeing-Linked Whistleblower Dies
  “It Was Brutal”: 2nd Boeing-Linked Whistleblower Dies

  A whistleblower at Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems died Tuesday morning following a struggle with a ‘sudden, fast-spreading infection,’ the Seattle Times reports.

  

  45-year-old Joshua Dean, a former mechanical engineer and quality auditor from Wichita, Kansas, alleged that Spirit leadership ignored manufacturing defects on the 737 MAX, including ‘mechanics improperly drilling holes in the aft pressure bulkhead of the MAX.’ When he brought this up with management, he said that nothing was done about it. So he filed a safety complaint with the FAA – and said that Spirit had used him as a scapegoat while they lied to the agency about the defects.

  “After I was fired, Spirit AeroSystems [initially] did nothing to inform the FAA, and the public” regarding the bulkhead defects, said Dean in his complaint.

  In November, the FAA suggested to Dean in a letter that his claims had merit, writing “The investigation determined that your allegations were appropriately addressed under an FAA-approved safety program,” adding “However, due to the privacy provisions of those programs, specific details cannot be released.”

  Dean also gave a deposition in a Spirit shareholder lawsuit.

  The shareholder lawsuit alleging that Spirit management withheld information on the quality flaws and harmed stockholders was filed in December. Supporting the suit, Dean provided a deposition detailing his allegations.

  After a panel blew off a Boeing 737 MAX plane in January, bringing new attention to the quality lapses at Spirit, one of Dean’s former Spirit colleagues confirmed some of Dean’s allegations. -Seattle Times

  He had been in good health, and ‘was noted for having a healthy lifestyle,’ according to the report.

  He had been in critical condition for two weeks, according to his aunt Carol Parsons, who said he became ill and went to the hospital due to breathing difficulties. He was intubated, after which he developed pneumonia and then MRSA, a serious bacterial infection.

  His condition deteriorated rapidly, and he was airlifted from Wichita to a hospital in Oklahoma City, Parsons said. There he was put on an ECMO machine, which circulates and oxygenates a patient’s blood outside the body, taking over heart and lung function when a patient’s organs don’t work on their own. -Seattle Times

  Doctors had considered amputating both hands and both feet.

  “It was brutal what he went through,” said Parsons. “Heartbreaking.”

  Dean was fired in April 2023, after which he filed a complaint with the Department of Labor, alleging he had been terminated in retaliation for blowing the whistle.

  

  He was represented by the South Carolina law firm that represented Boeing whistleblower John “Mitch” Barnett, who was found dead in an ‘apparent suicide’ in March in Charleston.

  

  Barnett was in the middle of giving depositions suggesting that Boeing retaliated against him over complaints related to quality issues when he was found dead from a gunshot wound.

  The Charleston County Coroner’s Office reported Barnett’s death appeared to be “from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.” Almost two months later, the police investigation into his death is still ongoing. -Seattle Times

  “Whistleblowers are needed. They bring to light wrongdoing and corruption in the interests of society. It takes a lot of courage to stand up,” said Brian Knowles, one of Dean’s lawyers. “It’s a difficult set of circumstances. Our thoughts now are with John’s family and Josh’s family.”

  In March, Boeing was rumored to be in talks to buy Spirit, as both companies have come under increasing pressure from airline customers and federal regulators to shore up quality issues following a January 5th incident in which a door plug blew out mid-flight on a 737 MAX 9.

  Alaska Airlines flight #AS1282, a Boeing 737 MAX 9, experienced a rapid decompression after the loss of a large panel that included an emergency exit door on the left side of the plane.
  The flight made a safe return to Portland (PDX).pic.twitter.com/KH4gs0X4o6

  — Aviation Safety Network (ASN) (@AviationSafety) January 6, 2024

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

  Four days later, United Airlines found “loose bolts” on 737 MAX doors following an emergency inspection.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 21:25

• Google Workers Sacked Over Israel Protests File Federal Labor Complaint
  Google Workers Sacked Over Israel Protests File Federal Labor Complaint

  Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

  Dozens of Google workers who were fired for protesting the tech giant’s cloud deal with the Israeli government filed a complaint on Monday with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) over their termination.

  The complaint, obtained by The Washington Post, alleges that Google violated the workers’ rights by “terminating and/or placing them on administrative leave in response to their protected concerted activity, namely, participation (or perceived participation) in a peaceful, non-disruptive protest that was directly and explicitly connected to their terms and conditions of work.”

  

  The workers are seeking reinstatement of their jobs and back pay, alleging that Google had “unlawfully retaliated” against them for engaging in “peaceful” protest, Jane Chung, a spokesperson for No Tech for Apartheid, was quoted as saying by the New York Post.

  No Tech for Apartheid, the group organizing the protests, claimed that Google fired over 20 workers on April 23, including non-participating bystanders.

  This adds to the 30 workers fired last week for their involvement in sit-in protests at Google offices in New York and Sunnyvale, California, bringing the total number of terminated workers to over 50 people.

  Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

  The protests targeted a $1.2 billion deal known as Project Nimbus that provides artificial intelligence technology to the Israeli government.

  The fired workers contend that the system is being lethally deployed in the Gaza war.

  “Google’s aims are clear: the corporation is attempting to quash dissent, silence its workers, and reassert its power over them,” the group said in an April 23 press release.

  “In its attempts to do so, Google has decided to unceremoniously, and without due process, upend the livelihoods of over 50 of its own workers,” it added.

  The activist group has vowed to continue organizing until their demands are met: for Google to “drop Project Nimbus and stop powering Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza now.”

  Project Nimbus was signed in 2021. It involves joint cloud computing and AI services provided by Google and Amazon to the Israeli government. Google has said that the program is not being utilized for military or intelligence purposes.

  Google has said that it fired the workers after gathering details from coworkers who were “physically disrupted” and it identified employees who used masks and didn’t carry their staff badges to hide their identities. Google didn’t specify how many were fired.

  In a blog post on April 18, Google CEO Sundar Pichai hinted that workers will be on a short leash as the company intensifies its efforts to improve its AI technology at a pivotal moment in the industry and, potentially, humanity. He did not openly refer to a specific incident.

  “But ultimately we are a workplace and our policies and expectations are clear: this is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics,” Mr Pichai wrote.

  “We have a duty to be an objective and trusted provider of information that serves all of our users globally,” he added.

  It’s not the first time Google workers have protested against some of the company’s ventures and its approach to AI development.

  A previous protest by employees in 2018 resulted in Google’s termination of a contract with the U.S. Department of Defense called “Project Maven.” The contract was largely focused on assisting armed forces with military video analysis.

  Despite this, Google has remained largely unaffected by the internal uproar.

  From a financial perspective, the company continues to flourish through revenue obtained through its main sources, primarily digital advertising and a dominant search engine.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 21:05

• The Countries Where The Most People Buy Organic
  The Countries Where The Most People Buy Organic

  According to the Statista Market Insights, more than 15 percent of food sales in Denmark are of organic products, making the country the biggest market for organic food in relative terms.

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz shows in the chart below, Austria, Luxembourg and Switzerland are the only other countries achieving a share above 10 percent, showing that in a global context, food marketed as organic is still a somewhat of a niche despite all the hype surrounding it.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Taking into consideration only foods marketed as organic (and not those which are not sold as such, for example in countries with less formalized food markets), the global share of organic products in total food revenue was just 1.9 percent.

  With Germany in rank 7, a strong preference for organic food in German-speaking countries is visible. Interestingly, Benelux and Scandinavian countries are not consistingly achieving rates above 5 percent. Statista analysts also took a look at the development of the market and concluded that it is only growing slowly in most places as price remains a (perceived) hurdle for many consumers.

  Also taking into account country size, the United States still had the largest market for organic food out of any country despite a lower share of organic food at 7.2 percent of all food sales in 2023.

  This is the equivalent of around $70 billion of the $975 billion U.S. food market (excluding out-of-home).

  In comparison, all of Europe generated food revenues almost $2 trillion but lower organic uptake in Eastern and Southern Europe led to a share of 3.9 percent organic food sales overall – the equivalent to an organic food market only slightly bigger than that of the U.S. at $77.6 billion.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 20:45

• California's Perpetual Drought Is Manmade And Intentional
  California’s Perpetual Drought Is Manmade And Intentional

  Authored by Roger Canfield via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) last week released its next five-year plan for the State Water Project—Update 2023. After years of meetings, California’s premier water agency has decided to focus on “three intersecting themes: addressing climate urgency, strengthening watershed resilience, and achieving equity in water management.”

  

  Water supplies for California’s 40 million people and the planet’s most productive agriculture have third- to fifth-level priority.

  There is nothing new here, except to publicly admit to betraying the public trust. Really?

  Over several decades, the public has been deceived into voting for water bonds that have little new water in them—phony promises to build new water storage and aqueducts. About 12 percent of bond funds are spent on new water storage. The rest of the bond funds have been squandered on scores of local and special-interest environmental projects, e.g., tearing down four Klamath-area dams—killing fish to save them—and opposing substantial new water projects, e.g., raising Shasta Dam and building Auburn Dam.

  Further, by California law, water must be equitably distributed, pumped “equally”—half to human beings (if you count agriculture) and half to fish (the water-short Pacific Ocean, 187 quadrillion gallons). During the big rains of 2024, about 90 percent of the water was flushed to the Pacific through the gills of perhaps a half dozen delta smelt.

  Farmers call it a manmade drought.

  The politicos halted humans “taking” water, “diverting” it, from fish. Under the U.S. Constitution, the taking of private property requires just compensation—not mass confiscation. Water rights are a complex species of property.

  “Our findings show that atmospheric river activity exceeds what has occurred since instrumental record keeping began,” said Clarke Knight, a U.S. Geological Survey research geographer.

  Still, DWR scheduled 2024 meetings of the Drought Resilience Interagency & Partners (DRIP) Collaborative for April, July, and October.

  The DRIP fantasy continues despite a deluge of 2024 water from two winters of giant “rivers in the sky” dumping excesses of water and creating massive floods and landslides.

  Recent massive atmospheric rivers, Ark events, are small compared to ancient monster storms that occurred long before human beings had any impact whatsoever on climate, let alone weather.

  Despite plentiful rainfall, DWR continued to limit pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to Central Valley agriculture to 30–40 percent to protect native fish. Nonnative bass are likely the greatest dangers to native fish. DWR insisted that its ability to move water south has been “impacted by the presence of threatened and endangered fish species.”

  Those water districts’ contractors, paying the full cost of State Water Project (SWP) water, thought otherwise.

  Jennifer Pierre, general manager of the State Water Contractors, stated: “While we are glad to see this modest allocation, it is still far below the amount of water we need. There is a lot of water in the system, California reservoirs are full, and runoff from snowpack melt is still to come. Even in a good water year, moving water effectively and efficiently under the current regime is difficult.”

  California’s drought fixation is entirely manmade. In the past, in wet years, the waters of the Sacramento River, greater than the mighty Colorado, turned the Central Valley into an inland sea.

  For over a century, California visionaries followed the lead of the Mesopotamians, Assyrians, Romans, and Nabataeans as well as the Aztecs before them. C.R. Rockwood, William Mulholland, Michael O’Shaughnessy, Gov. Pat Brown, and Gov. Ronald Reagan built dams and aqueducts to store and distribute water and to provide flood protection and hydroelectricity “too cheap to meter.”

  As I have said before, California wastes tens of billions of dollars’ worth (at a conservative $100–$200 an acre-foot) of precious fresh water to save handfuls of delta smelt and “restore” salmon runs where salmon never ran before.

  As I’ve also mentioned before, tyrannical water police order city folk, who use only 8 percent of California’s water, to drink recycled toilet water and to live on 55 gallons a day. The serfs may bathe every other Saturday whether they need it or not. California demands that its residents take a water conservation pledge: And to the utopia for which it stands. Neighbors turn neighbors in for “wasting” water, not to mention life, liberty, and property.

  Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 20:25

• 'Intel Insidious' – Here's All The 'Grants' Given By Biden's US CHIPS Act
  ‘Intel Insidious’ – Here’s All The ‘Grants’ Given By Biden’s US CHIPS Act

  This visualization shows which companies are receiving grants from the U.S. CHIPS Act, as of April 25, 2024. The CHIPS Act is a federal statute signed into law by President Joe Biden that authorizes $280 billion in new funding to boost domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors.

  The grant amounts visualized in this graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu, are intended to accelerate the production of semiconductor fabrication plants (fabs) across the United States.

  

  Data and Company Highlights

  The figures we used to create this graphic were collected from a variety of public news sources. The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) also maintains a tracker for CHIPS Act recipients, though at the time of writing it does not have the latest details for Micron.

  

  BAE Systems was not included in the graphic due to size limitations

  Intel’s Massive Plans

  Intel is receiving the largest share of the pie, with $8.5 billion in grants (plus an additional $11 billion in government loans). This grant accounts for 22% of the CHIPS Act’s total subsidies for chip production.

  From Intel’s side, the company is expected to invest $100 billion to construct new fabs in Arizona and Ohio, while modernizing and/or expanding existing fabs in Oregon and New Mexico. Intel could also claim another $25 billion in credits through the U.S. Treasury Department’s Investment Tax Credit.

  TSMC Expands its U.S. Presence

  TSMC, the world’s largest semiconductor foundry company, is receiving a hefty $6.6 billion to construct a new chip plant with three fabs in Arizona. The Taiwanese chipmaker is expected to invest $65 billion into the project.

  The plant’s first fab will be up and running in the first half of 2025, leveraging 4 nm (nanometer) technology. According to TrendForce, the other fabs will produce chips on more advanced 3 nm and 2 nm processes.

  The Latest Grant Goes to Micron

  Micron, the only U.S.-based manufacturer of memory chips, is set to receive $6.1 billion in grants to support its plans of investing $50 billion through 2030. This investment will be used to construct new fabs in Idaho and New York.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 20:05

• A Low Sodium Diet May Be Stressing You Out
  A Low Sodium Diet May Be Stressing You Out

  Authored by Jennifer Sweenie via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  There is a link between salt intake and stress, and it’s probably not what you think. While we are well aware of the purported dangers associated with a high-sodium diet, many of us are not aware that too little sodium comes with its own set of issues. When it comes to stress, salt plays an important role in helping flush cortisol from the body.

  

  A study published in Clinical Endocrinology in 2020 showed that an increase in salt consumption leads to a rise in cortisol levels in your urine and lower cortisol levels in your bloodstream. What does this potentially mean? Restricting your sodium intake may lead to higher levels of circulating cortisol.

  Salt is often vilified, and many physicians instruct their patients to adopt a low-sodium diet for health reasons. However, not consuming enough of it may interfere with the removal of cortisol from our bloodstream. Sodium helps flush the stress hormone from the body, and avoiding it may ultimately lead to chronically elevated blood cortisol levels. If left untreated, high cortisol levels can lead to a variety of bothersome symptoms and potentially serious complications. Most people are experiencing some symptoms of elevated or dysregulated cortisol from life stressors, and abstaining from salt may be exacerbating the situation.

  What Is Cortisol?

  Cortisol is an essential steroid hormone the adrenal gland produces in response to stress. It is often referred to as the stress hormone because the body releases it in higher amounts during the fight-or-flight response to a stressor. Cortisol helps release stored glucose from our cells so we have the energy to run away from a perceived threat.

  The stress hormone has many vital functions, including regulating blood sugar levels, managing metabolism, controlling inflammation, and assisting with your sleep and wake cycle. It is an important hormone, however, high cortisol levels over a prolonged period of time can negatively affect health—including weight gain, high blood pressure, and weakened immune function.

  The Difference Between Salt and Sodium

  People often use the words salt and sodium interchangeably, but there is a marked difference between the two. Sodium is a mineral found in many foods and is essential for our bodies to function properly. Salt is a combination of sodium and chloride. It is a chemical compound comprised of 40 percent sodium and 60 percent chloride, hence its moniker. Ultimately, sodium is one of two elements that salt is made from.

  Sodium is an essential mineral that helps regulate the body’s fluid balance and maintain normal nerve and muscle function. It is also involved in the absorption and transportation of nutrients throughout the body. Essential means your body cannot make it, and you must get adequate amounts from the food you eat. What is our primary source of sodium? Salt.

  The Salt and Cortisol Connection

  The findings of the 2020 study are not new. A separate study published earlier in the same year found that, “On a high-salt, as compared with a low-salt, diet, urinary aldosterone excretion decreased, whereas urinary cortisol and cortisone excretion increased.” In 2013, a study published in Cell Metabolism determined that “[A] high-salt diet increases cortisol excretion in humans.”

  A study published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism in 2003 stated, “In healthy subjects, dietary salt loading increases and sodium restriction decreases urinary free cortisol excretion” and “​​changes in cortisol metabolite excretion after salt loading were accompanied by a decrease in plasma cortisol concentration.”

  Prior to that, a 1998 study concluded, “This study supports the notion that sodium restriction decreases urinary cortisol excretion.”

  Although more research is needed to fully understand the relationship between salt intake and cortisol excretion, the 2020 study raises a few points. Increased dietary sodium intake may cause false positives in urinary-free cortisol excretion tests, and low-sodium diets may make cortisol blood tests inaccurate. Additionally, a low-sodium diet may raise cortisol, and incorporating high-quality sources of sodium into your diet comes with benefits in terms of cortisol regulation.

  The Type of Salt Matters

  When it comes to salt consumption, the type of salt matters. Table salt is the most commonly used salt. It is heavily processed and stripped of many of its natural minerals. Chemicals are often added to keep it from caking in humidity.

  Table salt is also usually fortified with iodine. Iodine can be beneficial for thyroid health. However, some experts argue that the processing of table salt can make it more difficult for the body to process and use and may lead to potential health issues. Sometimes dextrose, a form of sugar, is added to table salt.

  Sea salt is a more natural form of salt harvested from evaporated seawater. It retains many natural trace minerals, including magnesium, potassium, and calcium. It is not refined or processed. Himalayan pink sea salt is a popular type of salt mined from ancient salt beds in the Himalayan Mountains. It is known for its pink hue and is rich in minerals.

  Kosher salt is pure sodium chloride and contains no trace minerals, iodine, or unhealthy additives.

  Foods That Can Help Lower Cortisol

  In addition to high-quality salt, the best foods for lowering cortisol are those that are anti-inflammatory. Any foods that lower inflammation will, in turn, lower cortisol levels. Several foods can help reduce cortisol levels in the body, including:

  • Dark chocolate: Dark chocolate contains flavonoids and studies have shown it can reduce cortisol levels.
  • Berries: Berries are rich in antioxidants, which can help reduce inflammation and lower cortisol levels.
  • Fatty fish: Fatty fish such as salmon and tuna contain high levels of omega-3 fatty acids. Research has shown that omega-3s can reduce cortisol levels.
  • Nuts: Nuts are a great source of magnesium, which can help lower cortisol levels.
  • Leafy greens: Leafy greens such as spinach and kale are also rich in magnesium and antioxidants and can help reduce inflammation and lower cortisol levels.
  • Fermented foods: Fermented foods, including kimchi and sauerkraut, contain probiotics. Probiotics have been shown to help reduce cortisol levels.
  • Herbal teas: Research supports that herbal teas, such as chamomile and lavender, have calming properties that can help reduce cortisol levels.
  • Ashwagandha: A plant that has been used for centuries in traditional Ayurvedic medicine, ashwagandha is believed to reduce cortisol levels in the body. It has treated a variety of conditions, including stress, anxiety, fatigue, and depression.

  Some studies suggest that ashwagandha also has anti-inflammatory and immune-boosting properties. However, ashwagandha can be unsafe for some people and should be discussed with a physician.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 19:45

• Ukrainian Drones Hit Major Rosneft Refinery In Russia
  Ukrainian Drones Hit Major Rosneft Refinery In Russia

  By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

  Just as Russia had started to bring back some refinery capacity damaged by Ukrainian drone attacks earlier this year, a new wave of drone attacks hit a major refinery owned by Rosneft, for a second time.

  Rosneft’s Ryazan refinery southeast of Moscow caught fire after the overnight drone attack, an anonymous Ukrainian military source with knowledge of the situation told Bloomberg News on Wednesday.

  The refinery in the region of Ryazan, whose main city of the same name is some 120 miles southeast of Moscow, was first attacked by drones in the middle of March. The first attack also led to a fire.

  Drones attacked the Ryazan oil refinery, and a fire started there

  According to local residents, the attack on the plant took place around 3 am. In social networks report that at first a strong rumble of drones was heard, and then there were two explosions. According to… pic.twitter.com/RczhoYPhFo

  — NEXTA (@nexta_tv) May 1, 2024

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

  This year, Ukraine has stepped up attacks on oil refineries in Russia, which have reduced Russian refining capacity, and, reportedly, have the White House concerned about rising international prices.

  The United States has repeatedly urged Ukraine to halt its drone attacks on Russian oil refineries due to Washington’s assessment that the strikes could lead to Russian retaliation and push up global oil prices, the Financial Times reported in March, citing sources familiar with the exchange.

  As of mid-April, Russia had brought back online some oil refining units, reducing the capacity taken offline by Ukrainian drone hits to around 10%, from 14% at the end of March.

  The refining capacity in Russia that was offline due to drone attacks was estimated by Reuters in mid-April at around 660,000 barrels per day (bpd), compared to 907,000 bpd offline at the end of March.

  Russia said in early April it can repair all damaged units within two months.

  🔥💥 In addition to the Ryazan Refinery, 2 UAVs also attacked the Voronezhnefteprodukt Refinery, — ASTRA

  ❗1 UAV fell on the territory of “Voronezhnefteprodukt” in the village of Staraya Pokrovka. The other seemed to have been shot down in the suburbs of Voronezh. pic.twitter.com/B5gGZGGYAp

  — MAKS 23 🇺🇦👀 (@Maks_NAFO_FELLA) May 1, 2024

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

  Russia’s Energy Minister Nikolai Shulginov said that all damaged refineries in the country would be restarted by the beginning of June.

  “Repairs are underway at the refineries. We plan to re-launch a number of refineries after repairs in April-May, possibly before the beginning of June,” Russian news agency Interfax quoted Shulginov as saying.

  “All facilities that were damaged will be re-commissioned,” the minister added.  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 19:43

• US Imposes Sanctions On Chinese Companies Vital To Russia's Defense Industry
  US Imposes Sanctions On Chinese Companies Vital To Russia’s Defense Industry

  The Biden administration and US Treasury on Wednesday unveiled nearly 300 new anti-Russia sanctions which especially target third party entities which are said to help Moscow in sanctions-busting activities.

  “The almost 300 targets being sanctioned by both Treasury and the Department of State include sanctions on dozens of actors that have enabled Russia to acquire desperately needed technology and equipment from abroad,” the Treasury Department said in a press release.

  So-called dual-use items out of China are a key focus of the action, which is being hailed as one of “the most wide-ranging actions against Chinese companies so far in Washington’s sanctions aimed at Russia.” 20 companies based in China and Hong Kong were named.

  

  Companies in Turkey, Belgium, Azerbaijan, Slovakia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are also targeted.

  “Treasury has consistently warned that companies will face significant consequences for providing material support for Russia’s war, and the U.S. is imposing them today on almost 300 targets,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said.

  It also marks the furthest reaching action that seeks to specifically degrade Russia’s military-industrial base, as well as its biological and chemical weapons programs. For example, companies involved in manufacturing precursor materials for Russia to make explosives are listed.

  Last week during Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to China he warned about Beijing’s support for Russia’s war in Ukraine. “Russia would struggle to sustain its assault on Ukraine without China’s support,” Blinken had claimed provocatively, while also asserting China is the “top supplier” of Russia’s defense industrial base – albeit not in terms of lethal aid (but instead “dual use” technologies).

  This support to Russia’s defense industry additionally constitutes a “medium to long-term threat that many Europeans feel viscerally that Russia poses to them,” Blinken had asserted.

  Meanwhile, as Ukraine forces continue getting pushed back from frontline positions by the better-armed Russian force, hawkish threats out of Congress are getting more frantic…

  🤡We must be prepared to strike back at Putin on Russian soil – Congressman Scott

  “Supporting Ukraine means defeating Vladimir Putin in Russia. We must be prepared to hit him back on Russian territory. And when I see the Biden administration, which does not want to comply with… pic.twitter.com/B3UlXzV5ak

  — Victor vicktop55 (@vicktop55) April 30, 2024

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

  He warned last week that the Biden administration stood ready to introduce more sanctions against China if dual-use goods and technologies continue to be sent to Russia, including things previously identified by Washington as problematic: semiconductors, machine tools, chemical precursors, ball bearings, and optical systems. Based on Wednesday’s Treasury action it is clear that the sanctions were already being prepared even as Blinken was on the three-day trip, which including a meeting with President Xi.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 19:25

• Study Finds Elevated Risk Of Eye Inflammatory Disorder Following COVID-19 Vaccination
  Study Finds Elevated Risk Of Eye Inflammatory Disorder Following COVID-19 Vaccination

  Authored by Megan Redshaw, J.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  People with a history of uveitis may experience a recurrence of the eye inflammatory disorder following COVID-19 vaccination, especially in the early postvaccination period.

  

  A recently published study in JAMA Ophthalmology found that about 17 percent of nearly 474,000 vaccinated individuals with a history of uveitis experienced a recurrence within one year after vaccination.

  Uveitis is inflammation inside the eye that occurs when the immune system is fighting an infection or attacks healthy tissue in the eyes. It can cause symptoms including pain, redness, and vision loss while damaging the uvea and other parts of the eye.

  Researchers collected data on all individuals diagnosed with uveitis in South Korea between January 2015 and February 2021 to determine the risk of recurrence after COVID-19 vaccination. Data was retrieved from the Korean National Health Insurance Service and Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency databases. The incidence of uveitis was assessed from Feb. 26, 2021, to Dec. 31, 2022. The cases were classified according to the onset at three months, six months, and one year, the type of uveitis (anterior or nonanterior), and vaccine type.

  Individuals included in the study received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, or Johnson & Johnson and did not test positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period.

  Study Findings

  Of the 473,934 individuals included in the study, the cumulative incidence of postvaccination uveitis was 8.6 percent at three months, 12.5 percent at six months, and 16.8 percent at one year—primarily of the anterior type, which affects the iris at the front of the eye. Moreover, the risk of uveitis reoccurrence was highest in the first 30 days after vaccination, peaked between the first and second vaccine doses, and decreased with subsequent vaccinations.

  According to the researchers, the first dose of the vaccine may activate inflammatory pathways leading to initial inflammation in people who are prone to autoimmune reactions or have a history of uveitis. However, there’s a declining risk with repeated vaccination that may be due to the immune system’s adaptation to the vaccine antigen, although further studies are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

  Additionally, the risk of experiencing the condition increased among recipients of all four vaccine types, especially among those who received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. These patients were more likely to experience uveitis recurrence during the early-onset period. Likewise, those who received Moderna were at a higher risk of experiencing uveitis after the first vaccination and during the early-onset period.

  Notably, there were variations in the types of uveitis observed in the periods before and after vaccination. Among patients with infectious uveitis prior to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, nearly 54 percent had noninfectious uveitis after being vaccinated, whereas most of the individuals with noninfectious uveitis before vaccination had a recurrence of the same type after vaccination.

  Most patients with uveitis were 60 to 79 years old, followed by those aged 40 to 59. Among those with comorbidities, high blood pressure, diabetes, and rheumatic diseases were the most common.

  “Although uveitis following vaccination is rare, our findings support an increased risk after COVID-19 vaccination, particularly in the early postvaccination period,” the authors wrote. “These results emphasize the importance of vigilance and monitoring for uveitis in the context of vaccinations, including COVID-19 vaccinations, particularly in individuals with a history of uveitis.”

  Other Studies of Vaccine-Associated Uveitis

  Other studies have found an association between uveitis and COVID-19 vaccination, including a February 2023 study published in Ophthalmology. The study provided insights into a possible temporal association between reported vaccine-associated events and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines from Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson.

  Moreover, ocular adverse events have been reported following COVID-19 vaccination in addition to uveitis, including facial nerve palsy, retinal vascular occlusion, acute macular neuroretinopathy, thrombosis, and new-onset Graves’ disease.

  In a June 2022 paper published in Vaccines, researchers analyzed ocular adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to provide clinicians and researchers with a broader picture of ocular side effects of COVID-19 vaccinations.

  VAERS is a voluntary reporting system comanaged by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It is designed to detect vaccine safety signals, although it is estimated to represent less than 1 percent of actual adverse events.

  During the analysis period of December 2020 to December 2021, VAERS received 55,313 reports for ocular adverse events, 6,688 of which met the inclusion criteria. Of those reports, 2,229 were related to eyelid swelling, ocular hyperemia, and conjunctivitis, 1,785 were reports of blurred vision, and 1,322 were reports of visual impairment.

  Females accounted for 74 percent of the reports, and eye conditions affected primarily individuals between the ages of 40 and 59 who had received either the Johnson & Johnson shot or Moderna’s vaccine.

  Of the patients who reported ocular-related complications, 50 percent received Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, 38 percent received Moderna, and 12 percent received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

  Although the study’s authors said they could not determine whether the vaccines were associated with an increased risk of adverse events, their data suggests a “possible association between COVID-19 vaccines and ocular adverse events.”

  “Physicians are cautioned not only to be aware of this potential problem, but to check any underlying patient conditions, and to carefully document in VAERS within a few weeks of vaccination,” they wrote.

  According to current VAERS data, 734 cases of uveitis, 539 cases of eye inflammation, 2,781 cases of retina disorders, 11,641 cases of facial nerve disorders, and 3,909 reports of eyelid swelling, ocular hyperaemia, and conjunctivitis were reported following COVID-19 vaccination between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 29.

  Potential associations between uveitis and other vaccinations have been reported, including influenza, human papillomavirus, and varicella zoster virus vaccines. However, these studies did not necessarily establish a causal link.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 19:05

• FOMC Leaves Rates Unch, Says (Bigger Than Expected) QT Taper To Start In June
  FOMC Leaves Rates Unch, Says (Bigger Than Expected) QT Taper To Start In June

  Tl;dr: The Fed just told the market that ‘yields are too damn high‘.

  *  *  *

  Since the last FOMC meeting, on March 20th, gold has been the biggest outperformer (interesting along with dollar strength), while stocks, bonds, and crude (and crypto) have all been sold (with bonds and oil equally ugly)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  And since March 20th, US macro data has serially disappointed…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  More problematically, since the last FOMC meeting, inflation data has dramatically surprised to the upside and growth data to the downside – screaming stagflation in the face of the Fed…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Rate-cut expectations (for 2024 and 2025) have plunged significantly since the last FOMC (that is now just one 25bps rate-cut priced in for 2024)…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Expectations are fully priced for a nothing-burger today on rates…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  … with a slight hawkish bias in the language-changes in the statement (and the possibility of QT-taper signaling). But it will be Powell’s press conference that everyone will be focused on.

  So what did The Fed say?

  Rates unchanged…

  • *FED HOLDS BENCHMARK RATE IN 5.25%-5.5% TARGET RANGE

  Key statement changes

  Fed adds following sentence:

  “In recent months, there has been a lack of further progress toward the Committee’s 2 percent inflation objective.”

  Fed also replaces

  “The Committee judges that the risks to achieving its employment and inflation goals are moving into better balance“

  with

  “The Committee judges that the risks to achieving its employment and inflation goals have moved toward better balance over the past year.

  And the QT Taper is here – and its bigger than expected (-$35BN/mth vs -$30BN expected):

  Beginning in June, the Committee will slow the pace of decline of its securities holdings by reducing the monthly redemption cap on Treasury securities from $60 billion to $25 billion.

  The Committee will maintain the monthly redemption cap on agency debt and agency mortgage‑backed securities at $35 billion and will reinvest any principal payments in excess of this cap into Treasury securities

  This means $105BN less gross issuance needed in Q3, with The Fed implicitly saying ‘yields are too high’.

  Just as we said…

  The big question for today: how much will Fed taper QT by?

  If Taper goes to $30BN (from $60BN/month), that means less funding needed in Q3 (most likely from Bills), and means less pressure on issuance. Yields should slide

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 1, 2024

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

  Read the full redline below:

  

  What happens next (on average)?

  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 18:55

• House Approves 'Antisemitism Awareness Act' Aimed At Cracking Down On Campus Protests
  House Approves ‘Antisemitism Awareness Act’ Aimed At Cracking Down On Campus Protests

  Late in the afternoon Wednesday the House approved a bill which seeks to crack down on antisemitism on college and university campuses following days of protests and unrest driven by pro-Palestinian activists.

  The Antisemitism Awareness Act has been approved in a 320-91 vote and will now head to the Senate. But the central question is: how and by what measure will federal authorities crack down on speech deemed “antisemitic”?

  Will criticism of the government of Israel be deemed antisemitic? Will highlighting alleged war crimes or human rights abuses by the IDF be considered so? Will involvement in the BDS movement be deemed anti-Jewish? Will slogans such as “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” be illegal according to federal law? Will criticizing the US $3+ billion in annual foreign aid be considered anti-Jewish? 

  And what of the many Jewish protesters who are engaged in speech condemning the nation-state of Israel? 

  

  Already, active participation in causes boycotting Israel is ‘illegal’ in a number of US states (typically taking the form of prohibiting state agencies from engaging with companies involved in BDS).

  According to an explanation of the definition of antisemitism outlined by the new House-passed bill: 

  The bill would require the Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism when enforcing antidiscrimination laws.

  The group defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” and says “Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

  The organization provides a number of examples for what qualifies as antisemitism, including calling for the harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion, and accusing Jewish individuals as inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

  By this measure, even theoretical historical discussions or interpretation could be considered illegal (such has long been the case in some European countries).

  The legislation itself never says what the definition is. All it says is that the definition is whatever this other group says it is. Which is batshit bonkers already because it grants the force of law to whatever the IHRA happens to decree on the subject. But it gets worse.

  — Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) May 1, 2024

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

  Like with any attempt to legislate limits related to the 1st Amendment, this is certainly going to prove very slippery — especially if it gets signed into law and then comes the question of actual enforcement on the ground.

  A tiny minority of Republicans are voicing fierce opposition to the bill…

  Antisemitism is wrong, but I will not be voting for the Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 (H.R. 6090) today that could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews.

  Read the bill text and… pic.twitter.com/Y0eeOiVfnw

  — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) May 1, 2024

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

  Currently and historically, pro-Israel hawks who advocate for sending billions in American taxpayer dollars to Israel each year tend to accuse any and all opponents of such policies of being antisemitic. Some independent journalists say they’ve struggled to find blatant examples of people being targeted in antisemitic attacks on campuses for the sole reason of being Jewish. 

  

  So if the federal government gets involved in these polemical and semantic games, where will it end? 

  The vast majority of Republicans just voted for a bill to criminalize criticisms of the Israeli government. If the bill passes you will be guilty of hate speech if you “apply double standards” to the government of Israel or accuse it of genocide. This is honestly one of the most… https://t.co/5SPRT0I0jk pic.twitter.com/2k6n9A3hiY

  — Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) May 1, 2024

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 18:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Maté: What 10 Years Of US Meddling In Ukraine Have Wrought (Spoiler Alert: Not Democracy)
  Maté: What 10 Years Of US Meddling In Ukraine Have Wrought (Spoiler Alert: Not Democracy)

  Authored by Aaron Maté via RealClear Investigations,

  In successfully lobbying Congress for an additional $61 billion in Ukraine war funding, an effort that ended this month with celebratory Democrats waving Ukrainian flags in the House chamber, President Biden has cast his administration’s standoff with Russia as an existential test for democracy.

  “What makes our moment rare is that freedom and democracy are under attack, both at home and overseas,” Biden declared in his State of the Union address in March. “History is watching, just like history watched three years ago on January 6th.”

  

  While Biden’s narrative is widely accepted by Washington’s political establishment, a close examination of the president and his top principals’ record dating back to the Obama administration reveals a different picture. Far from protecting democracy from Kyiv to Washington, their role in Ukraine looks more like epic meddling resulting in political upheaval for both countries.

  Over the last decade, Ukraine has been the battleground in a proxy war between the U.S. and Russia – a conflict massively escalated by the Kremlin’s invasion in 2022. The fight erupted in early 2014, when Biden and his team, then serving in the Obama administration, supported the overthrow of Ukraine’s elected president, Viktor Yanukovych. Leveraging billions of dollars in U.S. assistance, Washington has shaped the personnel and policies of subsequent Ukrainian governments, all while expanding its military and intelligence presence in Ukraine via the CIA and NATO. During this period, Ukraine has not become an independent self-sustaining democracy, but a client state heavily dependent on European and U.S. support, which has not protected it from the ravages of war.

  The Biden-Obama team’s meddling in Ukraine has also had a boomerang effect at home.

  As well-connected Washington Beltway insiders such as Hunter Biden have exploited it for personal enrichment, Ukraine has become a source of foreign interference in the U.S. political system – with questions of unsavory dealings arising in the 2016 and 2020 elections as well as the first impeachment of Donald Trump. After years of secrecy, CIA sources have only recently confirmed that Ukrainian intelligence helped generate the Russian interference allegations that engulfed Trump’s presidency. House Democrats’ initial attempt to impeach Trump, undertaken in the fall of 2019, came in response to his efforts to scrutinize Ukraine’s Russiagate connection.

  This account of U.S. interference in Ukraine, which can be traced to fateful decisions made by the Obama administration, including then-Vice President Biden and his top aides, is based on often overlooked public disclosures. It also relies on the personal testimony of Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian diplomat and Democratic Party-tied political consultant who worked closely with U.S. officials to promote regime change in Ukraine. 

  Although he once welcomed Washington’s influence in Ukraine, Telizhenko now takes a different view. “I’m a Ukrainian who knew how Ukraine was 30 years ago, and what it became today,” he says. “For me, it’s a total failed state.” In his view, Ukraine has been “used directly by the United States to fight a [proxy] war with Russia” and “as a rag to make money for people like Biden and his family.”

  The State Department has accused Telizhenko being part of a “Russia-linked foreign influence network.” In Sept. 2020 it revoked his visa to travel to the United States. Telizhenko, who now lives in a western European country where he was granted political asylum, denies working with Russia and says that he is a whistleblower speaking out to expose how U.S. interference has ravaged his country. RealClearInvestigations has confirmed that he worked closely with top American officials while they advanced policies aimed at severing Ukraine’s ties to Russia. No official contacted for this article – including former CIA chief John Brennan and senior State Department official Victoria Nuland – disputed any of his claims.

  A Coup in ‘Full Coordination’ With the U.S.

  The Biden team’s path to influencing Ukraine began with the eruption of anti-government unrest in November 2013. That month, protesters began filling Kyiv’s Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square) after then-President Viktor Yanukovych, a notoriously corrupt leader, delayed signing a European Union (EU) trade pact. To members of what came to be known as the Maidan movement, Yanukovych’s decision was a betrayal of his pledge to strengthen Western ties, and a worrying sign of Russian allegiance in a country haunted by its Soviet past.

  The reality was more complex. Yanukovych was hoping to maintain relations with both Russia and Europe – and use competition between them to Ukraine’s advantage. He also worried that the EU’s terms, which demanded reduced trade with Russia, would alienate his political base in the east and south, home to millions of ethnic Russians. As the International Crisis Group noted, these Yanukovych-supporting Ukrainians feared that the EU terms “would hurt their livelihoods, a large number of which were tied to trade and close relations with Russia.” Despite claims that the Maidan movement represented a “popular revolution,” polls from that period showed that Ukrainians were evenly split on it, or even majority opposed.

  After an initial period of peaceful protest, the Maidan movement was soon co-opted by nationalist forces, which encouraged a violent insurrection for regime change. Leading Maidan’s hardline contingent was Oleh Tyahnybok of the Svoboda party, who had once urged his supporters to fight what he called the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia running Ukraine.” Tyahnybok’s followers were joined by Right Sector, a coalition of ultra-nationalist groups whose members openly sported Nazi insignia. One year before, the European Parliament condemned Svoboda for “racist, anti-Semitic and xenophobic views” and urged Ukrainian political parties “not to associate with, endorse or form coalitions with this party.”

  Powerful figures in Washington took a different view: For them, the Maidan movement represented an opportunity to achieve a longtime goal of pulling Ukraine into the Western orbit. Given Ukraine’s historical ties to Russia, its integration with the West could also be used to undermine the rule of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

  As the-late Zbigniew Brzezinski, the influential former national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, once wrote: “Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” Two months before the Kyiv protests erupted, Carl Gershman, head of the National Endowment for Democracy, dubbed Ukraine “the biggest prize” in the West’s rivalry with Russia. Absorbing Ukraine, Gershman explained, could leave Putin “on the losing end not just in the near abroad” – i.e, its former Soviet satellites – “but within Russia itself.” Shortly after, senior State Department official Nuland boasted that the U.S. had “invested more than $5 billion” to help pro-Western “civil society” groups achieve a “secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.”

  Seeking to capitalize on the unrest, U.S. figures including Nuland, Republican Sen. John McCain, and Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy visited Maidan Square. In a show of support for the movement’s hardline faction, which went beyond supporting the EU trade deal to demand Yanukovych’s ouster, the trio met privately with Tyahnybok and appeared with him on stage. The senators’ mission, Murphy said, was to “bring about a peaceful transition here.”

  The Maidan Movement’s most significant U.S. endorsement came from then-Vice President Joe Biden. “Nothing would have greater impact for securing our interests and the world’s interests in Europe than to see a democratic, prosperous, and independent Ukraine in the region,” Biden said.

  According to Andrii Telizhenko, a former Ukrainian government official who worked closely with Western officials during this period, the U.S. government’s role went far beyond those high-profile displays of solidarity.

  “As soon as it grew into something, into the bigger Maidan, in the beginning of December, it basically was full coordination with the U.S. Embassy,” Telizhenko recalls. “Full, full.”

  When the protests erupted, Telizhenko was working as an adviser to a Ukrainian member of Parliament. Having spent part of his youth in Canada and the United States, Telizhenko’s fluent English and Western connections landed him a position helping to oversee the Maidan Movement’s international relations. In this role, he organized meetings with and coordinated security arrangements for foreign visitors, including U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt, Nuland, and McCain. Most of their briefings were held at Kyiv’s Trade Unions Building, the movement’s de-facto headquarters in the city’s center.

  Telizhenko says Pyatt routinely coordinated with Maidan leaders on protest strategy. In one encounter, the ambassador observed Right Sector members assembling Molotov cocktails that would later be thrown at riot police attempting to enter the building. Sometimes, the U.S. ambassador disapproved of his counterparts’ tactics. “The U.S. embassy would criticize if something would happen more radical than it was supposed to go by plan, because it’s bad for the picture,” Telizhenko said..

  That winter was marked by a series of escalating clashes. On February 20, 2014, snipers fatally shot dozens of protesters in Maidan square. Western governments attributed the killings to Yanukovych’s forces. But an intercepted phone call between NATO officials told a different story.

  In the recorded conversation, Estonian foreign minister Urmas Paet told EU foreign secretary Catherine Ashton that he believed pro-Maidan forces were behind the slaughter. In Kyiv, Paet reported, “there is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovych, but it was somebody from the new [opposition] coalition.”

  In a bid to resolve the Maidan crisis and avoid more bloodshed, European officials brokered a compromise between Yanukovich and the opposition. The Feb. 21 deal called for a new national unity government that would keep him in office, with reduced powers, until early elections at year’s end. It also called for the disarmament of the Maidan forces and a withdrawal of riot police. Holding up its end of the bargain, government security forces pulled back. But the Maidan encampment’s ultra-nationalist contingent had no interest in compromise.

  “We don’t want to see Yanukovych in power,” Maidan Movement squadron leader Vladimir Parasyuk declared that same day. “… And unless this morning you come up with a statement demanding that he steps down, then we will take arms and go, I swear.”

  In insisting on regime change, the far-right contingent was also usurping the leadership of more moderate opposition leaders such as Vitali Klitschko, who supported the power-sharing agreement.

  “The goal was to overthrow the government,” Telizhenko says. “That was the first goal. And it was all green-lighted by the U.S. Embassy. They basically supported all this, because they did not tell them to stop. If they told them [Maidan leaders] to stop, they would stop.”

  Yet another leaked phone call bolstered suspicions that the U.S. endorsed regime change. On the recording, presumably intercepted in January by Russian or Ukrainian intelligence, Nuland and Pyatt discussed their choice of leaders in a proposed power-sharing government with Yanukovich. Their conversation showed that the U.S. exerted considerable influence with the faction  seeking the Ukrainian president’s ouster.

  Tyahnybok, the openly antisemitic head of Svodova, would be a “problem” in office, Nuland worried, and better “on the outside.” Klitschko, the more moderate Maidan member, was ruled out as well. “I don’t think Klitsch should go into government,” Nuland said. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea.” One reason was Klitschko’s proximity to the European Union. Despite her government’s warm words for the European Union in public, Nuland told Pyatt: “Fuck the EU.”

  The two U.S. officials settled on technocrat Arseniy Yatsenyuk. “I think Yats is the guy,” Nuland said. By that point, Yatsenyuk had endorsed violent insurrection. The government’s rejection of Maidan demands, he said, meant that “people had acquired the right to move from non-violent to violent means of protest.”

  The only outstanding matter, Pyatt relayed, was securing “somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing.” Nuland replied that Vice President Joe Biden and his senior aide, Jake Sullivan, who now serves as Biden’s National Security Adviser, had signed on to provide “an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick.”

  Just hours after the power-sharing agreement was reached, Nuland’s wishes were granted. Yanukovich, no longer protected by his armed forces, fled the capital. Emboldened by their sabotage of an EU-brokered power-sharing truce, Maidan Movement members stormed the Ukrainian Parliament and pushed through the formation of a new government. In violation of parliamentary rules on impeachment proceedings, and lacking a sufficient quorum, Oleksandr Turchynov was named the new acting president. The Nuland-backed Yatsenyuk was appointed Prime Minister.

  In a reflection of their influence, at least five post-coup cabinet posts in national security, defense, and law enforcement were given to members of Svoboda and its far-right ally Right Sector.

  “The uncomfortable truth is that a sizeable portion of Kyiv’s current government – and the protesters who brought it to power – are, indeed, fascists,” wrote Andrew Foxall, now a British defense official, and Oren Kessler, a Tel Aviv-based analyst, in Foreign Policy the following month. While denying any role in Yanukovich’s ouster, the Obama administration immediately endorsed it, as Secretary of State John Kerry expressed “strong support” for the new government.

  In his memoir, former senior Obama aide Ben Rhodes acknowledged that Nuland and Pyatt “sounded as if they were picking a new government as they evaluated different Ukrainian leaders.” Rather than dispel that impression, he acknowledged that some of the Maidan “leaders received grants from U.S. democracy promotion programs.”

  In 2012, one pro-Maidan group, Center UA, received most of its more than $500,000 in donations from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the National Endowment for Democracy, eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, and financier George Soros.

  By its own count, Soros’ International Renaissance Foundation spent over $109 million in Ukraine between 2004 and 2014. In leaked documents, a former IRF board member even bragged that its partners “were the main driving force and the foundation of the Maidan movement,” and that without Soros’ funding, “the revolution might not have succeeded.” Weeks after the coup, an IRF strategy document noted, “Like during the Maidan protests, IRF representatives are in the midst of Ukraine’s transition process.”

  Jeffrey Sachs, a Columbia University professor who advised Ukraine on economic policy in the early 1990s, visited Kyiv shortly after the coup to consult with the new government. 

  “I was taken around the Maidan where people were still milling around,” Sachs recalls. “And the American NGOs were around there, and they were describing to me: ‘Oh we paid for this, we paid for that. We funded this insurrection.’ It turned my stomach.” Sachs believes that these groups were acting at the behest of U.S. intelligence. To go about “funding this uprising,” he says, “they didn’t do that on their own as nice NGOs. This is off-budget financing for a U.S. regime-change operation.”

  Weeks after vowing to bring about a “transition” in Ukraine, Sen. Murphy openly took credit for it. “I really think that the clear position of the United States has in part been what has helped lead to this change in regime,” Murphy said. “I think it was our role, including sanctions and threats of sanctions, that forced, in part, Yanukovych from office.”

  The Proxy War Gets Hot

  Far from resolving the unrest, Viktor Yanukovych’s ouster plunged Ukraine into a war.

  Just days after the Ukrainian president fled to Moscow, Russian special forces stormed Crimea’s local parliament. The following month, Russia annexed Crimea following a hasty, militarized referendum denounced by Ukraine, the U.S., and much of the world. While these objections were well-founded, Western surveys of Crimeans nonetheless found majority support for Russian annexation.

  Emboldened by the events in Crimea, and hostile to a new government that had overthrown their elected leader Yanukovych, Russophile Ukrainians in the eastern Donbas region followed suit.

  On April 6 and 7, anti-Maidan protesters seized government buildings in Donetsk, Luhansk, and Kharkiv. The Donetsk rebels declared the founding of the Donetsk People’s Republic. The Luhansk People’s Republic followed 20 days later. Both areas announced independence referendums for May 11.

  As in Crimea, Moscow backed the Donbas rebellion. But unlike in Crimea, the Kremlin opposed the independence votes. The organizers, Putin said, should “hold off on the referendum in order to give dialogue the conditions it needs to have a chance.”

  In public, the Obama administration claimed to also favor dialogue between Kyiv and the Russia-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine. Behind the scenes, a more aggressive plan was brewing.

  On April 12, CIA chief John Brennan slipped into the Ukrainian capital for secret meetings with top officials. Russia, whose intelligence services ran a network of informants inside Ukraine, publicly outed Brennan’s visit. The Kremlin and Yanukovych directly accused Brennan of encouraging an assault on the Donbas.

  The CIA dismissed the allegation as “completely false,” and insisted that Brennan supported a “diplomatic solution” as “the only way to resolve the crisis.” The following month, Brennan insisted that “I was out there to interact with our Ukrainian partners and friends.”

  Yet Russia and Yanukovych were not alone in voicing concerns about the CIA chief’s covert trip. “What message does it send to have John Brennan, the head of the CIA in Kiev, meeting with the interim government?” Sen. Murphy complained. “Does that not confirm the worst paranoia on the part of the Russians and those who see the Kiev government as essentially a puppet of the West?… It may not be super smart to have Brennan in Kiev, giving the impression that the United States is somehow there to fight a proxy war with Russia.”

  According to Telizhenko, who attended the Brennan meeting and spoke to RCI on record about it for the first time, that’s exactly what the CIA chief was there to do. Contrary to U.S. claims, Telizhenko says, “Brennan gave a green light to use force against Donbas,” and discussed “how the U.S. could support it.” One day after the meeting, Kyiv announced an “Anti-Terrorist Operation” (ATO) against the Donbas region and began a military assault.

  Telizhenko, who was by then working as a senior policy adviser to Vitaliy Yarema, the First Deputy Prime Minister, says he helped arrange the Brennan gathering after getting a phone call from the U.S. embassy. “I was told there was going to be a top secret meeting, with a top U.S. official and that my boss should be there,” he recalls. “I was also told not to tell anyone.”

  Brennan, he recalls, arrived at the Foreign Intelligence Office of Ukraine in a beat-up gray mini-van and a coterie of armed guards. Others in attendance included U.S. Ambassador Pyatt, Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov, foreign intelligence chief Victor Gvozd, and other senior Ukrainian security officials.

  After a customary exchange of medals and souvenir trophies, the topic turned to the unrest in the Donbas. “Brennan was talking about how Ukraine should act,” Telizhenko says. “A plan to keep Donbas in Ukraine’s hands. But Ukraine’s army was not fully equipped. We only had stuff in reserves. They discussed plans for the ATO and how to keep Ukraine’s military fully armed throughout.” Brennan’s overall message was that “Russia is behind” the Donbas unrest, and “Ukraine has to take firm, aggressive action to not let this spread all over.”

  Brennan and Pyatt did not respond to a request for comment.

  Two weeks after Brennan’s visit, the Obama administration offered yet another high-level endorsement of the Donbas operation when then-Vice President Biden visited Kyiv. With Ukraine facing “unrest and uncertainty,” Biden told a group of lawmakers, it now had “a second opportunity to make good on the original promise made by the Orange Revolution” – referring to earlier 2004-2005 post-electoral upheaval that blocked Yanukovych, albeit temporarily, from the presidency.

  Looking back, Telizhenko is struck by the contrast between Brennan’s bellicosity in Donbas and the Obama administration’s lax response to Russia’s Crimea grab one month prior.

  “After Crimea, they told us not to respond,” he said. But beforehand, “the Americans scoffed at warnings” that Ukraine could lose the peninsula. When Ukrainian officials met with Pentagon counterparts in March, “we gave them evidence that the little green men” – the incognito Russian forces who seized Crimea – “were Russians. They dismissed it.” Telizhenko now speculates that the U.S. permitted the Crimean takeover to encourage a conflict between Kyiv and Moscow-backed eastern Ukrainians. “I think they wanted Ukraine to hate Russia, and they wanted Russia to take the bait,” he said. Had Ukraine acted earlier, he believes, “the Crimea situation could have been stopped.”

  With Russia in control of Crimea and Ukraine assaulting the Donbas with U.S. backing, the country descended into a full-scale civil war. Thousands were killed and millions displaced in the ensuing conflict. When Ukrainian forces threatened to overrun the Donbas rebels in August 2014, the Kremlin launched a direct military intervention that turned the tide. But rather than offer Ukraine more military assistance, Obama began getting cold feet.

  Obama, senior Pentagon official Derek Chollet recalled, was concerned that flooding Ukraine with more weapons would “escalate the crisis” and give “Putin a pretext to go further and invade all of Ukraine.”

  Rebuffing pressure from within his own Cabinet, Obama promised German Chancellor Angela Merkel in February 2015 that he would not send lethal aid to Ukraine. According to the U.S. Ambassador to Germany, Peter Wittig, Obama agreed with Merkel on the need “to give some space for those diplomatic, political efforts that were under way.”

  That same month, Obama’s commitment gave Merkel the momentum to finalize the Minsk II Accords, a pact between Kyiv and Russian-backed Ukrainian rebels. Under Minsk II, an outmatched Ukrainian government agreed to allow limited autonomy for the breakaway Donbas regions in exchange for the rebels’ demilitarization and the withdrawal of their Russian allies.

  Inside the White House, Obama’s position on Ukraine left him virtually alone. Obama’s reluctance to arm Ukraine, Chollet recalled, marked a rare situation “in which just about every senior official was for doing something that the president opposed.”

  One of those senior officials was the State Department’s point person for Ukraine, Victoria Nuland. Along with allied officials and lawmakers, Nuland sought to undermine the Minsk peace pact even before it was signed.

  As Germany and France lobbied Moscow and Kyiv to accept a peace deal, Nuland addressed a private meeting of U.S. officials, generals, and lawmakers – including Sen. McCain and future Secretary of State Mike Pompeo – on the sidelines of the annual Munich Security Conference. Dismissing the French-German diplomatic efforts as an act of appeasement, Nuland outlined a strategy to continue the war with a fresh influx of Western arms. Perhaps mindful of the optics of flooding Ukraine with military hardware at a time when the Obama administration was claiming to support to a peace agreement, Nuland offered a public relations suggestion.  “I would like to urge you to use the word ‘defensive system’ to describe what we would be delivering against Putin’s offensive systems,” Nuland told the gathering.

  The Munich meeting underscored that while President Obama may have publicly supported a peace deal in Ukraine, a bipartisan alliance of powerful Washington actors – including his own principals – was determined to stop it. As Foreign Policy magazine reported, “the takeaway for many Europeans … was that Nuland gave short shrift to their concerns about provoking an escalation with Russia and was confusingly out of sync with Obama.”

  As Nuland and other officials quietly undermined the Minsk accords, the CIA deepened its role in Ukraine. U.S. intelligence sources recently disclosed to the New York Times that the agency has operated 12 secret bases inside Ukraine since 2014. The post-coup government’s first new spy chief, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, also revealed that he established a formal partnership with the CIA and MI6 just two days after Yanukovych’s ouster.

  According to a separate account in the Washington Post, the CIA restructured Ukraine’s two main spy services and turned them into U.S. proxies. Starting in 2015, the CIA transformed Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, the GUR, so extensively that “we had kind of rebuilt it from scratch,” a former intelligence official told the Post. “GUR was our little baby.” As a benefit of being the CIA’s proxy, the agency even funded new headquarters for the GUR’s paramilitary wing and a separate division for electronic espionage.

  In a 2016 congressional appearance, Nuland touted the extensive U.S. role in Ukraine. “Since the start of the crisis, the United States has provided over $760 million in assistance to Ukraine, in addition to two $1 billion loan guarantees,” Nuland said. U.S. advisers “serve in almost a dozen Ukrainian ministries,” and were helping “modernize Ukraine’s institutions” of state-owned industries.

  Nuland’s comments underscored an overlooked irony of the U.S. role in Ukraine: In claiming to defend Ukraine from Russian influence, Ukraine was subsumed by American influence.

  Boomeranging Into U.S. Politics 

  In the aftermath of the February 2014 coup, the transformation of Ukraine into an American client state soon had a boomerang effect, as maneuvers in that country increasingly impacted U.S. domestic politics.

  “Americans are highly visible in the Ukrainian political process,” Bloomberg columnist Leonid Bershidsky observed in November 2015. “The U.S. embassy in Kyiv is a center of power, and Ukrainian politicians openly talk of appointments and dismissals being vetted by U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt and even U.S. Vice President Joe Biden.”

  One of the earliest and best-known cases came in December 2015, when Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in aid unless Ukraine fired its prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, whom the vice president claimed was corrupt. When Biden’s threat resurfaced as an issue during the 2020 election, the official line, as reported by CNN, was that “the effort to remove Shokin was backed by the Obama administration, European allies” and even some Republicans.

  In fact, from Washington’s perspective, the campaign for Shokin’s ouster marked a change of course. Six months before Biden’s visit, Nuland had written Shokin that “We have been impressed with the ambitious reform and anti-corruption agenda of your government.”

  And as RCI recently reported:

  An Oct. 1, 2015, memo summarizing the recommendation of the [U.S.] Interagency Policy Committee on Ukraine stated, “Ukraine has made sufficient progress on its [anti-corruption] reform agenda to justify a third [loan] guarantee.” … The next month, moreover, the task force drafted a loan guarantee agreement that did not call for Shokin’s removal. Then, in December, Joe Biden flew to Kyiv to demand his ouster.

  No one has explained why Shokin suddenly came into the crosshairs. At the time, the prosecutor general was investigating Burisma, a Ukrainian energy firm that was paying Hunter Biden over $80,000 per month to sit on its board.

  According to emails obtained from his laptop, Hunter Biden introduced his father to a top Burisma executive less than one year before. Burisma also retained Blue Star Strategies, a D.C. consulting firm that worked closely with Hunter, to help enlist U.S. officials who could pressure the Ukrainian government to drop its criminal probes.

  Two senior executives at Blue Star, Sally Painter and Karen Tramontano, formerly worked as top aides to President Bill Clinton.

  According to a November 2015 email sent to Hunter by Vadym Pozharsky, a Burisma adviser, the energy firm’s desired “deliverables” included visits from “influential current and/or former US policy-makers to Ukraine.” The “ultimate purpose” of these visits would be “to close down” any legal cases against the company’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky. One month after that email, Joe Biden visited Ukraine and demanded Shokin’s firing.

  Telizhenko – who worked in Shokin’s office at the time, and later worked for Blue Star – said the evidence contradicts claims that Shokin was fired because of his failure, among other things, to investigate Burisma. “There were four criminal cases opened in 2014 against Burisma, and two more additionally opened by Shokin when he became the Prosecutor General,” recalls Telizhenko. “So, whenever anybody says, ‘There were no criminal cases, nobody was investigating Burisma, Shokin was fired because he was a bad prosecutor, he didn’t do his work’ … this was all a lie. No, he did his work.”

  In a 2023 interview, Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devon Archer, said Shokin was seen as a “threat” to Burisma. Both of Shokin’s cases against Burisma were closed after his firing.

  Ukraine Meddling vs. Trump

  While allegations of Russian interference and collusion would come to dominate the 2016 campaign, the first documented case of foreign meddling originated in Ukraine.

  Telizhenko, who served as a political officer at the Ukrainian embassy in Washington, D.C., before joining Blue Star, was an early whistleblower. He went public in January 2017, telling Politico how the Ukrainian embassy worked to help Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election campaign and undermine Trump’s.

  According to Telizhenko, Ukraine’s D.C. ambassador, Valeriy Chaly, instructed staffers to shun Trump’s campaign because “Hillary was going to win.”

  Telizhenko says he was told to meet with veteran Democratic operative Alexandra Chalupa, who had also served in the Clinton White House. “The U.S. government and people from the Democratic National Committee are approaching and asking for dirt on a presidential candidate,” Telizhenko recalls. “And Chalupa said, ‘I want dirt. I just want to get Trump off the elections.’”

  Starting in early 2016, U.S. officials leaned on the Ukrainians to investigate Paul Manafort, the GOP consultant who would become Trump’s campaign manager, and avoid scrutiny of Burisma, as RCI reported in 2022. “Obama’s NSC hosted Ukrainian officials and told them to stop investigating Hunter Biden and start investigating Paul Manafort,” a former senior NSC official told RCI. In January 2016, the FBI suddenly reopened a closed investigation into Manafort for potential money laundering and tax evasion connected to his work in Ukraine.

  Telizhenko, who attended a White House meeting with Ukrainian colleagues that same month, says he witnessed Justice Department officials pressing representatives of Ukraine’s Corruption Bureau. “The U.S. officials were asking for the Ukrainian officials to get any information, financial information, about Americans working for the former government of Ukraine, the Yanukovych government,” he says.

  By the time Telizhenko spoke out, Ukrainian officials had already admitted intervening in the 2016 election to help Clinton’s campaign. In August, Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) released what it claimed was a secret ledger showing that Manafort received millions in illicit cash payments from Yanukovych’s party. The Clinton campaign, then in the early stages of its effort to portray their Republican rival as a Russian conspirator, seized on the news as evidence of Trump’s “troubling connections” to “pro-Kremlin elements in Ukraine.”

  The alleged ledger was first obtained by Ukrainian lawmaker Serhiy Leshchenko, who had claimed that he had received it anonymously by mail. Yet Leshchenko was not an impartial source: He made no effort to hide his efforts to help elect Clinton. “A Trump presidency would change the pro-Ukrainian agenda in American foreign policy,” Leshchenko told the Financial Times. For him, “it was important to show … that [Trump] is [a] pro-Russian candidate who can break the geopolitical balance in the world.” Accordingly, he added, most of Ukraine’s politicians were “on Hillary Clinton’s side.”

  Manafort, who would be convicted of unrelated tax and other financial crimes in 2018, denied the allegation. The ledger was handwritten and did not match the amounts that Manafort was paid in electronic wire transfers. Moreover, the ledger was said to have been stored at Yanukovych’s party headquarters, yet that building was burned in a 2014 riot by Maidan activists.

  Telizhenko agrees with Manafort that the ledger was a fabrication. “I think the ledger was just made up because nobody saw it, and nobody got the official documents themselves. From my understanding it was all a toss-up, a made-up story, just because they could not find any dirt on the Trump campaign.”

  But with the U.S. media starting to amplify the Clinton campaign’s Trump-Russia conspiracy theories, a wary Trump demanded Manafort’s resignation. “The easiest way for Trump to sidestep the whole Ukraine story is for Manafort not to be there,” Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and a Trump campaign adviser, explained.

  The 2016 Russian Hacking Claim

  The release of the Manafort ledger and cooperation with the Democratic National Committee was not the end of Ukraine’s 2016 election interference.

  A recent account in the New York Times revealed that Ukrainian intelligence played a vital role in generating CIA allegations that would become a foundation of the Russiagate hoax – that Russia stole Democratic Party emails and released them via WikiLeaks in a bid to help elect Trump. Once again, CIA chief Brennan played a critical role.

  In the Times’ telling, some Obama officials wanted to shut down the CIA’s work in Ukraine after a botched August 2016 Ukrainian intelligence operation in Crimea turned deadly. But Brennan “persuaded them that doing so would be self-defeating, given the relationship was starting to produce intelligence on the Russians as the C.I.A. was investigating Russian election meddling.” This “relationship” between Brennan and his Ukrainian counterparts proved to be pivotal. According to the Times, Ukrainian military intelligence – which the CIA closely managed – claimed to have duped a Russian officer into “into providing information that allowed the C.I.A. to connect Russia’s government to the so-called Fancy Bear hacking group.”

  “Fancy Bear” is one of two alleged Russian cyber espionage groups that the FBI has accused of carrying out the 2016 DNC email theft. Yet this allegation has a direct tie not just to Ukraine, but to the Clinton campaign. The name “Fancy Bear” was coined by CrowdStrike, a private firm working directly for Clinton’s attorney, Michael Sussmann. As RealClearInvestigations has previously reported, CrowdStrike first accused Russia of hacking the DNC, and the FBI relied on the firm for evidence. Years after publicly accusing Russia of the theft, CrowdStrike executive Shawn Henry was forced to admit in sworn congressional testimony that the firm “did not have concrete evidence” that Russian hackers took data from the DNC servers.

  CrowdStrike’s admission about the evidentiary hole in the Russian hacking allegation, along with the newly disclosed Ukrainian intelligence role in generating it, were both kept under wraps throughout the entirety of Special Counsel Robert Muller’s probe into alleged Russian interference. But when Trump sought answers on both matters, he once again found himself the target of an investigation.

  In late September 2019, weeks after Mueller’s halting congressional testimony – which left Trump foes dissatisfied over his failure to find insufficient evidence of a Russian conspiracy – House Democrats kicked off an effort to impeach Trump for freezing U.S. weapons shipments in an alleged scheme to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Bidens. The impeachment was triggered by a whistleblower complaint about a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky two months prior. The “whistleblower” was later identified by RealClearInvestigations as Eric Ciaramella, an intelligence official who had served as Ukraine adviser to then-Vice President Biden when he demanded Shokin’s firing and to the Obama administration’s other key point person for Kyiv, Victoria Nuland.

  Yet Trump’s infamous July 2019 phone call with Zelensky was not primarily focused on the Bidens. Instead, according to the transcript, Trump asked Zelensky to do him “a favor” and cooperate with a Justice Department investigation into the origins of Russiagate, which, he asserted, had Ukrainian links. Trump specifically invoked CrowdStrike, the Clinton campaign contractor that had generated the allegation that Russia had hacked the Democratic Party emails. CrowdStrike’s allegation of Russian interference, Trump told Zelensky, had somehow “started with Ukraine.”

  More than four years after the call, and eight years after the 2016 campaign, the New York Times’ recent revelation that the CIA relied on Ukrainian intelligence operatives to identify alleged Russian hackers adds new context to Trump’s request for Zelensky’s help. Asked about the Times’ disclosure, a source familiar with Trump’s thinking confirmed to RCI that the president was indeed referring to a Ukrainian role in the Russian hacking allegations that consumed his presidency. “That’s why they impeached him,” the source said. “They didn’t want to be exposed.”

  Trump’s First Impeachment

  The first impeachment of Donald Trump once again inserted Ukraine into the highest levels of U.S. politics. But the impact may have been even greater in Ukraine.

  When Democrats targeted Trump for his phone call with Zelensky, the rookie Ukrainian leader was just months into a mandate that he had won on a pledge to end the Donbas war. In his inaugural address, Zelensky promised that he was “not afraid to lose my own popularity, my ratings,” and even “my own position – as long as peace arrives.”

  In their lone face-to-face meeting, held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, Trump tried to encourage Zelensky to negotiate with Russia. “I really hope that you and President Putin can get together and solve your problem,” Trump said, referring to the Donbas war. “That would be a tremendous achievement.”

  But Ukraine’s powerful ultra-nationalists had other plans. Right Sector co-founder Dmytro Yarosh, commander of the Ukrainian Volunteer Army, responded: “No, he [Zelensky] would lose his life. He will hang on some tree on Khreshchatyk [Kyiv’s main street] – if he betrays Ukraine” by making a peace with the Russian-backed rebels.

  By impeaching Trump for pausing U.S. weaponry to Ukraine, Democrats sent a similar message. Trump, the final House impeachment report proclaimed, had “compromised the national security of the United States.” In his opening statement at Trump’s Senate trial, Rep. Adam Schiff – then seeking to rebound from the collapse of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory – declared: “The United States aids Ukraine and her people, so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.”

  Other powerful Washington officials, including star impeachment witness William Taylor, then serving as the chief U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, pushed Zelensky toward conflict.

  Just before the impeachment scandal erupted in Washington, Zelensky was “expressing curiosity” about the Steinmeier Formula, a German-led effort to revive the stalled Minsk process, which he “hoped might lead to a deal with the Kremlin,” Taylor later recounted to the Washington Post. But Taylor disagreed.  “No one knows what it is,” Taylor told Zelensky of the German plan. “Steinmeier doesn’t know what it is … It’s a terrible idea.”

  With both powerful Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and Washington bureaucrats opposed to ending the Donbas war, Zelensky ultimately abandoned the peace platform that he was elected on. “By early 2021,” the Post reported, citing a Zelensky ally, “Zelensky believed that negotiations wouldn’t work and that Ukraine would need to retake the Donetsk and Luhansk regions ‘either through a political or military path.’”

  The return of the Biden team to the Oval Office in January 2021 appears to have encouraged Zelensky’s confrontational path. By then, polls showed the rookie president trailing OPFL, the opposition party with the second-most seats in parliament and headed by Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian mogul close to Putin.

  The following month, Zelensky offered his response to waning public support. Three OPFL-tied television channels were taken off the air. Two weeks later, Zelensky followed up by seizing the assets of Medvedchuk’s family, including a pipeline that brought Russian oil through Ukraine. Medvedchuk was also charged with treason. 

  Zelensky’s crackdown drew harsh criticism, including from close allies. “This is an illegal mechanism that contradicts the Constitution,” Dmytro Razumkov, the speaker of the parliament and a manager of Zelensky’s presidential campaign, complained.

  Yet Zelensky won praise from the newly inaugurated Biden White House, while hailed his effort to “counter Russia’s malign influence.” 

  It turns out that the U.S. not only applauded Zelensky’s domestic crackdown, but inspired it. Zelensky’s first national security adviser, Oleksandr Danyliuk, later revealed to Time Magazine that the TV stations’ shuttering was “conceived as a welcome gift to the Biden Administration.” Targeting those stations, Danyliuk explained, “was calculated to fit in with the U.S. agenda.” And the U.S. was a happy recipient. “He turned out to be a doer,” a State Department official approvingly said of Zelensky. “He got it done.”

  Just days after receiving Zelensky’s “welcome gift” in March 2021, the Biden administration approved its first military package for Ukraine, valued at $125 million. That same month, Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council approved a strategy to recover all of Crimea from Russian control, including by force. By the end of March, intense fighting resumed in the Donbas, shattering months of a relatively stable ceasefire.

  Russia offered its own reaction. Two days after its ally Medvedchuk’s assets were seized in February, Russia deployed thousands of troops to the Ukraine border, the beginning of a build-up that ultimately topped 100,000 and culminated in an invasion one year later.

  The Kremlin, Medvedchuk claimed, was acting to protect Russophile Ukrainians targeted by Zelensky’s censorship. “When they close TV channels that Russian-speaking people watched, when they persecute the party these people voted for, it touches all of the Russian-speaking population,” he said.

  Medvedchuk also warned that the more hawkish factions of the Kremlin could use the crackdown as a pretext for war. “There are hawks around Putin who want this crisis. They are ready to invade. They come to him and say, ‘Look at your Medvedchuk. Where is he now? Where is your peaceful solution? Sitting under house arrest? Should we wait until all pro-Russian forces are arrested?’ ”

  A Whistleblower Silenced
  on Alleged Biden Corruption

  Along with encouraging a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine, the first Trump impeachment also promoted the highly dubious Democratic Party narrative that scrutiny of Ukrainian interference in U.S. politics was a “conspiracy theory” or “Russian disinformation.” Another star impeachment witness, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who leaked the Trump/Zelensky phone call to Ciaramella, testified that Telizhenko – who had blown the whistle on Ukrainian collusion with the DNC – was “not a credible individual.”

  Telizhenko was undeterred. After detailing reliable evidence of Ukrainian’s 2016 election interference to Politico, Telizhenko continued to speak out – and increasingly drew the attention of government officials who sought to undermine his claims by casting him as a Russian agent.

  Beginning in May 2019, Telizhenko cooperated with Rudy Giuliani, then acting as Trump’s personal attorney, in his effort to expose information about the Bidens’ alleged corruption in Ukraine. During Giuliani’s visits to Ukraine, Telizhenko served as an adviser and translator.

  That same year, Telizhenko testified to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as part of a probe into whether the DNC’s 2016 collusion with the Ukrainian embassy violated campaign finance laws. By contrast, multiple DNC officials refused to testify. Telizhenko then cooperated with a separate Senate probe, co-chaired by Republicans Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, on how Hunter Biden’s business dealings impacted U.S. policy in Ukraine.

  By the lead-up to the 2020 election, Telizhenko found himself the target of a concerted effort to silence him. As the Senate probed Ukraine, the FBI delivered a classified warning echoing Democrats’ talking points that Telizhenko was among the “known purveyors of Russian disinformation narratives” about the Bidens. In response, GOP Sen. Johnson dropped plans to subpoena Telizhenko. Nevertheless, Telizhenko’s communications with Obama administration officials and his former employer Blue Star Strategies were heavily featured in Johnson and Grassley’s final report on the Bidens’ conflicts of interest in Ukraine, released in September 2020.

  The U.S. government’s claims of yet another Russian-backed plot to hurt a Democratic Party presidential nominee set the stage for another highly consequential act of election interference. On October 14, 2020, the New York Post published the first in a series of stories detailing how Hunter Biden had traded on his family name to secure lucrative business abroad, including in Ukraine. The Post’s reporting, based on the contents of a laptop Hunter’s had apparently abandoned in a repair shop, also raised questions about Joe Biden’s denials of involvement in his son’s business dealings.

  The Hunter Biden laptop emails pointed to the very kind of influence-peddling that the Biden campaign and Democrats routinely accused Trump of. But rather than allow voters to read the reporting and judge for themselves, the Post’s journalism was subjected to a smear campaign and a censorship campaign unparalleled in modern American history. In a statement, a group of more than 50 former intelligence officials – including John Brennan, the former CIA chief – declared that the Hunter Biden laptop story “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” Meanwhile, Facebook and Twitter prevented the story from being shared on their social media networks.

  The FBI lent credence to the intelligence veterans’ false claim by launching a probe into whether the laptop contents were part of a “Russian disinformation” campaign aiming to hurt Biden. The bureau initiated this effort despite having been in possession of Hunter Biden’s laptop, which it had verified as genuine, for almost a year. To buttress innuendo that the laptop was a Russian plot, a CNN report suspiciously noted that Telizhenko had posted an image on social media featuring Trump holding up an edition of the New York Post’s laptop story.

  In January 2021, shortly before Biden took office, the U.S. Treasury Department followed suit by imposing sanctions on Telizhenko for allegedly “having directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign influence in a United States election.”

  Treasury, however, did not release any evidence to support its claims. Two months later, the department issued a similar statement in announcing sanctions on former Manafort aide Konstantin Kilimnik, whom it accused of being a “known Russian Intelligence Services agent implementing influence operations on their behalf.” Treasury’s actions followed a bipartisan Senate Intelligence report that also accused Kilimnik of being a Russian spy. As RealClearInvestigations has previously reported, neither the Treasury Department or Senate panel provided any evidence to support their allegations about Kilimnik, which were called into question by countervailing information that RCI brought to light. Just like Telizhenko, Kilimnik had extensive contacts with the Obama administration, whose State Department treated him as a trusted source.

  The U.S. government’s endorsement of Democratic claims about Telizhenko had a direct impact on the FEC investigation into DNC-Ukrainian collusion, in which he had testified. In August 2019, the FEC initially sided with Telizhenko and informed Alexandra Chalupa – the DNC operative whom he outed for targeting Paul Manafort – that she plausibly violated the Federal Election Campaign Act by having “the Ukrainian Embassy… [perform] opposition research on the Trump campaign at no charge to the DNC.” The FEC also noted that the DNC “does not directly deny that Chalupa obtained assistance from the Ukrainians nor that she passed on the Ukrainian Embassy’s research to DNC officials.”

  But when the Treasury Department sanctioned Telizhenko in January 2021, the FEC suddenly reversed course. As RealClearInvestigations has previously reported, the FEC closed the case against the DNC without punitive action. Democratic commissioner Ellen Weintraub even dismissed allegations of Ukrainian-DNC collusion as “Russian disinformation.” As evidence, she pointed to media reports about Telizhenko and the recent Treasury sanctions against him.

  Yet Telizhenko’s detractors have been unable to adduce any concrete evidence tying him to Russia. A January 2021 intelligence community report, declassified two months later, accused Russia of waging “influence operations against the 2020 US presidential election” on behalf of Trump. It made no mention of Telizhenko. The Democratic-led claims of Telizhenko’s supposed Russian ties are additionally undermined by his extensive contact with Obama-Biden administration officials, as journalist John Solomon reported in September 2020.

  Telizhenko says he has “no connection at all” to the Russian government or any effort to amplify its messaging. “I’m ready,” he says. “Let the Treasury Department publish what they have on me, and I’m ready to go against them.  Let them show the public what they have.  They have nothing … I am ready to talk about the truth.  They are not.”

  Epilogue

  Just as Telizhenko has been effectively silenced in the U.S. establishment, so has the Ukrainian meddling that he helped expose. Capturing the prevailing media narrative, the Washington Post recently claimed that Trump has “falsely blamed Ukraine for trying to help Democratic rival Hillary Clinton,” which, the Post added, is “a smear spread by Russian spy services.” This narrative ignores a voluminous record that includes Ukrainian officials admitting to helping Clinton.

  As the Biden administration successfully pressured Congress to approve its $61 billion funding request for Ukraine, holdout Republicans were similarly accused of parroting the Kremlin. Shortly before the vote, two influential Republican committee chairmen, Reps. Mike Turner of Ohio and Mike McCaul of Texas, claimed that unnamed members of their caucus were repeating Russian propaganda. Zelensky also asserted that Russia was manipulating U.S. opponents of continued war funding: “When we talk about the Congress — do you notice how [the Russians] work with society in the United States?”

  Now that Biden has signed that newly authorized funding into law, the president and his senior aides have been handed the means to extend a proxy war that they launched a decade ago and that continues to ravage Ukraine. In yet another case of Ukraine playing a significant role in domestic U.S. politics, Biden has also secured a boost to his bid for reelection. As the New York Times recently observed: “The resumption of large-scale military aid from the United States all but ensures that the war will be unfinished in Ukraine when Americans go to the polls in November.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 02:00

• US, Philippines Working On Intel Sharing Deal Amid Clashes With Chinese Vessels
  US, Philippines Working On Intel Sharing Deal Amid Clashes With Chinese Vessels

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  The US and the Philippines are working on a new intelligence-sharing deal as tensions are soaring between Manila and Beijing in the South China Sea.

  The Defense Post reported that US and Philippine officials discussed the potential agreement, known as the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA), during talks held in Washington last week.

  

  In a joint statement, the two nations said they wanted to conclude the GSOMIA by the end of 2024. The agreement would formalize intelligence sharing between the two militaries and create protocols for top-secret information.

  The US and the Philippines are currently conducting the Balikatan exercise, a major military drill the two nations hold annually. This year’s iteration is being billed as the most “expansive” yet and includes exercises in Luzon, a northern Philippine province that faces Taiwan, and Palawan, a province on the South China Sea.

  The South China Sea has become a potential flashpoint for a war between the US and China as Washington has committed to intervening if Philippine vessels come under attack in the waters.

  Chinese and Philippine boats often have tense encounters near disputed rocks and reefs, which sometimes end in collision.

  The US has been increasing its military presence in the South China Sea and is encouraging its allies, including Japan and Australia, to do the same. Alliance building in the region is a major aspect of the US military buildup that’s being done to prepare for a future war with China.

  The latest clash among rival coast guard patrols happened Tuesday…

  VIDEO: The Philippines said the China Coast Guard fired water cannon Tuesday at two of its vessels, causing damage to one of them, during a patrol near a reef off the Southeast Asian country. pic.twitter.com/Ro5kxk5DqW

  — AFP News Agency (@AFP) April 30, 2024

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

  In the joint statement released last week, the US and the Philippines committed to “expanding multilateral cooperation with likeminded countries, including through maritime cooperative activities, bilateral and multilateral exercises, and security cooperation coordination.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 05/01/2024 – 00:00

• Senate Passes Ban Of Russian Uranium Imports, Risking Market "Havoc" And Soaring Prices
  Senate Passes Ban Of Russian Uranium Imports, Risking Market “Havoc” And Soaring Prices

  With shares of CCJ tumbling earlier today after the company reported soggy Q1 earnings, despite its recent initiating coverage report by an enthusiastic Goldman Sachs which sees the Uranium company at the forefront of the “Next AI trade” and slapped it with a $55 price target (as we reported previously), the uranium trade suddenly found itself in need of a miracle.

  It got that after hours, when the Senate voted late on Tuesday to approve legislation banning the import of enriched uranium from Russia – the same Russia which supplies 25% of the uranium used by the 90 US commercial nuclear reactors – and sending the measure to the White House which has said it supports efforts to block the Kremlin’s shipments of the reactor fuel and is expected to sign the deal, guaranteeing that uranium prices will soar.

  

  The Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act, approved by unanimous consent and which must be sign by Biden before becoming law –  would bar US imports 90 days after enactment while allowing temporary waivers until January 2028.

  Some context for what this ban would mean for the US: Russia provided almost a quarter of the enriched uranium used to fuel America’s fleet of more than 90 commercial reactors, making it the No. 1 foreign supplier, according to US Energy Department data. Those sales provide an estimated $1 billion a year to Russia, but replacing that supply could be a challenge and risks raising the costs of enriched uranium by about 20%.

  

  The White House had called for a “long-term ban” on Russian imports, which is needed to unlock some $2.7 billion to stand up a domestic uranium industry made available by Congress earlier this year, contingent on there being limits on the import of Russian uranium in place.

  “This is a national security priority as dependence on Russian sources of uranium creates risk to the US economy and the civil nuclear industry that has been further strained by Russia’s war in Ukraine,” the White House said earlier in a fact sheet. “Without action, Russia will continue its hold on the global uranium market to the detriment of US allies and partners.”

  The House bill was approved by voice vote in December amid growing congressional support to cut off Russia in the wake of its invasion of Ukraine. The US has banned imports of Russian oil and worked with Group of Seven allies to impose a price cap on seaborne exports of crude and petroleum products.

  To be sure, there are loopholes: the legislation, which expires at the end of 2040, permits the Department of Energy to issue waivers authorizing the entire volume of Russian uranium imports allowed under export limits set in an anti-dumping agreement between the Department of Commerce and Russia through 2027.

  Without those waivers, an approximate 20% jump is possible from the current enrichment spot price of $165 per separative work unit to a record high of as much as $200 per SWU, according to Jonathan Hinze, president of nuclear fuel market research firm UxC. Enriched uranium is measured in separative work units, or SWU, which account for the volume and enrichment density of the radioactive metal.

  “But if there is an immediate ban it could be even more extreme,” Hinze said. “There are very limited supplies available.”

  Still, since the government is now intimately involved in every aspect of the uranium procurement, it is virtually guaranteed that prices will soar, which is why CCJ stock recouped almost all of its losses after hours.

  And while the Biden admin’s decision may be mostly posturing, it’s possible Russia will respond with a unilateral export ban if the US bars imports. Last December, Tenex, a Russian state-owned uranium company, warned American customers that the Kremlin may preemptively bar exports of its nuclear fuel to the US if lawmakers in Washington pass legislation prohibiting imports starting in 2028.

  Tenex’s US subsidiary told electric companies including Constellation Energy Corp., Duke Energy Corp. and Dominion Energy to prepare for such an outcome.

  “Tenex completely refutes as inaccurate the information regarding the alleged ‘warnings’ of a potential ‘pre-emptive’ ban on enriched uranium supplies to the United States,” Rosatom’s press office said in an emailed statement.

  As Bloomberg reported at the time, “a move to bar exports would risk wreaking havoc in uranium markets, causing prices to spike for the nuclear reactor fuel that may be harder for smaller utilities to absorb.”

  An import ban will take some time to affect operators of US nuclear power plants. Reactors are typically refueled every 18 months to 24 months, and fuel purchases are negotiated long in advance. That means most but not all utilities have already lined up enough uranium to keep their reactors running for at least the next few years. Still, negotiations for subsequent commodity procurement take place all the time, and while there is no immediate risk of scarcity, once the 2026 refueling negotiations take place, watch as Uranium stocks explode to new all time high.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 23:40

• NYPD Raids Columbia, Protesters Arrested
  NYPD Raids Columbia, Protesters Arrested

  Update (2335ET):

  The NYPD stormed Columbia University Tuesday evening at around 9pm local time, where they began arresting students occupying Hamilton Hall and cleared a nearby protest encampment on the college’s lawn.

  

  BREAKING 🚨

  Massive amounts of NYPD officers have entered the @Columbia campus to clear out pro-Hamas occupiers. pic.twitter.com/Ujj2Dxz30w

  — Shelley G (@ShelleyGldschmt) May 1, 2024

  Around 50 students were arrested and moved out of Hamilton Hall after activists took it over nearly 24 hours earlier amid two weeks of campus protests over the Israel-Gaza war. 

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

  🚨#BREAKING: New York police tactical teams can be seen raiding and clearing out students and protesters inside the Hamilton Hall building⁰⁰📌#Manhattan | #Newyork ⁰⁰New footage has been released by the New York Police Department, showing tactical teams fully equipped in riot… pic.twitter.com/kC93cAlN3a

  — R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) May 1, 2024

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

  🚨#BREAKING: The New York Police Department has just announced that they have declared a riot as they make their way into Columbia University, where violent protests are expected to break out as mrap swat vehicle can be seen rolling into the University pic.twitter.com/0MdnAhhErO

  — R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) May 1, 2024

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

  While early reports suggested the use of tear gas, NYPD Assistant Commissioner of Public Information, Carlos Nieve, denied it – telling Axios, “The NYPD does not use tear gas.”

  🚨#BREAKING: Police have begun entering the Hamilton Hall building through a second-floor window, deploying tear gas inside. Reports indicate there is an unconscious student in front of Hamilton Hall pic.twitter.com/IgoXOi6ZI6

  — R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) May 1, 2024

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

  NYPD Riot Cops are officially storming Columbia University! I was just chased off the sidewalk! Thank you so much for keeping us all safe from non-existent Anti-Semitism! ⁦Hopefully now Israel can continue to pulverize Gaza in peace! @JoeBiden⁩ ⁦@SpeakerJohnson⁩⁩ pic.twitter.com/jf4E7NKZvY

  — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) May 1, 2024

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

  Columbia officials said that the hall was “occupied, vandalised and blockaded,” and that “we were left with no choice.”

  Some of the kids are being a tad dramatic…

  NYC — As police attempt to clear the violent siege of Hamilton Hall at @Columbia, far-left rioters pretend to be injured in slapstick-style performances for cameras. A person rolls down the stairs while another on the ground snaps to her feet to fight. pic.twitter.com/udWcHg0rus

  — Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) May 1, 2024

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

  NYC man speaks out against college protesters:

  “The majority of these college students are here on a government loan”

  “They are studying something unbelievably stupid”

  “These are 10,000 people with nowhere else to be”

  “The average person at these protests is the kid that’s… pic.twitter.com/bl2j6OQYjj

  — Wall Street Silver (@WallStreetSilv) May 1, 2024

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

  *  *  *

  Dozens of Columbia University students broke into Hamilton Hall on the New York campus early Tuesday and barricaded themselves inside, hours after the school began suspending students who violated a deadline to disperse from a pro-Palestinian encampment.

  

  “The safety of every single member of this community is paramount,” said Ben Chang, vice president for communications at Columbia University, in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, adding “In light of the protest activity, we have asked members of the University community who can avoid coming to the Morningside campus to do so; essential personnel should report to work according to university policy.”

  Holy…. pic.twitter.com/42Lw4kaRHY

  — Jessica Schwalb (@jessicaschwalb7) April 30, 2024

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

  Taking over Hamilton Hall as done in 1968, Columbia students unfurl a banner that reads “Hind’s Hall,” in reference to Hind Rajab, a six-year-old girl killed by Israeli forces.
  Hundreds of students cheer as the banner is revealed, erupting into chants to “Free Palestine.” pic.twitter.com/Oi8WgdZmqf

  — Prem Thakker (@prem_thakker) April 30, 2024

  As the Epoch Times‘ Katabella Roberts notes further;  According to The New York Times, the students began occupying the hall at around 12:35 a.m.

  The protesters linked arms and blocked off the main entrance to the building at the Ivy League institution after previously marching around campus to chants of “free Palestine,” according to the publication.

  A statement shared on the social media platform Instagram by student groups said the protesters had “taken matters into their own hands,” and would remain in the building until the university “divests from death.” Protesters have been urging the university to pause its investments in companies that, they claim, are profiting from Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.

  The statement included video footage that appeared to show the students carrying metal barricades into Hamilton Hall as other students cheered them on.

  “This escalation is in line with the historical student movements of 1968, 1985, and 1996 which Columbia repressed then and celebrates now,” the statement read. “This action will force the university to confront the blood on its hands.”

  In the statement, the student group further accused the university of having been “complicit” in “Israel’s ongoing genocidal assault on the Gaza strip” for the past seven months.
  “The students are on the right side of history,” the statement continued. “We know that the university will remember them as anti-apartheid, anti-genocide activists with moral clarity.”

  Protesters Make Demands

  According to Politico, protesters hung a sign reading “intifada,” which is Arabic for uprising, from the front of the building.

  A spokesperson for the New York Police Department told Politico that law enforcement officers were outside the university campus as of Tuesday; however, they declined to elaborate further on exactly how many officers were on site or whether they had authorization to enter the school grounds.

  The Epoch Times has contacted a spokesperson at Columbia University and the New York Police Department for further comment.

  The takeover of Hamilton Hall occurred just hours after the university confirmed that it had begun suspending some students. The pro-Palestinian students failed to disband before Monday’s 2 p.m. deadline.

  

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

  Students have occupied the lawn in the middle of campus—in which graduation ceremonies are scheduled to take place for roughly 15,000 students on May 15—for nearly two weeks while calling on the university to disclose and divest from any of its financial ties to Israel.

  They are also calling for an end to alleged “land grabs” in the Harlem neighborhood of New York City and Palestine, no more policing on the university campus, and no academic ties with Israeli universities.

  However, negotiations between university officials and student protest leaders broke down earlier in the day when the university rejected their demands, prompting officials to issue the 2 p.m. deadline.
  In a statement, Minouche Shafik, Columbia’s president, said that ultimately, the university will not divest from Israel, adding that the school is committed to maintaining its core principles and shared values, which include ensuring no students suffer from harassment and discrimination and no anti-Semitic language is used.

  

  School, Students Fail to Reach Agreement

  “Both sides in these discussions put forward robust and thoughtful offers and worked in good faith to reach common ground,” Ms. Shafik said. “We thank them all for their diligent work, long hours, and careful effort and wish they had reached a different outcome.”

  While the University will not divest from Israel, it has offered to “develop an expedited timeline for review of new proposals from the students by the Advisory Committee for Socially Responsible Investing, the body that considers divestment matters,” Ms. Shafik noted.

  “The University also offered to publish a process for students to access a list of Columbia’s direct investment holdings, and to increase the frequency of updates to that list of holdings,” she added.

  Ben Chang, vice president for communications at Columbia University, confirmed the suspensions had begun in a press conference late Monday, USA Today reports.

  He added that students had been notified in advance that they would face disciplinary action, including suspension if they did not vacate the encampment by 2 p.m. ET and sign a form committing to abide by student politics until either June 30, 2025, or until their graduation, whichever came first.

  The site of the protests has created an unwelcoming environment for many Jewish students and faculty members, he said. It has also been a source of loud noise.

  “We’ve been suspending students as part of this next phase of our efforts to ensure safety on campus,” Mr. Chang said.

  Mr. Chang did not provide further details regarding how many students from Columbia and its affiliate Barnard College have been disciplined. However, he confirmed that those suspended would not be able to finish the semester or graduate, Axios reports.

  They will also be banned from entering any campus housing or academic buildings, he added.

  Juliette Fairley contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 23:34

• Biden Considering Bringing Some Refugees From Gaza To The US
  Biden Considering Bringing Some Refugees From Gaza To The US

  With scenes like this spreading across the country, as standoffs at various liberal campuses turn increasingly more violent…

  PANDEMONIUM IN NYC pic.twitter.com/6E6na2r14k

  — The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) May 1, 2024

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

  … the Biden administration appears to have gotten its Soros marching orders to pour gasoline into the fire, with CBS reporting that the White House is considering bringing “certain Palestinians” to the U.S. as refugees, a move that would offer a permanent safe haven to some of those fleeing war-torn Gaza, and would also drastically escalate what has already been the 2024 equivalent of the 2020 BLM summer of violence, only this time with spoiled, rich Marxist kids pretending they live in the 1960s and their actions can stop the war in Vietnam Middle East.

  According to the report, in recent weeks senior officials across several federal U.S. agencies have discussed the practicality of different options to resettle Palestinians from Gaza who have immediate family members who are American citizens or permanent residents.

  One of those proposals involves using the decades-old United States Refugee Admissions Program to welcome Palestinians with U.S. ties who have managed to escape Gaza and enter neighboring Egypt, according to the inter-agency planning documents.

  Top U.S. officials have also discussed getting additional Palestinians out of Gaza and processing them as refugees if they have American relatives, the documents show. The plans would require coordination with Egypt, which has so far refused to welcome large numbers of people from Gaza.

  Those who pass a series of eligibility, medical and security screenings would qualify to fly to the U.S. with refugee status, which offers beneficiaries permanent residency, resettlement benefits like housing assistance and a path to American citizenship.

  While the eligible population is expected to be relatively small, the plans being discussed by U.S. officials could offer a lifeline to some Palestinians fleeing the Israel-Hamas war, which local public health authorities say has claimed the lives of more than 34,000 people and displaced hundreds of thousands of civilians in Gaza.

  Needless to say, this comes from the same admin which a few days ago decided against a ban of menthol cigarettes over fears it would alienate the black vote, and today targeted the pot-smoking voters with a report the DEA was preparing to reclassify marijuana to a less dangerous drug category. The same admin which in the past 2 years has welcomed over 20 million illegals with the hope that they will illegally vote for Biden and the Democrats, and thus enshrine the current kleptofascist regime in perpetuity. So it is hardly a surprise that Biden, desperate to avoid losing the vote of the ultra-left progressive wing of the Democrat party which just happens to sympathize with Hamas, will pander to this group whose votes may end up deciding the November election.

  Naturally, news of the proposal spread like wildfire with prominent republicans slamming the idea…

  Biden wants to bring to America the same Gazans who elected and support Hamas?

  This may be his worst idea yet.

  — Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) April 30, 2024

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

  … although as with most things republicans oppose, or at least pretend to oppose, it is guaranteed that Biden will once again get his way, even though – as so many have noted – the US is on the verge of accepting Palestinians from Gaza when not a single Arab nation is doing so.

  The Biden Administration is considering bringing in Palestinians from Gaza as refugees into the US. But not a single Arab nation is welcoming their own brothers from Gaza. Why is that?

  Let’s find out. pic.twitter.com/srdNjNb4N5

  — Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) April 30, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 23:20

• Meet The Lawyers Taking Big Government To The Supreme Court… And Winning
  Meet The Lawyers Taking Big Government To The Supreme Court… And Winning

  Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As the administrative state implements more regulations on Americans, a team of legal veterans has come together to fight the expansion of unelected government agency power.

  

  Sometimes, they even win.

  The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), which consists of a team of 27 lawyers and support staff, including former judges, had four of the cases they litigated go before the Supreme Court in 2023. One case was decided in their favor, the remaining three are pending.

  Founded by Columbia Law professor Philip Hamburger six years ago, the NCLA targets cases where they believe federal agencies have blatantly overstepped their authority or violated civil liberties..

  “Normally, administrative power is understood as a separation of powers question, but it’s also a civil liberties problem because it dilutes our voting rights,” Mr. Hamburger told The Epoch Times. “We all get to vote, but the ability to make legislation is no longer in the hands of the people we elect.”

  The U.S. Constitution vests Congress with law-making authority. However, government agencies are not only making laws today, he said, they also enforce those laws, then act as judge and jury over alleged violations. Taking a historical view on this issue, Mr. Hamburger argues that such administrative “absolutism” is not a new phenomenon, but merely a modern expression of absolute power once wielded by medieval kings.

  The group’s clients include Drs. Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff, and Aaron Kheriaty, and Ms. Jill Hines, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri, which is currently before the Supreme Court. This case involves alleged violations of the doctors’ First Amendment rights by the White House, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the FBI, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and the Surgeon General.

  “It deprives us of the right to a jury; it deprives us of ordinary burdens of proof; it deprives us of having an unbiased judge,” he said. “We have ALJs and commissioners instead.”

  ALJ’s are “executive judges for official and unofficial hearings of administrative disputes in the federal government,” according to a Cornell Law School definition.

  “Administrative law judges are considered part of the executive branch, not the judicial branch, and ALJs are appointed by the heads of the executive agencies.”

  In this way, Mr. Hamburger said, the administrative state has not only accumulated powers explicitly vested in other branches of government; it has consolidated within itself the power of all three branches.

  Supreme Court Taking Notice

  The NCLA’s actions have been resonating in America’s court system, particularly the Supreme Court.

  

  “In 2018, we started filing briefs at the Supreme Court and almost immediately we were having an effect on the discussions of administrative power,” Peggy Little, senior counsel at the NCLA, told The Epoch Times.

  In one case, SEC v. Cochran, which Ms. Little led, appellate courts took the side of the SEC. This case challenged the lifetime tenure of ALJs, who act as judges for federal agencies.

  “We battled that for five years, and we had six circuit courts of appeals against us,” she said. “We got to the Supreme Court and we won unanimously.”

  Ms. Little said she is optimistic that the tide of expanding agency power can be turned back.

  “I think we are in a very important time for rethinking how our government should operate,” Ms. Little said, “and restoring the separation of powers and guardrails on agency power, that limit it to what Congress has actually empowered the agency to do, not what the agency itself thinks would be a good idea.”

  Mr. Hamburger said the NCLA has several advantages when arguing their cases.

  “We have the truth on our side, and I think the justices understand that,” he said. “Second, we take the Constitution seriously, while many agencies view it as a minor impediment to what they want to do in regulation.”

  In addition, “the administrative state has changed,” he said..

  “It isn’t like the 1930s where it was just an addition to the law; it is now the primary mode of controlling us,” he said. “It may eventually unravel our republic.”

  The End of ‘Chevron Deference’?

  One of the pivotal court decisions behind the expansion of the administrative state was the 1984 ruling in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.

  The Supreme Court decision in that case gave broad discretion to federal agencies to interpret for themselves how much authority Congress had given them. This led to a concept known as “Chevron deference,” where courts tended to defer to agencies regarding the scope of their power.

  There appeared to be a reversal of this doctrine with the 2022 Supreme Court Decision in West Virginia v. EPA, in which the court ruled that “the Government must point to ‘clear congressional authorization’ to regulate.” This case involved the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) attempt to regulate CO2 emissions by power generators, effectively compelling them to shift from coal and gas to so-called renewables, like wind and solar energy.

  But while this ruling may have slowed the expansion of the administrative state, it has by no means halted it. On April 25, the EPA set down a new regime for CO2 emissions, mandating that new gas and existing coal plants cut their greenhouse gas emissions by 90 percent by 2032.

  

  While many U.S. presidents have pushed for greater powers for the executive branch, the Biden administration has been particularly aggressive. This includes a 2021 edict from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requiring employees of large companies to take the COVID-19 vaccine; a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) mandate requiring all listed companies to submit audited reports on greenhouse gas emissions; EPA mandates designed to phase out coal plants and gas-fired cars and trucks; new restrictions on consumer appliances from the Department of Energy; and several executive orders to transfer student loan debt to taxpayers.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 23:00

• "House Destocking": China Politburo Hints New PLan To Fix BIggest Drag On The Economy
  “House Destocking”: China Politburo Hints New PLan To Fix BIggest Drag On The Economy

  China’s Politburo meeting on economic policy took place today, and as SocGen’s Wei Yao reports, the most important takeaway from the meeting is that policymakers are shifting their attention to housing destocking, as they pledged to ‘study measures’.

  As usual about 3 years behind the curve, Beijing policymakers – who burst China’s housing bubble sparking unprecedented wealth destruction across the country once the world’s largest asset class (as the chart from Goldman shows)…

  

  … went into freefall 3 years ago, have been alarmed by the drop in housing sales and home prices in recent months, and finally sense the urgency to provide more measures to avoid a sustained downturn, which can be harmful for household wealth and confidence, not to mention can lead to sporadic revolutions which overthrow the ruling “communist” kleptocracy made up of billionaire oligarchs.

  According to the SocGen strategist, “this change of attitude is important and with sufficient measures could help put a floor on housing. This may be THE catalyst to extend the recovery in confidence and equity markets, at least cyclically.“

  Below we excerpt several more key points from the SocGen report:

  Growth has improved but it’s not the time to reduce support. Policymakers acknowledged that the economy has improved, but demand remains insufficient and external uncertainty has risen notably. That is probably related to recent complaints from various countries on China’s overcapacities and the upcoming US election. Hence, economic policies need to avoid tightening too quickly. So we shouldn’t be concerned that policies will be less accommodative even with the improvement in 1Q GDP.

  The focus is on faster implementation of announced policies. Policymakers pledge to frontload and effectively implement macro policies that have been announced. That is in line with our expectations that no fresh stimulus will be added. These involve speeding up the utilisation of special CGBs and special LGBs, flexibly using interest rates and RRR cuts to lower financing costs, as well implementing the replacement of consumer goods and equipment. Therefore, we should see a continued recovery in infrastructure investments, while the strength of replacement policies is more uncertain as it depends on local policies. We also expect the PBoC to cut the the RRR and the 5y LPR further.

  Government to help on housing destocking? Beside countercyclical policies, the most important change is on the property sector. Policymakers pledge to study policies to support housing destocking, with no details announced. This is mentioned by policymakers for the first time, and follows more easing measures at a local level recently (e.g. relaxing purchase restrictions in Chengdu and promoting new home sales by tasking local SOEs to purchase existing homes from potential buyers). While it remains to be seen how the policies will be funded with local governments under fiscal pressure, this change of attitude is important, and can help reduce the chance of a sustained decline in house prices.

  The statement also mentioned other key policy goals, such as resolving local government debt risks (good luck). The government is focusing on reducing debt in high risk provinces, but it also stresses on growth stability, which means it will not push too hard since all growth in China is debt-funded.

  It is also interesting to note that the tasks to support low-income groups and to build a social safety net are mentioned, but without concrete details. Other tasks include promoting new productivity, resolving smaller banks’ risks, promoting capital market development and implementing measures to reach peak carbon.

  Separately, it was also announced that the Third Plenum, which had been delayed, will take place in July and will discuss reform directions to promote “modernization of the economy.” The confirmation of the date in itself is likely to be viewed as a positive sign, even though we do not have high expectations from the plenum yet.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 22:40

• The World Health Organization’s Pandemic Treaty Ignores Covid Policy Mistakes
  The World Health Organization’s Pandemic Treaty Ignores Covid Policy Mistakes

  Authroed by Kevin Bardosh & Jay Bhattarcharya via RealClearPolicy,

  The World Health Organization is urging the U.S. and 193 other governments to commit next month to a new global treaty to prevent and manage future pandemics. Current estimates suggest over $31 billion per year will be needed to fund its obligations, a cost most lower income countries cannot afford. But that isn’t the only reason to oppose it. Validating this treaty is a vote for the disastrous policies of the Covid years. Rather than taking time for deep reflection and serious reform, those pushing the pandemic treaty are set on ignoring and institutionalizing the WHO’s mistakes.

  

  From the Spring of 2020, many experts warned that the panic begun in Wuhan’s unprecedented lockdown would cause wide-ranging damage—and indeed they did. School closures deprived a generation of children—especially poor children—of access to basic education. Businesses were shuttered. Vaccine and mask mandates made public health an authoritarian exercise of power devoid of science. Border quarantines promulgated the idea that the rest of the world is unclean.  

  But few experts care to seriously dissect these errors. How many schools of public health—in America or Europe—held serious debates during the Covid response, or since? Very few.

  Opposing the treaty is a signal to the WHO and global health community that they cannot whitewash these mistakes. Next time, we need to ensure a better balance between trade-offs, evidence-based policies, and democratic rights. Such a view seeks to restore the WHO’s own definition of health into pandemic response: “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”

  Yet the governing philosophy of the WHO emergency program is the exact opposite. Its leaders chastise the world to “move faster’ and “do more.” Bill Gates, the agency’s single largest private donor, is convinced lockdown benefits vastly outweighed their harms. He’s wrong. 

  Read through the current draft of the treaty itself and you will find a whole section dedicated to “fighting misinformation.” There is no section focused on preventing harm. Those speaking out about these dangers have been subjected to harsh censorship. Once esteemed professionals were summarily fired for describing the reality of what was happening. The authors of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration—professors at Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford—were subject to a “devastating takedown” at the hands of Dr. Fauci and top scientific bureaucrats at the National Institutes of Health and the WHO. 

  Public health came to resemble the police, and those pushing the new WHO treaty want to go further. It calls for more mandates, more vaccine passports, and more censorship—our new global health “Lockdown Doctrine.”

  Proponents of the treaty would have you believe that it is merely a tool that countries can use to guide future pandemic response efforts, that it cannot trump national sovereignty or be used to force failed policies on entire populations. But the lifeblood of international treaties is not in the dried ink. Treaties are constantly ignored. Nonetheless, they do one thing very well: they create an illusion of consensus, signaling to those with power and influence. These priorities are then filtered down into national laws and plans where they can do tremendous damage. 

  How can national governments seriously endorse an international agreement when their own domestic Covid evaluations are ongoing? The UK Covid Inquiry is set to end in 2026. Australia’s commission is ongoing. Italy and Ireland have only recently announced them. Most have none planned. 

  The rush needs to slow down. The U.S. should avoid signing until a thorough, bipartisan review of WHO’s Covid pandemic management is accomplished. Until then, a vote for a pandemic treaty is a vote against real, positive change. 

  Kevin Bardosh is Director and Head of Research at Collateral Global. Jay Battacharya is a Professor at Stanford School of Medicine.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 22:20

• Meet The Lifelong Felon Who Killed Four Cops In North Carolina 
  Meet The Lifelong Felon Who Killed Four Cops In North Carolina 

  A neighborhood in Charlotte, North Carolina, was transformed into a warzone on Monday afternoon when a lifelong felon, illegally owning firearms, ambushed a US Marshals Fugitive Task Force and police officers as they were serving a warrant. 

  Three US Marshals and an officer from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department were killed in the shootout. Additionally, four police officers and one Marshal were injured.

  During a Monday evening press conference, police identified lifelong felon 39-year-old Terry Clark Hughes, Jr., who was also killed in the shootout. 

  Meet the deceased Charlotte shooting suspect: Terry Clark Hughes, Jr. pic.twitter.com/UjOjVZ33Si

  — Unbiased Crime Report (@UnbiasedCrime) April 30, 2024

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

  Has leftist corporate media identified the felon? Maybe not, because it doesn’t fit the narrative. 

  CNN has not. Fox News has. 

  

  According to police, US Marshals attempted to serve Hughes a warrant for firearm possession. He was also wanted for two counts of felony flee to elude out of the Charlotte area. 

  Police believe there were two other shooters in the home. A 17-year-old and a woman, both of them, were taken into police custody. 

  “We have two people of interest at the police station that are being questioned right now,” Police Chief Johnny Jennings told reporters. 

  Jennings said, “And we have confirmed that the individual that was set up that we were serving the warrant on was the individual who fired the initial shots and was deceased in the front yard at the end of all of this.” 

  America needs to restore law and order, and leftist corporate media outlets must report the news fairly. Perhaps this is why their ratings are imploding, as everyday Americans begin to see through their narrative control of misinformation and disinformation.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 22:00

• Health Canada Asked Pfizer For DNA Fragments Size In COVID Shots, Linked To 'Probability' Of Genomic 'Integration'
  Health Canada Asked Pfizer For DNA Fragments Size In COVID Shots, Linked To ‘Probability’ Of Genomic ‘Integration’

  Authored by Noé Chartier via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Canada’s drug regulator asked Pfizer to provide data on the size of DNA fragments in its COVID-19 vaccine, due to genomic integration concerns, shortly after learning the pharma giant withheld information on DNA sequences contained in its product.

  “Concerning the residual plasmid DNA in the drug substance, provide data/information characterizing […] the size distribution of the residual DNA fragments [and] residual intact circular plasmid,” says a request for clarification Health Canada issued to Pfizer on Aug. 4, 2023.

  

  The information was released as part of records obtained through an access-to-information request. It shows, in part, that a Health Canada official was keeping the department’s counterparts in the United States and Europe apprised of the department’s interactions with Pfizer, in a bid to harmonize the regulators’ approaches regarding the recently discovered DNA fragment impurities.

  “As you are aware, the fragment size is related to the probability of integration, and the WHO guidance assumes a fragment size of generally less than 200 bp,” Dr. Dean Smith, a senior scientific evaluator in Health Canada’s Vaccine Quality Division, wrote in an October 2023 email to counterparts at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

  DNA plasmids are used in the manufacturing process of mRNA vaccines and residual elements are supposed to be cleaned out below a certain threshold. Pfizer said DNA in its products is below the 10ng/dose guideline established by the World Health Organization (WHO) and followed by Health Canada, according to the official records.

  This assertion has been challenged by independent scientists, who found quantities of DNA in the vaccines to be above the threshold. They have also found the DNA fragments are larger than 200 base pairs (bp).

  Virologist Dr. David Speicher, who has studied Canadian mRNA vials, told The Epoch Times the average size of fragments his study found is 214 base pairs (bp), with some as large as 3.5 kilobase (kb).

  While small fragments frequently integrate spontaneously into the genome, these mutations are stopped through either DNA repair mechanisms or cellular death, Dr. Speicher said.

  “Larger fragments are much more problematic, especially if attached to an SV40 enhancer, because they can integrate into the genome where they can get transcribed and then translated into proteins,” he added. Independent scientists like Dr. Speicher found the undisclosed SV40 enhancer in Pfizer shots, a piece of biotechnology used to drive gene expression.

  Depending on the DNA fragment size, it can produce functional or aberrant proteins, Dr. Speicher explains. “These proteins can affect cellular metabolism, an immune response, as well as an increased risk for cancer. The risk of integration and associated health problems increases with the number of shots.”

  The Florida State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo has called for a halt of mRNA shots, citing concern about these risks. Dr. Philip Buckhaults, professor of cancer genomics and director of the Cancer Genetics Lab at the University of South Carolina, has initiated a study to investigate the risks.

  Health Canada has not studied those risks, but told The Epoch Times last summer “the presence of residual plasmid DNA in the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines does not change the safety assessment of these vaccines.”

  Seeking Clarifications

  Despite providing this answer to media in the summer of 2023, Health Canada scientists were privately discussing working with international partners to have Pfizer remove DNA fragments and SV40 sequences from its vaccines and they prepared several requests for clarification to the company.

  In an August 2023 email to a colleague providing information to relay to Pfizer, Health Canada senior biologist evaluator Dr. Michael Wall said his department would “continue to work with international regulatory partners to achieve harmonization regarding removal of these sequence elements from the plasmid for future strain changes.”

  Records show Health Canada was blindsided by the presence of undisclosed genetic substances in the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, almost four years after the initial emergency authorization.

  After Pfizer filed its submission for the authorization of its updated Omicron XBB.1.5 shot on July 21, 2023, Health Canada sent the company several Quality Clarifax—requests for additional information if deficiencies are identified in drug submissions—with the first one dated Aug. 4, 2023.

  Regarding the residual plasmid DNA in the COVID-19 vaccines, Health Canada asked Pfizer to provide data on the size distribution of the DNA fragments and on residual intact circular plasmid.

  Pfizer said this data was “not readily available and will require time to generate,” in a response on Aug. 11, 2023. The pharma giant added that Pfizer, the drug sponsor, and BioNTech, the manufacturer, had not been previously requested to provide this data across global markets.

  Pfizer committed to provide the data by Dec. 1, but the response is not captured in the information package released under the access-to-information regime.

  In a subsequent request for information sent on Aug. 22, 2023, Health Canada noted Pfizer’s commitment to provide the information and added a request by asking Pfizer to address “whether the residual DNA plasmid is capable of replication in bacteria.”

  Virologist Dr. Speicher, commenting on the agency’s request, noted that plasmids need to be circular to be replicated in a bacterial host, and that fragments can’t do so.

  “So if they were intact circular plasmids and injected, they could be taken up by our host bacteria, especially in the gut,” he said. “If the plasmid could propagate in bacteria into our body it could lead to a bacterial spike factory and drive kanamycin/neomycin resistance.”

  “This would cause an increase in antibiotic resistance of the bacteria including pathogens and increase spike production, and we know that spike is toxic on so many levels,” he said.

  Dr. Speicher added that Pfizer should have tested for this before putting its products to market. The fact that it did not have the data indicates it did not test for it, he said.

  SV40 Enhancer

  The request for information that Health Canada sent to Pfizer mainly focused on the presence of the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) enhancer-promoter in the Pfizer-BioNTech shots.

  Health Canada and other regulators like the FDA and EMA were not aware of its presence, since Pfizer “chose not to” disclose it, according to a separate email from Health Canada scientist Dr. Smith.

  Many sections of the Clarifax are redacted under the Access to Information Act, with reasons such as content containing proprietary information or which could lead to a material gain or loss for a third party, in this case Pfizer and BioNTech.

  The information disclosed shows that Health Canada challenged Pfizer on SV40 and asked for a “justification for the SV40 regulatory elements in the plasmid.”

  Pfizer responded that the “SV40 regulatory region sequences [redacted] in the submission since this [redacted] is relevant neither for plasmid production in E. coli nor for production of mRNA.”

  This is the position that has been adopted by Health Canada. In response to questions by the media and parliamentarians, the regulator has stated the SV40 enhancer-promoter is “inactive” and has “no functional role.”

  But Pfizer and Health Canada have not addressed why the SV40 enhancer-promoter is present in the vaccine if it is not used in the production of mRNA and has no functional role. Genomics expert Kevin McKernan has questioned this when faced with responses from regulators.

  Mr. McKernan made the initial DNA and SV40 fragments discovery and published his study in April 2023. His pre-print paper on the matter appears twice in the Health Canada information package released via access-to-information.

  Mr. McKernan has pointed out that regulators could have discovered the SV40 sequences themselves had they run the plasmid through a computer annotation tool.

  “If you ever used plasmid annotation tools, they annotate everything on the map and they don’t leave anything unannotated,” he told the International Covid Summit in February. 

  He provided his assessment to the summit of why Pfizer went this route. “They’re hiding the fact that this tool [SV40 enhancer] is used as a gene therapy tool and would classify their system as a gene therapy,” he said. “Because it’s a nuclear targeting sequence it moves DNA directly to the nucleus within hours in all cell lines.”

  The American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy (ASGCT) classifies the mRNA injections as gene therapy, whereas Health Canada does not.

  “The mRNA from the vaccines does not enter the cell nucleus or interact with the DNA at all, so it does not constitute gene therapy,” said Health Canada in a response to a parliamentarian on Dec. 13. The ASGCT also says the mRNA doesn’t alter the “recipient’s generic material” and is only present in the body “transiently.” However, because the vaccine introduces “new genetic material into cells for a short period of time to induce antibodies,” the American organization considers it gene therapy.

  Pfizer said in a response to the Aug. 4 Health Canada request for information that the “SV40 promotor/enhancer DNA does not contain known oncogenes, infectious agents, or regions that could lead to functional transcripts, the DNA does not present any specific safety concerns.”

  Health Canada also said in a document tabled in Parliament in March that “any claims the presence of the SV40 promoter enhancer sequence is linked to an increased risk of cancer are unfounded.” Health Canada itself has not studied the risks.

  ‘Drive Gene Expression’

  A senior Health Canada’s scientist’s view on the role of SV40 fragments is captured in an Oct. 26 email written in response to questions from Chief Medical Officer Dr. Supriya Sharma.

  Dr. Tong Wu of Health Canada’s Vaccine Quality Division responded that the “SV40 promoter enhancer is widely used to drive gene expression in mammalian cells.” He added, however, that it “serves no purpose in the manufacturing of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines.”

  Dr. Wu said it was unexpected to find the sequence in the finished product, since “Pfizer did not identify the presence of SV40 promoter enhancer on the plasmid template used to produce mRNA, in their original filing.”

  Dr. Wu also said that “to the best of our knowledge,” no other vaccine approved in Canada contains the SV40 sequence.

  Pfizer was contacted for comment, but the company hasn’t responded to inquiries.

  Matthew Horwood contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 21:40

• Employers Must Honor Preferred Pronouns, Bathrooms For Employees Identifying As Transgender: Feds
  Employers Must Honor Preferred Pronouns, Bathrooms For Employees Identifying As Transgender: Feds

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

  The Biden administration has rolled out a set of new guidelines, under which an employer would be deemed liable for harassment for referring to a worker by an unwanted pronoun or requiring the worker to use a restroom that aligns with his or her biological sex.

  

  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published the new workplace harassment guidelines on Monday after approving them in a party-line 3–2 vote on Friday. The new document enshrines gender identity as a category protected against harassment, just like sex, race, religion, or disability.

  “Harassing conduct based on sexual orientation or gender identity includes … repeated and intentional use of a name or pronoun inconsistent with the individual’s known gender identity (misgendering) or the denial of access to a bathroom or other sex-segregated facility consistent with the individual’s gender identity,” the new guidelines state.

  Joining Chairwoman Charlotte Burrows to vote in favor of the updated harassment guidance were two other Democrat commissioners, Jocelyn Samuels and Kalpana Kotagal. The two Republican members, Keith Sonderling and Andrea Lucas, voted against the changes.

  “Women’s sex-based rights in the workplace are under attack—and from the EEOC, the very federal agency charged with protecting women from sexual harassment and sex-based discrimination at work,” Ms. Lucas said in a statement on Monday.

  “The commission’s guidance effectively eliminates single-sex workplace facilities and impinges on women’s rights to freedom of speech and belief,” she added, accusing her Democrat colleagues of disregarding “biological realities, sex-based privacy and safety needs of women.”

  Legal Implications

  A guideline is not legally binding in the same way as laws passed by Congress or rules issued by government agencies. The EEOC website describes guidance as “official agency policy and explains how the laws and regulations apply to specific workplace situations.”

  However, Monday’s guidance communicates the EEOC’s position on legal issues, meaning an employee could potentially refer to the new guidelines in the event of a restroom or pronoun dispute.

  “Harassment, both in-person and online, remains a serious issue in America’s workplaces,” said Ms. Burrows in a statement Monday. “The EEOC’s updated guidance on harassment is a comprehensive resource that brings together best practices for preventing and remedying harassment and clarifies recent developments in the law.”

  The new federal guidance comes about three years after the EEOC suffered a legal defeat in its attempt to create exceptions for employees identifying as LGBT from workplace policies on restrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes.

  In August 2021, a coalition of attorneys general from 20 states sued to have the LGBT exception blocked, arguing that authority over such policies “properly belongs to Congress, the States, and the people.”

  “The guidance purports to resolve highly controversial and localized issues such as whether employers … may maintain sex-separated showers and locker rooms, … and whether individuals may be compelled to use another person’s preferred pronouns,” the complaint read. “But the agencies have no authority to resolve those sensitive questions, let alone to do so by executive fiat without providing any opportunity for public participation.”

  The lawsuit was led by Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery. He was joined by attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and West Virginia.

  In July 2022, a federal judge in Tennessee ruled in favor of the coalition to enjoin the EEOC guidance from going forward. Later that year, a separate federal court in Texas vacated and set aside the proposed guidance, determining that the EEOC misinterpreted the scope of the U.S. Supreme Court landmark 2020 ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, which concluded that it is unconstitutional for sexual orientation and gender identity to be considered as factors in employment decisions.

  The EEOC did not appeal those rulings.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 21:00

• Riverside County Sheriff's Deputy Caught Trafficking Fentanyl For Sinaloa Cartel
  Riverside County Sheriff’s Deputy Caught Trafficking Fentanyl For Sinaloa Cartel

  A former Riverside County Sheriff’s deputy, who was apprehended last year as part of an investigation into the Sinaloa cartel, has been found to have been working for “El Chapo” himself. 

  25 year old Jorge Oceguera-Rocha resigned from his position with the Sheriff after being caught with over 100 pounds of fentanyl pills and a firearm during a traffic stop in Calimesa, in September of last year, KTLA reports.

  Authorities did not specify how they discovered his alleged involvement in drug trafficking, but he was identified as a “corrupt Riverside County Correctional Deputy” mentioned in a press release about Operation Hotline Bling.

  

  Operation Hotline Bling “culminated last week with 15 arrests and significant drug seizures, including methamphetamine and quantities of fentanyl that potentially could produce 10 million lethal doses,” according to the DEA:

  In March 2023, the Drug Enforcement Administration Riverside District Office and the Riverside Police Department, with assistance from the United States Postal Inspection Service, initiated Operation “Hotline Bling.” During the investigation, agents seized a total of approximately 376 pounds of methamphetamine, 37.4 pounds of fentanyl, 600,000 fentanyl tablets, 1.4 kilograms of cocaine, and seven firearms. The drugs seized in this investigation have an estimated “street value” of $16 million.

  This operation targeted Sinaloa cartel activities in the Inland Empire, resulting in 15 arrests and the seizure of $16 million worth of narcotics. The Sinaloa cartel, once led by Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, is renowned for its influence akin to that of Pablo Escobar in the 1980s and early ’90s.

  Oceguera-Rocha faces multiple local felony charges and the Sheriff’s Department confirmed his involvement in trafficking narcotics within Riverside County while off duty.

  Although federal prosecutors didn’t press charges, Riverside County officials charged him with possession and transportation of narcotics, with enhancements for the drug’s weight, and possession of a firearm in connection with narcotics.

  The initial report on the arrest noted he was being detained at the John Benoit Detention Center with a $5 million bail, justified by the drug’s weight and potential flight risk. If convicted, he faces up to 10 years in jail.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 20:40

• First Cases Of HIV Transmitted Through Cosmetic Needles Identified: CDC
  First Cases Of HIV Transmitted Through Cosmetic Needles Identified: CDC

  Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Multiple people contracted human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) through cosmetic needles after receiving facials at an unlicensed spa in New Mexico, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  

  Three women who received platelet-rich plasma (PRP) microneedling facials, also known as vampire facials, at the spa contracted HIV and an investigation pointed to the facials as the method of transmission, a new paper from CDC scientists states.

  The spa in question, the since-shuttered VIP Salon, was dubbed spa A in the paper.

  “This investigation is the first to associate HIV transmission with nonsterile cosmetic injection services. A common exposure to spa A among clients without behaviors associated with HIV acquisition helped identify a possible cluster association, and analysis of additional data suggested that HIV transmission likely occurred via receipt of PRP with microneedling facial procedures,” said the scientists, who worked with New Mexico health officials.

  The source of the contamination remains unknown, they said.

  PRP microneedling facials involve taking blood from a person and separating out PRP. Then, a microneedle makes holes in the person’s skin, and the PRP is applied to the holes.

  The procedure is said to help treat acne and have other health benefits.

  New Mexico authorities announced in 2019 that they were investigating the VIP Spa after people contracted HIV following visits to the spa. Officials were providing free testing of any people who received treatments, including the microneedling facials, at the spa.

  An inspection by authorities led to the closure of VIP Spa after the identification of unsafe practices.

  Maria de Lourdes Ramos de Ruiz, former owner of the spa, was later hit with felony charges, including practicing medicine without a license. She pleaded guilty in 2022 to five counts.

  “This is a warning to those who place profit over the health and safety of New Mexico consumers, and I remain highly concerned that these procedures are not being regulated at the state and federal level,” New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas said at the time.

  Investigation

  New Mexico officials described two HIV cases among spa visitors previously. A wider investigation identified additional patients, scientists with the state and the CDC said in the new paper.

  Through calls, surveys, and other methods, authorities found five people with HIV, four of whom received microneedling at the spa in 2018. The fifth was in a sexual relationship with a spa client. Analysis of the patients’ blood showed that their cases were all related to the facility.

  The cases involving the man and woman in a sexual relationship were stage 3 or chronic HIV, which suggests “that their infections were likely attributed to exposures before receipt of cosmetic injection services,” according to the scientists.

  But no alternative explanations for the infections among the other three female patients were discovered.

  “The other three patients in this cluster had no known social contact with one another, and no specific mechanism for transmission among these patients was confirmed,” scientists said. “Evidence suggests that contamination from an undetermined source at the spa during spring and summer 2018 resulted in HIV-1 transmission to these three patients.”

  HIV is a virus that attacks immune systems and can lead to acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) if not treated. Symptoms include sore throat, fatigue, and ulcers in the mouth. Most people who contract the illness are gay or bisexual. While there is no cure for HIV, it can be controlled through available treatments.

  Nearly 200 other spa clients and their sexual partners were tested through 2023 as part of the investigation but none tested positive for HIV, hepatitis B, or hepatitis C, according to the paper.

  The findings highlight the importance of looking at “novel sources of HIV transmission among persons with no known HIV risk factors,” the scientists said.

  They also encouraged facilities to implement practices to control infections to try to prevent the transmission of bloodborne pathogens.

  Inspection Results

  When the spa was inspected in 2018, authorities saw troubling practices.

  Lying on a kitchen counter, for instance, were a centrifuge, a heating dry bath, and a rack of unlabeled tubes containing blood.

  In a refrigerator, stored with food, authorities found tubes of blood without labels, as well as medical injectables such as Botox.

  Unwrapped syringes were located in multiple places, including in drawers.

  No steam sterilizer was present and certain items designed to be disposable were cleaned and reused by staffers at the spa, authorities said.

  The investigation was hindered by disorganized records, including the lack of a system for scheduling appointments, according to the paper. Such systems usually include contact information for clients. Investigators combed through handwritten records and other documents to identify people who may have undergone the microneedling procedure.

  “Incomplete spa client records posed a substantial challenge during this investigation, necessitating a large-scale outreach approach to identify potential cases, as opposed to direct communication with all clients,” researchers said. “Requiring maintenance of sufficient client records to ensure adequate traceback by regulated businesses that provide injection services could ensure adequate capability to conduct traceback.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 20:20

• Independent Candidate RFK Jr. Clinches Spot On California Presidential Ballot
  Independent Candidate RFK Jr. Clinches Spot On California Presidential Ballot

  Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

  Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. secured his spot on the California presidential ballot after receiving a nomination from the American Independent Party (AIP).

  

  Mr. Kennedy said in a video released Tuesday that he and his running mate, Nicole Shanahan, are officially qualified to appear on the ballot in California, the most populous state in the United States.

  Huge news! Kennedy-Shanahan on the California ballot! Watch the video below to hear how it happened ⬇️ #KennedyShanahan24 pic.twitter.com/wV2R4P9y8Q

  — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) April 29, 2024

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

  He said that “ironically” the AIP was initially the party of Alabama’s former Gov. George Wallace, known for his segregationist politics in the 1960s, but that the party had undergone “its own rebirth” before he came along.

  “It’s been reborn as a party that represents not bigotry and hatred, but rather compassion and unity and idealism and common sense,” Mr. Kennedy said in the video posted on social media platform X.

  “When they learned about my candidacy, they had just drafted a new charter for their reborn party where they could use their battle line for good for helping independent candidates to unite America without being blocked by the two-party duopoly,” he added.

  The AIP is California’s third-largest qualified political party, with more than 835,000 registered voters in the state, according to the party’s press release.

  AIP state chairman Victor Marani said he had filed all the necessary paperwork with the California Secretary of State to put Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Shanahan on the state’s ballot.

  “Our party is pleased to provide the opportunity for all 22 million voters in California to vote for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for President. Voters crave a real leader who will unite America,” he said in a statement.

  Joe Cook, the regional field director-west for the Kennedy Campaign, said the AIP has “redefined its purpose and offers inspirational candidates a pathway to elected office outside the major parties.”

  “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the perfect candidate to embody this new shift to independent leaders that serve the common good,” he added.

  Since announcing last October that he would leave the Democrat Party’s presidential primary and run as an independent, Mr. Kennedy has said multiple times that he would appear on the general election ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

  To combat anticipated challenges from Democrats and Republicans regarding the validity of signatures, Mr. Kennedy’s campaign has said they are collecting 60 percent more signatures than required in every state.

  Some members of Mr. Kennedy’s family have previously denounced his decision to run for president as an independent candidate, calling it “perilous” and “dangerous to our country.”

  During an interview with CNN on March 25, his sister, Rory Kennedy, explained that they viewed his independent bid as dangerous because they believed his campaign was “siphoning” votes from President Joe Biden, potentially bolstering former President Donald Trump’s chances of winning.

  

  2024 presidential contender Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks with his vice presidential pick Nicole Shanahan in Oakland, Calif., on March 26, 2024. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

  “I feel strongly that this is the most important election of our lifetime. And there’s so much at stake, and I do think it’s going to come down to a handful of votes and a handful of states,” she told the news outlet.

  “And I do worry that Bobby just taking some percentage of votes from Biden could shift the election and lead to Trump’s election,” said Ms. Kennedy, the youngest daughter of late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 19:40

• South Korea's Central Bank Says May Buy Gold In The Mid To Long-Term
  South Korea’s Central Bank Says May Buy Gold In The Mid To Long-Term

  Back in 2011, around the time gold hits its previous cycle high, South Korea surprised the fiat world when it revealed that it had spent more than a billion dollars in its first gold purchase in more than a decade, as uncertainty about global growth and sovereign debt push central banks around the world to diversify foreign reserves. It then proceeds to buy a lot more gold (relatively speaking) for the next year and a half before halting purchases indefinitely once again in 2013. It now holds 104.4 tonnes of gold in its foreign exchange reserves, or $4.8 billion, accounting for 1.1% of its total $419.3 billion in reserves at the end of March.

  

  That may change soon, however, because with gold hitting a new all time high in recent weeks, South Korea’s central bank may consider buying more gold in the mid- to long-term, even if it is not thinking of immediately buying more after a recent surge in prices of the precious metal, a bank official said on Tuesday.

  The bank’s rare comments come after this month’s record high of $2,431.29 an ounce in spot gold as growing Middle East tension drove investors to seek safe-haven assets. The metal has risen 13% this year, building on a gain of 13% in 2023.

  “We don’t have any immediate plans to buy gold now,” Kwon Min-soo, head of the Bank of Korea’s reserve management group told Reuters, adding that numerous factors needed to be weighed to ensure the right circumstances for such purchases.

  “Foreign exchange reserves must be on a sufficiently increasing trend, and the foreign exchange market must be stable in order to ‘consider’ purchasing additional gold as an asset, which is why we would consider them only in the mid- to long-term,” he said.

  Translation: South Korea will buy more gold, but only after spot prices have jumped another several hundred dollars.

  In a blog post earlier, the bank’s Reserve Management Group said it needed to be cautious when investing in gold, but advantages offered by the precious metal included its role as a hedge against inflation and an alternative to the US dollar.

  Recent gains in gold prices were due mostly to purchases by central banks of countries such as China, Russia and Turkey, which are trying to become less dependent on the US currency or guard against war, the bank said.

  The thaw in sentiment toward gold is a reversal from the BOK’s June 2023 position when the central bank said it was more desirable to maintain dollar liquidity than boost its gold holdings, after its first inspection of gold holdings at the Bank of England.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 19:20

• Appeals Court Says State Health Policies Excluding Transgender Surgeries Violate Constitution
  Appeals Court Says State Health Policies Excluding Transgender Surgeries Violate Constitution

  Authored by Sam Dorman via The Epoch Times,

  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled against two state-level health policies that exclude so-called “gender-affirming” treatments, teeing up potential review by the U.S. Supreme Court…

  

  Judge Roger Gregory, an appointee of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, wrote in his majority opinion that the policies’ exclusion of surgeries such as vaginoplasties for certain diagnoses violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

  “The coverage exclusions facially discriminate on the basis of sex and gender identity, and are not substantially related to an important government interest,” he said.

  The 8–6 decision affirmed lower court decisions against West Virginia’s Medicaid policy and the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees. Both aimed to preclude coverage of procedures or treatments pursuant to attempts at changing one’s gender.

  During oral arguments in September, at least two judges said it’s likely the case will eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

  Judge Gregory’s opinion rejected the idea that the policies didn’t discriminate on the basis of gender identity merely because they focused on diagnoses rather than individuals experiencing that condition.

  “Appellants argue that the district courts’ equal-protection analyses were flawed because, they say, the exclusions distinguish on the basis of diagnosis,” he said.

  He added that “in this case, discriminating on the basis of diagnosis is discriminating on the basis of gender identity and sex.”

  Later in the opinion, Judge Gregory wrote that “gender dysphoria is so intimately related to transgender status as to be virtually indistinguishable from it. The excluded treatments aim at addressing incongruity between sex assigned at birth and gender identity, the very heart of transgender status.”

  He later added that in “addition to discriminating on the basis of gender identity, the exclusions discriminate on the basis of sex.”

  “Certain gender-affirming surgeries that could be provided to people assigned male at birth and people assigned female at birth are provided to only one group under the policy. Those surgeries include vaginoplasty (for congenital absence of a vagina), breast reconstruction (post-mastectomy), and breast reduction (for gynecomastia).”

  Criticism

  Judge Gregory’s opinion encountered three separate dissents, including one in which Judge Harvie Wilkinson, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, argued “the science behind gender dysphoria care is far from settled.”

  He suggested the majority overstepped its authority in encroaching on state decisions about health care.

  “Providing the best possible care to adults and youth struggling with gender dysphoria is a challenging task for our States,” he said.

  “But it is one that they are entitled to perform without premature judicial interference.”

  Andrea Picciotti-Bayer, director of the Conscience Project, said in a statement to The Epoch Times that the decision “cries out for reversal from the Supreme Court.”

  She warned that Judge Gregory’s reasoning “surely will be cited in attempts to force private insurance plans to do the same.”

  Judge Marvin Quattlebaum, an appointee of President Donald Trump, said the majority “improperly” declared statements from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health “to be facts.”

  “Individually and combined, these missteps improperly stack the deck, effectively ignoring the fair-minded debate about the medical necessity and efficacy of the treatments the plaintiffs seek,” he added.

  Lambda Legal, which challenged both states’ policies, declared victory.

  “We are pleased with the Court’s decision, which will save lives. It confirms that discriminating against transgender people by denying critical medical care is not only wrong but unconstitutional,” Lambda Legal Senior Counsel Tara Borelli said in a press release.

  “No one should be denied essential health care, but our clients in both cases were denied coverage for medically necessary care prescribed by their doctors just because they’re transgender.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 19:00

• Apollo Slapped With Lawsuit Alleging "Widespread Fraudulent Human Life Wagering Conspiracy" 
  Apollo Slapped With Lawsuit Alleging “Widespread Fraudulent Human Life Wagering Conspiracy” 

  Apollo Global Management has been entangled in a scandalous lawsuit and accused of acquiring illegal life insurance policies on senior citizens through a complex web of shell trusts. 

  The company allegedly used an affiliate, Financial Credit Investment, to manage about a $20 billion portfolio of stranger-originated life insurance policies, effectively engaging in what the lawsuit claims:

  “In short, Apollo has been carrying out a widespread fraudulent human life wagering conspiracy designed to not only hide its involvement, but to create the false appearance that the policies it owns are somehow legitimate.” 

  The complaint continues:

  “Worse still, when Apollo senses a claim is going to be brought, it attempts to dissolve its shell entities to give itself yet another layer of protection.”

  This scheme was designed to give the policies the illusion of legitimacy. Martha Barotz’s estate initiated the legal action filed in Delaware’s Chancery Court last Friday. It raises serious questions about Apollo’s ethical practices.

  

  “In this way, the senior citizens have no idea who owns a policy on their life, and who wants them dead,” the suit said, adding, “Apollo was fraudulently and illegally using these shell entities to perpetuate human life wagers not only on the life of Mrs. Barotz, but on the lives of hundreds (if not thousands) of other senior citizens.”

  

  Bloomberg first reported on the lawsuit. Responding to BBG’s note, Joshua Rosner, a  Graham Fisher & Co. managing partner, wrote on X that Apollo’s actions are “mind-bending and horrifying.” 

  Even as a co-author of “These are the Plunderers: How Private Equity Runs and Wrecks America”, which details how rapacious Apollo is… this is mind-bending and horrifying! They should be fried. https://t.co/6NxzpaXRSR pic.twitter.com/TPx2GUvnpS

  — joshua rosner (@JoshRosner) April 30, 2024

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

  “Apollo should have its insurance licenses pulled in every state by the @naic. They predate retirees and pensioners through pension risk transfers and now we find they take out life insurance policies against seniors. @AARP,” Rosner said. 

  #athene #appollo should have its #insurance licenses pulled in every state by the @naic. They predate #retirees and #pensioners through #pension risk transfers and now we find they take out life insurance policies against seniors. @AARP https://t.co/OdthIMcrCo

  — joshua rosner (@JoshRosner) April 30, 2024

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

  Rosner asks one heck of a question: “With Apollo managing hospitals, nursing & hospice facilities & also the retirement accounts of seniors, are they essentially taking a straddle position on seniors by buying life insurance policies on them?” 

  One has to ask: with Apollo managing hospitals, nursing & hospice facilities & also the retirement accounts of seniors are they essentially taking a straddle position on seniors by buying life insurance policies on them? @naic @AARP @BenSasse @HawleyMO @GovRonDeSantis… https://t.co/OlTYQop1t4

  — joshua rosner (@JoshRosner) April 30, 2024

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

  One X user asks: “Did they take out life insurance on Alfred Villalobos and Jeffrey Epstein?” 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 18:40

• DoJ Charges 'Bitcoin Jesus' With Tax Fraud
  DoJ Charges ‘Bitcoin Jesus’ With Tax Fraud

  Authored by Turner Wright via CoinTelegraph.com,

  The early crypto investor, often called ‘Bitcoin Jesus,’ faces extradition to the U.S. after being charged with evading nearly $50 million in taxes.

  

  Officials with the United States Department of Justice announced charges against early Bitcoin investor Roger Ver, known by many as ‘Bitcoin Jesus.’ 

  In an April 30 notice, the Justice Department said authorities in Spain had arrested Ver based on criminal charges in the United States, including mail fraud, tax evasion and filing false tax returns.

  

  The U.S. government alleged Ver defrauded the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) out of roughly $48 million with his failure to report capital gains on his sale of Bitcoin and other assets.

  According to the indictment filed on Feb. 15 but unsealed on April 29, Ver allegedly took control of roughly 70,000 BTC in June 2017 – before the now famous bull run – and sold many of them for $240 million. U.S. officials said they planned to extradite Ver from Spain to the United States to stand trial.

  Reactions to Ver’s arrest on social media were mixed.

  However, Bitcoiner Dan Held, the former growth lead at Kraken, claimed Ver “deserves everything that he’s about to get” after he “nearly destroyed Bitcoin.”

  “Roger attacked my livelihood by trying to get me fired, called up others to hurt my relationships, and attacked my reputation,” said Held on X.

  “He misaligned expectations around Bitcoin so much that it led to a civil war.”

  A cryptic message was Ver’s most-recent post on X, reading:

  

  Source: Roger Ver

  Ver was also a proponent of Bitcoin Cash.

  In 2022, he became embroiled in a scandal with crypto investment platform CoinFlex, which claimed he owed them $47 million in USD Coin.

  He had not commented on social media regarding the Justice Department charges at the time of publication.

  Ver has previously pleaded guilty and served time for selling explosives on eBay.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 18:20

• Blackrock's Larry Fink Jumps On "Next AI Trade", Warning World Will Be "Short Power"
  Blackrock’s Larry Fink Jumps On “Next AI Trade”, Warning World Will Be “Short Power”

  At the start of April, we penned a lengthy report for premium subs discussing why artificial intelligence data centers, the electrification of the economy, and onshoring trends will result in a major upgrade of the nation’s power grid. We followed the note up on Monday with a report titled Everyone Is Piling Into The “Next AI Trade.” 

  Now , BlackRock Chairman and Chief Executive Larry Fink has jumped on the “Next AI Trade” theme at a World Economic Forum event on Monday. 

  “I do believe to properly um build out AI. We’re talking about trillions of dollars of investing. So data centers today could be as much as 200 megahertz – and they’re now talking about data centers being one gigawatt. That powers a city,” Fink told the audience. 

  He pointed out that he spoke with the head of one tech company, who said their data centers currently require about 5 gigawatts of power. By 2030, the person told Fink that number could jump to 30 gigawatts. 

  “The amount of power that’s needed to use AI has a huge impact on society,” Fink said. 

  He then asked: “So where’s that power going to come from? Are we going to take it off the grid? What does that mean for elevated energy prices?” 

  Fink then said the surge in power demand because of AI data centers is a “huge investment opportunity.” 

  He warned: “The world is going to be short power – short power – and to power these data companies you cannot have this intermittent power like wind and solar.” 

  “You need dispatchable power because they can’t turn off and on these data centers,” he continued. 

  So what kind of clean, reliable energy could Fink be hinting at? 

  Well, nuclear, as we’ve explained to readers as early as December 2020: “Buy Uranium: Is This The Beginning Of The Next ESG Craze.”

  This week, the nuclear power industry appears to be gaining a major comeback. The federal government is expected to continue restarting shuttered nuclear power plants in the coming years, according to Jigar Shah, director of the US Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office, who spoke with Bloomberg on Monday. 

  In March, Shah’s office approved a loan to Holtec International Corp. to reopen the Palisades nuclear plant in Michigan. This was a historical shift, and it was the first nuclear power plant to be reopened in the US, setting a precedent for atomic energy to make a triumphal comeback. The plant could begin producing power as early as the second half of 2025.

  Shah said, “A lot of the other players that have a nuclear power plant that has recently shut down and could be turned back on are gaining that confidence to try.” He declined to give specifics about which plants were slated to reopen. 

  

  Now, the head of the world’s largest asset manager, with $10 trillion in assets under management, is a believer in the “Next AI Trade,” as everyone is seriously piling in. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• "Remarkable Turn Of Events" – Alleged Chinese Spy Working For AfD MP Was Informant For German Intelligence For Years
  “Remarkable Turn Of Events” – Alleged Chinese Spy Working For AfD MP Was Informant For German Intelligence For Years

  Authored by John Cody via ReMix News,

  The news about Alternative for Germany (AfD) MEP Maximilian Krah’s assistant and his arrest for suspected espionage on behalf of China continues to make national headlines, but as more information comes out, the more German intelligence and the political establishment continue to look worse and worse.

  

  Now, news reports have revealed that Krah’s employee, Chinese-German national Jian G., worked for the German domestic intelligence service for years before joining the AfD politician.

  Krah has since commented on the new bombshell information, writing on X:

  “Remarkable turn of events!”

  

  https://twitter.com/KrahMax/status/1783917894159458787

  Much is at stake, as Krah is the top candidate for the AfD in the run-up to the EU parliamentary elections in June. The latest report shows that the powerful Office for the Protection of Constitution (BfV) not only recruited Jian G. as a spy, but also dropped him as an informant because there were concerns he was a double agent for China.

  However, despite these suspicions, Jian G. gained German citizenship, became a member of the Social Democrats (SPD), and even passed the EU parliament’s security clearance.

  Former minister Mathias Brodkorb questioned the story on X, writing:

  They are really funny. Let’s assume the story is true:

  1. The Office for the Protection of the Constitution is working with the man.

  2. Then, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution ends the collaboration because the man could be a double agent.

  3. Then the German state naturalizes this agent.

  Intermediate question: Where was the Office for the Protection of the Constitution at that time?

  4. Then, Krah wants to hire the man as an employee of the EU parliament. That cannot be done without a security check. So the EU parliament should actually have asked the German security authorities whether there was anything against the man. But apparently they didn’t. Otherwise, the man would not have been cleared and could not have been hired.

  Intermediate question: Where was the Office for the Protection of the Constitution at that time? And you are now seriously asking what the problem is? Seriously?

  One of the main questions is why the Office for the Protection of the Constitution never informed Krah or the AfD about their suspicions, which is standard operating procedure, and one designed to protect the country’s parties from foreign infiltration. Notably, allowing Jian G. to work for Krah created a favorable political scenario for the establishment to later arrest him in order to smear the AfD. Notably, Jian G. was arrested right before EU parliamentary elections.

  The question now is whether the BfV purposefully kept the AfD in the dark for years about the information it knew in order to damage the party.

  Working for the BfV all the way back in 2007

  According to Bild newspaper, Jian G. was an informant for the Saxon Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) since 2007 at the earliest. Previously, he had unsuccessfully offered to work for the federal branch of the BfV, but he was rejected, and referred back to the Saxon branch of the BfV.

  Jian G. reportedly worked with the intelligence service on his own initiative, including supplying information that dealt with Chinese state actors taking action against Chinese exiles in Germany. Eight years after joining the Saxon BfV as an informant, the Saxon branch was informed by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution that G. could be a double spy.

  In 2015 and 2016, G. was then directly observed by the counterintelligence department of the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Officers also questioned him about their suspicions but were unable to prove that he was a spy for China. He was therefore listed as a “suspected case” during that period.

  In 2018, G. was finally removed as an informant by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.

  However, by that time, Jian G. had already made contact with Krah and then went on to work as his employee in the EU parliament beginning in 2019. He was then intensively monitored by the domestic intelligence service from 2020 and finally arrested in April 2024.

  As noted above, despite the suspicion of espionage, the Chinese national was granted a German passport, was also a member of the SPD for a time, and was able to pass the security check for the EU parliament.

  In addition, the BfV under Thomas Haldenwang (CDU), who is notoriously anti-AfD and publicly working against the party, failed to inform Krah or the AfD about the suspicion of espionage against Jian G.

  As Remix News has documented, Haldenwang has made numerous remarks against the AfD, including on state-funded television, all in violation of neutrality. Haldenwang belongs to the CDU party.

  Notably, this is standard procedure in such cases, which means the Office for the Protection of the Constitution withheld this information from the AfD in violation of past precedent and procedure.

  Read more here

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 04/30/2024 – 02:00

• Does The CIA Run America?
  Does The CIA Run America?

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  We’ve all surely had dark thoughts that the CIA is really running the United States, including many media venues. Maybe that’s been true for decades and we just didn’t know it. If so, let’s just say that it would explain a tremendous amount of what has otherwise been clouded in secrecy.

  

  How would this be possible? Knowledge is power while secret knowledge is full control. Even fake knowledge means power and control, such as we found out in the phony Russiagate investigation early in Trump’s term. They hounded the new administration for years under a completely fake scenario in which Russia somehow got Donald Trump elected.

  Yes, that was an intelligence operation all along, one directly designed to overthrow an election, a “color revolution” on our own soil.

  How dare an agency not elected by the people, and evading oversight and public accountability, put itself ahead of the Constitution and the rule of law? It’s been going on for many decades as the agencies have gained ever more power, even to the point of forcing a full lockdown of America and even the world under false pretense.

  None of this is verifiable precisely because of the secrecy involved. It’s not as if the intelligence community is going to send out a press release: “Democracy in America is an illusion. We know because we control nearly everything, plus we aspire to control even more.”

  The incredulous among us will shoot back: look at what you are saying! Your conspiracy theory is non-falsifiable. The less evidence you have for it, the more you believe it. How in the world can we argue with you? Your position is not really plausible but there is nothing we can do to convince you otherwise.

  Let’s grant the point. Still, let’s not dismiss the theory completely. Based on a New York Times (NYT) piece that appeared last week, it contains more than a grain of truth. The article is titled: “Campaign Puts Trump and the Spy Agencies on a Collision Course.”

  Quote: “Even as president, Donald J. Trump flaunted his animosity for intelligence officials, portraying them as part of a politicized ‘deep state’ out to get him. And since he left office, that distrust has grown into outright hostility, with potentially serious implications for national security should he be elected again.”

  Ok, let’s be clear. If the intelligence community led by the CIA is not the “deep state,” what is?

  Further, it is proven many times over that the Deep State is in fact out to get him. This is not even controversial. Indeed, there is no reason for these journalists to write the above as if Donald Trump is somehow consumed by some kind of baseless paranoia.

  Let’s keep going here: “Trump is now on a possible collision course with the intelligence community …. The result is a complicated and possibly destabilizing situation the United States has never seen before: deep-seated suspicion and disdain on the part of a former and perhaps future president toward the very people he would be relying on for the most sensitive information he would need to perform his role if elected again.”

  Wait just a moment. You are telling us that all previous presidents have had a happy relationship with the CIA? That’s rather interesting to know. And deeply troubling too, since the CIA has been managing regime change the world over for a very long time, and is now directly involved in U.S. politics at the most intimate level.

  Any president worth his salt should absolutely have a hostile relationship with such an agency, if only to establish clear civilian control over the government, without which it’s not possible to say that we live in a Constitutional republic.

  And now, according to the NYT, we have one seeking the Presidency who does not defer to the agency and that this is destabilizing and deeply problematic. Who does that suggest really rules this country?

  Is the NYT itself guilty of the most extreme conspiracy theory imaginable, or is it just stating facts as we know them? I’m going to guess that it is the latter. In this case, every single American should be deeply alarmed.

  Crazy huh? As for the phrase “never seen before,” we have to push back. What about George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, James Polk, and Calvin Coolidge? They were all previous presidents, according to the history books that people once read.

  There was no CIA back then. If you doubt this, I’m pretty sure that your favorite AI engine will confirm it.

  One must suppose that when the NYT says “never seen before,” it means in the post-war period. And that very well might be true. John F. Kennedy defied them. We know that for certain. The mysteries surrounding his murder won’t be solved fully until we get the documents. But the consensus is growing that this murder was really a coup by the CIA, a message sent as a lesson to every successor in that office.

  Think of that: we live in a country today where most people readily admit that the CIA probably killed the president. Amazing.

  It’s intriguing to know at this late date that the Watergate “scandal” was not what it appeared to be, namely an intrepid media holding government to account. Even astute observers at the time believed the mainstream narrative. Now we have plenty of evidence that this too was nothing but a deep state attack on a president who had lost patience with it and provoked another coup.

  All credit to my brilliant father who speculated along these lines at the time. I was very young with only the vaguest clue about what was happening. But I recall very well that he was convinced that Richard Nixon was set up in a trap and unfairly hounded out of office not for the bad things he was doing but for standing up to the Deep State.

  If my own father, not a particularly political person, knew this for certain at the time, this must have been a strong perception even then.

  You hear the rap that these agencies—the CIA is one but there are many adjacent others—are not allowed by law to intervene in domestic politics. At this point and after so much experience, this comes across to me like something of a joke. We know from vast evidence and personal testimony that the CIA has been manipulating political figures, narratives, and outcomes for a very long time.

  How involved is the CIA in journalism today? Well, as a traditionally liberal paper, you might suppose that the NYT itself would be highly skeptical of the CIA. But these days, they have published a long string of aggressively defensive articles with titles like “It Turns Out that the Deep State Is Awesome” and “Government Surveillance Keeps Us Safe.” We can add this last piece to the list.

  So let’s just say it: the NYT is CIA. So too is Mother Jones, Rolling Stone, Slate, Salon, and many other mainstream publications, including major tech companies like Google and Microsoft. The tentacles are everywhere and ever more obvious. Operation Mockingbird was just the beginning. The network is everywhere and the practice of manipulating the news is wholly normalized.

  Once you start developing the ability to see the markings, you simply cannot unsee them, which is why people who think and write about this can come across as crackpot crazy after a while.

  Have you considered that maybe the crackpots are exactly right? If so, shouldn’t we, at bare minimum, seek to support a Presidential candidate with a hostile relationship to the intelligence community?

  Indeed, that ought to be a bare minimum standard of qualification. There is simply no way we can restore civilian control of government and constitutional government until this agency can be thoroughly reigned in or abolished completely.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 23:40

• Have Fun Staying Poor: Washington Announces $45 Million Subsidy For Low Income Families To Buy EVs
  Have Fun Staying Poor: Washington Announces $45 Million Subsidy For Low Income Families To Buy EVs

  Just when you thought you’ve already witnessed a lifetime’s worth of examples of the government being excellent capital allocators with your tax money, one more shining example comes along. 

  Last week it was reported that Washington Governor Jay Inslee has announced $45 million worth of subsidies that is going to allow “low income” families to purchase an electric vehicle. 

  The initiative offers families the opportunity to receive financial assistance for either leasing or purchasing electric vehicles, with up to $9,000 allocated for leasing and $5,000 for purchasing, according to Must Read Alaska.

  The program is open to individuals earning 300% or less of the federal poverty level and extends to both new and used EVs. Approximately 9,000 people can benefit from the grant, with the potential for either 9,000 individuals to opt for the $5,000 deal or 5,000 individuals for the $9,000 option.

  

  “Washingtonians really get it when it comes to electric vehicles,” Inslee said at a press conference last week. 

  Governor Inslee characterized the initiative as a means to “democratize EVs,” emphasizing a broader goal of advancing the electrification of transportation. He expressed optimism about widespread adoption, anticipating significant participation and benefit from the program.

  However, the program has faced criticism, notably from Washington Policy Center Environmental Director Todd Myers. Myers contends that the subsidies fail to effectively curb carbon emissions and represent a misallocation of taxpayer funds that could be better utilized for other environmental priorities like (we swear we are not making this up) salmon recovery.

  Hey Todd, two wrongs don’t make a right! But we digress. Despite the controversy, the grant funds are slated to become available to eligible low-income residents in August.

  Myers wrote in a blog post: “This is one more example of how wasteful and ineffective Washington’s climate policy is.”

  He continued: “It also reveals the disingenuousness of claiming that climate change is an ‘existential crisis’ while wasting tens of millions of dollars on projects that do nothing to address that crisis.”

   

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 23:20

• China & The US: What Matters That's Overlooked
  China & The US: What Matters That’s Overlooked

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  Parsing geopolitics is fun but our attention is better directed to the limits and second-order effects of legacy systems in each of the rival states.

  Geopolitics, like any conflict, is dramatic: rivals jostle for hegemony on a 3-D chessboard, war threatens, etc. The focus of this drama is on the leaders’ calculations and the pieces being moved around the board in the complex battle for hearts, minds, resources and the high ground.

  This is the conventional context of history, and so accounts of the rivalry between the Roman Empire and the Persian Empire read like contemporary accounts of the rivalry between China and the U.S.: the actors and scenery changes, but the dramatic plot remains the same.

  A less dramatic but closer reading of history tells a different story: imperial decline stems not from external rivalries but from internal limitations. Externalities–plague, drought, invasion–are not causes so much as events which reveal the limits of the empire’s internal legacy institutions.

  These rigidities can be structural–economic or political–or cultural / social. There are two dynamics in play here:

  1. Once solutions are institutionalized, they become legacy systems that focus not on flexibly solving problems but on sustaining and defending the interests of the institution and its insiders. The solution becomes the problem.

  2. Whatever is viewed as a solution generates unanticipated second-order effects which the system is ill-equipped to resolve.

  There are many examples of these dynamics in both China and the U.S., and indeed, in every nation / polity.

  Consider the goal of increasing homeownership, a laudable ideal that the U.S. pursued after World War II by institutionalizing the heretofore unavailable innovation of 30-year fixed-rate mortgages and government-agency backed mortgages (Veteran Administration-backed mortgages for veterans, FHA, etc.).

  Once the institutions promoting homeownership became self-sustaining legacy systems, they changed from “solution” to “problem.” As homeownership rates reached 65% of American households, the institutional drive to increase homeownership led to the development of subprime mortgages designed for households that did not qualify for conventional mortgages.

  To grease the skids, lending standards were stripped to the point of irrelevance, liar loans took center stage and ratings agencies rubber-stamped risky mortgages as low-risk.

  The net result of this institutional self-serving inertia was the collapse of subprime securities and the near-collapse of the global financial system as the dominoes of default and obscured risk started falling.

  Turning to China, consider this chart of what happens when a one child per family state policy is enforced for three generations:

  

  The policy was institutionalized with a sensible goal of limiting population growth to increase living standards, but without consideration of the second-order effects down the road.

  In three generations, there are four grandparents and two parents who are all single children without siblings, uncles or aunts, and a single child who could be tasked not just with caring for two aging parents but four even older grandparents, should they live beyond the ability of their own aging offspring to care for them.

  China has acquired the markers of a great power–missions to the moon and Mars, a mighty military and global economic influence–but it lacks a state-funded universal social welfare system that provides a substantial pension and medical care for every retiree regardless of their employment or earnings. This leaves much of the care of China’s rapidly aging generations on the shoulders of the third generation of single offspring.

  As in other nations, China’s birthrate has declined precipitously as the financial pressures on parents mount, especially on young mothers who desire career opportunities equal to those available to young men.

  Social welfare programs become increasingly costly and burdensome as populations age. Any state-funded solution will require diverting enormous sums currently spent elsewhere to the care of a large aging cohort.

  The sources of brittleness and failure that are overlooked are internal, not external. Parsing geopolitics is fun but our attention is better directed to the limits and second-order effects of legacy systems in each of the rival states.

  *  *  *

  Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Subscribe to my Substack for free

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 23:00

• Senator Tells Taxpayers On Gaza Pier: "Cost Has Not Just Risen, It Has Exploded"
  Senator Tells Taxpayers On Gaza Pier: “Cost Has Not Just Risen, It Has Exploded”

  An initial US Navy ship has reached Eastern Mediterranean waters off the coast of the Gaza Strip where its crew has begun constructing a floating platform for the ambitious Gaza humanitarian pier project ordered by President Biden, new satellite images published by Planet Labs show.

  USNS Roy P. Benavidez is now some 5 miles from the shoreline location which serves as the base of operations, overseen by the Israeli military. The Associated Press writes that “A satellite image from Sunday by Planet Labs PBC showed pieces of the floating pier in the Mediterranean Sea alongside the vessel.”

  

  Both US and Israeli officials have voiced that they hope to have a mobile pier in place and humanitarian deliveries being offloaded via maritime routes by sometime in the first part of May.

  The causeway is expected to be at a length of 550-meters (1,800 feet) and will have Israeli military protection. US Army and Navy engineers are expected to remain at sea, especially after days ago the pier site came under mortar shelling by Palestinian militants who have warned against foreign forces stepping foot inside Gaza.

  A new Reuters report meanwhile indicates the pier will cost US taxpayers at least $320 million to finish. This is double the early estimates which were floated earlier this year.

  “The figure, which has not been previously reported, illustrates the massive scale of a construction effort that the Pentagon has said involves about 1,000 US service members, mostly from the Army and Navy,” writes Reuters.

  “The cost has not just risen. It has exploded,” Senator Roger Wicker, the top Republican on the Democratic-led Senate Armed Services Committee, has complained.

  “This dangerous effort with marginal benefit will now cost the American taxpayers at least $320 million [US dollars] to operate the pier for only 90 days,” he continued.

  Earlier this month, USAID director Samantha Power said that famine already exists in some parts of the Gaza Strip. WSJ has underscored this as well in its reporting last week: “Some U.S. officials have said the pier, which will float several miles off Gaza’s shore, will help get more aid into northern Gaza, where some residents are already living in famine-like conditions, according to estimates released last month by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, an international initiative tasked with assessing the risk of famine around the world.”

  Many government officials especially from Global South countries have highlighted Washington’s contradictory approach to Gaza – on the one hand the US has been funding the Israeli military machine, sending controversial weaponry like 2,000-pound bombs, while on the other Biden has condemned the soaring civilian death toll and humanitarian catastrophe. Ironically, to some degree the United States is funding both sides of the conflict.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 22:40

• Columbia Begins Suspensions After Demonstrators Ignore 2PM Deadline
  Columbia Begins Suspensions After Demonstrators Ignore 2PM Deadline

  Update (2230ET): Columbia University announced Monday evening that it has begun suspending students who wouldn’t leave an pro-Palestine encampment by a 2pm deadline.

  

  Students in the encampment along with hundreds of supporters spent Monday afternoon rallying in support of the movement, however by 4pm most of the protesters began to disperse after there was no sign of police action to arrest protesters or remove tents. Around 80 students remained by early evening.

  And now, they’ll be suspended.

  “We have begun suspending students as part of the next phase of our efforts to ensure the safety of our campus,” said University spokesman Ben Chang. 

  

  At present, a core group of students remain.

  At a news conference on Monday afternoon, Sueda Polat, a student organizer with the encampment, said that the university had not made significant concessions to the protesters’ main demand: divestment from companies with links to the Israeli occupation of Gaza. Columbia had also stopped negotiating. As a result, she said, the students inside the encampment “will not be moved unless by force.”

  “We’ve been asked to disperse, but it is against the will of the students to disperse,” she said. “We do not abide by university pressures. We act based on the will of the students.” –NY Times

  Earlier in the day faculty members, many wearing masks, were getting in on the action.

  NOW: Columbia University faculty link arms and form a wall in front of the entrance to the ‘Gaza Solidarity Encampment’ as hundreds of students encircle the both lawns

  Students remaining in the encampment were told they could face disciplinary action after 2PM pic.twitter.com/C1XRgHzs8b

  — katie smith (@probablyreadit) April 29, 2024

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

  Let’s see what tomorrow brings.

  *  *  *

  Columbia University has given protesting students until 2pm to leave their encampment and sign a form committing to abide by university policies through June 30, 2025, or by their graduation. Failure to do so will disqualify students from graduating this spring, or from participating in academic and extracurricular activities, Axios reports.

  

  “It is important for you to know that the university has already identified many students in the encampment,” reads the Monday letter that was shared by Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine. “If you do not leave by 2pm, you will be suspended pending further investigation.”

  ACTION ALERT:
  – Columbia University admin threatens MASS SUSPENSIONS and DISCIPLINARY PROBATION (until June 2025) to Gaza Solidarity Encampment participants who don’t leave by 2 PM.
  – Do not sign anything with administration.
  – Show up at NOON to protect the encampment! ❤️‍🔥 pic.twitter.com/v1Qw5gXu0q

  — Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine (@ColumbiaSJP) April 29, 2024

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

  “Sanctions include probation, access restriction, suspension for a term or more and expulsion,” reads the Monday notice – which doesn’t look like it’s going well.

  Columbia University has threatened the students in the Gaza solidarity encampment with mass suspensions if they do not sign waivers by 2pm today. The students’ response: pic.twitter.com/SIJkWJWvji

  — Palestinian Youth Movement (@palyouthmvmt) April 29, 2024

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

  According to the letter, talks between university leaders and student leaders at the encampment are at an impasse and the unauthorized encampment and associated disruption to the campus has created an “unwelcoming environment” which violates various school policies – including rules governing disruptive behavior and harassment.

  “Please promptly gather your belongings and leave the encampment,” reads the letter. “If you voluntarily leave by 2 p.m., identify yourself to a University officials, and sign the provided form where you commit to abide by all University policies through June 30, 2025, or the date of the conferral of your degree, whichever is earlier, you will be eligible to complete the semester in good standing (and will not be placed on suspension) as long as you adhere to that commitment.”

  Well something is about to go down a Columbia. pic.twitter.com/ws6Ztpw8en

  — Jarrett Stepman (@JarrettStepman) April 29, 2024

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

  Officials say they hope the protesting students will sign the form and leave by the deadline. Those who refuse will be put on disciplinary probation.

  Meanwhile, things are starting to get spicy:

  And there he goes. pic.twitter.com/3e0sv1qke5

  — Jarrett Stepman (@JarrettStepman) April 29, 2024

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

  As the Epoch Times notes further, efforts to dismantle the encampment have failed, as university president Minouche Shafik has faced an outcry from many students, faculty, and outside observers for summoning New York City police to take down the unauthorized encampment, resulting in more than 100 arrests.

  Protesters have vowed to keep their encampment unless three demands are met: divestment from Israel, transparency in Columbia’s finances, and amnesty for students and staff disciplined for taking part in the protests.

  Ms. Shafik said in her Monday statement that Columbia would not divest from Israel but that the university has offered to publish a process for students to access a list of its direct investment holdings, in the interest of transparency. Columbia has also offered to make investments in health and education in Gaza. And the letter sent to protesters promises an amnesty of sorts.

  She said that the campus has been roiled by divisions over the war in Gaza and, despite the fact that the school has provided space for protests and vigils that did not disrupt academic life, the encampment has gone too far.

  “We must take into account the rights of all members of our community,” she wrote. “The encampment has created an unwelcoming environment for many of our Jewish students and faculty. External actors have contributed to creating a hostile environment in violation of Title VI, especially around our gates, that is unsafe for everyone—including our neighbors.”

  “With classes now concluding, it represents a noisy distraction for our students studying for exams and for everyone trying to complete the academic year,” she continued, adding that Columbia would allow protests to continue on campus—by application with two-days’ notice in authorized locations—after the exam period and commencement.

  “We have no intention of suppressing speech or the right to peaceful protest,” Ms. Shafik wrote, adding that the protesting students had been asked to commit to following the university’s rules, including those on the time, place, and manner of demonstrations.

  “We urge those in the encampment to voluntarily disperse,” she added.

  Various streets are being blocked. Sounds like they are creating a corridor to shuffle the protesters out. pic.twitter.com/vH8WutuQ7O

  — Jarrett Stepman (@JarrettStepman) April 29, 2024

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

  It comes as a group of 21 House Democrats criticized the “anti-Israel, anti-Jewish” encampment at Columbia in an April 29 letter to the school’s trustees.

  “We, the undersigned, write to express our disappointment that, despite promises to do so, Columbia University has not yet disbanded the unauthorized and impermissible encampment of anti-Israel, anti-Jewish activists on campus,” the lawmakers said in their letter.

  “As a result of this disruption on campus, supported by some faculty members, many students have been prevented from safely attending class, the main library, and from leaving their dorm rooms in an apparent violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.”

  The group, led by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), is different from calls condemning the protests that have mostly come from GOP leaders. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Republican colleagues visited the campus last week and called for Ms. Shafik to resign.

  Chase Smith contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 22:30

• Von Greyerz: The Real Move In Gold & Silver Is Yet To Start
  Von Greyerz: The Real Move In Gold & Silver Is Yet To Start

  Authored by Egon von Greyerz via VonGreyerz.gold,

  Since the October 2023 gold low of just over $1,600 gold is up but is anyone buying?

  Well no, certainly none of the normal players.

  Gold Depositories, Gold Funds and Gold ETFs have lost just under 1,400 tonnes of their gold holdings in the last 2 years since May 2022. 

  

  But not only gold funds are seeing weak buying but also mints such as the Perth Mint and the US Mint with its coin sales down 96% year on year. 

  Clearly gold knows something that the market hasn’t discovered yet. 

  RATES MUCH HIGHER 

  For the last few years I have been clear that there will be no lasting interest rate cuts. 

  As the chart shows below, the 40 year down trend in US rates bottomed in 2020 and since then rates are in a secular uptrend.  

  

  I have discussed this in many articles as well as in for example this interview from 2022 when I stated that rates will exceed 10% and potentially much higher in the coming inflationary environment, fuelled by escalating deficits and debt explosion.

  “But the Fed will keep rates down” I hear all the experts call out!

  Finally the “experts” are changing their mind and  believe that cuts will no longer happen. 

  

  No central bank can control interest rates when its government recklessly issues unlimited debt and the only buyer is the central bank itself. 

  PONZI SCHEME WORTHY OF A BANANA REPUBLIC

  This is a Ponzi scheme only worthy of a Banana Republic. And this is where the US is heading.  

  So strongly rising long rates will pull short rates up. 

  And that’s when the fun panic starts. 

  As Niall Ferguson stated in a recent article:

  “Any great power that spends more on debt service (interest payments on the national debt) than on defence will not stay great for very long. True of Habsburg Spain, true of ancien régime France, true of the Ottoman Empire, true of the British Empire”.

  So based on the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), the US will spend more on interest than defence already at the end of 2024 as this chart shows: 

  

  But as often is the case, the CBO prefers not to tell uncomfortable truths. 

  The CBO forecasts interest costs to reach $1.6 trillion by 2034. But if we extrapolate the trends of the deficit and apply current interest rate, the annualised interest cost will reach $1.6 trillion at the end of 2024 rather than in 2034. 

  

  Just look at the steepness of the interest cost curve above. It is clearly EXPONENTIAL. 

  Total Federal debt was below $1 trillion in 1980. Now, interest on the debt is $1.6 trillion.

  Debt today $35 trillion rising to $100 trillion by 2034.

  The same with the US Federal Debt. Extrapolating the trend since 1980, the debt will be $100 trillion by 2036 and that is probably conservative.

  

  With the interest trend up as explained above, a 10% rate in 2036 or before is not unrealistic. Remember rates back in the 1970s and early 1980s were well above 10% with a much lower debt and deficit.

  US BONDS – BUY THEM AT YOUR PERIL  

  Let us analyse the current and future of a US treasury debt (and most sovereign debt):

  • Issuance will accelerate exponentially 

  • It will never be repaid. At best only deferred or more probably defaulted on

  • The value of the currency will fall precipitously

  HYPERINFLATION COMING

  So where are we heading? 

  Most probably we are facing an inflationary period leading to probable hyperinflation 

  With global debt already up over 4x this century from $80 trillion to $350 trillion. Add to that a Derivative mountain of over $2 quadrillion plus unfunded liabilities and the total will exceed $3 quadrillion. 

  As central banks frenetically try to save the financial system, most of the 3 quadrillion will become debt as counterparties fail and banks will need to be saved with unlimited money printing. 

  

  BANCA ROTTA – BANKRUPT FINANCIAL SYSTEM 

  

  But a rotten system can never be saved. And this is where the expression Banca Rotta derives from – broken bench or broken bank as my article from April 2023 explained. 

  But neither a bank nor a sovereign state can be saved by issuing worthless pieces of paper or digital money. 

  In March 2023, four US banks collapsed within a matter of days. And soon thereafter Credit Suisse was in trouble and had to be rescued. 

  The problems in the banking system have just started. Falling bond prices and collapsing values of property loans are just the beginning. 

  This week Republic First Bancorp had to be saved. 

  Just look at US banks’ unrealised losses on their bond portfolios in the graph below.

   Unrealised losses on bonds held to maturity are $400 billion.

  And losses on bonds available for sale are $250 billion. So the US banking system is sitting on identified losses of $650 billion just on their bond portfolios. As interest rates go up, these losses will increase.

  

  Add to that, losses on loans against collapsing commercial property values and much more.

  EXPONENTIAL MOVES 

  So we will see debt grow exponentially as it has already started to do.  Exponential moves start gradually and then suddenly whether we talk about debt, inflation or population growth. 

  The stadium analogy below shows how it all develops:

  

  It takes 50 minutes to fill a stadium with water, starting with one drop and doubling every minute – 1, 2, 4, 8 drops etc. After 45 minutes the stadium is only 7% full and the last 5 minutes it goes form 7% to 100%.

  THE LAST 5 MINUTES OF THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM

  So the world is most probably now in the last 5 minutes of our current financial system.

  The coming final phase is likely to go very fast as all exponential moves do, just like in the Weimar Republic in 1923. In January 1923 one ounce of gold cost 372,000 marks and at the end of November in 1923 the price was 87 trillion marks!

  The consequences of a collapse of the financial system and the global economy, especially in the West can take many decades to recover from. It will involve a debt and asset implosion plus a massive contraction of the economy and trade.

  The East and South and especially the countries with major commodity reserves will recover much faster. Russia for example has $85 trillion in commodity reserves, the biggest in the world. 

  As US issuance of treasuries accelerate, the potential buyers will decline until there is only one bidder which is the Fed. 

  Even today no sane sovereign state would buy US treasuries. Actually no sane investor would buy US treasuries. 

  Here we have an already insolvent debtor that has no means of repaying his debt except for issuing more of the same rubbish which in future would only be good for toilet paper. But electronic paper is not even good for that. 

  This is a sign in a Zimbabwe toilet: 

  

  Let us analyse the current and future of a US treasury debt (and most sovereign debt):

  • Issuance will accelerate exponentially 

  • It will never be repaid. At best only deferred or more probably defaulted on

  • The value of the currency will fall precipitously

  That’s all there is to it. Thus anyone who buys US treasuries or other sovereign bonds has a 99.9% guarantee of not getting his money back. 

  So Bonds are no longer an asset of value but just a liability for the borrower that will or can not be repaid.

  What about stocks or corporate bonds. Many companies won’t survive or experience a major decline in the stock price together with major cash flow pressures. 

  As I have discussed in many articles, we are entering the era of commodities and especially precious metals. 

  The coming era is not for speculation but for trying to keep as much of what you have as possible. For the investor who doesn’t protect himself, there will be a wealth destruction of an unprecedented magnitude. 

  There will no longer be a question what return you can get on your investment. 

  Instead it is a matter of losing as little as possible. 

  Holding stocks, bonds or property – all the bubble assets – are likely to lead to massive wealth erosion as we go into the “Everything Collapse”.

  THE NEW ERA OF GOLD AND SILVER

  For soon 25 years I have been urging investors to hold gold to preserve their wealth. Since the beginning of this century gold has outperformed most asset classes. 

  Between 2000 and today, the S&P, including reinvested dividends, has returned 7.7% per annum whilst gold has returned 9.2% per year or 8X.

  In the next few years, all the factors discussed in this article will lead to major gains in the precious metals and falls in most conventional assets. 

  There are many other positive factors for gold. 

  As the chart below shows, the West has reduced its gold reserves since the late 1960s, whilst the East is growing its gold reserves strongly. And we have just seen the beginning of this trend.

  

  The US and EU sanctioning of Russia and the freezing/confiscation of the Russian assets in foreign banks are very beneficial for gold. 

  No sovereign states will hold their reserves in US dollars any more. Instead we will see central bank reserves move to gold. That shift has already started and is one of the reasons for gold’s rise. 

  In addition, gradually the BRICS countries are moving away from the dollar to trading in their local currencies. For commodity rich countries, gold will be an important part of their trading. 

  Thus there are major forces behind the gold move which has just started and will reach further both in price and time than anyone can imagine. 

  HOW TO OWN GOLD

  But remember for investors, holding gold is for financial survival and protection of assets. 

  Therefore gold must be held in physical form outside the banking system with direct access for the investor. 

  Also gold must be held in safe jurisdictions with a long history of rule of law and stable government. 

  The cost of storing gold should not be the primary consideration for choosing a custodian. When you buy life insurance you mustn’t buy the cheapest but the best.

  First consideration must be the owners and management. What is their reputation, background and previous history. 

  Thereafter secure servers, security, liquidity, location and insurance are very important. 

  Also, high level of personal service is paramount. Many vaults fail in this area. 

  Preferably gold should not be held in the country where you are resident, especially not in the US with its fragile financial system. 

  Neither gold nor silver has started the real move yet. Any major correction is likely to come from much higher levels. 

  Gold and silver are in a hurry so it is not too late to jump on the gold wagon.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 22:20

• Major Dollar Tree Warehouse Demolished By Tornado, May Spark Supply Chain Chaos
  Major Dollar Tree Warehouse Demolished By Tornado, May Spark Supply Chain Chaos

  A tornado outbreak on Saturday night across southern Oklahoma decimated a major distribution center for budget retailer Dollar Tree. The facility supplies stores across the Oklahoma-Texas area, plus other surrounding states, which may spark supply chain issues. 

  Professional storm chaser Aaron Rigsby posted several aerial images of the Dollar Tree distribution center in the Marietta area on X. The photos show the damage left behind after a tornado ripped through the center of the massive warehouse. 

  Images from Marietta, OK Tornado. Would appear as if cars and semis were tossed off the interstate last night next to the Dollar Tree DC that was impressively shredded to bits. #OKwx pic.twitter.com/2y46FeJfdF

  — Aaron Rigsby (@AaronRigsbyOSC) April 28, 2024

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

  Another storm chaser, Brandon Clement, posted an up-close drone video of the wreckage, showing millions of products that won’t arrive on store shelves anytime soon.

  A tornado hit Matietta, OK. Destroying the Family Dollar Distribution center. It also hit a Dollar store, hospital and flipped cars and semis on I-35. #Tornado #Damage #OKWX #Oklahoma #WXTwitter pic.twitter.com/7AF7bgBcQ0

  — WxChasing- Brandon Clement (@bclemms) April 28, 2024

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

  Marietta is located in Love County. The country’s sheriff’s office posted on Facebook that “power lines everywhere and buildings have been destroyed.” 

  “Significant damage to dollar tree warehouse, homeland, dollar general, nursing home, and part of the hospital,” the sheriff’s office said. 

  With the Marietta distribution center offline, this may spark significant disruptions in the supply of goods to stores located in Texas, Oklahoma, and surrounding states. 

  Dollar Tree operates 25 distribution centers nationwide, serving over 15,500 stores.  

  

  There is no official statement from the company specifying supply chain impacts. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 22:00

• What, No Bitcoin? How "Hundreds Of Billions" Are Laundered With Cash On Airplanes
  What, No Bitcoin? How “Hundreds Of Billions” Are Laundered With Cash On Airplanes

  Will anti-bitcoin crusader Liz Warren demand that British Pounds be banned next?

  shut up https://t.co/7ytElXwXR5 pic.twitter.com/AiTKkB6aKJ

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 22, 2024

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

  Jo-Emma Larvin navigated through London’s Heathrow Airport on a fateful day in August 2020, pushing a cart laden with seven suitcases. Traveling business class to Dubai, Larvin and her companion passed through security, seemingly no different from the throngs of other travelers. Yet, unbeknownst to airport authorities, her bags held a clandestine cargo: millions of British pounds, wrapped in rubber bands and sealed in plastic.

  Their destination? An international money launderer, adept at converting cash into gold or other currencies, the Wall Street Journal reports, without mentioning bitcoin once, because let’s face it: 99% of all money laundering involves not crypto but cold, hard cash!

  

  The money launderer, who charges a hefty fee to clients to exchange cash for gold and other currencies, has been operating via Heathrow to Dubai – the former doesn’t scan outbound luggage for cash, while the latter welcomes sacks of it. They’re also the #1 and #2 of the world’s busiest airports for international passengers.

  The UK mandates passengers declare amounts exceeding $10,000 to customs authorities. Larvin, however, risked arrest by not disclosing her precious cargo, not that anyone would notice. The suitcases slid through Heathrow’s baggage-handling system and its 3-D scanner, designed to detect explosives rather than contraband currency.

  The next morning in Dubai, the women calmly collected their bags, declaring $2.8 million at customs, a practice fully permitted by UAE law. While the UAE allows any amount of cash to enter its borders, the laxity of international airports in monitoring money flows has created a loophole, one exploited by money launderers worldwide.

  Each year, more than $2 trillion in proceeds from illegal enterprises enters the global financial system, with a significant portion smuggled across borders by air. According to estimates by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime and the Financial Action Task Force, “hundreds of billions in illicit cash” fly out of the UK and other nations to countries with fewer regulations.

  One of the reasons for so much airline smuggling is that banks around the globe have stepped up the reporting of suspicious transactions, making it more difficult to launder money using traditional wire transfers. So it’s back to even more traditional ways of money laundering.

  “You just can’t walk into a bank with this much money without being flagged,” said George Voloshin, of ACAMS, an industry group for financial crime-fighting professionals. “You will be arrested at the next branch.“

  Larvin and her boyfriend became two operatives in an intricate web of money launderers working for a UAE-based kingpin. Over a few months in 2020, this network smuggled around $125 million, primarily from the UK to Dubai. “How did they manage so much money in such a short time?” wondered Ian Truby, a senior officer at the UK’s National Crime Agency. “Security isn’t designed to detect such activities.”

  Three weeks after her initial journey, Larvin returned to Heathrow with her boyfriend, carrying eight suitcases filled with cash. “It’s fucking ridiculous,” he texted, voicing concern about drawing attention. “Talk about conspicuous.”

  The pair’s operation ultimately contributed to unraveling a broader international laundering scheme.

  

  The Kingpin

  Documents, court records, and interviews reveal how a man named Abdulla Alfalasi spearheaded the smuggling operation, transporting cash from Heathrow to Dubai since 2017. He expanded during the pandemic, once departing with 11 suitcases weighing 463 pounds and reporting $850,000 in Dubai. Alfalasi’s connections, including his father-in-law’s involvement in developing Dubai’s airport, provided an air of legitimacy.

  

  He recruited Michelle Clarke, an executive assistant from Leeds, who soon began recruiting others, including Larvin. The scheme enticed participants with promises of easy money, business-class flights, and luxurious accommodations. Yet the allure was short-lived for many.

  In October 2020, two couriers were intercepted at Heathrow, and a subsequent investigation uncovered a vast network of 36 international couriers. Clarke was arrested in Zanzibar in December, carrying $9 million in gold on a private plane.

  Authorities eventually arrested Alfalasi and several couriers, unveiling details of the operation. Alfalasi pleaded guilty to money laundering and received a 9-year, 7-month prison sentence. His assets, including vehicles and watches, were seized. Clarke remains under investigation in Dubai for money laundering.

  In texts to the Journal, Larvin’s boyfriend, Jonathan Johnson, said that he and Larvin were simply two ordinary people who were hoodwinked. He suggested that if what they did was such a big crime, why aren’t airports scanning luggage for cash?

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 21:20

• Falling From Grace
  Falling From Grace

  Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

  Years ago, Doug Casey mentioned in a correspondence to me, “Empires fall from grace with alarming speed.”

  Every now and then, you receive a comment that, although it may have been stated casually, has a lasting effect, as it offers uncommon insight. For me, this was one of those and it’s one that I’ve kept handy at my desk since that time, as a reminder.

  I’m from a British family, one that left the UK just as the British Empire was about to begin its decline. They expatriated to the “New World” to seek promise for the future.

  As I’ve spent most of my life centred in a British colony – the Cayman Islands – I’ve had the opportunity to observe many British contract professionals who left the UK seeking advancement, which they almost invariably find in Cayman. Curiously, though, most returned to the UK after a contract or two, in the belief that the UK would bounce back from its decline, and they wanted to be on board when Britain “came back.”

  This, of course, never happened. The US replaced the UK as the world’s foremost empire, and although the UK has had its ups and downs over the ensuing decades, it hasn’t returned to its former glory.

  And it never will.

  

  If we observe the empires of the world that have existed over the millennia, we see a consistent history of collapse without renewal. Whether we’re looking at the Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Spanish Empire, or any other that’s existed at one time, history is remarkably consistent: The decline and fall of any empire never reverses itself; nor does the empire return, once it’s fallen.

  But of what importance is this to us today?

  Well, today, the US is the world’s undisputed leading empire and most Americans would agree that, whilst it’s going through a bad patch, it will bounce back and might even be better than ever.

  Not so, I’m afraid.

  All empires follow the same cycle.

  They begin with a population that has a strong work ethic and is self-reliant. Those people organize to form a nation of great strength, based upon high productivity.

  This leads to expansion, generally based upon world trade. At some point, this gives rise to leaders who seek, not to work in partnership with other nations, but to dominate them, and of course, this is when a great nation becomes an empire. The US began this stage under the flamboyant and aggressive Teddy Roosevelt.

  The twentieth century was the American century and the US went from victory to victory, expanding its power.

  But the decline began in the 1960s, when the US started to pursue unwinnable wars, began the destruction of its currency and began to expand its government into an all-powerful body.

  Still, this process tends to be protracted and the overall decline often takes decades.

  So, how does that square with the quote, “Empires fall from grace with alarming speed”?

  Well, the preparation for the fall can often be seen for a generation or more, but the actual fall tends to occur quite rapidly.

  What happens is very similar to what happens with a schoolyard bully.

  The bully has a slow rise, based upon his strength and aggressive tendency. After a number of successful fights, he becomes first revered, then feared. He then takes on several toadies who lack his abilities but want some of the spoils, so they do his bidding, acting in a threatening manner to other schoolboys.

  The bully then becomes hated. No one tells him so, but the other kids secretly dream of his defeat, hopefully in a shameful manner.

  Then, at some point, some boy who has a measure of strength and the requisite determination has had enough and takes on the bully.

  If he defeats him, a curious thing happens. The toadies suddenly realise that the jig is up and they head for the hills, knowing that their source of power is gone.

  Also, once the defeated bully is down, all the anger, fear and hatred that his schoolmates felt for him come out, and they take great pleasure in his defeat.

  And this, in a nutshell, is what happens with empires.

  A nation that comes to the rescue in times of genuine need (such as the two World Wars) is revered. But once that nation morphs into a bully that uses any excuse to invade countries such as Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and Syria, its allies may continue to bow to it but secretly fear it and wish that it could be taken down a peg.

  When the empire then starts looking around for other nations to bully, such as Iran and Venezuela, its allies again say nothing but react with fear when they see the John Boltons and Mike Pompeos beating the war drums and making reckless comments.

  At present, the US is focusing primarily on economic warfare, but if this fails to get the world to bend to its dominance, the US has repeatedly warned, regarding possible military aggression, that “no option is off the table.”

  The US has reached the classic stage when it has become a reckless bully, and its support structure of allies has begun to de-couple as a result.

  At the same time that allies begin to pull back and make other plans for their future, those citizens within the empire who tend to be the creators of prosperity also begin to seek greener pastures.

  History has seen this happen countless times. The “brain drain” occurs, in which the best and most productive begin to look elsewhere for their future. Just as the most productive Europeans crossed the Pond to colonise the US when it was a new, promising country, their present-day counterparts have begun moving offshore.

  The US is presently in a state of suspended animation. It still appears to be a major force, but its buttresses are quietly disappearing. At some point in the near future, it’s likely that the US government will overplay its hand and aggress against a foe that either is stronger or has alliances that, collectively, make it stronger.

  The US will be entering into warfare at a time when it’s broke, and this will become apparent suddenly and dramatically. The final decline will occur with alarming speed.

  When this happens, the majority of Americans will hope in vain for a reverse of events. They’ll be inclined to hope that, if they collectively say, “Whoops, we goofed,” the world will be forgiving, returning them to their former glory.

  But historically, this never occurs. Empires fall with alarming speed, because the support systems that made them possible have decamped and have become reinvigorated elsewhere.

  Rather than mourn the loss of empire that’s on the horizon, we’d be better served if we focus instead on those parts of the world that are likely to benefit from this inevitability.

  *  *  *

  Socialist ideas are becoming increasingly popular in the US. At the same time the US government is printing money hand over fist. All while the US empire continues to overstretch itself across the world. It’s all shaping up to be a world-class disaster… one unlike anything we’ve seen before. That’s exactly why New York Times bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video showing how it all could go down. Click here to watch it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 21:00

• "A Lot Of Shuttered Nuclear Power Plants Could Be Turned Back On", Fed Energy Official Says
  “A Lot Of Shuttered Nuclear Power Plants Could Be Turned Back On”, Fed Energy Official Says

  The United States is about to experience a resurgence in nuclear energy. The federal government is expected to continue restarting shuttered nuclear power plants in the coming years to meet the increasing demand for clean, dependable energy essential for powering the economy of tommorrow. 

  “There are a couple of nuclear power plants that we probably should, and can, turn back on,” Jigar Shah, director of the US Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office, told Bloomberg in an interview.

  In March, Shah’s office approved a loan to Holtec International Corp. to reopen the Palisades nuclear plant in Michigan. This was a historical shift, and it was the first nuclear power plant to be reopened in the US, setting a precedent for atomic energy to make a triumphal comeback. The plant could begin producing power as early as the second half of 2025.

  Shah said, “A lot of the other players that have a nuclear power plant that has recently shut down and could be turned back on are gaining that confidence to try.” He declined to give specifics about which plants were slated to reopen. 

  

  Nuclear power is the largest single source of carbon-free electricity. Given onshoring trends, electrification of transportation and buildings, and, of course, as we’ve noted in “The Next AI Trade,” the proliferation of AI data centers will overload power grids nationwide unless a significant upgrade is seen.

  We again highlighted the enormous investment opportunity early Monday titled “Everyone Is Piling Into The “Next AI Trade””, which lists companies powering up America for the digital age.

  Nearly 3.5 years ago, we provided readers with a straightforward investment thesis: “Buy Uranium: Is This The Beginning Of The Next ESG Craze.” Back then, it became apparent to us that the resurrection of the nuclear power industry was imminent. 

  And the trend is only gaining steam as the revival of nuclear power plants will continue benefiting some of the largest uranium producers, such as Cameco. We told readers to buy uranium stocks, such as Cameco around the $10 handle – now it’s nearing $50 a share. 

  As a whole, uranium stocks have soared… 

  

  We’ll leave readers with recent comments from Patti Poppe, the chief executive officer of Pacific Gas & Electric.

  Poppe told a Stanford University forum that nuclear power should continue to be part of California’s power generation mix as efforts to decarbonize the grid. 

  “Nuclear should be part of the future,” she said, noting that the state’s only nuclear power plant – Diablo Canyon – could be granted a license extension through the 2030s by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

  So there it is: Nuclear is being revived at a time when the nation’s grid is nearing a major upgrade due to rising power demand. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 20:40

• California State Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Ban Excessive Homework
  California State Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Ban Excessive Homework

  Authored by Eric Lundrum via American Greatness,

  A state lawmaker in California has introduced legislation that would severely restrict a teacher’s ability to hand out homework assignments to students that are deemed to be too much.

  

  As reported by Breitbart, State Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo (D-Calif.) introduced AB 2999, formally known as The Healthy Homework Act, in February.

  The bill would mandate public school officials to “develop, adopt, and update” their policies regarding homework “at least once every five years.”

  The bill would also require schools to take into account research which allegedly shows the physical and mental health impacts of homework.

  “I think this is going to make a huge impact for the students,” said Schiavo.

  “The times have changed and our homework policies don’t always change with the times, so we need to make sure we are addressing issues that are effective and also don’t harm kids.”

  Schiavo was partially influenced by the fact that her sixth-grade daughter, Sofia, hates homework; she described homework as “exhausting” and “overwhelming.”

  “It’s depressing that my whole day, from when I wake up to when I go to bed, is nearly all taken up with schoolwork,” said Sofia.

  Several alleged “experts” have agreed with Schiavo’s view that homework largely needs to be banned. Harris Cooper, professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Duke University, claimed that “there is a limit to how much kids can benefit from home study,” and that students should have no more than 10 minutes of homework per day.

  A recent survey by Stanford University found that, of over 300,000 student respondents, 45% said that homework was their top source of stress.

  “If it’s such a source of stress for kids, and we know taking stress off kids’ plates will make a difference in their mental health, this is something that can practically impact kids’ mental health overnight,” Schiavo continued.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 20:20

• Cocoa Crash Unfolds As "Liquidity Evaporates" 
  Cocoa Crash Unfolds As “Liquidity Evaporates” 

  Cocoa futures in New York crashed Monday in their biggest daily drawdown on record, driven mostly by improved weather forecasts and sliding liquidity. 

  “Cocoa prices are melting down. New York and London cocoa futures are down ~15% today (that’s, by far, the largest one-day % drop in data going back nearly 65 years),” Bloomberg’s Javier Blas wrote on X. 

  CHART OF THE DAY: Cocoa prices are melting down. New York and London cocoa futures are down ~15% today (that’s, by far, the largest one-day % drop in data going back nearly 65 years). #cocoa #chocflation https://t.co/hzcOgHkC2U pic.twitter.com/a3BxC9XjCw

  — Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) April 29, 2024

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

  Futures fell 15% to $8,931 a ton, having hit a record high of $11,722 on April 19. 

  

  On April 9, during the surge from $9,000 to nearly $12,000, Blas warned: “Liquidity in cocoa markets is quickly evaporating.” 

  

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

  Saxo Bank’s head of commodity strategy, Ole Hansen, explained to Dow Jones Newswires that today’s selloff was triggered by an improving weather forecast for rain in West Africa, the mecca of cocoa farming. This will only boost the bean outlook for mid-season crops. He also noted that the front contract showed strong signs of ‘buyer fatigue.’ 

  “Liquidity in the market due to the intense volatility of cocoa’s prices has also disappeared, so any kind of news–good or bad–will trigger strong fluctuations in price,” Hansen said, adding that the latest commitment of traders report exhibited broad selling from commercial traders, with the long exposure sliding to a 14-month low as traders panic exit the chaotic market. 

  Despite the cocoa plunge, London-based trading and agricultural consultant Paulo Torres told Bloomberg, “The shortage is not over” and “the elephant in the room is the fact that Ivory Coast and Ghana do not have cocoa, so there is no way prices can fall significantly.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 20:00

• California's Tax Revenue Projections Weakening As Newsom's Budget Revision Deadline Looms
  California’s Tax Revenue Projections Weakening As Newsom’s Budget Revision Deadline Looms

  Authored by Travis Gillmore via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  With the state facing a record-high budget deficit, tax collections are failing to meet California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s budget proposal projections, which could put further pressure on the state’s finances.

  

  As of April 25, the state’s franchise tax board is showing personal income tax collections on track to approximately match estimates for the month.

  However, corporate tax revenues of $4.16 billion equate to more than $500 million below forecasts for the month and are off by $1.4 billion for the fiscal year.

  Some economists point to disruptions in the technology industry—with thousands of California jobs slashed across several companies in recent months—as a contributing factor in declining corporate and personal income taxes.

  “The loss of tech jobs has also hurt California’s public finances, which have grown heavily dependent on Silicon Valley,” Joseph Politano, independent writer for online data and economy newsletter Apricitas Economics, posted April 14 on Substack. “It will mean less future potential revenue—forcing the state to raise tax rates or pare back spending on investment, social services, and more.”

  Sales and use taxes are also driving the shortfall, missing estimates by $1 billion since November.

  In March, such receipts came in $653 million below forecast, which the finance department said, “reflect ongoing weakness in taxable sales.”

  Data analysts blamed inflation and high-interest rates, in part, for the lackluster sales tax collections, as cash-strapped consumers are managing their finances by reducing spending on some items.

  “This decline reflects consumer challenges balancing higher prices and financing costs with essential household needs,” Andy Nickerson, president and CEO of HdL Companies—a data and consulting services provider for local governments—said in an April 16 tax report summary. “As the Federal Reserve considers a delay in softening rates, [we anticipate] consumer spending may continue to stagnate, delaying a return to normal historical growth trends in 2024.”

  Cumulative March tax receipts came in $243 million below estimates and contributed to a $5.8 billion shortfall since November—representing a 4 percent miss—according to a recently released report from the state’s Department of Finance.

  While personal income tax receipts exceeded expectations in March, estimated payments since November were down $4.7 billion, suggesting weakness in tax collections for the 2023 tax year, the finance department reported.

  With the income tax due date of April 15, more details will be available in the first week of May once calculations are complete. Preliminary information from the state’s controller’s office suggests the governor’s estimate could be $6 billion or more higher than actual revenues collected.

  While Mr. Newsom’s January proposal was based on forecasts, a revision due in May will be able to incorporate receipts received, which should provide more clarity.

  “All of these results suggest that April revenues, in the aggregate, may come in several hundred million dollars below monthly estimates,” Jason Sisney, budget director for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, said in a Substack post April 25. “It is virtually certain that the May Revision will downgrade revenue projections from those the Governor released in January.”

  Mr. Newsom is expected to provide the revision on or before the May 14 deadline.

  The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office predicted earlier this year after weak tax collections in January that revenues would miss the governor’s estimates by about $16 billion for the 2023–2024 fiscal year and another $9 billion for 2024–2025.

  But following personal income tax revenues in February and March that were closer to estimate, Mr. Sisney believes the shortfall will not be as large as the analyst’s office suggested.

  “Based on revenue trends to date … it is difficult for me to see revenues dropping quite that much,” he said.

  Disparities in estimates between the governor and the analyst’s office have existed since January regarding the severity of the budget deficit.

  Mr. Newsom estimates a $38 billion shortfall, while analysts forecast a $73 billion gap in funding. Some of the differences lie in the governor’s calculation of solutions proposed, which the analyst’s office says accounts for about $20 billion of the discrepancy.

  With the numbers in flux, lawmakers and policy experts are awaiting final totals so that budget proposals can be debated in earnest.

  Mr. Newsom recently approved a “budget bill junior” crafted by Democratic lawmakers as an early action plan to address a portion of the deficit.

  Approximately $17 billion to chip away at the deficit—including deferrals, delays, borrowing, and some $3.6 billion cuts—primarily to one-time funding—were enacted by his signing of Assembly Bill 106 on April 15.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 19:40

• "The Only Safe Asset" – Chinese Consumers Overtake India In Gold-Buying Frenzy
  “The Only Safe Asset” – Chinese Consumers Overtake India In Gold-Buying Frenzy

  Who could have seen this coming?

  ICYMI from Nov 2023, when gold was still 1900

  Behind The Mysterious Explosion In Gold Prices: China’s “Massive Accumulation Of Gold”https://t.co/6Yg2HPmMwf

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) April 28, 2024

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

  In November 2023, with gold trading around $1900/oz, we highlighted the beginning of a precious metal buying-binge from China, noting that the prcie for physical gold had never been more expensive at the time (while western gold prices were still below their prior record highs).

  Additionally we noted the total lack of demand for so-called ‘paper gold’ via ETFs as holdigs underlying these vehicles was declining, as investors rotated from paper to physical:

  “The rising interest in gold bars and coins was primarily driven by investors’ safe-haven demand, supported by global geopolitical instability and weak performance of investment products denominated in Chinese yuan.”

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Now, a few months later, we get confirmation as The South China Morning Post reports that consumers in China bought 308.9 tonnes (10.9 million ounces) of gold in the first quarter, representing a 5.9% increase compared to the same period in 2023.

  Having burned out in Chinese gold ETFs, we recetly noted that, amid a notable pick up in capital flight that the Chinese had “grabbed gold by the throat.”

  Sure enough, as SCMP points out, Chinese consumers are increasing their appetite for gold, seeking to protect their assets amid a volatile stock market, a depreciating yuan and property doldrums, which analysts said would continue to boost international gold prices coupled with geopolitical uncertainties.

  

  Purchases of gold bars and coins, which largely reflect investment and hedging demand, surged by 26.8 per cent year on year to 106.3 tonnes, while gold jewellery sales declined by 3 per cent from a year earlier to 183.9 tonnes.

  “Gold represents the only safe asset for [Chinese consumers] to protect their wealth against domestic inflation, asset price declines as well as against geopolitical risks,” said Chen Zhiwu, the chair professor of finance at the University of Hong Kong.

  “I expect Chinese household demand for gold to rise more in the future. And the Chinese central bank will also continue to purchase more gold to prepare for more geopolitical turmoil ahead.”

  China’s central bank bought 160,000 ounces of gold bullion in March, marking its 17th consecutive monthly purchase and bringing its total reserves to 2,262 tonnes (72.74 million ounces), as it aims to diversify holdings away from US bonds amid strained bilateral relations.

  “The escalation in gold holdings by global central banks, coupled with heightened gold demand in the Chinese market, has emerged as significant drivers propelling recent gold prices beyond market expectations,” the Bank of China said on Friday.

  “In the future, gold prices are expected to sustain their robust upwards trajectory, driven by ongoing global central bank efforts to de-dollarise, escalating geopolitical uncertainty, and shifts in the [US] Federal Reserve’s monetary policy,” the report said.

  China eclipsed India as the largest purchaser of gold jewellery in 2023, with consumption totalling 630 tonnes last year, representing an annual increase of 10 per cent.

  “The China story is one of the reasons supporting gold prices, but the global risk-off sentiment is also fuelling the demand,” said Gary Ng, senior economist at Natixis Corporate and Investment Bank, who expected China’s demand for gold to remain resilient in 2024.

  “Beyond China, whether the US can take inflation is another determinant for future gold prices, which is probably the biggest uncertainty.”

  However, as TD Securities’ Daniel Ghali points out another potential source of gold strength.

  With little trace in exchange data, buying activity must be OTC. However, price action in basis, forwards, and BoE gold suggest the buying program is price insensitive, has a sense of urgency, and deep pockets. This mysterious bid may point to curiously aggressive OTC buying activity, which appears to be highly correlated with acute currency depreciation pressures.

  

  Ongoing currency pressures could explain the sense of urgency behind this bid, with a high correlation with the CNY’s deviation from its fix inching towards its fixed band.

  

  Historically, this has been associated with a significant outperformance as the exceptional buying activity underpins a squeeze from those using the traditional playbook.

  Finally, US election dynamics are a positive for gold, according to TD Securities’ Bart Malek.

  A Republican administration is likely to push lower taxes, with spending largely unchanged. The resulting higher deficit projections, from the already very high numbers, should help gold, as it suggests higher inflation, lower real rates and continued central bank buying. A likely even more adversarial stance toward China and Iran taken by a Republican administration would also contribute to gold’s good fortune and should see oil well supported.

  

  Simply put, gold remains a good sanction-proof private- and central-bank-diversifier.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 19:20

• Mammas, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Activists
  Mammas, Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Activists

  Authored by Roger Simon via The Epoch Times,

  I am writing this column in the hopes you will pass it around.

  To be honest, I write every column in the hopes it will be passed around, times being what they are. I’m arrogant enough to think what I have to say is at least somewhat needed. More humbly, G-d gave me a modicum of writing skill I have concluded for a reason and, more than ever in my life, I, at the age of 80, seem constrained to use it. I rarely stop, and when I do, all I seem to think about is what I’m going to write next, except when I’m playing tennis… And even then…

  

   

  Today’s title is, of course, a knock-off of “Mammas Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Cowboys,” written by Ed and Patsy Bruce, but made famous, as these things go, by others—the estimable Waylon Jennings and Willie Nelson. If you’ve been living under the proverbial rock and haven’t heard their fabulous recording—and even if you have; I listen to it all the time—it’s right here.

  It begins: “Cowboys ain’t easy to love/And they’re harder to hold.” If you replace “Cowboys” with “Activists,” it still makes sense, maybe more. Trust me—I’ve been there myself, years and years ago. We were wrong then. They’re worse now.

  This is all a long way around to what my theme is – the cause of the civilization-threatening unholy mess we are in with so many of our supposedly premier institutions of higher learning – indeed the world’s supposedly premier institutions of higher learning – Ivy League on down, turned into satanic campgrounds celebrating a group of bloodthirsty maniacs that make the Nazi Party seem like… well, let’s just leave it there.

  Except that 1939 has come back. From Wikipedia:

  “On February 20, 1939, a Nazi rally took place at Madison Square Garden, organized by the German American Bund. More than 20,000 people attended, and Fritz Julius Kuhn was a featured speaker. The Bund billed the event, which took place two days before George Washington’s Birthday, as a pro-‘Americanism’ rally; the stage at the event featured a huge Washington portrait with swastikas on each side.”

  Déjà vu all over again? The proverbial canary in the coal mine come back for yet another bow?

  Yes, but now it’s arguably worse. No more wrapping themselves in the flag. George Washington, no longer revered, is just another statue to be toppled. It’s “Death to America” all the way down at our leading universities and it’s spreading.

  It’s Rashida Tlaib’s world. We just live in it.

  Mammas, don’t let your babies grow up to be activists—see what I mean?

  I’m not talking about the loyal readers of this site. I’d be astonished if they were the kind of parents or grandparents who would countenance that kind of thing. But I wouldn’t be surprised if they (you) know plenty who are.

  Also, I know many fine people who have done their bests with their progeny only to find that years of critical race theory (flagrant or masked) and other assorted “woke” excrescences in the schools, not to mention the inability to concentrate brought on via the supposed gifts of Silicon Valley, have made it impossible anyway.

  When looking for blame for what happened to this generation of college students, half or near of whom seem to prefer Hamas to Israel, most point at the educational system itself, so neo-Marxist “woke” from kindergarten up it’s hard to imagine how they could be more so, and to the media who cheer it along, amplify it, and excuse its excesses.

  But it all starts in the home. In other words, someone was not home to give these young people guidance and rein in at least some of their excesses—the parents.

  It’s not been just an abdication of responsibility. In more cases than we would like to know, the parents may also have cheered them on, seeing in their rebellious children the vindication of their own, much more tepid, rebellions years ago.

  In yet other cases it’s more direct, and worse.

  As illustration, recall how, back in 2020, former president Barack Obama proudly announced his daughters’ participation in protests led by Black Lives Matter, an organization that proved to be a financial rip-off not just of other blacks, but of all who contributed to their racialist con game. (That link, by the way, comes to you via the oh-so-chic folks at Harper’s Bazaar.)

  Of the three causes mentioned, the parents may, in the end, be the most to blame, though needless to say a fourth element, our government, has its portion too, an amazingly large one, fomenting what Christopher Rufo sees as internal “color revolutions” via such amusements (for children yet) as “Drag Queens for Palestine.”

  It’s impossible to know how many of these protestors come from single-parent homes, but it’s almost certain to be a high percentage. This is a national disaster in itself.

  It’s hard to know in general how many of them there are or even who they are because they wear masks or keffiyehs covering their faces (for fear of COVID or, more likely, identification by future employers).

  What we are seeing on our campuses is the product of a family environment imploding or, sadly, already imploded. Much of this is and has been intentional.

  I apologize to all of you for being so “hobbyhorsical,” as Laurence Sterne termed it hundreds of years ago, on this topic, but the situation we are in is indeed civilizational. One can only praise the few governors—Texas, Florida—who have stood up to the onslaught and properly used the National Guard to return their universities to what was supposedly their real purpose—something called education.

  So let’s end with some good news. It was long overdue, but the Ivy League and similar institutions are finally losing their luster. It is being widely reported that many students and their families—not just Jewish ones—are deciding to go elsewhere, to the Midwest and South, for their studies that might be more even-handed.

  Others are deciding that college isn’t such a great thing after all and are going to trade schools. Good on them. (I wonder how many of those trade schools are having pro-Hamas demonstrations. Not many, I’d wager.)

  Finally, a word about a word—“activists.” It is used as well to characterize adherents of what we often think of as good causes. I say—bag it. Let’s leave that term to the Left. That way you don’t have to let your babies grow up to be “activists,” because, chances are, they’re not going to be the kind you want.

  Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 19:00

• "Do Not Disclose This Is An Ad": OnlyFans Creator Says Biden Admin Paid For "Full On Political Propaganda"
  “Do Not Disclose This Is An Ad”: OnlyFans Creator Says Biden Admin Paid For “Full On Political Propaganda”

  OnlyFans creator and TikTok star Farha Khalidi says that the Biden administration paid her to push “full on political propaganda,” and asked her not to disclose that she was advertising for them.

  

  Speaking with commentator Richard Hanania, Khalidi said she’d been asked to boast about Ketanji Brown Jackson after Jackson was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Biden.

  “I was doing full-on political propaganda,” she said, adding “The funny thing is they’re like, do not disclose this is an ad because technically it’s not a product so you don’t have to disclose it’s an ad. Because I think they just wanted, like, some edgy girl of color to just tell people — like when they nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson, they’re, like, ‘Can you say “as a person of color,” you know, that you feel “reflected”?’”

  Watch:

  NEW: OnlyFans creator Farha Khalidi says she was paid by the Biden Administration to spread “political propaganda” & was told to not disclose her videos were ads.

  Everything about Biden is fake.

  Khalidi says the Biden admin reached out to her because they wanted someone with… pic.twitter.com/CQ40K5IHID

  — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) April 28, 2024

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

  Khalidi has 1.8 million TikTok followers.

  

  Speaking of propaganda, and we’ll save you the eye bleach by not posting his picture… director Steven Spielberg is also helping the Biden campaign with reelection, NBC News reported on Friday.

  The filmmaker will help to “convey the president’s successes and his vision for the country” to delegates and viewers of the Democratic National Convention, scheduled to take place August 19-22 in Chicago. Spielberg has been meeting event organizers, who expect more than 5,000 delegates from across the country to officially select Biden as the presidential nominee.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 18:40

• The Travesties Of The Trump Trials
  The Travesties Of The Trump Trials

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

  Do not believe the White House/mainstream media-concocted narrative that the four criminal court cases – prosecuted by Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Jack Smith, and Fani Willis – were not in part coordinated, synchronized, and timed to reach their courtroom psychodramatic finales right during the 2024 campaign season.

  

  These local, state, and federal Lilliputian agendas were designed to tie down, gag, confine, bankrupt, and destroy Trump psychologically and physically. They are the final lawfare denouement to years of extra-legal efforts to emasculate him.

  Indeed, the nation is by now worn out by these serial assaults on constitutional norms: the Hillary-funded Steele dossier subterfuge; the pre-election Russian laptop disinformation campaign; the two impeachments without special counsel reports; the impeachment Senate trial of a private citizen; the effort to remove Trump’s name from state ballots; the ongoing attempt to emasculate the Electoral College; or the radical opportune changes in state election laws to ensure massive mail-in balloting.

  Recently, Andrew McCarthy has reviewed in depth this coordination between White House personnel and prosecutors, long known and long denied by the left.

  Biden, for example, had complained to aides about Attorney General Merrick Garland’s tardiness in getting special federal prosecutor Smith appointed – and thus apparently ensuring Trump was convicted before the election.

  Nathan Wade, Fani Willis’s now-fired paramour prosecutor, visited and consulted with the White House counsel’s office when he was acting supposedly as a purely local county prosecutor. The January 6th left-wing-dominated congressional committee consulted with the Biden administration in sending forth its criminal referrals about Trump’s purported role in the protests. And to handle his pseudo-indictment against Trump, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg hired Biden Justice Department official Vincent Colangeio.

  Two, the prosecutors’ delayed criminal indictments and E. Jean Carroll’s civil suit were predicated only on Donald Trump running for reelection. After his 2020 defeat, the loss of the two Republican senate seats in Georgia, and the January 6 demonstrations/riot, Trump was written off by pundits as politically toxic.

  Then his historic comeback in the subsequent year terrified the left. The reboot prompted the subsequent indictments and suits years after the purported crimes. It was left unsaid that had Trump not been a conservative Republican and leading presidential candidate, he would have never been indicted.

  Three, most of the indictments either had no prior precedent in criminal law or will likely never be used again, at least against anyone left-wing. Moreover, many of the writs relied on manipulation of statutes of limitations.

  Neither Bragg nor any other local prosecutor had previously transformed a supposedly local affidavit misdemeanor into a supposed federal campaign finance violation, a gambit so preposterous that it had been passed on by federal attorneys.

  Letitia James was the first New York Attorney General to indict a state resident for the supposed crime of overvaluing real estate to obtain a loan, which was paid back timely and in full, to the profit of lending institutions. No bank, after auditing Trump’s assets and viability to pay back loans, was unhappy to loan to him. But all were quite happy to profit from the hefty interest—and would likely be happy to loan to him again.

  James sought to make Trump a criminal without ever finding a crime, much less a victim. Nor, until the checkered and unethical career of Fani Willis, had any local prosecutor ever indicted an ex-president for a supposedly improper phone call questioning whether all the state’s votes had been fully counted.

  Alvin Bragg’s case was nonexistent given the statute of limitations on supposed misdemeanors committed over six years prior—until Bragg transmogrified the accusations of minor crimes into felonies and, with them, extensions granted supposedly due to the COVID lockdowns.

  In Carroll’s case, her unsubstantiated accusations of a sexual assault were also well past the statute of limitations until a left-wing New York legislator and unapologetic Trump hater passed a special law—a veritable bill of attainder aimed at Trump—waiving the statute of limitations for a year in cases of accusations of long-past sexual assault in the state of New York.

  Four, all the indictments and suits took place in either blue cities, counties, or states. And most of the jury pools in or near New York, Atlanta, or Miami were or will be heavily Democrat. So far, the New York judges who have overseen Trump’s civil and criminal trials—Justices Engoron, Kaplan, and Merchan—were all liberals, appointed by Democrat or liberal politicians, and some have donated to Democrat causes. They were not shy about expressing disdain for defendant Trump. No changes in venues were ever allowed.

  Five, all the prosecutors, Bragg, James, Smith, and Willis, are likewise either Democrats or associated with liberal causes. In the case of Bragg, James, and Willis, all three ran for office and raised money on promises and boasts of getting Donald Trump. And all three have now set the precedent that local and state prosecutors can warp the law and use it to go after an ex-president and leading presidential candidate of the opposite party for naked political purposes.

  Six, all these cases were equally applicable to high-profile Democrat politicos. E. Jean Carroll’s defamation suit was the most laughable of all the court dramas, but its outline and protocols just as easily could have applied to Tara Reade. She came forward to accuse candidate Biden of having sexually assaulted her years earlier—roughly about the same period’s as Carroll’s fluid timelines. Her story is about as believable or unbelievable as Carroll’s. But the difference was that whereas the media canonized the delusional and self-contradictory Carroll as a useful anti-Trump tool, it demonized Reade as a crazy loon and liar—and a potential impediment to Biden’s 2019-20 primary campaign.

  Bragg had to torture the law to fabricate a federal campaign finance indictment against Trump. But Hillary Clinton clearly violated federal campaign statutes—and was variously fined—when she tried to hide her “opposition research” payments to Christopher Steele as “legal expenses.” In truth, Steele was hired and paid to concoct a fake anti-Trump dossier and likely should have been barred from working for a presidential campaign given he was not a U.S. citizen.

  In the case of Smith, simultaneously with his case against Trump, his twin special prosecutor, Robert Hur, found that Joe Biden had unlawfully removed classified files for much longer than Trump (30 years plus), in a much less secure location (his rickety garage), and without a president’s authority to declassify his documents. Moreover, he had disclosed their contents to his ghostwriter, who destroyed evidence under subpoena by Hur. Yet unlike Trump, Biden was not charged, given that Hur claimed that Biden, in his opinion, was so old and amnesiac that he might win sympathy rather than a conviction from a jury.

  Willis indicted Trump for supposedly trying to pressure officials to “find” missing Trump ballots, thus supposedly violating “racketeering” statutes, as he oversaw an attempt to find troves of ballots he thought had been cast for him. Of course, in the same state, Stacy Abrams, after losing the gubernatorial race of 2018, claimed she had actually won, despite losing by over 50,000 votes. She sued to overturn the election and then made a celebrity-political career touring the nation, falsely claiming she was the real governor and her victorious opponent was an illegitimate governor.

  For that matter, in 2016, left-wing organizations, celebrities, and thousands of political operatives sought to overturn the Trump victory by appealing to the electors to renounce their states’ popular vote tallies and thus become “faithless electors.” In sum, there was a true conspiracy, or, better, a “racketeering” scheme, to use Willis’s parlance, to coordinate various groups to overturn the constitutional duties of electors to throw the election to Hillary Clinton. Clinton, along with the likes of ex-president Jimmy Carter and soon-to-be House Minority Leader Hakim Jeffries, would continue to deny that Trump was the legitimately elected president.

  In sum, the number of suits against and indictments against Trump grew in correlation to his political fortunes. They were designed in the election year 2024 to do what Democrat voters likely cannot. They are ridiculous and sui generis, and will never be used against anyone other than Trump. They have done more damage to democracy, the rule of law, and equal justice to the law than all of the antics that Trump is accused of.

  Moreover, they will set in motion a dangerous tit-for-tat cycle of weaponization that threatens the very constitutional order of the United States.

  If Trump is elected to restore the rule of equal justice, will a Republican special counsel revisit Robert Hur’s work and find ex-President Biden quite capable of standing trial for the crimes Hur has already investigated and confirmed?

  Will then a new Republican-appointed FBI director order a SWAT-like raid, with Fox News forewarned and Newsmax reporters on the scene, to descend into the Biden beach house?

  Will county and state prosecutors in Utah, Montana, and Oklahoma feel that to stop this cycle of illegality, they must charge the Biden family members by bootstrapping local indictments onto federal crimes?

  Will conservative women in the future come forward in Arkansas, Idaho, and Alabama to claim that in their past, they now suddenly remember that decades ago a prominent Democrat candidate harassed them? Will their right-wing lawyers cherry-pick the proper red-state judge?

  Will conservative district attorneys find ways to indict Joe Biden on the various imaginative bookkeeping and “loan repayments” used to disguise the fact his corrupt family received well over $20 million from illiberal foreign interests, much if not all of it camouflaged to avoid income taxes?

  Will some South Carolina legislator get a bill of attainder passed in the legislature, ending the statute of limitations for a year for all those in 2016 who sought to undermine the electors and flip them to Hillary Clinton?

  In August or September, will a right-wing state prosecutor and a conservative judge find that Joe Biden’s creative bookkeeping warrants a $450 million fine, payable before appeal?

  And will Republican officials and judges in purple states move to get Biden’s name off the ballot?

  Such scenarios are endless and, given the current precedents, could all be justified as desperate deterrent measures to shock the left into ceasing their efforts to sabotage our constitutional system and rule of law.

  A final note.

  There is a divine order of balance in the world, one known variously by particular civilizations as kismet, nemesis, karma, or what goes around, comes around payback. We’ve already seen such forces at work: Sen. Schumer at the head of a mob at the doors of the Supreme Court, calling out threats to justices by name, only now finding pro-Hamas thugs circling his own home. Or Democrats during the Trump years straining to find ways to invoke the 25th Amendment, now humiliated into claiming a non-compos-mentis Joe Biden is “sharp as a knife.”

  Tragically for the country, to stop this left-wing madness, the Trump travesties may not be the end, but the beginning of precisely what the Founders feared.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 18:20

• Blinken Urges Hamas To Take 'Extraordinarily Generous' Ceasefire Deal
  Blinken Urges Hamas To Take ‘Extraordinarily Generous’ Ceasefire Deal

  Israeli officials have reportedly given Hamas an ultimatum, saying the group has “one last chance” to reach a deal, according to Axios. Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz said on Saturday, “If there is a deal, we will suspend the operation” – in reference to the planned Rafah ground offensive.

  He added that “The release of the hostages is a deep priority for us.” Following Oct.7 and the first hostage/prisoner swap which took place on November 22, the number of Israeli hostages (and dual nationals) which remain in Hamas captivity stand at 129. However, Israeli leaders have long acknowledged the likelihood that many of these are already deceased.

  

  Hamas is still pressing for a full and permanent cessation of all hostilities, along with full Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza, while Tel Aviv is just pushing for a temporary pause in fighting.

  According to Al Jazeera, this is ultimately unlikely to sway Hamas negotiators:

  Israel wants to “have its cake and eat it too. They want to get their captives back out of Gaza and into Israel. But then they want to be able to continue the war on Gaza after a brief pause,” Mohamad Elmasry, media studies professor and political analyst at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, told Al Jazeera.

  US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in Saudi Arabia on Monday, his first stop in a broader Middle East tour focused primarily in Gaza, but he’s pushing Saudi-Israel normalization.

  Blinken has called on Hamas to accept Israel’s latest and “extraordinarily generous” proposal for a Gaza truce. “Hamas has before it a proposal that is extraordinarily, extraordinarily generous on the part of Israel,” the US top diplomat said.

  “The only thing standing between the people of Gaza and a ceasefire is Hamas. They have to decide and they have to decide quickly,” Blinken said from Riyadh. “I’m hopeful that they will make the right decision.”

  This is where things stand via Reuters:

  A source briefed on the talks said Israel’s proposal entailed a deal to accept the release of fewer than 40 of the roughly 130 hostages believed to be still held in exchange for freeing Palestinians jailed in Israel, and a second phase of a truce consisting of a “period of sustained calm” – Israel’s compromise response to a Hamas demand for permanent ceasefire.

  Among these 40 would be any remaining children, women, sick and elderly hostages. Both sides have been this close before, but never with Washington applying this much pressure to see a deal through to the finish line.

  Blinken has sought to assure Arab states and Palestinian leaders that the US cannot support an attack against Rafah “in the absence of an (Israeli) plan to ensure that civilians will not be harmed.” 

  ⚡️Leaked Video: Several casualties among the Israeli army were transferred from the Gaza Strip to several hospitals via helicopters. pic.twitter.com/vjRrk9mvhS

  — War Monitor (@WarMonitors) April 28, 2024

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

  Blinken and the Biden administration are still hoping to secure a broader deal involving Saudi Arabia, which he says is “potentially very close to completion.” It hinges on Saudi-Israeli diplomatic recognition, and in return the basis for recognition of a Palestinian state by Israel.

  “To move forward with normalization, two things will be required: calm in Gaza and a credible pathway to a Palestinian state,” Blinken said in fresh remarks.

  However, Hamas is believed to have several intact battalions inside Rafah, and the Netanyahu government has vowed to see through its operation until it has accomplished the total eradication of Hamas. To do this, Israel believes it must got into Rafah with full ground and air might, but it will result in humanitarian catastrophe for the over one million civilians currently taking refuge there.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Who's In Favor Of A Potential TikTok Ban?
  Who’s In Favor Of A Potential TikTok Ban?

  As part of a larger national security and foreign aid package, President Joe Biden on Wednesday signed into law legislation that forces TikTok parent ByteDance to divest the U.S. arm of its popular social media platform within 270 days or be banned from operating in the United States. The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” seeks to cut any ties between TikTok, its current parent company and the Chinese government, which allegedly abuses the platform to “surveil and influence the American public” in a way that poses a threat to national security.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter reports, compared to an earlier standalone bill that had passed the House in March but then failed to gain traction in the Senate, the newly passed bill extends the time given to ByteDance from 180 to 270 days, with the possibility of a 90-day extension if the president finds that significant progress towards a “qualified divesture” has been made. This means that TikTok’s Chinese owner now has until after the U.S. presidential election to find a suitable buyer, turning the question of whether or not TikTok should be divested or banned into a potential election issue.

  Sure enough, former president Donald Trump told young voters to remember that “crooked Joe Biden is responsible for banning TikTok,” when they vote in November, omitting the fact that he tried to ban TikTok himself during his time in office.

  And while Trump was right in his view that young Americans would be more likely to oppose legislation against TikTok, he ignored the fact that the vast majority of Republican voters is in favor of a potential ban. According to a recent YouGov/The Economist survey, two thirds of Republicans strongly or somewhat approve the forced divesture/potential ban of TikTok versus just 20 percent who oppose such legislation. Democratic voters are almost evenly split on the issue, with 40 percent of respondents in favor of legislative action against TikTok and its parent company.

  Looking at different age groups, the trend is clear: the younger the respondents the more likely they are to oppose a potential TikTok ban, which is easily explained by the fact that young people are much more likely to be TikTok users.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  So what happens next?

  If ByteDance fails to find a suitable buyer within the given timeframe, it would be unlawful for app stores and web hosting companies to distribute the app in the United States.

  Finding a buyer will be hard though, as any company with an interest and deep-enough pockets to acquire a platform of TikTok’s stature will almost certainly face intense scrutiny from the FTC for antitrust reasons.

  It’s also unlikely that ByteDance will go down without a fight.

  “Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere,” TikTok CEO Shou Chew said in a video posted on Wednesday, claiming that the ultimate goal of the legislation is to ban TikTok, not sell it.

  “We are confident and we will keep fighting for your rights in the courts,” he said, addressing the platform’s 170 million U.S. users directly.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 02:45

• Ukraine's Top Five Challenges Are Unsolvable
  Ukraine’s Top Five Challenges Are Unsolvable

  Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

  It’s beginning to dawn on most Westerners that the US’ long-delayed aid to Ukraine isn’t all that it was hyped up to be and will only at most temporarily slow down the pace of Russia’s increasingly rapid advances. The conflict’s tempo has gradually intensified as Russia exploited Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive to regain the military-strategic initiative. Ukraine’s problems are immense and multifaceted, but they’re all connected one way or another to the five following factors:

  

  1. Russia’s Military-Industrial Complex Continues Outproducing NATO’s

  Russia won the “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with NATO long ago and that’s why it continued gaining ground over the past 18 months. The sanctions failed to bankrupt the Kremlin, required resources for production remain readily available, and sabotage had no impact on the assembly lines. Not only has NATO been unable to stop Russia’s military-industrial complex, but it couldn’t ramp up its own during this time either, thus creating an unbridgeable gap that weakens Ukraine more by the week.

  2. Ukraine Is Struggling To Replenish Its Depleted Military Ranks

  NATO’s loss in the abovementioned military-industrial competition with Russia, the consequent failure of Ukraine’s counteroffensive, and Russia’s subsequent on-the-ground gains combined to scare Ukrainian men away from joining the armed forces and helping to replenish their depleted ranks. Without enough soldiers, Ukraine can’t confidently hold off Russia’s advances, thus risking an impending collapse along the front. At the end of the day, it’s just a numbers game, and Ukraine’s continue trending downward.

  3. Less Equipment & Troops Mean More Difficulty Building New Defenses

  The pace with which Russia has recently gained ground in Donbass is stressing Ukraine’s existing defensive lines like never before, thus compelling it to build newer ones further behind the front lines. Although Zelensky demanded this be done late last year, little progress has been made due to the lack of equipment and troops for holding off the Russian advance while simultaneously accomplishing this task. The breakthrough that the Ukrainian Intelligence Committee warned about is now more likely than ever.

  4. Political Instability Is Still A Damocles’ Sword Hanging Over Ukraine

  The Committee also warned in their same message from February that political unrest might explode next month around the time that Zelensky’s term expires on 21 May. They of course claimed that Russia would be behind it, which he also preconditioned his partners to falsely believe late last year, but this would actually be a genuine response to growing problems. Authoritarianism, corruption, forcible conscription, serious economic troubles, and the lack of a realistic endgame all enrage Ukrainians.

  5. Ukraine Continues Thinking That It Knows Better Than The US

  The Washington Post’s two–part post-mortem report on last summer’s failed counteroffensive revealed that one of the reasons why it flopped was because Ukraine refused to listen to the US’ advice. This problem is attributable to Zelensky and most recently took the form of him ordering his forces to attack Russian energy infrastructure in defiance of the US at the expense of more tactically significant targets. It’s actually the US’ own fault, though, since their media convinced him that he was a “god among men”.

  *  *  *

  These unsolvable challenges have converged to create a full-fledged crisis for Ukraine that Commander-in-Chief Syrsky is unable to resolve, which is why he candidly informed Ukraine’s partners that “the difficult operational and strategic situation…has a tendency to get worse.” Unless Ukraine agrees to demilitarize the regions still under its control east of the Dnieper and turn them into a buffer zone, the front might collapse by summertime, which could either lead to capitulation or a NATO intervention.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 02:00

• US Space Force General Says China's Military Developing Space Assets At "Breathtaking Speed"
  US Space Force General Says China’s Military Developing Space Assets At “Breathtaking Speed”

  Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times,

  Gen. Stephen Whiting, commander of U.S. Space Command, recently warned about China’s “breathtakingly fast” development of space military capabilities, following his trips to South Korea and Japan.

  “We are seriously focused at U.S. Space Command on our pacing challenge, which is the People’s Republic of China,” Gen. Whiting told reporters during a call from Japan on April 24.

  “The People’s Republic of China is moving at breathtaking speed in space, and they are rapidly developing a range of counter-space weapons to hold at risk our space capabilities,” he added.

  “They’re also using space to make their terrestrial forces—their army, their navy, their marine corps, their air force—more precise, more lethal, and more far-ranging.”

  Gen. Whiting was on his first Indo-Pacific trip after becoming the head of U.S. Space Command in January, succeeding Army Gen. James Dickinson. During his trip, he met with top military leaders from South Korea and Japan, including Adm. Kim Myung-Soo, chairman of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Japanese Defense Minister Minoru Kihara.

  

  One particular concern was the number of Chinese satellites in orbit, Gen. Whiting said.

  “Over the last six years, they have tripled the number of intelligent surveillance and reconnaissance satellites on orbit, and they have used their space capabilities to improve the lethality, the precision, and the range of their terrestrial forces,” he said.

  “And so that obviously is a cause for concern and something that we are watching a very, very closely.”

  China’s satellite fleet stood at 359 systems as of January, according to his prepared remarks for a hearing of the Senate Armed Service Committee in February. He also noted that Beijing is developing hypersonic glide vehicles along with other advanced space weaponry to “overcome U.S. traditional missile warning and ballistic missile defense systems.”

  China’s ambitions with regard to the Moon are also among Space Command’s concerns.

  “We’ve seen the announcements of China’s ambitions to go to the Moon. And those appear to be exploratory and scientific on the surface, but the Chinese aren’t very transparent with what they do in space,” he said.

  “And so we hope there’s not a military component to that, but we would certainly welcome more transparency.”

  A U.S. military report published in January warned that China and Russia are putting up dual-use satellites in space while hiding their military applications. One example is a Chinese satellite equipped with a giant robotic arm, which could be used to grapple other satellites in the future.

  China is aiming to put its astronauts on the moon by 2030. Pakistan, South Africa, Belarus, and Nicaragua are among a group of nations that have signed up for a planned moon base led by China and Russia. The moon project is officially known as the International Lunar Research Station.

  Gen. Whiting said he visited Japan’s Space Operations Group and emphasized the importance of the two nations working together in space.

  “Their focus on space domain awareness along with ours to keep track of those threats in space that we see—and many of those are emanating from China—has put an impetus on us developing improved space domain awareness capability,” he said.

  Japan is working to bring on board a deep-space radar, Gen. Whiting said, adding that the radar will benefit both nations once it archives initial operational capability.

  “We expect that will provide both of our countries an enhanced understanding of what China is doing in space,” he said.

  Japan and the United States are also partners in launching new satellites that will be used to conduct space domain awareness missions, according to Gen. Whiting.

  In November last year, the United States, Japan, and South Korea agreed on a mechanism to share missile warning data to better track North Korea’s missile launches. The mechanism went into effect in December.

  “We need to continue the excellent work in the trilateral agreement between the United States, the Republic of Korea, and Japan to share missile warning information so that that all three countries fully understand anytime North Korea launches a missile where that missile is headed, and we can provide warning to our national leadership, to our military forces, and to our populations,” Gen. Whiting said.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 04/29/2024 – 00:05

• Relentless Chinese Bond Rally Hints at Yuan Challenge Ahead
  Relentless Chinese Bond Rally Hints at Yuan Challenge Ahead

  By Charlie Zhu and Helen Sun, Bloomberg Markets Live reporters and strategists

  Three things we learned last week:

  1. China’s bond rally seems unstoppable amid a shortage of quality assets for investments. From government bonds to corporate debentures, traders keep hunting for yields in all maturities.

  • After pushing the yield on 30-year sovereign debt to the lowest since 2005, investors flocked to the notes issued by local government financing vehicles, once deemed as the riskiest instrument in Asia. That helped to drive LGFV companies’ borrowing costs to record lows.

  • In light of a decline in mortgage loans, long-term sovereign bonds become a good alternative for banks as long-term assets and provides support to the bond rally until the trend changes, said Becky Liu, head of Greater China macro strategy at Standard Chartered Plc.

  • As the central bank warned the market again about the potential risks in long-term bonds and pointed to signs of stabilizing economic growth, funds rotated out of the back-end of the curve. The yield on two-year sovereign notes slid to the lowest level since mid-2020. That widened its gap with US Treasury to about 317 basis points, the biggest ever.

  

  2. Market speculation about a devaluation of the yuan emerged. To investors onshore, this is an unlikely scenario given the authorities’ emphasis on maintaining stability, but some offshore traders see signs that the pressure is building.

  • In addition to the record interest rate gap, China’s stockpiling of commodities including gold and copper has prompted conjecture that policymakers may weaken the yuan in a one-off move.

  • The central bank has been using the daily reference rate to limit the depreciation of the yuan, effectively making it one of the best-performing emerging-market currencies this month. However, the steady fixing kept the spot exchange rate remain close to the 2% daily limit on the weaker side, spurring concerns over the sustainability of the strategy.

  

  3. The US decision on TikTok may bring headwinds to stabilizing relations between Beijing and Washington. President Joe Biden has signed a bill forcing TikTok to find a new owner within a year or face a ban. The move, designed to cut off China’s access to the video app used by 170 million Americans, raised concerns that US firms with large exposure to China’s market, including Apple Inc. and Tesla Inc., may be retaliation targets.

  • While China’s response was rather restrained compared with last year, Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned his US counterpart Antony Blinken Friday that “negative factors” were rising between the world’s biggest economies.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 23:40

• 'FX Vigilantes' Strike – Yen Suddenly Crashes To April 1990 Lows Against The Dollar
  ‘FX Vigilantes’ Strike – Yen Suddenly Crashes To April 1990 Lows Against The Dollar

  The yen crashed in early Asia trading, tumbling to match is exact lows from April 1990 in what is being blamed on a ‘fat finger’ trade or multiple barrier-option trades being triggered, by sources that have literally no idea.

  The plunge extended Friday’s big drop which followed BoJ Governor Ueda’s apparent lack of interest in doing anything about the yen’s decline, claiming it had ‘no impact’ on the currency’s inflation picture.

  “Currency rates is not a target of monetary policy to directly control,” he said.

  “But currency volatility could be an important factor in impacting the economy and prices. If the impact on underlying inflation becomes too big to ignore, it may be a reason to adjust monetary policy.”

  In fact, policymakers have repeatedly warned that depreciation won’t be tolerated if it goes too far too fast.

  Finance Minister Shunichi Suzuki reiterated after the BoJ meeting that the government will respond appropriately to foreign exchange moves.

  Potential triggers for interventions are public holidays in Japan on Monday and Friday next week, which bring the risk of volatility amid thin trading.

  “Should the yen fall further from here, like after the BOJ decision in September 2022, the possibility of intervention will increase,” said Hirofumi Suzuki, chief currency strategist at Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp.

  “It is not the level but it’s the speed that will trigger the action.”

  Well currency volatility is what he has now…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The sudden drop pushed USDJPY perfectly to its April 1990 highs to the tick…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The currency pain was all focused in the Japanese market as EUR and GBP strengthened against the USD…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  Perhaps even more notably, the yen puked relative to the Chinese yuan, hitting 22 for the first time since 1992 and putting further pressure on Beijing to potentially do something…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The question is, of course, what will Japan’s MoF/BoJ do now – if anything as their recent excuses about ‘velocity’ or some such spin are now out of the window after a 6-handle standalone surge in their currency in a few short days (when the rest of the world’s currencies are not).

  “Authorities may say they don’t target levels per se, but they do pay close attention to the trend and the rate of change and current levels suggest they have to act soon or risk facing a credibility crisis,” said Chris Weston, head of research at Pepperstone Group Ltd.

  “The FX market is almost taking them on like the bond vigilantes of old.”

  Specifically as SocGen’s FX strategist Kit Juckes noted on Friday, the yen’s decline is becoming disorderly, which points to a final, potentially sharp, decline before it finds a floor.

  However, as we detailed last week, the problem with intervention is that once the genie is out of the bottle… it’s hard to put it back in.

  In other words, the onus should be on the BOJ to step in with a much more hawkish move than the market expects.

  As Viraj Patel from Vanda Research goes on to note that “we’re at a stage where MoF/BoJ have no choice but to intervene. The best way would be for BoJ to hike 25bps this week. It’s not about the macro anymore (BoJ should’ve normalized policy faster last year).”

  Instead, what is going on is that Japan’s disastrous handling of its currency has evolved into a game between speculators and officials: Specs are short yen for good fundamental reasons (carry). At this stage, a “surprise” hike to send a signal to markets that they are concerned about ongoing FX weakness (and don’t test us) would be less costly to the economy vs. a further devaluation in the yen. It also adds an additional level of uncertainty to the BoJ/MoF reaction function – which speculators (long carry trades) don’t like.

  Meanwhile, FX intervention – which unfortunately looks to be the MoF/BoJ’s preferred route based on recent history – is not even a short-term fix anymore. USD/JPY dips would be quickly bought into based on recent market chatter. A hike goes a bit further towards solving the root cause of yen weakness – even it’s only a marginally better option.

  

  However, not everyone is convinced intervention is imminent.

  In a note late last week, Deutsche Bank says the currency’s decline is warranted and finally marks the day where the market realizes that Japan is following a policy of benign neglect for the yen.

  We have long argued that FX intervention is not credible and the toning down of verbal jawboning from the finance minister overnight is on balance a positive from a credibility perspective. The possibility of intervention can’t be ruled out if the market turns disorderly, but it is also notable that Governor Ueda played down the importance of the yen in his press conference today as well as signalling no urgency to hike rates. We would frame the ongoing yen collapse around the following points.

  1. Yen weakness is simply not that bad for Japan. The tourism sector is booming, profit margins on the Nikkei are soaring and exporter competitiveness is increasing. True, the cost of imported items is going up. But growth is fine, the government is helping offset some of the cost via subsidies and core inflation is not accelerating. Most importantly, the Japanese are huge foreign asset owners via Japan’s positive net international investment position. Yen weakness therefore leads to huge capital gains on foreign bonds and equities, most easily summarized in the observation that the government pension fund (GPIF) has roughly made more profits over the last two years than the last twenty years combined.

  2. There simply isn’t an inflation problem. Japan’s core CPI is around 2% and has been decelerating in recent months. The Tokyo CPI overnight was 1.7% excluding one-off effects. To be sure, inflation may well accelerate again helped by FX weakness and high wage growth. But the starting point of inflation is entirely different to the post-COVID hiking cycles of the Fed and ECB. By extension, the inflation pain is far less and the urgency to hike far less too. No where is this more obvious than the fact that Japanese consumer confidence are close to their cycle highs.

  3. Negative real rates are great. There is a huge attraction to running negative real rates for the consolidated government balance sheet. As we demonstrated last year, it creates fiscal space via a $20 trillion carry trade while also generating asset gains for Japan’s wealthy voting base. This encourages the persistent domestic capital outflows we have been highlighting as a key driver of yen weakness over the last year and that have pushed Japan’s broad basic balance to being one of the weakest in the world. It is not speculators that are weakening the yen but the Japanese themselves.

  The bottom line, Deutscxhe concludes, is that for the JPY to turn stronger the Japanese need to unwind their carry trade. But for this to make sense the Bank of Japan needs to engineer an expedited hiking cycle similar to the post-COVID experiences of other central banks. Time will tell if the BoJ is moving too slow and generating a policy mistake. A shift in BoJ inflation forecasts to well above 2% over their forecast horizon would be the clearest signal of a shift in reaction function. But this isn’t happening now.

  The Japanese are enjoying the ride.

  Finally, it goes without saying that the only true circuit-breaker for yen weakness is lower US yields/weak US macro, which is unlikely until the election if, as so many now speculate, there has been a directive by the Biden admin to make the economy look as good as possible ahead of the elections, even if that means manipulating the data to a grotesque degree.

  One added complexity for MoF/BoJ is that their two options for tackling yen weakness indirectly adds upward pressure to global rates/yields. They’re caught between a rock and a hard place… and speculators know (enjoy) this.

  And finally there is China: the longer BOJ/MoF does nothing to curb the collapse of the yen, a move which is seen a pumping up the country’s exporting base at the expense of other mercantilist nations such as China, the higher the probability Beijing will retaliate against Tokyo by devaluing its own currency. At which point all hell will break loose.

  But, one way or another, as Goldman noted, it’s crunch time for USDJPY.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 23:15

• Stablecoin Volumes Are Tracking A Record $15 Trillion On Ethereum Alone
  Stablecoin Volumes Are Tracking A Record $15 Trillion On Ethereum Alone

  By Marcel Kasumovich, Deputy CIO of Coinbase Asset Management

  Crypto sparked a renaissance in real-time payments. Sleepy you say? Time for a wake-up call – payment solutions are at the cutting edge of crypto’s integration into the mainstream, and it has plenty of competition.

  “You’re probably used to crypto transactions, expecting me to bring out another guest for an eight-minute commentary while we wait for confirmation. But that’s old crypto. Are you ready for the new crypto world? Watch very closely…don’t blink…and that’s it,” John Collison exclaimed while illustrating a transaction on crypto rails with Stripe, a leading payment network that he co-founded. It was a seamless user experience, unlike the company’s initial foray into bitcoin in 2014.

  Both PayPal and Stripe are now harnessing the power of stablecoins into their familiar user interfaces. This strategic move effortlessly brings users onto the blockchain – point, click, and it’s done. It’s the new trend, too. Traditional companies are bringing users onchain. There’s the crypto we see in noisy headlines and those working quietly to monetize the technology, like PayPal and Stripe. And they combine for a staggering 62% share of online payment software processing.

  Digital payments may not seem like the exciting promise of the future. Yet, they are at the cutting edge. Digital payments are taking a rising share of a rapidly growing market as the world moves away from cash. Global payments are measured in the hundreds of trillions, and the digital payment market has risen from a modest $10 billion in 2017 to a projected $200 billion in 2030. We all live it, and the bulk of the transactions are small value, a coffee here, a donut there.

  The process is so seamless that we seldom pause to consider how it actually works. Poorly, as it happens. Users expect to be able to pay whenever it’s convenient. Settling your restaurant bill, you don’t care that it’s outside of banking hours. You just want a simple form of payment – and that’s not cash. During the time between you tapping your card and accounts being settled, a middleman provides credit to make sure it all clears. And it’s expensive at 2.3% of transaction value.

  One man’s profit margin is another’s invitation to disrupt. The typical narrative of disruption involves a wildly successful company losing its innovation edge, and missing market inflection points. Polaroid made the first instant camera in 1948 and dominated markets from floppy disks to film. Revenue peaked in 1991 and the company was unable to pivot to the new digital era, declaring bankruptcy ten years later. Learning from such histories, companies are now more adaptive.

  We see this clearly in payments. Efficiency is precisely what brought PayPal and Stripe back to crypto. Transaction speeds have improved exponentially, now clocking at milliseconds, and costs have plunged to fractions of a cent. It helps that crypto tech fails fast – revealing resilience and weakness quickly. For instance, the resilience of USDC is now supporting its entry into the mainstream while Bored Apes Yacht Club weakness persists, down 90% off previous cycle highs.

  Why now? Why not! Stablecoins are demonstrating their prowess as payment tools. Transaction volumes are tracking new highs this month, running at ~$15 trillion annualized on Ethereum alone (Figure 1). The efficiency gain is clear – instant and final settlements mean that your late-night coffee and donut purchases bypass the need for credit intermediaries. The middleman is dead, although living vibrantly through tools like Stripe that deliver users a familiar experience.

  

  Users don’t care that it’s crypto. They want a great experience. Businesses don’t care, either. They are optimizing operating efficiency for profit. As crypto matures, so too does its value proposition. Crypto is the protagonist of real time payments and like any great innovation, it fosters competition. What’s unique with payments is that the competition comes from both private and government organizations, with regulatory stagnation working in favor of both.

  Look beyond regions traditionally seen as leaders in innovation. The United States remains a beacon of creative talent behind innovation. But users are moving slowly, lagging in fintech adoption. After all, US users are accustomed to fees, don’t mind the service, and paying for points on expensive intermediation is a pastime. Real-time settlement systems adopted, like FedNow, are for business applications, not for consumers. It’s new players like India at the cutting edge.

  The Unified Payment Interface (UPI), India’s real-time payment solution, was developed by the central bank in 2016. It integrates peer-to-peer real-time payments, directly competing with crypto technologies. Last year, UPI integrated 522 commercial banks covering 300 million active users and 117 billion transactions. Different from developed regions, intermediaries were not disrupted as these are largely new users. Cash was disrupted at the expense of the central bank.

  Payments stand at the cutting edge of crypto’s future. User experience is paramount. Integrating into the regulatory mainstream will accelerate users onchain, just as service providers did for the internet. Crypto unlocked the real-time settlement innovation, but will face competition. It is a world that argues for being chain-agnostic. The data between Ethereum, Bitcoin and UPI will integrate to the highest of standards and security. That’s the road to making onchain the new online.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 22:40

• Justice Thomas Raises Scrutiny On Special Counsel Jack Smith's Appointment In Trump Hearing
  Justice Thomas Raises Scrutiny On Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Appointment In Trump Hearing

  Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

  U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has asked former President Donald Trump’s lawyers about whether they challenged special counsel Jack Smith’s authority to bring charges against the president.

  

  On April 25, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case about President Trump being immune from prosecution for official acts carried out during his presidency. During the hearing, Justice Thomas asked John Sauer, the attorney who represented Trump in court, “Did you, in this litigation, challenge the appointment of special counsel?” Mr. Smith was appointed to the case by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

  Mr. Sauer said that Trump attorneys have not raised such concerns “directly” in the current case at the Supreme Court. However, “it points to a very important issue here, because one of [the prosecution’s] arguments is, of course, that we should have this presumption of regularity,” Sauer stated.

  “That runs into the reality that we have here an extraordinary prosecutorial power being exercised by someone who was never nominated by the president or confirmed by the Senate at any time. … We hadn’t raised it yet in this case when this case went up on appeal.”

  Mr. Sauer said he agrees with the “analysis provided by Attorney General [Edwin] Meese and Attorney General [Michael B.] Mukasey,” referring to the amicus brief the two former attorneys general submitted to the Supreme Court on March 19.

  In it, the two attorneys general noted that irrespective of what one thinks about the immunity issue, Mr. Smith “does not have authority to conduct the underlying prosecution.”

  “Those actions can be taken only by persons properly appointed as federal officers to properly created federal offices. Smith wields tremendous power, and effectively answers to no one,” they wrote.

  “However, neither Smith nor the position of special counsel under which he purportedly acts meets those criteria. And that is a serious problem for the rule of law, whatever one may think of the conduct at issue in Smith’s prosecution.”

  Attorney General Garland appointed Mr. Smith as Special Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) citing several statutes.

  However, none of these statutes even “remotely authorized the appointment by the Attorney General of a private citizen or government employee to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement power under the title of Special Counsel.”

  The two attorneys general added there are times when the appointment of a special counsel would be appropriate and that the U.S. Constitution allows for such appointments.

  However, “the Attorney General cannot appoint someone never confirmed by the Senate, as a substitute United States Attorney under the title ‘special counsel,’” they added.

  “Smith’s appointment was thus unlawful, as are all actions flowing from it, including his prosecution of former President Trump.”

  The Case Against Trump

  The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing President Trump’s immunity case as part of Mr. Smith’s indictment of the former president alleging an attempt to subvert the transfer of presidential power following the 2020 election. President Trump is charged with four criminal counts in the case.

  President Trump had requested the lower courts to back his claims of presidential immunity as the actions were undertaken while he was serving as president.

  After the lower courts refused to grant the request, the 45th president appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, contending that his actions as president are covered by presidential immunity.

  The Supreme Court agreed to consider the following question—“Whether and, if so, to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.”

  In court, Mr. Sauer warned the justices against giving a judgment that undermines presidential immunity, noting that an American president would no longer be able to carry out his job properly if he was unsure whether his actions would trigger prosecution years after leaving office.

  “The implications of the court’s decision here extend far beyond the facts of this case,” he said. “For 234 years of American history, no president was ever prosecuted for his official acts. The framers of our Constitution viewed an energetic executive as essential to securing liberty.”

  “If a president can be charged, put on trial, and imprisoned for his most controversial decisions as soon as he leaves office, that looming threat will distort the president’s decision-making precisely when bold and fearless action is most needed.”

  Moreover, a lack of presidential immunity will denote that every president becomes a potential candidate for extortion by political rivals while still in office, Mr. Sauer added.

  “Prosecuting the president for his official acts is an innovation with no foothold in history or tradition, and is incompatible with our constitutional structure,” he said.

  The Supreme Court Justices appeared skeptical about President Trump’s claims that he has the right to absolute immunity for his actions as president. However, the justices also appeared to be open to accepting that presidents have some level of immunity.

  The court could decide to remand the case back to the Washington district court, with instructions for differentiating between official and private acts of a president so that additional fact-finding proceedings can be done.

  Such a move would delay the former president’s trial in Washington and potentially proceedings related to three other cases as well. This gives President Trump a strategic win as he attempts to hold off cases until after the elections.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 22:10

• "What Is The Sound Of One Hand Clapping" Asks BOJ Head Ueda As The Yen Collapses
  “What Is The Sound Of One Hand Clapping” Asks BOJ Head Ueda As The Yen Collapses

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “What is the sound of one hand clapping,” asked Kazuo Ueda, sitting alone in seiza. The dollar had just crossed above 158 to the yen, a level not seen in 34-years, back when he joined the University of Tokyo as professor of economics.

  

  “What is the sound of one hand clapping,” asked Ueda, letting the question drift gently across his mind. It is one of the great Zen koans, a question without answer, a tool to help us achieve satori, awakening.

  After its utter destruction in the war, Japan had become an economic wonder. By 1989 its Nikkei 225 equity index had surged to 38,915, the yen followed, and the governor’s palace was estimated to be worth as much as California.

  “What is the sound of one hand clapping,” asked Ueda, desperate to tap into the power of being fully present, but unable to calm his mind. From that wild 1989 market peak, it all came crashing down. Had policy makers and politicians allowed a short depression, the nation would have experienced something profoundly different from its lost deflationary decades.

  “What would have happened,” asked Ueda, instantly angry his attention had drifted from the koan. It had been one year since he became Bank of Japan Governor. He had restored simplicity to policy, returning interest rates to positive from negative, letting go of yield curve control. He accomplished this without compromising government finances, which are so vulnerable after decades of the stunningly large deficit spending required to maintain economic and social stability, that even a modest interest rate rise would prove catastrophic.

  “What is the sound of one hand clapping,” whispered Ueda.

  In his year at the helm, the Nikkei 225 had surged to finally reclaim the 1989 highs, driven in part by the collapsing yen, which showed no signs of stabilizing in the absence of material interest rate hikes. And this, of course, risks devastating Japan’s government finances.

  “What is the sound of one hand clapping.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 21:00

• Joe Biden's Brother Embroiled In High-Ranking Qatari Scheme To "Provide Wealth Of Introductions" Through "My Family": Politico
  Joe Biden’s Brother Embroiled In High-Ranking Qatari Scheme To “Provide Wealth Of Introductions” Through “My Family”: Politico

  Qatar has had a lot of fingers in a lot of pies. While we knew about the EU’s ‘Qatargate,’ investments with the Kushner family, and of course Sen. Bob Menendez advancing Qatar’s interests, Politico reports that the Biden family’s ties to Qatar “would constitute some of the closest known financial links between a relative of President Joe Biden and a foreign government,” if courtroom testimony about Jim Biden’s foreign fundraising efforts is substantiated.

  

  In June 2017, Qatar’s neighbors – led by Saudi Arabia, banded together and cut diplomatic ties with the country, citing its alleged support for terrorism. As a result, the country was thrown into a sustained crisis.

  To dig themselves out, Qatari rulers began showering well-connected Westerners with gifts and financial benefits, according to Politico, “sometimes in the form of investment funding.”

  Around this time, Jim Biden was trying to raise $30 million for embattled hospital chain Americore – teaming up with Florida businessman Amer Rustom, CEO of the Platinum Group, who boasted of his ties to officials in the Middle East, as well as fund manager Michael Lewitt. Together, the three sought investment funding from various Middle Eastern sources for Americore and other ventures – “which came to focus largely on Qatar,” according to a former Americore executive who spoke on condition of anonymity.

  According to public records obtained by the outlet, Jim Biden leveraged ties to his older brother and “sought workarounds to restrictions on international money movements,” including one discussion about trying to move money across a Middle Eastern border in the form of gold bars that may or may not have happened.

  “My family could provide a wealth of introductions and business opportunities at the highest levels that I believe would be worthy of the interest of His Excellency,” Jim Biden and Rustom wrote in a draft letter to an official at the Qatari sovereign wealth fund, the Qatar Investment Authority. “On behalf of the Biden family, I welcome your interest here,” the draft continues.

  Transactions related to the efforts are central to a recently-settled fraud case brought by the SEC, and are under fresh scrutiny as part of a federal criminal investigation in South Florida.

  Jim Biden suggested to congressional investigators in February that his fundraising efforts stalled for lack of viable projects to back. But the previously unreported testimony by fund manager Michael Lewitt about the ownership of the two companies — the Platinum Group USA and Obermeyer Engineering Consulting — indicates that Jim Biden forged closer ties to Qatar’s government than previously understood. -Politico

  In February of this year, Jim Biden told impeachment inquiry investigators that roughly $600,000 in payments from Americore were for his role in arranging a series of bridge loans – of which $200,000 was transferred to Joe Biden in March 2018 for what the White House claims is a repayment of an unrelated loan between brothers.

  In a March 10, 2018 draft presentation emailed from Jim Biden’s wife, Sara Biden, to a Platinum Group executive, Julie Lander, Americore touted Jim as “Brother and Campaign Finance Chair of former Vice President Joe Biden.”

  One month later, Lander emailed Jim Biden about the fundraising efforts – referencing an apparent meeting with a high-ranking Qatari official.

  

  “I am following up from the meeting we had with the Minister,” wrote Lander. “Your approach with him was flawless. He requested more information on Americore.”

  In the previously unreported email, Lander suggested a potential request of $200 million and asked Jim Biden to provide more information on the potential benefits to Qatar of an investment deal.

  Lander’s email came five days after a large delegation of Qatari officials and business leaders visited Miami. It is not clear which minister Lander, who did not respond to requests for comments, was referring to. -Politico

  “Snags”

  Despite Lander’s upbeat email to Jim Biden, fundraising efforts hit a ‘series of snags,’ according to Politico‘s anonymous former Americore source, who said that they were facing restrictions on moving investment funds across borders, and that the former executive “recalled discussion at one point of trying to move money across a Middle Eastern border in the form of gold bars, but said they were not aware of any action taken on the idea.”

  In order to solve their problem, Jim Biden explored working with payment processing company “Billerfy,” described as an “open network for global payments,” for which Jim Biden could be their “chief global banking emissary” – until Americore’s outside counsel, Christopher Anderson, shot it down. 

  With progress in Qatar slowing in mid-May of 2018 during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, tensions grew between Jim Biden and his comrades – with Jim Biden venting to Americore CEO Grant White in a May 17 email that he had “agreed to go to Qatar, Saudi Arabia and China (at my own expense).”

  A week later, Jim Biden complained to Rustom over the unsecured funds – writing that “The $30 million was committed to over two months ago and we made moves predicated on that available line of credit,” adding “Things have happened in the interim that are completely understandable, but the fact remains that the $5 million at this point in time is critical in order to get by for the big picture.”

  Then in late June, Lewitt emailed Jim Biden and White about trying to move money from Dubai to Qatar, referencing an unspecified “blockage” that was hindering the process.

  “Amer would like me to join Jim for the presentation to the Finance Minister in Doha so as soon as we have the date I will plan my travel,” the email concluded.

  The former Americore executive said that Jim Biden and Lewitt traveled to Qatar in mid-2018 as part of the fundraising efforts, but it is not clear whether any meeting between Jim Biden and Qatar’s then-finance minister, Ali Sharif Al Emadi, took place.

  Al Emadi left his post in 2021 after Qatar’s attorney general ordered him arrested on suspicion of corruption. In January, Reuters reported that he was convicted on charges that included laundering more than $5 billion and sentenced to 20 years in prison. -Politico

  Efforts to secure funding continued into August of 2018, as Jim Biden continued to work with Lewitt and Rustom to secure financing from the Qatar Investment Authority for other health care ventures, according to filings in a since-settled federal court case in Tennessee in which the three were named as co-defendants.

  As they continued to work together, Jim Biden’s financial ties to Lewitt deepened – with Lewitt’s investment fund, Third Friday, paying Jim Biden’s company, Lion Hall Groujp, $225,000 over the course of 2019. While Biden testified that this was a forgiven loan, Lewitt disputed it – telling Politico that Jim Biden’s debt was assumed by an unnamed third party.

  At the end of the day, Qatar and everyone else balked at the deal.

  “We weren’t able to show the financial bona fides of any one particular project,” said Jim Biden during his impeachment inquiry interview. “We got pretty far down the road on several hotel complexes, but they never came to fruition.”

  Meanwhile, in 2022, investors in Third Friday sued Lewitt, accusing him of embezzlement through Americore to Jim Biden and others. Lewitt has denied wrongdoing in the ongoing case, while Jim Biden has not been named a defendant.

  Lastly, the partners are now locked in a bitter legal dispute. During the course of Americore’s bankruptcy litigation, documents produced by Lewitt included an agreement between his fund and a Delaware company, Obermeyer Engineering Consulting – which calls for Obermeyer to purchase Third Friday’s loans to Americore, along with a 35% stake in the hospital chain, for $30 million.

  The agreement includes a signature from Azzam Rustom as Obermeyer’s “authorized signatory,” which Amer Rustom – Obermayer’s ‘manager,’ contested – saying it the signature was faked.

  Lewitt said during testimony that Amer Rustom ‘verbally authorized’ him to fake his signature on the disputed documents.

  Towards the end of the hearing Lewitt was asked why, if the agreements he produced were valid, the Rustoms were contesting them.

  Lewitt testified that the Rustoms owned both Obermeyer and the Platinum Group with “members of the Qatari government.” He speculated that the brothers had not cleared the agreements with the Qatari officials, whom he did not name. “I don’t think they expected these to become public,” he testified, “and I think they were trying to cover themselves.” -Politico

  According to the judge in the case, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” adding “and this is a black haze right now.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 20:25

• A Chipotle Double Steak Bowl Is Now $39 In California
  A Chipotle Double Steak Bowl Is Now $39 In California

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

  Food away from home has risen at least 0.3 percent for 34 out of the last 36 months

  

  Sticker Shock in California

  Higher state minimum wage went into effect April 1; chains say burritos and burgers are getting more expensive in response.

  The Wall Street Journal reports California Fast-Food Chains Are Now Serving Sticker Shock

  Since September, when California moved to require large fast-food chains to bump up their minimum hourly pay to $20 in April, fast-food and fast-casual restaurants in California have increased prices by 10% overall, outpacing all other states, the firm found in an analysis of thousands of restaurants across 70 large chains.

  Prices at Chick-fil-A, Domino’s, McDonald’s (MCD) Burger King (BKC), Pizza Hut (YUM), Jack in the Box (JACK ) and other fast-food chains have increased since September, the firm found. Chipotle (CMG) said in an investor call Wednesday that prices at its nearly 500 California restaurants climbed 6% to 7% during the first week of April compared with last year, playing out across its menu.

  “The state isn’t making it easy,” Chipotle Chief Executive Brian Niccol said in an interview.

  In Los Angeles on a recent April afternoon, Seth Amitin, a 39-year-old therapist, said his usual $16 meal that he picks up weekly at the Chick-fil-A in Hollywood, Calif., now costs $20. The price for a spicy chicken sandwich at that location had gone up to $7.09 from $6.29, or 13%, since mid-February, according to research by Gordon Haskett Research Advisors. Chick-fil-A’s prices increased 10.6% on average in California during that time period, Gordon Haskett found.

  California restaurants already had some of the highest fast-food prices in the country, according to market-research firm Revenue Management Solutions. Every month since October, California fast-food and fast-casual restaurants have raised prices across a greater percentage of their menus compared with restaurants in the rest of the country, Datassential found. 

  When I was in California for the Nuggets game on Thursday, we stopped at Chipotle. The same double steak bowl I get for $17 in Nevada is now $39 in California. The new minimum wage law is insane. Not even the rich will be able to afford to eat out anymore. Thank you Gavin Newsom!

  — Mike Alfred (@mikealfred) April 28, 2024

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

  Auto and Home, Insurance & Maintenance Costs Soaring and People Are Angry

  Insurance, repairs, and maintenance costs are up for both homes and autos.

  

  On April 19, I noted Auto and Home, Insurance & Maintenance Costs Soaring and People Are Angry

  Some homeowners are skipping home insurance. What’s going on and who is to blame?

  Growth in Spending Exceeds Growth in Income for Most of the Last 10 Months

  A deeper dive into personal income and outlays for March shows significant signs of consumer stress to maintain standards of living.

  

  For discussion, please see Growth in Spending Exceeds Growth in Income for Most of the Last 10 Months

  Would you believe …

  

  On April 20, I noted Truflation Claims Inflation is 2.06 Percent

  Would you believe believe year-over year inflation is barely over two percent? That’s the Truflation claim as of April 17, 2024.

  Some otherwise bright people on Twitter whom I follow actually believe that Trufltion nonsense. Click on the above link for details.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 19:50

• New Bombshell Evidence Emerges: Was Trump Set Up In Classified Docs Saga?
  New Bombshell Evidence Emerges: Was Trump Set Up In Classified Docs Saga?

  Authored by Matt Margolis via PJMedia.com,

  This week in Florida, Judge Aileen Cannon unsealed a trove of new documents that Jack Smith fought to keep hidden. And you’ll soon find out why. Among the documents unsealed were extensive exhibits, motions, and other filings shedding light on the intricate web of communication between the Biden White House and the National Archives and Records Administration in the lead-up to Trump’s indictment.

  

  Investigative journalist Julie Kelly found something interesting in the documents that could change everything.

  The first things is testimony from an FBI agent who testified that the General Services Association (GSA) had been in possession of Trump’s boxes in Virginia before ordering Trump’s team to come get them.

  WELL WELL WELL I am pretty sure we never heard this part of the “classified documents/box” story!

  More from unredacted motions in FLA–this is from an unsealed transcript of witness interview.

  FBI agent says GSA was holding large quantity of Trump’s boxes in VA and then ordered… pic.twitter.com/0i4tGdWZ9A

  — Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) April 27, 2024

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

  “So an entire pallet full of boxes that had been held by GSA somewhere outside of DC is dumped at Mar-a-Lago,” Kelly notes. “Apparently these are the boxes that ended up containing papers with ‘classified markings.'”

  “I will double check indictment but I don’t recall this event in the timeline,” she added.

  So, it appears that the Biden administration may have been responsible for shipping classified information to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida. This development is significant because Trump has previously blamed the GSA for packing the boxes that contained the classified documents, only to later accuse Trump of essentially stealing them and using that as pretext for sending the  FBI to raid his Mar-a-Lago home in August 2022.

  “It was a set-up from the get-go,” remarked Tom Fitton, the founder of Judicial Watch.

  Meanwhile, Joe Biden had classified information that he was never entitled to have stored in boxes in his garage for years, but was not charged. Biden blamed staffers for packing the classified information. 

  While this may not prove the Biden administration set up Trump in the classified documents case, considering the way the Biden administration has abused the legal system against Trump, no one can confidently say they wouldn’t.

  Even so, it still raises other legitimate questions.

  For example, if the GSA had been in possession of the boxes, why wasn’t a review of the materials conducted before they instructed Trump’s team to get them?

  When it comes to classified information, they wouldn’t have expected Trump and his staff to be responsible for ensuring that classified documents weren’t among the records.

  Perhaps they did review the contents of the boxes and knew classified documents were contained in them before they told Trump’s people to come get them.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 19:15

• Is 10% The New 1%
  Is 10% The New 1%

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  I’ve been thinking a lot about one of the first lessons I was taught as a junior trader. We were warned that when something happens, say a piece of economic data comes out, and the market doesn’t respond as you expected, to cut positions and be very careful. It is a sign that “something” is wrong in how you are thinking.

  On Friday, Treasuries rallied strongly on data that didn’t seem that great for rates. But the reality is (or so I believe) that Thursday’s sell-off was overdone, the “whisper” number was much worse than what came out, there are no longer term Treasury auctions, and the month-end index “extension” is usually good for bonds. So that doesn’t bother me much. What bothers me is that we had:

  • NVDA, a $2.2 trillion market cap company, drop 10% last Friday.

  • TSLA, a $500 billion market cap company, rise 10% on Wednesday.

  • META, a $1.1 trillion market cap company, drop 10% on Thursday.

  • GOOG, a $2.1 trillion market cap company, rise 10% on Friday.

  Four “megacap” companies moved around 10% (or more) in a day!

  

  I understand small cap companies do that. I understand that periodically something happens that is highly unusual – M&A, a scientific breakthrough, FDA approval, fraud, or something so unusual (but so profound) that a well-followed company gaps by that much. This was “just” earnings. Maybe I’m being overly dramatic? Maybe I haven’t adjusted my thought process to how large companies really are (probably part of the issue)? In any case it feels completely strange (even unnatural) for such large companies to move so much in a single session (let alone seeing it occur 4 times in 6 days)!

  I am willing to believe that this is just my perception, and maybe it is more common than I perceive, but it is so different than how I’ve been thinking, that I have to respect it. As a “macro” strategist, I think about broad indices. Normally that is quite “macro,” but when some of the largest components of these indices (and associated ETFs) move so much more than I tend to think they can, then I need to question if it is still macro.

  I can hear my first boss telling me that it is time to cut, sit back with less risk on the table, and think about what is going on. Maybe it is nothing. Maybe it is the new norm? Maybe 10% is the new 1%? Maybe moves close to 10% have always happened with market leaders and I just failed to notice that? I find it hard to believe, but knowing the T-Report audience, someone will likely send me a chart showing how common it is and that I need to “get over it.”

  But I don’t think in terms of megacaps moving like that. To me, it reduces the macro, and is highly relevant as we have some other megacaps reporting this week. Should I assume 10% in either direction is a valid range? MSFT, for example, followed a more “normal” pattern. Some wild swings post-earnings in the after-market and pre-market. Stops getting triggered. Options at play. Digesting the first headlines, reading the details, listening to the call. All things that have conditioned me to see reasonably large moves in after-hours sometimes continuing into the next day of trading, typically ending with a meaningful change, but not a 10% change – especially for megacaps.

  If this T-Report sounds like a broken record fixating on something that maybe isn’t important, I apologize, but it is bothering me a lot.

  China

  For the past 3 months, the CSI 300 (one measure of Chinese stocks) is up 8.5% versus 3.5% for the S&P 500 and 2% for the Nasdaq Composite.

  One could look at this and say that:

  • The Chinese economy has turned the corner, helping stocks.

  • If China is doing better, it should help the global economy and sales into China, which should be good for all markets.

  I remain firmly in the camp that:

  • Investors were too pessimistic on the Chinese market and positioning was too underweight or short. The unwind of structured notes sold to retail (that had leverage) was happening, but that has slowed.

  • It hasn’t taken much on the economic side to help the stock market (and there are some direct intervention techniques being used to help the stock market, without doing much for the economy). Less about the market.

  • Some of this is also linked to the performance of Chinese companies. Some are selling more products (Huawei phones in China, for example).

  Since I think:

  • The reasons for the Chinese market rise have little to do with the economy (and I have recommended to clients to cut exposure here to FXI/KWEB).

  • The Threat of Made By China 2025 is real, so any rebound in China is not going to benefit global companies as much as it would have in prior years.

  I have to caution against betting on global stocks because of what we are seeing in China.

  Geopolitics

  The pressure from global leaders calling on Israel to be cautious is mounting.

  Iran, assuming they had hoped for a modicum of success with their 300+ missile and drone strike, is unlikely to do anything while they figure out why their attack was such a failure. See my base case in Should I Stay or Should I Go.

  It would be a surprise if a geopolitical event caused problems for the markets this week, but then that is often the case. It is interesting that last weekend’s question of “Should I Stay or Should I Go” is as relevant as before, with some new factors added to the mix.

  Bottom Line

  Rates.

  I am most comfortable with my view on rates.

  • We will get some “soft” data and Powell won’t be hawkish enough to convince the market that we are only going to get 1 cut (basically what is currently priced in). I do not see how we get to 0 and think that we could see the case for 2 to 3 (what the dots had, depending on whether you use median or average). Buy 2s at 5% (or 4.98% as the case may be).

  • While I expect fears of the deficit, supply, etc. to push us higher at some point, I like owning 10s above 4.6% and think that 4.45% is a reasonable near-term target. As mentioned earlier, there are a number of factors that could take us there as early as this week.

  Equities

  Since I’m bullish on Treasuries, should I in theory be bullish on equities? Maybe, but that correlation has been weak to nonexistent of late. We’ve addressed this in Changing Times Impacting Signals and Correlations and Rorschach Test. I’m hesitant to be bearish stocks, but bullish on Treasuries. More importantly, I’m reluctant to be too committed in any direction until I can make better sense of these large, single day moves for megacaps. When something is bothering me and I should have a better idea of what is going on (but I don’t), then it is prudent to be cautious.

  So, I will remain bearish on equities and expect us to break the lows set on April 19th. It briefly looked like that was possible as recently as Thursday morning, but it seems less realistic now as the S&P gained 2.7% and the Nasdaq rallied 4.2%. I just cannot be too aggressive on this because I could easily see some additional 10% moves, which I’ve never really accounted for. Those moves could go in either direction.

  The one thing that does make some sense about 10% moves is that if we really are on the cusp of a viable revolution in technology, the entire market seems cheap. But, if the cost/benefit ratio is not great right now (less than revolutionary improvements at rapidly rising prices), then we could move down rapidly. So maybe 10% moves, even in megacaps, is normal when we are at an inflection point in technology and potential valuations? That is plausible, though I’m not sure how to incorporate that into my framework, other than moving more and more into options to express long and short bets.

  Credit.

  Yawn. Not a lot of room to tighten. Can widen a bit more, but primarily as a function of stocks going down than any obvious change in fundamentals. With supply likely slowing, relative to cash earmarked for new issues, I’m biased to be mildly bullish credit spreads, even while moderately bearish equities.

  May the stocks you own all go up 10% every day. I don’t completely understand it, but cannot ignore it, and might as well hope people benefit!

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 18:05

• The Struggle For The Soul Of The GOP
  The Struggle For The Soul Of The GOP

  Authored by Kevin Roberts via The Epoch Times,

  The Republican establishment doesn’t know it yet, but last weekend was a watershed moment for their party.

  

  On April 20, House Republican leadership facilitated passage of a foreign-aid package that sends roughly $60 billion to Ukraine, $26 billion to Israel and Gaza, $8 billion to Taiwan, and exactly zero dollars to the southern border. The bill has since passed the Democrat-led Senate and was signed by President Joe Biden.

  The vote will be remembered for the choice Republican leadership made to brazenly reject its own voters in favor of the “uniparty” in Washington, DC.

  In a move that can only be described as “McConnell-esque,” House Republican leadership teamed up with Democrats to overrule the position of their own conference, their voters, and the will of the American people. Democrats on the House Rules Committee made an unprecedented move by crossing the party line and overruling Republican opposition in committee, signaling an end to the typically Democrat versus Republican battle and the beginning of the conservative versus “uniparty” war.

  The disconnect between the Swamp and small-town America could not be more profound. How can a political party be so tone-deaf to the plight of the everyday American suffering under inflation, crime, and societal rot? How can a Republican-led House prioritize the borders of another country over our own border, even as American citizens are killed by illegal immigrants? How can so-called fiscally responsible Republicans sign off on what is now $174 billion in direct Ukraine aid with a national debt of $34 trillion, more than $250,000 for every American household? And how can House Speaker Mike Johnson, who had pledged repeatedly that no foreign-aid legislation would advance without first securing the border, so quickly be steamrolled by the Establishment?

  In their desire to send billions of dollars to a conflict that our commander-in-chief has still, to this day, offered no plan for winning, the GOP’s leadership not only spurned their party’s own supporters but overlooked an opportunity to appeal to independent Americans frustrated by both political parties.

  According to recent polling that The Heritage Foundation conducted with RMG Research, an overwhelming three out of four swing voters opposed sending any additional aid to Ukraine without also allocating funds for our own border. A majority (56 percent) of swing voters in key battleground states thought that the $113 billion the United States had already committed to Ukraine was too much.

  The entire Heritage enterprise fought for over a year and half on this issue. Heritage Action engaged our millions of grassroots members to voice their concerns to their representatives. Scholars at The Heritage Foundation presented a national security alternative package that included limited military aid to Ukraine but made border security the central focus. In an unprecedented move, we even issued a “key vote” on our legislative scorecard against Speaker Johnson’s convoluted rule, which was a gimmick that lowered the threshold to a simple majority (not a supermajority under suspension) and provided political cover for members to vote against individual pieces without jeopardizing the package.

  Powerful interests were aligned against us, however, and we lost on the day. Though we lost this battle, all signs indicate that we are winning the war for the soul of the GOP. A majority (112) of Republicans voted against Ukraine aid on April 20. Younger and newer members are particularly fed up with leadership’s conciliatory approach and manipulative tactics that have led us to this point. The average age of the Senate Republicans who voted “nay” is 59, while the average age of those who voted “yea” is 66. The average “nay” vote has been in office since just 2016, while the average “yea” vote has been in Washington since 2010. The same dynamic was true with the recent $1.2 trillion omnibus spending bill.

  This generational shift can be ignored by the “uniparty,” but it’s not going away. Newer, younger representatives want a choice, not an echo, and increasingly they’re adopting a populist form of conservatism that champions “government of the people, by the people, and for the people” above all else. In other words, they want a GOP that puts America first, something a government in any healthy republic would do. They want a GOP that acknowledges the reality that America is a nation in decline but is not yet too late to save.

  As Ronald Reagan said in his 1980 address accepting the presidential nomination at the Republican National Convention, “For those who have abandoned hope, we’ll restore hope and we’ll welcome them into a great national crusade to make America great again!”

  And that brings us to the importance of this year’s election.

  In 2016, despite staunch opposition from the GOP leadership, Donald Trump rejected the Washington consensus and initiated a generational realignment in American politics. If the conservative movement leans into the politics and policies President Trump made successful, the American people will again have the opportunity this fall to accelerate a new consensus in Washington, DC. This is why I remain optimistic about the future of our great nation.

  The GOP establishment’s actions this past week portend the end of the GOP establishment, not its survival. Conservatives will win the soul of the GOP and with it the hearts of the American people.

  Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 17:30

• Putin Did Not Order Alexei Navalny's Death, US Intelligence Finds
  Putin Did Not Order Alexei Navalny’s Death, US Intelligence Finds

  In a surprising turn, The Wall Street Journal has issued a new weekend report saying that US intelligence agencies do not believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin planned or ordered the death of opposition activist and politician Alexei Navalny.

  “U.S. intelligence agencies have determined that Putin likely didn’t order Navalny to be killed at the notoriously brutal prison camp in February, people familiar with the matter said, a finding that deepens the mystery about the circumstances of his death,” writes the Journal.

  

  “The assessment doesn’t dispute Putin’s culpability for Navalny’s death, but rather finds he probably didn’t order it at that moment,” WSJ continues. “The finding is broadly accepted within the intelligence community and shared by several agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the State Department’s intelligence unit, the people said.”

  And yet it must be recalled that Western officials and media pundits alike had immediately upon reports of the 47-year old Navalny’s death rushed to declare that he had been ‘assassinated’ by Russian authorities upon Putin’s order.

  This led to a new wave of US-led sanctions on Russia, and even disrupted momentum toward a hoped-for prisoner swap between Moscow and Kiev at the time.

  President Biden had asserted in a statement issued on the very day of his Feb.16 death that “Putin is responsible for Navalny’s death” and that it was “proof of Putin’s Brutality” – but ultimately that the ‘democratic future’ Navalny believed in was worth “dying for” – according to the president’s words at the time.

  Russian prison authorities had officially listed his demise as from “sudden death syndrome,” which is how natural causes such as heart attacks are typically described.

  Navalny’s team is not happy with the fresh WSJ report which is being seen as essentially an exoneration of Putin:

  In a statement to the Journal, Leonid Volkov, a longtime Navalny ally, rejected the U.S. intelligence assessment and said those who assert that Putin wasn’t aware of Navalny’s death “clearly do not understand anything about how modern day Russia runs.”

  “The idea of Putin being not informed and not approving killing Navalny is ridiculous,” he said.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Below, journalist and geopolitical commentator Aaron Maté explains that despite news of Navalny’s life and death having driven world headlines, he was still largely an unknown within broader Russian politics and society especially on a national level [emphasis ZH].

  * * *

  Navalny was a marginal opposition figure who polled at around 2%. Putin didn’t fear him; it served Putin to have him seen in the West as his main opposition.

  The Russian gov’t meanwhile has just barred anti-war candidate Boris Nadezhdin. A Russian court has also issued a draconian prison sentence to anti-war sociologist Boris Kagarlitsky. We don’t hear about people like Nadezhdin and Kagarlitsky in the West nearly as much for one reason: unlike Navalny, they don’t collaborate with Western governments.

  Navalny worked with NATO intel cutout Bellingcat and went through the “Yale World Fellow” program, a regime change training ground. For this reason, we also don’t hear that Navalny was an unrepentant xenophobe who compared Muslim immigrants to cockroaches and rotten teeth. 

  His death is a tragedy. He was undoubtedly mistreated. But because he served US interests, US state media will make him into someone he was not. And just compare their fawning coverage to their silence on, or even support for, the ongoing persecution of Julian Assange. Or their complete silence on the mistreatment and death of US citizen Gonzalo Lira in Ukrainian custody — universally ignored in US media.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 17:12

• NY Home Depot Hires Guards And Dogs To Combat Aggressive Parking Lot Migrants
  NY Home Depot Hires Guards And Dogs To Combat Aggressive Parking Lot Migrants

  A Home Depot in New York has hired armed security guards and K-9 units to protect shoppers from aggressive migrants and thieves in the parking lots, the NY Post reports.

  

  According to City COuncilwoman Kristy Marmorato, “Everybody is well aware of the culture here at Home Depot, that we have day laborers just trying to make an honest living, and they just started to feel like it just started to become a little more aggressive.”

  “Where people are walking from the store with stuff in their cart, individuals were coming up to them and literally taking stuff out of their carts to help them and they just felt very concerned, very unsafe.“

  Two men wearing MSA Security caps and bulletproof vests with a German shepherd in tow patrolled the Home Depot in New Rochelle on Tuesday.

  “It’s more about omnipresence,” one guard said, explaining that the company was contracted a few weeks ago. “It’s not like we let them go bite anyone or anything.”

  The guard said the store hired them for a number of reasons.

  “It’s not just because of [migrants], but because of a myriad of other things too, like people breaking into cars, that kind of stuff,” he said.  -NY Post

  A reporter for the Post observed at least 30 male migrants hovering near the doors of the Throggs Neck, Bronx location – with several day laborers aggressively confronting shoppers, trying to sell them fake Apple Airpods or trying to earn unsolicited tips for lifting items from shopping carts into cars. 

  “You come out and you’re a woman by yourself, they literally leech onto your wagon, and you’re like, ‘No, I don’t need any help,'” said one employee. “And when they’re following you to your car, it’s unnerving.”

  The employee said that a female supervisor saw one of the men washing his dick and balls with a water bottle in the lot, and that several women have called Home Depot customer service to complain of being robbed by migrants.

  “I came to work one day and there had to be 100 guys out here,” she told the Post. “And I’m like, ‘Oh, my God!'”

  A regular customer at the store, who asked to be identified only as Cheryl, said she and her husband had a frightening encounter last month.

  A man “practically runs over and he goes to point like, ‘Can I take the stuff,’ and my husband said, ‘No, thank you,’” she recalled, noting that they only had a couple of boxes and a paint scraper.

  “He’s still keeps following, like on top of us,” she said. “I said, ‘No, thank you.’” 

  When her husband turned around to open the car door, the man “put his hand” on one of the boxes in their cart. “My husband said, ‘Don’t touch anything.’”

  But the man didn’t stop. -NY Post

  “It’s come to the point where they’re invading personal space, touching people’s belongings, just harassing,” said Home Depot customer service employee, LaurieAnn Masciocco. “I get it, you’re trying to make a buck. But when it becomes aggressive and harassing, there’s a major issue.“

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 16:55

• NY Judge Claims '2nd Amendment Doesn't Exist In Her Courtroom' In Case Against Gunsmith
  NY Judge Claims ‘2nd Amendment Doesn’t Exist In Her Courtroom’ In Case Against Gunsmith

  Dexter Taylor, a software engineer and resident of Brooklyn, NY, took on gunsmithing as a hobby during the Covid-19 lockdowns.  He was already familiar with machining and found himself fascinated by the project, so he set out to learn the skills needed.  Taylor researched ATF rules regarding the building of firearms and wanted to follow them carefully.  Sadly, however, the state of New York has its own laws which leftist governments believe supersede federal law and the Constitution.  

  Because Taylor was apparently not officially licensed as a gunsmith in NY, authorities decided to raid his home and arrest him for possession of gun parts (including 80% lowers) which are legal federally but require a smithing certificate in the state (a legal gray area which is being contested).  Taylor was easy to find because he purchased all the parts with his own credit cards thinking he was protected under ATF rules.

  ATF rules state that the building of guns for personal use including 80% lowers and related parts is legal as long as the person does not build those weapons to sell.     

  Taylor’s lawyer, Vinoo Varghese, noted that the case is a difficult one in New York, hinting at the leftist bias within NY courtrooms when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.  In fact, Varghese suggested that when Judge Abena Darkeh took over the case she was oddly hostile towards the defense.  He mentions that she interrupted his opening statements multiple times, claiming that he could not use 2nd Amendment arguments in her courtroom:

  “She told us, ‘Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York.'”

  Of course, the 2nd Amendment and the Bill of Rights surpasses the authority of the State of New York and the courtroom of Judge Abena Darkeh.  New York progressives might like to think their state is a separate country from the US with its own rules, but it’s not.  It’s clear that this is a situation in which an activist judge is seeking to make an example out of a law abiding citizen with no previous criminal record.  The goal is to send a message that blue states are going to fabricate their own rules when it comes to gun rights regardless of constitutional precedent. 

  Varghese hints in a recent interview that the Judge is married to the “biggest fundraiser” for the Brooklyn DA, which may present a conflict of interest.  Also, Joe Biden has made the issue of “Ghost Guns” a primary target for his administration the past few years.  To date, the use of ghost guns in criminal acts in the US is statistically negligible.  It’s simply not a problem that needs the attention of the White House. 

  NEW: Brooklyn man convicted over his gunsmithing hobby after the judge says that the 2nd Amendment ‘doesn’t exist in this courtroom’

  ‘Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York.’ – Judge… pic.twitter.com/cgfPO4ANnm

  — Unlimited L’s (@unlimited_ls) April 23, 2024

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

  The defense also asserted that the Judge pressured the jury to come back with a guilty verdict, which they did, convicting Taylor of a list of offenses including: 

  Second-degree criminal possession of a loaded weapon, four counts of third-degree criminal possession of a weapon, five counts of criminal possession of a firearm, second-degree criminal possession of five or more firearms, unlawful possession of pistol ammunition, violation of certificate of registration, prohibition on unfinished frames or receivers.  Two lesser charges, including third-degree criminal possession of three or more firearms and third-degree possession of a weapon, were not voted on.

  Keep in mind that in the vast majority of states in the US all of these charges sound ridiculous.  Possession of a loaded weapon?  Unlawful possession of pistol ammunition?  What?

  Taylor now faces 10-18 years in prison and he awaits sentencing in Rikers Island, one of the worst prisons in the country.  The case is expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court, where a number of gun cases involving 80% lowers are awaiting decision.  New York’s habit of punishing good people while letting criminals go free is becoming an epidemic, and it’s likely a primary reason why the state is now suffering a net loss of hundreds of thousands of residents every year.     

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 15:45

• "Explain To Me Why We Don't Have The Right To Exist?" – Eva Vlaardingerbroek Warns Whites Against Massive Demographic Changes In Their Native Countries
  “Explain To Me Why We Don’t Have The Right To Exist?” – Eva Vlaardingerbroek Warns Whites Against Massive Demographic Changes In Their Native Countries

  By John Cody of RMXNews.com

  In an exclusive interview with Remix News, Dutch political commentator and lawyer Eva Vlaardingerbroek warns Europeans that they must take a stand against rapid demographic change or become a minority in their native countries.

  

  You’ve spoken a lot about White rights and the White replacement. But of course this kind of opens you up to these accusations of racism. So, how do conservatives deal with this Catch-22 of not wanting to be replaced in their native countries, but also not wanting to be attacked with this term?

  You can’t. That’s the thing, you can’t. So you have to pick a side. Of course, you’re going to be attacked if you say, “Hey, this continent, Europe, has been predominantly White for the entirety of its history, and now suddenly within one generation, a few bureaucrats have decided against the will of the people that we should suddenly be a minority. Why do we agree with that, or why do we allow that to happen?” If you say that, you are going to be attacked.

  But the only other option then you have is saying nothing and have it happen, so the choice is yours, and I’ve made my choice. I think there are many ways in which you can defend yourself, of course, against this ridiculous attack, so I’m sure that they’re going say about me that I’m a terrible racist again. No, that’s not true. I don’t think that any race is superior to another. I just think that mine is also not inferior to that of others.

  🚨 EXC: “The choice is yours and I’ve made mine!”@EvaVlaar tells Remix News she has accepted she will be attacked by the establishment for calling out attempts to make indigenous White Europeans a minority on their own continent.#CPACHungary2024 pic.twitter.com/faAE298zv3

  — Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) April 26, 2024

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

  So, I don’t have to be pointed at as the root of all evil, as the Neo-Marxist critical race theory does. I don’t have to become a minority in my own country, as Joe Biden said would be “a good thing,” would be “our strength.” No, why actually? Who was the racist here? Explain to me why we don’t have the right to exist, why we’re not allowed to be a majority in the continent, in the countries that we have been a majority in since forever? Explain it to me. Turn the question around.

  A lot of right-wing parties here are willing to talk about illegal immigration, but unwilling to address legal immigration. Some conservative parties even promote legal immigration. What do you think about this development?

  Well, the problem is of course that if you have tons of illegal immigration, and then you slap the label “legal” on it, then nothing changes. So that’s something that we’ve seen in the past few years that illegal immigration has been made legal in a way, so it’s been made really easy for certain people to come to Europe and also not so easy for others to go through the regular system. I think this problem exists in America to a certain degree as well, that it’s quite hard to immigrate legally to the United States, but illegally it’s not so difficult across the Mexican border.

  So, if you look at the problem of immigration, I think you have to look also at demographic change. That’s why I took this dance today on stage. We have to look at the reality rather than the term that they put on immigration. Do we agree with what’s happening here, with what is happening with this rapid change in our demographic makeup? If the answer is no, then something needs to change. It’s as simple as that.

  🇳🇱‼️ @EvaVlaar: “If we don’t start to fight for our continent, the time in which we live will go down in history as the time Western nations didn’t need to be invaded to be conquered. Our corrupt elite invited the invaders in!” #CPACHungary2024 pic.twitter.com/DmtQcXbFoU

  — Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) April 26, 2024

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

  You converted to Catholicism approximately a year ago. How has your Catholicism influenced your politics, if at all?

  It has influenced my politics in the sense that my faith has become such a huge part of my life, that even more so than before, I feel like it would be completely disingenuous and wrong for me to exclude my faith from my political messaging. So, as it has such a massive influence on me as a person, I think it’s noticeable to people that I let it seep through a lot more in my speeches and in my discourse than maybe I did before. So, it just inspires my ideas and my ability to go on stage. I pray to God before I go on stage, that is something that I didn’t use to do a few years ago, but it immediately calms me just asking God for guidance and help, you know, to give me the strength to do his will on stage.

  What do you think about the fact that most Northern European right-wing parties are shying away from religious messages in their party platform? The AfD, Sweden, Democrats, a lot of Dutch parties keep it in the background, perhaps because people are leaving the church, and many young people are leaving the church. So, how do conservatives reach young people in Northern Europe while maintaining their convictions?

  I think it’s a big mistake to leave religion and to leave the Christian faith out of your political messaging, especially if you want to reach the youth. I think that we’ve been brainwashed to believe that if we preach the Gospel, if we call upon our Lord during our speeches, if we speak proudly and openly about the fact that we’re Christians, that we’re then going to scare away the youth. I think the opposite is actually true.

  I think there is a moral vacuum that’s either going to be filled with climate insanity or woke nonsense or some other subversive left-wing ideology, or it’s going to be filled with the Holy Spirit. So, you have two choices, and I think that people are looking for truth. People are looking for answers and the best gift that you can give someone is to point them in the direction of the truth rather than to dance around it and sugarcoat it, which I think is what we’ve been doing in Northwestern Europe for a long time and look where it got us.

  Continue reading on RMXnews.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 15:44

• Watch: Biden Lectures Press To Get Behind His Campaign
  Watch: Biden Lectures Press To Get Behind His Campaign

  Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

  In an incredible moment at the annual White House correspondent’s Dinner Saturday, Joe Biden lectured reporters, telling them they need to “rise up” and get behind his campaign, insinuating that if they don’t there will no longer be a free press in America.

  

  Biden addressed the press, stating that “the most urgent question of our time is whether democracy is still the sacred cause of America. That is the question the American people must answer this year and you, the free press, play a critical role in making sure the American people have the information they need to make an informed decision.”

  Biden again calls on journalists to defend democracy (i.e. crush Republicans):

  “Move past the horse race numbers and the gotcha moments, and the distractions, the sideshows that have come to dominate and sensationalize our politics and focusing on what’s actually at stake. I… pic.twitter.com/bdGSSCTgUr

  — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 28, 2024

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

  First of all, Biden appears to be saying that he is ‘Democracy’ and if people do not vote for him that is somehow undemocratic.

  Secondly, he is telling the press that they are capable of swaying public opinion in his favour, which is completely undemocratic.

  He isn’t asking the press to report facts neutrally and let the people decide, as evidenced by his next sentence, which was replete with the usual disinformation about Donald Trump.

  “The defeated former President has made no secret of his attack on our democracy. He said he wants to be a dictator on day one and so much more. He tells supporters he is the revenge and retribution. When in God’s name ever heard of another president say something like that? And he promised a bloodbath when he loses again,” Biden asserted.

  While claiming he is not asking the press to “take sides,” he did exactly that.

  “We have to take this seriously. Eight years ago, it could have been written off as just Trump talk but no longer, not after January 6. I’m sincerely not asking you to take sides, but asking a rise up to the seriousness of the moment,” Biden persisted.

  “Move past the horse race numbers and the gotcha moments, and the distractions, the sideshows that have come to dominate and sensationalize our politics and focusing on what’s actually at stake,” he continued, adding “I think in your hearts, you know what’s at stake.”

  “The stakes couldn’t be higher every single one of us has roles to play — a serious role, to play in making sure democracy endures, American democracy. I have my role, but with all due respect, so do you,” he lectured reporters.

  He then had the gall to instruct reporters to provide “credible information,” rather than “disinformation,” while toasting the “free press.”

  “In the age of disinformation, credible information that people can trust is more important than ever and that makes you, and I mean this with the bottom of my heart, makes you more important than ever. So tonight, I’d like to make a toast — to a free press, to an informed citizenry, to an American where freedom and democracy endure. God bless America,” Biden concluded.

  A “free press” but I’m gonna tell you what to write about and what not to.

  — Chrissy (@Chrissys067) April 28, 2024

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

  So he’s saying don’t write anything about me, just go after Trump.

  — linda thompson (@lthomps54) April 28, 2024

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

  It’s a campaign rally. These are his constituents.

  — Janice (@jannyfayray) April 28, 2024

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

  In other words, take sides 🙄

  — Jeff Trent (@JLTrent86) April 28, 2024

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

  This all comes in a week when Biden has managed to ignite a war with The New York Times.

  The Times is annoyed with Biden’s complete disinterest in providing interviews or access for reporters, while his administration is angry that the Times isn’t falling into line as a propaganda arm against Trump.

  Biden ‘joked’ about it, Saturday. It’s funny because it’s true.

  In other words, take sides 🙄

  — Jeff Trent (@JLTrent86) April 28, 2024

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

  *  *  *

  Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 15:10

• Watch: Arizona State Fraternity Students Tear Down Pro-Palestine Encampment And Boot Out Activists
  Watch: Arizona State Fraternity Students Tear Down Pro-Palestine Encampment And Boot Out Activists

  After years of leftist activists disrupting the speech of groups and individuals they disagree with and threatening people with “cancellation” for having the “wrong” opinions, it’s hard to find sympathy for them when they finally get a taste of their own medicine.  Woke protesters have recently sought to bring back the old Seattle CHAZ model of taking over public property and declaring it their own territory; in this case the territory is college campuses around the US. 

  The problem of western progressives hijacking causes in order to insert their own agendas has been noted by many in the independent media.  While some people may be approaching the Gaza protests in good faith, there are many others who are not.

  Apologists might argue that the goal of a protest is to “disrupt” but there are still laws in place that activists must follow.  These include laws that make it illegal to obstruct other citizens from using public property, public roads and public buildings (the insane actions of anti-oil protesters come to mind).  Regardless of how you might feel about the Israel/Hamas conflict, the reality is that it has nothing to do with students trying to go to classes at universities across the country, and stopping them from doing so violates their rights.  

  This is something that the Gaza protesters seem to have forgotten; their cause is not the only important matter at hand.  If they are merely speaking their minds and engaging in fair discourse then they have every right.  Once they start taking over colleges and acting as if they own the place, then there’s going to be a problem.  It has also been reported that more than half of these activists are not even members of the colleges in question.   

  

  Various states have handled the matter differently.  Texas Governor Greg Abbot received criticism for what some argued were heavy handed tactics when removing protesters from campuses after declaring a no-tolerance policy for “antisemitism.”  Many conservative commentators suggested that even though they don’t like the activists involved, antisemitism is not a valid reason to remove them.  

  In other states police have been mostly de-fanged and can do very little even when protesters block other students from attending classes.  However, they may have found a way around this.  At Arizona State University fraternity members stepped in and tore down protester encampments while police stayed out of their way.

  Early this morning police at ASU, with help from fraternity members, tore down the pro-Hamas encampment.

  An extremist watching whined because she wasn’t being allowed to continue to break the law.

  Imagine the embarrassment of being this girl’s parents.pic.twitter.com/CU4IwuuCYb

  — Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) April 27, 2024

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsIn other words, this is not a case of police interfering with protester activities, this is members of the student body cleaning up their own campus. 

  One has to wonder why campuses are being targeted over a war on the other side of the world that does not directly involve them in any way?  If funding of Israel is the issue, then why aren’t these protestors on the front lawn of the Biden White House?  It only makes sense if the goal is to exploit the Gaza issue in order to get visibility for other agendas.   

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 04/28/2024 – 14:35